Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Are we prisoners of sin
Michamus
Member (Idle past 5157 days)
Posts: 230
From: Ft Hood, TX
Joined: 03-16-2009


Message 406 of 454 (506552)
04-27-2009 1:20 PM
Reply to: Message 398 by Peg
04-27-2009 5:04 AM


Re: contradiction?
Peg writes:
the bible only contradicts itself when you apply a certain belief that is contradictory to what the bible says
Hmmm, so then those passages you quoted don't contradict?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 398 by Peg, posted 04-27-2009 5:04 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 409 by Peg, posted 04-28-2009 3:36 AM Michamus has replied

Phage0070
Inactive Member


Message 407 of 454 (506601)
04-27-2009 7:28 PM
Reply to: Message 405 by Michamus
04-27-2009 1:19 PM


My point is that there is no reason to argue circles with dogma when the deity you are arguing about acts inconsistently. God might love you. God might kill you. God might punish you for something you didn't do, or over a bet, or to prove a point. God will act unethically by his own standards; how can you possibly be a prisoner of sin when it is such a nebulous concept? Killing innocents was allowed by God in that case, for crying out loud!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 405 by Michamus, posted 04-27-2009 1:19 PM Michamus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 411 by Cedre, posted 04-28-2009 5:05 AM Phage0070 has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 408 of 454 (506619)
04-28-2009 3:28 AM
Reply to: Message 400 by purpledawn
04-27-2009 7:36 AM


Re: contradiction?
purpledawn writes:
Actually it would be the author's who contradict each other. But you are correct that applying a certain belief can cause contradictions where there aren't any. That's why you're having difficulty finding support for the idea that humans are incapable of not sinning.
Im not having any problem finding support for the truth that we ARE sinners. The bible supports that statement as can be seen by those verses i quoted in msg 394
You may not agree, but Gods word surly does.
purpledawn writes:
The resurrection idea supposedly developed more just before and into the intertestamental period I mentioned earlier.
the idea of the resurrection is clearly seen in the OT therefore the idea was around from the time the scriptures themselves were written.
purpledawn writes:
The authors were doing what they felt necessary or were inspired to write for their people and time, not ours.
and yet the bible continues to be a book that is very practical for the modern world. God is the author of the bible and there are parts of it that are still in the process of coming to fulfillment...so there is no way that it is not meant for us today.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 400 by purpledawn, posted 04-27-2009 7:36 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 424 by purpledawn, posted 04-28-2009 8:59 AM Peg has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 409 of 454 (506620)
04-28-2009 3:36 AM
Reply to: Message 406 by Michamus
04-27-2009 1:20 PM


Re: contradiction?
Michamus writes:
Hmmm, so then those passages you quoted don't contradict?
they do contradict the assertion that we are NOT sinners, sure.
So the question is, should i believe purpledawn and Michimus who say we are not sinners, or should I believe the word of God which says we are sinners???
hmmm tough one

This message is a reply to:
 Message 406 by Michamus, posted 04-27-2009 1:20 PM Michamus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 410 by Michamus, posted 04-28-2009 4:20 AM Peg has replied

Michamus
Member (Idle past 5157 days)
Posts: 230
From: Ft Hood, TX
Joined: 03-16-2009


Message 410 of 454 (506622)
04-28-2009 4:20 AM
Reply to: Message 409 by Peg
04-28-2009 3:36 AM


