Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BATTLE TALK ~ BRX (rounds 4 thru 7)

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ahhh, so the Bible teaches us man's perspective about God, rather than the truth. But, of course, Calvinists have the supernatural ability to see past that and see what the Bible really means, when the Bible tells us the exact opposite of the truth, such as here with this "figurative" language.

    Jerry, you are telling us that God divinely inspired the Bible to tell us doctrinal claims that are the opposite of the truth about God, all so that we can read man's perspective about God.


    Frankly, if I want to read man's perspective about God, I will pick up the Bagavad Gita, or the Book of Mormon. But when I want to read man's perspective, I don't generally think of picking up the Bible. Rather, I go there to find out God's perspective about God.

    Thus, Jerry, you are revealing for all to see... the humanist underpinnings of the settled view that Bob has been referencing repeatedly in this debate. And God is talking to us in "baby talk," but of course the Calvinists and the other settled viewers have the amazing ability to know what is baby talk and what isn't.... which of course you can only do if you're an adult. Baby's cant' tell the difference! Problem is, Jerry.... that you're one of the babies, like the rest of us! So, for you to claim you understand the baby talk... is to put yourself on a level with God.

    Humanism in the church, there you have it.
    1 Corinthians 13:2
    And though I have ... all knowledge... but have not love, I am nothing.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by RightIdea
      Ahhh, so the Bible teaches us man's perspective about God, rather than the truth. But, of course, Calvinists have the supernatural ability to see past that and see what the Bible really means, when the Bible tells us the exact opposite of the truth, such as here with this "figurative" language.

      Jerry, you are telling us that God divinely inspired the Bible to tell us doctrinal claims that are the opposite of the truth about God, all so that we can read man's perspective about God.
      Rightidea,

      I am saying that God gave us a brain that enables us to tell "figurative" language" from "literal" language.If some people refuse to use their brains then that is their problem.

      For example,if we take a "literal" view of the verses that Jeremy provided at Exodus then we can only conclude that Moses was wiser than God Himself.I do not believe that that is true therefore I say that we must not take it literally but instead realize that it is to be interpreted in a "figurative" sense.
      Frankly, if I want to read man's perspective about God, I will pick up the Bagavad Gita, or the Book of Mormon. But when I want to read man's perspective, I don't generally think of picking up the Bible. Rather, I go there to find out God's perspective about God.
      Here is God telling Himself about Himself:

      "I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know"(Gen.18:21).

      Are to believe that God really went down to earth in order so that He could know whether or not the people had repented of their evil deeds?

      Of course not!

      "The eyes of the LORD are in every place, beholding the evil and the good"(Prov.15:3).

      The Lord did not have to come down to earth to see if the people had repented.Genesis 18:21 is not to be taken literally nor are we to believe that this is saying that God literally came down to earth.

      But you would accuse me of teaching exactly opposite of the trurh!
      Thus, Jerry, you are revealing for all to see... the humanist underpinnings of the settled view that Bob has been referencing repeatedly in this debate.
      It is you who is showing that you cannot tell the difference between figurative language and language that is to be taken literally.
      Problem is, Jerry.... that you're one of the babies, like the rest of us! So, for you to claim you understand the baby talk... is to put yourself on a level with God.
      Just because I know that some verses are used "figuratively" does not mean that I am putting myself on a level with God.

      I would say that those who cannot see the diffference between figuraitve language and language that is to be taken literally more closely resemble "babes" than I do.They have no need of "solid food" because they are content with their "milk".

      In His grace,--Jerry
      ”Dispensationalism Made Easy”
      http://gracebeacon.net/studies/shuga...made_easy.html

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
        doggieduff,

        I have already explained the "figurative" language that speaks of God repenting.It means that God appears to repent.
        Jerry, as I said before, 2 Tim. 3:16 says ALL scripture is for instruction in righteousness. What can I learn from a verse that says God repents? To this you have no answer, and a big problem. What if I said:

        "God does repent because the Bible says so, but the verses that say God doesn't repent MUST be read as figurative in light of those verses. I don't know what it means when He says He doesn't repent, I just know it's figurative because I used my brain."

