Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-08-2012, 06:46 PM
 
1,711 posts, read 1,892,342 times
Reputation: 183

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma View Post
Bob can you explain your past statements about God creating Adam after a fashion that he could not do anything but sin (for if he could not do anything but sin how is he responsible for his actions), in light of what you have said above.
As I said in my prior post, man does many good things besides sin. So it's wrong to say "he could not do anything but sin". But yes, I believe that Adam was not strong enough to never sin. But nevertheless Adam and you and I are still held accountable and responsible for our actions. I know that seems like a contraction. I can best explain by example.

People have natures. For example one person might be short-fused, get angry easy, tend to be impatient while the next person might tend to be very calm and patient and tolerant. Neither person chose or willed himself to have that nature. They may have been born that way. They may have had different environments growing up. Or both. But, the both have wills. They both can introspect. They both know right from wrong. The short-fused person knows by experience, that getting angry, being impatient, blowing up, is bad, has negative consequences, makes him feel lousy, hurts others etc. It is now his responsibility to strive to correct himself. No one else, including God is going to zap him with a "calm potent" to fix the problem. Only by experience and self-judging and consequences is He doing to change. So I reject the notation, that just because I did NOT choose my flaws, that I am therefore NOT responsible for my actions. I am.

Another example is a child. We know a child is going to have a sinful attitude and actions at times. A small child can act totally selfishly. It's part of his nature. He didn't choose to want to be selfish. But he does choose to act selfishly. And parents hold the child accountable and responsible for his selfish actions. The parent disciplines the child even though the child never chose to have this flaw in his nature that leads him to selfish actions.

Last edited by Thy Kingdom Come; 06-08-2012 at 06:55 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-09-2012, 08:09 AM
 
Location: Canada
11,123 posts, read 6,323,739 times
Reputation: 600
Quote:
My point is, factual statements about God written in the OT can be wrong according to your view.


Well when one in the OT says God does evil and one in the NT says God does not work or think evil, I simply believe the ones Jesus revealed the Father to.

Quote:
Doesn’t matter. Paul’s conclusion that none is righteous is based on an OT scripture and that writer could have been wrong according to your view.


You are missing one point here Bob, when I said their view was of a babe I was speaking of their view of the FATHER, not everything in the OT.

Jesus said

All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.

The view that the Father works evil in the OT is in total contradiction to the view of those Jesus revealed the Father to. Which states God/love neither worketh nor thinketh evil.


Quote:
The OT and even some of the NT is full of examples of God acting with force. You say God doesn’t force. That makes those beliefs untrue according to you, not just a baby’s view.



Bob your taking those examples literally in much the same fashion as those who believe in ET take the lake of fire literally. I simply do not see them as being literal.


Quote:
1. Man does many good things. He is not constantly sinning. So it is not true that “man could not do anything but sin”. But yes, I do believe that Adam was too weak to never sin. This is evidenced by 100% of men created with [free] will falling into sin. Furthermore, unless you believe that Pauls words “there is none good” will soon fail, God has already predicted that all men yet to be born will also sin. In that case… it seems that “free will” was a huge mistake by God.


That is the same as saying it does not matter whether Christ is with us daily or not we are just to weak to never sin. It is the same as saying our nature is stronger then Christ nature within us. It is the same as saying Christ cannot deliver us from sin.



Quote:
2. No, not “because God planned for Adam to be disobedient…” Rather because Adam was weak.


Yet you believe God made Adam so weak he could do nothing but be disobedient. Thus it is still saying God who knew before he created man (you idea of Gods foreknowledge) planned it all out that way so man would be disobedient.

Quote:
The most immediate cause of Adam sinning is Adam. While it is true that I believe that God’s plan of necessity included man to be weak and sin, it is wrong to call sin God’s plan.


Huh! That is double speak brother. It is not Gods plan to make man so weak that he will sin, but because of necessity God planned it all out that way. That makes absolutely no sense.


Quote:
God’s plan was for Adam to be created in God’s image and that plan of necessity required the existence of weakness and sin.


Nonsense Gods plan for man has always been in Christ and Jesus never sinned.

Quote:
Your emphasis is so wrong that it becomes altogether a lie. Suppose I am a sculptor and I spend months planning and sculpting a fine piece of art out of a rock. And at the end of it all you look at the ground below my beautiful sculpture and say, you planned for all this dust and debris to fall from this rock, so you are an architect of dirt and your plan was to make the floor dirty.


