Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,475 Year: 3,732/9,624 Month: 603/974 Week: 216/276 Day: 56/34 Hour: 2/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Condemn gay marriage, or just gay rape?
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 105 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 511 of 573 (585788)
10-09-2010 7:24 PM
Reply to: Message 508 by Omnivorous
10-09-2010 11:49 AM


Re: We are commanded to question even God.
Omniv writes
But tell me--if God didn't want homosexuality in his pattern, why did God create homosexual people?
Why did God create homosexual animals?
Why did God create desires in heterosexuals for the very same acts for which you condemn homosexuals?
Or do you not believe the created world is part of God's pattern?
H writes
For the same reason God created Satan. He needed somebody to bury dinosaur bones in order to test people's faith in God.
Omniv writes:
That's a better answer than I'm likely to get from Dawn, who apparently has no answer at all.
Wait a minute I thought we were talking about the standard you use to call God a thug and why you believe you have a right to kill ants
You still havent stated why you have a moral right to exterminate ants. perhaps you could provide it. I call this part having a little fun with the simplistic secular fundamental atheists, because there is a difference. The real smart ones know not to engage in this debate
Where does that leave you and H?
why do you assume that God created these desires in people. More assumptions you cannot demonstrate
If I did believe in God, I would find it the height of absurdity to believe that he cares what two of his spiritual likenesses do with their stuff. After all, what could he do with his, if he had it, that isn't banned by the Bible?
its not that difficult to understand why a person that does not believe in God, would not also believe why God is interested in what his creation is doing
If he is not interested in what they are doing and you think it should be no concern, why do you complain if he exterminates them for his own reasons. If one is not a concern, why should the other be a concern to you
Do you fellas actually think through any of the points you consider, before you speak them out loud. GEEEEs
Simplicity has found a home in you
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 508 by Omnivorous, posted 10-09-2010 11:49 AM Omnivorous has not replied

Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 105 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 512 of 573 (585795)
10-09-2010 7:42 PM
Reply to: Message 510 by ringo
10-09-2010 5:30 PM


The Bible isn't explicit about a lot of people's sex lives. It's foolish to assume that absence of evidence equals evidence of absence.
The Bible isnt explict about any Homosexual activities of Gods chosen people, because they knew it was wrong
Trust me Ringo, verbage and catchy phrases wont remove your problem of trying to make these friends, into gay people or gay marraiges.
I knew that question was going to put that topic to bed (No pun intended)
There is not the slightest indication that they were gay or gayly married
I guess David worked Jonathan in inbetween his 300 wives and 700 concubines and his other activities with Uriah's wife. Strange sorta activity for a Homosexual fella
Now I am not making fun of David, I am simply trying to show how absurd you implication actually is
Again show me where they knew eachother
Heterosexual porn usually has a wider audience than homosexual porn. Couple that with the general in-the-closet nature of homosexuality at the time the Bible was written and it isn't the least bit unusaul not to find explicit mention of committed homosexual relationships. It's foolish to assume that there weren't any.
There was, by the gentiles not the jews. If it were happening it would have got mentioned
We've been through that before. A common law relationship most certainly is recognized as a marriage. You've presented no evidence that the situation was any different in the Bible.
I asked you, can the state refuse to recognize a common law marraige? Can they make the rules different for each state or country.
they decide what a common law marraige is or is not, not the people
God set the standard and allows the state to dictate what rules will accomplish this task. if thier rules violate Gods rules it is no longer a marraige in his site.
If a man marries another women, yet he was the one commiting the adultry, he does not recognize that marraige, according to Matt 19:9
Bingo. Exactly. God didn't give us free will so that He could micro-manage our lives. The authority is our own and the responsibility is our own.
really, so I can disregard the statement to not commit adultry. what right does he have to micro manage my sexual activity
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 510 by ringo, posted 10-09-2010 5:30 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 513 by jar, posted 10-09-2010 8:00 PM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 514 by ringo, posted 10-09-2010 8:19 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 513 of 573 (585797)
10-09-2010 8:00 PM
Reply to: Message 512 by Dawn Bertot
10-09-2010 7:42 PM


