CARM Christian Needs your Help!

treeplanter

Well-known member
That wasn't a complete sentence. I fixed it for you.
You're really flailing, aren't you?

Face it, stigs
I've got you over a barrel

I know it
You know it
Everybody knows it

Why are you trying so hard to defend the indefensible?

Either God NEEDED to drown babies in order to save and resurrect them - in which case He is an inept god
or
God NEEDLESSLY chose the harmful means of drowning by which to save and resurrect babies - in which case He is an immoral god


Which is it, stiggy?
 

treeplanter

Well-known member
........... of monkeys, which you're more fun than, especially when I can make you repeat your whimpering over and over and over again as I'm doing here.



One of my favorite songs of all time. Seriously. Give a listen:




Both are pronouns.
IF God saved babies from this fallen world and resurrected them to a better one by means of drowning them during the Great Flood

{which is what you have been maintaining for years}


Then there can be only two possibilities!


1. God saved and resurrected these babies by means of drowning them because He was not able to do so by any other means

{in which case the harm was NEEDED}


or


2. God consciously and purposefully chose to inflict the unnecessary harm of drowning as the means by which to save and resurrect these babies even though He could just as easily have chosen non-harmful means

{in which case the harm was NEEDLESS}


Which is it, stiggy?
 

Algor

Well-known member
I think I'll let the eighth time I answered that in the past two days suffice.

So what did you think about the Leonard Cohen song?
I have a 1st edition of his A Spicebox Called Earth among my useless treasures.

The Future, This Waltz and Come Healing are 3 of my favorite songs of his.
 

Hark

Well-known member
Yes, really - that is why we have mutually-contradictory Christian philosophies that can all use the Bible as justification.
Calvinism vs arminianism, for example.
Errors can be found on both sides of that issue for why no one should be identifying with any one Calvin nor Armin on those issues.

We are to prove everything by Him at that throne of grace & scripture in the KJV can discern good & evil on those issues when we trust Jesus as our Good Shepherd to prove or reprove everything on both sides of those issues.

Thanks to Jesus Christ, it is because scripture cannot go against scripture is why I rely on the KJV for the meat / actual message of His words to reprove everything by Him.

So when you see contradictions, that can only mean misapplication of His words out of context of the message and ignoring other scripture that exposes and reproves such misapplication of scripture, but only Jesus can show that to you. So ask for wisdom from Him today..
 

Eightcrackers

Well-known member
Errors can be found on both sides of that issue for why no one should be identifying with any one Calvin nor Armin on those issues.
Well, the former is "salvation open to some" and the latter is "salvation open to all"... so, what's the alternative?
(Salvation for none? Because that is my position, actually!)
Thanks to Jesus Christ, it is because scripture cannot go against scripture
But it does - that is why we have contradictory doctrines.
Each says the other is wrong, but because both doctrines still exist, neither has been able to prove it.
So when you see contradictions, that can only mean misapplication of His words out of context of the message and ignoring other scripture that exposes and reproves such misapplication of scripture
Yes - this is exactly what Doctrine X says about Doctrine Anti-X, and vice-versa.
Neither side can prove why the other is wrong.

The other thing it can "mean" is that the Bible was

written by uninspired men,
translated by more uninspired men, and
compliled by even more uninspired men,

and some mistakes slipped through the cracks.

IMO, the Bible is not straightforward enough and too ambiguous to be the inspiration of an all-powerful god who was/is determined to get an important message across.
 

Hark

Well-known member
Well, the former is "salvation open to some" and the latter is "salvation open to all"... so, what's the alternative?
(Salvation for none? Because that is my position, actually!)
The invitation for salvation is open to all as Jesus is able to save all but not all will heed that invitation to be saved. Indeed, no man can come to the Son unless the Father draws them per John 6:44/ The Father hides the truth from some and reveals them to others per Matthew 11:25-27. Why is that done? God the Father knows who seeks Him to be delivered from their sins to live with Him, from those that prefer their evil deeds for why they will not believe in Him to be saved per John 3:18-21. That means our believing in Jesus Christ is the work of God also.


