To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 1774
1773  |  1775
Subject: 
Re: 22/7 & infinities (was: Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil?)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Tue, 24 Aug 1999 13:59:20 GMT
Viewed: 
1357 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jesse Long writes:
I prefer the security of knowing I was more than an accident, and that the
things I do have eternal significance.  I like my God, and if He wants to
define justice as giving you your entire life to accept Christ and then
basing all of eternity on that decision, then so be it.  He may not live up
to your standards of justice, but you haven't told us where you get your
standards of justice in the first place.  If you get them from this world,
then why are you surprised that they disagree with God's standards?

Trouble is it doesn't look to me like it really is 'God's standards' your
pushing. It looks to me more like a set of standards that *PEOPLE*
have come up with by following through one particular, and highly
questionable, interpretation of the Bible.

The
Bible paints a picture of man in rebellion against God, why shouldn't his
definitions be different?  Why are you surprised that God condemns as sin
things people today don't want to call sin (sex outside of marriage,
homosexuality, drunkenness, gluttony)?  As difficult as they are, I prefer
God's standards, because it means that there are standards that are
absolute, and that things like bestiality and pedophilia are absolutely
wrong, not just some evil today that are going to be perfectly acceptable
someday.  I'd rather be a sinner in a world of perfect standards and have a
chance to be forgiven than be perfect in my own self-defined universe that
doesn't even extend beyond my own mind.

OK. You haven't said it, but I from what you're saying it sounds like you
are basing your beliefs on having taken the Bible fairly literally as the
Word of God.

So how do you explain this?

Acts 1:18. (With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field.;
there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out.

Matthew 27:5. So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he
went away and hanged himself.

Presumably you're not going to claim that both of these are true? Yet they
are both very clearly written down.

Simon
http://www.SimonRobinson.com



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: 22/7 & infinities (was: Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil?)
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Simon Robinson writes: <snipped above> (...) <snip> (...) I can explain them as far as the context of "the reward he got for his wickedness" if we consider the verse after Acts 1:18, and the verses following Matthew 27:5, (...) (25 years ago, 24-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: 22/7 & infinities (was: Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil?)
 
Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote in message news:37C1467E.E8D0D6...ger.net... (...) How? All you do is sit around hacking away at other people's views without offering any workable alternatives (much like you do with your politics). How much (...) (25 years ago, 24-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

277 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR