Bible Study the resurrection

[Nathan]

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

This comment is evidence of somewhat of a misconception about the forgiveness of sin.
God has always forgiven sin.
Psa 32:1 A Psalm of David. A Contemplation.
Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, Whose sin is covered.
1Jo 1:8-9 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.I f we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

But forgiving our sin does not remove the consequence of sin which is death.
It is the resurrection that overcomes the death of the body and the release of the souls of the righteous from unjust captivity in Hades to be re-united with their resurrected bodies at His second coming.

The remission of our sins is through baptism.
Act 2:38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Because, in baptism, we are united to Christ in His death and raised again to new life in Christ.
Rom 6:4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

Baptism is a sacramental death and burial of the "old man of sin" and a resurrection into new life in Christ.

ABSOLUTELY!!!
You NAILED it!!!

Rom 8:38-39 For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

iakov the fool
(beaucoup dien cai dau)



DISCLAIMER: By reading the words posted above, you have made a free will choice to expose yourself to the rantings of iakov the fool. The poster assumes no responsibility for any temporary, permanent or otherwise annoying manifestations of cognitive dysfunction that, in any manner, may allegedly be related to the reader’s deliberate act by which he/she has knowingly allowed the above rantings to enter into his/her consciousness. No warrantee is expressed or implied. Individual mileage may vary. And, no, I don't want to hear about it. No sniveling! Enjoy the rest of your life here and the eternal one to come.

Sins were merely 'covered', not taken away, in the OT sacrifices. Christ put them away with His sacrifice. If that were not the case, then our sins would remain, even if we were raised from the dead. But because He died, taking our sins on Him, He did what we cannot do, by reconciling us to God.

Now, we will be raised, apart from sins - in complete perfection before God.

 

[Jim Parker]

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

i fully understand these scriptures i use all types translations . no body has discounted the Resurrection. but once again the cross was the ultimate sacrifice the atonement For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that "Christ died for our sins " according to the Scriptures; And that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures (I Corinthians 15:3, 4).
Hebrews 9:15-16 Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) 15 Therefore, He is the mediator so that those who are called might receive the promise of the eternal inheritance, { because a death has taken place for redemption from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. }16 Where a will exists, the " death " of the one who made it must be established. paul said
Galatians 6:14 “But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.”

Because of the influence of Augustine and the scholastics on western theology, the RC and Protestants emphasize the death of Christ as the required satisfaction of God's justice and tend to see the resurrection as almost an afterthought due to the juridical view of the atonement improperly inserted into western theology by Augustine et.al.

But scripture says the opposite. It is not Christ's death which is the "main event" but His resurrection.
If Christ dies from her sins of mankind but did not rise again from the grave then He would have accomplished nothing.

1Co 15:17 And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins!

Of course you do not disregard the resurrection. I haven't suggested that. My point was entirely about the misapplication of pagan Greek juridical meaning into the atonement.
Sin is NOT a crime against God, it's "missing the mark" and falling short of the glory of God.
Death is NOT God's punishment for sin; it is the "wages of sin."
Jesus was not born of the virgin and did not die on the cross to pay the fine for mankind's crimes against God.
He didn't do it because God was angry with mankind and demanded justice for His infinitely bruised infinite ego.
Jesus did it all because "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life" (Jn 3:16)
It was all about God's love for His creatures; not about God's (nonexistent) need to get justice for being offended.

iakov the fool
(beaucoup dien cai dau)



DISCLAIMER: By reading the words posted above, you have made a free will choice to expose yourself to the rantings of iakov the fool. The poster assumes no responsibility for any temporary, permanent or otherwise annoying manifestations of cognitive dysfunction that, in any manner, may allegedly be related to the reader’s deliberate act by which he/she has knowingly allowed the above rantings to enter into his/her consciousness. No warrantee is expressed or implied. Individual mileage may vary. And, no, I don't want to hear about it. No sniveling! Enjoy the rest of your life here and the eternal one to come.

 

[Jim Parker]

heading for a he said she said debate ... not a good idea..

We are comparing different views.
Please don't cut it off.
We both feel this is very important.

iakov the fool

 

[Jim Parker]

The death of Christ was necessary to make atonement for our sins. It was the main event, together with the ressurection.

1Co 15:17 And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins!

That would make the resurrection the "main event."
The death would have accomplished nothing without it.

iakov the fool

 

[ezra]

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Because of the influence of Augustine and the scholastics on western theology, the RC and Protestants emphasize the death of Christ as the required satisfaction of God's justice and tend to see the resurrection as almost an afterthought due to the juridical view of the atonement improperly inserted into western theology by Augustine et.al.

