REPORT: Nicer Than God - By Bob Enyart

[Nineveh]

But you can't answer me as to how this is suppposed to make sense can you?

I have over and over again. I don't think it's all that uncommon. Other than a lame "to decribe man" you seem to be the one lacking explanation.

A literal being who has full knowledge tries to take on a creator who could destroy him and he KNOWS that? That is beyond insanity....

Yet people do it on a daily basis.

Thats what makes more sense though! Man doesn't need a literal satan to commit evil,

That's why God didn't need a metaphor.

...if anything it's a copout to blame some other being for our own shortcomings, why not just accept responsibilty?

Hello? You are the one saying satan is a metaphor for man.

And why do you think that to think of this as metaphorical gives my view any grief?

Because you can't dismiss satan if he is real. You would have to acknowledge that beings can and do really reject God. Oh, you forgot to answer... are all angels metaphors or just satan?

Oh, come off it, plenty of those who even believe in ET think the lake is metaphor, remember the chapter in which it appears? The one that is actually written in signifiers? Knight and PK have differing interpretations on it as well as a load of other people so it's hardly 'straightforward'
as for genesis I happen to take it metaphorically as well, so what? So do many others....

An appeal to majority (that's a fallacy by the way). Wouldn't you rather appeal to God?

How much of the Bible is a "metaphor"? Is Jesus?

Hello? He stopped doubting once he'd had the proof that he required, he was not condemned for this and you dodge around the point that he didnt believe until he had had the proof....

Your point was that Jesus didn't condemn him for unbelief. Thomas could have rejected Him, even at that point. After all faith is the evidence of things unseen. The difference between someone who believes and someone who doesn't believe is their own heart.

Um, yeah, and look at what is required to fulfill the law, love.....

That was the summation of the Law. Love of God and love of neighbor. Obedience fulfilled the Law. That is why only Jesus could. Trying to avoid a witness to a sexually immoral person (or standing in the way of a witness to such with labels of "intolerant/hateful/bigot") is neither Loving God (as it's His command to not sin by practicing sexual immorality) nor is it loving your neighbor as yourself, unless you believe it's "ok" for you to break God's Laws of sexual immorality and tolerate others who do. Then it becomes an issue of leading others into sin. So "love" all by itself is not the be-all-end-all that both you and dave believe it is. God's love is very different than the worldly love you both preach.

 

[Clete]

Great post Nineveh!

 

[Nathon Detroit]

That was the summation of the Law. Love of God and love of neighbor. Obedience fulfilled the Law. That is why only Jesus could. Trying to avoid a witness to a sexually immoral person (or standing in the way of a witness to such with labels of "intolerant/hateful/bigot") is neither Loving God (as it's His command to not sin by practicing sexual immorality) nor is it loving your neighbor as yourself, unless you believe it's "ok" for you to break God's Laws of sexual immorality and tolerate others who do. Then it becomes an issue of leading others into sin. So "love" all by itself is not the be-all-end-all that both you and dave believe it is. God's love is very different than the worldly love you both preach.

:first: POTD

 

[red77]

I have over and over again. I don't think it's all that uncommon. Other than a lame "to decribe man" you seem to be the one lacking explanation.

What are you on about with 'uncommon'?! This was a being that must have had full knowledge and yet chose to rebel against a deity that he knew could have crushed him to shreds!!!! You have not addressed this at all....!

Yet people do it on a daily basis.

What?! People take on God thinking they can defeat him on a daily basis? Where??????? Please make some sense......

That's why God didn't need a metaphor.

Uh, ok, what is that supposed to mean exactly?

Hello? You are the one saying satan is a metaphor for man.

Hello? back....! Why blame some other entity for our own shortcomings? Explain that......!

Because you can't dismiss satan if he is real. You would have to acknowledge that beings can and do really reject God. Oh, you forgot to answer... are all angels metaphors or just satan?

Or maybe I would prefer to accept that whatever evil and sin I have done actually eminates from me and not from some being who I can conveniently blame my trespasses or temptations on!

An appeal to majority (that's a fallacy by the way). Wouldn't you rather appeal to God?

An 'appeal'? You havent even made any effort to address why there are so many discrepancies within the theology of eternal torment!

How much of the Bible is a "metaphor"? Is Jesus?

A lot I believe, how much do you believe is metaphor or literal? I don't happen to believe that Jesus is a metaphor but he employed them as such on a regular basis...

Your point was that Jesus didn't condemn him for unbelief. Thomas could have rejected Him, even at that point. After all faith is the evidence of things unseen. The difference between someone who believes and someone who doesn't believe is their own heart.

