Man raised back to life in Jesus' name

There's another place Jesus said that: Also, the Book of Proverbs is full of admonitions of sickness as a result of sin, and improved health is promised for obedience.This message has been edited by Faith, 12-31-2005 03:18 PMThis message has been edited by Faith, 12-31-2005 03:19 PM

You have trouble reconciling what the Bible says with the God of Love, about whom we would know zip except for the Bible, which is the only source of the idea that God is Love. Interesting.This message has been edited by Faith, 12-31-2005 07:11 PM

You were responding to a post in which I did nothing but quote the Bible.

Proverbs 3:8, 7:23.If I'm up to it I may answer further later.This message has been edited by Faith, 12-31-2005 09:34 PM

Of course not metaphors. In that case the suffering was a test. Job was certainly a righteous man, but like everyone else he'd inherited the sin nature -- or no suffering could have touched him (the only perfectly righteous man was Jesus, who had to choose to suffer and die bearing the sins of others, because in Himself he couldn't die).Happy New Year Arach.I disagree with just about everything you write, but I hope it doesn't get personal.This message has been edited by Faith, 01-01-2006 02:40 AMThis message has been edited by Faith, 01-01-2006 09:59 PM

Again, I wasn't "saying" anything. I quoted the Bible. Referred to the Bible in the case of Proverbs. Didn't give my own view of anything. In fact I have to guess what you are talking about. You are imputing all kinds of ideas to me without quoting me, and most of them I don't recognize as my own.However, assuming this is what you are talking about: The view of Jesus as a loving Father comes from the Bible. So does the view of God as a righteous judge. Yes, there is, for those who believe in Him. But the same writings that announce the New Covenant also explain that the need for the New Covenat is that all human beings are by nature under God's wrath. I don't impose my opinions on God as you are doing. I don't question His lovingness based on my own feelings. I try to understand how it all works together as the Bible presents it, not as it appeals or doesn't appeal to me. This is of course because I am certain that it is the Word of God. If I didn't have this conviction, then I might feel free to judge it. And I've done my best to explain what I understand of it at times here at EvC too. I'm doing my best to stick to what I understand to be traditional theology and not indulge in my own private interpretation. Only according to your own personal way of reading it, not according to, say, the Westminster Catechism which I've posted, or most evangelical believers. Do you still beat your dog? Sorry, that's the way your either/or hits me. Yes, much easier. Leaves it open for picking and choosing whatever one pleases. Funny, I don't have any of those problems. Sounds reasonable to me. But not if you think that means they aren't relevant to us too. It is not exactly a punishment. It is the natural consequence of sin. And certainly who ARE we to question this? If, that is, you accept that the Bible is God's word. If you don't, all kinds of questions come up. You can't have read much of what I have written here to be saying such things. Are you sure you meant to address this post to me? Oh nonsense. Straw man. I've never said anything to justify such a notion. The problem is that there is no other source of information about the nature of God. If you don't rely on the Bible's information you are subject to making up your own God and worshiping an idol of your own invention. I don't subscribe to that view of inerrancy.Happy New Year to you as well.This message has been edited by Faith, 01-01-2006 11:27 AM

I don't understand your confusion, or hers. Perhaps you can make it clearer. If she had quoted anything I'd said other than that one post she was answering, which is nothing but Bible references, it would have helped, as most of what she said that supposedly characterizes my beliefs, couldn't be less recognizable to me.As for that one post, of course those references support my arguments, or more accurately, they are the source of my arguments. But I didn't make any arguments on this thread. I believe the Bible quotes speak for themselves, don't they? Not ambiguous that I can see.I didn't enter this thread until Message 76 in answer to Crashfrog's Message 74. CF was answering Buzsaw's saying that Jesus' saying "Go and sin no more" to someone He had just healed implies a connection between sin and disease. Crash objected that he thought Jesus only said that to the woman caught in adultery, but I pointed out that He said it to a man he had just healed, and gave the reference in the gospel of John. I added that the Book of Proverbs also has many warnings that health will be adversely affected by sin and improved by obedience. Referring to this Biblical reference is simply saying that's what it says, and it does. It says that. I can go through the book and list the verses where this is said, if that is needed. There is no ambiguity in them. I have NO idea how this hypothetical conversation represents anything I have said. The topic is the Bible's connection between sin and death and disease. It's there. It's not an opinion. It's there.Trixie's first retort to my post was a complaint about "my reasoning" when all I had done was quote the Bible.Sorry, but if YOU are confused, I am all the more so.This message has been edited by Faith, 01-01-2006 11:10 PM