Re: contradiction?
Peg writes:
they do contradict the assertion that we are NOT sinners, sure.
So then in Job, when it says Job was a perfect man that stood upright and blameless before God... what it was really saying was Job was a sinner that needed Jesus Christ as a savior so he can stand blameless before God?
I find it interesting how far some will go to defend their ill conceived concepts. It appears to me you are more interested in fitting what you think the Bible should say, into these passages, than finding out what they do say.
Peg writes:
So the question is, should i believe purpledawn and Michimus who say we are not sinners, or should I believe the word of God which says we are sinners???
You should do neither. As a Bible believing Christian you should actually be looking at what the prophets of old felt compelled to write down. This whole "God's word" concept is completely unfounded, and a direct result of the canonization process utilized by Ancient Rome in a last ditch effort to unify "The Empire".
I would prefer you utilize your God-given logic, and reason while attempting to come to an understanding of the true nature of our universe, and our own species.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 409 by Peg, posted 04-28-2009 3:36 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 412 by Cedre, posted 04-28-2009 5:24 AM Michamus has replied
 Message 417 by Peg, posted 04-28-2009 6:52 AM Michamus has not replied

Cedre
Member (Idle past 1490 days)
Posts: 350
From: Russia
Joined: 01-30-2009


Message 411 of 454 (506624)
04-28-2009 5:05 AM
Reply to: Message 407 by Phage0070
04-27-2009 7:28 PM


Purpledawn and Phage0070
Is it in the atheists’ nature to ridicule whatever his close-mind fails to understand or what? It sure is the feeling that I'm getting from many of the bible's critics who have posted an idea or two on this thread.
Purpledawn and her attacks on biblical authority accepting only those words attributed to Jesus, as if those words were not penned by the same guy who wrote the rest of the book, how silly! Why should you only trust the words in red while even they were written by the author whose words you bring into question in other places of the same book? Purpledawn your rough treatment of the bible is unacceptable as it arise from a partial consideration of the bible, you are the one who babbles about one-liners , yet you cherry pick scripture picking only those passages that if read in isolation will maybe back your arguments. Firstly you have not presented a proper argument for your methods, that is how do you determine which part of scripture to ignore as uninspired and which part to regard as inspired, you have not shown how this can be determined; you simply decide that that is God’s word and that that isn’t. You also are fond of talking away with nonsensical statements any and every scripture that clearly goes against what you’re selling, it doesn’t work like that. If this is how you are going to make your case then I cannot take you seriously Purpledawn.
But why don’t we go to scripture to see what it says about itself.
(2Ti 3:16) All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
In the next passages Paul is citing from the gospels and he is calling it scripture.
1Co 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which also I received: that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
1Co 15:4 and that he was buried; and that he hath been raised on the third day according to the scriptures;
And below the same Peter who walked the shores of Galilee with Jesus is placing Paul’s letters or epistles scripture in the category of Scripture, and all Scripture is given by the inspiration of God:
2Pe 3:16 Paul talks about these same things in all his letters, but part of what he says is hard to understand. Some ignorant and unsteady people even destroy themselves by twisting what he said. They do the same thing with other Scriptures too.
Therefore I am compelled to believe what Paul taught in scripture and what the bible itself teaches that all men are born sinners, here again Paul is quoting from the old testament passage I gave in an earlier post of mine describing the unrighteous state of mankind. We are not sinners because we sin, we sin because we are sinners.
Rom 3:10 as it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one;
Interestingly purpledawn you started out denying sin altogether but in your much later posts it looks to me as if you have softened up to the idea of sin, (your conscience must have gotten to you). Well that is how God operates he comes as a thief in the night, and so by the time you become cognizant of his presence he has already stolen your heart.
Okay Now let me tackle what Phage0070 is claiming.
My point is that there is no reason to argue circles with dogma when the deity you are arguing about acts inconsistently. God might love you. God might kill you. God might punish you for something you didn't do, or over a bet, or to prove a point. God will act unethically by his own standards; how can you possibly be a prisoner of sin when it is such a nebulous concept? Killing innocents was allowed by God in that case, for crying out loud!
Show that God is inconsistent. He actions are in line with his nature, God is merciful but don’t overlook his justice, and yes God does love you and yes he may kill you, if you deserve death, such as when you lead a sinful life, the wages of sin is death, Judges, the jury, give the death sentence all the time if called for does that make them unloving? Surely you would not conclude that that judge is evil or the jurors have no love. If you love your wife and a man is seriously threatening to kill, wouldn’t you kill him if it meant saving your wife? You see you killed out of love not because you lacked love, God doesn’t punish anybody because he hates them, he does it for the same reason that a judge does, to preserve justice. And yes God can kill a sinner he is the author of life after all and he has full authority in heaven and on earth, and yes might in God’s case does makes right, because God as I have repeatedly pointed out in this thread will not do anything just for kicks or anything out of whack with his personality, he is Love but also is just and will carry out justice on lawbreakers or sinners.
Killing innocents was allowed by God in that case, for crying out loud!
For crying out loud no one is innocent everyone has sinned and missed the mark of God’s glory. Get that into your head or shall I have to pound it in.
Edited by Cedre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 407 by Phage0070, posted 04-27-2009 7:28 PM Phage0070 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 418 by Phage0070, posted 04-28-2009 7:06 AM Cedre has replied
 Message 421 by purpledawn, posted 04-28-2009 7:49 AM Cedre has replied