        What saith Jerry of that argument? Not much you can say, since it's exactly what you're saying. The verses that I hold to as figurative are verses that I realize what God is trying to teach through the use of a metaphor or figure. But you can't even give me that. WHAT DO I DO WITH A VERSE THAT SAYS GOD IS WEARY OF REPENTING? WHY DID GOD PUT THAT VERSE IN THE BIBLE? HOW CAN I BE INSTRUCTED IN RIGHTEOSNESS WITH THAT VERSE JERRY? Please answer any or all of the capital questions. Face the facts. If God is weary, that shows emotion and the OV is true. If God repents, then the OV is true. The Bible says God is weary of repenting, but Jerry says, "God does not repent!" Who do I believe?

        You seem to think that we should be able to explain all "figurative" language literally,but when given a chance to do just that you decline!

        In His grace,--Jerry
        ”Dispensationalism Made Easy”
        http://gracebeacon.net/studies/shuga...made_easy.html
        I didn't decline. I asked you to fill out my simple sentence which you've admitted now that you cannot. THANK YOU. That's the only right answer Jerry. You don't know. How do you know that the "sun riseth" is a figure? Science. Do you think in the OT, the audience knew that? Of course not. Hence the figure. NOW we know what's going on with the sun because of scientific advancements and technological growths in this century. Guess what? Not only do I know God repents, but they knew in the OT as well. Moses asked God to repent, and Jonah said God repents. Either Moses was crazy in the head and Jonah a liar, or you're wrong Jerry. I'll take the latter. God needn't use a figure because they fully knew God repented as stated above. Jeremiah and Ezekiel knew as well. (See Chapter 18 in each book.) More biblical authors disagreeing with Jerry Shugart. Why does all this OT scripture say God repents, when indeed He never repents according to you?

        Genesis 22:12 is not a figure and now I'll explain to you since you admitted to having no idea what it means when it says God repents. God was testing Abraham. (Why the test if Calvinism is true?) Abraham proved himself faithful in Genesis 15, but went straight downhill from there. He lied twice about his wife being his sister in fear of his death. (Wouldn't God protect the one whom He promised a seed too? Abraham didn't believe.) Then Abraham had a "flesh" trip with Hagar, because he again didn't believe God would follow through with his unconditional promise. Now, God must put Abraham to the ultimate test, to find out how much Abraham trusted God. Would he walk the walk to the very end, to the point of killing his son, whom God promised seed like the start sof the sky? Only time would tell. It's obvious Abraham waivered in his faith, so it matters not Abraham's present heart state, but future heart state. It's one thing for Abraham to say, "Sure God, I'd sacrifice my son" and it's another to actually do it. Not until Abraham was about to plunge the knife in his sons chest did God know he would walk the walk. Abraham could have climbed half way up the mountain, "chickened" out and ran back. But he did not. Abraham believed God would raise his son from the dead, so he followed through. No figure of speech here Jerry. Why is this so hard?
        "Ignorance sustained by denial is crippling this nation's response to abortion. When something is so horrifying that we can't stand to look at it, perhaps we shouldn't be tolerating it." -Gregg Cunningham (Center for Bio-Ethical Reform)

        Comment


        • Jerry wants us to choose not to believe God when He says (in the first person!) that He is weary of repenting.

          Hmmmm.... believe Jerry, or believe God? I pick God.


          Jerry, here's part of the problem. There is no value whatsoever in God using such figurative language, if that's what it is! What could God possibly trying to communicate? That's what Will is driving at!

          If God wants to communicate that He always intended to do X, what on earth would be the value of Him speaking to humanity in the first person and saying, "I repent of____" or "I am weary of repenting!" if the exact opposite is true?

          It makes not the least bit of sense for you to claim God would be so deceitful! You make Him out to be a God of confusion.
          1 Corinthians 13:2
          And though I have ... all knowledge... but have not love, I am nothing.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by RightIdea
            Jerry wants us to choose not to believe God when He says (in the first person!) that He is weary of repenting.

