13
   

God's Presence on Earth through His Spirit (Scripture & Photos Examined)

 
 
MWal
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Oct, 2014 12:43 pm
@neologist,
Love nescitates need. So God doesn't love want or know anything? Lol I am all.
0 Replies
 
Krumple
 
  0  
Reply Fri 17 Oct, 2014 01:38 pm
@neologist,
neologist wrote:

'Omniscient' is not a biblical expression. It is a word sometimes applied to God's power to know the outcome of any event. But it implies necessity and God is subject to no necessity. That is how he allows us choice. - Deuteronomy 30:19


I am well aware of what it says. The point I am making is that it makes no sense at all period. It is a paradox which renders both meaningless. It would be like saying I am infinitely tall but I'm six foot. Both can't be true unless you render one of the definitions as meaningless.

But let me humor you for a minute. Even if god ignored the knowledge of all outcomes he would still have to know that statistically there is always going to be a certain number of created humans who no matter what they are subjected to will not be convinced without direct experience. That means that what ever that number is are created for the sole purpose of being tortured for eternity. That in itself disqualifies god to be all loving or benevolent.

He would have to know that he will create individuals destined for endless torture. Now how can that in any way be compassionate? Yet the believer will ignore this fact. Justify it by saying they deserve it. Really? A finite crime deserves a permanent punishment? No that is injustice. There is no way to learn or grow from a mistake or to ratify it and become more.
Patches
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Oct, 2014 03:35 pm
@Krumple,
There is a real photograph of the Spirit of truth bearing witness in my OP. And, I've provided a good explanation of it. You needn't be confused.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Oct, 2014 05:46 pm
@Krumple,
Krumple wrote:
But let me humor you for a minute.
Hahahahahahah! Thanks!
Krumple wrote:
Even if god ignored the knowledge of all outcomes he would still have to know that statistically there is always going to be a certain number of created humans who no matter what they are subjected to will not be convinced without direct experience.
Including some who never knew. So? . . .
Krumple wrote:
That means that what ever that number is are created for the sole purpose of being tortured for eternity. That in itself disqualifies god to be all loving or benevolent.
Straw man! Do not expect me to defend teachings which are not in the bible
Krumple wrote:
A finite crime deserves a permanent punishment? No that is injustice.
Preaching to the choir, here.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Oct, 2014 06:28 pm
@InfraBlue,
If, indeed, there is a message in the bible of importance to people of today, it would be a shame if they were unable to read it.
Patches
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Oct, 2014 07:41 am
@izzythepush,
God and Jesus hears our cries through the Holy Spirit.
izzythepush
 
  0  
Reply Mon 20 Oct, 2014 09:10 am
@Patches,
Instead of bunking off school to go to Brainwashing House, you should have learnt a bit of grammar, then you wouldn't be writing a sentence like this.
Quote:
God and Jesus hears our cries through the Holy Spirit.


I've corrected it for you.

Quote:
God and Jesus hear our cries through the Holy Spirit.


Empty words. Empty head.

Now enrol in a class in elementary English.
Patches
 
  2  
Reply Mon 20 Oct, 2014 09:53 am
@izzythepush,
Don't get all worked up in a tizzy izzy.
izzythepush
 
  0  
Reply Mon 20 Oct, 2014 09:55 am
@Patches,
How long did it take you to think up that one? Basic rhyme can't be easy for someone like you.
Patches
 
  2  
Reply Mon 20 Oct, 2014 10:40 am
@izzythepush,
I'm speaking at your whinny, childish level.
timur
 
  2  
Reply Mon 20 Oct, 2014 11:10 am
@Patches,
No, you are just uttering some meaningless crap.

How sensitive are the holy spirit's ears (in decibels, please)?
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Oct, 2014 11:18 am
@Patches,
You think I'm a horse?
neologist
 
  2  
Reply Mon 20 Oct, 2014 01:42 pm
@izzythepush,
Probably a Shetland, considering how childish he thinks you are.
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Oct, 2014 03:14 pm
@neologist,
You're not addressing the question.

Anyhow, people of today can read the various translations available, discrepancies and all.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Oct, 2014 03:52 pm
@neologist,
New Forest surely.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/FlaxenChestnutNF.jpg/220px-FlaxenChestnutNF.jpg
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Oct, 2014 05:12 pm
@izzythepush,
You are a singularly handsome creature, my friend.
0 Replies
 
Smileyrius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Oct, 2014 06:33 pm
@InfraBlue,
My advice would be to use multiple translations, preferably those considered to contain less denomination bias, as well as a good concordance. It shows up discrepencies for what they are, most often mistranslations. It is a lot of work that not many people have the patience for but it is worth a good study.
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Oct, 2014 09:20 pm
@Smileyrius,
Smileyrius wrote:

My advice would be to use multiple translations, preferably those considered to contain less denomination bias, as well as a good concordance. It shows up discrepencies for what they are, most often mistranslations. It is a lot of work that not many people have the patience for but it is worth a good study.

Ya hear that neo?
Patches
 
  2  
Reply Tue 21 Oct, 2014 09:04 am
@izzythepush,
I want to call it a truce and let bygones be bygones. What do you say?
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Tue 21 Oct, 2014 09:06 am
@Patches,
It'll cost you a sugarlump and a rub down, but OK.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/03/2024 at 05:23:59