You see it that way because you believe Gods plan for man is through Adam, I don't, I see Gods plan through Christ and there is no dirt, as you put it, in sculpting Him.

Quote:
3. Just as of necessity the sculpture will make the floor dirty when he makes a fine sculpture, I believe that God, of necessity, had to make man weak, in order to show us His glory and experience His nature. We don’t call the scultors plan making dirt, likewise God’s plan was not forcing sin. We don’t call the sculptor the architect of dirt, so we shouldn’t call God the architect of sin.


Yet Jesus Christ did not have to be made that way in order to have Gods nature.
As I have told you many time before brother God plan is and always has been in Christ, from start to end, Christ has always been Gods plan. You believe Gods plan starts with Adam and ends with Christ.




Quote:
What not give man God’s nature. God can not sin.


That is the whole point brother, I believe God did give us His nature and if we listen to that nature we will not sin. Our sinning is because we do not listen to Him.



Quote:
God gave us sin-ability that God did not have or need.


Jesus most assuredly had free will, but refused to use it to sin. And you seem to have a wrong understanding of ability. Ability means a natural ability to do something well. So in effect you are saying God gave us a natural ability to sin well.


Quote:
I meant that in your view, God did not have foreknowledge at the time He was deciding to give man fee will. That makes God ignorant of the effect of His actions. And catastrophe ensued out of that ignorance. And little children are suffering as a result.


Well scripture tells us God searches our hearts in order to know what we will do. If God knows what we will do before we were ever born why does He test us? scripture tells us it is to see if we will obey His voice or not.

In your understanding God foreknew that catastrophe would happen and little children are suffering as a result of His foreknowledge and plan. In other words God planned out all the suffering in this world.

Your view seems to run like this

God in His foreknowledge makes man so weak, that even though He is with him daily, God planned for man not to listen to Him in order that little children suffer as a result.


Quote:
I know you don’t believe those things. I prefaced those statements about your beliefs with “I can do the same you do Scott”. You constantly derive you own beliefs about my beliefs like "God is the architect of sin" and say that I believe what you believe I must believe.


The only difference brother is you have actually in the past stated those things and defended what you had said. I have never made those statements.


Quote:
We were talking about whether or not God uses force. A spanking is force.


Well if that is your idea of force, I cannot argue with it because I do believe God spanks His children for correction.

Quote:
I never said those things are discipline.


Then what is the purpose of them? You don't believe they are for correction, so what then is the reason for people eating the face off another, the rape of a child and serial killings?


Quote:
That is your belief, not mine. Again, it was out of necessity for God’s actual plan, to make man in His image, that man was made weak. Sin was not what God was architecting.


I agree sin was not what God was architecting; however in your scenario sin was the result of Gods architecting. Yes in your scenario it turns into a statue but you cannot excuse God from all the dust/sin that is the result of His architecting.

What you are doing is ignoring the sin in order to get the desired result.

In my scenario no sin is required to get the desired result, because I look at Christ as being the plan from being to end. You seem to look at Adam to be the beginning of God plan and Christ the end of Gods plan.


Quote:
I can make an analogy about your belief too. If an architect builds a building with a flimsy roof and it collapses on all the people, he is considered inept and held accountable. In your view God endowed man with the ability to sin. God does not have this ability to sin. Had God created man like Himself, none would have sinned. But instead God hoped the roof would not collapse. But it did.


That does not hold up to anything I believe brother, for I believe Christ is the beginning and of Gods plan. Nothing flimsy or collapsible in Christ.



Quote:
Jesus was not created. He proceeded from the Father.


So did we all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2012, 08:10 AM
 
Location: Canada
11,123 posts, read 6,323,739 times
Reputation: 600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thy Kingdom Come View Post
As I said in my prior post, man does many good things besides sin. So it's wrong to say "he could not do anything but sin". But yes, I believe that Adam was not strong enough to never sin. But nevertheless Adam and you and I are still held accountable and responsible for our actions. I know that seems like a contraction. I can best explain by example.

People have natures. For example one person might be short-fused, get angry easy, tend to be impatient while the next person might tend to be very calm and patient and tolerant. Neither person chose or willed himself to have that nature. They may have been born that way. They may have had different environments growing up. Or both. But, the both have wills. They both can introspect. They both know right from wrong. The short-fused person knows by experience, that getting angry, being impatient, blowing up, is bad, has negative consequences, makes him feel lousy, hurts others etc. It is now his responsibility to strive to correct himself. No one else, including God is going to zap him with a "calm potent" to fix the problem. Only by experience and self-judging and consequences is He doing to change. So I reject the notation, that just because I did NOT choose my flaws, that I am therefore NOT responsible for my actions. I am.

