Fellowship, Fall, Salvation:

Originally posted by FMF
We discussed all this kind of stuff before ~ when you were posting as Fetchmyjunk, it may even have been exactly the same text ~ and you basically ignored what I said. Which is your prerogative, of course. So no. Sorry. Not interested. See if someone else wants to "engage" your copy pasted text.

The questions were addressed to one of your identical triplet siblings. Let's see if he if has the balls to attempt an answer.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
I'm more curious why you are 'not' disturbed by bears being sent to kill young men, irrespective of how slanderous they were, and how you will go out on a ridiculously thin limb to justify such an occurrence.

What does the word Holy mean to you?

Originally posted by KellyJay
What does the word Holy mean to you?

Apologies for not answering that question previously Kelly, I did intend on responding to it.

'Holy' doesn't mean a great deal to me, to be honest, though do realise it means a great deal to you. - I'm unsure though why you raise it in regards to me questioning Sonship about the killer bears. Does 'holy' somehow encompass that in your thinking?

Originally posted by dj2becker
The questions were addressed to one of your identical triplet siblings. Let's see if he if has the balls to attempt an answer.

"The balls"? No. I don't think it's "courage" that people need when it comes to dealing with you.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
I'm more curious why you are 'not' disturbed by bears being sent to kill young men, irrespective of how slanderous they were, and how you will go out on a ridiculously thin limb to justify such an occurrence.

Nice dodge.
Don't want your hypocrisy to be exposed to the light ?

Originally posted by sonship
Nice dodge.
Don't want your hypocrisy to be exposed to the light ?

I'll be starting a new thread in your honour a little later sir. Look out for it.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Apologies for not answering that question previously Kelly, I did intend on responding to it.

'Holy' doesn't mean a great deal to me, to be honest, though do realise it means a great deal to you. - I'm unsure though why you raise it in regards to me questioning Sonship about the killer bears. Does 'holy' somehow encompass that in your thinking?

No worries, and need for apologies, some of us are involved in several conversations,
with multi people...not hard to lose track of question now and then.

Holy does mean a lot to me, as does evil, vile, horrific, common, and so on with Holy
being the perfection of what is. As I was sharing with others about why God does not
let us come into direct contact with Him, it would be because what isn't Holy cannot
abide in its presence.

Going back to the bears, would you think insulting God should have resulted in a long
life and dying of old age? Each day here is a gift from God, each breath is too, there is
nothing we have that we have received from above. So if God gives, and God takes away
how is that nothing short of something that is God's right to do? How would His reaction to
things we do be anything, but His right to react? We react as we will too, some times with
grace, insults, kindness, rage, love, hate, forbearance, ridicule and it is these things God
has given us power to do, choose, but with each choice consequence.

Exodus 33:19
And he said, “I will make all my goodness pass before you and will proclaim before you my name ‘The Lord.’ And I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy.

Romans 9:15
For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

Originally posted by dj2becker
Sorry but your belief system cannot even account for the laws of logic so don't even get started with that.

Or can you tell me how you account for the laws of logic within your atheism? Isn't logic a process of the mind? Yes. Isn't logical thought based upon the laws of logic? If logic is conceptual (a process of the mind) and certainly appear to be ...[text shortened]... those here are a few more questions you can test your atheism on:
https://carm.org/cut-atheism

Wow.
So much stupidity in a single person.
Read this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic
then get back to me.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
I'll be starting a new thread in your honour a little later sir. Look out for it.

An even nicer dodge - a whole new thread !

Do you have a similar feeling of outrage about those 1.06 Million innocent kids as the 40 slandering young folks insulting the prophet knowing something of ...[text shortened]... ?

Originally posted by sonship
An even nicer dodge - a whole new thread !

Do you have a similar feeling of outrage about those 1.06 Million innocent kids as the 40 slandering young folks insulting the prophet knowing something of ?

No dodge sir. Just an opportunity to expand on whether or not being pro-life (which I am) is a bad thing.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
No dodge sir. Just an opportunity to expand on whether or not being pro-life (which I am) is a bad thing.

I am going to have to assume that you do not grasp the selective outrage. People notice the 40 young people slain by two bears sent by God. A God who just had Elisha perform a merciful act of purifying the water supply for the society there.

Their way of showing thanks (at least the youths) called for God to make an example of the situation.

But put that aside for the time being. You did allude to Romans 2 about the work of the law of God being written on the hearts of the Gentiles.

Do you think that young men who were aware of a man of God miraculously healing sickening waters, needed mocking, insulting and ridicule were they going along with what was written upon their hearts ?

Was this disrespectful show of unthankfulness them listening to the law of God's work written upon their hearts? Or do you think they were drowning out their consciences, going along with the crowd to lampoon a servant of God who had just rendered benefit to the society ?

I think they were going AGAINST their better leadings of human conscience.
One instance at least seems reserved for God to reveal His attitude.

" ... whisperers, slanderers, hateful to God, insolent, arrogant, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, senseless, faithless, affectionless, merciless;

Who, though fully knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, not only do them, but also have fellow delight in those who practice them." (See Romans 1:30-32)

I would bring to your attention that it does not say EACH time God will kill us. But it DOES say that the practitioners of such things "are worthy of death".

I take to story of the 42 youths slain by the bears as a specifically tailored example for God to remind us that though He has longsuffering with our sins, -

" ... those who practice such things are worthy of DEATH."

Originally posted by sonship
I am going to have to assume that you do not grasp the selective outrage. People notice the 40 young people slain by two bears sent by God. A God who just had [b]Elisha perform a merciful act of purifying the water supply for the society there.

Their way of showing thanks (at least the youths) called for God to make an example of the situation.

...[text shortened]... sins, -

" ... those who practice such things are worthy of DEATH."

[/b]

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also."

Matthew 5:38

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also."

Matthew 5:38

That "eye for eye" stopped people from doing whatever they wanted for any slight
whatsoever. Jesus upped the ante on what the righteous requirements were, why would
He do that? To leave no doubt that the righteous requirements of God were very tight,
and they are impossible without God.


Matthew 5:27-29King James Version (KJV)
Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Matthew 5:21-23King James Version (KJV)
Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee;

Originally posted by KellyJay
That "eye for eye" stopped people from doing whatever they wanted for any slight
whatsoever. Jesus upped the ante on what the righteous requirements were, why would
He do that? To leave no doubt that the righteous requirements of God were very tight,
and they are impossible without God.


Matthew 5:27-29King James Version (KJV)
Ye have heard that it ...[text shortened]... hou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee;

Indeed sir. Therefore, if a group of youths mock your bald head, should you turn the other cheek or have God rip them apart with bears?

I know, it's a toughy.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Indeed sir. Therefore, if a group of youths mock your bald head, should you turn the other cheek or have God rip them apart with bears?

I know, it's a toughy.

I wouldn't than again, I didn't send Him, to speak in my name as a Holy God to a sinful
people.