Religious

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

I am afraid what everyone seems to be objecting to is how you make it say what you would like it to say, even in the face of repeatedly breaking laws of nature.

Hermeneutics?
What one biblical expert had to say


Just as John Calvin apparently came to a different interpretation of your so-called 7 solar day creation. Which is totally far fetched.

Why does it amaze you that so many come to a different understanding? Is it because the scripture is false or because all men are liars?

Boxcar
P.S. Honesty is not mankind's strong suit, for your info. This is precisely why men, universally, do not implicitly trust one another. Try to stay connected to reality.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

This is what I wrote:



Those words or concepts, you allege I said, are no where to be found in my statement. My statement about Paul is clear in the context of the entire text regarding authority to teach.

So no you didn't refute anything, you shifted the timeline. You responded that Paul was authorized by Jesus, which is prior in time to the event I used as an example. Me thinks you are the one that forgot a few later passages.

In fact Paul, himself, had no authority to preach until the original Apostles allowed it. Paul needed the authority of the Apostles to teach the Gentiles did not have to follow Jewish laws and traditions.[/quote]

This is a lie. Prove this assertion from Scripture. In the Acts passage, I quoted Jesus Christ gave Paul all the authority needed!

Why in the world world would the Creator of the universe and the Redeemer of men need or want sinful, fallible mortals to approve of His eternal decrees!? You surely have gone mad! My bible tells me that God needs nothing from man!

God chose Paul to become His apostle in eternity past. In fact, Paul is the quintessential example of a Doctrine of Grace known as....drum roll please....Unconditional Election.

Boxcar

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

I don't watch vids. I don't have time. If you have a particular point to make and you can make it succinctly , make it.

You have posted over twice as many replies to this thread as I have. Your so-called 11 part pseudo-scientific treatise is dense and ponderous (not to mention totally lacking science). And now your telling us you don't have 40 minutes to spare? But it's ok for you on the other hand to tell your critics to waste countless minutes each, to search and google and to find out what might be, or not be your actual "views" on specific issues like the age of the universe which you refuse to back up, or cultural non religious traces of floods in historical accounts because you cannot explain yourself properly?

Whatever. So be it.

Tyson "we tend to ignore these obvious problems

This is all simply stupid design. The problem is, if you look for what is intelligent, and yes you can find some things that are really beautiful, and really—“hey, that’s clever,” such as the ball-socket of the shoulder. There are a lot of things you can point to, but then you stop looking at all the things that confound that revelation. And so, if I came upon a frozen waterfall, and it just struck me for all its beauty, I would then turn over the rock and try to find a millipede, or some kind of deadly newt, and put that in context, and realize, of course, the universe is not here for us"

Neil Tyson's verdict: “No engineer would design that, at all. Ever!”

As Hume’s character's Philo put it more than two centuries ago,

from David Humes' Argument from Design in Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion,....

.... But there is no view of human life, or of the condition of mankind, from which, without the greatest violence, we can infer the moral attributes, or learn that infinite benevolence, conjoined with infinite power and infinite wisdom, which we must discover by the eyes of faith alone. It is your turn now to tug the laboring oar, and to support your philosophical subtleties against the dictates of plain reason and experience.

You never support any of your claptrap when the rubber meets the road. Unless one counts multitudes of Boxcarian "Let it Be's

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Why does it amaze you that so many come to a different understanding? Is it because the scripture is false or because all men are liars?


P.S. Honesty is not mankind's strong suit, for your info. This is precisely why men, universally, do not implicitly trust one another. Try to stay connected to reality.

Why is it when you get on your high horse to bitch about mankind, you do such a perfect job describing yourself?

[Show Me the Wire]

In fact Paul, himself, had no authority to preach until the original Apostles allowed it. Paul needed the authority of the Apostles to teach the Gentiles did not have to follow Jewish laws and traditions.[/quote]

This is a lie. Prove this assertion from Scripture. In the Acts passage, I quoted Jesus Christ gave Paul all the authority needed!

Why in the world world would the Creator of the universe and the Redeemer of men need or want sinful, fallible mortals to approve of His eternal decrees!? You surely have gone mad! My bible tells me that God needs nothing from man!

God chose Paul to become His apostle in eternity past. In fact, Paul is the quintessential example of a Doctrine of Grace known as....drum roll please....Unconditional Election.

Boxcar


Read post 10235.

Why does God use men, because that what he does. He used Abraham, Moses, apostles and many more.

[Show Me the Wire]

Why does it amaze you that so many come to a different understanding? Is it because the scripture is false or because all men are liars?

Does the same standard apply to Luther, Calvin and Zwingli?

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

God didn't slip up at all. There was only one rule and regulation given to Adam -- not to eat from a particular tree. Very difficult commandment, eh? But Adam "slipped up" (sinned), so he passed on his evil nature to his posterity; therefore all men became sinners (which is what Paul teaches also in Romans 5). As a result, most men on earth "slipped up", save for eight.

