Slaughtered the first born of Egyp

childeye 2 said:

God can create and does create whatever He desires with the power of His Word (He is the source of the energy that forms all things).

But the decree itself is dependent upon what God desires before He decrees it. It looks to me like God made mankind so as to reveal Himself to the creation both in heaven and on earth, and also, to create children unto Himself made in His likeness. And since He is the incorruptible Eternal Love being displayed in a temporal, carnal, corruptible existence, His decree would be dependent upon His desire that mankind would have Human feelings capable of knowing Him and comprehending Him from each unique and Human perspective.
2 Corinthians 4:7

In that sense, His eternal decree would be dependent upon human feelings.

Click to expand...

So the Creator is dependent on creation. . . which doesn't even exist unless the Creator first creates it according to his decree.

Clare73 said:

So the Creator is dependent on creation. . . which doesn't even exist unless the Creator first creates it according to his decree.

Click to expand...

That's not the articulation I used. I said the decree is dependent upon what God desires to create.

childeye 2 said:

God can create and does create whatever He desires with the power of His Word (He is the source of the energy that forms all things).

But the decree itself is dependent upon what God desires before He decrees it. It looks to me like God made mankind so as to reveal Himself to the creation both in heaven and on earth, and also, to create children unto Himself made in His likeness. And since He is the incorruptible Eternal Love being displayed in a temporal, carnal, corruptible existence, His decree would be dependent upon His desire that mankind would have Human feelings capable of knowing Him and comprehending Him from each unique and Human perspective.
2 Corinthians 4:7

Click to expand...

We are to know and comprehend God from the perspective of his revelation, not from our own perspective.
Man is not the center of the Universe.

childeye 2 said:

In that sense, His eternal decree would be dependent upon human feelings. <--- This is a semantical construct which may or may not apply to what you had in mind when you said: "God's economy is not based on human feelings. It is based on his eternal decrees."

Click to expand...

We know what God "desired" and decreed by what exists, depending on nothing more than his will.

Clare73 said:

We are to know and comprehend God from the perspective of his revelation, not from our own perspective.
Man is not the center of the Universe.

Click to expand...

Subjective semantic analysis shows that each person reflects the same revelation of Spirit from a different perspective of comprehension. There's only One God that is the Light shining in the darkness. However, there are countless directions into darkness (paths into sin) in separation from God/Light. Each person has had their own unique walk into darkness/sin Isaiah 53:6. Therefore each person, when they turn back to God (repent), has their own unique repentance unto God and also their own unique cross to bear, and subsequently their own unique perspective of God. Each child of God is unique in the way they reflect God back to His Self. The body of Christ has many different members according to how God has gifted and crafted them, albeit they are one body.

Example: Those forgiven much love the master more than those forgiven little.

Clare73 said:

We know what God "desired" and decreed by what exists, depending on nothing more than his will.

Click to expand...

For what it's worth, that is an accurate articulation. And since God desired/willed to be known and to create children in His likeness, it means we had to have been given human feelings/emotions to know God. God is the Spirit of Love, and the will to Love depends upon being able to love someone.

1 John 4:7-8
7 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.

8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.

1 John 4:12-13
12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.

13 Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.

Romans 1:19-21
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

childeye 2 said:

Subjective semantic analysis shows

Click to expand...

Only what divine revelation shows is authoritative.

childeye 2 said:

For what it's worth, that is an accurate articulation. And since God desired/willed to be known and to create children in His likeness, it means we had to have given human feelings/emotions to know God.

Click to expand...

You are in no position to mandate what God had to do in order to accomplish his purposes.

Clare73 said:

Only what divine revelation shows is authoritative.

Click to expand...

"Those forgiven much love the Master more than those forgiven little". <--- Jesus is literally applying subjective semantic analysis.

Just so you know, subjective semantic analysis measures evidence of an objective authoritative Truth in the sentiments of words. For example, putting yourself in someone else's shoes to understand their sentiments from their point of view, is subjective semantic analysis. To see that someone is deceived in what they say and believe requires subjective semantic analysis.

Clare73 said:

You are in no position to mandate what God had to do in order to accomplish his purposes.

Click to expand...

Of course this is true. By definition, because God is the Eternal power, no creature could possibly mandate what God had to do in order to accomplish His purposes. Subjective semantic analysis ----> Therefore you must be misunderstanding my sentiments because this above is a mischaracterization of my sentiments.

My sentiments: I conveyed that from observing that mankind has been given human feelings, God as our Creator had to make mankind with human feelings to be able to know God as Love. To rephrase, I'm in no position to deduce there was some better way Mankind could know God as Love without God giving mankind Human feelings. I even gave scripture that support my observation:

12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.
13 Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Moreover, you've already expressed the same sentiment that I did right here: "We know what God "desired" and decreed by what exists, depending on nothing more than his will".

childeye 2 said:

"Those forgiven much love the Master more than those forgiven little". <--- Jesus is literally applying subjective semantic analysis.