But scripture says the opposite. It is not Christ's death which is the "main event" but His resurrection.
If Christ dies from her sins of mankind but did not rise again from the grave then He would have accomplished nothing.

1Co 15:17 And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins!

Of course you do not disregard the resurrection. I haven't suggested that. My point was entirely about the misapplication of pagan Greek juridical meaning into the atonement.
Sin is NOT a crime against God, it's "missing the mark" and falling short of the glory of God.
Death is NOT God's punishment for sin; it is the "wages of sin."
Jesus was not born of the virgin and did not die on the cross to pay the fine for mankind's crimes against God.
He didn't do it because God was angry with mankind and demanded justice for His infinitely bruised infinite ego.
Jesus did it all because "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life" (Jn 3:16)
It was all about God's love for His creatures; not about God's (nonexistent) need to get justice for being offended.

iakov the fool
(beaucoup dien cai dau)



DISCLAIMER: By reading the words posted above, you have made a free will choice to expose yourself to the rantings of iakov the fool. The poster assumes no responsibility for any temporary, permanent or otherwise annoying manifestations of cognitive dysfunction that, in any manner, may allegedly be related to the reader’s deliberate act by which he/she has knowingly allowed the above rantings to enter into his/her consciousness. No warrantee is expressed or implied. Individual mileage may vary. And, no, I don't want to hear about it. No sniveling! Enjoy the rest of your life here and the eternal one to come.

i am through i have studied scripture minus Augustine and the scholastics on western theology, the RC and Protestants . it was not my intent to take this into some doctrine disagreement. i discussed in a civil manner with A J.W saturday . when they are told to leave or told how wrong they are. they feel they have done their job. i told him i was not asking him to leave and i disagreed with the j.w teachings . we shook hands and he went on his way.

 

[Nathan]

1Co 15:17 And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins!

That would make the resurrection the "main event."
The death would have accomplished nothing without it.

iakov the fool

Only because if Christ had not risen, then that would mean He wasn't the Son of God, and He wouldn't have been the perfect sacrifice.

There is more prophecy concerning His atonement for sins than His ressurection. The issue between God and man has always been sin, not the inability of man to be eternal.

This is why Adam and Eve were removed from the Garden. So they would not be able to live forever in sin(separation).

Christ died to remove that sin. If it were not about the removal of sin then there was no need to die. He did not have to die in order to be raised - He was already eternal.

The very fact He died is proof that the sins of man were placed on Him. Without those sins on Him, He could not have died. There is no death apart from sin.

 

[Jim Parker]

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Sins were merely 'covered', not taken away, in the OT sacrifices. Christ put them away with His sacrifice. If that were not the case, then our sins would remain, even if we were raised from the dead. But because He died, taking our sins on Him, He did what we cannot do, by reconciling us to God.
Now, we will be raised, apart from sins - in complete perfection before God.

Sins were forgiven in the OT. Lev 4:20, 36, 35; 5:10, 13; 19:22
The word "reconciled" means to be restored to communion with God.
Those who sinned in the OT but turned from their sins were reconciled to God; they were restored to communion with Him.
The Gentiles who had been God's enemies were reconciled to Him through the Gospel.
But they all still died and their bodies still corrupted (they decomposed back "to dust.") because the wages of sin is death.
By "putting on our sins" Christ offered Himself in our behalf but, because He had no sin, He could destroy death's power and secure the release of the prisoners of Hades.

God created man with a soul and a body to be in eternal communion with Him.
Satan enticed man to sin which brought death to the body even if the sinner repented.
Jesus' death and resurrection restored our bodies to perfection, released the righteous souls from Hades and gave eternal life to the righteous by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

My original point was that the western (RCC & Protestant) emphasis on the death as satisfaction of God's justice is an error (God acted in Love only without any need to have any imaginary divine justice satisfied) and tends to see the resurrection as, "icing on the cake." But the truth is that without the resurrection, His death would have accomplished nothing.
1Co 15:17 And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins!

iakov the fool
(beaucoup dien cai dau)

DISCLAIMER: By reading the words posted above, you have made a free will choice to expose yourself to the rantings of iakov the fool. The poster assumes no responsibility for any temporary, permanent or otherwise annoying manifestations of cognitive dysfunction that, in any manner, may allegedly be related to the reader’s deliberate act by which he/she has knowingly allowed the above rantings to enter into his/her consciousness. No warrantee is expressed or implied. Individual mileage may vary. And, no, I don't want to hear about it. No sniveling! Enjoy the rest of your life here and the eternal one to come.

 

[Jim Parker]

Only because if Christ had not risen, then that would mean He wasn't the Son of God, and He wouldn't have been the perfect sacrifice.