Another example is a child. We know a child is going to have a sinful attitude and actions at times. A small child can act totally selfishly. It's part of his nature. He didn't choose to want to be selfish. But he does choose to act selfishly. And parents hold the child accountable and responsible for his selfish actions. The parent disciplines the child even though the child never chose to have this flaw in his nature that leads him to selfish actions.

That is the same as saying it does not matter whether Christ is with us daily or not we are just to weak to never sin. It is the same as saying our nature is stronger then Christ nature within us. It is the same as saying Christ cannot deliver us from sin.

Brother Jesus came to save mankind from sin and death, not from the Fathers plan.

No matter how one looks at it Bob if God planned it all out the way you and others believe then Jesus came to save us from what God has worked according to the council of His own will.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2012, 08:47 PM
 
1,711 posts, read 1,892,342 times
Reputation: 183
Quote:
Well when one in the OT says God does evil and one in the NT says God does not work or think evil, I simply believe the ones Jesus revealed the Father to.
You and I have different definitions of what it means to “work evil”. Most OT verses where you would say God is “working evil” I would say God is using evil for good. But I agree there are some OT scriptures which taken literally appear to show God doing evil (e.g. having joy when babies are dashed against the cliffs). But I don’t “solve" those by claiming that the OT writers were wrong or babies. I take these as allegories of spiritual realities and not as statements about physical realities.

Quote:
You are missing one point here Bob, when I said their view was of a babe I was speaking of their view of the FATHER, not everything in the OT.

All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.

The view that the Father works evil in the OT is in total contradiction to the view of those Jesus revealed the Father to. Which states God/love neither worketh nor thinketh evil.
It's not totally an OT vs NT thing.

Quote:
Bob your taking those examples literally in much the same fashion as those who believe in ET take the lake of fire literally. I simply do not see them as being literal.
I am taking the symbol to have a similar meaning in the spiritual as it does in the literal. That’s how parables work. God uses physical symbols that we are familiar with. to give an understanding of a spiritual truth. A “tormentor” is something unpleasant and undesirable, and God delivering shows that it is by force. Why don't you tell me exactly what that means to you. I suspect you think it means reaping what you sowed. Which is how I take it too. But that is still torment by force according to God's law.

Quote:
That is the same as saying it does not matter whether Christ is with us daily or not we are just to weak to never sin. It is the same as saying our nature is stronger then Christ nature within us. It is the same as saying Christ cannot deliver us from sin.
I was describing natural man.

Quote:
Yet you believe God made Adam so weak he could do nothing but be disobedient.
That’s wrong. Adam was sometimes obedient.

Quote:
Thus it is still saying God who knew before he created man (you idea of Gods foreknowledge) planned it all out that way so man would be disobedient.
That's wrong. Your words “so man would be disobedient” indicate the wrong purpose of God's plan. The purpose is to show God's glory.

If I go to the store to buy food and you tell someone “bob went to the store so he could spend money” then you stated the wrong purpose
even though my plan did include spending money.

Quote:
Nonsense Gods plan for man has always been in Christ and Jesus never sinned.

Yet Jesus Christ did not have to be made that way in order to have Gods nature.
As I have told you many time before brother God plan is and always has been in Christ, from start to end, Christ has always been Gods plan. You believe Gods plan starts with Adam and ends with Christ.

You see it that way because you believe Gods plan for man is through Adam, I don't…
Your statements about us being in Adam are inaccurate description of my beliefs. I do not say that your own sin helps you see God’s glory in any way. To be in Christ we must be as He was which includes suffering, overcoming evil, being cursed by others, forgiving sinners. That necessitates the existence of sinners to forgive.

Quote:
…I see Gods plan through Christ and there is no dirt, as you put it, in sculpting Him.
Yes there was dirt. The dirt of the sinners Christ forgave.

Quote:
That is the whole point brother, I believe God did give us His nature and if we listen to that nature we will not sin. Our sinning is because we do not listen to Him.
God's nature does not include sin-ability. Our nature does. So our nature differs from God's nature. So God did not give us His nature.

Quote:
Jesus most assuredly had free will, but refused to use it to sin. And you seem to have a wrong understanding of ability. Ability means a natural ability to do something well. So in effect you are saying God gave us a natural ability to sin well.
Ability simply means the capacity to do something. I have the ability to play football. Doesn't mean I do it well. Just means I can do it.

