I tried.

[pneuma]

Sorry I just can't believe UR to be true although I wish with all my heart it was

Well shadow your heart is in the right spot, and that's what counts with God.

[Paul Hazelwood]

God has devised a system that totally places the blame on Satan and mankind without it reflecting back to him, after all no one created themselves

Shadow, I went through a lot of the same turmoils, and what I found out is that God really does take responsibility and has devised the system to hold us accountable for what we do, its just that the judgment that is normally attributed to eternity in hell is not forever.

It is actually that system that is true hope.

That is true before we even study what hell "is".

So it is Man that has devised the doctrine that has you in knots.


What I do know is that God will bring you to his truth, even if your struggling now.  God will bring those you are concerned with to the same.  God is love and love never fails and Fred phelps being bold does not cause him to be correct.

[WhiteWings]

Personally I find the flood one of the best arguments agains UR.... :sigh:

[pneuma]

Personally I find the flood one of the best arguments agains UR.... :sigh:

Yup, until you read in Peter how Jesus preached the gospel to all the disobedient ones in the days of Noah, which would be just about everybody.

[valueallhumanlife2008]

Father in Heaven,
We ask thee to please bless Nightflight.  Open his heart and mind to the truth of Your words.  Let him know that he is blessed and Loved. We pray for understanding to come unto him.  Bless him Lord.  Show him your Love, and guide him into all truth and righteousness.  Help him to grow in you Lord.  In your name we pray,
Amen

[Tony N]

Personally I find the flood one of the best arguments agains UR.... :sigh:

I am kind of curious why you believe that.

I find it neither for nor against UR.

But if we sneek a peek into the future we see that God is going to raise everyone who ever lived (including those who died in the flood) through the miracle of life.

In taking this peek into the future, do we see even one of these people being mad at God? No, not even one is mad that God shortened their life by the flood.

If we look at Philippians 2:8-11 we see all these people bowing in the name of Jesus, Jesus meaning Saviour. We also see them happily acclaiming that "Jesus Christ is Lord."

Phi 2:8-11  and, being found in fashion as a human, He humbles Himself, becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."  (9)  Wherefore, also, God highly exalts Him, and graces Him with the name that is above every name,  (10)  that in the name of Jesus every knee should be bowing, celestial and terrestrial and subterranean,  (11)  and every tongue should be acclaiming that Jesus Christ is Lord, for the glory of God, the Father."

Now I ask you, is not the future bright for those who died in the flood?

And if they are not upset at God in the future day, why should we judge God and say that what He did was horrible?

Tony

[WhiteWings]

Personally I find the flood one of the best arguments agains UR.... :sigh:

I am kind of curious why you believe that.

Because God drowned sinless babies and animals He does looks sadistic... :sigh:

[Tony N]

Personally I find the flood one of the best arguments agains UR.... :sigh:

I am kind of curious why you believe that.

Because God drowned sinless babies and animals He does looks sadistic... :sigh:

Well that certainly is fair. And I'm sure you are not alone in your judging of God for what He has done with what is His.

But don't you think God is going to more than make up for it by giving them not just life but immortality and incorruption? Don't you think God more than made up for it in giving His own perfect Son to save them all?

They were all going to die anyway had the flood not come.

There was so much horrid evil in the earth prior to the flood that God had to start with a fresh gene pool.

Sure, He could have waved a magic wand (if He had one) and said: "Everyone will now act righteous and walk perfectly in love!" with those pre-flood people. But what would that teach them? They would know nothing of what it is like to be saved out of sin and death by the perfect Saviour, Jesus Christ.

I pray, dear friend, that you are able to see the bigger picture that God is aiming for with all mankind.

None of those babies or animals are going to accuse God of wrongdoing in the future. So, why should you?

Tony

[WhiteWings]

Personally I find the flood one of the best arguments agains UR.... :sigh:

I am kind of curious why you believe that.

Because God drowned sinless babies and animals He does looks sadistic... :sigh:

Well that certainly is fair. And I'm sure you are not alone in your judging of God for what He has done with what is His.

Am I judging....yeah guess I'm. But I'm also simply puzzled by such things.

But don't you think God is going to more than make up for it by giving them not just life but immortality and incorruption? Don't you think God more than made up for it in giving His own perfect Son to save them all?

Frankly speaking no. It even sounds like the "God has a BBQ so he can even better show His love to others."
Even I could have found another solution. But God made a completly different choice.

They were all going to die anyway had the flood not come.

