TriniTuner.com | Latest Event:
Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
If the child can be positively impacted by the actions the parent then likewise they could be negatively impacted too, right?Slartibartfast wrote:they think a child's early life should be positively impacted, within reason, by the achievements of the parent
I think one of the many sins that those parents will have to account for is subjecting their children to the sinful environment worthy of God's immediate judgement which could fall on an entire community. Those children, who will be lovingly embraced in His grace in heaven, are victims of their parent's reckless iniquity, not victims of God's just wrath.Slartibartfast wrote: do you think that parents should have absolutely no responsibility for their children or do you think that it should be okay to put a child to death for the sins of his/her parents?
Habit7 wrote:Liberals need to stop comparing ISIS/Islam to Christianity. The Quran represents a total different orthopraxy than the Bible.
rspann wrote:Those laws were in the past, we live under a new covenant now, one of grace. Jeremiah 31 28 says .In those days,No longer shall the father eat sour grapes and the children's teeth be set on edge. Every man shall die for his own iniquity.
Also,Ezekiel 18 20 says that the soul that sinneth shall die,the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father and the father shall not bear the iniquity of the son,the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
Habit7 wrote:P.S.you can't compare anything to the Christian God while not comparing it to Christianity. They are not mutual exclusive.
God is real but the entire concept of god is mistaken by all religion, In many faiths, God’s origin is straightforward. Christian doctrine teaches that God is eternal and thus had no beginning. The Psalms speak clearly about God’s eternal nature, affirming, but never defending God’s existence: "Before the mountains were born or you gave birth to the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, you are God.”
“For a thousand years in Your sight are like yesterday when it passes by, or as a watch in the night.” These verses, and many others like them, highlight the complexity of God’s relation to time. Theologians have debated the relationship of God to time for centuries and no doubt will continue to do so. It is a question that we probably cannot answer. In one thoughtful response, God is the creator of time itself, and thus exists outside of time seeing all of history at once. Therefore god is the creator of time , and time allowed evolution to take place...the bible is a historical document that has been exaggerated over time and shouldn't be taken literally like some people do. Religions portray God to be a being that created the universe to satisfy the following questions : "Who am I?" "Why am I here?" "How did the universe come into being?" But realistically god may not be a being but might just be time itself.....
Habit7 wrote:rspann wrote:Those laws were in the past, we live under a new covenant now, one of grace. Jeremiah 31 28 says .In those days,No longer shall the father eat sour grapes and the children's teeth be set on edge. Every man shall die for his own iniquity.
Also,Ezekiel 18 20 says that the soul that sinneth shall die,the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father and the father shall not bear the iniquity of the son,the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
I understand that what your saying in Jer 31:28 and Eze 18:20, what I am referring to is children not having to account for their parents' sin, but living under the consequence of the parents actions.
Slartibartfast just can't see beyond his prejudices, so even though I corrected his misrepresentation of God's justice (based on deeds not "lack of faith"), him equating all killing to murder and his ideological incapability to impose his moral views anyone, he still arrives at the insular view, without a leg to stand on, that God's tortures children.
I hope your parents never smoked around you when you were a child, because somehow in your logic, God might be torturing you with cancer for the irresponsible actions of parents.
P.S.you can't compare anything to the Christian God while not comparing it to Christianity. They are not mutual exclusive.
Habit7 wrote:Didn't attack your "side comment" it was the main point of your post before you ran back and tried to scribble over the contradictions. I thought I didn't need to quote you but now apparently I do.
Don't know how to be clearer than this.Slartibartfast wrote:Again this is an example. I am not God. I am not perfect so it's okay if there are flaws in my plan. I am flattered that you compare me to him though.
No argument of yours yet to attack my main point God has punished/tortured and killed some innocent people... which is one of the things that ISIS has done that cause people to hate them.
I must have missed that, can you point me to which post you explained it in?Habit7 wrote:When I logically showed you that God doesn't punish innocent people,
This is just too vague for me to argue with.Habit7 wrote: there are no innocent people, children who are unaware of their own morality are covered by God's grace go to heaven and that actions of a minority affects a majority positively and negatively.
Vatican calls for Catholic Church to welcome gays
Vatican document states homosexuals have 'gifts and qualities to offer' in unprecedented step to 'welcome' gay people
Catholic bishops took an unprecedented step on Monday to "welcome" homosexuals and noting they had "gifts and qualities" to offer the church.
As the global synod on the family entered its second week at the Vatican, the bishops released a midterm document summarising the closed-door debate taking place between nearly 200 bishops and lay officials.
