What if you seek and don't find?

[Oncedeceived]

It would seem that others' interpretations of the Bible of differ from yours.

"The FBI gave the standard profile of a serial killer, He is a person with few friends. He became much more religious just before he started murdering people. Almost all serial killers start quoting one verse after another from the Christian Bible.

Nearly all serial killers are very devout men who were raised by members of Pentecostal sects, fundamentalist Catholics or were 'hard-shell' Baptists and Methodists."

link

I don't see any link to this FBI information that the author is using. I also would like some actual sources that support the claim that "nearly all serial killers are very devout men..." Do you have it? I find it interesting that you bring forward something that is to imply that Christianity was the cause of these people to kill when it is very clear in the Christian faith that murder is wrong. Horrendous murderers come under the secular mindset and have a great deal more victims...Lenin and Stalin killed something like 66.7 million. Mao Tse Tung killed according to some sources killed 63.7. Pol Pott killed an incredible number of people 1/3 of an entire country was put to death. I could actually go on. It should be completely clear that there are times when people may kill who claim they are Christian but that is inconsistent with what a Christian is or should be. I doubt that most individuals that claim to be secular would go out and kill millions but the largest mass killings on earth have been done by people with a secular mindset. I think it would be unfair to claim that you belong to a murderous worldview because the worst mass killings have been perpetrated by people of that view. I think it is equally unfair of you to imply that Christians belong to a murderous worldview when in fact the worldview opposes such actions and when those actions directly counters the teachings of such a worldview.

Luke 14:26: "If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters--yes, even their own life--such a person cannot be my disciple."

Here Jesus is saying that by choosing to follow Him we might have to lose everything. He is saying that sometimes there is a cost to following Him even unto death. We see this in Muslim families for instance when a person leaves Islam and follows Jesus. They very often will never be able to see their families again. They can be killed. This is what He was talking about in this passage.

Then you are contradicting Oncedeceived's post, where she implied that anything goes, as long as you believe.

You are misrepresenting what I said.[/quote][/QUOTE]

 

[Oncedeceived]

Once Deceived can speak for herself about what she meant or implied.

Thank you. I totally agree with you however. He is misrepresenting what I said.

But yes there are people who think you can get saved, then do any sin, at all, and still go to Heaven, even if you have not repented of things like killing and eating babies. I don't buy that. I believe if God brings a person to Jesus, He finishes what He started; and a person who comes truly to Jesus gives up one's own free will and submits to God and becomes changed so he or she will not do things like that. 1 John 4:17 to me means God does not leave people in their own stupidity and evil so they can keep on doing evil things.

Exactly. You can't be following Jesus and go out and become a serial killer. But if a serial killer turns to Jesus and asks to be forgiven AND REPENTS and stops killing and going against Christ's teaching then He can go to heaven. To ask forgiveness is to recognize the sin and to repent from it. I think we both agree, do we not?

 

[com7fy8]

@Oncedeceived Yes, I agree; thank you so much for your encouragement I used to be a perpetual bully. It for me was very entertaining to be able to make a child cry. It was a treasure pleasure. How horrible. So, from that I can see that there are people who go so down in Satanic stuff, that killing can for them be a treasure pleasure. And this, "of course", keeps them from being with God in His love.

And, like this, any person can have treasure pleasures which keep the person from seeking and finding Jesus. This can be "why" someone "tries" so many things to find out about God, but fails, then can wonder "why". Any of us can be holding on to what is wrong and witch can beguile us from doing what really works.

"Therefore submit to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you." (James 4:7)

 

[com7fy8]

@Oncedeceived This morning, I woke up to realizing how ones can be so very busy with disproving and questioning and arguing about or against Christianity, but what they are doing is not working > they are unhappy. And the Bible does say,

"Destruction and misery are in their ways;
.And the way of peace they have not known."
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(Romans 3:16-17)

So, God's word shows that God knows this, about people. Plus, God wants us to feel for people who are suffering in their sin and struggling. Jesus Himself cares about us, and says,

"'Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light." (Matthew 11:28-30)

So, yes there are all the things which people say and claim to have discovered to "debunk" Christianity, but I have been "there", and I keep finding that nothing and no one else works, but Jesus . . . God through Jesus. The resurrection needs to be in us > Ephesians 2:1 > rising from our love-dead stuff, sacrificing ourselves to how God is able to make us new and in rest.

And though this in me does not always happen, there is nowhere else to go, but to some sort of living hell mainly of my own personality torments. Nothing and no one else has worked; nothing and no one else has been able to make me alive in love which is gentle and humble and nicely quiet (1 Peter 3:4) . . . "and can not be corrupted by my self stuff".

But . . . I offer > God has proven Himself and this to me. So, this is all I can ask for anyone, is that God proves Himself to each of us humans.