You know what; I drop by this weekend and will drown your wife in the pool. Means nothing really. She was going to die anyway. I let you watch and to show how a good guy I am I even pay $100

There was so much horrid evil in the earth prior to the flood that God had to start with a fresh gene pool.

Sure, He could have waved a magic wand (if He had one) and said: "Everyone will now act righteous and walk perfectly in love!" with those pre-flood people. But what would that teach them? They would know nothing of what it is like to be saved out of sin and death by the perfect Saviour, Jesus Christ.

He could have selectively killed those people. With the plague for example.

I pray, dear friend, that you are able to see the bigger picture that God is aiming for with all mankind.

I certainly don't see the bigger picture. I fear it will take a long time before I will see torture as something good.
Just like I can feel good that Jesus was nailed to the cross. Saying how great that was etc is kinda selfish isn't it?

None of those babies or animals are going to accuse God of wrongdoing in the future. So, why should you?

Perhaps because it clashed with the 10 commandments etc. Forgive, love etc.
I'm just not ready, if ever, for that. Or perhaps I'm ready because I don't only look at thinks for my own benefit?

Tony

Tony
PS do you already mail to teh Netherlands  :laughing7:

[Paul Hazelwood]

The story of the flood shows the reality of the system that is in place that believers and non believers have to contend with concerning accountability. That is we reap what we sow.   You may hate Gravity too. :happy3:

I do not soft sell the story of the the flood, if people think that our sowing cannot be reaped by the innocent (whoever or whatever that actually is) just because they think it shouldn't, are mistaken.

But that is not all it is telling us.

Another issue is  whether the flood was global or from a perspective of a region.   The reason I say that is people bring up this Gene Pool stuff, LOOK AROUND!!!!  Does the Gene Pool look any better NOW?    :sigh:


It is also using this literal event to give us a spiritual story and I think it is concerning the called and chosen.  the called is everyone, and some will reap a destructive path to be reconciled.  Some may be on a boat to avoid it.

[Tony N]

Tony:

But don't you think God is going to more than make up for it by giving them not just life but immortality and incorruption? Don't you think God more than made up for it in giving His own perfect Son to save them all?

WW: Frankly speaking no. It even sounds like the "God has a BBQ so he can even better show His love to others."
Even I could have found another solution. But God made a completly different choice.

Tony's reply: I don't know what you mean by BBQ. Do you mean God is going to torture people in literal fire? If that's the case then you are incorrect.

Tony:

They were all going to die anyway had the flood not come.

WW: You know what; I drop by this weekend and will drown your wife in the pool. Means nothing really. She was going to die anyway. I let you watch and to show how a good guy I am I even pay $100

Tony's reply: That $100 dollars would not offset your taking the life of my make-believe wife. However, if you were able to not only give me my wife back but also give her immortality and incorruption, I'd say your deed was more than offset by what she received in return.

Tony wrote:
There was so much horrid evil in the earth prior to the flood that God had to start with a fresh gene pool.

Sure, He could have waved a magic wand (if He had one) and said: "Everyone will now act righteous and walk perfectly in love!" with those pre-flood people. But what would that teach them? They would know nothing of what it is like to be saved out of sin and death by the perfect Saviour, Jesus Christ.

WW replied: He could have selectively killed those people. With the plague for example.

Tony wrote: It is not based upon what you think He could have done otherwise. This is His creation and we the work of His hands. He can and does do with it as He sees fit according to the dictates of love. Did they even suffer? I've heard drowning is very peaceful.

Tony wrote: I pray, dear friend, that you are able to see the bigger picture that God is aiming for with all mankind.

WW replied: I certainly don't see the bigger picture. I fear it will take a long time before I will see torture as something good.
Just like I can feel good that Jesus was nailed to the cross. Saying how great that was etc is kinda selfish isn't it?[/quote]

Tony's reply:
If you were in a concentration camp and a bunch of G.I.'s liberated you after many of them sacrificed their lives would you say: "Sorry chaps, I can't thank you because that would be too selfish. Now run along!" don't you think that would be odd?

Tony wrote: None of those babies or animals are going to accuse God of wrongdoing in the future. So, why should you?

WW replied: Perhaps because it clashed with the 10 commandments etc. Forgive, love etc.
I'm just not ready, if ever, for that. Or perhaps I'm ready because I don't only look at thinks for my own benefit?

Tony's reply: So you are saying that all those people are bowing in the name of Jesus and acclaiming Jesus is Lord because they, by law, must love and must forgive? That sounds like you are making God and Christ failures. That after all they did for us the only way we can thank them is if they make us by some law.

