- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
03 Jun 19
Sonship is basically saying 'you do not believe what I believe so, therefore, communicating with you is futile.'
Nope, I'm just saying listening to an atheist pretend to appeal to the authority of the Bible's words as a show yet rejecting the existence of the authoritative one One who's word it is, is eventually a useless discussion.
When the light in you is darkness, how great is the darkness!
04 Jun 19
@sonship saidI am not appealing to the authority of the Bible, but rather guiding you to do so, over and above the disjointed ramblings of a sheep in wolf's clothing. (A wolf who has condemned Christians to Satan).
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
Sonship is basically saying 'you do not believe what I believe so, therefore, communicating with you is futile.'
Nope, I'm just saying listening to an atheist pretend to appeal to the authority of the Bible's words as a show yet rejecting the existence of the authoritative one One who's word it is, is eventually a useless discussion.
When the light in you is darkness, how great is the darkness!
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
04 Jun 19
7 edits
I am not appealing to the authority of the Bible, but rather guiding you to do so, over and above the disjointed ramblings of a sheep in wolf's clothing. (A wolf who has condemned Christians to Satan).
No you are not. Like DIvegeester before you and Rajk999 has always done, you are parking at one place where you think you have an infallible objection, and remaining there perpetually.
You will remain with your favorite criticism, pointing with perpetual repetition to it in all subsequent discourse with me.
DIvegeester has his hot chains and space aliens.
Rajk999 has his 'sonship teaches Christians to continue sinning.'
And you have your 'Witness Lee has his condemning theists and Christians to Satan. '
While you proclaim God's non-existence, at least Lee said systems which had their beginning in the truth of the existing God have been corrupted. So his evaluation is more true then your concept that there is NO GOD at all for any of them to speak of.
04 Jun 19
1 edit
@sonship saidYes, I will be doing that.
You will remain with your favorite criticism, pointing with perpetual repetition to it in all subsequent discourse with me.
As in chess, I tend to stick with a tried and tested opening.
04 Jun 19
@sonship saidObviously nobody has received satisfactory responses to your deeply flawed doctrine, otherwise we would have left you alone. We cannot in good conscience allow you to continue discussing other [petty] matters when these critical ones are pending. You need to get back to the LCM and have someone with more knowledge, intellect and communication skills to help you out here. For the last 8 years or so your performance in defending Witness Lees doctrine is dismal. Take a break.
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
I am not appealing to the authority of the Bible, but rather guiding you to do so, over and above the disjointed ramblings of a sheep in wolf's clothing. (A wolf who has condemned Christians to Satan).
No you are not. Like DIvegeester before you and Rajk999 has always done, you are parking at one place where you think you have ...[text shortened]... s evaluation is more true then your concept that there is NO GOD at all for any of them to speak of.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
To everyone but you.
Let me pick up on your comment.
In First Corinthians Paul does explain that his apostolic team speaks mysteries that cannot be ascertained by the natural mind, even though such a natural mind be very philosophical.
"But we have received not the spirit of the world but the Spirit which is from God, that we may know the things which have been graciously given to us by God.
Which things also we speak, not in words taught by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual things with spiritual words." (1 Cor .3:12,13)
This was part of the problem in the church there. Some thought Paul should teach like on of the great Greek philosophers. Others thought Paul was not Jewish enough. Others didn't have the capacity to spiritually discern the significance of some of his teaching. Many of these things which distracted them from Christ were good things in the eyes of society,
"But a soulish man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God." (v.14a)
This is not an absolute matter but a matter of degrees.
It is not a binary matter but a matter of the limitation imposed by immaturity.
Of course with the unbeliever it may be a binary or absolute matter.
But Paul here is speaking to natural or soulish Christians who are saved, not unbelievers.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
05 Jun 19
1 edit
Lest I be too verbose, I'll wind up my thoughts soon for this post.
Though they may have been good things, Paul, in chapter three, says that they can defile the local church, mar it, deface it, and damage it, so as to destroy its holy nature. For the local church is built by Christ growing and uniting the believers. That is God growing in people to produce God indwelt people for the building up of the living temple of God.
"For we are God's fellow-workers; you are God's cultivated land, God's building." (3.9)
The growth of the life planted is also the building up of the building.
The building is built by the growth of the life planted in the Corinthians.
They are like a farm, a cultivated plot of earth for growing a crop.
The growth of that crop is also the building up of the temple - God's farm is also God's building.
@sonship saidYour two posts above are rock solid. You explained it better than I could. Sound and clear.
Lest I be too verbose, I'll wind up my thoughts soon for this post.
Though they may have been good things, Paul, in chapter three, says that they can defile the local church, mar it, deface it, and damage it, so as to destroy its holy nature. For the local church is built by Christ growing and uniting the believers. That is God growing in people to produce God indwelt peo ...[text shortened]... that crop is also the building up of the temple - God's farm is also God's building.
Too bad Rajk stopped learning at the law.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Your two posts above are rock solid. You explained it better than I could. Sound and clear.
I asked God years ago a heartfelt prayer which I believe He answered. I am not boasting. I just asked God as a young Christian to put me with some Christians that could help me grow. That's all.
I think, God answered that prayer for me. Not that I have always been faithful. I haven't. But He was faithful. He was faithful to my petition. He faithfully according to my request put me among some Christians that showed me how I can grow and gain more and more Christ.
Now, please share with me - do you have anything thoughts on this matter I have brought up - God wants people of God - God-men more than simply good people.
I mean, why wasn't God satisfied to have millions up millions of good angels that have everlasting life ?
What more did God want or need ?
05 Jun 19
@sonship said'To admit the existence of a need in God is to admit incompleteness in the divine Being. Need is a creature-word and cannot be spoken of the Creator. God has a voluntary relation to everything He has made, but He has no necessary relation to anything outside of Himself. His interest in His creatures arises from His sovereign good pleasure, not from any need those creatures can supply nor from any completeness they can bring to Him who is complete in Himself.'
I mean, why wasn't God satisfied to have millions up millions of good angels that have everlasting life ?
What more did God want or need ?
A. W. Tozer - The Knowledge of the Holy
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
Some progress. At least Ghost nods timidly toward the existence of God.
Some progress from atheism, don't you think?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
05 Jun 19
Too bad Rajk stopped learning at the law.
You know sometimes after prayer, I come to this board with a real sympathetic heart towards just about everyone.
Let's see how long it lasts today. lol.
Now, this fellow, as belligerent as he can be, sometimes invokes my sympathy. Sympathy which he probably would not appreciate.
But he just had no one to take good care of him. You know I wrote a thread way back called "Don't Be Too Hard on Yourself". I have realized some issues God seems not to LET us get through completely alone. We have to have support from other members of the Body of Christ.
Anyway, what do you think of Paul's word - "I ... have died to the law that I might live to God." (Gal. 3:19) ?
Died to the law.
Died to the law that he might live to God.
What is this ?