Cedre
Member (Idle past 1490 days)
Posts: 350
From: Russia
Joined: 01-30-2009


Message 412 of 454 (506627)
04-28-2009 5:24 AM
Reply to: Message 410 by Michamus
04-28-2009 4:20 AM


Re High claims from Michamus
So then in Job, when it says Job was a perfect man that stood upright and blameless before God... what it was really saying was Job was a sinner that needed Jesus Christ as a savior so he can stand blameless before God?
I have dealt briefly with this very question in my second last post the really long one, why don't you read it. And yes Job was a sinner, since we all men are conceived into sin
Job 15:14 What is man, that he should be clean? And he that is born of a woman, that he should be righteous?
So yes if Job lived in the present he would need to be a Christian, remember God dealt differently with the ancients as I have said in the same post I mention above. Ancient people either gained or lost salvation based on their works and chiefly on God's mercy, and what is more they required a mediator, serving as a bridge between man and God man did not just approach God, since we are separated from him as a result of our sin nature, priests, and other special people called by God served as these mediators between man and God.
I find it interesting how far some will go to defend their ill conceived concepts. It appears to me you are more interested in fitting what you think the Bible should say, into these passages, than finding out what they do say.
Show were peg or I have done this.
You should do neither. As a Bible believing Christian you should actually be looking at what the prophets of old felt compelled to write down. This whole "God's word" concept is completely unfounded, and a direct result of the canonization process utilized by Ancient Rome in a last ditch effort to unify "The Empire".
If you just read your bible you would not have made these charges, in my post before this one I show with scripture that both the Synoptic Gospels and Paul's letters were regarded as scripture, long before the bible was assembled into a single unit.
Edited by Cedre, : No reason given.
Edited by Cedre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 410 by Michamus, posted 04-28-2009 4:20 AM Michamus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 413 by Michamus, posted 04-28-2009 5:47 AM Cedre has replied

Michamus
Member (Idle past 5157 days)
Posts: 230
From: Ft Hood, TX
Joined: 03-16-2009


Message 413 of 454 (506628)
04-28-2009 5:47 AM
Reply to: Message 412 by Cedre
04-28-2009 5:24 AM


Re: Re High claims from Michamus
Cedre writes:
Job 15:14 What is man, that he should be clean? And he that is born of a woman, that he should be righteous?
Oh my, did you really just quote Eliphaz the Temanite's rebuttal to Job as a statement from God? Eliphaz was obviously rebutting this rhetorical question from Job:
quote:
Job 13:23 How many are mine iniquities and sins? make me to know my transgression and my sin.
In fact, if you go to Chapter 16, you get to see what Job thinks of Eliphaz's statement you just quoted:
quote:
Job 16:
1Then Job answered and said,
2I have heard many such things: miserable comforters are ye all.
3Shall vain words have an end? or what emboldeneth thee that thou answerest?
Cedre writes:
Show were peg or I have done this.
I believe I have once again met this challenge.
Cedre writes:
If you just read your bible you would not have made these charges
That's pretty funny. I have attended 4 years of seminary, including 8 years of Sunday school, which at least one member of this forum can verify. I have read the Bible dozens of times.
I believe I have demonstrated my qualifications in discrediting yours, and Peg's claims thoroughly.
This is yet another example of you trying to assert some type of authority that you do not have.
This is also, yet another example of you cherry picking specific verses, so that it appears the general message of the passages agree with your warped interpretation thereof.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 412 by Cedre, posted 04-28-2009 5:24 AM Cedre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 414 by Cedre, posted 04-28-2009 6:08 AM Michamus has replied