Dawn Bertot writes:
If a man marries another women, yet he was the one commiting the adultry, he does not recognize that marraige, according to Matt 19:9
But again, that is NOT what Matthew 19:9 says.
quote:
8Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."
What that says is that the only reason Jesus allows for a man to divorce his wife in the Matthew 19 version of the story is if the woman was unfaithful.
BUT WAIT...There's more...
That is what the author of Matthew 19 wrote.
If we look at the version of the story that the author of Mark 10 wrote we find that there is NO way to get a divorce.
quote:
10When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. 11He answered, "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. 12And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery."
BUT WAIT..There's still more...
In the version of the story that the author of Mark wrote it also talks about a wife divorcing a husband. In the version the author of Matthew there is no mention of whether or not a woman can divorce a husband.
AND GUESS WHAT??? There's still more.
The guy that wrote the version in Matthew 19 adds a bunch more conditions and exceptions...
quote:
11Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."
So the pattern is not as set as you claim, the standards changed, they evolved, and you still have not addressed the question.
jar writes:
And you never bothered to address the real issue.
Just as patterns and standards change throughout the Bible, today we need to address the needs of another group, the least of these my brothers.
How do we provide equal protection under the law for same sex marriages?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 512 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-09-2010 7:42 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 519 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-10-2010 4:16 PM jar has replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 514 of 573 (585804)
10-09-2010 8:19 PM
Reply to: Message 512 by Dawn Bertot
10-09-2010 7:42 PM


Dawn Bertot writes:
The Bible isnt explict about any Homosexual activities of Gods chosen people, because they knew it was wrong
You have no way of knowing that. You're just making it up.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Trust me Ringo....
No. I don't.
Dawn Bertot writes:
I guess David worked Jonathan in inbetween his 300 wives and 700 concubines and his other activities with Uriah's wife. Strange sorta activity for a Homosexual fella
David had eight wives. It was Solomom who had 700 wives and 300 concubines. It's possible that David was bisexual but it seems unlikely that every man in Sodom was bisexual.
Dawn Bertot writes:
ringo writes:
... It's foolish to assume that there weren't any [committed homosexual relationships].
There was, by the gentiles not the jews. If it were happening it would have got mentioned
It's foolish to pretend that there were no committed homosexual relationships among the Israelites/Jews. There have always been homosexuals in every human society.
Dawn Bertot writes:
I asked you, can the state refuse to recognize a common law marraige?
The state recognizes that a common law marriage is a de facto marriage. It recognizes that it doesn't have the authority (or the power) to dictate the relationships that people choose for themselves.
Dawn Bertot writes:
If a man marries another women, yet he was the one commiting the adultry, he does not recognize that marraige, according to Matt 19:9
"What God hath joined together" doesn't suggest that God made the rules. All it says is that He wants the commitment made by both parties to be honoured.
Dawn Bertot writes:
ringo writes:
God didn't give us free will so that He could micro-manage our lives. The authority is our own and the responsibility is our own.
really, so I can disregard the statement to not commit adultry. what right does he have to micro manage my sexual activity
It's almost inconceivable that you could have gotten that from what I wrote. Did you miss the word "responsibility"? The responsibility to honour your commitments is your own. God doesn't have the right to micro-manage your sexual activity. You have the responsibility to manage it.

"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 512 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-09-2010 7:42 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 521 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-10-2010 4:47 PM ringo has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1963 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 515 of 573 (585874)
10-10-2010 8:27 AM


Dawn Bertot writes:
The Bible isnt explict about any Homosexual activities of Gods chosen people, because they knew it was wrong
Ringo:
You have no way of knowing that. You're just making it up.
A few of the Jewish kings are said to have discontinued the male cult prostitutes. So this indicates Israel had some male homosexual activity.
(1 Kings 14:24; 15:12)
Such relationships also would have been consensual and committed, albeit with a financial incentive perhaps.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 517 by ringo, posted 10-10-2010 10:26 AM jaywill has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1963 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 516 of 573 (585878)
10-10-2010 8:48 AM
Reply to: Message 505 by Hyroglyphx
10-09-2010 10:33 AM