Tony

Tony
PS do you already mail to teh Netherlands  :laughing7:
[/quote]
We have two people in the Netherlands who get SAF.

[WhiteWings]

Tony:

But don't you think God is going to more than make up for it by giving them not just life but immortality and incorruption? Don't you think God more than made up for it in giving His own perfect Son to save them all?

WW: Frankly speaking no. It even sounds like the "God has a BBQ so he can even better show His love to others."
Even I could have found another solution. But God made a completly different choice.

Tony's reply: I don't know what you mean by BBQ. Do you mean God is going to torture people in literal fire? If that's the case then you are incorrect.

Yep I mean litteral fire. But that was not my point. My point was that ET followers argue the fire (BBQ) is ok because that way God can show His love to those in Heaven. That's similar to your "...more than make it up..."

Tony:

They were all going to die anyway had the flood not come.

WW: You know what; I drop by this weekend and will drown your wife in the pool. Means nothing really. She was going to die anyway. I let you watch and to show how a good guy I am I even pay $100

Tony's reply: That $100 dollars would not offset your taking the life of my make-believe wife. However, if you were able to not only give me my wife back but also give her immortality and incorruption, I'd say your deed was more than offset by what she received in return.

:eeew: :eek:

Tony wrote: I pray, dear friend, that you are able to see the bigger picture that God is aiming for with all mankind.

WW replied: I certainly don't see the bigger picture. I fear it will take a long time before I will see torture as something good.
Just like I can't feel good that Jesus was nailed to the cross. Saying how great that was etc is kinda selfish isn't it?

Tony's reply:
If you were in a concentration camp and a bunch of G.I.'s liberated you after many of them sacrificed their lives would you say: "Sorry chaps, I can't thank you because that would be too selfish. Now run along!" don't you think that would be odd?[/quote]
Would be odd yes. But a totally different situation.
I would feel sad that the GIs died. But in case of Jesus I should be happy he died?
Both where there to save my life.

Tony wrote: None of those babies or animals are going to accuse God of wrongdoing in the future. So, why should you?

WW replied: Perhaps because it clashed with the 10 commandments etc. Forgive, love etc.
I'm just not ready, if ever, for that. Or perhaps I'm ready because I don't only look at thinks for my own benefit?

Tony's reply: So you are saying that all those people are bowing in the name of Jesus and acclaiming Jesus is Lord because they, by law, must love and must forgive? That sounds like you are making God and Christ failures. That after all they did for us the only way we can thank them is if they make us by some law.

Nowhere in this thread, or forum, I claimed Father and/or Sone where/are failures.
Are you claiming its great to break every command in the Bible because Father and Son succeeded?

[rosered]

Personally I find the flood one of the best arguments agains UR.... :sigh:

I am kind of curious why you believe that.

Because God drowned sinless babies and animals He does looks sadistic... :sigh:

well this is off topic   :sigh:
but I believe the flood is the Dragons flood in Rev and the earth[our flesh] swallowed it up [ where else could all that death come from ?]
the reasoning is this , I believe the  Revelation  is a [  conclusion or summary ] of all the Books  in One reference    book
  just as   book one of Genesis  is  complete by itself  and  than we go on into  chapter  2  :2c:

[Tony N]

Tony:

But don't you think God is going to more than make up for it by giving them not just life but immortality and incorruption? Don't you think God more than made up for it in giving His own perfect Son to save them all?

WW: Frankly speaking no. It even sounds like the "God has a BBQ so he can even better show His love to others."
Even I could have found another solution. But God made a completly different choice.

Tony's reply: I don't know what you mean by BBQ. Do you mean God is going to torture people in literal fire? If that's the case then you are incorrect.

Yep I mean litteral fire. But that was not my point. My point was that ET followers argue the fire (BBQ) is ok because that way God can show His love to those in Heaven. That's similar to your "...more than make it up..."

Maybe we are having a difficult time communicating our thoughts.
Let's think this through. God destroyed all the humans in the flood in Noah's day sans Noah and family. They were going to die anyway. God gave His only begotten Son and through that is bringing them all back to life through the miracle of the resurrection and will give them immortality and incorruption yet you say that does not more than make up for having them die earlier than they would have because some people improperly believe He will BBQ some of them? To me that does not logically follow. Maybe you just are not communicating to me clearly enough for me to grasp your point.

Tony:

They were all going to die anyway had the flood not come.