Well of course he didn't! Thomas needed something other than his own faith and needed in his own mind some proof which seeing the wounds of the nails gave him! Theoretically even having been shown the wounds Thomas could have rejected Jesus but why on earth would he??!

That was the summation of the Law. Love of God and love of neighbor. Obedience fulfilled the Law. That is why only Jesus could. Trying to avoid a witness to a sexually immoral person (or standing in the way of a witness to such with labels of "intolerant/hateful/bigot") is neither Loving God (as it's His command to not sin by practicing sexual immorality) nor is it loving your neighbor as yourself, unless you believe it's "ok" for you to break God's Laws of sexual immorality and tolerate others who do. Then it becomes an issue of leading others into sin. So "love" all by itself is not the be-all-end-all that both you and dave believe it is. God's love is very different than the worldly love you both preach.

"love" is not self righteous lecturing and condemnation of people who don't live up to the 'moral standard' that you would have certain people executed for not complying with, phariseeical legalism is NOT love by any stretch and imposing what would effectively be a police state mentality to correspond with how things should be run would result in little more than a 1984 society.......... :vomit:

 

[Nineveh]

What are you on about with 'uncommon'?! This was a being that must have had full knowledge and yet chose to rebel against a deity that he knew could have crushed him to shreds!!!! You have not addressed this at all....!

What part are you missing? God lived in the middle of Israel, Jesus walked among His own people. God lamented His own people would reject Him for false idols while pagans were faithful. The first two people ignored what God had to say. The Bible is full of folks rejecting God from Gen to Rev. The majority of people still do today. Satan and his followers are just one example.

What?! People take on God thinking they can defeat him on a daily basis? Where??????? Please make some sense......

I wish you would make some sense on the issue of the "metaphor" of satan.

Folks who try to change God's Law are "trying to defeat Him". People who murder His followers are "trying to defeat Him". Every pagan religion under the sun is "trying to defeat Him".

Golly, red. What does the word rebel mean to you? A quick search of the Bible gives us 6 pages of rebel/rebellion/rebellious. Every time someone sins it's being rebellious.

Uh, ok, what is that supposed to mean exactly?

God didn't need to use satan as a "metaphor". I've already said this more than once. God is quite capable of pointing out who is to blame for men's evil hearts without making up "satan".

Hello? back....! Why blame some other entity for our own shortcomings? Explain that......!

You are the one calling satan a metaphor, not me. That is up to you to explain.

Or maybe I would prefer to accept that whatever evil and sin I have done actually eminates from me and not from some being who I can conveniently blame my trespasses or temptations on!

Once again, if even you can see where your sin comes from, why make up "satan"?

Again: Are all angels "metaphor" or just satan? How about Michael? Gabriel? The Seraphim or Cherubim?

An 'appeal'? You havent even made any effort to address why there are so many discrepancies within the theology of eternal torment!

The "discrepancies" of any doctrine are man made. God is clear. Appealing to a majority, even good council such as Knight or PK, is still a fallacy. Knight and PK are still mere mortal men who could be in error. If you ask either, they would most likely tell you they would change their stand on any given topic if they were provided sound Biblical information. A "majority" does not a sound doctrine make.

A lot I believe, how much do you believe is metaphor or literal? I don't happen to believe that Jesus is a metaphor but he employed them as such on a regular basis...

If "a lot" of the Bible is "metaphor", what makes Jesus so special? Jesus is said to be the Word that was in the beginning through whom all things were made. Why is His accomplishments in Gen 1 metaphor but He Himself is not?

Personally, I take the history as history, the metaphor as metaphor and the poetry as poetry, etc. Context, context, context.

...even having been shown the wounds Thomas could have rejected Jesus but why on earth would he??!

Let's state that this way, even though the pharisees could read the Bible and knew it by heart, and saw Christ was fulfilling what they had been waiting for, why did they reject Him? Did they need to see Him more? Did they need more proof?

Faith is the evidence of things unseen. He calls to us, our own consciences bear witness. Yet... it's still up to each heart to accept or continue in rebellion.

"love" is not self righteous lecturing and condemnation of people who don't live up to the 'moral standard' that you would have certain people executed for not complying with, phariseeical legalism is NOT love by any stretch and imposing what would effectively be a police state mentality to correspond with how things should be run would result in little more than a 1984 society.......... :vomit:

Godly Love is not embarrassed of the moral stand God clearly laid out in His word. Nor does Godly Love try to dismiss that moral standard by offering excuses to those who need Christ. Godly Love, and love of our neighbors looks at the Law as a "tutor that brings us to Christ".

When was the Law repealed? I'll need a verse. Do you know Who first called for death in cases of sexual immorality? Was it God? Bob Enyart? The Pope? Me? Who?

