Why did Peter need to announce the withering if they had witnessed it the previous day?
[
The Bible - Fiction, or non-fiction?
- Thread starter St. SteVen
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
[
You know a better solution than God? lol
I think you're digging a DEEP hole for yourself on Judgment Day when you stand before God Whom you're accusing!
Why does that upset you what Jesus clearly said? Jesus said burning Sodom alive and drowning all on Earth but 8 is FACT! You said you love the Bible. Did you change your mind?
You asked about Gods character, it shows consistency, he would have spared Sodom if there were ten as well. There was what? Lot, (his wife, who would have made it had she not looked back) which would be two, his sons and laws (if they didnt think he was joking) which would be four, and his two daughters, which would be six.
So there just eight during the days of the flood (and so under ten before destruction water ) and there would have 6 of them in the days of Lot but it ended up being just 3 of them (and so again, under ten before destruction by fire).
So according to the character of God (which you asked about) simply shows consistency before destruction between the pictures of water and fire there.
Of course, but the accounts don't align.
There was no need for Peter to announce what they had all witnessed the previous day.
It withered immediately, correct?
[
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
The word translated in the NIV as "sorry" has this entry in Strong's Concordance:
"05162. nacham [naw-kham ;] a primitive root; properly, to sigh, i.e. breathe strongly; by implication, to be sorry, i.e. (in a favorable sense) to pity, console or (reflexively) rue; or (unfavorably) to avenge (oneself): comfort (self), ease [one s self], repent(-er,-ing, self)."
So not "regret" in the sense of wishing He had never done something, or admitting that He had made a mistake.
Why does punishing sin have to have a value? God is perfectly holy, so by His nature, He cannot simply "turn blind eye" to sin
As for the verse from 1 John, if it meant that Christ died for people who don't believe in Him, John would be going against so much of what he had written in his gospel, which makes it clear that Jesus died for His sheep, that is, those who believe in Him. For example:
““But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. “And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand.” (Joh 10:26-28 NKJV)
In his letter, John is addressing Jewish Christians, who had been brought up to believe that they alone were God's chosen people. That is the context of him writing, "not for ours only." He was explaining to them that salvation in Jesus Christ is available to people from all nations.
Did you read what Peter said? He was taught by Jesus in person!
2 Peter 2:4-7
4 For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; 5 and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; 6 and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly;
Is that true? (nope)
2 Corinthians 5:18-20 NIV
All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation:
19 that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them.
And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. 20 We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors,
as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God.
[
Stevie seems convinced that his morals are much higher than God's. And yet stevie said "I love the Bible". Won't Judgment Day be fascinating!!
Last edited:
It's more than that. You stopped short of the full quote.
Was the atonement incomplete?
1 John 2:2 NIV
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.
[
He could just be speaking of where it mentions
"The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence"
So God took them all out (that would be giving him the benefit of the doubt)
Stevie found a verse he likes. He should have kept reading
My 16 He that believeth not shall be DAMNED!
Who said he made a promise there?
He didnt even make one to Abraham. He just expressed that if there were ten righteous he would not destroy the place. Sodom was his second rodeo, Noahs flood was the first rodeo, Gods character (which you are asking about) appears to follow the same course (as far consistency between the two pictures) as his limits go before ending things. If there be ten, there were not ten in either place.
My context was your own words, "What does Noah's flood teach us about the character of God?"
It shows the consistency of God between the two pictures
