Sigh...

 

I wish you well as you try to find your way according to your own rules Ace... :thumb:

 

2 Things

 

First in response to this particular post:

You may not mean it, but your statement is terribly condescending. Just for the record I believe in Jesus the messiah who was sent to show me the way to God and who died on the cross as a means for me to be fully a part of God. (because I do not believe that Jesus HAD to die does not mean I am making up my own rules - I believe he CHOSE to die as the perfect example of perfect love). I also believe that GOD is omnipotent and can choose to rescue me simply by choosing to rescue me - with whatever means God chooses. To deny that is to deny omnipotence. Not only that, to suggest that Jesus HAD to die before GOD could forgive is also to deny omnipotence.

 

Second, in response to this thread and in the spirit of 007.

 

The Western God is one who shows favor on countries like the US who put words like "In God we Trust" on its money and "Under God" in its pledge to the flag. Because of God's favoritism to us, it is our duty to Go and Spread democracy around the world - by force and by killing. God favors us more that the infidels in the east because they are not really God's creation, they are the sons of Ishmael and as a result deserve to die. All who deserve to die, will die b/c God is a just God - except for those whom he chooses to let live b/c they were born in the west and are so much more enlightened.

 

There, I think I have it now.:banana:

The Western God is one who shows favor on countries like the US who put words like "In God we Trust" on its money and "Under God" in its pledge to the flag. Because of God's favoritism to us, it is our duty to Go and Spread democracy around the world - by force and by killing. God favors us more that the infidels in the east because they are not really God's creation, they are the sons of Ishmael and as a result deserve to die. All who deserve to die, will die b/c God is a just God - except for those whom he chooses to let live b/c they were born in the west and are so much more enlightened.

That's a nice little try at turning the tables. The only problem is, that it lacks any validity. You're trying to make people see things from the point of view of the Islamic terrorists. That's all well and good, except that it doesn't work both ways.

 

Of course, I'm assuming here, that you're just saying these ridiculous things to make a point. I'm assuming you don't actually hold any of these beliefs. If you do, you are sadly alone in this world...:cry:

That's a nice little try at turning the tables. The only problem is, that it lacks any validity. You're trying to make people see things from the point of view of the Islamic terrorists. That's all well and good, except that it doesn't work both ways.

 

Of course, I'm assuming here, that you're just saying these ridiculous things to make a point. I'm assuming you don't actually hold any of these beliefs. If you do, you are sadly alone in this world...:cry:

 

Not at all - just responding to 007

First in response to this particular post:

 

You may not mean it, but your statement is terribly condescending. Just for the record I believe in Jesus the messiah who was sent to show me the way to God and who died on the cross as a means for me to be fully a part of God. (because I do not believe that Jesus HAD to die does not mean I am making up my own rules - I believe he CHOSE to die as the perfect example of perfect love). I also believe that GOD is omnipotent and can choose to rescue me simply by choosing to rescue me - with whatever means God chooses. To deny that is to deny omnipotence. Not only that, to suggest that Jesus HAD to die before GOD could forgive is also to deny omnipotence.

You know what Ace, I was strongly compelled to bow out of this pointless debate. I still feel the need to remove myself from bantering with you in this regard. If you want to be the Lone Ranger, go for it.

 

Your assessment of me being condescending may indeed be accurate in terms of how my typed words come across to you. I can assure you that arrogance and pride have nothing to do with my conclusions however. I had to get beyond myself to reach the beliefs I know hold true.

 

As simply as I can state it, I believe in such a thing as the truth. By definition, the truth is exclusive. It is impossible to have multiple divergent truths. There is only one truth and many imitators.

 

I believe that Jesus is who He said He is, “I am the Way the Truth and the Life, no one comes to the Father but through Me.” Jesus made himself exclusive, not me. I am betting my eternal destiny on the accuracy of this truth.

 

If this makes me arrogant, or condescending, so be it, but it must be recognized that my confidence and my full faith is in Jesus Christ and the traditional and orthodox interpretation of the Bible, not in myself or my own wisdom.

 

Your posts have led me to believe that you think you have found insights and truths that generations of Christians have somehow overlooked. I’m not going to label that as condescending, but it is IMO at the very least quite risky on your part.

 

Good luck… :thumb:

2 Things

 

First in response to this particular post:

You may not mean it, but your statement is terribly condescending. Just for the record I believe in Jesus the messiah who was sent to show me the way to God and who died on the cross as a means for me to be fully a part of God. (because I do not believe that Jesus HAD to die does not mean I am making up my own rules - I believe he CHOSE to die as the perfect example of perfect love). I also believe that GOD is omnipotent and can choose to rescue me simply by choosing to rescue me - with whatever means God chooses. To deny that is to deny omnipotence. Not only that, to suggest that Jesus HAD to die before GOD could forgive is also to deny omnipotence.

 

Second, in response to this thread and in the spirit of 007.

