A question about Cain

  • 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!

bluestarwizard

New Member
Dec 12, 2006
12
0
0
50
Thanks Ros.
smile.gif
 

pointer

New Member
Oct 5, 2006
179
0
0
71
(bluestarwizard;5042)
You may need to explain your exact meaning here a bit further for me, even with the help of the Latin you provided, I guess I'm just not getting it.
Be encouraged, at least you found the correct context this time! If there are any statements of mine that you wish to query, please do likewise again and use the quote facility, without alteration, of course. (Doing that can save a great deal of difficulty and indeed suspicion.)
This is the church being referred to here, in case anyone didn't know
Is it? It does not say so. In any case, how does anyone know what or who the church is?
so from Christ's perspective, correct doctrine is only to be found with the minority.
But Christ is not here to tell us who the minority is. Almost every group is a minority in some respect.
Now, as for book referrals, please forgive me Pointer for recommending a great book by a well respected historian, I thought that since he is considered a world renowned expert his views might prove useful as a quide to the feasibility of the ideas we were discussing.
smile.gif
You really are an addict of my posts! Of course a one world government is feasible, and has been mooted for a very long time now, but we need more than feasibility. Refer to all the books you like, poster, but don't expect to get anywhere until you do as I advised you.
However, the recommendation of Guigley's book was not the only discourse in my post, so your remark about a book referral in your experience being an "advertisement for an argument that is a failure from the start", and it's insinuation of my having nothing substantive of my own to offer on the subject is without merit.
For all your words you have not yet made any substantive contribution whatever, Chris. We are still discussing little more than your forum etiquette, unfortunately. You have not proved or given direct evidence that a single world government is planned; you mentioned Cain's descendants, but have not proved that these people are an identifiable group. Even if you succeed with both projects, you need to make a connexion between that group and the proposed one world government. Then you need to show that it would be a bad thing. And of course this minority idea is a bit like asking how long a piece of string is.
After browsing through a few threads I see that this has been discussed before, so I consider it doubtful any argument or amount of documentation I could provide would do anything other than fill pages with posts, it most certainly would not change your opinion on the subject as you're already convinced of your position.
I have not contributed to any threads on eschatology. What is my position? I'd be very interested to know!
smile.gif
 

bluestarwizard

New Member
Dec 12, 2006
12
0
0
50
For all your words you have not yet made any substantive contribution whatever, Chris.
Well that certainly is an arrogant statement, arrogant as it may be thought it is simply your opinion, and I'm sure there are some who would disagree with you. In any case you have certainly made no more a compelling argument to the contrary other than to instruct me in what type of information you would consider valid to qualify as a contribution.
Quote:This is the church being referred to here, in case anyone didn't know Is it? It does not say so. In any case, how does anyone know what or who the church is?
It does say so, Paul has charged Timothy with Preaching the Word of God. Since those that would be preached to concerning proper doctrine are those in the church it is quite obvious who is being spoken to. The scripture in question also states that "the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine", the world has never had anything that would approach sound doctrine at any time, so once again it is clear that it is the church being spoken of. With information right there to let you know who is being spoken to I can't understand why you would make such a statement. The church consists of all who are believers in Christ.
Quote:so from Christ's perspective, correct doctrine is only to be found with the minority. But Christ is not here to tell us who the minority is. Almost every group is a minority in some respect.
Christ isn't here defacto to tell us the meanings of anything he said, that's what His Word is for, and it tells you very plainly in Revelation who the minority is He's talking about and what doctrine they teach that puts them in this minority.
Refer to all the books you like, poster, but don't expect to get anywhere until you do as I advised you.
Don't expect to get anywhere until I do as you advised me, once again, whether I have gotten anywhere or not is merely a matter of your own personal opinion.I think it would be better if you would list the errors you see with my and others' view of Cain's history and let me respond to each of those as I can, otherwise we will simply do nothing but swap insults.
smile.gif
 

RoyalPriestHood

New Member
Dec 13, 2006
5
0
0
48
We must remember why God delivers or shows anyone mercy... Its because He is Love.. Who of us would perserve anyone who tormented our children, wouldnt most people want to just rid themselves of their punishers. Yet God In His love, still provides a way of escape, even then He doesn't utterly destroy you, He allows you to be tormented forever.. His Love is obvious in all the standerds He alone sets up as examples to us.
 