So, we offer people to You, O God our Father, in the name of Your own Son Jesus, that You would have mercy on any and all and bring people to all Your proof which is proof to You and not only what limited humans can dictate is "evidence" and seek in their self-limited way. Ones have their own preferences and pleasures they want, and these can shut them down and isolate them and limit them; a person's own treasure pleasures can be someone's real motive behind how he or she decides to interpret the Bible and Christianity.

However, treasure pleasures do not give us real love. Only You, O God, are "love" (1 John 4:8&16) ! ! ! So, please do personally prove Yourself to people who need Jesus, by whatsoever process. We offer ones who need You, and ourselves to You, for all You are able to do with us, in the name of Jesus Your Son. Amen

 

[com7fy8]

@Oncedeceived

We are in winter, here in New England, and this little duck is diving in the winter harbor water for food . . . not hanging around humans for a handout! This is a very smart little ducky

I have given a little handout that I can offer; but I myself need to go deep to God Himself for all He has to feed us of His own love

"Deep calls unto deep at the noise of Your waterfalls;
.All Your waves and billows have gone over me."
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(Psalm 42:7)

Each of us needs to leave our little selfish shells behind, and go deep with God. On the surface, it can be dark and cold; and in the shallow world, here, there is all the old sand, and people's shells can be so cute and beautiful to show, but they are dead, not alive with God's love. So we need to go deeper . . . deeper than what this world can show us and make us pay so dearly for it.

With Jesus, the "cost" is our self >

"If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me." (in Luke 9:23)

Yes > self which has made us able to fail, able to seek desperately for our treasure pleasures which have not satisfied us, and self which has kept on giving in to those nagging and dictatorial lusts which have driven us after those foolish and childish pleasures and the people we have used to get them, but which have not given us true love. Love does not have us using anyone, I now consider.

While we have used people, hasn't this helped to keep us from finding and personally sharing with and enjoying God who would have us lovingly caring for any and all people . . . as ourselves? "For if you love those who love you, what reward have you?" (in Matthew 5:46)

Oh yes, and self has made us deeply weak so that after getting a treasure pleasure, then we have been also weak enough to suffer in guilt and shame and bitterness and frustration and nasty angry reacting and arguing and unforgiveness. Our ego's weakness for pleasure is also weakness for pain and personality torments!

So, thank You, God, for the correction I myself need, and the healing into Your own love and way of loving Amen, in the name of Jesus Your Son

God bless you, too

Bill

 

[Davian]

I understand that what Jesus means by "hate" in this scripture is not what John means by hating, in 1 John 4:15. To me, it makes sense that Jesus who is about love does not mean for us to hate parents in the way John means hating.

However, there are people who seem to dictate what a word has to mean, then they use their own dictated meaning to see contradictions of words which do not even mean what these people dictate.

A same word can have various meanings, after all. To hate pickles is not the same as to hate a person. And Jesus can mean we put God first and stop having our parents as love idols > "For if you love those who love you, what reward have you?" (in Matthew 5:46) I think to hate can mean to despise, which can mean that we look down on anything or anyone who is not as beneficial to us as God is. It does not mean to dishonor or disrespect, but simply to consider someone or something to be so inferior to God.

I cannot imagine a context in which I could say to my mother "I hate you" in which it might be taken in any other way than despise/dislike/loathe/etc. It seems you are just reinterpreting the Bible as you see fit.

Once Deceived can speak for herself about what she meant or implied.

She did supply a list of actions that might preclude one from entering "Heaven". The only thing on it was disbelief.

But yes there are people who think you can get saved, then do any sin, at all, and still go to Heaven, even if you have not repented of things like killing and eating babies. I don't buy that. I believe if God brings a person to Jesus, He finishes what He started; and a person who comes truly to Jesus gives up one's own free will and submits to God and becomes changed so he or she will not do things like that. 1 John 4:17 to me means God does not leave people in their own stupidity and evil so they can keep on doing evil things.

That was not the issue being discussed. The question was, if one can commit a crime, such as the example provided by Once, and still get into "Heaven" (by whatever theological process), how is it objectively wrong?

So, God's word can contradict how you understand a part of it, and can contradict what a number of Bible claiming people understand.

And if someone is seeking God by means of intellectual self-invented understanding of words, dictating what they have to mean, then surely this can keep them away from truly seeking God. They can boast how they have made such an intellectual effort, found all the contradictions which they have created and dictate to be contradictions, then wonder why this did not bring them to God; but we need to be humbled, not boasting what we can get ourselves to do.

 

[Oncedeceived]

That was not the issue being discussed. The question was, if one can commit a crime, such as the example provided by Once, and still get into "Heaven" (by whatever theological process), how is it objectively wrong?

Why would it not be?

 

[Davian]

I stand corrected. I should have went back and looked. I apologize.

It appears so. No, that example is fine, like I said, I believe it to be objectively wrong.

I said I thought death would be the punishment deserved.

Perhaps you misunderstood. Death is a fact of life, not a punishment.

I asked, what should the repercussion(s) be for committing this "wrong" that should happen to you if you did it, but not happen to you if you did not commit it?