Cedre
Member (Idle past 1490 days)
Posts: 350
From: Russia
Joined: 01-30-2009


Message 414 of 454 (506630)
04-28-2009 6:08 AM
Reply to: Message 413 by Michamus
04-28-2009 5:47 AM


Re: Re High claims from Michamus
Again you have shown your lack of understanding of scripture, purpledawn has got some I'm not sure I think 20 years of scripture under her belt and you have four, but my God, why did you guys even bother it is apparent that you have thrown away what would otherwise have been fruitful years of your lives if spend on something else.
Let me tackle your claim of Job 15:14, firstly Paul an authoritative figure of scripture quotes that same verse as if it retained truth, this is very important since not only was Paul very familiar with that portion of scripture seeing that he used to be a pharisee but he was also at home with the Hebrew language. Secondly Job does not debate the truthfulness of this verse in his reply, the only thing he says is that he has heard it mentioned already.
Let us analyze Job reply shall we. Job said that this guy was a lousy comforter not that what he said was lousy. And Job is right, if you're bedfast by cancer as an example and I come along your supposed comforter and start saying, "you know what your suffering because you have sin and sickness is a consequence of sin". Even though I'm telling the truth it doesn't comfort you in anyway in fact I'm condemning you, I should be encouraging to get better and to dwell on the positives not break you down with unneeded information.
I'm not surprised you didn't see the obviousness you wouldn't because you examine scripture critically and with a particular worldview.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 413 by Michamus, posted 04-28-2009 5:47 AM Michamus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 415 by Michamus, posted 04-28-2009 6:21 AM Cedre has replied
 Message 419 by Phage0070, posted 04-28-2009 7:12 AM Cedre has not replied
 Message 436 by bluescat48, posted 04-28-2009 2:35 PM Cedre has not replied

Michamus
Member (Idle past 5157 days)
Posts: 230
From: Ft Hood, TX
Joined: 03-16-2009


Message 415 of 454 (506631)
04-28-2009 6:21 AM
Reply to: Message 414 by Cedre
04-28-2009 6:08 AM


Re: Re High claims from Michamus
Cedre writes:
I'm not surprised you didn't see the obviousness you wouldn't because you examine scripture critically and with a particular worldview.
ROFL! Okay guy... That's a good one. Talking about the pot calling the wedding dress black.
Cedre writes:
Paul an authoritative figure of scripture
Authoritative to who? You? How do you know Paul even wrote anything?
Cedre writes:
quotes that same verse as if it retained truth
As you just did as well... and that was thoroughly annihilated.
Cedre writes:
Secondly Job does not debate the truthfulness of this verse in his reply, the only thing he says is that he has heard it mentioned already.
AND CALLS IT VAIN, he even goes further in verse 4! I had a feeling I should have included verse 4, but I made the mistake of expecting you to look at the chapter yourself.
quote:
Job16
4I also could speak as ye do: if your soul were in my soul's stead, I could heap up words against you, and shake mine head at you.
Hmmm, the message is clear. Job says, "But I haven't done anything wrong". Heck even Job 1:1 agrees with him. His "friends" say he has sinned somehow, and Job replies succinctly with how easy it is to place blame, and that he builds men up with his words.
He is OBVIOUSLY completely DISAGREEING with Eliphaz's view on the matter. But you refuse to see that, don't you? You would rather revert to Paulism than read what the passages actually say.
Peg writes:
Again you have shown your lack of understanding of scripture, purpledawn has got some I'm not sure I think 20 years of scripture
I have 20 years of scripture study as well... what are the PROFESSIONAL qualifications which you -or- purpledawn -or- Peg hold?
Once again, your attempt falls short.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 414 by Cedre, posted 04-28-2009 6:08 AM Cedre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 416 by Cedre, posted 04-28-2009 6:37 AM Michamus has replied