 

The Western God is one who shows favor on countries like the US who put words like "In God we Trust" on its money and "Under God" in its pledge to the flag. Because of God's favoritism to us, it is our duty to Go and Spread democracy around the world - by force and by killing. God favors us more that the infidels in the east because they are not really God's creation, they are the sons of Ishmael and as a result deserve to die. All who deserve to die, will die b/c God is a just God - except for those whom he chooses to let live b/c they were born in the west and are so much more enlightened.

 

There, I think I have it now.:banana:

On your first part, yeah he could. But your argument reminds me of the old story of a person caught in a flood and and sitting on his house. He prayed and prayed and along came a boat. The worker in the boat said hope in and the guy deferred saying God would save him. He continued to pray and another boat came but he deferred again saying God would save him. Next a helicopter should up and gave the same offer but was met with the same response. Finally, the guy perished in the flood.

 

When the guy got to face God, he asked why God hadn't saved him. God asked the guy, I sent you two boats and a helicopter what more do you want.

 

You are looking for all these ways to be saved and God has made it real simple. Believe in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior.

 

What will be done with the ones who haven't heard of Jesus I cannot say, but to point out that those of us who are followers of Jesus Christ have two options. Assume God will do something or realize that we are the two boats and the helicopter that is sent to help lead people to safety. While I cannot provide saving, I can be the vessel that helps reveal it to them.

 

On your second point, I am not advocating killing but understand that the SAME GOD of the NT was the GOD of the OT and he did allow killing when it was necessary.

Second, in response to this thread and in the spirit of 007.

 

The Western God is one who shows favor on countries like the US who put words like "In God we Trust" on its money and "Under God" in its pledge to the flag. Because of God's favoritism to us, it is our duty to Go and Spread democracy around the world - by force and by killing. God favors us more that the infidels in the east because they are not really God's creation, they are the sons of Ishmael and as a result deserve to die. All who deserve to die, will die b/c God is a just God - except for those whom he chooses to let live b/c they were born in the west and are so much more enlightened.

 

There, I think I have it now.:banana:

The more you rant, the more you make my point. :thumb:

 

:lol: :lol: :lol:

You know what Ace, I was strongly compelled to bow out of this pointless debate. I still feel the need to remove myself from bantering with you in this regard. If you want to be the Lone Ranger, go for it.

 

Your assessment of me being condescending may indeed be accurate in terms of how my typed words come across to you. I can assure you that arrogance and pride have nothing to do with my conclusions however. I had to get beyond myself to reach the beliefs I know hold true.

 

As simply as I can state it, I believe in such a thing as the truth. By definition, the truth is exclusive. It is impossible to have multiple divergent truths. There is only one truth and many imitators.

 

I believe that Jesus is who He said He is, “I am the Way the Truth and the Life, no one comes to the Father but through Me.” Jesus made himself exclusive, not me. I am betting my eternal destiny on the accuracy of this truth.

 

If this makes me arrogant, or condescending, so be it, but it must be recognized that my confidence and my full faith is in Jesus Christ and the traditional and orthodox interpretation of the Bible, not in myself or my own wisdom.

 

Your posts have led me to believe that you think you have found insights and truths that generations of Christians have somehow overlooked. I’m not going to label that as condescending, but it is IMO at the very least quite risky on your part.

 

Good luck… :thumb:

 

I never once denied that Jesus is who he says he is, and I have not once denied that he shed his blood for me and all other believers. I am not a lone-ranger in the belief that the bloodshed was not DEMANDED by God.

 

Propitiation vs. Expiation

(Not my words, Wikipedia) you can doubt its thoroughness, but you cannot doubt that there are at least 1000 years of debate over what it meant when Christ died, so please don't claim to have a handle on what is the Truth.

 

 

The Greek word hilasterion is the Greek rendering of the Hebrew kapporeth which refers to the Mercy Seat of the Arc. Hilasterion can be translated as either "propitiation" or "expiation" which then imply different functions of the Mercy Seat. Propitiation literally means to make favorable and specifically includes the idea of dealing with God’s wrath against sinners. Expiation literally means to make pious and implies either the removal or cleansing of sin.

 

The idea of propitiation includes that of expiation as its means, but the word "expiation" has no reference to quenching God’s righteous anger. The difference is that linguistically the object of expiation is sin, not God (i.e. sin is removed, not God). Linguistically, one propitiates a person (makes them favorable), and one expiates a problem (removes it). Christ's death was therefore both an expiation and a propitiation. By expiating (removing the problem of) sin God was made propitious (favorable) to us.