 

[red77]

What part are you missing? God lived in the middle of Israel, Jesus walked among His own people. God lamented His own people would reject Him for false idols while pagans were faithful. The first two people ignored what God had to say. The Bible is full of folks rejecting God from Gen to Rev. The majority of people still do today. Satan and his followers are just one example.

These are human beings you're talking about, not some supposedly literal angel who dwelled in the realm of Heaven! Surely you can ascertain the difference here....?

I wish you would make some sense on the issue of the "metaphor" of satan.

satan, lucipher, a metaphor for the darkness of man the same as the number of the beast, is the beast the same as satan and lucipher?

Folks who try to change God's Law are "trying to defeat Him". People who murder His followers are "trying to defeat Him". Every pagan religion under the sun is "trying to defeat Him".

According to you seemingly everyone who isn't a 'christian' is a pagan, is that correct? So this would include agnostics who are merely searching for answers in this life and in many cases reaching out for God, how is this rebellious?

Golly, red. What does the word rebel mean to you? A quick search of the Bible gives us 6 pages of rebel/rebellion/rebellious. Every time someone sins it's being rebellious.

So everyone who sins is consciously thinking that they're doing so against God whether they believe or not? :dizzy:

God didn't need to use satan as a "metaphor". I've already said this more than once. God is quite capable of pointing out who is to blame for men's evil hearts without making up "satan".

Yes, men are, it's more and more of a copout to blame temptation and wrongdoing on another, if as you seem to believe that satan is a literal being - then how can we have freewill when it is affected by an entity with the power and will to influence people?

You are the one calling satan a metaphor, not me. That is up to you to explain.

I think I explained this above

Once again, if even you can see where your sin comes from, why make up "satan"?

Again: Are all angels "metaphor" or just satan? How about Michael? Gabriel? The Seraphim or Cherubim?

Why blame our shortcomings on him? wouldn't that be a fair defence? "Hey, I would never have thought about eating the apple if this really powerful entity hadn't suggested it first?" None of the other angels are mentioned as having anywhere near this literal power - and just what exactly is a literal 'angel' anyway?

The "discrepancies" of any doctrine are man made. God is clear. Appealing to a majority, even good council such as Knight or PK, is still a fallacy. Knight and PK are still mere mortal men who could be in error. If you ask either, they would most likely tell you they would change their stand on any given topic if they were provided sound Biblical information. A "majority" does not a sound doctrine make.

But there shouldn't be any discrepancies in a theology of such a nature, not when people such as PK say it's intrinsically clear, how can it be when there is still room for manoevuere in interpretation? I agree with you in that we're all fallible people who are prone to error, so why should that not mean that those who are convinced that such a horrible thing as eternal torment is true could not be in error themselves?

If "a lot" of the Bible is "metaphor", what makes Jesus so special? Jesus is said to be the Word that was in the beginning through whom all things were made. Why is His accomplishments in Gen 1 metaphor but He Himself is not?

Personally, I take the history as history, the metaphor as metaphor and the poetry as poetry, etc. Context, context, context.

the 'key' word - "personally", who are you to decipher what is contexturally metaphorical or literal apart from yourself ? This is why there so many different theologies out there isn't it?
I do believe that much of the bible is literal as well when taken in context - such as the 10 commandments for example, that does not mean that everything else is as conveniently literal for certain doctrines...

Let's state that this way, even though the pharisees could read the Bible and knew it by heart, and saw Christ was fulfilling what they had been waiting for, why did they reject Him? Did they need to see Him more? Did they need more proof?

Because they were still fallible men who were full of pride and abusing their authority, they were still on earth and hadn't experienced heaven as satan the 'literal' being supposedly had, don't forget that Jesus came to Earth as a man, he may have performed miracles yes but I don't recall any in front of the pharisees - although feel free to point out any if I'm istaken....

Faith is the evidence of things unseen. He calls to us, our own consciences bear witness. Yet... it's still up to each heart to accept or continue in rebellion.

Yes, and this requires belief in something or someone which is not proven beyond any doubt, otherwise it would not be faith but absolute knowledge, something which God wills all men to have at some point

Godly Love is not embarrassed of the moral stand God clearly laid out in His word. Nor does Godly Love try to dismiss that moral standard by offering excuses to those who need Christ. Godly Love, and love of our neighbors looks at the Law as a "tutor that brings us to Christ".

When was the Law repealed? I'll need a verse. Do you know Who first called for death in cases of sexual immorality? Was it God? Bob Enyart? The Pope? Me? Who?

