A WRATHFUL GOD & THE ATONEMENT

[journeyman]

I don’t hold a position on that matter but what does “God forsook his own Word” mean? If you or I “forsake” his word, it clearly means we stop doing it, not that somewhere we purposely left our Bible behind.

"We stop doing it" is a good way to rephrase it. Abandoning his Word made flesh, or his spoken word transcribed. Living apart from God.

Well, it’s a stretch to call that temptation “a theology.” It was an appeal to pride.

Eve would acquire knowledge of God aparently without study so not an "ology", but temptation to know what God knows only with a twist. That's not a stretch.

I have no idea what that looks like, this idea of God forsaking his Word.

Maybe it'sdifficult to see because it would never happen. The only way the word of God is forsaken is by sinners.

Since Jews don’t teach Paul’s writings at all, that’s a pretty safe argument.

Jews do teach Pauls' writings because all of the authors of scripture are Jewish and they all agree with him.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

"We stop doing it" is a good way to rephrase it. Abandoning his Word made flesh, or his spoken word transcribed. Living apart from God.

Well, that describes us. But What would the state of “God abandoning his Word” look like? God abandoning His Word is not abandoning Jesus. Jesus is the Logos is a metaphor. The Word is the Bible, the book. Jesus isn’t a book.

Eve would acquire knowledge of God aparently without study so not an "ology", but temptation to know what God knows only with a twist. That's not a stretch.

The Devil wasn’t offering knowledge of God. Where do you see he was?

Maybe it'sdifficult to see because it would never happen. The only way the word of God is forsaken is by sinners.

I think the whole phrase makes no sense at all. Doesn’t mean God didn’t briefly forsake Jesus.

Jews do teach Pauls' writings because all of the authors of scripture are Jewish and they all agree with him.

Can you show where the authors of scripture quoted Paul teaching his writings please?

 

[journeyman]

Well, that describes us. But What would the state of “God abandoning his Word” look like? God abandoning His Word is not abandoning Jesus. Jesus is the Logos is a metaphor. The Word is the Bible, the book. Jesus isn’t a book.

The word (logos) came to the prophets (1Cor.14:36.) What Christ said is steadfast.

The Devil wasn’t offering knowledge of God. Where do you see he was?

ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. Gen.3:5

Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: Gen.3:22

I think the whole phrase makes no sense at all. Doesn’t mean God didn’t briefly forsake Jesus.

It is a different way to think about it, but the end result is the same which is a transgression of his word.

Can you show where the authors of scripture quoted Paul teaching his writings please?

I said they all agreed. Paul and the other NT writers quoted the prophets and of course Jesus.

 

[jasonc]

Why do babies die within hours of birth ... what sin did they have time to do?

Sids,sudden infant death syndrome .

Saw a baby dead from that .it was then I realized I couldn't be an EMT

 

[Dorothy Mae]

The word (logos) came to the prophets (1Cor.14:36.) What Christ said is steadfast.

Your mean words came to the prophets? Jesus didn’t personally visit them all.

ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. Gen.3:5

Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: Gen.3:22

It is a different way to think about it, but the end result is the same which is a transgression of his word.

No, knowing good and evil is definitely NOT knowing God. All people know good and evil but that doesn’t mean they all know God by any stretch of the imagination.

I said they all agreed. Paul and the other NT writers quoted the prophets and of course Jesus.

You said Jews teach Paul. I says they don’t because the they don’t believe the Gospel. You retreated to the 12 disciples which isn’t the same, of course. So I asked you where they quote him. You cannot teach someone else’s position without quoting them. Since you cannot do that, you’ve retreated to “well, they agree with him” which you can’t prove either and is a far cry from TEACHING Paul. Ao we’re back to my position of Jews don’t teach Paul.

 

[atpollard]

Sids,sudden infant death syndrome .

Saw a baby dead from that .it was then I realized I couldn't be an EMT

Dorothy Mae was advocating "no Adamic guilt" but, rather, that "all men die because all men sin".
So my question was directed as a rhetorical counterpoint of "What sin did the baby commit if it did not die because of any imputed sin that made it condemned to death (just because it was born a human being)?"

If babies are born SINLESS, then they should be immune from DEATH (the wages of sin) until they have personally sinned and earned the "wage". The fact that babies DO DIE indicates that they are subject to the "wage of sin" and must, therefore, be "sinners from conception" (to paraphrase King David).

To your point about S.I.D.S. ... I agree. There is ample evidence to even an unbeliever that we are born into a hopelessly broken and unfair world. To believe the world is under a curse requires no imagination ... one need only open their eyes and look around you. To believe that God loves us and will make everything better, requires a gift of supernatural faith.

 

[journeyman]

Your mean words came to the prophets? Jesus didn’t personally visit them all.

That's right, but not just any word. The word of God.

No, knowing good and evil is definitely NOT knowing God.

Things about God. Things God knew that Eve didn't know.

All people know good and evil but that doesn’t mean they all know God by any stretch of the imagination.

So all people know what God thinks is good or evil.

You said Jews teach Paul. I says they don’t because the they don’t believe the Gospel.

Not unbelieveing Jews, but these Jews,

he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures, Rom.1:2

Paul quoted them often.

You retreated to the 12 disciples which isn’t the same, of course. So I asked you where they quote him. You cannot teach someone else’s position without quoting them. Since you cannot do that, you’ve retreated to “well, they agree with him” which you can’t prove either and is a far cry from TEACHING Paul. Ao we’re back to my position of Jews don’t teach Paul.

