If Jesus was God, explain this verse...

[Benoni]

"Hey Adam, even though you can't do anything about it, I command you to not eat from the Tree, even though I'm going to make you eat from the Tree anyway, and you can't do anything about it, and then I'll curse you and your descendents for it because it's all part of my plan, and make you suffer for something you had no power over".

Seems legit.

It is:

Romans 5:18-20 (Weymouth’s)
It follows then just as the result of a single transgression is a condemnation which to the whole race, so also is the result of a single degree of righteousness is a life giving acquittal which extends to the whole race. (19) for as thought the disobedience of one individual the mass of mankind were constituted as sinners, so also though the obedience of one, the mass of mankind will be constituted righteous. Now law was brought in later on so that the transgression might increase, but sin increased, grace is overflowed.




1 Corinthians 15:22-24
http://www.biblegateway.com/bg_versions/bgclick.php?what=2
http://www.biblegateway.com/bg_versions/bgclick.php?what=222For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

 

[Benoni]

Okay, so that was your answer as to why he offered the question. So God just cursed Adam for something Adam had no control over and was just being all rhetorical. Fascinating.

And no, I don't think Satan was the Snake in the Garden, the "Old Serpent" is something totally different, but that's for another day.

I hope you're ready to address all the problems with your theological concept that we don't have Free Will and God just drives human kind to sin and be punished like dolls.

The Lord knows how to rescue/deliver the godly out of temptation and to reserve the unrighteous unto the day of judgement to be punished... -2 Peter 2:9-

Punishment=Kolasis: Correction, Punishment, Penalty.

Kolasis Rooted In Kolazo

Kolazo:

1. To lop or prune, as trees and wings.

2. To curb, check, restrain.

3. To chastise. To correct. Punishment .

4. To cause to be punished.

Correction=

Alteration that improves: An alteration that removes an error.

Punishment meant to improve: Punishment, especially meant to improve or reform the person punished.

Law treatment of offenders: The system of dealing with criminals by improvement, rehabilitation, parole, probation.

Treatment of a specific defect.

The act of offering an improvement to replace a mistake. Something substituted for an error.

A rebuke for making a mistake.

The act of punishing.

Removing of errors: The removing of errors from something or the indicating of errors in something.

The act or process of correcting.

Something that is substituted or proposed for what is wrong or inaccurate.

Rectification/ modification/ adjustment/ amending.

Amendation.

Rectification.

Rectification=

To set right. To correct.

To purify.

To correct by removing errors.

To adjust.

A quantity applied by way of correcting.

The act or process of correcting.

Something that is substituted or proposed for what is wrong or inaccurate.

Amendation.

To correct something or make something right.

The act of rectifying or the fact of being rectified.

To correct by calculation or adjustment.

To adjust.

To fix/ repair/ remedy/ amend/ correct/ redress/ put to right/ to straighten/ to reform/ to adjust something.

The act of amending, correcting or setting right that which is wrong or erroneous.

"Vessels of wrath fitted to destruction"

Fitted= Katartizo=

To mend what has been broken or rent.

To repair.

To complete/ put in order/ to arrange/ to adjust.

To make one what he aught to be.

 

[Shermana]

It is:

Romans 5:18-20 (Weymouth’s)
It follows then just as the result of a single transgression is a condemnation which to the whole race, so also is the result of a single degree of righteousness is a life giving acquittal which extends to the whole race. (19) for as thought the disobedience of one individual the mass of mankind were constituted as sinners, so also though the obedience of one, the mass of mankind will be constituted righteous. Now law was brought in later on so that the transgression might increase, but sin increased, grace is overflowed.




1 Corinthians 15:22-24
http://www.biblegateway.com/bg_versions/bgclick.php?what=2
http://www.biblegateway.com/bg_versions/bgclick.php?what=222For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

You definitely have a propensity to quote verses that have absolutely nothing to do with your claim, in addition to insisting on interpretations that not even any of the classical commentators agree with.

Carry on.

 

[Benoni]

You definitely have a propensity to quote verses that have absolutely nothing to do with your claim, in addition to insisting on interpretations that not even any of the classical commentators agree with.

Carry on.

Obviously the deeper I go in God's Word the more your worn out wine skin will bust.

 

[Benoni]

You definitely have a propensity to quote verses that have absolutely nothing to do with your claim, in addition to insisting on interpretations that not even any of the classical commentators agree with.

Carry on.

I would love to see you refute these verses. I have never met a so called Christian in my life who TRIED refuted so many Bible verses

 

[Shermana]

Obviously the deeper I go in God's Word the more your worn out wine skin will bust.

No, you're going deep into nonsense and your ego is bursting but you can't accept the possibility that you've been wrong all this time and lying to yourself.

How painful was it each time you said "You are right" to me?