Quote:
Your view seems to run like this

God in His foreknowledge makes man so weak, that even though He is with him daily, God planned for man not to listen to Him in order that little children suffer as a result.
Ridiculus. God never did anything in order that children suffer. Once again you substitute God’s true purpose with something horrific.

At this point Scott, your view seems like this (below) to me. I’m not saying you believe like this. I’m saying, if I tried to believe like you, these are the problems I would have....

God said to himself… let’s make Man in Our image. Let’s give man the ability to do good like Me, but wait, let’s also give him an extra ability that I do not have. Let’s give him sin-ability so I can find out if he loves me. I hope man will never use this sin-ability I gave him. If he does, it will mean little children get rapes and killed. But I have to find out if he will love me so it’s worth the gamble. I love mankind even though I don’t have sin-ability, but I can’t tell if man loves me unless he has sin-ability. Don’t ask me to explain. Oh, and if man does do those horrific things, I’m have a rule for Myself. I won’t stop them. I have to honor this free will I give them. I might take away a king’s entire kingdom by force. But I won’t stop the serial killer or the rapist by force. Why? Don’t ask me to explain. It’s just a rule I have about free will. But, if man prays to me enough, then I might stop the serial killer and rapist. Otherwise, I won’t or I can’t. I’m not sure which.

Quote:
The only difference brother is you have actually in the past stated those things and defended what you had said. I have never made those statements.
I don’t ever recall saying God is “the architect of sin” or that God did anything “in order that children suffer”. All I said was that God’s plan included man sinning. And I didn’t say that in a vacuum either. It was in the context of stated God’s real ultimate purpose of showing man His glory and having man share His glory.

Quote:
Then what is the purpose of them? You don't believe they are for correction, so what then is the reason for people eating the face off another, the rape of a child and serial killings?
I don’t claim to know. I just trust that God knows what He is doing. If I adopted your view I would still say “I don’t know” because you have not offered any coherent explanation as to why God allows these things while the same God forcefully stopped Nebuchadnezzar from possessing his kingdom.

[quote]Huh! That is double speak brother. It is not Gods plan to make man so weak that he will sin, but because of necessity God planned it all out that way. That makes absolutely no sense.[/qutoe]

It makes total sense. See the bolded words in my next answer. Those are the necessities I refer to. They are not the goal of the plan. But they are necessary elements of the plan.

Quote:
I agree sin was not what God was architecting; however in your scenario sin was the result of Gods architecting.
Yes. That’s true. Not because sin was a goal or purpose of God. Only because God’s glory includes such things as

- forgiving sinners
- blessing those who curse Him
- overcoming evil with good
- learning obedience though suffering
- laying down his life for His enemies

Quote:
Yes in your scenario it turns into a statue but you cannot excuse God from all the dust/sin that is the result of His architecting.
I’m in no position to excuse God. If God made me a vessel of dishonor in order to show me His glory… I’m good with that.

Quote:
In my scenario no sin is required to get the desired result, because I look at Christ as being the plan from being to end. You seem to look at Adam to be the beginning of God plan and Christ the end of Gods plan.
That’s mostly an accurate statement. But in your scenario, God gave man sin-ability for no apparent reason.

Quote:
That does not hold up to anything I believe brother, for I believe Christ is the beginning and of Gods plan. Nothing flimsy or collapsible in Christ.
The flimsy roof is the sin-ability portion of free will and God's hope that man would only use the other 1/2 of God's "gift".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2012, 12:17 PM
 
Location: NC
14,674 posts, read 17,010,860 times
Reputation: 1503
Quote:
Yes. That’s true. Not because sin was a goal or purpose of God. Only because God’s glory includes such things as

- forgiving sinners
- blessing those who curse Him
- overcoming evil with good
- learning obedience though suffering
- laying down his life for His enemies

I totally agree with you, TKC. All is a part of the design of God and in the end, all will benefit from the experience. God bless and peace.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2012, 11:16 PM
 
Location: Canada
11,123 posts, read 6,323,739 times
Reputation: 600
Quote:
You and I have different definitions of what it means to “work evil”. Most OT verses where you would say God is “working evil” I would say God is using evil for good. But I agree there are some OT scriptures which taken literally appear to show God doing evil (e.g. having joy when babies are dashed against the cliffs). But I don’t “solve" those by claiming that the OT writers were wrong or babies. I take these as allegories of spiritual realities and not as statements about physical realities.


