| Route_70 |
| Posted 05/16/12 at 08:52 AM | Reply with quote #31 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by innerblingQuote: Originally Posted by Route 70
What a crock!
So you get truth and falsehood from a crock but you do not know what crock is so you ask what a crock!
Ah but lack of question mark tells me that your intention is not to really know what a crock is but it was more of an rhetorical question.
The phrase, "What a crock!" is not a question; it is an exclamation: that is what the exclamation point ("!") represents.
The post to which I was responding in an example of pure rhetoric, parroted by a zombie who was indoctrinated by another zombie. |
| Loading... | |
| Tetelestai |
| Posted 05/16/12 at 09:21 AM | Reply with quote #32 |
|
Further to that, some separate issues:
Quote: 1. You are born a sinner.
Most mainstream Christians would agree to this (as do I) but some do not so I cannot see an objection to Christianity here. Given that we all sin, whether we are born with sin or not is pretty immaterial to our need of a saviour.
Quote: 2. Because of your sins you are destined to spend an eternity languishing in eternal torment in an eternal flame.
I'd agree with that on face value. Something unholy can not exist in the presence of the Holy God. His justice will consume anything unholy. Where I do take issue is the "eternal torment in an eternal flame" portion. We've been through this in the other thread, hell is not the medieval depiction of flames with Satan standing around with his fork and pointy tail frying the sinners. Hell is separation from God which, to me, is way way scarier than burning forever. If you do not want to be with God now, would it torment you to be without him forever? The impllications are a bit different so I'd advise you to make sure you understand by what is really understood as hell before you use your incorrect opinion on it as basis to criticise
Quote: 3. Even though you were born that way God is justified in consigning you to eternal torment for your sins. Same issue as the above. You want to be without God, God removes himself from you. He grants your wish. Quote: 4. God has provided a way out: trust in his son Jesus Christ, and he will absolve you of your sins (you don't have to quit sinning -- just acknowledge Christ as savior). I'd agree with this. Except I'd be less snarky on the "you don't have to quit sinning" bit. You definetely must be in a battle against sin. If you don't, you simply don't realise what Jesus did which would mean you don't accept Him as your Saviour - you like what he gives but you don't like following Him, being with Him. That would be like my wife staying with me for the convenience of the income I bring (or whatever example you prefer) but not interested in a relationship any more. You can think where that ends up in the long run. Quote: 5. After you have accepted Jesus as your savior you can rest in the assurance that you will not spend an eternity languishing in the eternal flames of hell (you will, however, bear the burden of worrying whether or not your friends and relatives have trusted Christ as savior). Yes, except for the snarky tone. And acceptance of Jesus as I pointed out under my discussion of point 4, not just wearing a gold cross around your neck and still living the gansta' life.
1. We are all sinners, whether we are born as sinners or not, we sin out of our own free choice.
2. Because of our sin, we can not live in harmony with God forever as he needs to do justice, being good. His justice will mean that as unholy people we can not be in His holy presence.
3. Because we sin by our own free choice, God is justified to serve justice by removing Himself from our presence.
4. Because God is graceful (as well as just) He has provided someone to suffer separation from Him in our stead. You can accept Jesus's penal substitution and so spend the afterlife in God's full presence. If you accept this you do good works (and battle against your own sin) because you are thankful. Not to earn salvation. You can also reject Jesus's penal substitution and spend the afterlife with God removing Himself from you completely as you didn't want to be in His presence, you chose your own way.
5. Accepting Jesus's penal substitution gives the peace of eternity with God but because you care about those around you, you want to share the gift you received. As Christian you are saddened by people rejecting this gift of salvation and strive to have as much of your family and friends accept Christ.
What problems would you have with my restated 5 points?
|
| Loading... | |
| Lawlessone777 |
| Posted 05/16/12 at 10:21 AM | Reply with quote #33 |
|
 |
| Loading... | |
| Tetelestai |
| Posted 05/16/12 at 10:27 AM | Reply with quote #34 |
|
Thanks lol. I'll see if this one develops indigestion first before moving on. If Route 70 answers my questions in post 30 and interact with my 5 restated points in post 32 trurthfully I'll stick around. If the snarky tone (peaceful? I doubt it) continues, I'm moving on. Certainly, calling us indoctrinated zombies parroting other zombies' sayings is not conducive to good conversation.
|
| Loading... | |
| TheProblemOfAtheism |
| Posted 05/16/12 at 10:47 AM | Reply with quote #35 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by idunnoQuote: Your position does not logically follow from your statement.