Re: We are commanded to question even God.
For the same reason God created Satan. He needed somebody to bury dinosaur bones in order to test people's faith in God.
Hyrog,
It is reasonable to wonder why God create or allowed Satan to come into existence. (I don't think He created Satan. I think He created the Day Star- the Anointed Cherub who was perfect in wisdom until he caused himself to become Satan).
But, of late, I think God did allow Satan to develop to be a grand repository to contain all the created creatures that for one reason or another do not want to have anything to do with God.
Satan, is the great resevior, a grand all-incompassing holding area to head up and include any and all beings created by God, who of their own wills, want to be independent from God.
God in His eternal existence, knew that out of all the free agents He was going to create, some would want to revolt against His ultimate headship of all creation. To contain them all in one repository, He allowed the ancient angelic being of immense authority, to become the leader and head of all such creatures.
My opinion is that all the rebels, all the revolters, all the unbelievers, all those disgruntled and opposed to Ultimate Governor of the universe, needed a big repository to all go together. Satan the Devil was allowed become what he did from his lofty position to be that leader.
Whatever God is, Satan became the opposite of that. And as such he sums up and leads all lesser beings who do not want thier Creator God to govern them.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 505 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-09-2010 10:33 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 518 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-10-2010 2:37 PM jaywill has replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 517 of 573 (585903)
10-10-2010 10:26 AM
Reply to: Message 515 by jaywill
10-10-2010 8:27 AM


jaywill writes:
A few of the Jewish kings are said to have discontinued the male cult prostitutes. So this indicates Israel had some male homosexual activity.
(1 Kings 14:24; 15:12)
Such relationships also would have been consensual and committed, albeit with a financial incentive perhaps.
That is certainly not what we are talking about here. What you're doing is equating your own wife to a prostitute.

"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 515 by jaywill, posted 10-10-2010 8:27 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 530 by jaywill, posted 10-11-2010 6:33 AM ringo has replied

Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 518 of 573 (585914)
10-10-2010 2:37 PM
Reply to: Message 516 by jaywill
10-10-2010 8:48 AM


Re: We are commanded to question even God.
It is reasonable to wonder why God create or allowed Satan to come into existence. (I don't think He created Satan. I think He created the Day Star- the Anointed Cherub who was perfect in wisdom until he caused himself to become Satan).
God, being omnipotent and omnipresent, surely knew before hand that the "perfect" angel would go astray. Obviously he wasn't "perfect" or he would have never have fallen. And because God knew what would happen well in advance, he is therefore complicit in everything that Satan supposedly is.
But, of late, I think God did allow Satan to develop to be a grand repository to contain all the created creatures that for one reason or another do not want to have anything to do with God.
Satan's role has changed considerably from OT to NT. In the earliest manuscripts, we see him as a helper of God to test people's faith in God -- essentially a devil's advocate (no pun intended). His role dramatically changes to become evil incarnate and the ruination of man.
We see in the book of Job where God uses Job as a test tube experiment to see if he will fall. So he causes Job's entire family to die and to have him inflicted with diseases so God can prove something to Satan. If you ask me, it sounds like Satan one that little battle by getting God to become so (for lack of a better word) ungodly.
The problem is that he is God's invention, and on that basis alone makes God complicit. Satan is masterfully cunning and humans are stupid in comparison. So whose fault is it for man falling for the bait? Did not God set up the trap, the bait, and the allure itself? After all, God is allegedly the Creator of all that is. Any and all things that happen have to, logically, be attributed to him and him alone.
My opinion is that all the rebels, all the revolters, all the unbelievers, all those disgruntled and opposed to Ultimate Governor of the universe, needed a big repository to all go together. Satan the Devil was allowed become what he did from his lofty position to be that leader.
How can you rebel against something you aren't even sure is there? Is it really rebellion against God, or is there simply not enough information to make an educated guess?
Are both you and I rebelling against Allah, or do we simply have no good reason to assume Allah's existence?
Whatever God is, Satan became the opposite of that.
Whose fault is that, ultimately? Last I checked, Satan didn't create himself and neither did we create ourselves. It seems that you are minimizing, severely, God's own role in the whole kit and caboodle.

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 516 by jaywill, posted 10-10-2010 8:48 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 523 by jaywill, posted 10-10-2010 8:01 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 105 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 519 of 573 (585940)
10-10-2010 4:16 PM
Reply to: Message 513 by jar
10-09-2010 8:00 PM