While the church reaffirmed its opposition to marriage and same sex unions, the ground-breaking document said homosexuality prompted "serious reflection" and was an "important educative challenge".
"Are we capable of welcoming these people, guaranteeing them a fraternal space in our communities?" the document asked. "Often they wish to encounter a church that offers them a welcoming home.
"Are our communities capable of providing that, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?"
Cardinal Vincent Nichols, the Archbishop of Westminister and the head of the Catholic Church in England and Wales, told The Telegraph there were no easy answers and stressed that this was a synod about pastoral care.
"I don't think this document approves of same sex unions or same sex marriage. But it does make a very strong compassionate, heartfelt effort to say we want to talk, we want to engage with you," he said.
The synod document also signalled a more "constructive" approach to cohabitation and a simpler approach to marriage annulment, "speeding up" the procedure and the possibility of giving local bishops more power to dissolve marriages.
No decisions or doctrinal changes were announced. But the report was described as an "earthquake" by John Thavis, journalist and author of the bestselling The Vatican Diaries". Other commentators agreed.
"This is a stunning change in the way the Catholic church speaks of gay people," said the Rev James Martin, a Jesuit author.
"The synod is clearly listening to the complex, real-life experiences of Catholics around the world and seeking to address them with mercy, as Jesus did."
While reinforcing matrimony between a man and a woman, the bishops acknowledged that gay partnerships had merit, apparently taking their lead from Pope Francis whose "Who am I to judge?" comment about gays last year signalled a new approach.
"Without denying the moral problems connected to homosexual unions, it has to be noted that there are cases in which mutual aid to the point of sacrifice constitutes a precious support in the life of the partners," they said.
For a 2,000-year-old institution that officially maintains that gay sex is "intrinsically disordered" the shift in tone surprised Marianne Duddy-Burke, head of DignityUSA, the country's largest Catholic gay and lesbian organisation.
"The specific language used about lesbian and gay people is astonishingly new," Ms Duddy-Burke said. "The recognition that 'homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community' is a far different starting point than saying we are 'disordered', which has been the mantra for almost 30 years."
But the new approach provoked a storm of protest from more than a dozen bishops before they left the synod hall, and conservative Catholics elsewhere were outraged with the global pro-life coalition, Voice of the Family, dismissing it as a "betrayal".
John Smeaton, co-founder of Voice of the Family, which represents 15 organisations in eight countries, said: "Those who are controlling the synod have betrayed Catholic parents worldwide.
"We believe that the synod's midway report is one of the worst official documents drafted in Church history. Catholic families are clinging to Christ's teaching on marriage and chastity by their fingertips."
Asked about the future of the philandering Bishop of Arundel, Kieran Conry, Cardinal Nichols declined to discuss whether he may be unfrocked or even make a return to the church.
"It's very important, in terms of the synod, that he is able to step back and come to some sort of reflection and a decision about what he wants to do," Cardinal Nichols said. "I don't think he will know that at the moment. I certainly don't.
"Now I can understand the anger and dismay of those who feel they have been betrayed by him. I would ask that he is given time to assess for himself what he has done and its implications in his own life. That should come first."
I said there are no innocent people. Rather than refute my claim and prove the innocence of any man before a holy God, you have now switched to:Slartibartfast wrote:my main point God has punished/tortured and killed some innocent people
But before we move on, prove your point.Slartibartfast wrote:God creates beings that he knows will most likely be subject to torture later.
but in your little analogy ISIS (who you liken to God) is responsible to the children born of them if they torture and kill them. You contradict you self in that one instance parents are not responsible, in another instance the parents are ISIS, then they become responsibleSlartibartfast wrote:You keep on trying to blame it on the parents but the child is born of the parents, not created by them.
Slartibartfast wrote: So God created them in a world of sin...knowing that they will be tortured for their lack of faith
Habit7 wrote:Com'on stop misrepresenting my position.
The God of the Bible justly punishes those who willingly chose to sin against His law. He doesn't "tortures someone for lack of faith."
James 2:19 says, You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!
Lack of faith is not the issue, justice is. Many people who believe in God are haters of Him
My answer was basically children that have not reached the age of reason.Habit7 wrote:I said there are no innocent people...
