Search results

I thought it was going to be about using the seat heaters.

It's not a lie to withold some pieces of information, unless you first say you are going to tell the whole truth

To what purpose in our resurrection, or His, for that matter? Wouldn't it be easier to say that He blinded their eyes so that they didn't recognize Him rather than that He changed His appearance? Both might be in His power, but one is deceitful to those who love Him.

Enough that He didn't have to manufacture scars on a new body, for tge reason below. If so, then the scars He showed them were fake, or of something that were not intrinsically evidential to His resurrection. I don't think I'm taking that part too literally. 👍

For sure! And that's my point. I had said earlier in the thread that the reason I think God had to "go down and see" was not that He didn't know enough to make a righteous judgment, but that He wanted to see if the cause was hopeless, at least so far as the circumstances warranted*. That's part...

And often tests the people to see if they will repent, like Noah preaching righteousness and Jonah going Nineveh.

Don't you think that a God who can hear from heaven could also see from heaven? 2 Chronicles 7:14 KJV — If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and...

Then He needed the "gory details" to make a righteous judgment? And His other sources of information are not trustworthy, apparently?

But in the Sodom case, God goes down to see whether what He has been told is true. He hasn't chosen to not know, but to know better.

I've heard that here before, but it doesnt make sense. If God chooses not to know something, doesn't He already have to know it well enough to choose not to know it?

To all of us. But we have His Spirit in us, to make it less and less of a challenge each day

If you require love to enemies to be requited before you offer it, and your enemies oblige you, they are morally superior to you, a Christian. Yet as little Christs, we should be morally superior. Just like Jesus forgave His tormentors during their torments of Him.

Because it doesn't make sense to invade a country that already believes like you do.

Since we're supposed to deny ourselves, it seems like it assumes we normally love ourselves. Duty means doing something even when we're uncomfortable (or in danger) doing it. discomfort in denying ourselves equates to loving ourselves normally. But even still, we are told that we save ourselves...

Why don't they have a Nobel Prevarication Prize?

You are missing some scripture. Jesus also said to do good to those who hurt you, which is how you love even your enemies. He didn't require us to do good to ourselves first (it was assumed).

Sounds right to me

Something Jesus and Moses assumed was happening but is never commanded. Which makes me wonder if it's something we are asking of people unnecessarily.

And we're supposed to confess and repent when we do. Repent means stop doing the sin and do the good. Yes, you can, if you are a Christian...if you have the Spirit of Christ in you. That's part of loving them. But do you forgive first before you love them, or vise versa? What is it to love...

But we’re supposed to love our enemies, not appreciate them. And love our neighbor as ourselves, which has to include appreciation, doesn’t it?