"CONSEQUENCES of Adam's sin... not the consequences of the sin itself"
no diff. but let's not stray from the thorn topic.
no diff. but let's not stray from the thorn topic.
Upvote
0
Was Paul's Thorn Some Sickness?
- Thread starter Andrew
- Start date
- Status
LouisBooth
Well-Known Member
"#61
"CONSEQUENCES of Adam's sin... not the consequences of the sin itself"
no diff. but let's not stray from the thorn topic.
"
there is a BIGGGG difference. I can lie to someone and the consequecne is they will not trust me, the sin consequence is that I am out of fellowship with God because of my sin. The sin consequence can be cured through Christ, the other consequences can only be cured through other ways...or maybe not at all.
Christ lived in a fallen world and was tired, hungry , and could have gotten sick. These are all because of the consequences of the actions of Adam. He did NOT have to have the sin nature (which has NOTHING to do with being sick as proven by John 9) which was the consquences of Adam's sin. There are 2 very DIFFERENT things. This is the point we disagree on thus it is very on topic.
So you think if christ was a women, and being christ never would have sinned..he could have had NO pain in child birth? This is a far out example, so maybe its best not to cover it. The point is that the consequences of sin are NOT the consequences of the action. They are 2 very different things. I can kill off a twin and be forgiven by God and the other twin, but that doesn't bring back the twin, for consequences of that action are different from the sin.
"CONSEQUENCES of Adam's sin... not the consequences of the sin itself"
no diff. but let's not stray from the thorn topic.
"
there is a BIGGGG difference. I can lie to someone and the consequecne is they will not trust me, the sin consequence is that I am out of fellowship with God because of my sin. The sin consequence can be cured through Christ, the other consequences can only be cured through other ways...or maybe not at all.
Christ lived in a fallen world and was tired, hungry , and could have gotten sick. These are all because of the consequences of the actions of Adam. He did NOT have to have the sin nature (which has NOTHING to do with being sick as proven by John 9) which was the consquences of Adam's sin. There are 2 very DIFFERENT things. This is the point we disagree on thus it is very on topic.
So you think if christ was a women, and being christ never would have sinned..he could have had NO pain in child birth? This is a far out example, so maybe its best not to cover it. The point is that the consequences of sin are NOT the consequences of the action. They are 2 very different things. I can kill off a twin and be forgiven by God and the other twin, but that doesn't bring back the twin, for consequences of that action are different from the sin.
Upvote
0
quote:"Christ lived in a fallen world..."
yeah but he wasnt fallen like Adam becos he wasnt born with sin nature and did not sin.
quote:"NOTHING to do with being sick as proven by John 9..."
John 9 irrelevant.
quote: "So you think if christ was a women, and being christ never would have sinned..he could have had NO pain in child birth?"
EXACTLY. btw there are many women who experience supernatural childbirth today. Easy pregnancy, no labour pains. becos the claim the promises of God -- that Christ has redeemed them from the curse of painful childbirth given out in Genesis.
this will be my last post unless you get back to the topic of the thread.
yeah but he wasnt fallen like Adam becos he wasnt born with sin nature and did not sin.
quote:"NOTHING to do with being sick as proven by John 9..."
John 9 irrelevant.
quote: "So you think if christ was a women, and being christ never would have sinned..he could have had NO pain in child birth?"
EXACTLY. btw there are many women who experience supernatural childbirth today. Easy pregnancy, no labour pains. becos the claim the promises of God -- that Christ has redeemed them from the curse of painful childbirth given out in Genesis.
this will be my last post unless you get back to the topic of the thread.
Upvote
0
LouisBooth
Well-Known Member
"yeah but he wasnt fallen like Adam becos he wasnt born with sin nature and did not sin."
I agree, but living in a fallen world has NOTHING to do with having a sin nature as I explained above.
"quote:"NOTHING to do with being sick as proven by John 9..."
John 9 irrelevant."
Its perfectly relevant. Here Christ explains that a person is sick and diseased and sin is not at fault. Goes right in with my explains of why Christ could have been sick because sin has nothing to do with being physically sick. You can be physically sick and be sinless.
"Easy pregnancy, no labour pains. "
Yea, its called luck..LOL. If you can bring me a medical study linking this to christians, then I might think about it, until then, its luck and nothing more.
The topic of the thread is Paul's thorn and I have already posted to you about this and how it is physical in nature. You have not shown any other references to the greek word for thorn or any other instances in historical literature using this greek word or phrase. Thus I must conclude that, your first post, very nicely written, holds no real water in terms of this issue.
I agree, but living in a fallen world has NOTHING to do with having a sin nature as I explained above.
"quote:"NOTHING to do with being sick as proven by John 9..."
John 9 irrelevant."
Its perfectly relevant. Here Christ explains that a person is sick and diseased and sin is not at fault. Goes right in with my explains of why Christ could have been sick because sin has nothing to do with being physically sick. You can be physically sick and be sinless.