WW: You know what; I drop by this weekend and will drown your wife in the pool. Means nothing really. She was going to die anyway. I let you watch and to show how a good guy I am I even pay $100

Tony's reply: That $100 dollars would not offset your taking the life of my make-believe wife. However, if you were able to not only give me my wife back but also give her immortality and incorruption, I'd say your deed was more than offset by what she received in return.

:eeew: :eek:
[/quote][/quote]

Tony's reply: You realize your analogy failed miserable, right?

Tony wrote: I pray, dear friend, that you are able to see the bigger picture that God is aiming for with all mankind.

WW replied: I certainly don't see the bigger picture. I fear it will take a long time before I will see torture as something good.
Just like I can't feel good that Jesus was nailed to the cross. Saying how great that was etc is kinda selfish isn't it?

Tony's reply:
If you were in a concentration camp and a bunch of G.I.'s liberated you after many of them sacrificed their lives would you say: "Sorry chaps, I can't thank you because that would be too selfish. Now run along!" don't you think that would be odd?

Would be odd yes. But a totally different situation.
I would feel sad that the GIs died. But in case of Jesus I should be happy he died?
Both where there to save my life.[/quote][/quote]

Tony's reply: The GI's saved your life by their suffering and Christ saved you by giving your immortality and incorruption by His suffering. I fail to see the difference. Yes, you should be happy that not only did Jesus die FOR YOU but was resurrected FOR YOU too and in that He overcame death so will you. And you are not thankful for that? What a chump you are! :dontknow:
I'd hate to give you any toys or money for your birthday or Christmas. I can just hear you say as a child: "Am I supposed to be thankful for this?"

Tony wrote: None of those babies or animals are going to accuse God of wrongdoing in the future. So, why should you?

WW replied: Perhaps because it clashed with the 10 commandments etc. Forgive, love etc.
I'm just not ready, if ever, for that. Or perhaps I'm ready because I don't only look at thinks for my own benefit?

Tony's reply: So you are saying that all those people are bowing in the name of Jesus and acclaiming Jesus is Lord because they, by law, must love and must forgive? That sounds like you are making God and Christ failures. That after all they did for us the only way we can thank them is if they make us by some law.

Nowhere in this thread, or forum, I claimed Father and/or Sone where/are failures.
Are you claiming its great to break every command in the Bible because Father and Son succeeded?[/quote][/quote]

Tony's reply:
Again, this comes down to communication. I was merely asking you what you meant. I was not saying you claimed the Father or Son were failures. But I was saying that if they force people to have a fake happiness then they failed in their objective.
So by "the law" you mean that God was supposed to forgive those pre-flood people and that for Him to show His love He was supposed to just let them go on in their extreme vileness of that age? You call that love?

God showed His love by ending the whole degradation knowing full well that His Son was going to bring them back to life. How is that not love? How is that not forgiveness? Where in the law does it say to just forgive someone for breaking the law and just let them go their merry way to murder, steal etc?

[Tony N]

Personally I find the flood one of the best arguments agains UR.... :sigh:

I am kind of curious why you believe that.

Because God drowned sinless babies and animals He does looks sadistic... :sigh:

well this is off topic   :sigh:
but I believe the flood is the Dragons flood in Rev and the earth[our flesh] swallowed it up [ where else could all that death come from ?]
the reasoning is this , I believe the  Revelation  is a [  conclusion or summary ] of all the Books  in One reference    book
  just as   book one of Genesis  is  complete by itself  and  than we go on into  chapter  2  :2c:

dear rosered,
Thanks for your two cents.
However....Revelation cannot a summary of Paul's writings because Paul completes the Word of God
Col 1:25 of which I became a dispenser, in accord with the administration of God, which is granted to me for you, to complete the word of God -"

Also, what Paul wrote about, the secrets, no one knew about in either the Old or New Testaments, John included.

As a matter of fact, Paul goes way beyond John's revelation in scope.

Jesus and the other N.T. writers took the flood of Noah's day as a literal event, not an analogy of something else. Of course, there may be shadows or types of Christ in the true account that does not mean it never happened.

[WhiteWings]

the reasoning is this , I believe the  Revelation  is a [  conclusion or summary ] of all the Books  in One reference    book just as   book one of Genesis  is  complete by itself  and  than we go on into  chapter  2  :2c:

I think Revelation is not a conclusion but merly a very important step.

