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!
Sid can bounce around on his views, especially on subjects like prophecy, which he covers a lot. But I suppose he's trying to give others a voice as much as possible without fully knowing the answers himself. But on the up side, Sid Roth has a similar vision to me: He wants people to know that the gifts are still real for today, and that God is still in the business of accomplishing the Supernatural. That's an important message to get out, IMO. So you know, this is actually the message Keraz has been preaching for several years now. Can't say as I agree with him, though, because I believe we still have a lot further to go than that. But to each his own. I'm glad you have people you find interesting. These days that gets pretty tough for me. I miss the days when I could watch somebody and learn things without having to dig night and day in the word for it myself.
I've watched him some, yes.
Well, being excited about things is good if it causes you to live that much more for the Lord.
You just covered a lot of ground.
I agree with some of it, yes, only I've been fearing we're getting to a little too far afield of the OP's intentions for this thread, so maybe we might wanna hold off on the end-times discussions for another thread for now ; )
Of course He did because nothing is ever beyond His ability to know and that's why the names of penitents are written in heaven in the Book of Life.
How do you understand God's foreknowledge, 1stCL? And I'll refer specifically to Romans 8:29-30.
No, not at all, really. These are, I guess, two different things. Everything He does He does for His glory, but ~ the but indicating a contrast ~ He cannot, will not, compromise His glory in any way ~ He shares it with no one, as He says through the prophet Isaiah. If he were to compromise His justice at all, He would be lessening His glory, and He will not do that.
Hmm, no, the premise is wrong. I'm certainly not making that argument, nor would I. I would agree that that's where that argument would lead, but, well, He did not "create us in a state deserving Hell." He created us, yes, but we are born in this state not because He "created us that way," but rather because we have inherited this state of sinfulness ~ this fallen, sinful nature ~ from our first parents, Adam and Eve, who plunged God's creation (humanity included, of course) into this state when they disobeyed God in Genesis 3. Adam is the federal head of the human race, and because of his act (Eve was deceived), his failure, we are imputed his unrighteousness from birth. This is why we all, from birth, are in Adam, and thus deserving of Hell; in a very real sense, it is our own doing. We are all, from birth, in need of a savior, in need of the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, the second (final, perfect) Adam, the Savior, God Himself ~ to be in Christ.
Well, I don't quite understand what you're saying here, but we shouldn't accept the argument as you formed it above at all. The premise is wrong, so the entire argument itself is wrong, and thus the conclusion is invalid.
Sure, I get that, but understanding His ways is not the issue. The issue is thinking we know better than God, or that our ways ~ though it may, superficially, at least, seem so ~ are better, or more just, or more loving, or more Godly than God's ways. But some things, Hidden In Him, we have to say that about, because we are not given the answer, in which case we have to just accept them for what they are. And even in these cases, it's not really the "what" that we can't understand or grasp, it's the "why."
And I appreciate (really, really appreciate) the earnestness and politeness from you also!
Well I think this particular part of the exchange was a good start, if we want to go that way.
Unless it's something that is putting others, or a Christian community, in spiritual danger, I'm kinda like, "Yeah, here's my deal. Take it or leave it," LoL. And sharing differences of opinion on doctrine with others politely is a rather pleasant way to go through the day, IMO. Beats clanging one another over the head with clubs when the matter can't be proven beyond doubt either way anyway.
But you make it sound now as if God was not aware they would sin, which would conflict with His Omniscience. Do you believe He knew we would sin or no? If the answer is yes, then we're back to the same question: Why would He create us deserving of Hell, knowing we would sin in advance, if so many of us are actually going there after we die?
Never a premise I can accept, I'm afraid. We are given the mind of Christ, and if Christ is not given answers on such matters then this goes against Christ's Omniscience as well. Now some don't mind this one as much because they don't consider Him Divine. But for those who do, it would be a problem.
Yeah, there are circumstances where I will step in and get downright dogmatic and protective of people on things, but when it comes to just debating over doctrine with others, I've relaxed tremendously over the last 6 months especially. I realized, especially in debating the Divinity of Christ, that sometimes doctrinal positions can be exceedingly difficult to prove in light of the original languages, and that in the end it often comes down to those who have ears to hear wisdom and those who don't. So I no longer get too uptight about trying to "prove" my arguments to people.
God bless. We might be on stalemate with this one, but I've enjoying sharing some thoughts back and forth as well.
You really shouldn't say that Lifelong_sinner. That's just terribly provocative, and not winsome at all. To me, at least, there's no grace in that kind of "response."