I know who first repealed the death penalty for a woman who several people here would seemingly be prepared to stone to death nowadays - with some powerful words which I believe applied to more than just the crowd in question but to everyone then and now....Mosaic law is a thing of the past and I believe applied only then and there, you don't still believe in 'an eye for an eye' do you? If not why not? Who repealed that I wonder?

 

[Aletheia]

Is David describing God as nice in Psalm 5:4-6?

 

[Nineveh]

These are human beings you're talking about, not some supposedly literal angel who dwelled in the realm of Heaven! Surely you can ascertain the difference here....?

Freewill is freewill, red. You wanted examples of folks who rejected God to His face. Satan was only one instance. The entire nation of Israel did the same.

satan, lucipher, a metaphor for the darkness of man

Where in the Bible does God not point out that evil resides in the hearts of men that He would need to use a metaphor? Even when Christ used metaphor He used reality. IE comparing the Lake (and yes it's real) to a garbage pit (also real). He didn't make up something to use as His metaphor.

...the same as the number of the beast, is the beast the same as satan and lucipher?

I dread getting into the significance of numbers with you. Even easy things you tend to ignore/misunderstand/twist. But I will give it a shot and see how it goes: Seven is completeness/perfection. The number of man, created on the 6th day, labors six days, six words for man in Hebrew, etc. is 6. I'm sure if you think about it... what is one less than 7/perfection? Three is the number of Divine Perfection IE the Trinity. So if we take this cursory look at numbers used in the Bible, what do we get when we look at the number 666? "Divine" imperfection or "Divine" man. It's a mockery of God in essence. IE: beast, false prophet, dragon. The god of man. For further understanding

According to you seemingly everyone who isn't a 'christian' is a pagan, is that correct?

Almost. I make exception for the Jews. So my view is Jew, Christian, pagan.

So this would include agnostics who are merely searching for answers in this life and in many cases reaching out for God, how is this rebellious?

They search forever, being careful to accept only that which contradicts God.

So everyone who sins is consciously thinking that they're doing so against God whether they believe or not? :dizzy:

That's how it is. Sin is rebellion against God. Of course when our consciences bring up the point, we tend to turn to more sin to quell that soft inner voice.

Yes, men are, it's more and more of a copout to blame temptation and wrongdoing on another, if as you seem to believe that satan is a literal being - then how can we have freewill when it is affected by an entity with the power and will to influence people?

I never claimed satan or his demons force anyone into anything. We are quite capable of evil, as God has pointed out. I believe these fallen beings can influence us, that is why Paul tells us to put on our spiritual armor. (Eph 6) But influence and force are two different things. A freewill against can act against influence, as those who reject God illustrate.

Why blame our shortcomings on him?

I never have, so why keep implying I do? It's you that believes God needed to create a metaphor for something He has no problem pointing out very clearly from Gen to Rev.

...wouldn't that be a fair defence? "Hey, I would never have thought about eating the apple if this really powerful entity hadn't suggested it first?" None of the other angels are mentioned as having anywhere near this literal power -

The power to influence? Really? What about the one that visited Mary's husband, Joseph?

...and just what exactly is a literal 'angel' anyway?

God's messengers. We read quite a bit about them throughout the Bible. I take it by this response you believe all angels are metaphor. Is this correct?

But there shouldn't be any discrepancies in a theology of such a nature, not when people such as PK say it's intrinsically clear, how can it be when there is still room for manoevuere in interpretation? I agree with you in that we're all fallible people who are prone to error, so why should that not mean that those who are convinced that such a horrible thing as eternal torment is true could not be in error themselves?

It's called the Bible. When a person earnestly seeks to know the Truth of a matter and they can not figure it out, they seek council. Good council will instruct using in context passages to edify the seeker. When someone states outright they can only believe the Bible using esoteric hermeneutic it is usually an indicator they are try to sell unBiblical ideas.

the 'key' word - "personally", who are you to decipher what is contexturally metaphorical or literal apart from yourself ? This is why there so many different theologies out there isn't it?

The Bible indicates how it is to be read itself. History is told as history, poetry as poetry. It's only when we seek to move away from God we try to use improper interpretation techniques. It is not rational to look at the genealogies and claim them in a metaphorical light or claim they are poetry.

I do believe that much of the bible is literal as well when taken in context - such as the 10 commandments for example, that does not mean that everything else is as conveniently literal for certain doctrines...

Why only the 10 commandments? Why not Genesis? Lets look at the 4th Commandment:

Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

Why do you take one as metaphor and one as literal when they both say the same thing?

Because they were still fallible men who were full of pride and abusing their authority, they were still on earth and hadn't experienced heaven as satan the 'literal' being supposedly had, don't forget that Jesus came to Earth as a man, he may have performed miracles yes but I don't recall any in front of the pharisees - although feel free to point out any if I'm istaken....

