For those who argue for the omnibenevolence of God…

[Hammster]

OK, but specifically is death bad for you and if so why?

No, it’s not bad for me. But your original statement was what I responded to. It’s not on me that you moved the goalposts.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

It’s not even close to the subject of the OP.

Isn't the thesis of the OP - that God is not "all-loving"?

 

[Hammster]

Isn't the thesis of the OP - that God is not "all-loving"?

Yes.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Yes.

In that case post #76 is entirely on topic with the OP as a rebuttal of the OP's false claims.

 

[Hammster]

In that case post #76 is entirely on topic with the OP as a rebuttal of the OP's false claims.

Why? Because you took a verse out of context? I don’t think so.

 

[returntosender]

It’s both, actually. And since it’s both, sin isn’t the result of rejecting God. Rejecting God is the first of all sin.

If that is true then ignorance is bliss. Stay in ignorance and live forever.

People still die. So no, death hasn’t been defeated.

Spiritual death? Are you sure of which one?

 

[Hammster]

If that is true then ignorance is bliss. Stay in ignorance and live forever.

Except Romans 1 doesn’t allow for that.

Spiritual death? Are you sure of which one?

I don’t understand your questions.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Why? Because you took a verse out of context? I don’t think so.

Several verses and all in their proper context.

It is a source of amazement how context, unspecified context, is so often an excuse to ignore the scriptures so that one's favoured doctrines can be kept safe from scrutiny.

 

[Hammster]

Several verses and all in their proper context.

You gave one, and I had to track it down since you gave no reference.

It is a source of amazement how context, unspecified context, is so often an excuse to ignore the scriptures so that one's favoured doctrines can be kept safe from scrutiny.

Context is the only way to properly understand scripture. If you pull a verse out that applies to Israel and try to make it universal, that’s ignoring context.

 

[sawdust]

That does not really equate, but would being hit by a bus and causing your physical death, allow you to join Christ and the thief by Christ on the cross in Paradice?

I'm already joined to Christ and neither is in Paradise any longer. Christ has ascended and took the prisoners with Him.

You confuse God's ability to bring good out of bad things and what is actually good. Death is not good. If it was, it would not be thrown into the lake of fire.

Revelation 20:14
Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

 

[bling]

No, it’s not bad for me. But your original statement was what I responded to. It’s not on me that you moved the goalposts.

OK so finally to my comment "death is not bad in and of itself is it?", for you and I death is not bad.
So it should be taken off God's list for disciplining any and all Christians?

 

[bling]

I'm already joined to Christ and neither is in Paradise any longer. Christ has ascended and took the prisoners with Him.

You confuse God's ability to bring good out of bad things and what is actually good. Death is not good. If it was, it would not be thrown into the lake of fire.

Revelation 20:14
Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Answer me this: If there was no death and you were stuck on this earth forever, would that help you fulfill your earthly objective and/or would it help you be humble?
Death is done away with when we leave earth, so it needs to be destroyed.

 

[Hammster]

OK so finally to my comment "death is not bad in and of itself is it?", for you and I death is not bad.

Just because God can draw a straight line with a crooked stick doesn’t mean the stick isn’t crooked.

So it should be taken off God's list for disciplining any and all Christians?

I don’t even know what that means.

 

[sawdust]

Answer me this: If there was no death and you were stuck on this earth forever, would that help you fulfill your earthly objective and/or would it help you be humble?
Death is done away with when we leave earth, so it needs to be destroyed.

If there was no death it would mean there was no sin so being here forever would be a blessing.

You sure are going out of your way to try and convince that death is a good thing. You are wasting your breath on this little black duck mate.

 

[bling]

If there was no death it would mean there was no sin so being here forever would be a blessing.

You sure are going out of your way to try and convince that death is a good thing. You are wasting your breath on this little black duck mate.

Does death help us to turn from sinning?

 

[bling]

Just because God can draw a straight line with a crooked stick doesn’t mean the stick isn’t crooked.

Do not understand your analogy.

I don’t even know what that means.

We were talking about God using death as discipline for Christians, but as you say: death is not bad for you ( Christians).

 

[Hammster]

Do not understand your analogy.

Just because God uses evil to accomplish His goals doesn’t make the evil a good thing.

We were talking about God using death as discipline for Christians, but as you say: death is not bad for you ( Christians).

I never said He used death for discipline. So I can’t fathom what your argument is.

 

[sawdust]

Does death help us to turn from sinning?

That's an argument that only confirms death is bad because death is the result of sin. So if sin is bad so is it's result.

Stop trying to make what God takes no pleasure in, what scripture calls the last enemy and what is to be thrown in the lake of fire as something good. Read my lips ... Death is not good!

Just because God can bring good from something as bad as death is a testament to His power, not a witness to the goodness of death.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Would you argue that God is not loving, that he cares little for the people [of Israel]?

"Can a woman forget her infant, so as not to have pity on the son of her womb? and if she should forget, yet will not I forget thee." It is said by God that his love endures forever and is more enduring than that of a mother for her own children. This is a picture of love deeper than the author of the quote above suggests.

The verses here are from Isaiah and from the psalms.
Can a woman forget her infant, so as not to have pity on the son of her womb? and if she should forget, yet will not I forget thee.
Isaiah 49:15

Praise the LORD! O give thanks to the LORD, for he is good; for his steadfast love endures for ever!
Psalms 106:1

O give thanks to the LORD, for he is good; for his steadfast love endures for ever!
Psalms 107:1

Context is the only way to properly understand scripture. If you pull a verse out that applies to Israel and try to make it universal, that’s ignoring context.

Your post doesn't document the alleged context that the verses allegedly are not using.

 

[bbbbbbb]

The verses here are from Isaiah and from the psalms.
Can a woman forget her infant, so as not to have pity on the son of her womb? and if she should forget, yet will not I forget thee.
Isaiah 49:15

Praise the LORD! O give thanks to the LORD, for he is good; for his steadfast love endures for ever!
Psalms 106:1

O give thanks to the LORD, for he is good; for his steadfast love endures for ever!
Psalms 107:1

Your post doesn't document the alleged context that the verses allegedly are not using.

Curiously, your verses support the belief in particular benevolence as all three are only applicable to Israel and not all humanity.

It is not unlike the various applications of Psalm 23. If the Lord is the shepherd of each and every person on earth, that means that all people are the sheep of His pasture and the John 10 is meaningless, as well as Matthew 25 because there are no goats nor can there be.