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.
Since the God revealed by Christ IS love, then one who is NOT is an anti-Christ God.
Peter kind of shared similar sentiments with Jesus... and Jesus called him Satan for having man's interests, and not God's interests.
Matthew 16:21-23 - From that time Jesus began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised up on the third day. 22 Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, "God forbid it, Lord! This shall never happen to You." 23 But He turned and said to Peter, "Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me; for you are not setting your mind on God's interests, but man's."
You ARE a judgemental fundie. The problem with fundamentalism as it occurs in any belief system is that it begins with a premise and then seeks to support that premise at all cost. Which means only accepting information which serves to support the preconceived premise. So if the premise is that God is only good and loving, then any suggestion that He is connected to evil MUST necessarily be wrong. Even if that means retranslating what the Bible very specifically says to bring it in conformance with what fundamentalists have decided it really must have intended to say.
That is your opinion, but it may or may not have any bearing on what is truth.
Since the God revealed by Christ IS love, then one who is NOT is an anti-Christ God.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
Peter kind of shared similar sentiments with Jesus... and Jesus called him Satan for having man's interests, and not God's interests.
Matthew 16:21-23 - From that time Jesus began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised up on the third day. 22 Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, "God forbid it, Lord! This shall never happen to You." 23 But He turned and said to Peter, "Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me; for you are not setting your mind on God's interests, but man's."
You insist on thinking that the brutality Jesus was subject to was from God, but it was NOT. It was from our ignorant ancient ancestors who rejected Jesus. God sent Jesus to reveal God's true nature and bring the message of love, but God AND Jesus knew what our primitive ancestors would do to Him because of it. Jesus was willing to endure it out of love for us all because we knew not what we did, i.e. were ignorant.
If endless punishment were true & victims of infanticide all go to heaven, then infanticide saves infants from any chance of growing up & going to endless torments or annihilation.
Should a loving parent, therefore, kill their infants before they reach an age at which God would hold them accountable?
"Evangelicals are divided in their opinion about the fate of infants who die.
"Some, who believe in God's sovereign election of the "few," also believe that non-elect babies who die will spend eternity suffering in hell. John Calvin said, "there are babies a span long in hell."
"Others consider this unfair, and assert that infants who die will spend eternity in heavenly bliss. This of course is true, but not because the child is innocent. It's true because the Scriptures teach that God intends to save everyone from everything that they need to be saved from.
"A few years ago there was a story in a Montreal paper about an Ohio lady who drowned her baby in a bathtub. Her defense was that she loved the baby so much that she wanted to make sure that her child would not have to suffer forever in hell. After serving a sentence she remarried, had another child and drowned it for the same reason. She trusted that God would forgive her because her intention, though warped by false theology, was for the good of her children.
"The jury decided that she was mentally ill, BUT WAS SHE? The simple pragmatic fact remains that if Arminianism is right, her two infants will spend eternity in heavenly bliss because she loved them so much that she insured, by killing them, that this will be so.
"Apparently, many Christians believe that there is a magical split-second in time before which a child, if they die, will go to heaven, and after which, if they die will spend eternity suffering in hell. They call this the "age of accountability."
"If I believed this nonsense I would take a gun into the largest maternity ward in Toronto and, before the police arrived, kill every infant who had just been born. This would cause an enormous amount of suffering to the parents, but this wouldn't matter much in the long run, because probably most of them (according to evangelical theology) are destined to suffer forever in hell anyway, so why not save their babies from the same fate?
"Don't try to argue that what I would be doing would be wrong ("thou shalt not kill"). The fact remains that my act would, in fact insure the eternal salvation of the babies. If Arminianism is right, then infanticide would certainly be one of the most effective ways of "saving souls." Besides, God forgives murder, especially when it is done for such a noble, though misguided cause. Sure, they would lock me away in an institution, but I would spend my life revelling in the glow of the emotional high of knowing that I had, beyond any shadow of a doubt guaranteed the salvation of the babies that I had killed.
"Folks, the actual truth about the matter is much more sane and blessed. The Scriptures teach that salvation is all of the Lord, and He will not fail to save every one of us according to His own timing. No one will be able to boast in His presence and say, "I have saved myself from eternal hell by exercising my faith in God's provision. God will get all of the glory for everyone's salvation.
"The important issue never should be "what is right or what is wrong." The only really important issue is, "What is God going to do with the person who is wrong?" The Scriptures teach that God will fit every one of us into His master plan in a positive way, and He will use our temporary involvement with sin to teach us the lessons that He wants us to learn. As my Dad often says, "That's what makes Him God!" "
Most people today are ignorant of this very simple thing.
Dead babies go to Paradise, not hell. It's the Law.
Ok, so what's the Law?
The Ten Commandments
Do not have any other god before God
Do not make yourself an idol
Do not take the Lord's name in vain
Remember the Sabbath Day and keep it holy
Honor your mother and father
Do not murder
Do not commit adultery
Do not steal
Do not testify or fear false witness against your neighbor
Do not covet
The Ten Commandments is also called the Mosaic Law, Law of Moses, Royal Law and simply The Law. It was given by God to convict of sin. The Law is given so that mankind would have a DEFINITION OF SIN AS GOD SEES IT. Unfortunately the post modern church doesn't inform us of these things. They tell us we owe tithes, but they don't tell us what God really wants. He wants us to obey the Law.
Ok, so it's real simple. Which of the dead babies in our example broke the Law? When did this amazing thing happen? Are there witnesses to this act? Which dead baby had an adulterous affair with a married nurse at the hospital? Which one killed the baby in the next crib? Do you see how stupid this can be?
Humanity is born with the potential to sin, but nobody including God convicts a man of a crime UNTIL ITS COMMITTED. Ergo, dead babies go to Paradise because they haven't sinned.
Donations for this word of wisdom will be gently denied. If you want to get money sucked out of your wallet, go to church. You'll leave poorer, but you may still leave unforgiven because nobody there told you what the hell sin was.
Sins are not mistakes. Read the list again.
Is it a sin for a kid to fall off her bicycle? No. It's a mistake of balance. Is it a sin for a carpenter to smash his thumb with a hammer? No. It's a mistake of aim. I'll bet dimes to donuts that Jesus smashed his thumb a few times, but HE didn't take God's name in vain when HE did it. A mistake is not the same as a sin.
God hates sin. God doesn't blame anybody for mistakes. Big difference.
The time to repent of sin is now. Jesus is coming back soon and things are going to get pretty dicey on earth before that happens. Don't wait.
and that's me, hollering from the choir loft...
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.
