Daring Death - a Sin?

[Job]

God is not even in control of our tougnes. We can say or do what we like always.

I bet your video preacher told you that. That's what happens when you rely on others to do your studying for you.

It would appear God can control our tongues. What do you think of that?

Luke 1
20 But behold, you will be mute and not able to speak until the day these things take place, because you did not believe my words which will be fulfilled in their own time.”

k

 

[Job]

You are talking from ignorance and telling me to think.

This made me smile.

 

[aspen]

aspen,

Are you saying that if someone commits suicide that it is God who is choosing how they die?

Oz

If God is sovereign, indeed.

 

[aspen]

The perception of free will is relative to our place in creation. If my dog could conceive of free will, he would definitely believe he possessed it. He would claim that he chooses to put his butt on the floor because he is choosing to ask for a treat; safety and comfort when he seeks out his family; order, when he obeys commands. Dog owners can see the determinism in play every time we look at our dogs - right down to the aspects designed through breeding.

I am sure God sees the same as he loves us

 

[Stranger]

Well one thing is sure we will find out in time wont we.

Indeed we will.

And, I don't read any messages you send to my profile. I just delete them. So, you are wasting your time.

Stranger

 

[Richard_oti]

because the children are not literal children. Fwiw you can continue to believe that they are as long as you like, and still consider that they represent another concept that might serve you now, simply as a thought exercise. If it yields no fruit, toss it then.

With regard to your first sentence, long ago I explored that as perhaps an option.

However:
Job 1:2 And there were born unto him seven sons and three daughters.

Job 1:18 While he was yet speaking, there came also another, and said, Thy sons and thy daughters were eating and drinking wine in their eldest brother's house;

If we start here and attempt to rationalize it as not being literal, where do we stop?

To use an example that verges upon hyperbole: Do we then allow it to be considered that "Jesus" is not literal, but merely represents some other concept?

From my perspective, that is the inherent danger when we start to allow the text to be merely "figurative" and remove any "literal" aspect. Once it becomes merely "figurative" or "spiritual", we have what amounts to nothing more than the "Gospel of SkyAngel".

Yes, some things are perhaps hard to swallow:

Joh 6:60 Many therefore of his disciples, when the heard this, said, This is a hard saying; who can hear it? 61 But Jesus knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at this, said unto them, Doth this cause you to stumble?

From my perspective, one has to admire Job:
Job 2:10 But he said unto her, Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh. What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil? In all this did not Job sin with his lips.

Anyway, just my 1/2 cent. I appreciate your post.

 

[Richard_oti]

I have thought the same thing. People are not possessions or cattle that can be replaced. And I don't believe for a second that is what God is implying in Job. If I may, I believe the lesson of Job's suffering is "the Lord turned the captivity of Job, when he prayed for his friends: also the LORD gave job twice as much as he had before." When we lose this world, God restores. Eternally. The promise of abundant life. Satan cannot take away life (in Christ).

I agree, the "replacement" is not the moral of the story. However, it remains a hard pill to swallow.

 

[Richard_oti]

Then why bother talking to anyone online. I posted a video of a man who in my opinion is walking as close to Chrislike as anyone on the planet. I have learened from Him and other men. I will only learn from them if they are walking the walk and he is. I gace my opinion of most men and what you find in them. This guy is the real deal. You cant preach the way he does and be false. You know them by there fruits.

You and I are from vastly different times on the internet. It does not require video to speak with someone online. You and I are speaking now, completely apart from video between you and I.

You are free to attempt to relay part of his message in your own words. In that manner, perhaps we both might learn. But from my perspective, to post the work of another in video or to copy and paste quotes does nothing to help you learn. We learn most, when we do the work ourselves.

Not sure how you missed it its in Gods word.

Oh gee, how condescending.

As I stated, it's been a long time since I have read it. The last time I would have read it, would have been from the Torah portion, not the NT.

I spoke in genearal about men. We clearly see the huge amount of confusion in here let alone the 50.000 denominations. where men teach. there not all wrong but most are in most things.

I do realize you spoke in general. But remember, to me, the video you posted is no more than another opinion of a man. You are more than free to convey some part of his message in your own words. There is benefit to stating things in your own words.

<snip>

 

[aspen]

'Why even bother talking with people online?'

This a great question. Everything posted online, unless it is loving, is ego. Aquianas would declare all of it, 'straw'. George MacDonald describes an eerie depiction of a message board in a snapshot of Hell, in his book, Lilith; two armies fight to the death daily to determine who is right about doctrine.

 

[OzSpen]

If God is sovereign, indeed.

aspen,

In God's sovereignty, he allows human responsibility. It started way back in the beginning with Adam and Eve choosing to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen 3:1-7).

Otherwise we have a monster God who sovereignly sent millions of Jews to the gas chambers under Hitler. You have a God who caused the slaughter on Sept 11, 2001. This sovereign Lord created all the evil in the world.

