S
Sissy
Guest
That's Mormons, not JWs.
S
Sissy
Guest
It's going to be a bumpy night.Fasten your seatbelts
I don't see how rejecting those that reject God would make God the unjust one.
You always forget that God is not just love, but is also jealous, holy, and vengeful.
The story of the prodigal son shows us that the heavenly Father does not go out and drag people back to Him.
It's their decision to live in His presence or not.
B
Bladerunner
Guest
oops
F
freelight
Guest
Yes it can be, especially when we question our beliefs and perspectives allowing us to see more and a greater revelation of truth, or feature of some truth
- the whole of a diamond has many facets that includes its totality, but each make up the whole of it. Even as 'God' is 'Light'.....that light contains an infinity of colours and tones, every frequency and vibration possible.Love is still love, and its will never changes. This is important to see as we reflect on the condition of souls in time and eternity, dont you think? Every soul is loved because of their inherent worth and origin of being. - thats the first essential. - all the karmic interplays and liberties of free will seeming to operate from that center, may be conditional or variable, of course.
I could not disregard one aspect of 'God' over another, because 'God' is ONE. We are covering Gods nature and attributes in the Urantia thread, doing commentaries there (here), some good stuff. I dont see 'God' as 'jealous' or 'vengeful' as these confine him to human terms and qualities,...'God' the INFINITE is so much more, although he may be the Source of these features, more or less finite or imperfect as they seem to exist in man's personality. I dont limit 'God' to the tribal god 'Yahweh' or some other regional 'god', but view the universal 'God' as more and greater
- 'God' is 'God', and is both unknowable and knowable, but within the scope and dimensions of what is actually unknowable and knowable - to the finite mind, 'God' forever maintains the quality as being unknowable in his infinity.Thats a wonderful parable
- of course the Father ever waits for his prodigal sons to RETURN home, and does so eternally, unless by some means or choice the possibsility of such a reunion is retarted or no long available. On the grounds of Gods omnipresence and infinity, I question if anyone can in reality ever be seperate from 'God', the one universal ever-present absolute reality. God's allness and infinity appears to me as absolute, all-inclusive, all-encompassing. I guess I just give 'God' too much liberty to be ONE and ALL - that is the case always from the perspective of God-consciousness, at any rate. - a soul may be shrouded by ignorance, 'sin', or other distortions that prevent him from accepting the allness of 'God', but 'God' ever IS, the Infinite ONE, ...the ONE and ONLY Presence within which all life inheres, and the only womb from which all creation emerges.As far the absurdity and atrocity of ECT, I've expounded on that elsewhere,.....if that is one's concept of 'God' and his treatment of his own offspring, to allow for and maintain the ECT of souls in some eternal hellfire, that is most atrocious. God is wholly loving, just and altogether fair, of course, so I have no problems in trusting his divine providence for one and all. - some theologies or belief-systems would denigrate the divine name, and do injustice to his good character but assuming a caricature of his majesty as some pompous egotistical 'god' who gets away with doing evil (inflicting harm), by a belief-system that gives him sanction. I question that on prinicple and more.
--------o
S
Sissy
Guest
hehe!
I was quoting quoting Bette Davis in All About Eve.
Does the Urantia book say to oppose the scriptures that say God is jealous and vengeful?
Those terms don't confine God to anything.
God the creator of the universe is the same God as Israel's God, YHWH.'God' the INFINITE is so much more, although he may be the Source of these features, more or less finite or imperfect as they seem to exist in man's personality. I dont limit 'God' to the tribal god 'Yahweh' or some other regional 'god', but view the universal 'God' as more and greater
That doesn't confine Him to a single nation.
According to scripture God is longsuffering, but not eternally waiting.Thats a wonderful parable
Another indication that the god of Urantia is not the God of scripture.
Which makes Him perfectly capable of setting whatever boundaries He deems fit, not the ones man deems fit.On the grounds of Gods omnipresence and infinity, I question if anyone can in reality ever be seperate from 'God', the one universal ever-present absolute reality. God's allness and infinity appears to me as absolute, all-inclusive, all-encompassing. I guess I just give 'God' too much liberty to be ONE and ALL
Except that we have scripture that records God as being wrathful and harming to people.
Scripture flat out tells us that God will offend many.
I don't get to set the boundaries of God according to my sensibilities.
M
Mr G Lee
Guest
Same difference to include Catholicism . It is like the Pharisees with Sadaucesss two sects that put aside their differences to make sola scriptura (all things written in the law and the prophets ) without effect so they can rather follow the oral traditions of mankind. I heard it through the fathers grape vine.
Both serve a hierarchy of venerable men (elders or fathers) that the lord it over the faith or understanding of the non-venerable .
The bible calls it a "law of the fathers" . They serve another written authority other than all things written in the law and prophets (sola scriptura)
God is not served by human hands in any way shape or form .He has no needs but satisfies all.
In that way the Holy Spirit can use one not redeemed to bring his gospel.
Born again Paul previously as Saul came out from those who sought after the true believers with the law of the fathers receiving letters (oral traditions ) and not the law of God as it is writen (sola scriptura)
Acts 24:5-6 For we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes: Who also hath gone about to profane the temple: whom we took, and would have judged according to our law. (oral traditions)
They tried to prove the word of God was heresy (a opinion.) and not the law. Usurping the law from above as it is writen and giving it their own, I heard it through the fathers grapevine . But could not . In effect that Holy Spirt working in Paul turned things right side up .