 

[Shermana]

I would love to see you refute these verses. I have never met a so called Christian in my life who TRIED refuted so many Bible verses

Refute what? I'd love to see you actually address anything I post when I do refute you. You've already admitted you were in error more than once to me, but then went back to resisting. It's like the Demon of Ego is so fierce with you, it can't even accept when you yourself admit you're wrong! In this case, you're simply not even close to interpreting those verses right. Anyone can say "See this verse backs up what I'm saying" and then insist and double down on it even when it is nothing close to what they're saying, and say "Oh, but the meaning is DEEP you have to dig down for it". All I have to do is say "It doesn't say at all what you're saying".

Again, this is the problem with debate, and why many times an objective moderator is needed, to slap people back to reality when they insist and dig in on positions that are completely untenable while refusing to accept that they are far out of bounds.

Simply put, your verses don't remotely support what you're pushing. So the onus is on YOU to demonstrate how they do. And I showed you in your last attempt you were wrong.

 

[Benoni]

No, you're going deep into nonsense and your ego is bursting but you can't accept the possibility that you've been wrong all this time and lying to yourself.

How painful was it each time you said "You are right" to me?

If I am so wrong how come you can never follow thought with scriture? You try to refute the verses I post and have no verses to support your view. Show me using God's Word where Adam had a freewill to sin. You can't and you are lying to yourself. How am I lying to my self I quote the Bible you just make excuses.

 

[Benoni]

Refute what? I'd love to see you actually address anything I post when I do refute you. You've already admitted you were in error more than once to me, but then went back to resisting. It's like the Demon of Ego is so fierce with you, it can't even accept when you yourself admit you're wrong! In this case, you're simply not even close to interpreting those verses right. Anyone can say "See this verse backs up what I'm saying" and then insist and double down on it even when it is nothing close to what they're saying, and say "Oh, but the meaning is DEEP you have to dig down for it". All I have to do is say "It doesn't say at all what you're saying".

Again, this is the problem with debate, and why many times an objective moderator is needed, to slap people back to reality when they insist and dig in on positions that are completely untenable while refusing to accept that they are far out of bounds.

Simply put, your verses don't remotely support what you're pushing. So the onus is on YOU to demonstrate how they do. And I showed you in your last attempt you were wrong.

You are the one with the ego. I admitted one time over a minor detail that jesus was not a soulish being that is it. You cannot not admait God caused the fall and you have NO verses to back your bias assumpion. Chapter and verse please.
Far out of whos bounds; some one who cannot back his false doctrine with the Bible he claims he believe in???

ReallY? You say "Simply put, your verses don't remotely support what you're pushing." At least I have verses.

 

[Shermana]

You are the one with the ego. I admitted one time over a minor detail that jesus was not a soulish being that is it. You cannot not admait God caused the fall and you have NO verses to back your bias assumpion. Chapter and verse please.
Far out of whos bounds; some one who cannot back his false doctrine with the Bible he claims he believe in???

ReallY? You say "Simply put, your verses don't remotely support what you're pushing." At least I have verses.

I don't think you're even worth responding to anymore.

You have absolutely no desire to be rational, debate, or think logically. You've already admitted I was right on each point of contention so far, then you went back to resisting, and now you're just digging in on something you can't prove, which no other scholar or commentary agrees with, in something that doesn't come close to the plain text reading, and you keep using the word "bias" as if you don't have any.

You already agreed that it says Jesus has a soul. Then you come up with some idea that I have to prove he is a "soulish" being even after you admit he has a soul, and even after I prove that the text clearly implies the soul is retained after death.

This is why Christianity is on the freefall.

 

[Shermana]

If I am so wrong how come you can never follow thought with scriture? You try to refute the verses I post and have no verses to support your view. Show me using God's Word where Adam had a freewill to sin. You can't and you are lying to yourself. How am I lying to my self I quote the Bible you just make excuses.

I have used scripture each time, and you said I am right, but then when I point out to you that the verses you are using don't reflect what you're saying, you tell me that I have to get verses to disprove your interpretation which doesn't at all remotely back what you're saying.


What you're asking me to do is disprove a negative.

What I've done is the same thing you've done, in examining the concept of context, except I actually back it up with argument, in showing that the verses clearly indicate that Adam did have a choice.

You might as well ask me to prove with scripture that Adam didn't pick his nose.

I have asked you to prove how the verses you use remotely back what you're saying.

What do you want, verses that specifically indicate there's Free will?

There are plenty. Such as in Proverbs and Psalms. What's the point of even reading the Proverbs? Why even write the Proverbs? The concept of "Choice" is well alive in the scripture.

I asked you what the point is of even giving commandments in the first place, and warning the Israelites what would happen if they don't obey them, if there's no free will.