I don't buy into that theology as an accurate expression of the sovereignty of God.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

i am not trying to find God with logic at all though, i hope you understand;

bb,

I don't understand because you have a misunderstanding of logic. To even write a sentence on this forum requires logic. God gave us the Bible as a written document and that means he made logical statements so that I might understand what he was trying to communicate.

Whether you know it or not, you use logic in the sentences you write on this forum but it becomes fallacious reasoning when you use logical fallacies.

'If the writing is not logical, then the reader will not be convinced of the logic of the analysis' (Sentence logic and punctuation).

Oz

 

[bbyrd009]

If we start here and attempt to rationalize it as not being literal, where do we stop?

imo there is no reason the story cannot be literally true also; but "7" sons and "3" daughters might also be speaking on another level, and it does not hurt to consider parables from a completely different pov than the one you might be being led into, using known symbology for, in this case, 3, 7, son, and daughter, or consider whether Job is not an accurate representation of every seeker who accepts God conditionally, with their minds but not their heart, no relationship, what we all do at first, a religious approach, to fit God into our life instead of our life into God.

Instead Job is like almost worshipped as an example of a "sinless" guy who nonetheless got catastrophe heaped upon them by a capricious God, in the Christian retelling. And then we apply Job to ourselves when something we deem "evil" befalls us, instead of applying him to everyone else. And we then assume the position of one of "3" friends, each of whom sinned in a spec...well, etc

 

[bbyrd009]

Do we then allow it to be considered that "Jesus" is not literal, but merely represents some other concept?

that would be a vastly superior approach imo as Christ is essentially a concept, a Spirit, and that stuff was written by guys who were acknowledged to be dialectical masters. And it still shows today--rabbis forum completely differently from us. Anyway, by all means believe it in as literal a level as you like too, but understand that you can read water or wine, and there is abundant acknowledged symbolism in Scripture.

Few people expect Christ to appear with a sword literally protruding from His mouth; swords and mouths have spiritual meanings then, obviously.

 

[bbyrd009]

where do we stop?

stop when it does not produce fruit

which in my experience is usually some painful revelation about some sin of omission or whatever. something that i could do to manifest Christ better, that i haven't been doing yet because i won't look as cool or something

 

[bbyrd009]

From my perspective, that is the inherent danger when we start to allow the text to be merely "figurative" and remove any "literal" aspect. Once it becomes merely "figurative" or "spiritual", we have what amounts to nothing more than the "Gospel of SkyAngel".

to that i would say that any figurative interpretation will have to stand up to the fire one way or another, may as well share it in a forum lol, but tbh if love your neighbor is 9/10ths of the law, imo we basically just debate the other 10% anyway

 

[bbyrd009]

I don't understand because you have a misunderstanding of logic. To even write a sentence on this forum requires logic. God gave us the Bible as a written document and that means he made logical statements so that I might understand what he was trying to communicate.

i can only ask you to consider that the Bible even says that it is written in such a way so as to deceive, be "seen and not seen," in parables to confound the evil, etc. And the authors are acknowledged to have thought dialectically, google can explain more, but it is worth considering that the Bible was not written logically at all.

 

[bbyrd009]

Whether you know it or not, you use logic in the sentences you write on this forum but it becomes fallacious reasoning when you use logical fallacies.

then please understand that the term is being used "as opposed to dialectical thought"

what can be interpreted as logical statements are being made with the full knowledge that they are directly contradicted in other passages of Scripture, but in such a way that it is hard to dispute either. quite ingenious really

 

[bbyrd009]

every, single thing that you (or i) think you know from Scripture is strictly your opinion, and there is someone else out there with an equally "valid" doctrine to dispute yours. at least i think so

 

[bbyrd009]

because of this, the closest approach to any verbally expressed truth is like contained in a post and a contending reply, as weird as that seems; both should be considered

 

[Sword]

You and I are from vastly different times on the internet. It does not require video to speak with someone online. You and I are speaking now, completely apart from video between you and I.

You are free to attempt to relay part of his message in your own words. In that manner, perhaps we both might learn. But from my perspective, to post the work of another in video or to copy and paste quotes does nothing to help you learn. We learn most, when we do the work ourselves.




Oh gee, how condescending.

As I stated, it's been a long time since I have read it. The last time I would have read it, would have been from the Torah portion, not the NT.




I do realize you spoke in general. But remember, to me, the video you posted is no more than another opinion of a man. You are more than free to convey some part of his message in your own words. There is benefit to stating things in your own words.

<snip>

Really this is all your going to reply to. You tell me how we learn together as I post my thought. But you decide to ignore every thing of any importance and decide to talk about the video,online . All I said about your wife and healing and faith and ignorance and you come back with nothing .

Really pathetic. You call me condecending because you got hurt. I remember a verse and you dont and you get hurt. listen it wont matter to you what ever I post. You are acting the same as all the other little petals that get hurt when confronted with truth . you dont wont to listen to people like me. and clearly you dont want to talk about what I said. other than the unmeaningfull tripe about talking online. You came in talking about why you wife was taken and I answer why and you dont even mention it. Its the biggest thing you heard since she passed. Wilfully ignorant