"In the book of Revelation we do not have the final plan of God. Paul, in 1Co_15:22-28 takes us much further into the future than does the book of Revelation. To illustrate this more clearly, study the following: 1Co_15:22-28 as compared with the new heaven and new earth of Revelation 20-22:  

In 1Co_15:22-28, we have:
 
No more rule
No more authority
No more power
No more enemies
No more reigning
All subjected
No more death, death destroyed
All made alive, immortal  

In Revelation 20-22, we have:  

Still rule (Rev_20:6; Rev_22:5)
Son still reigns (Rev_22:1-5; Rev_21:5)
Authority (Rev_21:24-25)
Power (Rev_21:24-25; Rev_22:2)
Kings (Rev_21:24-26)
Saints reign (Rev_22:5)
Second death still exists (Rev_21:8)
The nations still mortal (Rev_22:2)"  

[WhiteWings]

Let's think this through. God destroyed all the humans in the flood in Noah's day sans Noah and family.

Agreed.

They were going to die anyway.

Agreed. But many old old age. Not of drowning.

God gave His only begotten Son and through that is bringing them all back to life through the miracle of the resurrection and will give them immortality and incorruption

Agreed.

yet you say that does not more than make up for having them die earlier than they would have because some people improperly believe He will BBQ some of them? To me that does not logically follow. Maybe you just are not communicating to me clearly enough for me to grasp your point.
I'll try again.

I do not believe in the ET BBQ
ET follows do believe in classic hell.
When asked if that doesn't clash with all the God=Love verses they answer: "...by having the majority in hell God can extra clearly show you how special you are..."
My point is that you use the same logic.
God wipes out the planet but thats fine because it's for the greater cause.
I do not deny the greater cause and/or the prefect job Jesus has done.
I merly state I'm not that every possible 'tool' is a good way to reach a goal. Especially for someone with infinte possibilities.

Tony's reply: You realize your analogy failed miserable, right?

It still stands.

Tony's reply: The GI's saved your life by their suffering and Christ saved you by giving your immortality and incorruption by His suffering. I fail to see the difference. Yes, you should be happy that not only did Jesus die FOR YOU but was resurrected FOR YOU too and in that He overcame death so will you.
And you are not thankful for that? What a chump you are! :dontknow:
I'd hate to give you any toys or money for your birthday or Christmas. I can just hear you say as a child: "Am I supposed to be thankful for this?"

Pffff, you are either misreading or twisting my words. Point me to the place where I wrote such a thing! You can't...
I liked the presents. But I doubt I still like them if Santa said: "Nice stuff ain't it? I had to massacre 50000 people to get the toys."

I like the fact Jesus payed for our sins.
I don't like the fact he had to suffer for that.
I would have liked he preached until He died of old age. Or perhaps had a quick painless accident.
And after that rise from the grave.
So I do like the gift of live Jesus offered me. I do not like the price He payed for that gift.

Tony's reply:
Again, this comes down to communication. I was merely asking you what you meant. I was not saying you claimed the Father or Son were failures. But I was saying that if they force people to have a fake happiness then they failed in their objective.
So by "the law" you mean that God was supposed to forgive those pre-flood people and that for Him to show His love He was supposed to just let them go on in their extreme vileness of that age? You call that love?

No. I say if killing was needed they do it selectivly. Just like in a war. You can win a war in 2 ways. Take out military installations and personell. Or you you can wipe a whole country out by using NBC junk on large scale.
God chose the last. I would prefer he used the first method.

God showed His love by ending the whole degradation knowing full well that His Son was going to bring them back to life. How is that not love? How is that not forgiveness? Where in the law does it say to just forgive someone for breaking the law and just let them go their merry way to murder, steal etc?

I'm not spreaking about laws and verses.
I'm saying that for me the love message is not compatible with the wipe all out message. Certainly not for someone who has unlimitted possibilities.

[rosered]

Personally I find the flood one of the best arguments agains UR.... :sigh:

I am kind of curious why you believe that.

Because God drowned sinless babies and animals He does looks sadistic... :sigh:

well this is off topic   :sigh:
but I believe the flood is the Dragons flood in Rev and the earth[our flesh] swallowed it up [ where else could all that death come from ?]
the reasoning is this , I believe the  Revelation  is a [  conclusion or summary ] of all the Books  in One reference    book
  just as   book one of Genesis  is  complete by itself  and  than we go on into  chapter  2  :2c:

dear rosered,
Thanks for your two cents.
However....Revelation cannot a summary of Paul's writings because Paul completes the Word of God
Col 1:25 of which I became a dispenser, in accord with the administration of God, which is granted to me for you, to complete the word of God -"

Also, what Paul wrote about, the secrets, no one knew about in either the Old or New Testaments, John included.

