Senseless condemnation | Flippiefanus
In a commentary Emil asked me to my interpretation of Abraham's mission moviestarplanet and discuss two passages from the Bible. Since I did not have a theological education has not been I anxious to provide Bible layouts. No now I lie, as Farmer in Exile all noticed, I am not afraid of my head in a beehive to cross;-) and it is not this just looks bad if I would shy away from such direct requests. moviestarplanet
That the mission of Abraham is concerned, there obviously volumes that can be written. Maybe I should ask for Emil more be specific about what aspect of Abraham's mission he wants me to discuss. In the meantime, I can refer him to what is written in Hebrews 11 verses 11 to 19 about Abraham. Maybe this answer your questions Emil.
When ordered Samuel, "Bring King Agag of Amalek to me." moviestarplanet Agag said cheerfully walked up to him and said, "Now I am not afraid moviestarplanet that they me will not kill you." Samuel said to him: "As you sword has made women childless, so shall thy mother be among the childless women. "And Samuel hewed Agag in pieces before the Lord in Gilgal.
Elisa is thence to Bethel. While he was on the way to there, a lot of little boys came out of the city, and mocked him, "Higher up, thou bald head; Higher moviestarplanet up, you baldhead! "He turned around, looked at them and cursed them in the name of the Lord. Two bears came out of the woods and mauled two and forty of the children.
These two parts to Tell if parts which I have already been asked before, over and over delivered sometime comments. Clearly, the question that is being asked here about the justification of these events. In both cases it seems as if God by implication approved events. The question then is why something for us today as gruweldare looks to be approved by God. The short answer in the first case is that of obedience. Samuel simply did what God commanded, and that Saul failed to do. The question moviestarplanet then is why God commanded that Amalek must be destroyed. Today we will act so as genocide (genocide) see. Read what I wrote in the context below.
The short answer to the second part is a mockery of God's prophet on a mockery of God himself put. It is therefore down to the dismantling of God's authority again obedience compromise. The question then is whether the fresh selection of the children may have very severe in comparison with the offense. Again I refer you to what I write below. It is interesting to note that there is talk specifically of 42 children who were torn apart by the bears. The number 42 has a special meaning in the Bible. It comes down to perfection. One can, therefore the punishment that the children received interpret as the perfect punishment, not too much and not too little.
Now for the long answer. Therefore we have to stand back and look at what the question behind the question of the interpretation moviestarplanet of the scriptures. It will in fact have a conviction of God's judgment. As I explained to Emil make such a judgment for someone who believes moviestarplanet in the existence of a true living God, simply makes no sense. moviestarplanet Any conviction aims, the administration of an appropriate action, such as punishment or reward. Any conviction depends not just in the air, it requires action. By condemning one tries to act condemned to limit in the future. However, to judge for God to totally pointless because you can not God punish. Someone to punish or reward a person has to be able to exercise a degree of control over that person. Man can not exercise any control moviestarplanet over the living.
The implication of a judgment from God so that those who make such judgment express the assumption that God does not exist. The alternative does not make sense. This conviction is perhaps more of a condemnation of the concept of God that exists in people's minds. It's a condemnation of how Christians interpret moviestarplanet the Bible, and acts accordingly, and judge others. It's the image of God reflected in these Christians are to be condemned. Now it is unfortunate that Christians often reflect a very distorted image of God. The actions of Christians is not necessarily correct according to the will of God. As tragic as it is, it's face it a reality. Man remains a faalbare being. Thus God trying to see in the actions of the people who believe in him will inevitably sometimes a distorted image of God gives.
The conviction that, however, is under discussion here goes beyond mere condemnation of the Christian concept of God. It's going here about something that was written in the Bible. In other words
In a commentary Emil asked me to my interpretation of Abraham's mission moviestarplanet and discuss two passages from the Bible. Since I did not have a theological education has not been I anxious to provide Bible layouts. No now I lie, as Farmer in Exile all noticed, I am not afraid of my head in a beehive to cross;-) and it is not this just looks bad if I would shy away from such direct requests. moviestarplanet
That the mission of Abraham is concerned, there obviously volumes that can be written. Maybe I should ask for Emil more be specific about what aspect of Abraham's mission he wants me to discuss. In the meantime, I can refer him to what is written in Hebrews 11 verses 11 to 19 about Abraham. Maybe this answer your questions Emil.
When ordered Samuel, "Bring King Agag of Amalek to me." moviestarplanet Agag said cheerfully walked up to him and said, "Now I am not afraid moviestarplanet that they me will not kill you." Samuel said to him: "As you sword has made women childless, so shall thy mother be among the childless women. "And Samuel hewed Agag in pieces before the Lord in Gilgal.
Elisa is thence to Bethel. While he was on the way to there, a lot of little boys came out of the city, and mocked him, "Higher up, thou bald head; Higher moviestarplanet up, you baldhead! "He turned around, looked at them and cursed them in the name of the Lord. Two bears came out of the woods and mauled two and forty of the children.
These two parts to Tell if parts which I have already been asked before, over and over delivered sometime comments. Clearly, the question that is being asked here about the justification of these events. In both cases it seems as if God by implication approved events. The question then is why something for us today as gruweldare looks to be approved by God. The short answer in the first case is that of obedience. Samuel simply did what God commanded, and that Saul failed to do. The question moviestarplanet then is why God commanded that Amalek must be destroyed. Today we will act so as genocide (genocide) see. Read what I wrote in the context below.
The short answer to the second part is a mockery of God's prophet on a mockery of God himself put. It is therefore down to the dismantling of God's authority again obedience compromise. The question then is whether the fresh selection of the children may have very severe in comparison with the offense. Again I refer you to what I write below. It is interesting to note that there is talk specifically of 42 children who were torn apart by the bears. The number 42 has a special meaning in the Bible. It comes down to perfection. One can, therefore the punishment that the children received interpret as the perfect punishment, not too much and not too little.
Now for the long answer. Therefore we have to stand back and look at what the question behind the question of the interpretation moviestarplanet of the scriptures. It will in fact have a conviction of God's judgment. As I explained to Emil make such a judgment for someone who believes moviestarplanet in the existence of a true living God, simply makes no sense. moviestarplanet Any conviction aims, the administration of an appropriate action, such as punishment or reward. Any conviction depends not just in the air, it requires action. By condemning one tries to act condemned to limit in the future. However, to judge for God to totally pointless because you can not God punish. Someone to punish or reward a person has to be able to exercise a degree of control over that person. Man can not exercise any control moviestarplanet over the living.
The implication of a judgment from God so that those who make such judgment express the assumption that God does not exist. The alternative does not make sense. This conviction is perhaps more of a condemnation of the concept of God that exists in people's minds. It's a condemnation of how Christians interpret moviestarplanet the Bible, and acts accordingly, and judge others. It's the image of God reflected in these Christians are to be condemned. Now it is unfortunate that Christians often reflect a very distorted image of God. The actions of Christians is not necessarily correct according to the will of God. As tragic as it is, it's face it a reality. Man remains a faalbare being. Thus God trying to see in the actions of the people who believe in him will inevitably sometimes a distorted image of God gives.
The conviction that, however, is under discussion here goes beyond mere condemnation of the Christian concept of God. It's going here about something that was written in the Bible. In other words
No comments:
Post a Comment