Troy was this dry humor? If so it was genius 
Haha that was hilarious |
| Loading... | |
| TheProblemOfAtheism |
| Posted 05/16/12 at 10:50 AM | Reply with quote #36 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by Route_70Quote: Originally Posted by TheProblemOfAtheism
... you do believe that nature all around us came about on accident.
That is not what I believe.
Furthermore, this is an example of what I have been saying: Christians are so arrogant as to presume to know what atheists believe and why.
So you must believe that nature was designed purposefully by some rather powerful being.
Why would you believe that? |
| Loading... | |
| Route_70 |
| Posted 05/16/12 at 02:01 PM | Reply with quote #37 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by Tetelestai
Something unholy can not exist in the presence of the Holy God. His justice will consume anything unholy. Where I do take issue is the "eternal torment in an eternal flame" portion. We've been through this in the other thread, hell is not the medieval depiction of flames with Satan standing around with his fork and pointy tail frying the sinners. Hell is separation from God which, to me, is way way scarier than burning forever.
Don't you see here where you and your kind constantly invent your own beliefs? This particular one does not square with what the Bible says. Are you not familiar with the story of Job, where Satan was ushered into the presence of God to discuss the case of Job? Satan certainly would fall into that category of "unholy," yet he was not consumed by the presence of God.
Another example would be found in Revelation 14:10, Quote: The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb.
Here is clearly an indication that the place of eternal torment (not consummation) takes place wherever Jesus (God) is. This verse disagrees with your belief in several ways, among which it disagrees with your notion of "separation from God," and your notion of eternal torment.
Why can't you just believe the Bible?
Quote: We are all sinners, whether we are born as sinners or not, we sin out of our own free choice.
So I can "choose" not to sin. But that would contradict your assertion that "we are all sinners."
You cannot have it both ways, bub. Either we are all sinners through no choice of our own, or we have a choice, and not everyone is a sinner.
Quote: Because of our sin, we can not live in harmony with God forever as he needs to do justice, being good. His justice will mean that as unholy people we can not be in His holy presence.
This is clearly contradicted by Revelation 14:10
Quote: Because we sin by our own free choice, God is justified to serve justice by removing Himself from our presence.
IBID, so on and so forth.
Let me help you a bit here. I know more about what the Bible says and teaches than you or any 10 people on this or any forum. |
| Loading... | |
| lapwing |
| Posted 05/16/12 at 05:44 PM | Reply with quote #38 |
|
Hi Route_70 How many times have you written "What a crock" on this website? What percentage of your posts include this? I think you must be either a Whack Actor or a Chart Wacko or both. I note you registered on 1 April - an indication of your credibility level? |
| Loading... | |
| Tetelestai |
| Posted 05/17/12 at 02:07 AM | Reply with quote #39 |
|
Right, you've committed a red card offense which means I will step out of the conversation but we'll get to that.
You are aware that presently, God has not removed Himself from us as sinners right? You don't believe you are in hell at the moment which means God has not removed himself from you. So what's the issue with the Job passage?
You are aware Revelations is largely in symbolic language so literal interpretations are mostly problematic? As for my belief in the Bible, I do believe the Bible but I also believe good exegesis is when we look at the Bible in its entirety and not pluck a single verse here and there. Scary things have happened when people did that.
If you want to choose not to sin, good luck with that. Your condecension in this thread, well, that's considered sin already. I wonder if you truly realise how sinful we as humans are.
Quote:
Let me help you a bit here. I know more about what the Bible says and teaches than you or any 10 people on this or any forum
This is where you get red carded. In sport, an offense that leads to your immediate suspension for the rest of the match. On the forum, me stopping having this conversation and heeding Lawlessone777's advice, albeit a bit late.
|
| Loading... | |
| troyjs |
| Posted 05/17/12 at 03:07 AM | Reply with quote #40 |
|
route 70,
You said:
Quote: Let me help you a bit here. I know more about what the Bible says and teaches than you or any 10 people on this or any forum.
I will give you an opportunity to substantiate this claim.