?????
Where do you get that????
That has nothing to do with the context of the verse.
I'm confused.

There is more prophecy concerning His atonement for sins than His ressurection.

Argument from silence??

The issue between God and man has always been sin, not the inability of man to be eternal.

Sin is the reason for man not being able to have eternal life as was God's original intention for man.
That's why God created man in His image and likeness and gave man access to the tree of life: So man could have eternal life.
Sin is not an offense against God, it is a turning off the path to moral perfection (perfect Godly love) and eternal life.
Satan tried to make it impossible to get back on that path.
Christ opened the way to all mankind; to "whosoever would believe."

But you have exactly made my point. The early Church did not see sin as a crime against God the was punishable by death as the western Church has and has framed the atonement entirely withing the juridical notion of the necessity to satisfy divine justice. The teaching of the early church had none of that. Their teaching explained that the death and resurrection of Christ restored man's ability to have eternal life in union with God as had been God's plan from eternity.

iakov the fool

 

[Nathan]

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Sins were forgiven in the OT. Lev 4:20, 36, 35; 5:10, 13; 19:22
The word "reconciled" means to be restored to communion with God.
Those who sinned in the OT but turned from their sins were reconciled to God; they were restored to communion with Him.
The Gentiles who had been God's enemies were reconciled to Him through the Gospel.
But they all still died and their bodies still corrupted (they decomposed back "to dust.") because the wages of sin is death.
By "putting on our sins" Christ offered Himself in our behalf but, because He had no sin, He could destroy death's power and secure the release of the prisoners of Hades.

God created man with a soul and a body to be in eternal communion with Him.
Satan enticed man to sin which brought death to the body even if the sinner repented.
Jesus' death and resurrection restored our bodies to perfection, released the righteous souls from Hades and gave eternal life to the righteous by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

My original point was that the western (RCC & Protestant) emphasis on the death as satisfaction of God's justice is an error (God acted in Love only without any need to have any imaginary divine justice satisfied) and tends to see the resurrection as, "icing on the cake." But the truth is that without the resurrection, His death would have accomplished nothing.
1Co 15:17 And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins!

iakov the fool
(beaucoup dien cai dau)

DISCLAIMER: By reading the words posted above, you have made a free will choice to expose yourself to the rantings of iakov the fool. The poster assumes no responsibility for any temporary, permanent or otherwise annoying manifestations of cognitive dysfunction that, in any manner, may allegedly be related to the reader’s deliberate act by which he/she has knowingly allowed the above rantings to enter into his/her consciousness. No warrantee is expressed or implied. Individual mileage may vary. And, no, I don't want to hear about it. No sniveling! Enjoy the rest of your life here and the eternal one to come.

I guess I've never dug into the Orthodox Churchs view of Christs death. I never knew that a belief like this existed.

OT sacrifices did not please God. They couldn't. Even though they were 'seemingly' perfect, they were still imperfect animals. Those animals were under the same curse that all creation is under.

The people offered sacrifice, in faith, because they were waiting for the perfect sacrifice promised. They were reconciled by faith. God only set the sacrificial system up to keep them in the faith, not to actually, eternally, atone for sin. It was to foretell of the perfect sacrifice coming.

Hebrews 10
1 For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near.
2 Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins?
3 But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year.
4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.
5 Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said, "Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you prepared for me;
6 in burnt offerings and sin offerings you have taken no pleasure.
7 Then I said, 'Behold, I have come to do your will, O God, as it is written of me in the scroll of the book.'"
8 When he said above, "You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings" (these are offered according to the law),
9 then he added, "Behold, I have come to do your will." He does away with the first in order to establish the second.
10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,
13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet.
14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.
15 And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us; for after saying,
16 "This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds,"
17 then he adds, "I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more."
18 Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin.

 

[Nathan]

?????
Where do you get that????
That has nothing to do with the context of the verse.
I'm confused.

Argument from silence??

Sin is the reason for man not being able to have eternal life as was God's original intention for man.
That's why God created man in His image and likeness and gave man access to the tree of life: So man could have eternal life.
Sin is not an offense against God, it is a turning off the path to moral perfection (perfect Godly love) and eternal life.
Satan tried to make it impossible to get back on that path.
Christ opened the way to all mankind; to "whosoever would believe."

But you have exactly made my point. The early Church did not see sin as a crime against God the was punishable by death as the western Church has and has framed the atonement entirely withing the juridical notion of the necessity to satisfy divine justice. The teaching of the early church had none of that. Their teaching explained that the death and resurrection of Christ restored man's ability to have eternal life in union with God as had been God's plan from eternity.

iakov the fool

I know you don't think God didn't know man would sin. God knew man would. If it was Gods only desire that man never sin then He would not have given man the option.