Well what I presented is the unambiguous words of the Bible so your argument is with the Bible, not with me. You perfectly well know that the Bible is full of God's will to cure the sick, so what kind of game are you playing anyway? Please excuse me if I say that I can't think of this question as anything but absurd, disingenuous, dishonest, manipulative. If you know the Bible at all, you know perfectly well that it teaches BOTH. You perfectly well know that healing is a great part of the Biblical teaching, so why are you asking me if God "approves of us trying to mitigate his punishment?" You're playing games. If you didn't know that it teaches that disease is caused by sin I'm surprised, but by now evidence enough has been given to demonstrate that to you. BS. You didn't need to SAY it. You were implying what jar always says, that I "worship ink on paper" and that I disregard the Bible's message of compassion. And "where you are coming from" seems to be this absurd idea that I personally somehow disregard the message of compassion in the Bible simply because I gave some evidence for the other topic of how the Bible says that disease is related to sin. Between God and BELIEVERS, not God and man as such, although God takes care of all humanity, "sends rain on the just and the unjust" in compassion, and through His believers blessings have spilled over to the rest of humanity as well. He is a God of mercy to his disobedient human creation, who saved us "even when we were yet sinners."The two pictures are not diametrically opposed, for starters. God's hating and punishing sin doesn't mean he hasn't mercy on the sinner. As you yourself are saying, mercy and compassion are the great theme of Jesus' ministry.The reason we need salvation and healing is that we are under God's wrath because of sin. He has in mercy provided the salvation, the healing of the diseases that are the consequence of the sin, the whole works. There is no salvation, no mercy, no compassion without wrath. It makes no sense without wrath. I've explained this many many times before here, though maybe you've missed it.This message has been edited by Faith, 01-02-2006 04:29 AM

ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!! I did NOT say "Follow God for better health" Percy, I quoted JESUS telling a man He healed to "Go and sin no more" and I referenced Proverbs where people are admonished to avoid sin and practice righteousness and ill or good health is often the consequence.Yes this is my opinion ALSO, but the FIRST thing that has to be noticed is that I WAS JUST PROVIDING A CITATION, WHICH CRASHFROG EVEN NOTED, why can't you? This is what the Bible says. So that if someone is going to start arguing with me about what the Bible says they are arguing with the Bible and not with me.And second, Trixie's accusation that because I quote the Bible on one topic means I am therefore ignoring another Biblical theme is incredibly absurd and annoying. How on earth could anyone read the Bible and not notice the abundance of teachings on healing? Why is she accusing me of this irrelevant side issue of this whole other Biblical theme when the topic is the relation of disease to sin and all I've done is provide a citation to this topic? I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you find my answer contradictory but her insinuating irrelevant post admirable. Right, by targeting me rather than her.Have a Happy New Year.This message has been edited by Faith, 01-02-2006 10:40 AM

Oh good grief.This message has been edited by Faith, 01-02-2006 03:17 PM

Oh good grief and a half.NEVER MIND. For heaven's sake. I'm sorry I ever answered you, I really didn't want to as it was so irrelevant to my post, but you DID demand that I do so.Why can't you see what you are doing here? Why can't Admin?This message has been edited by Faith, 01-02-2006 04:01 PM

Here, let me apologize for everything. Everything is my fault. It always is. I completely misunderstood Trixie. I completely misunderstood Admin. I'm just overly sensitive. Everybody else is doing everything right, I'm just out of step. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea culpa.Happy?

deletedThis message has been edited by Faith, 01-02-2006 10:00 PM

I hope you are reviewing this thread.This is
my very first post on this thread, in which I am answering Crashfrog's questioning of Buzsaw: Trixie then answers in Message 77 in a way I think is already very confused and confusing since all I did was reference scripture. Now of course it IS my view but the way she treats it as contradicting the God of Love becomes very problematic as THAT is of course my view TOO, also based on scripture: The problem between Trixie and me on this thread began right here. I quoted and referred to scripture only, and discussed none of it. She responds that those scriptures are hard to reconcile with "the God of Love" but she is calling this "reasoning" as if she hasn't grasped that I'm quoting scripture. This has already begun to sound like an accusation that I somehow reject "the God of Love" if I agree with the scriptures I quoted and referenced.I respond as follows, which I think should have made her aware of her confusion: But it didn't make her aware of anything. She
now goes on to insist that she was responding to a view I had expressed, reasoning I had put forward, implicitly denying that all I had done was reference scripture, and further implying that if I agree with this scripture I must disagree with the God of love and healing: But I did NOT put forward any reasoning whatever. I did NOT express a "view." I quoted & referenced scripture, period. In that post she just goes on and on arguing with what she seems to be denying comes from the Bible: Believe "Faith?" Why believe Faith? This is a bogus either/or. I quoted SCRIPTURE. We are to believe ALL scripture, not pick and choose. Why is this so hard to grasp? This bizarre either/or here even implies that I somehow dispute Jesus Christ, dispute the God of Love, dispute the God of healing. This was becoming maddening to sort out.All of Trixie's Message 79 is confused and confusing. She's arguing scripture against scripture but imputing the part she doesn't like to ME just because I quoted it. She keeps asking me questions like "are we not supposed to pray for healing?" which make absolutely no sense to me. She just seems to be accusing me of either thinking we aren't to pray for healing or contradicting myself if I think we are and it's all wrapped up in her never acknowledging that all I did was quote scripture.Do I agree with it? Of course I do. I agree with ALL of scripture. She is the one who is splitting it up, assigning the parts she doesn't like to me personally, and upholding this other part that she called the "God of Love" as if it contradicted ME.Trixie is very very confused at the very least and it is almost impossible to figure out how to set her straight, and with her implying that I disagree that God offers healing, disagree with the message of love in Jesus Christ, I found it VERY hard to deal with.This message has been edited by Faith, 01-07-2006 05:27 PMThis message has been edited by Faith, 01-07-2006 05:34 PM

Because our sins are imputed to him, they are IN him or ON him or however that is to be said, they were taken into or upon himself as if they were his own, so he died for all those sins as his own.