As a matter of fact, Paul goes way beyond John's revelation in scope.

Jesus and the othere N.T. writers too the flood of Noah's day as a literal event, not an analogy of something else. Of course, there may be shadows or types of Christ in the true account that does not mean it never happened.

ok  Thanks Tony ,  literal  probably , Spiritual definatly !

I   just  have to admit I dont have it all figured out , . I dont !! 
   but John was in the Spirit  on the Lords Day 

   and    Jesus SPOKE through John in the Spirit    because any and all even some of us today  same as back than  have the Spirit of Prophecy    which is the Testimony[WITNESS]  of Jesus Christ
  speaking through  them and In them ,  Paul did  also  and that is more of why I still believe  this about Revelations , they made  the words Red [SPIRIT ] to decipher , for our help
  Which is Christ speaking  revealing everything in the Books
  the little book as well as the book of the  dead and the Book of the Living
[Lambs book of Life]
  I still think the dragons flood  was /is and will be what happens in time  we still have the false church today , same as the True Church
  because it is just  beliving lies  and  being in the flesh   , to me the same as being dead to God ... the false  church /woman


And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
Rev 12:16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.

  its is fine , but look how they all died and How Peter explains it and How Jesus explains as the days of Noah to me  still coming  as is the Son of Man
And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.
Luk 17:27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.  

   The churchy  thing  destroyed me  several years  ago  , 
  i was sooo suicidal , Thank  GOD for His mercy on me 
  God bless you all .rose

[Tony N]

Let's think this through. God destroyed all the humans in the flood in Noah's day sans Noah and family.

Agreed.

yet you say that does not more than make up for having them die earlier than they would have because some people improperly believe He will BBQ some of them? To me that does not logically follow. Maybe you just are not communicating to me clearly enough for me to grasp your point.
I'll try again.

I do not believe in the ET BBQ
ET follows do believe in classic hell.
When asked if that doesn't clash with all the God=Love verses they answer: "...by having the majority in hell God can extra clearly show you how special you are..."
My point is that you use the same logic.
God wipes out the planet but thats fine because it's for the greater cause.
I do not deny the greater cause and/or the prefect job Jesus has done.
I merly state I'm not that every possible 'tool' is a good way to reach a goal. Especially for someone with infinte possibilities.

Tony's reply:
But I don't use the same logic. The logic of the ETer is that God eternally tormenting humans is to show His love for us believers. God does nothing to remediate those in eternal torment.

My logic is that God's love is not just to drown the world in Noah's day but is to raise them back to life, not to eternally torture them but to remediate them by giving them immortality and incorruption. THAT IS LOVE! And He will do it all through the faithfulness of His Son.

Tony's reply: You realize your analogy failed miserable, right?

It still stands.[/quote]

If fails miserably. I stated:
They were all going to die anyway had the flood not come.
Then you, WW replied:" You know what; I drop by this weekend and will drown your wife in the pool. Means nothing really. She was going to die anyway. I let you watch and to show how a good guy I am I even pay $100."

Why does your analogy fail miserably? Your 100 dollars does not come even close to bringing my wife back from the dead like God is going to do for all those who died in the flood. That 100 dollars also fails miserably because it does not come close to giving my wife, who you drowned, immortality and incorruption. If you can't see how your logic fails, I'm sorry but I can't help you.

Tony's reply: The GI's saved your life by their suffering and Christ saved you by giving your immortality and incorruption by His suffering. I fail to see the difference. Yes, you should be happy that not only did Jesus die FOR YOU but was resurrected FOR YOU too and in that He overcame death so will you.
And you are not thankful for that? What a chump you are! :dontknow:
I'd hate to give you any toys or money for your birthday or Christmas. I can just hear you say as a child: "Am I supposed to be thankful for this?"

WW replied: Pffff, you are either misreading or twisting my words. Point me to the place where I wrote such a thing! You can't...

Tony's reply:
Well, you did write: "Just like I can't feel good that Jesus was nailed to the cross. Saying how great that was etc is kinda selfish isn't it?"

WW wrote: I liked the presents. But I doubt I still like them if Santa said: "Nice stuff ain't it? I had to massacre 50000 people to get the toys."

Tony's reply:
But Santa can't bring back those 50,000 people and give them immortality and incorruption. So it is not equal. Neither did God massacre 50,000 people to get you salvation. It was just One Person God sent to die for you and He (Jesus) died willingly for you. So please don't put it on equal footing with someone massacring 50,000 people so you could get some toys.