"Easy pregnancy, no labour pains. "
Yea, its called luck..LOL. If you can bring me a medical study linking this to christians, then I might think about it, until then, its luck and nothing more.
The topic of the thread is Paul's thorn and I have already posted to you about this and how it is physical in nature. You have not shown any other references to the greek word for thorn or any other instances in historical literature using this greek word or phrase. Thus I must conclude that, your first post, very nicely written, holds no real water in terms of this issue.
Upvote
0
"Please provide some medical sources of documented cases."
Please provide evidence of your new birth.
ps:Read the book Supernatural Childbirth by Jackie Mize if you are sincere.
Please provide evidence of your new birth.
ps:Read the book Supernatural Childbirth by Jackie Mize if you are sincere.
Upvote
0
LouisBooth
Well-Known Member
Good testimony on the book
"I personally used this book with my 4th birth and I can say that it made a dramatic difference. Although the birth was not "pain free"--the pain was less and the my faith was greater. I enjoyed this birth and kept saying the scriptures and prayers over and over in my mind until our 9lb 10 oz , 24 in. long baby boy was born at home...perfectly healthy and strong. This book helped immensely!"
Notice the words not pain free
I'll see if I can chec the book ou though.
http://www.icgold.net/mother/childbirth.html
Pain can be overcome through thinking and techniques though..that is a medical fact, that doesn't prove anything though?
"I personally used this book with my 4th birth and I can say that it made a dramatic difference. Although the birth was not "pain free"--the pain was less and the my faith was greater. I enjoyed this birth and kept saying the scriptures and prayers over and over in my mind until our 9lb 10 oz , 24 in. long baby boy was born at home...perfectly healthy and strong. This book helped immensely!"
Notice the words not pain free
I'll see if I can chec the book ou though.http://www.icgold.net/mother/childbirth.html
Pain can be overcome through thinking and techniques though..that is a medical fact, that doesn't prove anything though?
Upvote
0
Greeter
The Space Invaders did not get by on me!
- May 27, 2002
- 13,291
- 180
- 55
- Faith
- Catholic
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
Your arguments for the thorn are well thought out but you have me stumped on this opening. From that opening about using that line "to support their argument that God wants some of us to stay sick" are you referring to the argument that if you are saved then you should be cured of all disease(implying that if you are not cured then you must not have true faith)?
Upvote
0
quote: "are you referring to the argument that if you are saved then you should be cured of all disease(implying that if you are not cured then you must not have true faith)?"
no I'm not greeter. although I've been accused of that.
there are Christians who believe that God authors sickness and death eg inflicts cancer on your wife and kills her eventually to teach some lesson. ie it is God's will in her case for her to stay sick and die. they then use this verse as support ie Paul prayed for his "sickness" to be removed but God said "tough luck this time round son". i dont believe this nonsense. i dont believe God is a child abuser.
"argument that if you are saved then you should be cured of all disease(implying that if you are not cured then you must not have true faith)?"
The bible says we've been redeemed from the curse of sickness through the cross. Read Deu 28:61 then Ga 3:13. but obviously, Christians still fall sick and die. so its up to us to believe this verse and claim the promise . Do we say "yes and amen in Christ" to it, or do we say "no thanks, not interested". those who do the former, tend to live longer, healthier lives. Yet we dont go by experiences, but what the Word clearly says.
Lack of faith? i believe all Christians have faith in certain areas, yet lack faith in other areas. eg one might have strong faith to go out and witness and get souls saved but have little faith to believe that God will supply all his needs, and another Christian, vice versa. does that mean one is better than the other? no.
no I'm not greeter. although I've been accused of that.
there are Christians who believe that God authors sickness and death eg inflicts cancer on your wife and kills her eventually to teach some lesson. ie it is God's will in her case for her to stay sick and die. they then use this verse as support ie Paul prayed for his "sickness" to be removed but God said "tough luck this time round son". i dont believe this nonsense. i dont believe God is a child abuser.
"argument that if you are saved then you should be cured of all disease(implying that if you are not cured then you must not have true faith)?"
The bible says we've been redeemed from the curse of sickness through the cross. Read Deu 28:61 then Ga 3:13. but obviously, Christians still fall sick and die. so its up to us to believe this verse and claim the promise . Do we say "yes and amen in Christ" to it, or do we say "no thanks, not interested". those who do the former, tend to live longer, healthier lives. Yet we dont go by experiences, but what the Word clearly says.
Lack of faith? i believe all Christians have faith in certain areas, yet lack faith in other areas. eg one might have strong faith to go out and witness and get souls saved but have little faith to believe that God will supply all his needs, and another Christian, vice versa. does that mean one is better than the other? no.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
DaveKerwin
Represent the Most High
agreed. It could have been physical, it could have been something else. Either way God allowed him to have it, and didn't take it away this malady for a specific purpose.
Upvote
0
LouisBooth
Well-Known Member
"no I'm not greeter. although I've been accused of that."