            Hmmmm.... believe Jerry, or believe God? I pick God.
            RightIdea,

            You just ignored the verse that I gave that demonstrates that God uses figurative language when describing His actions:

            "I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know"(Gen.18:21).

            Do you take this literaly,RightIdea,or are you just going to ignore this verse again?

            If you take it literally then how do you explain the following verses?:

            "Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence? If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; Even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me"(Ps.139:7-9).
            It makes not the least bit of sense for you to claim God would be so deceitful! You make Him out to be a God of confusion.
            If you hold that both Genesis 18:21 and Psalms 139:7-9 are to be taken literally then it is you who makes God out to be a God of confusion.

            In His grace,--Jerry

            ”Dispensationalism Made Easy”
            http://gracebeacon.net/studies/shuga...made_easy.html

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
              RightIdea,

              You just ignored the verse that I gave that demonstrates that God uses figurative language when describing His actions:

              "I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know"(Gen.18:21).

              Do you take this literaly,RightIdea,or are you just going to ignore this verse again?

              If you take it literally then how do you explain the following verses?:

              "Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence? If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; Even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me"(Ps.139:7-9).

              If you hold that both Genesis 18:21 and Psalms 139:7-9 are to be taken literally then it is you who makes God out to be a God of confusion.

              In His grace,--Jerry

              ”Dispensationalism Made Easy”
              http://gracebeacon.net/studies/shuga...made_easy.html
              Jerry, to coin a phrase, "I thought I was being kind by not addressing that one."

              Yes, God went down. More specifically, the Son, who is the one who is the mediator between the Father and mankind, and we know that the Son had a bodily form even in the Old Testament, which he frequently appeared in on numerous occasions, even before 72 leaders in the wilderness! The Son, since Creation, has possessed locality!

              What's the alternative, Jerry? You ignored my point, which was that there is no value to such figurative language, if that is in fact what it is! You'd have us believe that just as with the unfulfilled prophecies, God willfully tells us things He knows to be false, over and over and over again.

              Yes, we know that the Son came down from heaven, met with Abraham, and investigated those wicked cities. The Lord says so, right there in scripture! And your personal human wisdom tells you that can't be true, thta would be "beneath God" to do that, so surely it must mean the opposite of what God says.

              God is speaking in the first person there, Jerry. It's not some man's impression of the event. God is speaking, Himself! And He says He will go down! And I, for one, believe Him. He is not a God of confusion, and certainly not a God of lies. A figure of speech here makes no sense.
              1 Corinthians 13:2
              And though I have ... all knowledge... but have not love, I am nothing.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by RightIdea
                Yes, we know that the Son came down from heaven, met with Abraham, and investigated those wicked cities.
                So the Lord had to come down to the earth in order to investigate those wicked cities?

                Is that what you think?

                If so,how do you explain the following verse?:

                "The eyes of the LORD are in every place, beholding the evil and the good"(Prov.15:3).

                In His grace,--Jerry
                ”Dispensationalism Made Easy”
                http://gracebeacon.net/studies/shuga...made_easy.html

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
                  So the Lord had to come down to the earth in order to investigate those wicked cities?

                  Is that what you think?

                  If so,how do you explain the following verse?:

                  "The eyes of the LORD are in every place, beholding the evil and the good"(Prov.15:3).

                  In His grace,--Jerry
                  ”Dispensationalism Made Easy”
                  http://gracebeacon.net/studies/shuga...made_easy.html
                  It's not my opinion. It's what I know to be true from God's word. The Son came down, because He is personal, relational, not a distant God who only keeps us at bay!

                  Do you deny the Son had a bodily form in the OT? Do you deny that this bodily form had locality? I know you can't deny that God said He was going down. Unfortunately, you don't believe Him.

                  God's eyes are everywhere. We know that God is present everywhere He wants to be, amen. But you should darn well know that Proverbs is an artistic writing, one given to sweeping statements for effect, and not written for precision! My gosh, there are many proverbs that couldn't possibly be taken literally, and you know it.