Which man can say,[/b] "Lord, I have succumbed to the mortality inherited by my father Adam, but with me being a free moral agent I have never broken your laws as you have set before me, I deserve eternal bliss in heaven and not divine punishment like those other sinners on Earth"
Ok you clearly missed the tone of that last piece. I meant that according to you the child is born of the parents, and not created by them. According to me the child is born of and created by the parents and the parents assume all responsibility for the child. I tried to illustrate your contradiction where you blamed the parents for the situation that children may be put in but maintain that they are God's creation which means God should have the ultimate power over what situations they are put in. I'll try to be more direct in future.Habit7 wrote:but in your little analogy ISIS (who you liken to God) is responsible to the children born of them if they torture and kill them. You contradict you self in that one instance parents are not responsible, in another instance the parents are ISIS, then they become responsibleSlartibartfast wrote:You keep on trying to blame it on the parents but the child is born of the parents, not created by them.
I see you completely ignored my more refined broken down argument with easy-to-follow lines of the argument that even you will be able to follow. Why not take a little bite and just disprove one of the lines to disrupt the argument a little bit?Habit7 wrote:Com'on stop misrepresenting my position.Slartibartfast wrote:So God created them in a world of sin...knowing that they will be tortured for their lack of faith
Slartibartfast wrote: So God created them in a world of sin knowing they will be sinners, knowing some of them won't get the opportunity to know the faith, knowing that they will be tortured for their lack of faith (and sins that they were born into) and make the path to righteousness a hard one (long and winding) ergo..
God creates beings that he knows will most likely be subject to torture later.
and why does he do this? Isn't he powerful enough to create beings perfectly?
So that we can serve him for eternity.
That's even worse. That's the equivalent to ISIS members having children just so they can torture them and kill them later. But like you said "He is sovereign and we are subjects."
Seems the contradictions was a misunderstanding and the misrepresentation was cleared up but ignored by you. I try not to be shifty but there is so much you claim the answer for without answering and I display no more incredulity that you do. Feel free to answer my points as directly as I have answered yours as soon as your sidestep dance is over.Habit7 wrote:Contradictions and misrepresentations.
It is one thing to be skeptical but convincible, but it seems you are being incredulous and shifty and you are wasting my time.
you have now limited those "people" toSlartibartfast wrote:God has punished/tortured and killed some innocent people
God doesnt torture innocents He does torture uncontentiousness children, He justly punishes willing, responsible criminals of His law.Slartibartfast wrote:children that have not reached the age of reason
and again I said (the first post on this page)Habit7 wrote:A starving child is not undergoing the torture of God, that is responsibilty of its parents. The parents' irresponsibility is the cause of a starving child or even the irresponsibility of their leaders. Whoever it is, they will have to stand before a holy God and account for their actions, then is where the punishment starts not before. A child who has not attained a level of consciousness of their responsibility before God is covered by God's grace, I won't call them innocent. But the circumstances that you and I all live in are the result of the "free will" decisions taken by those who went before us.
Habit7 wrote: The God of the Bible said, "Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God" Luke 18:16. The kingdom of God doesn't belong to tortured individuals but precious vessels of God's grace.
Yes please be more direct. God does have "ultimate power over what situations they are put in" and His reason explained again belowSlartibartfast wrote:Ok you clearly missed the tone of that last piece... I tried to illustrate your contradiction where you blamed the parents for the situation that children may be put in but maintain that they are God's creation which means God should have the ultimate power over what situations they are put in. I'll try to be more direct in future.
viewtopic.php?f=4&p=8235800#p8235800Habit7 wrote:Acts 17: 26-31 And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us, for “‘In him we live and move and have our being’; as even some of your own poets have said, “‘For we are indeed his offspring.’ Being then God’s offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man. The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.”
Slartibartfast wrote: So God created them in a world of sin knowing they will be sinners God created a sinless world, man bears responsibility of sin in this world, not God, knowing some of them won't get the opportunity to know the faith They bear the responsibility to know God, see Acts 17:26-31 the above passage, knowing that they will be tortured for their lack of faith (and sins that they were born into) not true and not true, no one is tortured for their lack of faith, no one is tortured for sins they were born into and make the path to righteousness a hard one whether it is hard or easy is relative, but here I am sharing Christianity, and you reject it, but as you admitted before, you refuse to serve God because you want your personal autonomy, I can say for you, I have made it is far easier than those who havent had someone spell it out so clearly to (long and winding) ergo..
God creates beings that he knows will most likely be subject to torture later. God violates none of His moral standards in this, he justly punishes the wicked, He rewards righteous, that is called justice
and why does he do this? Isn't he powerful enough to create beings perfectly? yes, but He created free moral agents, not robots
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], ProtonPowder and 52 guests