Click to expand...

Or Jesus is simply declaring a spiritual fact.

childeye 2 said:

Just so you know, subjective semantic analysis measures evidence of an objective authoritative Truth in the sentiments of words. For example, putting yourself in someone else's shoes to understand their sentiments from their point of view, is subjective semantic analysis. To see that someone is deceived in what they say and believe requires subjective semantic analysis.
Of course this is true. By definition, because God is the Eternal power, no creature could possibly mandate what God had to do in order to accomplish His purposes. Subjective semantic analysis ----> Therefore you must be misunderstanding my sentiments because this above is a mischaracterization of my sentiments.

Click to expand...

My sentiments: I conveyed that from observing that mankind has been given human feelings, God as our Creator had to make mankind with human feelings to be able to know God as Love.

Click to expand...

Assuming God's love is about feeling above purpose, will and choice.

childeye 2 said:

To rephrase, I'm in no position to deduce there was some better way Mankind could know God as Love without God giving mankind Human feelings. I even gave scripture that support my observation:

Click to expand...

But yet you postulate and treat your postulation as fact, which is the sole reason for my response.
You make God too small. . .so he can fit into your human reasoning and understanding.

childeye 2 said:

12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.
13 Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Moreover, you've already expressed the same sentiment that I did right here: "We know what God "desired" and decreed by what exists, depending on nothing more than his will".

Click to expand...

Clare73 said:

Or Jesus is simply declaring a spiritual fact.

Click to expand...

Indeed, Jesus did state a spiritual fact. However, his statement is in response to hearing the thoughts/sentiments/feelings of the Pharisee which is subjective semantic analysis (Spiritual discernment), and this is how Jesus knew what to say to correct the way the pharisee thought of the woman.

Clare73 said:

Assuming God's love is about feeling above purpose, will and choice.

Click to expand...

You don't know that feeling God's Love is the only meaningful/purposeful power in mankind that wills within us to choose what is moral?

Clare73 said:

But yet you postulate and treat your postulation as fact, which is the sole reason for my response.
You make God too small. . .so he can fit into your human reasoning and understanding.

Click to expand...

I'm observing, not postulating. I admit knowing God as Love is simple, but that doesn't mean I'm making God small.

childeye 2 said:

Of course, he did indeed state a spiritual fact. However, His statement is responding to hearing the thoughts/sentiments/feelings of the Pharisee which is subjective semantic analysis (Spiritual discernment)

Click to expand...

Are you sure about that?
Or as God did he know the heart of the Pharisee better than did the Pharisee, and was responding according to his divine knowledge of him?

childeye 2 said:

and this is how he knew what to say to correct the way the pharisee thought of the woman. Hence words have power.

Click to expand...

I'm going with God's imparted divine power rather than words' natural power.
I'm going with his divinity knowing the hearts of men, rather than subjective semantic analysis.
I'm not much on "subjective semantic analysis" in preference to the all-knowing God.
Your God is too small.

childeye 2 said:

For what it's worth, feeling God's Love is the only meaningful/purposeful power in mankind that wills within us to choose what is moral.

Click to expand...

Contraire. . .love for/of God, by God's power, is more meaningful.

childeye 2 said:

I admit knowing God as Love is simple, but that doesn't mean I'm making God small.

Click to expand...

Your view of God subjects him to human subjective semantics.
He is subject to nothing.
You make God in your own image.

Clare73 said:

Are you sure about that?
Or as God did he know the heart of the Pharisee and was responding according to his divine knowledge?

Click to expand...

Yes, I am sure. Let me explain something.
Subjective= a person's feelings/opinions/view.
Semantics= the meanings/sentiments/spirit that are conveyed in the words people think and speak.
Analysis= examination.

Therefore, anytime someone speaks, and we seek to understand their expressed sentiments, we are using subjective semantic analysis in some degree of examination of their terms.

Now, I am sure about Jesus analyzing what the Pharisee said within himself because scripture says he did by conveying that Jesus responds to what the pharisee said within himself.

Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner. And Jesus answering said unto him, Simon, I have somewhat to say unto thee.

Did Jesus know his heart by analyzing what the pharisee said? Yes, because elsewhere Jesus said, "out of the heart proceed evil thoughts".

As for divine knowledge, I would think Jesus knows everyone's heart. That doesn't mean he doesn't examine everyone's personal sentiments. Scripture even says we will be judged by what we say.

Clare73 said:

I'm going with his divinity knowing the hearts of men, rather than subjective semantic analysis.

Click to expand...

They're not mutually exclusive, and respectfully, I think you simply misunderstand me.

Clare73 said:

I'm not much on "subjective semantic analysis" in preference to the all-knowing God.
Your God is too small.

Click to expand...