A question for you:
In light of the Granville-Sharp rule, what Christological doctrines are taught by the following verse?
simwn petros doulos kai apostolos ihsou cristou tois isotimon hmin lacousin pistin
en dikaiosunh tou qeou hmwn kai swthros hmwn ihsou cristou
|
| Loading... | |
| idunno |
| Posted 05/17/12 at 03:10 AM | Reply with quote #41 |
|
haha, well played troy. Route 70 give me a shout if you need help  |
| Loading... | |
| Route_70 |
| Posted 05/17/12 at 08:52 AM | Reply with quote #42 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by troyjs
route 70, In light of the Granville-Sharp rule, what Christological doctrines are taught by the following verse?
"simwn petros doulos kai apostolos ihsou cristou tois isotimon hmin lacousin pistin en dikaiosunh tou qeou hmwn kai swthros hmwn ihsou cristou"
This is not a biblical question; it is a question of grammar. You being a young seminarian probably do not yet realize that there is a difference. Nevertheless, I shall make an attempt to help you understand.
Well, to begin with, let us use the proper alphabet: "simwn (sumewn) petros doulos kai apostolos ihsou cristou tois isotimon hmin lacousin pistin en dikaiosunh tou qeou hmwn kai swthros ihsou cristou"
Although I have over 300 college credit hours, two semesters of Greek among them, I am a bit embarrassed to admit to being a bit rusty in that language. However, it is quite apparent that this verse arrives to us from 2 Peter chapter 1, where Peter says in the KJV version:
"Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:"
According to Granville Sharp, an 18th century classical grammarian, the terms "servant" and "apostle" refer to the same person, as do the terms "God" and "Saviour."
I sense that you might be a young seminary student who is stuck on a homework question, and being the helpful sort of person that I am, I decided to help you out a bit.
|
| Loading... | |
| Route_70 |
| Posted 05/17/12 at 08:56 AM | Reply with quote #43 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by Tetelestai As for my belief in the Bible, I do believe the Bible but I also believe good exegesis is when we look at the Bible in its entirety and not pluck a single verse here and there. Scary things have happened when people did that.
In other words, you really do not have a lot of confidence in the Bible. It scares you. Quote: I wonder if you truly realise how sinful we as humans are.
Speak for yourself.
|
| Loading... | |
| Route_70 |
| Posted 05/17/12 at 10:13 AM | Reply with quote #44 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by innerbling
... your post is incoherent as where do you get this "falsehood" or "truthful" if your position is "I don't know"?
"I don't know what it is, but I know what it ain't."
This is the summation of the difference between the believers and the nonbelievers:
Apparently it is human nature to have an answer to every question; and equally apparently the lack of any answer leads to a diminishing of self-esteem. So it is important to "know."
There is nothing demeaning about not knowing. Every human being passes through the womb with a complete and utter lack of knowledge of anything (apparently). It is at that point that we begin the journey of education. Then when we die there is still litany of unanswered questions.
The Christian is someone who has been indoctrinated to believe that the Bible contains all the answers to every question. It is a shame that so many people believe in that way. It only contributes to the overall ignorance of any society that has an appreciable number of believing Christians. Christianity, along with many other religions, only contributes to the "dumbing down" of a society.
The true scientist says: "I don't know, but I shall study the evidence until I have a good idea of the answer;" the Christian, on the other hand says: "I have the answer, now let me find some data that appears to support my position." The scientist is ever learning; the Christian continues in his ignorance. |
| Loading... | |
| johnBee |
| Posted 05/17/12 at 10:20 AM | Reply with quote #45 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by Route_70
According to Granville Sharp, an 18th century classical grammarian, the terms "servant" and "apostle" refer to the same person, as do the terms "God" and "Saviour."
This serves as a good example of how grammar alone isn't conclusive in showing how a text should be interpreted or translated. The Greek period(for example) doesn't present Sharp’s rule as a rigid rule without exception. Which is why we find a number of translations agreeing that 2 Peter 1:1 concerns two distinct persons.
On the exegesis side however, I'd point-out that in cases where two nouns are connected(ie. καί; kai - and), where the first noun is preceded by the definite article(ie. τοῦ; tou - of the) and with the second without it, it is normally accepted that two distinct persons are connected. Examples of such construction can be found(Greek) in; Acts 13:50, Ephesians 5:5; 2 Timothy 1:12; 1 Titus 5:21 and 2 Timothy 4:1. Likewise.. with reference to 2 Peter 1:1, the context presents us with a clear distinction between God and Jesus in the following verse(2).
Hope this helps.
|
| Loading... | |