 

The case for translating hilasterion as "expiation" instead of "propitiation" was put forward by C. H. Dodd in 1935 and at first gained wide support. As a result, hilasterion has been translated as "expiation" in the RSV and other modern versions. Dodd argued that in pagan Greek the translation of hilasterion was indeed to propitiate, but that in the Septuagint (the oldest Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament) that kapporeth (Hebrew for "atone") is often translated with words that mean "to cleanse or remove" (CH Dodd "The Bible and the Greeks" p 93). This view was challenged by Leon Morris who argued that because of the focus in the book of Romans on God's wrath, that the concept of hilasterion needed to include the appeasement of God's wrath (Leon Morris "Apostolic Preaching" p 155).

 

Theologians stress the idea of propitiation because it specifically addresses the aspect of the Atonement dealing with God's wrath. Critics state that seeing the Atonement as appeasing God is a pagan idea that makes God seem tyrannical. In response to this theologians have traditionally stressed that propitiation should not be understood as appeasing or mollifying God in the sense of a bribe or of it making an angry God love us, because it is God who—both in the Old and New Testaments—provides the propitiation. "I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls" (Lev 17:11). God, out of his love and justice, renders Himself favorable by his own action.

 

On this point proponents of penal substitution are virtually unanimous. John Stott writes that propitiation "does not make God gracious...God does not love us because Christ died for us, Christ died for us because God loves us" (The Cross of Christ, p.174). John Calvin writes, “Our being reconciled by the death of Christ must not be understood as if the Son reconciled us, in order that the Father, then hating, might begin to love us.” (Institutes II 16:4)

 

 

Not so black and white is it?

Not so black and white is it?

You can throw all the words you want at the problem Ace. The answer is remarkably clear.

 

How does Romans Chapter 3 fit in your theology?

 

Romans 3

22 This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25 God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished-- 26 he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

 

If the birth of Jesus was all that was necessary for our atonement, why does Paul tell us "God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood."?

 

Thanks, but given the choice between trusting your "revelation" or the teaching of Paul... I choose Paul. :thumb:

You can throw all the words you want at the problem Ace. The answer is remarkably clear.

 

How does Romans Chapter 3 fit in your theology?

 

Romans 3

22 This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25 God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished-- 26 he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

 

If the birth of Jesus was all that was necessary for our atonement, why does Paul tell us "God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood."?

 

Thanks, but given the choice between trusting your "revelation" or the teaching of Paul... I choose Paul. :thumb:

 

Presented himself as a sacrifice for atonement - it does not say "And God demanded that Jesus Christ be put to death so that he could then forgive all those who had sinned."

 

You can say what you want, but to say I am way outside of the norm when I show evidence that I am not . . . at some other point we can talk about Matthew 25 which says nothing about blood and atonement but only about how we treat the poor. If I go with Matthew and you go with Paul, who has the Truth?

Can we get back to discussing why American Liberals just don't understand Iraq, please?

Can we get back to discussing why American Liberals just don't understand Iraq, please?

I would submit the apparent lack of understanding going on in the FB/Ace mini-thread as evidence of the overall problem, but that would probably just get me in hot water...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Can we get back to discussing why American Liberals just don't understand Iraq, please?

I think we are. Neither the American Liberals or the Muslims understand Christianity and both are contrasts to American Liberals.:sssh:

 

The Middle East will always be an area of conflict based on religious conflicts until the final days. I think that has been shown in the points that the basis of Muslim and Christianity are distinctly different.

I think we are. Neither the American Liberals or the Muslims understand Christianity and both are contrasts to American Liberals.:sssh:

 

Now them is fighting words. This Christian, American, liberal understands Christianity quite well. Bottom line, I think it was a serious mistake to invade Iraq and that it has caused and will continue to cause damage to American security. It will be many years before we know the extent of the damage.

You know what Ace, I was strongly compelled to bow out of this pointless debate. I still feel the need to remove myself from bantering with you in this regard. If you want to be the Lone Ranger, go for it.

 

Your assessment of me being condescending may indeed be accurate in terms of how my typed words come across to you. I can assure you that arrogance and pride have nothing to do with my conclusions however. I had to get beyond myself to reach the beliefs I know hold true.

 

As simply as I can state it, I believe in such a thing as the truth. By definition, the truth is exclusive. It is impossible to have multiple divergent truths. There is only one truth and many imitators.

 

I believe that Jesus is who He said He is, “I am the Way the Truth and the Life, no one comes to the Father but through Me.” Jesus made himself exclusive, not me. I am betting my eternal destiny on the accuracy of this truth.

 

If this makes me arrogant, or condescending, so be it, but it must be recognized that my confidence and my full faith is in Jesus Christ and the traditional and orthodox interpretation of the Bible, not in myself or my own wisdom.

 

Your posts have led me to believe that you think you have found insights and truths that generations of Christians have somehow overlooked. I’m not going to label that as condescending, but it is IMO at the very least quite risky on your part.

 

Good luck… :thumb:

Beautiful post! :thumb:

Awesome... Comparing the "war" in Iraq to World War II.... Stretch much?

 

No not a stretch. Radical Islam wants to destroy America. God Bless all our young men and women defending our country.