A hopeless theology?

[OldWiseGuy]

God has an anger issue, eh? Assuming Freud's in heaven, maybe He should talk to him...

Seriously, I have no idea what that sentence is supposed to be about. For that matter, I have no idea what pretty much anything you said is supposed to prove.

1. Why can God only punish demons by restraining them?

2. Are you saying demons cannot sin? If they can only influence, then what did they do before humans came along?

3. Why does being a spirit limit one's ability to sin?

4. Why are we the perfect vehicle for sin?

5. Why does God find it necessary to demonstrate sin? Or painful punishment?

Or maybe I'm not sure I want to hear the answers you might provide...

Thanks for that last comment. It saves me from wasting my time trying to explain these things to you.

 

[TrueMyth]

Thanks for that last comment. It saves me from wasting my time trying to explain these things to you.

I'm sorry that you took the comment that way. That was not my intent. My purpose in commenting that way was to point out that so far I have found most of your conclusions to be alternately confusing (such as demons being unable to sin), deplorable (such as God creating human beings with will and feelings only so He can use them as a divine object lesson), and flat-out bizarre (such as God having an anger issue). I mentioned in passing I might not want to hear them because patterns so far had not indicated that the responses you provided would be of any different character than the ones you had offered so far, which would just lead to further misunderstanding, disgust, and "Huh?!" moments.

I have no problem listening to your reponses, and I was not intending to be a smart-a**. However, if the discussion continues to go further away from the topic and continues to display the type of unpalatable approach, I really don't want to continue it. You are more than free to believe whatever you want, as long as you don't infringe on my safety, rights, or interests. One of the things I have learned on the Internet-- after many hurt feelings and frustrated replies-- is that I need to know when to give up and let people believe what they will, since it's their life.

That was my intent: to express that I was close to giving up because it wasn't worth it. Not your opinions, of course: my reactions.

 

[Zeena]

Here's TWO scriptural references to refute the theories posted above!

God is NOT the author of confusion NOR sin, and it never entered HIS heart for man to do such a thing!

Make that three passages! =P

1 Corinthians 14:33
For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Romans 9:19
Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? In context

Job 34:10
Therefore hearken unto me ye men of understanding: far be it from God, that He should do wickedness; and from the Almighty, that He should commit iniquity.

Jeremiah 32:35
35And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.

 

[Sojourner<><]

Here's TWO scriptural references to refute the theories posted above!

God is NOT the author of confusion NOR sin, and it never entered HIS heart for man to do such a thing!

Make that three passages! =P

1 Corinthians 14:33
For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Romans 9:19
Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? In context

Job 34:10
Therefore hearken unto me ye men of understanding: far be it from God, that He should do wickedness; and from the Almighty, that He should commit iniquity.

Jeremiah 32:35
35And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I'm sorry that you took the comment that way. That was not my intent. My purpose in commenting that way was to point out that so far I have found most of your conclusions to be alternately confusing (such as demons being unable to sin), deplorable (such as God creating human beings with will and feelings only so He can use them as a divine object lesson), and flat-out bizarre (such as God having an anger issue). I mentioned in passing I might not want to hear them because patterns so far had not indicated that the responses you provided would be of any different character than the ones you had offered so far, which would just lead to further misunderstanding, disgust, and "Huh?!" moments.

I have no problem listening to your reponses, and I was not intending to be a smart-a**. However, if the discussion continues to go further away from the topic and continues to display the type of unpalatable approach, I really don't want to continue it. You are more than free to believe whatever you want, as long as you don't infringe on my safety, rights, or interests. One of the things I have learned on the Internet-- after many hurt feelings and frustrated replies-- is that I need to know when to give up and let people believe what they will, since it's their life.

That was my intent: to express that I was close to giving up because it wasn't worth it. Not your opinions, of course: my reactions.

Here's our problem. It's common on these threads. People are so anxious to express their views that they don't carefully, or honestly, consider and respond to what others have actually said. In your case here's just one example:

I said,

"He created us to act out the fullness of sin, something the demons can influence but cannot do directly as they are spirit."

