- This topic is empty.
- Posts
As I said earlier, Nick, you did a wee bit more than just talk about that. You made some highly insensitive remarks abut Trinitarians.
I’m not sure I quite follow you logic here, Kevin. I can’t follow whether you are claiming God did not did not remit David’s punishment. According to Scripture, God did; otherwise, via the law, David would have been put to death for his actions with Basheeba. Granted, forgiveness means more than just remission of punishment, but it does meant least that. I can’t say more, until I get a clearer understanding what you are driving at.
Hoghead,
He modified it by having the child of Bathsheba die shortly after birth. If one puts too much faith in this life it may be seen as an unfair wage for the crime committed but bottom line is our children pay for our sins as do others. Of course we would argue that Bathsheba’s distress at her husband’s death and he guilt over the affair over David resulted in the child’s death.
Hi hoghead,
Those plants the Father did not plant will be pulled out.
God did not teach trinity through any of His servants but you think you can see it written between the lines?
I see it out there in plain biblical print, Nick. Remember, Christ is the Savior, and only God can truly save. Certainly God’s Spirit is God. Obviously teh Farther is God. It’s that simple. This doesn’t require any sort of reading between the lines.
Well, again, we are getting off topic, Kerwin. however, I think it is n unusually cruel and actually unbiblical idea that our children should pay for our sins. I realize certain biblical passages claim that, whereas others deny it. A famous biblical contradiction. I believe God is loving and therefore I do not believe does mean and unfair things to people like that. This subject deserves much more extensive treatment, but it is off topic; so let’s get back to the Trinity.
Hi Hoghead,
Jesus told Mary Magdalene he was returning to his Father and his God.
Does God have a God?
“Returning to Father’ means gong back onto the state he was in previous to his incarnation in the Christ event.
Hi hoghead,
Should we consult you for the meaning of the words of scripture ?
Can it not be read as written or must it go through your trinity filter?
Nick, you asked me what I thought the passage meant and I told you. If you cannot be respectful of my replies, do not ask. If you object to what I have to day, then present your counter-argument, which you have yet to do.
Hoghead1,
God is all powerful and all knowing and so anything that occurs is either at his instigation or because he allows it. In short his will. He could have at any time stepped in and prevented the death of the child but he chose not to. In fact he had the choice to stop the conception or even David and Bathsheba’s choice to indulge in conception. He chose not to.
He has a different view of morality than you do as you have been schooled by our society and not so much by Scripture. The two do not agree nor has any mere human society ever agreed with the morality of Scripture and the later is just an outline if the morality of the Spirit. In his eternal view anything that occurs to a body is brief and temporary but that which occurs to the soul is eternal. In short David grieved about the temporary illness and death of the child but God knows its final fate. If that child had died silently in his sleep as an old man then its life and and death would brief and God would still know his final fate.
Yes, it off topic but the conversation may get back on track as many things are related.
Hello, Kerwin,
It is true that divine omnipotence is an ancient and venerable Christian tradition. It is customary to think of God as a cosmic dictator, a Ruling Caesar. However, I hold it is a major theological mistake. I see it as unbiblical, as a central biblical theme is that God is often deeply disappointed by what is happening, that it is not al all going the way God wants it to. I see it as making God teh author of all kinds of terrible evil. I see it as denying any sense of human freedom. As Luther once said, “the princes are merely puppets.” No, I just don’t buy into this kind of what I call Pinocchio Theology. Divine omnipotence is irrational. Ask yourself this question: Can God make a stone so heavy that he can’t lift it when he wants to?
It has also been customary to think of God as the Ruthless Moralist. The OT, especially, depicts God as juridical, vengeful, raining down draconian punishments on persons, encouraging Moses to act without mercy, etc. However, that is certainly not a God of love and forgiveness, and definitely not a God I could put any real faith in.
However, we are getting way, way off topic here. To treat any of this material in any real detail would require a whole other thread.
Nick, please. Could you give me some solid food, something really meaty to really think about, a challenge? Again, all you are doing here is posting inflammatory rhetoric, not theology. Boring, very boring.
Hoghead1,
Can God make a stone so heavy that he can’t lift it when he wants to?
It is an absurd argument as it essentially is posing the question whether God is more powerful than himself. The statement that God is omnipotent is not claiming God is more powerful than himself.
That’s the point, Kerwin. Actually, I had in mind something a bit different from the stone example, but let’s roll with how you answered here. Omnipotence means God can do anything. Well, you just shot that idea down by saying that there is a limitation on God, that God can ever be more powerful than himself, that God can’t do anything absurd or contradictory. Can God answer all questions? one might well ask. And one my well receive an answer of yes, from the omnipotence people. OK, can God tell me how many miles there are in yellow? Uuk oh. Seems that right there is something God can’t do. Even the omnipotence people saw fit to seriously qualify themselves. St. Thomas Aquinas, for example, firmly affirmed God’s omnipotence, but then provided a kind of cannot-do list for God: God cannot break the laws of geometry, God cannot change, God cannot reach out to something God does not already have, God cannot have any potentiality, God cannot experience any emotion, especially negative emotion, etc. So, in the end, omnipotence is a totally bogus concept.
Hi Hoghead,
The good food is for the children of God.
Those who prefer other teachers than Jesus for now enjoy the patient mercy of God.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