You're making the same mistake Judaism makes. The OT says when the Messiah comes, he and his ministers will teach the world (the gentile nations) about God. Unbelieving Jews are still waiting for this to happen even though it has been going on for 2000+ years.

Our Savior, the prophets and disciples are all Jews. I shouldn't have to cite the many instances where they quote the OT.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Things about God. Things God knew that Eve didn't know.

The Devil did not offer to know things about God. God still knows things we don’t. That’s not anything worth reading.

So all people know what God thinks is good or evil.

Oh, He has considerably more thoughts than that. People, even believers, generally have no idea what God thinks.

Not unbelieveing Jews, but these Jews,

I actually said Jews DON’T (present tense) teach Paul, not didn’t 2000 years ago.

he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures, Rom.1:2

Paul quoted them often.

Ah, but they didn’t quote Paul. He quoted them. That’s not the same thing.

You're making the same mistake Judaism makes.

Where?

The OT says when the Messiah comes, he and his ministers will teach the world (the gentile nations) about God. Unbelieving Jews are still waiting for this to happen even though it has been going on for 2000+ years.

You think I think that??????

Our Savior, the prophets and disciples are all Jews. I shouldn't have to cite the many instances where they quote the OT.

You said they teach Paul. Still waiting for an example of the prophets or disciples quoting Paul.

 

[journeyman]

The Devil did not offer to know things about God.

He did about our Fathers' knowledge of good and evil. I did say he twisted it. He twisted the gospel too.

God still knows things we don’t.

That's not the point. Apparently even angels don't know all there is to know about their Creator. It doesn't matter, because our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ told us all we need to know about our heavenly Father. So, seeing the forebearance born out of love displayed by the Messiah, we recognize the gospel he preached.

That’s not anything worth reading.

I think how mankind acquired the sense of good/evil is noteworthy, especially since today children in school are basically being told that God doesn't exist. That subject doesn't belong in this thread.

Oh, He has considerably more thoughts than that. People, even believers, generally have no idea what God thinks.

I hope the believers think both Father and Son endured such sickening sin against themselves, it's stunning how they turned their wrath away from their enemies.

I actually said Jews DON’T (present tense) teach Paul, not didn’t 2000 years ago.

Ah, but they didn’t quote Paul. He quoted them. That’s not the same thing.

Where?

You think I think that??????

You said they teach Paul. Still waiting for an example of the prophets or disciples quoting Paul.

I wish you would go back to my quote without editing it stopping just before "because." It makes it sound like, "The prophets would have had to live after Paul to have quoted him." But that's not what I said, or what my point was.

My point is the "Jews of Judaism" don't recognize Pauls' interpretation of the prophets. Jews who believe in Jesus do.
And in a real sense those prophets are still speaking to us by their faith in Christ.

You're seem to be concerned about "who came first", instead of "do they agree."

And yes, it sounded like you were saying, "The Jews don't agree with Paul." I guess I should have qualified my statement by specifying "believing Jews", so our conversation didn't deteriorate into a circus. Too late.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

He did about our Fathers' knowledge of good and evil. I did say he twisted it. He twisted the gospel too.

He said “know good and evil” and “become LIKE God” which is not knowing God at all. If I learn about history like the history professor, doesn’t mean I know the professor.

That's not the point. Apparently even angels don't know all there is to know about their Creator.

Why do you say that?

It doesn't matter, because our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ told us all we need to know about our heavenly Father. So, seeing the forebearance born out of love displayed by the Messiah, we recognize the gospel he preached.

Here, I respectfully beg to differ. Jesus didn’t say the above is “all you need to know” regarding God. He said knowing God IS eternal life. Those who wrote the Bible knew God to varying degrees and not just what He did for them. They understood Him. They knew what He did and why. He wasn’t a mystery to them like He is to so many.

I think how mankind acquired the sense of good/evil is noteworthy, especially since today children in school are basically being told that God doesn't exist. That subject doesn't belong in this thread.

I agree.

I hope the believers think both Father and Son endured such sickening sin against themselves, it's stunning how they turned their wrath away from their enemies.

Revelation, Jonah, the Despersion shows the wrath of God falls on the guilty at Judgement but it isn’t for sin done against them personally. They care about others too.

I wish you would go back to my quote without editing it stopping just before "because." It makes it sound like, "The prophets would have had to live after Paul to have quoted him." But that's not what I said, or what my point was.

You said the disciples taught Paul. I asked where. No evidence of this is there.

My point is the "Jews of Judaism" don't recognize Pauls' interpretation of the prophets. Jews who believe in Jesus do.

Ok, I agree. But that wasn’t your statement.

And in a real sense those prophets are still speaking to us by their faith in Christ.

Yes

You're seem to be concerned about "who came first", instead of "do they agree."

Well, people agreeing doesn’t mean people taught. They agreed with Christ, not Paul, as the reference.

And yes, it sounded like you were saying, "The Jews don't agree with Paul." I guess I should have qualified my statement by specifying "believing Jews", so our conversation didn't deteriorate into a circus. Too late.

That’s true but they then call themselves by a different name.

That they refuse to call themselves by the name of Jesus must have an impact, but that’s another subject.

 

[journeyman]

They agreed with Christ, not Paul, as the reference.

I've been advocating for this all along.He never changes. It's our perception of him that changes. Since our Lord came, we can see how his atonement is bringing sinners to himself, the real God of the Bible.