Did you know the Jews are/were known as the "People of the Book"? Do you know why? To imply the pharisees did not know what to look for in their Messiah is a bit of a stretch. They knew Who He was and they rejected Him straight to His face, just as their forefathers rejected God time and again while He lived in their midst.

Yes, and this requires belief in something or someone which is not proven beyond any doubt, otherwise it would not be faith but absolute knowledge, something which God wills all men to have at some point

Men often thwart God's will. God did not want men to become so evil He was sorry He made us, but we did. That was not God's will. God's will is that we all humble ourselves and turn to Him, yet history is full of just the opposite. We find the same today as recorded in the Bible.

I know who first repealed the death penalty for a woman who several people here would seemingly be prepared to stone to death nowadays - with some powerful words which I believe applied to more than just the crowd in question but to everyone then and now...

Wow! I didn't know you were Fred Astaire! Great dance number! :BRAVO:

Now back to my questions:
When was the Law repealed? I'll need a verse. Do you know Who first called for death in cases of sexual immorality? Was it God? Bob Enyart? The Pope? Me? Who?

... .Mosaic law is a thing of the past and I believe applied only then and there, you don't still believe in 'an eye for an eye' do you? If not why not? Who repealed that I wonder?

Let's look at what Paul says about the Law:
For if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness would have been by the law. But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

Did you get that? Until we become dead to the Law through faith in Christ we are under it, it condemns us. It stands as witness we are sinners who need Christ.

Now, let's look at what Paul has to say about the death penalty:
Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.

You have options at this point. You can call Paul a liar. You can turn to esoteric metaphor to interpret what Paul said. You can believe that the DP given to Noah and his descendants is still in effect today as Paul bears witness.

 

[Lighthouse]

Is David describing God as nice in Psalm 5:4-6?

Or is David being nice in Psalm 139:19-22?:think:

 

[PKevman]

Freewill is freewill, red. You wanted examples of folks who rejected God to His face. Satan was only one instance. The entire nation of Israel did the same.



Where in the Bible does God not point out that evil resides in the hearts of men that He would need to use a metaphor? Even when Christ used metaphor He used reality. IE comparing the Lake (and yes it's real) to a garbage pit (also real). He didn't make up something to use as His metaphor.



I dread getting into the significance of numbers with you. Even easy things you tend to ignore/misunderstand/twist. But I will give it a shot and see how it goes: Seven is completeness/perfection. The number of man, created on the 6th day, labors six days, six words for man in Hebrew, etc. is 6. I'm sure if you think about it... what is one less than 7/perfection? Three is the number of Divine Perfection IE the Trinity. So if we take this cursory look at numbers used in the Bible, what do we get when we look at the number 666? "Divine" imperfection or "Divine" man. It's a mockery of God in essence. IE: beast, false prophet, dragon. The god of man. For further understanding



Almost. I make exception for the Jews. So my view is Jew, Christian, pagan.



They search forever, being careful to accept only that which contradicts God.



That's how it is. Sin is rebellion against God. Of course when our consciences bring up the point, we tend to turn to more sin to quell that soft inner voice.



I never claimed satan or his demons force anyone into anything. We are quite capable of evil, as God has pointed out. I believe these fallen beings can influence us, that is why Paul tells us to put on our spiritual armor. (Eph 6) But influence and force are two different things. A freewill against can act against influence, as those who reject God illustrate.




I never have, so why keep implying I do? It's you that believes God needed to create a metaphor for something He has no problem pointing out very clearly from Gen to Rev.



The power to influence? Really? What about the one that visited Mary's husband, Joseph?



God's messengers. We read quite a bit about them throughout the Bible. I take it by this response you believe all angels are metaphor. Is this correct?




It's called the Bible. When a person earnestly seeks to know the Truth of a matter and they can not figure it out, they seek council. Good council will instruct using in context passages to edify the seeker. When someone states outright they can only believe the Bible using esoteric hermeneutic it is usually an indicator they are try to sell unBiblical ideas.



The Bible indicates how it is to be read itself. History is told as history, poetry as poetry. It's only when we seek to move away from God we try to use improper interpretation techniques. It is not rational to look at the genealogies and claim them in a metaphorical light or claim they are poetry.



Why only the 10 commandments? Why not Genesis? Lets look at the 4th Commandment:

Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

Why do you take one as metaphor and one as literal when they both say the same thing?




Did you know the Jews are/were known as the "People of the Book"? Do you know why? To imply the pharisees did not know what to look for in their Messiah is a bit of a stretch. They knew Who He was and they rejected Him straight to His face, just as their forefathers rejected God time and again while He lived in their midst.