Cedre
Member (Idle past 1490 days)
Posts: 350
From: Russia
Joined: 01-30-2009


Message 416 of 454 (506634)
04-28-2009 6:37 AM
Reply to: Message 415 by Michamus
04-28-2009 6:21 AM


Re: Re High claims from Michamus
Its official guy you have chucked out four years of your lif in seminary.
AND CALLS IT VAIN, he even goes further in verse 4! I had a feeling I should have included verse 4, but I made the mistake of expecting you to look at the chapter yourself.
quote:
Job16
4I also could speak as ye do: if your soul were in my soul's stead, I could heap up words against you, and shake mine head at you.
Hmmm, the message is clear. Job says, "But I haven't done anything wrong". Heck even Job 1:1 agrees with him. His "friends" say he has sinned somehow, and Job replies succinctly with how easy it is to place blame, and that he builds men up with his words.
Job isn't again shedding any light on the authenticity of that passage all he is saying is, it would not be hard for me to say such things if your souls were in my soul's place; joining words together against you, and shaking my head at you. You need to get some new reading glasses sir cos your current pair is expired.
Edited by Cedre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 415 by Michamus, posted 04-28-2009 6:21 AM Michamus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 434 by Michamus, posted 04-28-2009 12:31 PM Cedre has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 417 of 454 (506637)
04-28-2009 6:52 AM
Reply to: Message 410 by Michamus
04-28-2009 4:20 AM


Re: contradiction?
Michamus writes:
I would prefer you utilize your God-given logic, and reason while attempting to come to an understanding of the true nature of our universe, and our own species.
the best source of that information surely must be God alone.
He made us, therefore he knows us best.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 410 by Michamus, posted 04-28-2009 4:20 AM Michamus has not replied

Phage0070
Inactive Member


Message 418 of 454 (506642)
04-28-2009 7:06 AM
Reply to: Message 411 by Cedre
04-28-2009 5:05 AM


Re: Purpledawn and Phage0070
Cedre writes:
"Is it in the atheists’ nature to ridicule whatever his close-mind fails to understand or what?"
If your position is ridiculous you should expect to be ridiculed. I'm not going to call you names, but that does not mean that I have to hold your beliefs in high regard.
Cedre writes:
"...Judges, the jury, give the death sentence all the time if called for does that make them unloving?"
Yes. Yes it does. Judge and jury are not your mother, that isn't their role. You should recall that it is specifically forbidden for your parents or spouse to serve on a jury because of an almost certain conflict of interest; do you think this is because your loved ones are feared to be too strict or too lenient?
Cedre writes:
"... and yes might in God’s case does makes right, because God as I have repeatedly pointed out in this thread will not do anything just for kicks or anything out of whack with his personality,..."
Again, this is circular reasoning. You argue that God's will is moral because he always does things which are moral but don't give anything to back up that assertion other than maintaining that God's actions define morality directly, despite such actions being apparently immoral on many occasions. It is like arguing that a yard stick is the perfect yard stick despite its length periodically changing; you conclude that obviously the length of a yard must be changing because the yard stick is perfect.
Cedre writes:
"For crying out loud no one is innocent everyone has sinned and missed the mark of God’s glory. Get that into your head or shall I have to pound it in."
Ohh, now I recognize your debate style: "Wooden Mallet" Simple, and reliant on persistence to put that square peg in the round hole.
So your argument boils down to that God is supposed to be a nice guy but he never really seems to act like it, so you conclude that we must deserve it. Let me offer a counterpoint; it is possible that the original assertion that God is a nice guy is false. Additionally it may also be that God does not even exist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 411 by Cedre, posted 04-28-2009 5:05 AM Cedre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 420 by Cedre, posted 04-28-2009 7:31 AM Phage0070 has replied