But it does - that is why we have contradictory doctrines.
Only when you align with other scripture with His help, can the truth be fully understood.
Each says the other is wrong, but because both doctrines still exist, neither has been able to prove it.
Depends on what it is, but each side need to be objective and with His help prove or reprove on both sides of the issue being discussed.
Yes - this is exactly what Doctrine X says about Doctrine Anti-X, and vice-versa.
Neither side can prove why the other is wrong.
Scripture with the Lord's help can.
The other thing it can "mean" is that the Bible was

written by uninspired men,
translated by more uninspired men, and
compliled by even more uninspired men,

and some mistakes slipped through the cracks.

IMO, the Bible is not straightforward enough and too ambiguous to be the inspiration of an all-powerful god who was/is determined to get an important message across.
Jesus referred to it and testified that the scripture cannot be broken.

I rely on the KJV because of the warning Jesus said in John 14:23-24 & John 15:20. That is why leaning on Him as my Good shepherd & friend, He has led me to rely on the KJV for the meat of His words in discerning good & evil by His words.

All I can ask you to do is go before that throne of grace and ask Jesus Christ for help in proving all things by the KJV.

If you are not a believer, then ask the Father to reveal His Son to you. If you are seeking for the truth, and not an excuse because you prefer not to repent or be delivered from your sins, then expect an answer. I can understand how the world can be misleading and Christians confusing everything, but when you ignore all that and seek the Lord, you may be drawn to the Son by the Father right now to be able to see the Truth.
 

stiggy wiggy

Well-known member
Speaking of screwing up - you might want to take look at my new thread

You mean the idiotic one where you copy/pasted three non-contradictory things I said, all of which I stand by, and none of which necessitated any "wriggling?"

You like to watch men wiggle?
 

Tercon

Well-known member
John 14:6
“Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” “

When Jesus says that NO ONE comes to the Father except through Him – does He actually mean NO ONE?


Does NO ONE mean, that of the human race, there are none who can come to God except through Him
or
does Jesus actually mean to say that there are certain people who can come to God without going through Him?

Does NO ONE mean, that of all people, there are none who can come to God except through Him
or
does Jesus actually mean to say that there are certain individuals who can come to God without going through Him?


It’s my belief that when Jesus Christ says that NO ONE comes to the Father except through Him – He means this to include everybody – the entire human race, all people!

It is my belief that God says what He means and means what He says
NO ONE means NO ONE!


My Christian friend, though, seems confused
He maintains, for example, that when YHWH uses the term HUMAN RACE – it’s not meant to include all people

Specifically, when YHWH says:
“I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created”
{Genesis 6:7}
my Christian friend, somehow, insists that babies were not wiped away like the rest of the HUMAN RACE to which they obviously belong…

Likewise, my Christian friend asserts that when YHWH uses the term ALL PEOPLE – it’s meant to include only some persons on earth, namely those above a certain age

EX:
“I am going to put an end to all people"
{Genesis 6:13}
means, according to my Christian friend, that YHWH drowned everyone except babies - as if babies are not a part of ALL PEOPLE…



Anyway, here’s my concern:

If my Christian friend can’t get it through his head that HUMAN RACE and ALL PEOPLE automatically and absolutely includes babies, then who is to say that he might not get it into his head that one can come to God without faith in Jesus Christ despite Jesus Christ assuring us that NO ONE may come to the Father except through Him?

I’d hate for my friend to lose his salvation…

Can anyone help him to understand that NO ONE means NO ONE just as surely as HUMAN RACE means HUMAN RACE and ALL PEOPLE means ALL PEOPLE?

All it means is that Christ is the truth incarnate and you can't know the truth and reality of God without believing the truth in reality. And the only people excluded from the Kingdom of God is unbelievers who disbelieve the truth and reality of God exists, because outside of or without a belief in reality the truth is unknowable. And that's where unbelievers find themselves.
 

treeplanter

Well-known member
You mean the idiotic one where you copy/pasted three non-contradictory things I said, all of which I stand by, and none of which necessitated any "wriggling?"
Who said anything about these particular statements of yours being contradictory?

To the contrary, {and for a change} there is nothing contradictory in what you said:

You agreed that it is immoral to consciously and purposefully inflict needless harm
You agreed that God inflicted the needless harm of drowning upon babies
You agreed that God, on this basis, is neither good nor just

All of which perfectly follows a logical progression
 
Top