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.
I would rather be honest to you and admit i have no intention or desire to look at a link that basically is going to remind me of all that i left behind because it didn't add up or harmonize. I half helped you by putting a sentence together that all you needed to do was fill in the blanks. You are not convinced about what you believe, if you was, it would roll off your tongue, so you rely on something else to say what you can't say for yourself.
You believe God is righteous and cannot commune with sinful man (there is no scriptural basis for this), that God being righteous needs to punish sinful man(No scriptural basis for this too), but because he loves man was stuck with a problem of saving man from his(God's) own wrath(are you listening to what you actually believe) that he(man) deserves because he is sinful, so he derived a plan to save them from his own wrath by punishing his own son instead and by simply believing this you are saved from his wrath which inevitably ends up putting you in eternal hell to suffer a fete worse than his wrath if you cannot believe this. Notice i never supported any of this with scripture?.
So the big question that i am asking you is why you are equating God being righteous and holy with wrath?. What you are saying is A righteous holy God needs to punish the sin of sinful man before he can commune with him.
The unwillingness to respond speaks volumes.
And I’m still waiting for an answer to this...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleroo
I simply know that holiness is a manifestation of what God is: love, and therefore is not in contradiction with love.
But, I see you ignore the clear contradiction of your belief that God will hold the sin of the majority of the world against them forever with the biblical statement that God does not hold the sin of the world against them and love keeps no record of wrongs. Do you think you can explain that away?
I answered pcamps question. Your question was an add-on to the discussion of God’s holiness. I’ll attempt to answer that later, although I have a busy day.
Who is being unwilling here that speaks volumes ... and it's not those who claim that all of what Jesus said (i.e. John 3:16 - 36) is the truth.
But you are correct when you deny that you only believe ONE verse is the true ... it's probably only parts of THREE.
1) John 3:16 "For God so loved the world ..." (the rest isn't compatible especially John 3:36)
2) 1 John 4:8 " ....... God is love. "
3) 2 Corinthians 5:19 "that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them."
Do you really think the "incompatibility" rational argument is going to rule the day?
A: No. The "incompatibility" rational argument is finding offense to the message of the cross.
Want to see love in action? Attend the Good Friday church service.
I simply know that holiness is a manifestation of what God is: love, and therefore is not in contradiction with love.
But, I see you ignore the clear contradiction of your belief that God will hold the sin of the majority of the world against them forever with the biblical statement that God does not hold the sin of the world against them and love keeps no record of wrongs. Do you think you can explain that away?
I assume you are referring to 2 Cor. 5. I believe you are taking this passage out of context. God is not holding sins against those who are in Christ. You’ll notice, Paul said “we persuade men.” He also refers to being “in Christ”. Finally, Paul says, “we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.“ How does this reconcile with Universalism?
For further proof, refer to Jesus’ words in John 3:16-18. The Apostle John repeats those same words in 1 John 5.
10 The one who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself; the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning His Son. 11 And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. 12 He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life.
God’s love is open to all, via Christ’s redemptive work. If it is rejected, God’s holiness and justice will be manifested upon that person.
..snip...
God’s love is open to all, via Christ’s redemptive work. If it is rejected, God’s holiness and justice will be manifested upon that person.
In this instance, "holiness and justice" being "manifested" is code for: dumping the poor bassett into an everlasting BBQ and grooving to the music of eternal howls of unbearable pain.
I assume you are referring to 2 Cor. 5. I believe you are taking this passage out of context. God is not holding sins against those who are in Christ. You’ll notice, Paul said “we persuade men.” He also refers to being “in Christ”. Finally, Paul says, “we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.“ How does this reconcile with Universalism?
For further proof, refer to Jesus’ words in John 3:16-18. The Apostle John repeats those same words in 1 John 5.
10 The one who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself; the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning His Son. 11 And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. 12 He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life.
God’s love is open to all, via Christ’s redemptive work. If it is rejected, God’s holiness and justice will be manifested upon that person.
Not out of context at all...
"... in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation."
It says that God is not counting the trespasses of the world against them. Either that's true or it isn't.
Who is being unwilling here that speaks volumes ... and it's not those who claim that all of what Jesus said (i.e. John 3:16 - 36) is the truth.
But you are correct when you deny that you only believe ONE verse is the true ... it's probably only parts of THREE.
1) John 3:16 "For God so loved the world ..." (the rest isn't compatible especially John 3:36)
2) 1 John 4:8 " ....... God is love. "
3) 2 Corinthians 5:19 "that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them."
Do you really think the "incompatibility" rational argument is going to rule the day?
A: No. The "incompatibility" rational argument is finding offense to the message of the cross.
Want to see love in action? Attend the Good Friday church service.
God is not holding the sins of the world against them. That's what your Bible says, twin. I'm not making it up. If the rest of what you read in the Bible contradicts that, it's on you who hold it to be infallible to deal with, not me.
God is not holding the sins of the world against them. That's what your Bible says, twin. I'm not making it up. If the rest of what you read in the Bible contradicts that, it's on you who hold it to be infallible to deal with, not me.
So....."his Bible" says "that". OK.
Wow. And you get this contradictory info from where? You say you're not making it up. So.....where does it come from? Why should we believe you?
In this instance, "holiness and justice" being "manifested" is code for: dumping the poor bassett into an everlasting BBQ and grooving to the music of eternal howls of unbearable pain.
Some "holy."
Some "justice."
Some godling you worship.
That is why we can be sure that such concepts of "Justice" and "holy" need to be revisited. What you and jimmiej have in mind are not characteristics of God, but of men projected by those men onto God because they are not "perfect" in love as God is. When love is the operating principle "justice" is making up as far as possible for wrong done, and a determination to work for real justice in love in all our other dealings, and "holy" is "set apart" for God's purpose, which IS to demonstrate that He "so loved the world." The idea that it is anything else is an attempt to frighten people into line with whatever conduct the prejudices of those men direct.
Wow. And you get this contradictory info from where? You say you're not making it up. So.....where does it come from? Why should we believe you?
He gets it from not reading into the text what controlling men, not led by the Spirit have taught, but instead reading in the light of that Spirit whose "fruit" is described in Galatians. You should try it.
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.
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.