                  Jerry, you would have us take a historical account figuratively, and an artistic writing that uses hyperbole... as literal! Brother, your hermeneutic is so incredibly backward! We know God isn't literally everywhere. Proverbs commonly uses exaggeration. It doesn't say things that are the opposite of the truth, but rather it expresses in strong and sweeping statements things that do resemble the truth! But God isn't in the heart of a wicked man. So, no, God isn't absolutely everywhere. And the Bible says so.


                  On what basis do you believe we should take historical accounts figuratively and hyperbolic, artistic writings literally? What is the basis for that hermeneutical principle, Jerry? Where'd you learn that?
                  1 Corinthians 13:2
                  And though I have ... all knowledge... but have not love, I am nothing.

                  Comment


                  • doggieduff,

                    You said:
                    Jerry, as I said before, 2 Tim. 3:16 says ALL scripture is for instruction in righteousness. What can I learn from a verse that says God repents? To this you have no answer, and a big problem'
                    Since you think that there is an explanation for every single thing that is said in a narrative that is in figurative language then perhaps you will explain the meaning of the following words:

                    "I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know"(Gen.18:21).

                    If we take a "literal" view of this verse then we must believe that at the time those words were spoken that the Lord did not know whether or not the reports about the wicked cities were true or not.But we know that this is not to be taken literally,because the Lord surely knew that they were acting wickedly:

                    The eyes of the LORD are in every place, beholding the evil and the good"(Prov.15:3).

                    So since Genesis 18:21 is figurative,then perhaps you will provide an answer as to what is the meaning when the Lord said that He will come down to investigate the wicked cities.After all,you seem convinced that there is a meaning that we can always put on figurative language.Here is your chance to prove it.

                    In His grace,--Jerry

                    ”Dispensationalism Made Easy”
                    http://gracebeacon.net/studies/shuga...made_easy.html
                    Last edited by Turbo; September 6th, 2005, 05:03 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Jerry, I have a very sincere question.

                      Do you believe God responds to prayer? If so, how is that different from Moses petitioning to God, face to face back then? That's all it is, nothing more. We pray to God about our needs, He responds to us, genuinely responds! As Bob said, He's not a stone idol but a living Person in relationship with us!

                      Moses essentially prayed to God, and God acted based on Moses' prayer! Just as we hope He will do in regards to us, today!

                      So then, do you believe God responds to prayer?
                      1 Corinthians 13:2
                      And though I have ... all knowledge... but have not love, I am nothing.

                      Comment


                      • RightIdea,

                        I quoted this verse:

                        "The eyes of the LORD are in every place, beholding the evil and the good"(Prov.15:3).

                        And this is the way that you answered it:
                        Originally posted by RightIdea
                        God's eyes are everywhere. We know that God is present everywhere He wants to be, amen. But you should darn well know that Proverbs is an artistic writing, one given to sweeping statements for effect, and not written for precision! My gosh, there are many proverbs that couldn't possibly be taken literally, and you know it.
                        Proverbs 15:3 is saying that He sees everything.But in your zeal to limit God you say that God is only present where He wants to be!

                        How about His "undertanding" being infinite?Is that not to be taken literally:

                        "Great is our Lord, and of great power: His understanding is infinite"(Psa 147:5).

                        According to your literal reading of Genesis 18:21 He did not even have an understanding of what was going on in the wicked cities until He went down to investigate.In other words,you deny that the Lord's knowledge is infinite because you say that He did not even know what was going on in the wicked cities until He went to investigate.

                        And how about this verse?:

                        "Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in His sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of Him with whom we have to do"(Heb 4:13).

                        According to you the people in Sodom and Gomorrah were not manifest in His sight until He went down to investigate.

                        After reading the teaching of those who support the brand of Open Theism espoused by Bob Enyart I have come to realize that they do not believe that He can know everything about us that will happen in the future,and they believe that the Lord can make a false prophecy,and they believe that God does not know everything that is happening on the earth at the present time.

                        They are willing to argue that God can be wrong so that they can cling to their fables.