 

[Oncedeceived]

Perhaps you misunderstood. Death is a fact of life, not a punishment.

I asked, what should the repercussion(s) be for committing this "wrong" that should happen to you if you did it, but not happen to you if you did not commit it?

Uh...yes, the death penalty was what I said it should have.

 

[Davian]

I don't see any link to this FBI information that the author is using. I also would like some actual sources that support the claim that "nearly all serial killers are very devout men..." Do you have it? I find it interesting that you bring forward something that is to imply that Christianity was the cause of these people to kill

My point was to say Christianity does not appear to be incompatible to the beliefs of serial killers.

when it is very clear in the Christian faith that murder is wrong.

Why is it wrong? What [theological] repercussions might there be?

Horrendous murderers come under the secular mindset and have a great deal more victims...Lenin and Stalin killed something like 66.7 million. Mao Tse Tung killed according to some sources killed 63.7. Pol Pott killed an incredible number of people 1/3 of an entire country was put to death. I could actually go on.

Those could be considered cults of personalities, much like religions, but would still be missing my point.

It should be completely clear that there are times when people may kill who claim they are Christian but that is inconsistent with what a Christian is or should be. I doubt that most individuals that claim to be secular would go out and kill millions but the largest mass killings on earth have been done by people with a secular mindset. I think it would be unfair to claim that you belong to a murderous worldview because the worst mass killings have been perpetrated by people of that view. I think it is equally unfair of you to imply that Christians belong to a murderous worldview when in fact the worldview opposes such actions and when those actions directly counters the teachings of such a worldview.

You say that it counters it, but how?

Here Jesus is saying that by choosing to follow Him we might have to lose everything. He is saying that sometimes there is a cost to following Him even unto death. We see this in Muslim families for instance when a person leaves Islam and follows Jesus. They very often will never be able to see their families again. They can be killed. This is what He was talking about in this passage.

I do not see how you get from "losing" your family to "hating " them.

You are misrepresenting what I said.

Did you not say that the only "action" that might preclude one from entering "Heaven" was disbelief?

 

[Davian]

Why would it not be?

I am still waiting to see if what you mean by [theologically] "wrong" should have any [theological] repercussions.

 

[Davian]

Uh...yes, the death penalty was what I said it should have.

The death penalty is the result of the legal system's actions. We are talking about what you consider to be "objective wrong" actions, not the legal system.

The legal system aside, in your theological worldview, what should the repercussion(s) be for committing this "objective wrong" that should happen to you if you did it, but not happen to you if you did not commit it?

 

[Oncedeceived]

My point was to say Christianity does not appear to be incompatible to the beliefs of serial killers.

The number of ideas that would not appear to be incompatible to the beliefs of serial killers would be probably almost infinite. Your point?

Why is it wrong? What [theological] repercussions might there be?

Theologically, would be the same as will all unrepentant sin.

Those could be considered cults of personalities, much like religions, but would still be missing my point.

Oh? Your point wasn't to show so called Christians in a bad light?

You say that it counters it, but how?

Christians are not suppose to kill obviously.

I do not see how you get from "losing" your family to "hating " them.

I'll have to ask Jesus exactly what He meant when I see Him.

Did you not say that the only "action" that might preclude one from entering "Heaven" was disbelief?

No.

 

[Oncedeceived]

I am still waiting to see if what you mean by [theologically] "wrong" should have any [theological] repercussions.

Answered.

 

[Oncedeceived]

The death penalty is the result of the legal system's actions. We are talking about what you consider to be "objective wrong" actions, not the legal system.

The legal system aside, in your theological worldview, what should the repercussion(s) be for committing this "objective wrong" that should happen to you if you did it, but not happen to you if you did not commit it?

I hope I cleared this up for you.

 

[Davian]

The number of ideas that would not appear to be incompatible to the beliefs of serial killers would be probably almost infinite. Your point?

Serial killing is not compatible with my worldview. It does seem to be compatible with yours.

Theologically, would be the same as will all unrepentant sin.

When then the emotionally charged examples involving children? Why not use j-walking?

Oh? Your point wasn't to show so called Christians in a bad light?

No.

Christians are not suppose to kill obviously.

Why not?

I'll have to ask Jesus exactly what He meant when I see Him.

Dodge.

No.

Disbelief is okay then, in your theology?

 

[Davian]

I hope I cleared this up for you.

For that you would need to answer the question.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Serial killing is not compatible with my worldview. It does seem to be compatible with yours.

It is not compatible, how did you reach that conclusion?

When then the emotionally charged examples involving children? Why not use j-walking?

When talking morality it is best to use something that most people would agree to be morally wrong.

No.

Why not?

It goes against its teaching.

Dodge.

No, I simply don't know what He meant by it.

Disbelief is okay then, in your theology?

Read what I've said, it is very clear.

 

[Oncedeceived]

For that you would need to answer the question.

I did. Do I need to go back and get it for you?

 

[Davian]

I did. Do I need to go back and get it for you?

Yes.