Search results

This is the statement... What they heard (internally) was condemnation and their defence was to blame, to find fault, Adam with God, Adam with Eve, Eve with the serpent. This was now their new 'go to' and it initiated the human default. God on the other hand sought them out 'as was his...

Our 'natural' definitions/ understanding of God's love, of his justice and judgement require revisiting. Without this we will superimpose/ project fallen human assumptions onto God. How do we revisit this? By hearing and observing the only eyewitness and unmitigated revelation of God....namely...

The God we ultimately worship is defined by the character we defend he has. This definition is also manifested in our attitudes and behaviour towards 'the least of these my brethren....Jesus. Jesus warned us, 'be careful HOW you hear' Luke 18:18 Here's an example of poor 'hearing'. After A&E...

The assumption that their death was initiated from God flies in the face of Jesus statement 'I have come that they may have life abundantly' God does not induce fear which is what was produced when these guys dropped dead. What is reinforced in this event is Jesus' statement prefacing 'I have...

Re Ananias and Sapphira .... The revelation of the truth which they conspired to conceal was too much for their emotional/ mental system. They died of heart/ brain failure induced by instant emotional/ mental overload.....as is, 'their hearts failing them for fear' idea.

I don't view it like that (one of discomfort) I will say however that the severity of God seen independent of Jesus informs the logic of man's disposition to violence. For example, consider the amount of posts on hell and punishment and their justifications as opposed to presenting Jesus so that...

We must see Jesus through the Father's eyes and we must see the Father through Jesus' eyes. This will give us balance. Any other view (and there are many) distort, malign and misrepresent the heart of God......irrespective of how learned or pious they appear.

Well there yer go...you've decided on labels (they become your defining 'end of story') and more than that, your definition of labels informs you without understanding HOW and WHY others use them...in their context.

You are spinning off into all sorts of imagining and projection Behold.

It is.....a label with baggage. The type of baggage is determined by the one doing the defining. Watch Brad's clip....you don't need or have to concede anything. Not having seen it and relying on the reports of others only puts you into the category warned by the texts you quoted below

The Gospel is Gods message of kindness to fallen mankind. Does that fit into Calvin or Luther's legal model or Mother Teresa's hospital model? What I know is that God is kind even to those who murder him.

So there you go, you validate my previous statement about 'labelling'...post #231

Did you watch Brad's 'Gospel in Chairs' presentation?

You see them as bombs instead of prompts to consider what is said.

or is your projection a defence mechanism because you refuse to or can't answer my questions

Did you say you did a course for certification or was it purchased on eBay at discount?

The fact that you short circuit in your mind by labelling (the validity of that label in your mind allows you to negate thinking objectively) creates fertile soil for all manner of justification.....whether it be thoughts, conclusions or actions.

Do you even know what born again means Behold ?

Is it a surprise? Blaming this party or that party is part of the play book. Look at what the Nations do, subvert the truehearted, dominate, colonise, exploit etc. Why throw our hands up in shock horror as if it wasn't known this stuff is coming down the pike?

All humanity...in particular, those who believe. All are dead in their sins.