- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
24 May 21
9 edits
What I say is depraved and grotesque is the definition of "ultimate" and "perfect" morality that you propagate here.
The propagation of the teaching of God as both the incarnate Savior and the final divine judge is not my invention. Why is it so hard for you to recognize that is something taught in the Bible?
This is propogated right out of the mouth of Jesus whom you regard as depraved.
"For just as the Father has life in Himself, so He gave to the Son to also have life in Himself; And He gave Him authority to execute judgment because He is the Son of Man.
Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming in which all in the tombs will hear His voice and will come forth: those who have done good, to the resurrection of life; and those who have practiced evil, to the resurrection of judgment.
I can do nothing from Myself; as I hear I judge, and My judgment is just, because I do not seek My own will but the will of Him who sent Me." (John 5:26-30)
God gave authority to a man to both grant eternal life and to judge. All who are in the tombs, ie. are dead, cannot avoid to arrive alive before Him for final judgment.
Jesus is the Propogator of Him being Son of God, Savior, and Judge according to God's final infallible ultimate decrees. For He seeks only His Father's will.
Again right out of the Propagator's mouth - He came to be a ransom for all the people of the world as a propitiatory sacrifice to substitute His death in place of our being subject to the infallible justice of God.
"For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve and to give His life as a ransom for many." (Mark 10:45)
What am I propagating that Jesus the Son of God, the Son of Man is not propagating?
24 May 21
@sonship saidIt's you who is propagating a torturer God ideology. I don't care whether you got it from an article in a journal or from a pamphlet in a waiting room.
The propogation of go God as both the Savior and the final judge is not my invention. Why is it so hard for you to recognize that is something taught in the Bible?
You either take responsibility for the moral coherence of the ideology you propagate or you don't.
You appear to be trying to hide behind the fact you claim to be regurgitating it ~ without taking any personal responsibility for its coherence ~ because a supernatural being supposedly told you about it and/or has told you do do it.
24 May 21
@sonship saidGod gave authority to a man to both grant eternal life and to judge. All who are in the tombs, ie. are dead, cannot avoid to arrive alive before Him for final judgment.
God gave authority to a man to both grant eternal life and to judge. All who are in the tombs, ie. are dead, cannot avoid to arrive alive before Him for final judgment.
Jesus is the Propogator of Him being Son of God, Savior, and Judge according to God's final infallible ultimate decrees. For He seeks only His Father's will.
Again right out of the Propagator's mouth - He came to be a ransom for all the people of the world as a propitiatory sacrifice to substitute His death in place of our being subject to the infallible justice of God.
Where does this talk about burning non-Christians in burning flames for eternity?
Where does this talk about it supposedly STILL being morally just ~ "perfect morality" ~ to be torturing a non-believer - with one of the worst kinds of agonizing pain known to humans - for their non-belief in, say, 10,000,000,000 years from now?
24 May 21
The interpretation of divine judgement and punishment by Rajk999 seems to me to be morally sound in so far as it apples to human beings.
The interpretation of divine judgement and punishment by Suzianne seems to me to be morally sound.
The interpretation of divine judgement and punishment by divegeester seems to me to be morally sound.
The interpretation of divine judgement and punishment by you seems to me to be one of the most morally repugnant ideologies that humans have ever come up with.
And here you are peddling it, calling it "perfect morality", and trying not to take any personal responsibility for its incoherence and evil nature.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
24 May 21
1 edit
It's you who is propagating a torturer God ideology. I don't care whether you got it from an article in a journal or from a pamphlet in a waiting room.
I speak of many angles of God's nature, salvation, and purpose. YOU hone in on ONE THING about the judgment of the unsaved. However you wish to describe this it is part of the Bible's message.
1.) You cannot insist it is my favorite thing to talk about as I have written much on God's plan of uniting with His people - dispensing His life into them.
2.) You cannot insist it is something EXTRA I added to the Bible from my own invention.
You either take responsibility for the moral coherence of the ideology you propagate or you don't.
I take full responsibility for, among other aspects of the Gospel, informing people that there is consequences for not being reconciled to God.
For example, right out of the mouth of the Lord Jesus "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that everyone who believes into Him would not perish, but would have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes into Him is not condemned, but he who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed into the name of the only begotten Son of God.
And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light, for their works were evil." (John 3:16-19)
What good does it to squint your eyes, ignore these words and flood your thoughts with accusations against ME for inventing and propagating something Jesus did not teach?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
24 May 21
3 edits
You appear to be trying to hide behind the fact you claim to be regurgitating it ~ without taking any personal responsibility for its coherence ~ because a supernatural being supposedly told you about it and/or has told you do do it.
