Does God Care What We Believe?

[Kenny]

Decisions aren't spontaneous; correct. So what are they? Causal.

Decisions of faith aren't spontaneous.

The woman with the issue of blood say "If I but touch the hem of his garment, I shall be healed". It was a decision!

If faith is done by God then He messed up with Peter but Jesus gave the correct understanding.

If it is only God and Peter began to sink then God messed up! But Jesus said "Peter, why did YOU doubt"... free will.

Where does the word of God originate? And according to Isaiah, God's word does not return unaccomplished.

What you're referring to is autolatry.

God wanted Israel to go to the promised land. The first group's free will prevented it with only Joshua and Caleb having a spirit of faith. God's word was still accomplished... but it the second generation.

 

[Sleeppy]

Decisions of faith aren't spontaneous.

The woman with the issue of blood say "If I but touch the hem of his garment, I shall be healed". It was a decision!

If faith is done by God then He messed up with Peter but Jesus gave the correct understanding.

If it is only God and Peter began to sink then God messed up! But Jesus said "Peter, why did YOU doubt"... free will.



God wanted Israel to go to the promised land. The first group's free will prevented it with only Joshua and Caleb having a spirit of faith. God's word was still accomplished... but it the second generation.

OK. Answer my questions first.

1) Are decisions spontaneous or causal?

2) Is there any creation wholly removed from God's hand?


John 9
And passing by, he saw a man blind from birth, and his disciples asked him, saying, `Rabbi, who did sin, this one or his parents, that he should be born blind?' Jesus answered, `Neither did this one sin nor his parents, but that the works of God may be manifested in him; it behoveth me to be working the works of Him who sent me while it is day; night doth come, when no one is able to work: -- when I am in the world, I am a light of the world.'

 

[Kenny]

Your solution is to learn more of God. The Son of Man, i.e. mankind, is not here to destroy himself, but to save.

You were told not to resist evil with evil, but to turn the other cheek, forgiving beyond your limit, and going the extra mile.

You house. You clothe. You feed. You teach. You purify. --And by God, the beasts of field are domesticated, responding to the voice of the Shepard, not of the wolf.

I agree that is our mandate... but the context of my statement was in reply to Viola who was talking about the old Testament.

However, regardless, you have a problem..

Do you turn your other cheek when someone was about to slaughter an innocent child? Or did you just turn your cheek to have a blind eye to injustice in the name of just turning your cheek?

 

[Sleeppy]

I agree that is our mandate... but the context of my statement was in reply to Viola who was talking about the old Testament.

However, regardless, you have a problem..

Do you turn your other cheek when someone was about to slaughter an innocent child? Or did you just turn your cheek to have a blind eye to injustice in the name of just turning your cheek?

"In the name of just turning your cheek"?

1) What was the command?
2) Who gave it?
3) In whose name is it followed?

 

[Kenny]

I have a feeling that when I answer the questions you will forget mine.

OK. Answer my questions first.

1) Are decisions spontaneous or causal?

Both... depending on circumstances and timing.

2) Is there any creation wholly removed from God's hand?

Depends on what you mean...

Can God work through any circumstance? Yes.

Is everything the way God wants it? Not yet. Is everything obedient to God? Obviously not. Is there anything 100% again what God wants? Satan obviously as is the anti-Christ.

John 9
And passing by, he saw a man blind from birth, and his disciples asked him, saying, `Rabbi, who did sin, this one or his parents, that he should be born blind?' Jesus answered, `Neither did this one sin nor his parents, but that the works of God may be manifested in him; it behoveth me to be working the works of Him who sent me while it is day; night doth come, when no one is able to work: -- when I am in the world, I am a light of the world.'

Application?

 

[Kenny]

"In the name of just turning your cheek"?

1) What was the command?
2) Who gave it?
3) In whose name is it followed?

You obviously didn't get it... the person who let an innocent child be slaughtered didn't turn his cheek... he turned a blind eye and a cold hardened heart and the child's cheek as he/she cried "help me". That was the scribe and the pharisee passing by the injured man.

But we should still preach the gospel to reach those whose heart are still reachable.

 

[columbus]

Do you turn your other cheek when someone was about to slaughter an innocent child?

If, as is taught by most Abrahamic religionists, the "innocent child" goes directly to Heaven (without risking a less desirable fate), then why is that a bad thing?
Why would a Christian oppose sending an innocent child to Heaven?
Tom

 

[Kenny]

If, as is taught by most Abrahamic religionists, the "innocent child" goes directly to Heaven (without risking a less desirable fate), then why is that a bad thing?
Why would a Christian oppose sending an innocent child to Heaven?
Tom

Because it's more than a child, it generations of lives and the hardening of hearts by the one who turns a blind eye. It is justice going out the window. It isn't love.

 

[Sleeppy]

You obviously didn't get it... the person who let an innocent child be slaughtered didn't turn his cheek... he turned a blind eye and a cold hardened heart and the child's cheek as he/she cried "help me". That was the scribe and the pharisee passing by the injured man.

But we should still preach the gospel to reach those whose heart are still reachable.

No. I understand you.

You're attempting to equate returning evil for evil, with the command to turn your cheek.

Protecting children in the U.S. does not somehow justify the murder of children in Japan, or elsewhere. Terrorism is self-perpetuating.

 

[Kenny]

No. I understand you.

You're attempting to equate returning evil for evil, with the command to turn your cheek.

.

Apparently, you don't.

But now I understand... you view what is written through the eyes of a pacifist. (Which I have no problems with for it is within your rights and privileges as a free will spiritual entity)

 

[Sleeppy]

Because it's more than a child, it generations of lives and the hardening of hearts by the one who turns a blind eye. It is justice going out the window. It isn't love.