WW wrote: I like the fact Jesus payed for our sins.
I don't like the fact he had to suffer for that.
I would have liked he preached until He died of old age. Or perhaps had a quick painless accident.
And after that rise from the grave.
So I do like the gift of live Jesus offered me. I do not like the price He payed for that gift.

Tony's reply:
Again, this comes down to communication. I was merely asking you what you meant. I was not saying you claimed the Father or Son were failures. But I was saying that if they force people to have a fake happiness then they failed in their objective.
So by "the law" you mean that God was supposed to forgive those pre-flood people and that for Him to show His love He was supposed to just let them go on in their extreme vileness of that age? You call that love?

WW replied: No. I say if killing was needed they do it selectivly. Just like in a war. You can win a war in 2 ways. Take out military installations and personell. Or you you can wipe a whole country out by using NBC junk on large scale.
God chose the last. I would prefer he used the first method.[/quote]

Tony's reply: It sure is a pleasure to meet someone who has more wisdom than God. I am honored! We should build a shrine to you and start a new religion.

God showed His love by ending the whole degradation knowing full well that His Son was going to bring them back to life. How is that not love? How is that not forgiveness? Where in the law does it say to just forgive someone for breaking the law and just let them go their merry way to murder, steal etc?

Ww's reply: I'm not spreaking about laws and verses.
I'm saying that for me the love message is not compatible with the wipe all out message. Certainly not for someone who has unlimitted possibilities.
[/quote]

Tony's reply: Obviously the God who had unlimited possibilities made the most perfect decision as to what to do that could be done. Just because you are far wiser than God doesn't mean He would do it your way.

[reFORMer]

I don't like this screwed up world and my couple of short gasps of suffering ignorant life in it either, much like The Great Deluge.  I think it's the best God could do, given all the variables.  He's after something within us.  I shared elsewhere how that recently, thinking about all this evil and if I was all wise and all powerful, I remarked to God, "And You don't think I could do better!?"  He immediately answered me with the realization just as I said.  He's doing an inner work. He's bringing about not only His image in us, but also His likeness, an inner quality of character, a similitude of His nature.

He also says that He will bring us into the new heavens and earth (in which will dwell righteousness) that He will create and the former things will not be remembered or brought to mind due to the glory of that which is to come.  He'll do it much better next time.

I sometimes think God lost patience with puny man for filling the earth with violence.  I don't trust people with little experience of God who casually offer some doctrinaire about what He will or won't do.  Just check out the last two verses (Malachi 4:5-6) in the O.T.  I think it's something like what C. S. Lewis said of the Lion in Narnia: "He's good; but, He's not tame."  God is dangerous.  There are things He very much hates.  Don't get up in His face and make Him mad.  We need to respect Him.

He's also developing along with us, according to the Bible. There's no end to His increase and we are to increase with all the increase of God.

[WhiteWings]

Tony's reply:
But I don't use the same logic. The logic of the ETer is that God eternally tormenting humans is to show His love for us believers. God does nothing to remediate those in eternal torment.

True. But still the step towards that remediate point is kinda cruel. And thats was and still is my point.

Why does your analogy fail miserably? Your 100 dollars does not come even close to bringing my wife back from the dead like God is going to do for all those who died in the flood. That 100 dollars also fails miserably because it does not come close to giving my wife, who you drowned, immortality and incorruption. If you can't see how your logic fails, I'm sorry but I can't help you.

For me you are now taking things out of context but never mind I point to what a wrote above.
Perhaps I can add that torture (on babies) will never look good to me no matter what the reward is afterwards.

Tony's reply:
Well, you did write: "Just like I can't feel good that Jesus was nailed to the cross. Saying how great that was etc is kinda selfish isn't it?"

Yes I did write that. And still have that opinion.

WW wrote: I liked the presents. But I doubt I still like them if Santa said: "Nice stuff ain't it? I had to massacre 50000 people to get the toys."

Tony's reply:
But Santa can't bring back those 50,000 people and give them immortality and incorruption. So it is not equal. Neither did God massacre 50,000 people to get you salvation. It was just One Person God sent to die for you and He (Jesus) died willingly for you. So please don't put it on equal footing with someone massacring 50,000 people so you could get some toys.

Indeed it isn't the same. As a way to compare: Santa is limited being had no other choice that killing 50000 to get the toys. God with unlimited powers could have gotten the toys by magic. Let the people fell asleep for a while and then grab the toys. Or use another method that is at His disposal because He has unlimeted powers/possibilities.