See...God always preserves a remnant for Himself. God chose to save eight human beings.

But God used his "eraser' many times. Lots of divine oop-ses You said Adam had a simple choice. Why not allow his progeny to also make choices?

God's Top 50 Killings

A list of sinners. Each is annotated on this page......

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot....-you-rate.html

God killed every first born Egyptian child

God sent two bears to rip apart 42 boys for making fun of a prophet's bald head

God killed 14,700 for complaining about his killings

The Amalekite genocide

God killed 70,000 because David had a census that he (or Satan) inspired him to have

God slowly killed David's baby boy to punish David for adultery

Jephthah sacrifices his daughter to God as a burned offering (to pay him back for helping him slaughter 20 cities)

The Flood of Noah

When the people complained, God burned them to death

Sodom and Gomorrah

God killed 50,070 for looking into the ark of the Lord

God and Satan kill Job's children in a bet

The opposing party is buried alive (with their families)

Jeroboam's son: God kills another child

Elijah kills 450 religious leaders in a prayer contest

God killed one million Ethiopians

The Midianite Massacre: Have you saved the women alive?

Onan for spilling his seed

The massacre of the peaceful, unsuspecting people

Who is on the Lord's side? (Family and friends are forced to kill each other because of Aaron's golden calf)

God made Jehoram's bowels fall out

David killed 200 Philistines for their foreskins (to buy his first wife)

Phinehas' double murder stops God's plague (after 14,000 were killed)

God burns Aaron's sons to death for offering him "strange fire"

God sent snakes to bite people for complaining

God commands a blasphemer to be stoned to death

God burned to death 102 men for asking Elijah to come down from his hill

Herod was eaten by worms for not giving God the glory

God sent a lion to kill a man for not smiting a prophet

God smote them with hemorrhoids in their secret parts

God sent lions to eat those that don't fear him enough

An angel killed 185,000 sleeping soldiers

250 are burned to death for burning incense

Achan and his family are stoned and burned to death

Ananias and Sapphira were killed by God for not giving Peter all their money

God kills Ezekiel's wife and tells him not to mourn her death

God killed Uzzah for trying to keep the ark from falling

Samson kills 3000 in a suicide terrorist attack

Ehud delivers a message from God: A knife blade into a fat man's belly

A man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day

Seventy heads in two heaps

Samson murders 30 men for their clothes

Jehu assembles the followers of Baal and then slaughters them all

God killed Nabal (and David got his wife and other stuff)

Samson kills 1000 men with the jawbone of an ass

A holy civil war (called by rotting concubine body part messages)
Jeroboam's family: God kills a family

God stops the sun so Joshua can kill in the daylight

Baasha's family and friends: God kills another family

P.S: it's me hcap

[hcap]

[YT="Divine OOpses"]/8VN8xXYDPnk?[/YT]

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot....-in-bible.html

The table shows two numbers: the number given by the Bible, if any, and an estimate, when no biblical number is available.

Total number killed by God in the Bible
- Using biblical numbers only: 2,821,364
- With estimates: 25 million

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by hcap

But God used his "eraser' many times. Lots of divine oop-ses You said Adam had a simple choice. Why not allow his progeny to also make choices?

God's Top 50 Killings

A list of sinners. Each is annotated on this page......

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot....-you-rate.html



P.S: it's me hcap

With that list of "accomplishments", God could make a Mafia Don blush.

[Show Me the Wire]

God chose Paul to become His apostle in eternity past. In fact, Paul is the quintessential example of a Doctrine of Grace known as....drum roll please....Unconditional Election.

Actually Paul's conversion is about how God takes drastic measures to overcome God's gift of free will to man. Paul so strongly opposed his election to be the apostle to the Gentiles, God worked a miracle designed to make Paul submit, because Paul would not voluntarily answer God's call.


Acts 9:1 Then Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest 2 and asked letters from him to the synagogues of Damascus, so that if he found any who were of the Way, whether men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. 3 As he journeyed he came near Damascus, and suddenly a light shone around him from heaven. 4 Then he fell to the ground, and heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?" 5 And he said, "Who are You, Lord?" Then the Lord said, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. It [is] hard for you to kick against the goads." 6 So he, trembling and astonished, said, "Lord, what do You want me to do?" Then the Lord [said] to him, "Arise and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do."

First, God blinded Paul with a bright light, then Christ personally spoke to Paul. Scripture clearly says that Paul was resisting the call of God (kicking against the goad), and the harsh measures by God required to win Paul's cooperation. Paul's response was immediate and complete submission to Jesus. This section of Scripture clearly shows man's free will to accept or reject God's calling and shows Calvin's errors of the doctrine called Irresistible Grace.