Jar qwrites
The guy that wrote the version in Matthew 19 adds a bunch more conditions and exceptions...
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So the pattern is not as set as you claim, the standards changed, they evolved, and you still have not addressed the question.
The specifics that you describe are of a type and pattern of marraige, where the pattern of its foundation are always the same. Male and Female
Yours is a dodge and a strech to try and demonstrate that becuase specifics were added or deleted, the pattern of its foundation, can also, be different.
If you have such authority to make changes to its foundation, then you should be able to produce the same type of evidence as did Christ and Paul
"If you do not believe me for the words that I speak, believe for the WORKS that I do, becuase they testify of me" Christ
"The signs of an Apostle were wrought amoung you" Paul
If you wan t additions to the original pattern and you believe you are justified in doing so, demonstrate it in the biblical fashion of signs
Biblically speaking and Besides God himself in Genesis, there have only been the three sets of lawgivers in the Bible, Moses, Christ, then his Apostles, all of which demonstated thier New revelations by signs and wonders
Do you have any that would convince me that you can add to Gen 2s foundational pattern?
other than bare assertion and gross assumption
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 513 by jar, posted 10-09-2010 8:00 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 520 by jar, posted 10-10-2010 4:28 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 520 of 573 (585944)
10-10-2010 4:28 PM
Reply to: Message 519 by Dawn Bertot
10-10-2010 4:16 PM


Convince Dawn Bertot? Why?
Do I do miracles?
Maybe. I have saved a few lives, brought at least one person back from being dead, but today miracles are pretty common, mundane even, far more miracles happening daily then Jesus ever performed.
Do I want to convince you?
No, of course not. In fact I have repeatedly said that if YOUR chapter of Club Christian does not approve of same sex marriages I suggest that YOUR chapter of Club Christian shouldn't perform same sex marriages.
I have been charged though by Jesus to try to do for the least of these my brothers.
I have shown that patterns and standards changed using Biblical passages to support my position.
I have shown that we were given the great gift of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and that we are charged to use that ability using Biblical passages as support of my position.
I have shown that we are even charged to challenge God Herself when we believe She is acting immorally and presented the Biblical Passages that support that position.
And the question remains:
jar writes:
Just as patterns and standards change throughout the Bible, today we need to address the needs of another group, the least of these my brothers.
How do we provide equal protection under the law for same sex marriages?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 519 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-10-2010 4:16 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 524 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-10-2010 9:57 PM jar has replied

Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 105 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 521 of 573 (585948)
10-10-2010 4:47 PM
Reply to: Message 514 by ringo
10-09-2010 8:19 PM


DB writes
The Bible isnt explict about any Homosexual activities of Gods chosen people, because they knew it was wrong
Ringo writes
You have no way of knowing that. You're just making it up.
Jaywills information notwithstanding, the Bible speaks of no gay marraiges as acceptable to God. If I am making it up all you need to do is produce it
Ringo, its your assumption that needs to be supported. I dont need to support what I am saying, does not exist. That would be kinda knucleheaded woudnt it?
David had eight wives. It was Solomom who had 700 wives and 300 concubines. It's possible that David was bisexual but it seems unlikely that every man in Sodom was bisexual.
"possible" is far from demonstrating it. The bible is notorious for pointing out peoples faults. I dont think it would have got that far with david then, stopped
foolish to pretend that there were no committed homosexual relationships among the Israelites/Jews. There have always been homosexuals in every human society.
No No. I am asking for an example of a Gay marraige and its approval
state recognizes that a common law marriage is a de facto marriage. It recognizes that it doesn't have the authority (or the power) to dictate the relationships that people choose for themselves.
Who sets the time limits and periods to decide what constitues enough time fo rit to be a marraige?
t God hath joined together" doesn't suggest that God made the rules. All it says is that He wants the commitment made by both parties to be honoured.
When I stopped laughing it took awhile to start writing again.
Now watch, even if we move up to Jesus time, he is still making comments like, "From the begiinning it hath not be so"
If, What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder", is not a rule, then I dont know what would be a rule
your problem is simple, its just like Jars, you only have the worst form of assertion and assumption to support your contention that you have authority to change the pattern God chose to make one flesh
"doesnt suggest God made the rules"" man I never laughed so hard in my life. Your a hoot Ringo
It's almost inconceivable that you could have gotten that from what I wrote. Did you miss the word "responsibility"? The responsibility to honour your commitments is your own. God doesn't have the right to micro-manage your sexual activity. You have the responsibility to manage it.
Honoring commitments is not what constitues the initial validity of a marraige, to be a marraige, this happens stricly and soley by God and the State
Your born into citizenship, you dont slip into marraige just because you live together and are faithful to eachother. it has to be authorized and sanctioned by someone
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 514 by ringo, posted 10-09-2010 8:19 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 522 by ringo, posted 10-10-2010 5:19 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 522 of 573 (585956)
10-10-2010 5:19 PM
Reply to: Message 521 by Dawn Bertot
10-10-2010 4:47 PM