Phage0070
Inactive Member


Message 419 of 454 (506644)
04-28-2009 7:12 AM
Reply to: Message 414 by Cedre
04-28-2009 6:08 AM


Re: Re High claims from Michamus
Cedre writes:
...why did you guys even bother it is apparent that you have thrown away what would otherwise have been fruitful years of your lives if spend on something else.
I have to agree on this point, it would have been so much better if those years had been spent on something that actually applied to reality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 414 by Cedre, posted 04-28-2009 6:08 AM Cedre has not replied

Cedre
Member (Idle past 1490 days)
Posts: 350
From: Russia
Joined: 01-30-2009


Message 420 of 454 (506646)
04-28-2009 7:31 AM
Reply to: Message 418 by Phage0070
04-28-2009 7:06 AM


Re: Phage0070
Obviously you have demonstrated not do not understand the dynamics of society.
Yes. Yes it does. Judge and jury are not your mother, that isn't their role. You should recall that it is specifically forbidden for your parents or spouse to serve on a jury because of an almost certain conflict of interest; do you think this is because your loved ones are feared to be too strict or too lenient?
According to you it would be more loving for the judge to let the criminals loose without punishment each time they committed a crime, because to punish them would turn him into an evil lunatic. Does this make sense? A judge may not necessarily show mercy at the time of his laying out the sentence but it doesn't mean the judge doesn't love the person.
Look at these following examples, say you were a judge and your mother killed a man in cold blood, you would have to sentence her rightly with a punishment that befits her crime. At the time you're sentencing her you have withhold your mercy, but does it mean you don't love your mother anymore? Of course you still love her. Mercy and love are not synonymous, don't confuse the two.
Another example would be spanking a child, spanking hurts the child and you know that it hurts, it would be easier to let the child get off Scott free for his misdemeanor, but as a parent you have to show the child who’s in charge and why certain actions need to be punished for. Does the parent hate his child during the spanking and suddenly re-loves the child, as it were, after the spanking has ceased? Of course not the parent still loves the child but has to punish for wrong action.
The same applies to God, he doesn't stop loving you because he punishes you, no his love is transcendent but so his justice. If God had never punished any wrongs then he would be a liar because in his word the bible he is also described as a judge, the judges in righteousness and in truth.
Again, this is circular reasoning. You argue that God's will is moral because he always does things which are moral but don't give anything to back up that assertion other than maintaining that God's actions define morality directly, despite such actions being apparently immoral on many occasions.
You are fond of making statements ad lib. I asked you. How does God’s punishing a sinner for breaking the law contradict his other aspect of love? As I argued above these two things don’t needful contradict each other, God loves us that is why we are still around if he hated us he would have send us all to hell to burn many years ago, he would have used his power to torment us.
Phage do you know what hate is? Hate=Dislike intensely; in short it is the absence of love. Hitler hated the Jews what was the end result of his hate for them. The Middle East wants Israel wiped off the world map, and if they had the resources they would have done it a long time ago, that is hate. Hate results in death, Jesus said, if you hate your brother in your heart you have surely killed him already. How true this words are, seeing that hate leads to murder.
So you see your very existence is prove that God loves you, listen if you were to die today you would go to hell as said by the bible, the fact that you are still alive is that God is sparing your life until some point you accept his free gift of salvation so that you can escape death and hell. Your existence testifies to God’s love for humanity.
Edited by Cedre, : No reason given.
Edited by Cedre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 418 by Phage0070, posted 04-28-2009 7:06 AM Phage0070 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 423 by Phage0070, posted 04-28-2009 8:45 AM Cedre has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024