quietthinker
Well-Known Member
...and so you sidestep and generate doubt; drawing into question the Saviour.
Why do you do this Hidden? Is it because you don't recognise my language ie, it has no resonance with you?
What makes a doctrine false?
- 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!
Why do you do this Hidden? Is it because you don't recognise my language ie, it has no resonance with you?
Nothing is left to chance.
Many don't have a first chance.
That's a cheap shot. (back on IGNORE)
no that is BIBLE ignore the truth if you want . while your at it scratch your itchy ears
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
Because knowing you know him not allows me to inspect error.
Because you hold to false beliefs and when questioned you cannot show an understanding.
Let me put it this way - the hope which is in you is darkness and as the Lord said, "how great is that darkness?"
quietthinker
Well-Known Member
?? what are you talking about?
Now I understand where you are coming from!
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
In almost every interaction we have had you have discarded the Word of God for your own beliefs. For this reason, I am able to easily inspect your error.
That is a relief. In future, try to heed the Word before advancing your own theological positions.
Do you remember how you outright rejected the truth that God offered His Son, and that it was by God's determinate counsel (Acts 2:23) and foreknowledge that every intricate event was brought together in that singular moment in time?
Do you remember how adamant you were that it was solely by wicked hands that your salvation was accomplished?
This was my first interaction with you and to date nothing has changed.
quietthinker
Well-Known Member
I doubt it. In fact what you label 'the word of God' are in fact your own deductions.
quietthinker
Well-Known Member
You say 'that is a relief' not understanding what is meant.
You speak and maintain distortions generating accusations just like Jack. My guess is you do it because you are unable to countenance a generosity displayed by God. A generosity which cuts clean across the penal substitution theories you champion.
Last edited:
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
Nice try, Quiet, but aligning me with Jack was careless on your part. You’re free to speculate as much as you like, but it changes nothing about your situation.
Where did you get the idea that I hold to penal substitutionary atonement?
It seems you are reaching again, first with Jack, and now in trying to define what I believe without genuinely asking or seeking to understand.
But something has just become clear, you have misinterpreted Acts 2:23. Not only does the meaning of that verse remain hidden from you, it also appears that the true principles of atonement are unfamiliar to you also.
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
No, it is true, Quiet, and I think on some level you know it. A person cannot be corrected repeatedly from the Word and continue to ignore it while clinging to humanism, as you do, without consequence.
As if your interpretation is the correct one.
Do you have a Messiah complex?
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
All these empty responses do nothing to help either Quiet or yourself see how devoid you both are of God’s truth. Time and again, you have resisted what is true in order to cling to what is false.
A Messiah complex implies believing I can save or fix people. I do not. At most, I can guide, explain, or clarify. Salvation, truth, and transformation are not mine to dispense, and anyone who believes otherwise is already in trouble.
I’ve seen how you repeatedly copy and paste lists of quotations that you believe support your universalist claims. They do not. When this is shown to you, you end the discussion, because you are unable to enter into the Word or offer a coherent, scriptural explanation.
I'll give you and @quietthinker an example.
Isaiah 53 is considered to be one of the most Messianic chapters in the Bible.
Speaking of the suffering God would inflict on His Son:
Isaiah 53:10 “Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush him; he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.”
Other translations state that its
Isaiah 53:10 "Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief…”
How are we to understand the statement that it pleased God to bruise His Son?
What doctrinal truths flow from this verse?
Can the same teaching be clearly demonstrated from the New Testament?
Why did translators replace the phrase “it pleased the LORD” with “the will of the LORD”? Is there a meaningful distinction between the two?
For what purpose did God put His Son to grief?
If you both truly know God, you should be able to articulate what it is that gives Him pleasure.
These are not trick questions designed to trip you up; the answers are readily found in the Word of God. It is possible you may respond as you have in previous discussions, but let us see whether, together, you can arrive at the core doctrinal truth concerning what truly pleases God.
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
More of the same - the predictability is astounding.
Why not give it a go? what do you have to lose?
Isaiah 53 is considered to be one of the most Messianic chapters in the Bible.
Speaking of the suffering God would inflict on His Son:
Isaiah 53:10 “Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush him; he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.”
Other translations state that its
Isaiah 53:10 "Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief…”
How are we to understand the statement that it pleased God to bruise His Son?
What doctrinal truths flow from this verse?
Can the same teaching be clearly demonstrated from the New Testament?
Why did translators replace the phrase “it pleased the LORD” with “the will of the LORD”? Is there a meaningful distinction between the two?
For what purpose did God put His Son to grief?
If you both truly know God, you should be able to articulate what it is that gives Him pleasure.
These are not trick questions designed to trip you up; the answers are readily found in the Word of God. It is possible you may respond as you have in previous discussions, but let us see whether, together, you can arrive at the core doctrinal truth concerning what truly pleases God.
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
Why did you misrepresent SteVen?
Was it your intention to omit the words “I do not”?
Do you honestly believe you can acknowledge this, or has your pride built a fortress around your heart?
Surely you cannot be so unaware as to think that everyone reading these posts won’t see what you are doing.
Surely not!
