Nathan Poe
Well-Known Member
And how would you define "sin"?
This is an important theological question, one which many Christians flub the answer to. Perhaps you'll get it right.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The deterrent is the bondage. We live free so we do not have to live in bondage or be a slave to sin. Kind of a catch 22.
The deterrent is the bondage. We live free so we do not have to live in bondage or be a slave to sin. Kind of a catch 22.
2 -- try paraphrased.Let's apply AV's "theology" up to this point:
1 -- AV says God wrote the Bible
2 -- AV has just rewritten the Bible
Q.E.D., AV considers himself to be (or at least equal to) God.
"Vain deceit," indeed -- AV's narcissism has finally taken its toll.
2 -- try paraphrased.
More like paraphrased for clarity.More like "conveniently reinterpreted to suit your own agenda."
Chapter and v... er ... I mean, post where I said that, please?You hate evolution, but God doesn't.
Well, just now, in another thread, I asked someone who must think he is God if I have been tithing to him.So you told God to take a hike and took over.
That's not going to work with me, and you know it.You call that Christianity? You call that your "Great Commission"? You honestly think you're fooling anyone?
More like paraphrased for clarity.
Chapter and v... er ... I mean, post where I said that, please?
If that's what you culled from my post, then I would say the problem lies on your end.The only thing made clear is your own agenda, AV --
Why shouldn't I be? the Bible is a two-edged sword.-- as long as you can use the Bible as a tool for that, you're happy with it.
Try paraphrase for clarity.When it's not useful, you edit it.
Yes -- if you're the yardstick.You still think you're difficult to figure out?
Try paraphrase for clarity.
Admit that there are things written in the Bible that cannot be independently verified? Ok.Produce evidence that verifies this:
Genesis 5:24 And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.
... or admit that there are things God did that didn't generate any.
What do you think I've been doing here for the past five years, newbie; just posting numbers or something?Admit that there are things written in the Bible that cannot be independently verified? Ok.
Apparently.What do you think I've been doing here for the past five years, newbie; just posting numbers or something?
Then I'll consider your request sterile.Apparently.
I define sin as anything that I will be taken to the woodshed for. Something that has a price to pay or consequences. You know the price you pay when you don't think it will be that bad but when the time comes it is a lot worse then you thought it was going to be.And how would you define "sin"?
God cleaned up evidence of the sin and the rebellion, so people were not influence by it anymore. We do not need them out there setting a bad example for others.So, god "cleaned" up evidence for the flood so we could live free? I do not follow.
Then I'll consider your request sterile.
Because He cleaned up the mess.
What would you think if your teenage son spilled milk on the floor, then just walked away and said, "Let nature handle it. It'll be gone tomorrow."?
Romans 1:20 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
That's right --
Um ... that analogy was only to show a motivation for cleaning up the mess.Ah, but that's different. There would be a measurably smaller amount of milk in the fridge. There would have been a measurable amount of water used when he mopped up the spill. There would be the broken cup in the garbage bin. There would be one less cup sitting in the cupboard.
Yes -- got it.Even if I didn't know that my son had spilled the milk, and he had cleaned up the evidence, I'd still see that some milk had gone, and that there was a cup missing, I'd see that the mop bucket was moved, that there was slightly less detergent in the bottle (since he'd used some while mopping). In short, I'd be able to look at reality and still see that something had happened. I might not be able to figure out the exact details, but I'd still know that something fishy was going on.
That's one of your problems. You guys want to 'figure it out' on your own. The Bible is just as much a part of reality as DNA, and in It is the information you're seeking.So your analogy is flawed, since you maintain that we cannot look at reality and figure out something happened.
It says you are 'without excuse'.That passage seems to say that an investigation of the world is the best place to learn about God. I fully agree. Investigate the world and see what it says.
Riiiight -- then you guys would be harping that the [completed] Bible didn't exist when Romans was written, and that the term was snuck in there after-the-fact by conspiratists, who also secretly implanted prophecies.Now, if the passage said, "Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are explained in the Bible, for they cannot be seen in the world, and thus the only way we can ever find out about them is from the Bible," then maybe you'd have a passage that fits in better with what you've repeatedly demonstrated - an unfailing choice to place a collection of old books above reality.
I define sin as anything that I will be taken to the woodshed for. Something that has a price to pay or consequences.
Um ... that analogy was only to show a motivation for cleaning up the mess.
Or perhaps I gave the source too much credit for understanding?If your analogy is so woefully insufficient, perhaps you shouldn't have used it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?