Dawn Bertot writes:
Jaywills information notwithstanding, the Bible speaks of no gay marraiges as acceptable to God.
Neither does it speak of gay marriages being unacceptable to God. For the umpteenth time, the Commandments would have been an excellent place to mention that. They don't.
Dawn Bertot writes:
The bible is notorious for pointing out peoples faults. I dont think it would have got that far with david then, stopped
Exactly. If homosexuality was such a "fault" as you claim it is, why doesn't the Bible present any specific examples? You're arguing in circles, first assuming it is a fault and then concluding it didn't exist because it wasn't mentioned as a fault.
Dawn Bertot writes:
I am asking for an example of a Gay marraige and its approval
Most of the marriages in the Bible weren't explicitly approved or disapproved, so there's no reason to think that gay marriages, if any, would be explicitly approved or disapproved.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Now watch, even if we move up to Jesus time, he is still making comments like, "From the begiinning it hath not be so"
We've been over that. Jesus was talking about divorce. He was clarifying and/or correcting what Moses said. He was saying that it's commitment to the contract that counts.
Commitment is the only commandment dealing with marriage. Why don't you ever address that fact?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 521 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-10-2010 4:47 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 526 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-10-2010 10:37 PM ringo has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1963 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 523 of 573 (586022)
10-10-2010 8:01 PM
Reply to: Message 518 by Hyroglyphx
10-10-2010 2:37 PM