God wanted to give man a choice, knowing full well he would choose wrong. God confined man under sin, for the expressed reason of offering His Son - for our sin - in order to manifest His love. Without sin man could not understand the true love of God.

His love is manifest in the death of Christ. His eternal reconciliation is manifest in Christs ressurection.

 

[Jim Parker]

I guess I've never dug into the Orthodox Churchs view of Christs death.

These are not the views of the Orthodox Church; they are the views of the original Church for the first centuries before Augustine introduced Platonic philosophical teaching into Christianity. (Where it didn't belong.)

His influence on the western Church changed the entire view of the atonement by making it a legalistic process by which God was required to have justice served. The offense against God required either a reimbursement for lost honor or the punishment of the death of the offending sinner.
Since man could neither recompense God for His loss nor satisfy justice with his death, because he already owed a death, another man who had no sin had to satisfy justice's demand that the offender should die.

The reason for the sacrifice of Christ became, not God's love for mankind, but, the demands of justice that sufficient recompense be made for the sin/crime against God's honor.

God was, in effect, subordinate to justice and necessity. (That makes sense in Greek philosophy but not in Judaism or Christianity.)

It meant that God was the creator of death.

It meant that the guilt of Adam was laid on all of mankind.

It meant that by repenting and believing the Gospel, man could be saved from God who needed to kill man in order to satisfy the demands of justice for man having committing sin/crimes against Him.

It is the result of the insertion of Platonic ideas about God into the revelation of God in the scriptures which completely changed man's understanding of God and His dealings with man.
The west has never recovered from the influence of Greek philosophy.

Western Theological Seminaries and Bible Schools neglect the study of the writings of the early Church. To do so would overturn the cornerstones of western theology and cause a mass exodus to the Orthodox Churches which were not influenced by Augustine et.al. and have attempted 9with varying degrees of success) to retain the original teachings of the Early Church.

iakov the fool

 

[reba]

The birth, life, death, and resurrection are all one .. not one aspect can be separated from the others or we would not have the Saviour .

 

[Nathan]

These are not the views of the Orthodox Church; they are the views of the original Church for the first centuries before Augustine introduced Platonic philosophical teaching into Christianity. (Where it didn't belong.)

His influence on the western Church changed the entire view of the atonement by making it a legalistic process by which God was required to have justice served. The offense against God required either a reimbursement for lost honor or the punishment of the death of the offending sinner.
Since man could neither recompense God for His loss nor satisfy justice with his death, because he already owed a death, another man who had no sin had to satisfy justice's demand that the offender should die.

The reason for the sacrifice of Christ became, not God's love for mankind, but, the demands of justice that sufficient recompense be made for the sin/crime against God's honor.

God was, in effect, subordinate to justice and necessity. (That makes sense in Greek philosophy but not in Judaism or Christianity.)

It meant that God was the creator of death.

It meant that the guilt of Adam was laid on all of mankind.

It meant that by repenting and believing the Gospel, man could be saved from God who needed to kill man in order to satisfy the demands of justice for man having committing sin/crimes against Him.

It is the result of the insertion of Platonic ideas about God into the revelation of God in the scriptures which completely changed man's understanding of God and His dealings with man.
The west has never recovered from the influence of Greek philosophy.

Western Theological Seminaries and Bible Schools neglect the study of the writings of the early Church. To do so would overturn the cornerstones of western theology and cause a mass exodus to the Orthodox Churches which were not influenced by Augustine et.al. and have attempted 9with varying degrees of success) to retain the original teachings of the Early Church.

iakov the fool

Very interesting. Thank you for sharing.

 

[Jim Parker]

I know you don't think God didn't know man would sin.

Not at all! OF course God knew what would happen. That's what "omniscient" means.

If it was Gods only desire that man never sin then He would not have given man the option.

Then man would have been a puppet. If man does not have the freedom to sin then the concept of morality has no meaning. To be moral, man must have the ability to choose between sinning and not sinning.

God wanted to give man a choice, knowing full well he would choose wrong. God confined man under sin, for the expressed reason of offering His Son - for our sin - in order to manifest His love. Without sin man could not understand the true love of God.

God had no need to demonstrate His love.
He didn't have to create a catastrophe in order to save the victims from the catastrophe He created just to show them how much He loved them.
God created man to be in eternal union with Him.
To be in union with God, man had to be morally perfect.
To be morally perfect requires that man have the freedom to choose between good and evil.
Satan unjustly enticed man to make that choice before man had the maturity to do so.
Thereby, Satan introduced death to all mankind through the sin of Adam.
God did not have to save mankind.
Out of love, God chose to save mankind by destroying the power of death. That's what Jesus did.
Rather than understanding the true love of God, believers are told to live it.