There is nothing allegorical or spiritual in the reality of the rape or murder of children, just watch the news, it actually happens. And you are saying God is using that evil for good.

Again Jesus said no one knows the Father except the son and those He (the son ) revealed the Father to. Until Jesus came there was no real understanding of the Father.

Not even the apostle knew the Father 100% for they cannot be made perfect without us.

Thus Paul stated that Christ was revealed to him not by flesh and blood or by the apostles that were before him. Christ is alive within us and it is Him and Him alone we are to follow. Peter wanted to make tabernacles to Moses and Elijah and people are doing this, but have added Paul, Peter, and the boys to the equation. Reading what they say as if life is found in their words, but life is not found in any ones words but those of Christ.

I see no difference in the making of these tabernacles to these people then when the people of Lystra wanted to make sacrifices to Paul and Barnabas. Paul told them not to be doing these things but to turn from these vanities unto the living God.





Quote:
It's not totally an OT vs NT thing.


No it is not, it's about growth and maturity in Christ.



Quote:
I am taking the symbol to have a similar meaning in the spiritual as it does in the literal. That’s how parables work. God uses physical symbols that we are familiar with. to give an understanding of a spiritual truth. A “tormentor” is something unpleasant and undesirable, and God delivering shows that it is by force. Why don't you tell me exactly what that means to you. I suspect you think it means reaping what you sowed. Which is how I take it too. But that is still torment by force according to God's law.


I know how parables work Bob. Yes it is about reaping what WE sow, not what God has caused us to sow because we are to weak to do right.

Our unforgiving hearts is what will torment us.



Quote:
I was describing natural man.


Yes a natural man that had the spirit of God within him, after all he was a son of God. What you are saying is that man (we are all natural men) who have the spirit of God in them are to weak to obey God.

God does not command us to do something and then withhold the power of the spirit to accomplish what He commands of us.




Quote:
That’s wrong. Adam was sometimes obedient.


Your skirting the issue brother, you know we are talking about Adams disobedience in the garden in regards to eating from the tree. You believe Adam was so weak that he could not do anything but disobey Gods command.




Quote:
That's wrong. Your words “so man would be disobedient” indicate the wrong purpose of God's plan. The purpose is to show God's glory.


God has no glory in people sinning Bob. God did not make man so weak for the purpose of man sinning to show forth His glory. Gods glory is only found in Christ in whom was no sin.


Quote:
If I go to the store to buy food and you tell someone “bob went to the store so he could spend money” then you stated the wrong purpose
even though my plan did include spending money.


That is the same as saying a part of Gods plan was for man to sin. When did God and the devil come into agreement? Sin is of the devil.

Quote:
Your statements about us being in Adam are inaccurate description of my beliefs. I do not say that your own sin helps you see God’s glory in any way. To be in Christ we must be as He was which includes suffering, overcoming evil, being cursed by others, forgiving sinners. That necessitates the existence of sinners to forgive.


Yes to be in Christ is what will glorify God. So why must man sin in order for God to be glorified? Your belief still hinges on a part of Gods plan was for man to sin, for without man sinning God could not be glorified. Yet Jesus never sinned and He was the glory of the Father.

Bob man did not have to sin in order to suffer, overcome evil, being cursed of others or forgive sinners. Sin (which is of the devil ) was in the world BEFORE God created man.


Quote:
Yes there was dirt. The dirt of the sinners Christ forgave.


There was NO dirt is Christ, yet he suffered, overcome evil, being cursed of others or forgive sinners. Man simply did not have to fall into sin and experience its wages to overcome sin for sin was in the earth BEFORE God created man.



Quote:
God's nature does not include sin-ability. Our nature does. So our nature differs from God's nature. So God did not give us His nature.


Huh! So your saying we do not have the nature of Christ within us. Sorry but without His nature you simply cannot be a follower of Christ.

I find it funny (in a sad way) that you believe Adam did not have Christ's nature within him when the scriptures tell us Adam was a son of God.





Quote:
Ridiculus. God never did anything in order that children suffer. Once again you substitute God’s true purpose with something horrific.


It is not me that is doing that brother you are. You have stated that God made Adam so weak that Adam could not obey his voice for the purpose of bringing sin into the world so that we all could suffer, overcome evil, being cursed of others and forgive sinners.

Therefore the child rapist is for what? That the child may suffer? The child might overcome evil? The child might learn to forgive the rapist?