Re: We are commanded to question even God.
Hyro,
This is a bit diversionary. But, I'll kick it around with you some, if the moderators don't object.
God, being omnipotent and omnipresent, surely knew before hand that the "perfect" angel would go astray.
I suppose that is true.
Obviously he wasn't "perfect" or he would have never have fallen.
I don't think that is so "obvious" or necessarily follows.
I see in this just the foreknowledge of God. I don't think the foreknowledge of God means the imperfection of God. Nor the self choice of a free will creation implicates his Creator.
And because God knew what would happen well in advance, he is therefore complicit in everything that Satan supposedly is.
This is a philosophical problem which has been argued for centries. I don't think we can solve it.
However, who are you going to find transcendent to God as an umpire to do a little straightening of Him out ? It has never made sense to me that the creature man, could be superior in any way to the Creator God.
There are two choices to me. One is that somehow God was able to create beings, (humans), who are more moral and ethical then Himself. And thus we His creations, have to have a good talk to teach Him what He did wrong. This makes no sense to me, though it may be tempting to think that way.
How could the effect be superior to the cause ? How could God give to us something that He did not have to give - ie, superior ethics, so that we must educate the Almighty ?
The second possibilty is that, Yes God foreknew. And yes, this being became something so negative. Yet God is still absolutely right and righteous. And this is difficult for us to understand.
I take the second approach.
One writer put it this way. The day will come when we realize that in many things we in which we thought we were right and God was wrong, we will find that God was not wrong but we were.
And in some other things in which we think God is wrong and we are right, He may say "I was right. But you were right also."
This difficult problem of the foreknowledge of an omniscient God may be like that. God may not say "You were wrong. And I was right." But He may say "I was right. But you were right also."
At any rate, the idea of us the creatures finding fault with the Creator does not make sense to me.
jaywill:
But, of late, I think God did allow Satan to develop to be a grand repository to contain all the created creatures that for one reason or another do not want to have anything to do with God.
Hyro:
Satan's role has changed considerably from OT to NT. In the earliest manuscripts, we see him as a helper of God to test people's faith in God -- essentially a devil's advocate (no pun intended). His role dramatically changes to become evil incarnate and the ruination of man.
I don't think Satan role changes as you say.
From the beginning Satan injects the thought into man that God is an arbitrary tyrant who does not have man's best interest at heart. He causes man to doubt the goodness and love of the Divine heart. He causes man to doubt the truth of the Divine word.
This activity is constant throughout time until Satan goes into eternal perdition.
His job has always been to convince man that he, Satan, is God, and that God, is Satan. Satan's scheme has been to reverse roles of God and Satan in man's mind. That is so that we regard the Devil, the Slanderer as the one setting free and God the Savior as the enemy.
We see in the book of Job where God uses Job as a test tube experiment to see if he will fall.
I do not deny that Satan was like a mad dog on a leash which gave God an opportunity to display His glory.
God knew what would happen. God let the matter happen so that you and I and the Devil could see what would happen.
Many things are brought out for OUR sake, to see. It is not as though God goes through them so that He can find out what is what. He knows already.
So he causes Job's entire family to die and to have him inflicted with diseases so God can prove something to Satan.
That is right.
Concerning thier temporal existence, they really had it bad off. Concerning their eternal life, you do not know how greatly they will be blessed. Do you ?
If you ask me, it sounds like Satan one that little battle by getting God to become so (for lack of a better word) ungodly.
The reason for Job's experience is really not found in the book of Job. God, in the book of Job, NEVER gives Job OR the reader, an explanation of the whole ordeal.
I do believe that there is an explanation. But I think it is found in the New Testament probably mostly in the book of Second Corinthians. It is there that we see the outward vessel of God's saints being torn down that the inward treasure of God's life may be manifested in its indestructible nature, value and worth.
I have graduated from believing Satan's slanders and regarding God as the villian of the universe or the Bible.
The problem is that he is God's invention, and on that basis alone makes God complicit.
As I said, this is an age old philosophical debate about free will and predestination. Does God's foreknowledge make God responsible for the choices of the free will agent ?
You may adopt the view that the existence of Satan shows the evil of God. But this makes no sense to me. I think God is one for whom a greater cannot be imagined. Who is the transcendent umpire who is qualified to correct the Almighty ?
The "faulty, error prone Almighty" who needs some education and correction from His own creatures, makes no sense to me.
I lean towards our finite and limited comprehension may at times just not understand the rightness of the Ultimate Governor - God.
For example, you are here cautioning me of the faulty and error prone God. Yet of all men who seemed qualified to make that judgement, Jesus Christ, I think, showed Himself the most qualified. And He did not teach that way.
Satan is masterfully cunning and humans are stupid in comparison.
Satan is too cunning for us to be able to deal with. But He is not too cunning for Christ to deal with. So we humans need to be in oneness with Christ in order to overcome Satan.
Christ has to become our wisdom. Which is what Paul told the Corinthian Christians:
"But of Him [God] you are in Christ Jesus, who became wisdom to us from God: both righteousness and sanctification and redemption." (1 Cor. 1:30)
You see there? Being put by God into the sphere of Jesus Christ causes this Person to become wisdom to us from God - righteousness and sanctification and redemption.
All the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are in Christ - "In whom all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hidden. This I say that no one may delude you with persuasive speech." (Colossians 2:3,4)
So whose fault is it for man falling for the bait? Did not God set up the trap, the bait, and the allure itself? After all, God is allegedly the Creator of all that is. Any and all things that happen have to, logically, be attributed to him and him alone.
I think this kind of reasoning lead to a dead end. And few people live thier lives this way. You have no sense of being coerced or forced in many of the decisions you make.
I mean, Flip Wilson got a lot of laughs saying "The Devil made me do that !" But actually, your truer sense is that you made choices. Many of them were simply evil.
Concocting and elaborate philosphy that God is the one to blame for your evil choices, is not as sactifactory a justification as the justification God has provided by the saving redemption in Christ.
So my approach is to marvel at the salvation God has provided in His Son rather then continue Adam and Eve's excuses to blame thier Creator.
"And the man said, The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruuit from the tree, and I ate.
And Jehovah God said to the woman, What is this you have done? And the woman said, The serpent deceived me, and I ate." (Gen. 3:12,13)
I regard your line of reasoning as just a further passing of the buck. "God's to blame. God is implicated. God is responsible. I am innocent and God is the guilty one."
I find it much better to simply take the way of Justification through faith in the finished work of the Savior Christ and let the plan of redemption be my way of jutification.
If you want to carry that argument with you to the judgement day, go ahead. I would rather stand upon Christ whom God has put forth as my merit and justification before an eternally righteous Judge.
jaywill:
My opinion is that all the rebels, all the revolters, all the unbelievers, all those disgruntled and opposed to Ultimate Governor of the universe, needed a big repository to all go together. Satan the Devil was allowed become what he did from his lofty position to be that leader.
Hyro:
How can you rebel against something you aren't even sure is there? Is it really rebellion against God, or is there simply not enough information to make an educated guess?
I think if God is not there, there should be no sense of wrong doing in your own conscience.
But in many things, your own conscience protests, that you were off. You were wrong.
If there is no God I think you would have perfect peace about everything you did.
Are both you and I rebelling against Allah, or do we simply have no good reason to assume Allah's existence?
Islam has a completely different teaching on Allah forgiving you sins. And that goes well beyond the scope of this topic.
jaywill:
Whatever God is, Satan became the opposite of that.
Hyro:
Whose fault is that, ultimately? Last I checked, Satan didn't create himself and neither did we create ourselves. It seems that you are minimizing, severely, God's own role in the whole kit and caboodle.
Last time I checked, God said to this being " You were perfect in yur ways from the day you were created, until unrighteousness was found in you." (Ezekiel 28:15)
A being created perfect in his ways at some point gave birth to unrighteousness within himself.
I agree with you that God probably foreknew this would happen. I have graduated from the game of trying to imagine that we creatures need to educate the Creator to His erroneous ways.
If anyone in history had the qualifications to point out that God is the faulty one in all this, that would have been Jesus. As you can see, Jesus poured out His life under the conviction that His Father was absolutely right and righteous:
"Righteous Father, though the world has not known You, yet I have known You, and these have known that You have sent Me." (John 17:25)
Jesus prayed "Righteous Father .. the world has not known You, yet I have known You ..."
He acted like it. He trusted His Father to the uttermost, even unto His death on the cross. His conviction of the Father's rightness was the strongest of all human convictions, I think, in the history of man.
Christ, who was excelling in purity, goodness, and holiness, did not give us any hint that His Father was at fault. I think I have to trust His testimony over your kind of rationale.
Jesus went through all of what He suffered under the unshakable conviction that His Father was the Righteous Father. I trust Him on that.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 518 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-10-2010 2:37 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 532 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-11-2010 11:33 AM jaywill has replied

Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 105 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 524 of 573 (586050)
10-10-2010 9:57 PM
Reply to: Message 520 by jar
10-10-2010 4:28 PM


Re: Convince Dawn Bertot? Why?
I have shown that patterns and standards changed using Biblical passages to support my position.
Right by lawgivers that demonstrated that they had the right and authority to do so by confirmations through visible demonstratable miracles. Where is your proof of the idea that you believe you can circumvent or add to a pattern clearly set out
If you say you have used Biblical passages to demonstrate this, you must believe that the ones you quoted are valid as stated. In other places you call the writer an ass for making what you believe to be changes he has made. So how do we decide from the Jar method which writer is reliable?
Secondly, without any signs to demonstrate you add ons concerning assumptions in Gen 2, how would we differentiate between your assertions and the Heaven gate fellow thaT TOLD THEM there was a ship behind the moon, whereby they needed to castrate themselves
Is there is a reason I should believe your assertion, anymore than they believed his
I have shown that we are even charged to challenge God Herself when we believe She is acting immorally and presented the Biblical Passages that support that position.
And of course with no surpise to me, your next comment confirms my position
I am surprised we even try and rely on God and the scriptures, when we have jar to lead and Guide us
jar writes:
Just as patterns and standards change throughout the Bible, today we need to address the needs of another group, the least of these my brothers.
before you do this you need to demonstrate where you got the authority to alter his words and patterns
How do we provide equal protection under the law for same sex marriages?
By appealing to local state and federal authorites, because you DO NOT and will not find authority for it in the scriptures
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 520 by jar, posted 10-10-2010 4:28 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 525 by jar, posted 10-10-2010 10:27 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 525 of 573 (586058)
10-10-2010 10:27 PM
Reply to: Message 524 by Dawn Bertot
10-10-2010 9:57 PM


Re: Convince Dawn Bertot? Why?
Dawn Bertot writes:
before you do this you need to demonstrate where you got the authority to alter his words and patterns
Too funny. I have done that. God Herself confirmed it.
quote:
22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil.
I know good from evil.
What you try to market is evil.
Dawn Bertot writes:
And of course with no surpise to me, your next comment confirms my position
I am surprised we even try and rely on God and the scriptures, when we have jar to lead and Guide us
You did not recognize the source for that comment?
Have you EVER read the Bible or even my posts since I have presented the source for that in this very thread.
Read Message 504.
Dawn Bertot writes:
By appealing to local state and federal authorites, because you DO NOT and will not find authority for it in the scriptures
You may not find the authority in the Bible but I certainly can and have repeatedly presented the scriptural basis for that authority.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 524 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-10-2010 9:57 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 528 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-10-2010 11:00 PM jar has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024