The all-knowing God invented subjective semantic analysis when He created the ability to speak and understand what others say.

So just take a moment and think about this. When you say you're not much on subjective semantic analysis it simply means you're not much on trying to understand the sentiments that others express.

Clare73 said:

Contraire. . .love for/of God, by God's power, is more meaningful.

Click to expand...

I didn't say it wasn't (strawman argument). I'm just saying we can't Love God or others without feeling Love.

Clare73 said:

Your view of God subjects him to human subjective semantics.
He is subject to nothing.

Click to expand...

This is where you are mistaken. I never implied that God is subject to anything. My expressed sentiment that God "had to" make mankind with human feelings for us to know Him, was never a mandate as you have assumed. It's simply an observation that to personally know God as Love, God "Had to" make mankind able to feel Love. It's the same as saying God made mankind able to feel love so that mankind could know God as Love.

childeye 2 said:

Yes, I am sure. Let me explain something.
Subjective= a person's feelings/opinions/view.
Semantics= the meanings/sentiments/spirit that are conveyed in the words people think and speak.
Analysis= examination.
Therefore, anytime someone speaks, and we seek to understand their expressed sentiments, we are using subjective semantic analysis in some degree of examination of their terms.
Now, I am sure about Jesus analyzing what the Pharisee said within himself because scripture says he did by conveying that Jesus responds to what the pharisee said within himself.

Click to expand...

Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner. And Jesus answering said unto him, Simon, I have somewhat to say unto thee.

Did Jesus know his heart by analyzing what the pharisee said? Yes, because elsewhere Jesus said, "out of the heart proceed evil thought,s".

Click to expand...

The Pharisee did not speak audibly, he spoke within himself.
Jesus did not physically hear him, he didn't need to do so, for as God he knew the hearts of all men.
Your God is too small.

Clare73 said:

The Pharisee did not speak audibly, he spoke within himself.
Jesus did not physically hear him, he didn't need to do so, for as God he knew the hearts of all men.
Your God is too small.

Click to expand...

I've already stated this in Post #48:

"However, his statement is in response to hearing the thoughts/sentiments/feelings of the Pharisee which is subjective semantic analysis (Spiritual discernment), and this is how Jesus knew what to say to correct the way the pharisee thought of the woman. I'm also on the record saying this: Semantics= the meanings/sentiments/spirit that are conveyed in the words people think and speak. I never said Jesus needed to physically hear the pharisee speak (strawman argument).

I've also already stated in post #50:
"As for divine knowledge, I would think Jesus knows everyone's heart. That doesn't mean he doesn't examine everyone's personal sentiments."

childeye 2 said:

I've already stated that in Post #48. "However, his statement is in response to hearing the thoughts/sentiments/feelings of the Pharisee which is subjective semantic analysis (Spiritual discernment), and this is how Jesus knew what to say to correct the way the pharisee thought of the woman.

I never said Jesus physically needed to hear the pharisee (strawman argument).

Click to expand...

"Subjective semantics analysis" without sound?

Clare73 said:

"Subjective semantics analysis" without sound?

Click to expand...

Yes. Semantics in thought=psycholinguistics. It's used in spiritual discernment. Semantics= the meanings/sentiments/spirit that are conveyed in the words people think and speak.

5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

childeye 2 said:

Yes. Semantics in thought=psycholinguistics. It's used in spiritual discernment. Semantics= the meanings/sentiments/spirit that are conveyed in the words people think and speak.

Click to expand...

The meanings, sentiments, spirit in the words people think and speak are not a mystery.

Clare73 said:

The meanings, sentiments, spirit in the words people think and speak are not a mystery

Click to expand...

I don't see how there could be any mystery for God.

childeye 2 said:

I don't see how there could be any mystery for God.

Click to expand...

Who doesn't need a "subjective semantics analysis" of man.

Clare73 said:

Who doesn't need a "subjective semantics analysis" of man.

Click to expand...

For what it's worth, I wouldn't say that. We're talking about spiritual discernment. Scripture says He searches the hearts to know the intentions of our thoughts. That's also how the Holy Spirit is able to guide us unto life and convict us of sin, just like Jesus was able to correct the pharisee. Words have power, God's Word is a Living Spirit, and discernment is a gift of the Holy Spirit.

childeye 2 said:

For what it's worth, I wouldn't say that. We're talking about spiritual discernment. Scripture says He searches the hearts to know the intentions of our thoughts. That's also how the Holy Spirit is able to guide us unto life and convict us of sin, just like Jesus was able to correct the pharisee. Words have power, God's Word is a Living Spirit, and discernment is a gift of the Holy Spirit.

Click to expand...

Agree. . .God's words have power.

LayHong_Loves_Christ said:

Where is the justice for the death of babies?
If they cried for justice will God listen?

Click to expand...

Hmmm....

We have a modern day Job among us.