Men often thwart God's will. God did not want men to become so evil He was sorry He made us, but we did. That was not God's will. God's will is that we all humble ourselves and turn to Him, yet history is full of just the opposite. We find the same today as recorded in the Bible.



Wow! I didn't know you were Fred Astaire! Great dance number! :BRAVO:

Now back to my questions:
When was the Law repealed? I'll need a verse. Do you know Who first called for death in cases of sexual immorality? Was it God? Bob Enyart? The Pope? Me? Who?



Let's look at what Paul says about the Law:
For if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness would have been by the law. But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

Did you get that? Until we become dead to the Law through faith in Christ we are under it, it condemns us. It stands as witness we are sinners who need Christ.

Now, let's look at what Paul has to say about the death penalty:
Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.

You have options at this point. You can call Paul a liar. You can turn to esoteric metaphor to interpret what Paul said. You can believe that the DP given to Noah and his descendants is still in effect today as Paul bears witness.

:up: Superb Nineveh! Absolutely superb!

 

[Ecumenicist]

Is David describing God as nice in Psalm 5:4-6?

Destroying sin, destroying sickness, healing, all the same thing, all acts of Loving Grace.

 

[red77]

Freewill is freewill, red. You wanted examples of folks who rejected God to His face. Satan was only one instance. The entire nation of Israel did the same.

The nation of israel was not face to face with God in Heaven were they? How does this answer the absurdity of a being who with complete knowledge rebels against a deity that crush him like an ant without a seconds thought?

Where in the Bible does God not point out that evil resides in the hearts of men that He would need to use a metaphor? Even when Christ used metaphor He used reality. IE comparing the Lake (and yes it's real) to a garbage pit (also real). He didn't make up something to use as His metaphor.

You say the lake is real and yet you don't know what it is......

I dread getting into the significance of numbers with you. Even easy things you tend to ignore/misunderstand/twist. But I will give it a shot and see how it goes: Seven is completeness/perfection. The number of man, created on the 6th day, labors six days, six words for man in Hebrew, etc. is 6. I'm sure if you think about it... what is one less than 7/perfection? Three is the number of Divine Perfection IE the Trinity. So if we take this cursory look at numbers used in the Bible, what do we get when we look at the number 666? "Divine" imperfection or "Divine" man. It's a mockery of God in essence. IE: beast, false prophet, dragon. The god of man. For further understanding

Aside from you petty cheap shot which I could easily return this could just as easily be metaphor, it's an interesting explanation and one which I've heard also, it also stands up and doesn't negate the beast being metaphor either.....

Almost. I make exception for the Jews. So my view is Jew, Christian, pagan.

Oh ok, so a disbeliving jew is not a pagan then? Maybe 'people' would just be better?

They search forever, being careful to accept only that which contradicts God.

That is ridiculous, an agnostic is someone who is unsure one way or another, you seem to be confusing agnosticism with close view atheism, they are not the same, plenty of people who are christians have been agnostics beforehand.....

That's how it is. Sin is rebellion against God. Of course when our consciences bring up the point, we tend to turn to more sin to quell that soft inner voice.

That depends on how strong your conscience is...

I never claimed satan or his demons force anyone into anything. We are quite capable of evil, as God has pointed out. I believe these fallen beings can influence us, that is why Paul tells us to put on our spiritual armor. (Eph 6) But influence and force are two different things. A freewill against can act against influence, as those who reject God illustrate.

It's hardly a level playing field is it? Influence is a very powerful thing and affects freewill

I never have, so why keep implying I do? It's you that believes God needed to create a metaphor for something He has no problem pointing out very clearly from Gen to Rev.

Ok then, so why would a literal satan be allowed to influence people and affect their freewill?

The power to influence? Really? What about the one that visited Mary's husband, Joseph?

What about him?

God's messengers. We read quite a bit about them throughout the Bible. I take it by this response you believe all angels are metaphor. Is this correct?

no, not all of them...

It's called the Bible. When a person earnestly seeks to know the Truth of a matter and they can not figure it out, they seek council. Good council will instruct using in context passages to edify the seeker. When someone states outright they can only believe the Bible using esoteric hermeneutic it is usually an indicator they are try to sell unBiblical ideas.

Well if anyone said they could only believe the bible using esoteric hermeneutic then they would be wrong, fortunately nobody has......and 'good council' is a pretty subjective term....