Meanwhile, you have not given much real text support for your views. You have flung verses that don't support what you're saying, then you just insist "Yes they do" without explaining how. There's really no point in even humoring you with the respect of discussion. I have a feeling you're simply a Hard-calvinist locked in his views who refuses to accept the possibility that his doctrine itself is in error.

 

[Benoni]

I have used scripture each time, and you said I am right, but then when I point out to you that the verses you are using don't reflect what you're saying, you tell me that I have to get verses to disprove your interpretation which doesn't at all remotely back what you're saying.


What you're asking me to do is disprove a negative.

What I've done is the same thing you've done, in examining the concept of context, except I actually back it up with argument, in showing that the verses clearly indicate that Adam did have a choice.

You might as well ask me to prove with scripture that Adam didn't pick his nose.

I have asked you to prove how the verses you use remotely back what you're saying.

What do you want, verses that specifically indicate there's Free will?

There are plenty. Such as in Proverbs and Psalms. What's the point of even reading the Proverbs? Why even write the Proverbs? The concept of "Choice" is well alive in the scripture.

I asked you what the point is of even giving commandments in the first place, and warning the Israelites what would happen if they don't obey them, if there's no free will.

Meanwhile, you have not given much real text support for your views. You have flung verses that don't support what you're saying, then you just insist "Yes they do" without explaining how. There's really no point in even humoring you with the respect of discussion. I have a feeling you're simply a Hard-calvinist locked in his views who refuses to accept the possibility that his doctrine itself is in error.

I already explained to you carnal man has a freewill. But I also quoted to you verses that declare Adam had no choice it was Ps. 90:1-3 and Romans 8:20. You tell Adam had a freewill. Seeing I posted verses that declare he had no choice where is your proof he had a choice? Chapter and verse.

I also pointed out carnal man is not saved by him choosing freely; God needs to draw him. Which means drag in the Greek. (how can someone freely choose if he was dragged?)

I am not a calvanist I do not believe in eternal hell. Calvanist do.

I am locked in my view because I have use God's Word to prove it. You say there are "There are plenty of vrses to back your false claims such as "in Proverbs and Psalms"

Well lets see them.

Then you have something to stand on outside of your religous bias. chapter and verse.

 

[Benoni]

I don't think you're even worth responding to anymore.

You have absolutely no desire to be rational, debate, or think logically. You've already admitted I was right on each point of contention so far, then you went back to resisting, and now you're just digging in on something you can't prove, which no other scholar or commentary agrees with, in something that doesn't come close to the plain text reading, and you keep using the word "bias" as if you don't have any.

You already agreed that it says Jesus has a soul. Then you come up with some idea that I have to prove he is a "soulish" being even after you admit he has a soul, and even after I prove that the text clearly implies the soul is retained after death.

This is why Christianity is on the freefall.

Your on the freefall and you are really streaching the truth here. I have given you a rational, debate, or think logically. Locic whos logic? You who refutes every verse he sees and then cannot produce a any verses to back you false claims?

"You already agreed that it says Jesus has a soul" yes i did. I never seen a text you or anyone else posted the clearly implies the Jesus soul is retained after death. Another out right lie.

 

[Shermana]

Your on the freefall and you are really streaching the truth here. I have given you a rational, debate, or think logically. Locic whos logic? You who refutes every verse he sees and then cannot produce a any verses to back you false claims?

"You already agreed that it says Jesus has a soul" yes i did. I never seen a text you or anyone else posted the clearly implies the Jesus soul is retained after death. Another out right lie.

I don't "refuse" every verse I see, you are the one who refuses the fact that there are other interpretations that actually go by the plain reading. You are the one who accuses any and all scholars and commentators of being "Goofy" and "attacking God's word". You have absolutely no concept of honesty or honorable debate.

I showed you that it said Body and Soul are destroyed in Hell/Gehenna, then I directed you to my link which shows that there's good reason the early Christians thought this Gehenna was real.

 

[Shermana]

I already explained to you carnal man has a freewill. But I also quoted to you verses that declare Adam had no choice it was Ps. 90:1-3 and Romans 8:20. You tell Adam had a freewill. Seeing I posted verses that declare he had no choice where is your proof he had a choice? Chapter and verse.

I also pointed out carnal man is not saved by him choosing freely; God needs to draw him. Which means drag in the Greek. (how can someone freely choose if he was dragged?)

I am not a calvanist I do not believe in eternal hell. Calvanist do.

I am locked in my view because I have use God's Word to prove it. You say there are "There are plenty of vrses to back your false claims such as "in Proverbs and Psalms"

Well lets see them.

Then you have something to stand on outside of your religous bias. chapter and verse.