Rather than venerating the fathers as if they were in the place of our Holy Father in heaven .Paul worshiped the God of the fathers .Again not the fathers as if they a legion make up our one God, who works in those born again from above...
Acts 24:13:14 Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me. But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets: . . . . . (sola scriptura)
Again not the fathers as God
They went out from us because they were not of us. The bible defines the us. Not the fathers or elders .
S
Studyman
Guest
Hey Blade,
Often a theologian will grasp a way of thinking about God: and suddenly some will say it is a new religious sect!
Calvin was a theological thinker... It was never his intention to turn his arguments into yet another sect...
The world so wants to label people as one denomination or other...
Calvin, I imagine would be horrified if people after him said they are 'Calvinist'.... I dare say most reformists would have seen themselves as Christian, but with differing understandings revealed to them.
We are a broad church... and we have access to so many understandings derived from Scripture and debate, and our relationship directly with God, manifested through His Holy Spirit. It adds to the picture- though some would want to limit that to suit their own needs for control over revelation.
So I am concurring- Calvin is a theologian with a revelation about Scripture... but he is firstly a Christian
If you think about it, the first recorded "Reformer" given in the Scriptures, was the serpent in the garden who set about to "reform" the teaching of God. ("Hath God not said", "For God doeth know")
The first large body of "reformers" recorded in the Bible were the corrupt Levite Priest's.
Mal. 2:7 For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts. 8 But ye are departed out of the way; ye have caused many to stumble at the law; ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi, saith the LORD of hosts. 9 Therefore have I also made you contemptible and base before all the people, according as ye have not kept my ways, but have been partial in the law.
These religious men, who came in God's Name, "reformed" the teaching of Moses, who God sent to teach HIS Way. They kept "some" of God's instruction, but rejected and polluted the rest. (According to the Jesus of the Bible, and the Prophets)
In Jesus Time, the Pharisees were those who promoted the doctrines and traditions of these "reformers". As Paul teaches;
Gal. 1:13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: 14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.
Then Constantine came along, and "Reformed" the religion the Pharisees had created.
But they got one thing horribly wrong. They claimed/believed that the Jews were obeying God. That their traditions and subsequent rejection by the Christ, was the result of trying to "Obey God" for the purpose of Salvation, not disobedience to God, as Jesus and the Bible actually teaches.. So the Catholic continued to "Reform" Moses/God by creating their own religion, just as the Pharisees had done. Only the Catholic kept some of the Pharisees Traditions, such as building a religious business, shrines of worship, images of God in the likeness of men, and creating their own high days, etc..
John Huss came along and became a "Reformer" of some of the man made traditions of the Catholic Church, but kept "many" of the same traditions, high days and their business model. John Calvin was influenced by Huss, and read scriptures through the prism of this influence. This "Reforming" continues to this day, but some of the made traditions, created by the Corrupt Levites, still stands. They have all continued in the business model, the practice of building man made shrines of worship, with preachers in the Chief seats of the house, and their rejection of Moses, who gave them God's instruction, that HE created our "Our Sake's no doubt".
It's a fascinating study, but one which is difficult to engage, for those who have adopted the views of one or more of these "Reformers".
7
7thMoon
Guest
No they don't exist Calvin. Repetitive punishment, hellfire, and purging all exist pre the Calvin. Sure there are English translations that use the mass construction or mass nounage 'everlasting punishment' which only imply endless punishments. The everlasting punishment is one that corrects or chastises someone into a permanent change. I believe in everlasting punishment not endless punishments.
S
Studyman
Guest
I would consider everlasting punishment" to mean the same as "Everlasting Death", that is , a death that stays. A death upon which there is no return. "Death everlasting". "Permanent destruction".
The teaching that God give mortals the Gift of immortality, and then tortures them forever, is not Biblical at all. Truly a doctrine of men.
7
7thMoon
Guest
But nonetheless all mortals are given the afterlife. Can you persuade anyone that they will be punished in the afterlife? But certainly that was the case for the rich man and many others who lead wicked lives.
Conditional immortality is the same as conditional annihilationism. Even the wicked of mankinds have to obey GOD eventually. Call me a conditional universalist. The wicked are not rewarded on earth while as if the righteous are in soul sleep.
S
Studyman
Guest
No, The rich man was resurrected, and saw his fate. There is no evidence that God granted him immortality.
I disagree based on the actual teaching of the Bible. But I know how powerful religious traditions are.
Jesus didn’t say to fear Him who is able to make you obey, He said to fear Him who was s able to destroy. Surely this means something.
7
7thMoon
Guest
There is no evidence that immortality exists. I do not believe in a immortal afterlife; just a less painful life with God.
To what do you disagree?
The soul based on the greek verb ψυχω to breathe in and out. Yes, don't fear Jesus, fear God who can destroy both breathe and frame in Gehenna.
YLT
'And be not afraid of those killing the body, and are not able to kill the soul, but fear rather Him who is able both soul and body to destroy in gehenna.
TR
καὶ μὴ φοβηθῆτε ἀπὸ τῶν ἀποκτεινόντων τὸ σῶμα τὴν δὲ ψυχὴν μὴ δυναμένων ἀποκτεῖναι· φοβηθήτε δὲ μᾶλλον τὸν δυνάμενον καὶ ψυχὴν καὶ σῶμα ἀπολέσαι ἐν γεέννῃ