ROS777

New Member
Sep 21, 2006
260
3
0
53
(RoyalPriestHood;5056)
We must remember why God delivers or shows anyone mercy... Its because He is Love.. Who of us would perserve anyone who tormented our children, wouldnt most people want to just rid themselves of their punishers. Yet God In His love, still provides a way of escape, even then He doesn't utterly destroy you, He allows you to be tormented forever.. His Love is obvious in all the standerds He alone sets up as examples to us.
Yes, RoyalPriestHood love is important. Should we love Satan? No, he is a son of perdition, meaning sentenced to die.Tormenting forever? No, in the Lake of Fire at the white throne judgement, he is made ashes from within as well as everything that is thrown in the Lake of Fire.That is more merciful then being tormented forever with no hope.
 

RoyalPriestHood

New Member
Dec 13, 2006
5
0
0
48
We are to hate any charchter or idea, and yes the works of satan...But Love, being the Lord Himself should be in us, we walk by the Power of His Love. He leads The way. Love God, Love The Body of Christ, serve...I sertainly hope you were not serious about loving satan..if so, then I encourage you that we are told not to love the world nor anything in the world, why well because the love of The Father is not in any of those things. :study:
 

pointer

New Member
Oct 5, 2006
179
0
0
71
(bluestarwizard;5053)
I'm sure there are some who would disagree with you.
Let them speak.
In any case you have certainly made no more a compelling argument to the contrary other than to instruct me in what type of information you would consider valid to qualify as a contribution.
I cannot argue to the contrary if there is no substance to argue against.
It does say so, Paul has charged Timothy with Preaching the Word of God. Since those that would be preached to concerning proper doctrine are those in the church it is quite obvious who is being spoken to.
People who have lusts and itching ears cannot be the church. They may call themselves the church, or they may be Muslims, New Agers, Christian Scientists, all manner of things.
The scripture in question also states that "the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine", the world has never had anything that would approach sound doctrine at any time,
The world is not stated to have any doctrine, only that it would not endure it. The church is the pillar and foundation of the truth, or it is not the church at all.
Christ isn't here defacto to tell us the meanings of anything he said, that's what His Word is for, and it tells you very plainly in Revelation who the minority is He's talking about and what doctrine they teach that puts them in this minority.
Who, then? The Southern Baptists?
I think it would be better if you would list the errors you see with my and others' view of Cain's history
You will let me see your history so that I can comment, then.
we will simply do nothing but swap insults.
I haven't insulted, and I don't intend to start.
 

bluestarwizard

New Member
Dec 12, 2006
12
0
0
50
People who have lusts and itching ears cannot be the church. They may call themselves the church, or they may be Muslims, New Agers, Christian Scientists, all manner of things.
Give me your definition of what the church is Pointer? It could be that we are talking about two different things. The church is all those who are believers in Jesus Christ, and they can most certainly have lusts and itching ears as they are human, so you are quite wrong.
The world is not stated to have any doctrine, only that it would not endure it. The church is the pillar and foundation of the truth, or it is not the church at all.
The scripture stated that "the time would come when they would not endure sound doctrine", this means at one time they did have sound doctrine, so as I said before the world has never had sound doctrine, so this is definitly speaking to the church. As far as the church being the pillar and foundation of the truth, this could only be true if every denomination and Christian viewed everything the same way and we knew it for sure to be correct, because there are many different denominations that make up the church and I'm sure they all are incorrect in varying degrees on different doctrinal issues. The only pillar and foundation of truth is God's Word, none of us will ever have complete truth in this age, but we are all still "the church". I will bring up another point again that I've mentioned several times that proves this statement false. Christ considered all seven of the churches in Revelation to be the church, but they did not all posses %100 of the truth. In fact He found fault with the majority of them because they did not teach a particular doctrine that He considered important.
Quote:Christ isn't here defacto to tell us the meanings of anything he said, that's what His Word is for, and it tells you very plainly in Revelation who the minority is He's talking about and what doctrine they teach that puts them in this minority. Who, then? The Southern Baptists?
I answered this already, the Southern Baptists opinion in not needed, Revelation tells us plainly what doctrine was taught by the minority and was absent from the majority.
Quote:I think it would be better if you would list the errors you see with my and others' view of Cain's history You will let me see your history so that I can comment, then.
I see that you need to establish yourself as the one in control in a debate situation by establishing what is and what isn't permisible or substantive as welln as laying down all the ground rules, unfortunately I can't participate in this kind of debate.
 

