quietthinker
Well-Known Member
Paul defines God's wrath in Romans 1:18-31. He 'gives them over', vs 24, 26 and 28. What does he give them over to?... to the naturally resulting consequences of their choices.....depravity, breakdown and finally death.So you disagree, not with me, but the Scriptures?
So, if I understand you correctly, you conveniently "skip" the wrath and Hell of a holy YHVH, and stay with the 4 gospel accounts?
Or is this a wrong "assumption" on my part?
2Ti 2:14 These things remind them of, testifying fully before the Lord—not to strive about words to nothing profitable, but to the subversion of those hearing;
2Ti 2:15 be diligent to present thyself approved to God—a workman irreproachable, rightly dividing the word of the truth;
--or are we "selective" in the studying of Scripture-
What is your gospel to a lost and dying world-"God is all love" and that's it?
Waiting-this is getting interesting.
Johann.
It appears to me that you want to define God's wrath as some arbitrary affliction that God loads onto those who don't dance to his tune?
Is it thought that God rejoices/ gets satisfaction in his children making a mess of their lives and their resulting death? ..... he who loved them to the point of dying for them?...I don't think so. I think God weeps and will weep even at the final demise of his bright shining angel who turned against him.
Do I disagree with the scriptures? It will depend on which scriptures. Would you participate in the stoning of certain law breakers like those committing adultery? as commanded by Moses or burning certain ones?
Jesus left no doubt what his position was when the religious tight shorts tried to trap him using scripture in the account of the woman they dragged before him caught in adultery. Moses in the law commanded such to be stoned they gleefully asserted. They weaponised scripture. His reply, 'he who is without sin cast the first stone' and finally to the woman, 'neither do I condemn you'
Did he contradict scripture? ...of course he did.
There are plenty of other examples also. Jesus would say, 'you have heard said.... but I say unto you', the 'but' contradicts what they had heard said.....and where had they heard it said? from the scriptures of course!
Would you weaponise scripture to contradict Jesus when the writer of Hebrews is clear that Jesus is the express image of the Almighty?
The way this conversation is going, it appears you would.
Talk about rightly dividing......we need to know who the final authority is......and if you had watched Brians presentation, you might have understood this.
Last edited: