Originally posted by Rajk999
This the crux of problem with your doctrine .. the blanket claim that God loves sinners.

Gods does not love sinners they way you express it. Let me clarify :

God loves sinners in that he sent his Son Jesus to die for sinners ... YES
God loves repentant sinners who after repentance refrain from or resist sin ..YES
God loves sinners who continue on in ...[text shortened]... ain. Cain was among just a handful of people whose task was to multiply and replenish the earth.

"Cain was among just a handful of people whose task was to multiply and replenish the earth."

What on earth are you talking about? Cain was rejected and sent on his way. No further mention of him after that.

Originally posted by josephw
[b]"Cain was among just a handful of people whose task was to multiply and replenish the earth."

What on earth are you talking about? Cain was rejected and sent on his way. No further mention of him after that.[/b]

Does not Gen 4 speak of Cain's wives and children and grandchildren? Dont you think that was significant seeing he would have been one of the few sons of Adam?

There is a kind of narrow mindedness with some of you people. The Bible is not the only source of information about the days of Adam and Eve. There are writings many thousands of years old, some of which contain stories handed down about the activities of these early people. Maybe you should have a read.

Originally posted by josephw
If you're not an atheist, then how do you know there is a creator God?

I don't claim to "know". I think 'intuition' would be the nearest word to explaining the "how". But it's not detailed or substantial enough to enable me to set about persuading others that my gut feelings constitute "truth".

The sheer volume and specificity of details and facts that religionists claim to "know", with surmise and speculation and superstition, piled up, layer upon layer, knitted together with wishful thinking, and wrapped in portentous and pretentious language [meticulously internalized and then trotted out when deemed necessary], all seems to me to be counterintuitive, prosaic and all too often just plain preposterous.

That's why I do not proselytize ~ because I do not have anything to proselytize ~ except perhaps that I believe God has not revealed Himself in the way that religionists claim He has, but then that's just a personal conviction, and I am not much motivated to try actively to make it float anyone else's boat.

The fact that people like you feel you do have something to proselytize does not make the "something", in and of itself, true to any degree.

Originally posted by Rajk999
This the crux of problem with your doctrine .. the blanket claim that God loves sinners.

Gods does not love sinners they way you express it. Let me clarify :

God loves sinners in that he sent his Son Jesus to die for sinners ... YES
God loves repentant sinners who after repentance refrain from or resist sin ..YES
God loves sinners who continue on in ...[text shortened]... ain. Cain was among just a handful of people whose task was to multiply and replenish the earth.

This the crux of problem with your doctrine .. the blanket claim that God loves sinners.

I think that Genesis 4 reveals God's love for Cain as well as for Abel.

I think "For God so loved the world ..." (John 3:16a) means that there are a lot of "Cains" who are in the world that God loves.

Gods does not love sinners they way you express it. Let me clarify :

God loves sinners in that he sent his Son Jesus to die for sinners ... YES
God loves repentant sinners who after repentance refrain from or resist sin ..YES
God loves sinners who continue on in their sinful lifestyle ... NO

The opposite of love is hate. I told you before that the New Testament exhorts the Christians "Do not grieve the Holy Spirit" .

Grief is not an expression of hate but of love.
Failing to walk in the Spirit can cause the sorrow of grief to the Holy Spirit.
You are saying that the Holy Spirit should not be made to hate with anger the disobedient Christian.

But grieving is like the sorrow of a parent for a juvenile who keeps getting into trouble. That parent may have to discipline that juvenile. And that parent even may express some displeasure or anger in doing so.

However, the exhortation to not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, I think emphasizes the Father's continued love for His children.

"And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, in whom you were sealed unto the day of redemption. " (Eph. 4:30)

God loves sinners who boast that they are sinners or sinful ... NO
God loves sinners who think that Jesus died so that they can continue on with sin .. NO.

Such believers need to learn about the judgment seat of Christ. That's in the New Testament also. That is the rewards and disciplines accompanying the coming millennial kingdom.

There are many good reasons not to kill Cain. God had plans for Cain. Cain was among just a handful of people whose task was to multiply and replenish the earth.

The parable of the prodigal son in Luke 15:11-32 is applicable to many situations. It is not just appropriate to sinners being saved for the first time. I think it is also quite appropriate to backsliders repenting of their poor spiritual life and returning to God.

In either case the love of the father for the prodigal is revealed. The longing father ran to meet the returning prodigal.

" And he [the prodigal] rose up and came to his own father. But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was moved with compassion, and he ran and fell on his neck and kissed him affectionately." (v.20)

The longing love of the father expresses God's love for the repentant sinner. I think the parable is broad enough to indicate ANY repentant sinner, including a backslidden Christian who wakes up and decides to go BACK to his heavenly Father.

My point is that the love of God was still there. He hates the prodigal's situation, for sure. But He has undying love for the prodigal.

Did Jesus express love toward Peter after Peter had denied Him, and that three times and with curses ? Three times Jesus reaffirmed His love towards Peter. Jesus restored Peter with love.

It is no accident that the Evangelist John included that incident to arm wayward and error prone future disciples of Jesus. The leading disciple, Jesus never stopped loving.

I think Jesus loved Judas. He washed his feet in love as well as the other disciples.

Originally posted by FMF
The fact that people like you feel you do have something to proselytize does not make the "something", in and of itself, true to any degree.

It doesn't make it ipso facto false, either. Something plenty here somehow miss.

Originally posted by Rajk999
Does not Gen 4 speak of Cain's wives and children and grandchildren? Dont you think that was significant seeing he would have been one of the few sons of Adam?

There is a kind of narrow mindedness with some of you people. The Bible is not the only source of information about the days of Adam and Eve. There are writings many thousands of years old, some o ...[text shortened]... in stories handed down about the activities of these early people. Maybe you should have a read.

Why? Does not God's Word contain enough truth for you?

btw Gen. 4 says Cain had one wife and one son, and grandsons, but that's the end of the story for Cain. Are you saying God is lying? Is there more to Cains story than what's in the Word of God?

Better pay attention to the story line. The story switches back to Seth were runs the seed line to Jesus. Forget Cain, there's nothing there worth knowing.

Originally posted by josephw
Why? Does not God's Word contain enough truth for you?

btw Gen. 4 says Cain had one wife and one son, and grandsons, but that's the end of the story for Cain. Are you saying God is lying? Is there more to Cains story than what's in the Word of God?

Better pay attention to the story line. The story switches back to Seth were runs the seed line to Jesus. Forget Cain, there's nothing there worth knowing.

A couple things for you to consider:
- Gods Word was the Bible used by the Apostles. Maybe you should investigate it and see what books the Apostles used, rather than simply accept the Bible which some men decided you should use. However that takes reading so you may not be able to handle that.
- Cain's line contained a string of evil and sinful people who paid for their sins .. so its worth knowing for people like you who falsely claim that your sins would not be held against you and you can sin without consequences. So the story of Cain is very relevant.
- Im sure all the Apostles were very well read and did not only read Gods Word.

Originally posted by Rajk999
A couple things for you to consider:
- Gods Word was the Bible used by the Apostles. Maybe you should investigate it and see what books the Apostles used, rather than simply accept the Bible which some men decided you should use. However that takes reading so you may not be able to handle that.
- Cain's line contained a string of evil and sinful people who ...[text shortened]... very relevant.
- Im sure all the Apostles were very well read and did not only read Gods Word.

🙄

Originally posted by Suzianne
It doesn't make it ipso facto false, either.

I didn't say it did. But for me, none of the self-styled proselytizers here offer any convincing evidence that God has revealed Himself to them ~ nor do they exhibit mind maps that inspire admiration or make we want emulate them. Some of the proselytizers don't even seem particularly spiritual, if you ask me.

Originally posted by FMF
I didn't say it did. But for me, none of the self-styled proselytizers here offer any convincing evidence that God has revealed Himself to them ~ nor do they exhibit mind maps that inspire admiration or make we want emulate them. Some of the proselytizers don't even seem particularly spiritual, if you ask me.

".., none of the self-styled proselytizers here offer any convincing evidence that God has revealed Himself to them~.."

You want "convincing evidence" that God has revealed Himself to me? Just how do you think that evidence will sound? Do you think I can conjure up a series of words to that effect? I could say God has revealed Himself to me, or better yet, in me, but how am I to prove that?

You're asking the wrong questions, and of the wrong person. Ask the Truth. God will answer.

Faith is the key. No need to stumble at faith either. You say that intuitively you know there is a God, a creator, a being of eternal proportions perhaps, then why not believe God will reveal Himself to you? Why do you need a middle man?

Originally posted by josephw
You want "convincing evidence" that God has revealed Himself to me?

Not especially. I already have the measure of you and your mind map.

Originally posted by josephw
You're asking the wrong questions,

Euphemism for "I do not know the answer"

Originally posted by FMF
I didn't say it did. But for me, none of the self-styled proselytizers here offer any convincing evidence that God has revealed Himself to them ~ nor do they exhibit mind maps that inspire admiration or make we want emulate them. Some of the proselytizers don't even seem particularly spiritual, if you ask me.

No, I get it. I understand your meaning here. We already know that there are those who won't really be recognized by Christ as Christian, even though they identify themselves that way.

But like I keep telling sonhouse, you can't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Religion per se isn't the problem here. It's with those who say they are religious and yet are not. The main unfortunate side-effect of this seems to be people then call their religion false. You cannot blame religion for the acts of those who hide behind religion.

Originally posted by Suzianne
No, I get it. I understand your meaning here. We already know that there are those who won't really be recognized by Christ as Christian, even though they identify themselves that way.

But like I keep telling sonhouse, you can't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Religion per se isn't the problem here. It's with those who say they are reli ...[text shortened]... their religion false. You cannot blame religion for the acts of those who hide behind religion.

You aren't thinking about RJHinds - The Near Genius are You?

Originally posted by Suzianne
But like I keep telling sonhouse, you can't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Religion per se isn't the problem here.

I suppose, for me, the 'problem' is more about whether or not there is a baby in the bathwater at all.