What you're describing, is the regeneration of Cain's shame and contempt. This is why it's actually murder. Your defense is Lamech's defense.

God did not intervene with Cain and Abel; He did know them, and what would become of them - because, by His word they were appointed without disappointment, but so "that the works of God are manifested" (John 9:3). Brothers who are apart from God, reap what is apart from God, having been sown apart.

Your command was theirs: "Leave there your gift before the altar, and go -- first be reconciled to your brother, and then having come bring your gift." (Matthew 5:24)

 

[Sleeppy]

Apparently, you don't.

But now I understand... you view what is written through the eyes of a pacifist.

Restating my position doesn't justify yours. Protecting children locally shouldn't equate to destroying them elsewhere.

 

[leibowde84]

Any reason is a good reason if you are bent to a specific thought. Even if you have to make it up.

So, you just convince yourself of your claims about Christianity by making up facts? Is that why you are unable to provide any evidence to back them up?

 

[Sleeppy]

I have a feeling that when I answer the questions you will forget mine.


Both... depending on circumstances and timing.


Depends on what you mean...

Can God work through any circumstance? Yes.

Is everything the way God wants it? Not yet. Is everything obedient to God? Obviously not. Is there anything 100% again what God wants? Satan obviously as is the anti-Christ.


Application?

A degree of spontaneity doesn't justify self-righteousness.

Any monotheistic God, by definition, must maintain supremacy. The adverse does not describe God; it describes a subordinate. You're subordinating God beneath your "free will". This is autolatry.

 

[Amadeus27]

Disagreement is fine. But saying that you have more insight or those who disagree are merely obtuse is insulting. You open yourself up to a huge burden of proof when u imply either.

You shouldn't be putting words in my mouth that were not expressed by me. Burden of proof? The proof for me is in me, placed there by God. Share my proof? You would have to accept my word that I have it or obtain it from the source which is God. I am guessing that you are choosing not to go to the source.

Probably a number of people took as insults the words of Jesus. He did not apologize because he never lied nor did he ever speak when it was not the right thing to do [right thing decided by God].

I am not Jesus or God, but sometimes when I am where He wants me to be my words are right on the mark. For those I do not apologize. Anyone he so desires may ask God to apologize. For anything I said which came from the old man of flesh rather the quickening of God in me, I do apologize to anyone who was needlessly offended.

 

[Amadeus27]

So, what's your proof? Obviously scripture won't cut it as it is merely unverified claims by unknown authors.

I told you in my earlier post where the proof was. As to being by unknown authors, the Author is not unknown to me. Perhaps you would be seriously interested in an introduction?

So because you don't know God you won't accept His explanations or His explanations through me, Nevertheless you would expect me to accept what you say when I have known you for less time and definitely not as well as I know Him.

A more appropriate answer would be in Jesus words here:

leibowde84 "...because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed." John 20:29

I understand you do not believe scripture, but you apparently would receive some conclusions of science without knowing the scientists responsible for them being available to us. Why would they be more reliable?

 

[leibowde84]

I told you in my earlier post where the proof was. As to being by unknown authors, the Author is not unknown to me. Perhaps you would be seriously interested in an introduction?

So because you don't know God you won't accept His explanations or His explanations through me, Nevertheless you would expect me to accept what you say when I have known you for less time and definitely not as well as I know Him.

A more appropriate answer would be in Jesus words here:

leibowde84 "...because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed." John 20:29

I understand you do not believe scripture, but you apparently would receive some conclusions of science without knowing the scientists responsible for them being available to us. Why would they be more reliable?

But, God did not write the scriptures. It was written by men.

 

[Amadeus27]

But, God did not write the scriptures. It was written by men.

While you are correct, they wrote as inspired to do so by God. The secret, [which is not secret really in a sense] is that to receive God's message from the scripture written under inspiration requires that the reader or hearer be also inspired by God. Without that inspiration the writings we call as scriptures are a dead carcass.

Jesus was also a dead carcass hanging on a cross. His carcass came to Life. Similarly the carcass which a man consumes by reading or listening to what is written in the Bible can be quickened [brought to Life] in that man by the Holy Spirit.

Not having received the Holy Spirit you disbelieve me and God, but for you there is still time...

 

[Tony L Smith]

Obviously people can lead good lives and be great people regardless of whether they believe in God. So, why do you think belief in God is important?

I agree that is true, at least you don't have to believe in a deity apart from yourself, and you may not consider yourself as a deity either. A good life can only be lived by someone who believes that it is a possibility for them and they haven't given in to a victim mentality to where they feel they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
You must admit that we are the masters of our life, good or bad. A good and powerful life is only achieved (or maybe received) by a willing acceptance of spiritual laws that govern success in any and every area.
A boat will only go upstream until the fuel runs out, but after it surrenders to the flow if will go on indefinitely in the pattern. So who is the stream? Call it God or call it a stream, you know its there.

 

[Kenny]

What you're describing, is the regeneration of Cain's shame and contempt. This is why it's actually murder. Your defense is Lamech's defense.

God did not intervene with Cain and Abel; He did know them, and what would become of them - because, by His word they were appointed without disappointment, but so "that the works of God are manifested" (John 9:3). Brothers who are apart from God, reap what is apart from God, having been sown apart.

Your command was theirs: "Leave there your gift before the altar, and go -- first be reconciled to your brother, and then having come bring your gift." (Matthew 5:24)

Selecting one item and making a point doesn't establish a truth...

is Jesus coming back and is he going to destroy those who are against God?

Every judge that judges between two men can do so without having ought against his brother. It is a matter of the heart.