Blood Sacrifice?

Originally posted by whodey
Right back at ya....excpet for the Pauline part. We all know how much you loath St Paul.

Speaking of Paul, where is he? Is he in heaven or hell?

As with all bigots, you aren't exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
As with most bigots, you aren't exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer.

Why won't you answer the question? Were did Paul go, heaven or hell?

Originally posted by whodey
Why won't you answer the question? Were did Paul go, heaven or hell?

Other than because it's a stupid question?

Originally posted by whodey
God did not create Satan, he created Lucifer. The whole arguement as to whether God created evil comes down to the debate over free will, which we have debated at great length on these threads. Basically it is my position that free will is simply a property of love. The scriptures indicate that God is love, so what does that mean? It means that in order t ...[text shortened]... think it a coincidence that the scriptures use the term darkness to describe the realm of evil.

Yes, I remember the threads. Someone usually brings up what I'll call the Problem of Free Will in Heaven - people have free will in heaven, yet do no evil. They are capable of loving God, even though none choose to reject him.

I have not yet heard a convincing response to this one.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Other than because it's a stupid question?

Well you already accused me of not being a "sharp knife". So are you precluded from answering questions on the basis of me being stupid?

Originally posted by whodey
There may be things you can to do improve your moral position. However, do realize that the motivation for doing so comes from an innate sense of what is "right", thus, it ultimatly comes from God. Add to this fact that as Jesus taught sin has a tendency to hold you in bodage. In fact, I believe that with some sins that only Christ can set us free. I have ...[text shortened]... hing we have or do as attributable to God is a lack of humilty, assuming you believe in God.

Sure - my former youth pastor used to be a methamphetamine dealer. Turning to Jesus helped him get out of that lifestyle. That's why I'd never go back and try to talk him out of his faith. For him, it is far better than the alternative.

But God couldn't have done him any good if he hadn't been willing to change himself. That is the true reason he changed. We tend to underestimate our own ability to turn things around. Faith is just one means of making sure we "listen to ourself" - the part of us that knows we've taken a wrong path.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Sure - my former youth pastor used to be a methamphetamine dealer. Turning to Jesus helped him get out of that lifestyle. That's why I'd never go back and try to talk him out of his faith. For him, it is far better than the alternative.

But God couldn't have done him any good if he hadn't been willing to change himself. That is the true reason he chan ...[text shortened]... making sure we "listen to ourself" - the part of us that knows we've taken a wrong path.

I don't underestimate the power of wanting to change. If it were not for this desire, then salvation would not be possible. Do realize, however, that just because we desire to change does not mean we have the power to do so on our own.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Other than because it's a stupid question?

Since you are too afraid or "intelligent" to answer my question, I'll help you work through it. Was Paul saved? Well lets see, he persecuted the church and kiilled Christians. Sounds like a "bad" man to me. So what possible hope had a man like this? Perhaps salvation through grace?...... or so he says. Then we have a transformation with Paul. He no longer goes around persecuting the church. In fact, he becomes one of them and later does "good" works in the name of Jesus. So is he or was he saved upon his initial conversion, or was it the good works that later came after his conversion? Then again, did he espouse a false doctrine, even though he did "good works" after his conversion? Was this enough to have him sent to hell, assuming that you are right and he espoused a false doctrine.

Originally posted by whodey
Well you already accused me of not being a "sharp knife". So are you precluded from answering questions on the basis of me being stupid?

Read my post again.

I said that it was because the question is stupid.

How you manage to twist that up in your mind into it being "basis of [you] being stupid" is beyond me.

But that points to what I said earlier about you not comprehending what I've been posting.

Evidently somehow the words that you read are not properly translated into thoughts.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Read my post again.

I said that it was because the question is stupid.

How you manage to twist that up in your mind into it being "basis of [you] being stupid" is beyond me.

But that points to what I said earlier about you not comprehending what I've been posting.

Evidently somehow the words that you read are not properly translated into thoughts.

I say my question is about as stupid as you questioning the salvation of all those who espouse Pauline theiology. So pony up and answer the question.

Originally posted by whodey
I say my question is about as stupid as you questioning the salvation of all those who espouse Pauline theiology. So pony up and answer the question.

I say my question is about as stupid as you questioning the salvation of all those who espouse Pauline theiology.

Seems you've managed to twist this up in your mind also. What I question is theology that does not coincide with the teachings of Jesus. Those whose theology differs, almost without exception, point to Paul and, from what I've seen, they can make a pretty reasonable case.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[b]I say my question is about as stupid as you questioning the salvation of all those who espouse Pauline theiology.

Seems you've managed to twist this up in your mind also. What I question is theology that does not coincide with the teachings of Jesus. Those whose theology differs, almost without exception, point to Paul and, from what I've seen, they can make a pretty reasonable case.[/b]

To better understand Pauls theology, one might try to explain why he persecuted Christians to begin with. What say you? Why did Paul persecute the early Christians? In fact, what about Christ was so offensive to the Jews?

Originally posted by whodey
To better understand Pauls theology, one might try to explain why he persecuted Christians to begin with. What say you? Why did Paul persecute the early Christians? In fact, what about Christ was so offensive to the Jews?

If you have something to say, just plainly state it.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
If you have something to say, just plainly state it.

You imply that Pauls teachings conflict with the teachings of Christ. In your view Chirst NEVER claimed to be anything more than a prophet. If so, why did Paul and the rest of the Jews take issue with him?

Originally posted by whodey
You imply that Pauls teachings conflict with the teachings of Christ. In your view Chirst NEVER claimed to be anything more than a prophet. If so, why did Paul and the rest of the Jews take issue with him?

By "just plainly state it", I didn't mean for you to ask another question. I literally meant for you to state your position. Hope this is clear now.