I am not hiding my "regurgitating" what Jesus spoke to us or not taking responsibility for teaching what the NT teaches.
You are perhaps trying to minimize its significance by obsessing that I concocted these words out of my imagination and foisted them upon you.
And I do not say believing everything of what is actually there in the Bible is always easy. We all would like to think at some time we could discard with God's all knowing, all seeing, all remembering, and calling us to account for what we have done.
What I "regurgitated" above shows us God's love and willingness to grant salvation and what many of us would not even think to ask of Him - eternal life.
You work hard to shift blame on me for repeating what Christ and His apostles spoke.
24 May 21
@sonship saidIf you propagate an evil ideology that appeals to your imagination and which your moral compass condones ~ even if it has no significance to me or the reality in which I live ~ then you should take personal responsibilty for it.
You are perhaps trying to minimize its significance by obsessing that I concocted these words out of my imagination and foisted them upon you.
24 May 21
@sonship saidTell me where these words...
What good does it to squint your eyes, ignore these words and flood your thoughts with accusations against ME for inventing and propagating something Jesus did not teach?
"For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that everyone who believes into Him would not perish, but would have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes into Him is not condemned, but he who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed into the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light, for their works were evil."
...answer this question: "Where does this talk about it supposedly STILL being morally just ~ "perfect morality" ~ to be torturing a non-believer - with one of the worst kinds of agonizing pain known to humans - for their non-belief in, say, 10,000,000,000 years from now?"
24 May 21
@sonship saidYou are working very hard to shift the goalposts. We are not discussing your ideology of "God's love and willingness to grant salvation" which I have never described as depraved.
What I "regurgitated" above shows us God's love and willingness to grant salvation and what many of us would not even think to ask of Him - eternal life. You work hard to shift blame on me for repeating what Christ and His apostles spoke.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
24 May 21
1 edit
The interpretation of divine judgement and punishment by Rajk999 seems to me to be morally sound in so far as it apples to human beings.
Forget about Rajk999 and sonship and read it for yourself, why not?
YOU read and YOU interpret.
What do YOU say the New Testament teaches?
The interpretation of divine judgement and punishment by Suzianne seems to me to be morally sound.
You have to finally decide what it means to you.
What you don't like you cannot blame on me.
The interpretation of divine judgement and punishment by divegeester seems to me to be morally sound.
You have to read it and decide what you are going to believe.
The interpretation of divine judgement and punishment by you seems to me to be one of the most morally repugnant ideologies that humans have ever come up with.
You have to decide for yourself what you are being told.
24 May 21
@sonship saidThe ideology of eternal torture is the evil darkness at the very heart of your creed. There is nothing wrong if one "hones in" on the evil at the very core of what you propagate, especially if you describe it as "perfect morality".
I speak of many angles of God's nature, salvation, and purpose. YOU hone in on ONE THING about the judgment of the unsaved.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
24 May 21
And here you are peddling it, calling it "perfect morality", and trying not to take any personal responsibility for its incoherence and evil nature.
I stand by Jesus Christ as the perfect life that alone was qualified to be an offering for the sins of the world. I stand by Jesus having the Spirit of Himself to impart into us to transform us to the highest level of moral living in sanctification.
And how can I not own that to neglect such a great salvation will lead to eternal separation from God. And God has told us in terms impossible to misunderstand, that that is not something anyone is going to enjoy.
" I want to have nothing to do with God and have no bad consequences for this. "
It is not me making up something by warning you that the Bible simply doesn't allow for this. If we believe we share Christ's glorious eternal destiny. If we reject Christ we go with our leader Satan to his miserable eternal destiny. We go with our leader in either regard. I encourage the Son of God as the Leader to go with.
24 May 21
@sonship saidI think we all die and that death is the end.
YOU read and YOU interpret.
What ideology you extract from ancient Hebrew mythology and the literature of early Christianity is for Christians.
If I find the moral compass you base upon it to be morally grotesque and demented, or - more to the point, ludicrous - then it's my prerogative to say so and to say why.
Indeed, it's your prerogative to run away from taking responsibility for what your personal moral compass is telling you about never ending torture being the "perfect morality".
Hey, you can even declare your conjecture about this supernatural matter to be "objective": yet another gimmick to distance yourself from taking personal responsibility for the morally twisted and incomprehensible ideology you propagate.
24 May 21
@sonship saidHow would it STILL be morally just and "perfect" to be STILL torturing a non-believer for their non-belief [during their 70-year life on earth], in, say, ten billion years from now?
What you don't like you cannot blame on me.
What about one hundred billion years from now?
What would be the moral justification for STILL torturing someone one trillion years after they die?