                        In His grace,--Jerry

                        ”Dispensationalism Made Easy”
                        http://gracebeacon.net/studies/shuga...made_easy.html

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
                          Jeremy,

                          If you used Numbers 14 to show that God changed Him mind then why did you say the following?:

                          The third reference refers to Numbers 14. The word "nacham" or repent was not used there. God Himself said, "I have pardoned according to your word." That's why I said, "God did not repent there" Jerry... Pay attention.

                          And there are your comments on Numbers 14:

                          God planned to strike and disinherit Israel, but responded to Moses prayer. He didn't repent Jerry, He pardoned according to the words Moses spoke.
                          Jerry,

                          I hope you're not purposely trying to aggravate me. I hope that you're unaware of my point. I hope that it is my fault, and that I'm not being clear. I'll try for a third time...

                          In Exodus 32:14, God "repented" of the harm He said He would do. The Hebrew word "nacham" is used in Exodus 32:14. God repented, or had a change of mind concerning His intended judgment. God inspired Moses to use the Hebrew word "nacham" when He wrote Exodus 32:14, which is commonly translated "repent" in many places (Numbers 23:19 says God will not "nacham" repent).

                          In Numbers 14, God again states that He will destroy Israel. Specifically, God says He will "strike them with pestilence and disinherit" Israel. Moses prayed (as he did in Exodus) and God responded to that prayer. God responded, "I have pardoned according to your word." God did not inspire Moses to use the Hebrew word "nacham" in this passage. God changed His mind, but Moses showed this truth without using the Hebrew word for repent (nacham). Again, that's why I said what I said.

                          To clarify for you Jerry... God changed His mind in Exodus 32 and in Numbers 14. God repented (nacham) in Exodus 32 and changed His mind. God pardoned the people in Numbers 14 and did not use the Hebrew word for repent (nacham). Am I clear now Jerry?

                          Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
                          Previously when speaking about Numbers 24...
                          Do you mean Numbers 14?

                          ...you said that "God did not repent there",but now you are saying that you used Numbers 14 "to show that God changed His mind".

                          Are you not aware that to "repent" means to change one's mind?
                          I'm well aware Jerry. That's why I clarified for the third time above...

                          Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
                          I said that if we are to take these verses "literally" then they show that God changes His mind.Leave it to you to take what I said out of its context.

                          And of course you did not answer the fact that if they are taken literally then they also teach that Moses was wiser than God.All you have to say is:

                          Here is the problem with a "literal" reading of those verses,Jeremy.Perhaps you will address that problem instead of just ignoring it.You said:
                          If we take the verses at Exodus 32 and Ezekiel 20 "literally" then we must believe that Moses had more wisdom than the Lord.If we take a literal reading of the verses then we must believe that the Lord did not realize the consequences would be if He destroyed the children of Israel.After He makes His threat we read:

                          "And Moses besought the LORD his God, and said, LORD, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people, which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power, and with a mighty hand?Wherefore should the Egyptians speak, and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people...And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people"(Ex.32:11,12,14).

                          Then we see that is was not until Moses told the Lord these things that He repented.And the Lord tells us exactly why He repented:

                          "Then I said, ‘I will pour out My fury on them and fulfill My anger against them in the midst of the land of Egypt.’ But I acted for My name’s sake, that it should not be profaned before the Gentiles among whom they were, in whose sight I had made Myself known to them, to bring them out of the land of Egypt"(Ez.20:8,9).

                          If these verses are to be taken literally then we must believe that the Lord was not aware that if He destroyed Israel that His Name would be profaned among the Gentiles for the mischief He would do for bringing them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth.

                          But the Lord was not wise enough to realize this,and it was not until Moses explained this to Him did He understand.That is what we must believe if we take these verses in a literal manner.

                          Jeremy,since you say that these verses should be read literally then you must believe that the Lord was not as wise as Moses.
                          No Jerry, that's your opinion. You set up a straw man here. God is gracious and desires all men everywhere to repent. God intended to destroy Israel numerous times, and changed His mind. Ezekiel 20 clarifies why He changed His mind. Moses being "smarter" than God never enters the picture.

                          I echo Doogieduff's question to you Jerry. What am I suppose to learn from Exodus 32 and Numbers 14 when they say God changed His mind? You say these passages are "figurative," and do not really mean what they say. Please explain what truth I can take from these passages if they don't really mean what they say.