The Bible indicates how it is to be read itself. History is told as history, poetry as poetry. It's only when we seek to move away from God we try to use improper interpretation techniques. It is not rational to look at the genealogies and claim them in a metaphorical light or claim they are poetry.

can you interpret the whole of revelation? and if this is the case then why again is there a discrepancy in belief between PK and Knight? One of them has to be interpreting things wrongly.....

Why only the 10 commandments? Why not Genesis? Lets look at the 4th Commandment:

Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

Why do you take one as metaphor and one as literal when they both say the same thing?

because I believe that God could have created the world in a nanosecond if he chose, you may choose to read that as literal but the evidence against the Earth being only 6000 years old is immense....

Did you know the Jews are/were known as the "People of the Book"? Do you know why? To imply the pharisees did not know what to look for in their Messiah is a bit of a stretch. They knew Who He was and they rejected Him straight to His face, just as their forefathers rejected God time and again while He lived in their midst.

Jesus appeared to these people as a man, it's hardly the same as being face to face with God.....yes, they rejected him at the time and were more concerned with their own legalism and laws but thats not to say that they would once they have a knowledge of the truth that would be irrefutable....

Men often thwart God's will. God did not want men to become so evil He was sorry He made us, but we did. That was not God's will. God's will is that we all humble ourselves and turn to Him, yet history is full of just the opposite. We find the same today as recorded in the Bible.

Men are fallible flesh and blood, God in time can achieve his will without having to force anything on anyone...

Wow! I didn't know you were Fred Astaire! Great dance number! :BRAVO:

Now back to my questions:
When was the Law repealed? I'll need a verse. Do you know Who first called for death in cases of sexual immorality? Was it God? Bob Enyart? The Pope? Me? Who?

thank you Ginger Rogers I noticed you managed a neat little sidestep around my question regarding 'an eye for an eye', care to answer it? Do you still believe in it? or do you accept that it was repealed by Jesus?

If the case of the adulterous woman isn't enough to show that times were changing and old laws were being done away then I suspect there won't be anything to convince you anyway, if your argument was the case then every single OT law would still apply today, quite a few of them don't seem to be though, I wonder why that is....?

Let's look at what Paul says about the Law:
For if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness would have been by the law. But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

Did you get that? Until we become dead to the Law through faith in Christ we are under it, it condemns us. It stands as witness we are sinners who need Christ.

Now, let's look at what Paul has to say about the death penalty:
Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.

You have options at this point. You can call Paul a liar. You can turn to esoteric metaphor to interpret what Paul said. You can believe that the DP given to Noah and his descendants is still in effect today as Paul bears witness.

Why should I call Paul a liar? He says be subject to our governing authorities, that includes our present governments doesn't it? And this passage doesnt even mention the DP anyway! God abhors the shedding of innocent blood which our current systems were inevitably do to people the way they currently are, do a google search on miscarriages and you might just understand how bad the problem with miscarriages is....

 

[Nineveh]

Destroying sin, destroying sickness, healing, all the same thing, all acts of Loving Grace.

The question was nice, dave. He sounded rather harsh to me.

 

[Nineveh]

The nation of israel was not face to face with God in Heaven were they?

Why isn't heaven metaphorical?

Anyway, God lived with them in their presence. How much closer can you get than that? How much closer were His angels?

How does this answer the absurdity of a being who with complete knowledge rebels against a deity that crush him like an ant without a seconds thought?

I don't see it as any more or less absurd than Israel OT and NT.

You say the lake is real and yet you don't know what it is......

Sure I do. It's outside of God's Kingdom. Where the folks who don't want to be with God will be. Or as Jesus described it, outside the city where the garbage is dumped.

Aside from you petty cheap shot which I could easily return this could just as easily be metaphor, it's an interesting explanation and one which I've heard also, it also stands up and doesn't negate the beast being metaphor either.....

As I said, no matter what I said on the issue, you would either ignore/misunderstand/twist. You chose ignore. So much for my valid claim being called a "petty cheap shot". Anyway, it rebuts your numerology argument, whether you accept it or not.

Oh ok, so a disbeliving jew is not a pagan then? Maybe 'people' would just be better?

What is wrong with Jew, Christian and pagan? Do you not know to whom I refer with those terms?

That is ridiculous, an agnostic is someone who is unsure one way or another, you seem to be confusing agnosticism with close view atheism, they are not the same, plenty of people who are christians have been agnostics beforehand.....

Oh! Look, you made a distinction between a pagan and a Christian! "plenty of people who are christians have been agnostics beforehand." You know there is a difference. So does God. He defines the difference.

That depends on how strong your conscience is...

True. Some come to the question, "Will you follow Me?" and say, "No." so many times their conscience becomes seared and their hearts hard. It's more difficult to reach these folks, but it can happen. Where there is life, there is hope.