pointer

New Member
Oct 5, 2006
179
0
0
71
(bluestarwizard;5079)
Give me your definition of what the church is Pointer? It could be that we are talking about two different things. The church is all those who are believers in Jesus Christ, and they can most certainly have lusts and itching ears as they are human
If you believe that, there is nothing left to say on this aspect as far as I am concerned.
The scripture stated that "the time would come when they would not endure sound doctrine", this means at one time they did have sound doctrine
It means that they endured sound doctrine, as indeed the apostles found, because they could not have planted churches otherwise.
there are many different denominations that make up the church
Denominations are man-made and Satanic divisions that are of not the smallest genuine consequence to God, except insofar as God uses everyone, one way or another. Christians may be part of them, but they have no spiritual significance. Many Christians are outside denominations, and the church is an invisible body that exists largely independently of denominations. No-one knows who is a Christian, and this notion that there is a discrete, identifiable minority somewhere is far from reality.
The only pillar and foundation of truth is God's Word
'The church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.' 1 Tim 3:15 NIV
I answered this already
Did you provide chapter and verse?
I see that you need to establish yourself as the one in control in a debate situation by establishing what is and what isn't permisible or substantive as welln as laying down all the ground rules, unfortunately I can't participate in this kind of debate.
I can't comment on what I cannot see. If I get no response on this I will assume that you are unwilling to furnish your history for scrutiny because it is of no value.
 

ROS777

New Member
Sep 21, 2006
260
3
0
53
ROS777;3364 said:
1 John 3:12: " not as Cain who was of the wicked one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his works were evil and his brothers's righteous.Jude 11 : Woe to them! For they have gone in the way of Cain, have run greedily in the error of Balaam for profit, and perished in the rebellion of Korah.Ahem, Cain, as he is thought of in the New Testament.
 

bluestarwizard

New Member
Dec 12, 2006
12
0
0
50
Denominations are man-made and Satanic divisions that are of not the smallest genuine consequence to God, except insofar as God uses everyone, one way or another.
I new sooner or later we would agree on something.
Many Christians are outside denominations, and the church is an invisible body that exists largely independently of denominations.
As am I, and even though you brought into question earlier the possibility of anyone knowing who or what the church is, you've done a pretty good job yourself of defining it. Again we agree on something.
'The church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.' 1 Tim 3:15 NIV
And it was in Timothy's day, when it had sound doctrine.
Did you provide chapter and verse?
Rev.2:7-9 Rev.3:7-9
I can't comment on what I cannot see. If I get no response on this I will assume that you are unwilling to furnish your history for scrutiny because it is of no value.
It is certainly your right to assume as you wish, but my not furnishing any history for your scrutiny has more to do with not wanting to waste hours of my time putting together information to present to someone who cares nothing for it but only wishes to argue. You are a talented debater sir, and I suspect you could argue the subtleties of charmin vs. angel soft in latin while watching TV, but I'm not here to provide for your entertainment, assume whatever you like.
 

pointer

New Member
Oct 5, 2006
179
0
0
71
(bluestarwizard;5086)
even though you brought into question earlier the possibility of anyone knowing who or what the church is, you've done a pretty good job yourself of defining it.
But not of identifying the church, which is a prerequisite for making any sense of your view.
And it was in Timothy's day, when it had sound doctrine.
So you didn't know this bit of Scripture.
Rev.2:7-9 Rev.3:7-9
Totally useless. All who call themselves Christians can and will claim that sort of thing.
It is certainly your right to assume as you wish, but my not furnishing any history for your scrutiny has more to do with not wanting to waste hours
Hours? Don't you have this already worked out? Didn't you say that others have a history of Cain? I'm surprised you haven't recommended a book by an illustrious author.
putting together information to present to someone who cares nothing for it but only wishes to argue.
It was all your idea! You wrote:'I think it would be better if you would list the errors you see with my and others' view of Cain's history and let me respond to each of those as I can'Don't you actually mean that you realise that you have met someone who will shred your 'facts' with ease?
I'm not here to provide for your entertainment, assume whatever you like.
Really? If not for entertainment, what? You've made some vague sort of claim concerning a descendancy of Cain, but provided not a scrap of evidence for it. You haven't justified the single government idea, or identified the minority you reckon to be part of. You know more than Paul, and your Revelation quotes are useless. If that isn't entertainment, I don't know what it is. It ain't education, that's for sure.
smile.gif
 

Christina

New Member
Apr 10, 2006
10,885
101
0
15
pointer Theres no point to your points it just grows tiresome.You have made the same arguments before they go no where.
 