Come on Bob what is the purpose of the child rapist?

Quote:
At this point Scott, your view seems like this (below) to me. I’m not saying you believe like this. I’m saying, if I tried to believe like you, these are the problems I would have....

God said to himself… let’s make Man in Our image. Let’s give man the ability to do good like Me, but wait, let’s also give him an extra ability that I do not have. Let’s give him sin-ability so I can find out if he loves me. I hope man will never use this sin-ability I gave him. If he does, it will mean little children get rapes and killed. But I have to find out if he will love me so it’s worth the gamble. I love mankind even though I don’t have sin-ability, but I can’t tell if man loves me unless he has sin-ability. Don’t ask me to explain. Oh, and if man does do those horrific things, I’m have a rule for Myself. I won’t stop them. I have to honor this free will I give them. I might take away a king’s entire kingdom by force. But I won’t stop the serial killer or the rapist by force. Why? Don’t ask me to explain. It’s just a rule I have about free will. But, if man prays to me enough, then I might stop the serial killer and rapist. Otherwise, I won’t or I can’t. I’m not sure which.


Bob this shows me you have yet to understand what I am saying. That scenario is only applicable if one see God's plan as running through Adam sin to get to Christ. What I believe is that Gods plan runs through Christ and ONLY through Christ. You cannot seem to grasp that plan.



Quote:
I don’t ever recall saying God is “the architect of sin” or that God did anything “in order that children suffer”. All I said was that God’s plan included man sinning. And I didn’t say that in a vacuum either. It was in the context of stated God’s real ultimate purpose of showing man His glory and having man share His glory.


No you did not use the word architect brother, but it amounts to the same thing. If God's plan included man to sin He is the architect of the plan. After all an architect is the one who draws up the PLAN.

I asked

Then what is the purpose of them? You don't believe they are for correction, so what then is the reason for people eating the face off another, the rape of a child and serial killings?


Quote:
I don’t claim to know. I just trust that God knows what He is doing. If I adopted your view I would still say “I don’t know” because you have not offered any coherent explanation as to why God allows these things while the same God forcefully stopped Nebuchadnezzar from possessing his kingdom.


There is no purpose in God for people to eat the face off another, the rape of a child and serial killings. You say if you adopted my view you would still say you don't know, but brother in my view their is NO purpose in Gods plan for man to do these horrible things to each other. You cannot see this because you are stuck in your own view that everything that man does is according to the plan of God.




I said

Huh! That is double speak brother. It is not Gods plan to make man so weak that he will sin, but because of necessity God planned it all out that way. That makes absolutely no sense.

Quote:

It makes total sense. See the bolded words in my next answer. Those are the necessities I refer to. They are not the goal of the plan. But they are necessary elements of the plan.


It does NOT make sense Bob, you just finished saying you don't know why people eat the faces off another, children being raped and serial killing; and now your saying they are necessary elements to Gods plan.

I said

I agree sin was not what God was architecting; however in your scenario sin was the result of Gods architecting.


Quote:
Yes. That’s true. Not because sin was a goal or purpose of God. Only because God’s glory includes such things as
- forgiving sinners
- blessing those who curse Him
- overcoming evil with good
- learning obedience though suffering
- laying down his life for His enemies


Bob, sin, evil and deathwere ALREADY in the earth before God created man, He (God) simply did not need man to sin, do evil and die in order for man to forgive sinners, overcome evil with good, learn obedience through suffering or lay down ones life for their enemies.

Satan was here before man, he is the god of this world and it is because of him (Satan) that sin, evil and death are in this world and he enticed man into partaking of his world.

God created man to overcome Satan, that Satan might know the manifold wisdom of God.


And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: 10To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God, 11According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:


Also take note brother of in whom is God's eternal purpose.

Quote:
I’m in no position to excuse God. If God made me a vessel of dishonor in order to show me His glory… I’m good with that.



So your good with the idea that God created man to eat the faces off other men, the child to be raped and serial killings.

Bob that is just another form of elitism, God made me a vessel of honour and He made others a vessel of dishonour. Good grief.

I have given you a different understanding of those scriptures Bob, you might want to go back and read it.



Quote:
That’s mostly an accurate statement. But in your scenario, God gave man sin-ability for no apparent reason.




According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:


Quote:
The flimsy roof is the sin-ability portion of free will and God's hope that man would only use the other 1/2 of God's "gift".



God gave man free will to overcome the devil brother, not to sin, but like all of God's gifts He gave to man Satan has corrupted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top