WW wrote: I like the fact Jesus payed for our sins.
I don't like the fact he had to suffer for that.
I would have liked he preached until He died of old age. Or perhaps had a quick painless accident.
And after that rise from the grave.
So I do like the gift of live Jesus offered me. I do not like the price He payed for that gift.

Tony's reply: It sure is a pleasure to meet someone who has more wisdom than God. I am honored! We should build a shrine to you and start a new religion.

I don't even bother answering such nonsense besides noone will be able to get me cornered with such reasoning.

[Tony N]

WW wrote: I like the fact Jesus payed for our sins.
I don't like the fact he had to suffer for that.
I would have liked he preached until He died of old age. Or perhaps had a quick painless accident.
And after that rise from the grave.
So I do like the gift of live Jesus offered me. I do not like the price He payed for that gift.

Tony's reply: It sure is a pleasure to meet someone who has more wisdom than God. I am honored! We should build a shrine to you and start a new religion.

I don't even bother answering such nonsense besides noone will be able to get me cornered with such reasoning.

Dear WW, you took the above quote from me out of context.

This is the context:

WW replied: No. I say if killing was needed they do it selectivly. Just like in a war. You can win a war in 2 ways. Take out military installations and personell. Or you you can wipe a whole country out by using NBC junk on large scale.
God chose the last. I would prefer he used the first method.

Tony's reply: It sure is a pleasure to meet someone who has more wisdom than God. I am honored! We should build a shrine to you and start a new religion.

Quite a different context, huh?

[WhiteWings]

WW wrote: I like the fact Jesus payed for our sins.
I don't like the fact he had to suffer for that.
I would have liked he preached until He died of old age. Or perhaps had a quick painless accident.
And after that rise from the grave.
So I do like the gift of live Jesus offered me. I do not like the price He payed for that gift.

Tony's reply: It sure is a pleasure to meet someone who has more wisdom than God. I am honored! We should build a shrine to you and start a new religion.

I don't even bother answering such nonsense besides noone will be able to get me cornered with such reasoning.

Dear WW, you took the above quote from me out of context.

This is the context:

WW replied: No. I say if killing was needed they do it selectivly. Just like in a war. You can win a war in 2 ways. Take out military installations and personell. Or you you can wipe a whole country out by using NBC junk on large scale.
God chose the last. I would prefer he used the first method.

Tony's reply: It sure is a pleasure to meet someone who has more wisdom than God. I am honored! We should build a shrine to you and start a new religion.

Quite a different context, huh?

Not at all. Stating one thing doesn't automaticly mean I stated or are implying another thing.
I even stated things like:

I do not deny the greater cause and/or the prefect job Jesus has done.

That automaticly exclude what you wrote. No need to read between the lines in my posts. I openly state what I mean.
I think/hope I fairly well explained you my line of reasoning. Answered all your replies by reexplaining earlier posts.
A more correct answer would have been "It's strange/odd; but I hope the reasons will one day revealed to me." (I hope the same thing)
But you choose to try to use my unspoken words against me. Be free to do that but don't expect me to be impressed with it.

[Tony N]

Dear WW, you are skirting the issue. You said God should have done the killing differently. In effect you are saying God should not have done a global flood. You, in effect are saying you would have done it selectively. By you saying that you are saying you are wiser than God.

It is obvious that since God is all knowing and all powerful and is Love, that since He flooded the earth that there was no better way, no more loving way, no wiser way to do it than the way God did it.

This is the context:

WW replied: No. I say if killing was needed they do it selectivly. Just like in a war. You can win a war in 2 ways. Take out military installations and personell. Or you you can wipe a whole country out by using NBC junk on large scale.
God chose the last. I would prefer he used the first method.

Tony's reply: It sure is a pleasure to meet someone who has more wisdom than God. I am honored! We should build a shrine to you and start a new religion.

[WhiteWings]

Dear WW, you are skirting the issue.

Nope.

You said God should have done the killing differently.

In effect you are saying God should not have done a global flood.
You, in effect are saying you would have done it selectively.

Yes or another selective method.

By you saying that you are saying you are wiser than God.

I'm not and never claimed so. But that doesn't mean I find it a contradiction with UR. (that was my initial statement)

It is obvious that since God is all knowing and all powerful and is Love, that since He flooded the earth that there was no better way, no more loving way, no wiser way to do it than the way God did it.

Even then I keep seeing the above mentioned contradiction until God gives me the wisdom to understand.

Understanding != believing/agreeing/etc