His love is manifest in the death of Christ. His eternal reconciliation is manifest in Christs ressurection.

The death is meaningless without the resurrection.
The death and resurrection are BOTH the redemptive act of God's love for mankind.
The death and resurrection are both required for man's reconciliation to God.

Your insistence on separating the two are an artifact of the influence of Augustine, the scholastics, et.al.

iakov the fool

 

[Jim Parker]

The birth, life, death, and resurrection are all one .. not one aspect can be separated from the others or we would not have the Saviour .

That's a fact!

iakov the fool

 

[Jim Parker]

Very interesting. Thank you for sharing.

My pleasure.

By the way, Anselm's CUr Deus Homo is available in a readable translation from his Latin at:
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Cur_Deus_Homo

It is in the form of an apology between Anselm and another person.
It is very illuminating if you can plow through it all.
Check the titles of the chapters to pick interesting points.

iakov the fool

 

[reba]

Thanks guys for keeping the exchange pleasant ..

 

[Nathan]

Not at all! OF course God knew what would happen. That's what "omniscient" means.

Then man would have been a puppet. If man does not have the freedom to sin then the concept of morality has no meaning. To be moral, man must have the ability to choose between sinning and not sinning.

God had no need to demonstrate His love.
He didn't have to create a catastrophe in order to save the victims from the catastrophe He created just to show them how much He loved them.
God created man to be in eternal union with Him.
To be in union with God, man had to be morally perfect.
To be morally perfect requires that man have the freedom to choose between good and evil.
Satan unjustly enticed man to make that choice before man had the maturity to do so.
Thereby, Satan introduced death to all mankind through the sin of Adam.
God did not have to save mankind.
Out of love, God chose to save mankind by destroying the power of death. That's what Jesus did.
Rather than understanding the true love of God, believers are told to live it.

The death is meaningless without the resurrection.
The death and resurrection are BOTH the redemptive act of God's love for mankind.
The death and resurrection are both required for man's reconciliation to God.

Your insistence on separating the two are an artifact of the influence of Augustine, the scholastics, et.al.

iakov the fool

No, I assure you I'm not under the influence.

God could have withheld satan from the garden. He didn't. God used satan, because of who satan was.

We would not know light, if there was no darkness. We would not know truth, if there was not anything false.

We would not know love, if there was not hate. God allowed sin to enter to show love. Not a general love, but a Godly love. Without sin, we would not know love.

Satan enticed man because God allowed it. There is no way to get around that point. God designed it that way.

1 John 4:9 (ESV) 9 In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent his only Son into the world, so that we might live through him.

1 John 4:10 (ESV) 10 In this is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

John is clear that it is in Christs death the love of God is manifested to us. Yes, His ressurection was also a part, but it was His death specifically where love is manifested.

The ressurection is the assurance of this manifested love, and the eternal nature of it.

 

[Nathan]

Thanks guys for keeping the exchange pleasant ..

Well, I don't like the So I figure I better be good.

It's getting late here. Good discussion. Maybe we can continue tomorrow.

 

[Jim Parker]

God could have withheld satan from the garden. He didn't. God used satan, because of who satan was.

That is the Augustinian and Scholastic view that Satan is an agent of God and, therefore, God is the author of evil and God tempts man to do evil.

We would not know light, if there was no darkness. We would not know truth, if there was not anything false.

True. But you don't set those kind of choices before children as Adam and Eve were in their experience, for, up to the point of Satan's deception, they knew only God and weren't aware that evil even existed, let alone what it might be. (They didn't know they were naked until after they sinned.)

God allowed sin to enter to show love.

So do you let your 4 year old play in the street so you can show him compassion when he gets hit by a bus?
You comment makes God responsible for sin. (Augie and the gang again)
God gave man freedom so that, once he was ready, he could choose between good and evil.
Now, we have apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers who are supposed to train us up to the point of the maturity of the fullness of Christ so we can make the right choices. (Mostly, they just preach about tithing....)

Satan enticed man because God allowed it. There is no way to get around that point. God designed it that way.

The you agree that some folk are predestined to hell and others to eternal life because God allows it and designed it that way.
More Augie and the gang.

Sorry, my friend, but you are definitely "under the influence" of Augustine and the Scholastics.

A book: The Ancestral Sin, John S. Romanides, Zephyr Publishing. (You'll need a quiet place and plan to read it at least twice. 175 pages)

iakov the fool