                          God Bless,
                          --Jeremy
                          Do you desire to make all men see what is the Dispensation of the Mystery? (Eph 3:9)

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
                            RightIdea,

                            I quoted this verse:

                            "The eyes of the LORD are in every place, beholding the evil and the good"(Prov.15:3).

                            And this is the way that you answered it:

                            Proverbs 15:3 is saying that He sees everything.But in your zeal to limit God you say that God is only present where He wants to be!
                            And I explained my logical rationale for exactly that (as has Bob), which you ignore, pretend I never even wrote (just like Sam), because it's not convenient for you to actually address. And you completely ignored the question of why you take literally something in an artistic book like Proverbs or Psalms, but you take figuratively a specific historical account. Which makes not the least bit of sense, Jerry!

                            How about His "undertanding" being infinite?Is that not to be taken literally:

                            "Great is our Lord, and of great power: His understanding is infinite"(Psa 147:5).
                            Amen, what's the problem with that? I'm with ya. No disagreement there.

                            According to your literal reading of Genesis 18:21 He did not even have an understanding of what was going on in the wicked cities until He went down to investigate.In other words,you deny that the Lord's knowledge is infinite because you say that He did not even know what was going on in the wicked cities until He went to investigate.
                            You completely ignored my question about prayer, and you expect me to still respond to you, Jerry? Hypocrite.

                            And how about this verse?:

                            "Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in His sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of Him with whom we have to do"(Heb 4:13).
                            Amen to that! All things are available for God to see if He wants! All things are naked and opened unto the eyes of Him! No problem there...

                            According to you the people in Sodom and Gomorrah were not manifest in His sight until He went down to investigate.

                            After reading the teaching of those who support the brand of Open Theism espoused by Bob Enyart I have come to realize that they do not believe that He can know everything about us that will happen in the future,and they believe that the Lord can make a false prophecy,and they believe that God does not know everything that is happening on the earth at the present time.
                            Amen, amen and amen! God does not know our future free will choices, and thank God He doesn't!

                            Thank God that He does change His mind and does not bring about some of the things He said He would do! (Do you even deny this? How can you possibly?)

                            And amen, God doesn't want to watch children sodomized while they're being filmed for mass distribution. God does not want to see absolutely everything. You would imprison God in His own omniscience, make Him a slave to knowledge. How dare you put God in a box like that and command Him to do this or that, or have the gumption to tell Him what is appropriate?

                            They are willing to argue that God can be wrong so that they can cling to their fables.

                            In His grace,--Jerry

                            ”Dispensationalism Made Easy”
                            http://gracebeacon.net/studies/shuga...made_easy.html
                            Oh yes. You take artistic poetry as literal, and specific historical accounts as figurative, and you claim we are the ones who cling to fables? I did need a laugh today, Jerry. Thanks!
                            1 Corinthians 13:2
                            And though I have ... all knowledge... but have not love, I am nothing.

                            Comment


                            • RightIdea,

                              Let us examine your responses to my last post.First I said:

                              How about His "undertanding" being infinite?Is that not to be taken literally:

                              "Great is our Lord, and of great power: His understanding is infinite"(Psa 147:5).


                              To which you replied:

                              Amen, what's the problem with that? I'm with ya. No disagreement there.

                              RightIdea,if the Lord's understanding is infinite,why did He not know about what was going on in the wicked cities?In other words,why was it necessary to go down and investigate what was going on there?

                              That is why I said:

                              According to your literal reading of Genesis 18:21 He did not even have an understanding of what was going on in the wicked cities until He went down to investigate.In other words,you deny that the Lord's knowledge is infinite because you say that He did not even know what was going on in the wicked cities until He went to investigate.

                              And your answer is no answer.It is nothing but an evasion.You said:

                              You completely ignored my question about prayer, and you expect me to still respond to you, Jerry? Hypocrite.

                              What does prayer have to do with this?We were discussing the passages in regard to the evil cities before you even asked anything about prayer.But now you will not answer because I have not yet responded to a question about something that has nothing to do with what we were previously discussing.