bluestarwizard

New Member
Dec 12, 2006
12
0
0
50
Quote:Originally Posted by bluestarwizard View Posteven though you brought into question earlier the possibility of anyone knowing who or what the church is, you've done a pretty good job yourself of defining it.But not of identifying the church, which is a prerequisite for making any sense of your view.
Once again, the church consists of those who are believers in Christ, you're talking in circles here, what the church is and it's identity are one in the same and certainly not a prerequisite for making sense of my view at all. The church does not consist of a small group of "special" people, this is not what I've said, as Christ referred to all seven in Revelation as the church even though the majority were not teaching sound doctrine.
It was all your idea!
No, this was my idea.......
'I think it would be better if you would list the errors you see with my and others' view of Cain's history and let me respond to each of those as I can'
Not this...........
You will let me see your history so that I can comment, then.
Get the facts straight, your proposal was actually the exact opposite of mine and then you tried to turn it on me as being my idea, very clever.
Hours? Don't you have this already worked out? Didn't you say that others have a history of Cain? I'm surprised you haven't recommended a book by an illustrious author.
Yes, I completely understand the teaching of the Kenites; no, I don't have every single scripture that relates to the subject memorized. If you had specific objections then I would have been more than happy and able to respond to those. However, if I were to present a broad overview of the entire subject then it must be done in a proper format and in a way that's easy for all to understand, this would understandably take time. Surely you know these things already and should not need to make sarcastic comments like the one above. After skimming through some of your previous posts in other threads I've noticed this same tactic used before when a request was made for you to list specific objections, instead you insisted that they provide an entire overview of the subject. Basic strategy really, you cause the other person to make the first move thereby giving yourself the upper hand in the debate, you force them to lay out their cards so you can then pick and choose what to tear down and what to ignore, once again, quite clever.
Don't you actually mean that you realise that you have met someone who will shred your 'facts' with ease?
No, this is not actually what I mean, but thank you for asking.
Quote:Rev.2:7-9 Rev.3:7-9Totally useless. All who call themselves Christians can and will claim that sort of thing.
Is this your idea of shredding facts with ease, this statement doesn't even make any sence, as I don't recall hearing the majority of people who call themselves Christians making any claims about knowing what is taught in the verses I provided. Exactly what sort of thing is it from these verses that all who call themselves Christians will claim in your opinion? Once again I believe you and I are talking apples and oranges, of course it would be you talking apples.As I said before, I could put together an excellent study with plenty of fine documentation and it would only serve to waste hours of my time and provide you with an opportunity to engage in intellectual cyber wrestling. Not falling into that trap, if the information is of interest to you then it is readily available, I have no interest in this type of debate.
 

pointer

New Member
Oct 5, 2006
179
0
0
71
(bluestarwizard;5106)
Once again, the church consists of those who are believers in Christ
Yes, but you believe that the church contains people who give rein to their lusts, and who cannot abide the truth. I believe that the church is those who have self-control, showing the fruits of the Spirit, who love the truth, who are prepared to die for Christ's sake, as Revelation tells us. Only people like that are allowed into my church. So there is little chance that we can agree on this matter.
your proposal was actually the exact opposite of mine
If you can explain how I am to ask questions about a history of Cain without seeing it, I will understand that you might be right.
Yes, I completely understand the teaching of the Kenites
You think that the Kenites were Cain's descendants? We've already discussed that in this thread. As you have read back to #31 at least, I'm surprised you don't know that.
no, I don't have every single scripture that relates to the subject memorized.
Do you have even a single Scripture in your memory? I believe that this notion has gained some credence in the home of home-spun heresies, the USA. There must be a website to swiftly give you all the gen, surely.
If you had specific objections then I would have been more than happy and able to respond to those.
There are objections already in his thread. There is a sort of person who waits for a lost argument to take its course, and then later joins the thread pretending not to have read it. I do hope we are not dealing with that now.
I don't recall hearing the majority of people who call themselves Christians making any claims about knowing what is taught in the verses I provided.
But then you haven't asked them.All we know about this minority is that you consider yourself to be one of them; we now suppose that you think that the Kenites were Cain's descendants, but you have no evidence for that, so far. We suppose that the Kenites are in some way linked to an alleged plot to have a single world government. But not a syllable of evidence for any of it.
 

ROS777

New Member
Sep 21, 2006
260
3
0
53
(kriss;5100)
pointer Theres no point to your points it just grows tiresome.You have made the same arguments before they go no where.
rolleyes.gif
You got that right, KrissYawn--Oh excuse me