And I showed you that the verses you quoted don't back up what you're saying. I've asked you to name a single other person anywhere on the web who agrees with you. You have none. Your ideas are crackpottery. You have not used God's word to prove your view anymore so than you've used God's word to prove Adam was a chronic nose picker. You persistently refuse to even explain how you derive your view from what verses you quote, you underline them, but that doesn't make it actually show how it agrees with you. The fact is, you can't. You know you're reading into it something that's not there, that's all there is to it.

You are the one with religious bias without anything to stand on. This is about all you're capable of doing at this point.

 

[Benoni]

I don't "refuse" every verse I see, you are the one who refuses the fact that there are other interpretations that actually go by the plain reading. You are the one who accuses any and all scholars and commentators of being "Goofy" and "attacking God's word". You have absolutely no concept of honesty or honorable debate.

I showed you that it said Body and Soul are destroyed in Hell/Gehenna, then I directed you to my link which shows that there's good reason the early Christians thought this Gehenna was real.

Hell is a big fat religious lie. Notice I gave you two verses that all cursed by Adam will be made alive in Christ and you rejected them.

Were you there with the early christians. Yes all scholars and commentators are not the Spirit of Truth but that is where you find your truth human carnal scholars and commentators and reject the spirit of truth ..

Who are you to tell anyone which of these all scholars and commentators is of God.

Its all based on your bias opinion.

No I did not attack God's Word; I interpeted it by the facts their are two sides of the issue. One side you reject and that is the ultimate salvation of all men. The other you condemn billions with.

 

[Benoni]

And I showed you that the verses you quoted don't back up what you're saying. I've asked you to name a single other person anywhere on the web who agrees with you. You have none. Your ideas are crackpottery. You have not used God's word to prove your view anymore so than you've used God's word to prove Adam was a chronic nose picker. You persistently refuse to even explain how you derive your view from what verses you quote, you underline them, but that doesn't make it actually show how it agrees with you. The fact is, you can't. You know you're reading into it something that's not there, that's all there is to it.

You are the one with religious bias without anything to stand on. This is about all you're capable of doing at this point.

More opinion. There are thousand of believers who believe just like I do and this is especially true on the web. You paint with a broad brush and give me vague details that no one has any idea what you are talking about.

HOGWASH You said "You persistently refuse to even explain how you derive your view from what verses you quote, you underline them, but that doesn't make it actually show how it agrees with you" but do you give me example? No because your full of HOGWASH.

You said Adam had a freewill to choose and I asked you for chapter and verse and I am still waiting.

I posted Ps. 90: 1-3 and Romans 8:20 which told any one who can read God took the blaime not little Adam, Romans even tells us that Adam had no choice.

Did I not explain what these verses say?

Yet you are telling me I refuse to expain. The real issue here is you are rejecting the Bible and replace it with how you want to to read with your bias opinion.

 

[Benoni]

Do you even know where the Holy Spirit is?

 

[Benoni]

So why would God torture billions and billions of His creation seeing He caused the fall and Adam had no choice? As well as carnal man does not have a freewill in his own salvation?

 

[Shermana]

More opinion. There are thousand of believers who believe just like I do and this is especially true on the web. You paint with a broad brush and give me vague details that no one has any idea what you are talking about.

HOGWASH You said "You persistently refuse to even explain how you derive your view from what verses you quote, you underline them, but that doesn't make it actually show how it agrees with you" but do you give me example? No because your full of HOGWASH.

You said Adam had a freewill to choose and I asked you for chapter and verse and I am still waiting.

I posted Ps. 90: 1-3 and Romans 8:20 which told any one who can read God took the blaime not little Adam, Romans even tells us that Adam had no choice.

Did I not explain what these verses say?

Yet you are telling me I refuse to expain. The real issue here is you are rejecting the Bible and replace it with how you want to to read with your bias opinion.

I already explained. The mere fact that God tells Adam not to do something is a sure indication that Adam had a choice. I also pointed out that the entire book of Proverbs is dedicated to telling people to make the right choices. You have dismissed this and brushed it off without any good reason. You can post Romans 8:20 til the cows come home, that doesn't make it support what you're saying whatsoever. There's a reason why you persistently refuse to explain how it does. Likewise, I showed you that Psalms 90: 1-3 does NOT say what you're saying it says, you simply brushed it off and insisted on it as if you were right even when I proved it wrong.

What you're doing is basically denying and dismissing interpretations that disagree with yours just because you disagree with them, and then you come up with some non-answer based on a verse that doesn't even indicate what you're saying.

It's impossible debating with people like you. It really is. You're obviously not here to even debate, you're here to preach, and your preaching has been debunked.

What are you going to do, post 10 more times in a row those verses that don't even support what you're saying and dismiss and deny my reasoning behind the concept of Free Will in the Bible as if your verses somehow disprove it?