                              In His grace,--Jerry
                              ”Dispensationalism Made Easy”
                              http://gracebeacon.net/studies/shuga...made_easy.html

                              Comment


                              • Jeremy,

                                I asked you:

                                Are you not aware that to "repent" means to change one's mind?

                                To which you replied:

                                I'm well aware Jerry.

                                But you said that God did not repent at Numbers 14:

                                The third reference refers to Numbers 14. The word "nacham" or repent was not used there. God Himself said, "I have pardoned according to your word." That's why I said, "God did not repent there" Jerry... Pay attention.

                                But now you say that at Numbers 14 that God did change His mind:

                                God changed His mind in Exodus 32 and in Numbers 14.

                                At one place you said that God did not repent at Numbers 14 and then at another place you say that He did change His mind at Numbers 14.

                                If “repent” means to change one’s mind,then how is it possible that the Lord did not repent at Numbers 14 but yet He changed His mind?
                                I hope you're not purposely trying to aggravate me. I hope that you're unaware of my point. I hope that it is my fault, and that I'm not being clear.
                                I think that it is the third “hope”—that it is your fault and that you are not being clear.In fact,you are contrdicting yourself.

                                Next,I demonstrated that if Exodus 32 and Ezekiel 20 are to be taken literally then we must believe that the Lord was not aware that if He destroyed Israel that His Name would be profaned among the Gentiles for the mischief He would do for bringing them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth.

                                But the Lord was not wise enough to realize this,and it was not until Moses explained this to Him did He understand.That is what we must believe if we take these verses in a literal manner.

                                Jeremy,since you say that these verses should be read literally then you must believe that the Lord was not as wise as Moses.

                                Here is your response:

                                No Jerry, that's your opinion. You set up a straw man here.

                                You said:

                                Ezekiel 20 clarifies why He changed His mind.

                                Yes,He changed His mind so that His Name would not be profaned before the Gentiles:

                                "Then I said, ‘I will pour out My fury on them and fulfill My anger against them in the midst of the land of Egypt.’ But I acted for My name’s sake, that it should not be profaned before the Gentiles among whom they were, in whose sight I had made Myself known to them, to bring them out of the land of Egypt"(Ez.20:8,9).

                                And it is obvious when He realized that His Name would be profaned before the Gentiles if He destroyed Israel—after Moses told Him that would happen if He did destroy Israel:

                                And Moses besought the LORD his God, and said, LORD, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people, which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power, and with a mighty hand?Wherefore should the Egyptians speak, and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people...And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people"(Ex.32:11,12,14).

                                Again,if we are to take a literal reading of these verses we must conclude that the Lord was not even aware of the consequences of destroying Israel until Moses pointed out those consequences.But you say that I am wrong but you do not tell me what I said that was wrong.In other words,you just evaded the whole question.
                                I echo Doogieduff's question to you Jerry. What am I suppose to learn from Exodus 32 and Numbers 14 when they say God changed His mind? You say these passages are "figurative," and do not really mean what they say. Please explain what truth I can take from these passages if they don't really mean what they say.
                                I will give you a chance to answer what I said to doggieduff:

                                “Since you think that there is an explanation for every single thing that is said in a narrative that is in figurative language then perhaps you will explain the meaning of the following words:

                                "I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know"(Gen.18:21).

                                If we take a "literal" view of this verse then we must believe that at the time those words were spoken that the Lord did not know whether or not the reports about the wicked cities were true or not.But we know that this is not to be taken literally,because the Lord surely knew that they were acting wickedly:

                                ”The eyes of the LORD are in every place, beholding the evil and the good"(Prov.15:3).

                                So since Genesis 18:21 is figurative,then perhaps you will provide an answer as to what is the meaning when the Lord said that He will come down to investigate the wicked cities.After all,you seem convinced that there is a meaning that we can always put on figurative language.Here is your chance to prove it.”

                                In His grace,--Jerry
                                ”Dispensationalism Made Easy”
                                http://gracebeacon.net/studies/shuga...made_easy.html

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X