You responded:

"....I have found most of your conclusions to be alternately confusing (such as demons being unable to sin), deplorable....."

Note that I didn't say demons are 'unable to sin'. I said that they cannot 'act out the fullness of sin.'

I forgive you though, as this happens a lot here.

 

[Sojourner<><]

Here's our problem. It's common on these threads. People are so anxious to express their views that they don't carefully, or honestly, consider and respond to what others have actually said. In your case here's just one example:

I said,

"He created us to act out the fullness of sin, something the demons can influence but cannot do directly as they are spirit."

You responded:

"....I have found most of your conclusions to be alternately confusing (such as demons being unable to sin), deplorable....."

Note that I didn't say demons are 'unable to sin'. I said that they cannot 'act out the fullness of sin.'

I forgive you though, as this happens a lot here.

Oldwiseguy, if you don't mind me asking, what kind of theology is it that teaches this?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Oldwiseguy, if you don't mind me asking, what kind of theology is it that teaches this?

This is not 'theology' in the orthodox sense. It's simply something that I believe to be true, at this time. I think we have to 'flesh out' some things ourselves, as the bible is vague or incomplete about many subjects. Much of this must be deduced using scripture, common sense, experience, observation, etc. I think it really falls under the heading of true meditation, or thinking deeply about a subject rather than merely rehearsing what is already known and accepted.

A good example is God's anger. I believe that God created anger for his own use as one of his responses to the rebellion. When he created us, in his own image, this emotion was imparted to us as well. Of course this is not part of orthodox belief, but I believe it to be true nonetheless.

 

[WarriorAngel]

This morning on my way to school I tuned in to a Bible radio broadcast. The program was on a lesson of God's sovereignty and His involvement in natural disasters. The preacher made the statement that we must consider God to have directly willed for all natural tragedies that have occurred. My own position on the subject is that God specifically causes some tragedies since He is sovereign but that some tragedies (and not all) are an indirect effect of the curse on this world. The preacher I listened to then commented on this view and stated that it is a "hopeless theology", but he failed to qualify his statment, at least in my own opinion. In doing so he attempted to assert that the Bible is not as concerned with defending God's character as much as some theologians (like me) are and that God can be very harsh in punishing us when He judges us. I agree about the judgement bit but I don't believe that He wants to judge the world because He loves the world (please note that I am not saying that God is a big softy and that He will forgive all sin and not punish anybody).

God removes Himself from holding back disasters...and allows them.

Most often we know we can see this when the world is wicked.

And IMHO, disasters are warnings so ppl will turn back to Him.

Some disasters 'just are'. [IE they are used to replenish the earth.]

If you agree with him in that it is in fact a hopeless theology, can you explain why?

Furthermore, if you do please consider these 3 questions: If you have a child that disobeys you, would it be your will to spank that child? (I would answer yes). Do you want to spank that child? (I hope not). And would it have been your will for the child to disobey so that you could spank that child? (if you answer yes to this question please provide your name, address, and names of your children so I can report you.)

My point is that if any one person answered yes to all three of those questions, I think we could safely assume that his/her character is more than slightly flawed when it comes to parenting. Yet this is precisely the kind of theology I hear coming from someone who holds the view of the preacher I listened to this morning.

Any thoughts?

What is hopeless theology?

Ok ok..I got it.

I agree, I dont think God wants to punish anyone. I think if He must, He will.
Our free will [choice] determines His action and course.

 

[WarriorAngel]

I'm not so sure that all suffering is sharing Christ's suffering. God ordained suffering through the effects of the curse because of sin. Christ later said:

"Blessed [are] they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when [men] shall revile you, and persecute [you], and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake." Mat 5

To lump all suffering together into this category would be a mistake.

To suffer because of Him is one thing...to suffer willing for Him is another.

Did you know all suffering can be offered up?

Just thought I would make an observation.