Well then you admit that Christ could have been sick
"so its up to us to believe this verse and claim the promise . "
Hmm..so if we don't get it do we not have enough faith then? And later in your post you admit that. I think this is very unbiblical. Christ said so himself in John 9. A man was sick and it had NOTHING to do with his lack of or great faith.
Well then you admit that Christ could have been sick
"so its up to us to believe this verse and claim the promise . "
Hmm..so if we don't get it do we not have enough faith then? And later in your post you admit that. I think this is very unbiblical. Christ said so himself in John 9. A man was sick and it had NOTHING to do with his lack of or great faith.
Upvote
0
Exactly Louis, I totally agree. The same thing goes for preventing sickness. A Christian can say that he got sick because he wasn't following the direction of Christ in taking care of his body, the "temple" of the Holy Spirit. Well guess what? A nonChristian can do the same thing! Anyone can defend against the flu by practicing proper preventive hygiene. Anyone can encourage good bodily health by following good hygiene techniques.
Upvote
0
not sure what the thorn is?
Those who understand simple English wld know what the scriptures plainly state.
"Well then you admit that Christ could have been sick"
no, I'm not in agreement with the devil. If u wanna preach another Jesus that's your problem.
Those who understand simple English wld know what the scriptures plainly state.
"Well then you admit that Christ could have been sick"
no, I'm not in agreement with the devil. If u wanna preach another Jesus that's your problem.
Upvote
0
Thunderchild
Sheep in Wolf's clothing
Post number 2 is a masterly summation Andrew.
A couple of factors need to be added.
1/ Peter, when he opposed Jesus on the matter of his sacrifice, could very easily be termed an angel of Satan (at the time).
2/ Paul makes no attempt to identify the person of the "angel of Satan," - I would assume that this angel might be something to do with his own desire. Given his complaint that he had no wife, this could tentativelybe listed as his thorn in the flesh.
A couple of factors need to be added.
1/ Peter, when he opposed Jesus on the matter of his sacrifice, could very easily be termed an angel of Satan (at the time).
2/ Paul makes no attempt to identify the person of the "angel of Satan," - I would assume that this angel might be something to do with his own desire. Given his complaint that he had no wife, this could tentativelybe listed as his thorn in the flesh.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Thank u for your +ve comments TC. aprreciated.
1. abt Peter. my pastor once said it shld be read as follows...
"Peter get behind me ... Satan is tempting you..." ie Jesus was protecting Peter.
2. Paul's thorn... i tend to think its the buffetings he got from those who opposed him (they carried that spirit) and caused him so much problems. eg judaizers. every time he preached grace, the judaizers wld come in to his flock to add back law. this plus imprisonments, persecutions etc...
1. abt Peter. my pastor once said it shld be read as follows...
"Peter get behind me ... Satan is tempting you..." ie Jesus was protecting Peter.
2. Paul's thorn... i tend to think its the buffetings he got from those who opposed him (they carried that spirit) and caused him so much problems. eg judaizers. every time he preached grace, the judaizers wld come in to his flock to add back law. this plus imprisonments, persecutions etc...
Upvote
0
the comma comes after "get thee behind me",
anyway, the usu explanation is fine by me and I wont make a big deal out of it.
anyway, the usu explanation is fine by me and I wont make a big deal out of it.
Upvote
0
DaveKerwin
Represent the Most High
Andrew, nice first post. Next time quote the source before you post it though, so people know you didn't write it.
Andrew, you say you opinion is from scripture.
Louis, you say your opinion is from scripture.
One of you is wrong, but we cannot say which. I have stated in other posts that we cannot be certain what it was. It is possible that it was physical, it is possible that it was somekind of bad treatment from the evil one. Andrew brought this up to show how the "thorn in the flesh" cannot be used as an argument against the prosperity gospel. That is what this is really all about. This is his way of saying "see, I told you it is God's will for every human being on the planet to have good health."
I agree with Louis, this messenger from satan could have come to give him physical problems, like Job. He could have come to tempt him somehow, but I don't see temptation as much of an ailement as a constant pain. What really could a demon do that is not physical ? I have briefly looked into demonic stuff, and how that affects believers. What could this messenger of satan really have done to Paul ?
Andrew, you say you opinion is from scripture.
Louis, you say your opinion is from scripture.
One of you is wrong, but we cannot say which. I have stated in other posts that we cannot be certain what it was. It is possible that it was physical, it is possible that it was somekind of bad treatment from the evil one. Andrew brought this up to show how the "thorn in the flesh" cannot be used as an argument against the prosperity gospel. That is what this is really all about. This is his way of saying "see, I told you it is God's will for every human being on the planet to have good health."
I agree with Louis, this messenger from satan could have come to give him physical problems, like Job. He could have come to tempt him somehow, but I don't see temptation as much of an ailement as a constant pain. What really could a demon do that is not physical ? I have briefly looked into demonic stuff, and how that affects believers. What could this messenger of satan really have done to Paul ?
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Status
Similar threads