An error, which makes sense as Calvin is a man making him a liar trusting in his depraved will.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by tucker6

With that list of "accomplishments", God could make a Mafia Don blush.

A Mafia Don probably has fifty years at most to leave his legacy. God has eternity.

A Mafia Don has about 20 to 30 soldiers. God has whole nations.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

THEN...WHAT?

Then...the formation of misguided men...which cannot distinguish between allegory and fact.

FIFY.

[Show Me the Wire]

Belief is not a choice. If it were then rest assured I would be the greatest believer.

Forgive me Actor. I am skeptical.

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by Actor

A Mafia Don probably has fifty years at most to leave his legacy. God has eternity.

A Mafia Don has about 20 to 30 soldiers. God has whole nations.

It's all very interesting that God was this active back in the days before cameras and tape recorders and written records, and hasn't appeared in 2,000 years. Maybe he feels guilty about the bet he had with the devil.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Actually Paul's conversion is about how God takes drastic measures to overcome God's gift of free will to man. Paul so strongly opposed his election to be the apostle to the Gentiles, God worked a miracle designed to make Paul submit, because Paul would not voluntarily answer God's call.


Acts 9:1 Then Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest 2 and asked letters from him to the synagogues of Damascus, so that if he found any who were of the Way, whether men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. 3 As he journeyed he came near Damascus, and suddenly a light shone around him from heaven. 4 Then he fell to the ground, and heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?" 5 And he said, "Who are You, Lord?" Then the Lord said, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. It [is] hard for you to kick against the goads." 6 So he, trembling and astonished, said, "Lord, what do You want me to do?" Then the Lord [said] to him, "Arise and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do."

First, God blinded Paul with a bright light, then Christ personally spoke to Paul. Scripture clearly says that Paul was resisting the call of God (kicking against the goad), and the harsh measures by God required to win Paul's cooperation. Paul's response was immediate and complete submission to Jesus. This section of Scripture clearly shows man's free will to accept or reject God's calling and shows Calvin's errors of the doctrine called Irresistible Grace.

An error, which makes sense as Calvin is a man making him a liar trusting in his depraved will.

I find it rather disturbing than any professing Christian would characterize God's exceedingly gracious acts toward Paul as "harsh measures" or "drastic measures". In the world of insipid Arminianism, I suppose you think it would have been better for God to have left Paul to his own devices so that he could contemplate them for all eternity in hell? That would have been less harsh and drastic of God and, therefore more gracious of Him to your way of thinking?

Secondly, it appears to me that Paul was unable to resist God's grace at the end of the day! So, yes, he submitted himself to the Lord entirely. Paul is the perfect illustration of another Doctrine of Grace known as Effectual Calling.

Rom 8:30
30 and whom He predestined, these He also called; and whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.
NASB

God only calls those whom He has predestined in eternity.

And the apostle was no different than any other saint in the church of Rome:

Rom 1:6-7
6 among whom you also are the called of Jesus Christ; 7 to all who are beloved of God in Rome, called as saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
NASB

"The called of Jesus Christ". Paul, too, was called of Jesus Christ, was he not?

Also, the call of Paul to salvation was no different because the New Covenant promise is only for those whom God calls to Himself. And God certainly does not call the entire world to Himself. Not carefully Peter's qualified statement with respect to who is brought into the covenant relationship with God. The "promise" being spoken of here can only be the unconditional New Covenant promise, which is contained in the OT scriptures.

Acts 2:39
39 "For the promise is for you and your children, and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God shall call to Himself."
NASB

Thirdly, while Paul's conversion experience was certainly spectacular by most known standards, nonetheless the nature of his salvation was no different from any other of chosen vessel of God, since the apostle's spiritual state prior to his conversion was absolutely no different from any other lost person's.

Eph 2:4-8
4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved US, 5 even when WE were dead in OUR transgressions, made US alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised US up with Him, and seated US with Him in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus, 7 in order that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward US in Christ Jesus.
NASB

Paul was just as spiritually dead as a door nail as the Ephesians were prior to conversion. Paul wasn't more dead! In fact to go further, the Ephesians epistle was a General Epistle. It was not written specifically to the Ephesians. It was an epistle that was meant to be circulated among all the churches. So, it would not be an exaggeration or a stretch at all to say that Paul was saying that he was no different than any other saint. Dead is dead is dead. There is no such thing as less dead or more dead.

So, what you call "harsh measures", the apostle considered God's salvation as a manifestation of "the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness...". But many Arminians do tend to hold God's grace in very low regard, exalting instead in the supposed "free will" of man.

Like your hero the pope, I think you actually know very little scripture. You may want to change that while you still have time, since scripture says that man lives by every word that proceeds from God's mouth!

Boxcar