It's hardly a level playing field is it? Influence is a very powerful thing and affects freewill

I can only affect freewill if the agent allows it to. A Christ follower has the opportunity to take any form of temptation straight to God. The more they exercise their faith, the stronger it gets. On the other hand, some actually seek out demons. In this age they are likely to be called "spirit guides" and the like, and most who seek them out are more than happy to follow along. Sometimes they are called "angels" and there are books out there that teach how to contact and talk to these beings.

Ok then, so why would a literal satan be allowed to influence people and affect their freewill?

He has not been bound yet, but he will be. At that time he will be shut up and not allowed to deceive folks for 1000 years. Rev 20

What about him?

He influenced Joseph. I thought that would be apparent.

no, not all of them...

Which ones? Just the "bad" ones? The ones who used their freewill to act against God like freewill humans do? By what measure do you judge the metaphorical from the actual?

Well if anyone said they could only believe the bible using esoteric hermeneutic then they would be wrong, fortunately nobody has......and 'good council' is a pretty subjective term....

So far you have claimed quite a good deal of the Bible is metaphorical. Good council uses verse in context to prove a point. They don't have to lapse into metaphor to push away what doesn't agree.

can you interpret the whole of revelation? and if this is the case then why again is there a discrepancy in belief between PK and Knight? One of them has to be interpreting things wrongly.....

And if both wanted to invest their time and effort, it would be awsome to watch two strong Christian men hash out a difference. But as to why, it is the same reason you and I disagree. We are human. The difference between us is I take God for what he says in context. That is why I was not convinced of your position on the Lake. I had to read far too much into a handful of passages, and that was not enough to erase what we find in the Bible.

because I believe that God could have created the world in a nanosecond if he chose, you may choose to read that as literal but the evidence against the Earth being only 6000 years old is immense....

Your lens is set on ages, the evidence isn't. If you believe He could have created everything in a nanosecond, why do you believe it took ages?

God could have ____________ (fill in the blank), I agree. The difference is, He said He did it a different way. Not just once, but again in the Law. He thought it was that important.

You didn't answer the question though. Why do you take one as a metaphor but the other you do not? It appears the 10 commandments must be partly metaphor for you. And in this light, what does God repeating his 6 days of work mean if it means something other than His literal 6 days of work?

Jesus appeared to these people as a man, it's hardly the same as being face to face with God.....yes, they rejected him at the time and were more concerned with their own legalism and laws but thats not to say that they would once they have a knowledge of the truth that would be irrefutable....

The whole OT pointed to Christ. The folks who knew the Books the best rejected Him outright. They saw Him. They saw His miracles. And they hated Him. He was their own come to give them their Kingdom just as He promised, and they rejected Him.

Men are fallible flesh and blood, God in time can achieve his will without having to force anything on anyone...

Then you need give the freewill agent the freedom to reject God if you believe he will not use force. It's odd you don't believe God will force anyone, but that satan must.

thank you Ginger Rogers I noticed you managed a neat little sidestep around my question regarding 'an eye for an eye', care to answer it? Do you still believe in it? or do you accept that it was repealed by Jesus?

I have sen no evidence in the Bible that repeals the Law. Paul points out that the governing authorities are to mete out justice. Same OT same NT.

If the case of the adulterous woman isn't enough to show that times were changing and old laws were being done away then I suspect there won't be anything to convince you anyway, if your argument was the case then every single OT law would still apply today, quite a few of them don't seem to be though, I wonder why that is....?

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." - Jesus

Misusing that one instance isn't going to prove your case. Especially when Paul makes it clear the government is to strike fear in the hearts of evil doers.

Why should I call Paul a liar? He says be subject to our governing authorities, that includes our present governments doesn't it? And this passage doesnt even mention the DP anyway!

What is a sword for? The government does not bear it in vain, according to Paul. "...for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil."

God abhors the shedding of innocent blood which our current systems were inevitably do to people the way they currently are, do a google search on miscarriages and you might just understand how bad the problem with miscarriages is....

Paul didn't say any of that though did he? Nor did God tell that to Noah. What God has said both OT and NT is put murderers to death. What has changed between Noah and now? Paul and now?

 

[Nineveh]

C'mon red! Where ya at?

 

[CRASH]

*crickets*

 

[Nick M]

Hello? back....! Why blame some other entity for our own shortcomings? Explain that......!

I don't. If Adam hadn't fallen, I would have anyway.

 

[Cricket]

*crickets*

WHERE!!??

 

[Nineveh]

Red? C'mon... how about a reply to post 254. You sure do preach a lot, but so far from our convo it all seems to come from the Book of Red. Enlighten me.

 

[Stripe]

......