Quote:
Originally Posted by Mensan
I like to remain neutral on 3:18, for you see, I believe God is benevolent. Your fire and brimstone die hard interpretation literally leaves no room for sin/failure/learning. As humans we're all flawed, but to dwell on failure leaves no room for success here or in heaven. To dwell on sin/failure can easily become an obsession, an addictive behavior God would surely frown on.
|
The problem with your "sin/failure/learning" model is what people learn. It's not a new idea. Cain for example sinned and failed. What did he learn? Only how to sin even more. He sinned, step one in your scheme. He failed: step two completed successfully. He learned TO DO MURDER; not the outcome you'd led us to expect!
Genesis 4:6-8
6 The LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?
7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.
8 And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.
If you'd prefer it from the Gutenberg Bible I'm happy to provide that for you.
Code:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mensan
I forgot one. According to the DSM5, the "obsession of perfection" can be one of the most difficult daunting conditions to treat. Guilt seems to be the main root of this when it becomes a mental illness. It's also tied to excessive compulsion disorders. In other words, it is possible to become "too religious" in the extreme, especially if fire and brimstone is on ones plate all the time. I think God would understand this as "only He" is perfect.
|
The Bible provides us with God's statement on this topic. Christians are [
1] required to be perfect and [
2] incapable of sin. It's something we learned by listening to God rather than by following Cain's example of trial and error. Perhaps in your reply you could find the references for this? You'd need to be in
Matthew chapter 5 and
I John chapter 3.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mensan
Any Germans in here transcribe Gutenberg? A great blacksmith setting the mold of our future for sure on his scripture, but how many trannies since then? Scripture is not stone if the stone was corrupted by, let's see, time since 1450? I own MANY versions of the Bible, and interpretation varies greatly. Quote Gutenberg in here and impress me!
|
We do keep track of gendernonexclusionary status here: your suggestion does not appear on the list. Please check your privilege before insinuating pickup lines which in any event are unlikely to "click" – review here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mensan
Any Germans in here transcribe Gutenberg? A great blacksmith setting the mold of our future for sure on his scripture, but how many trannies since then? Scripture is not stone if the stone was corrupted by, let's see, time since 1450? I own MANY versions of the Bible, and interpretation varies greatly. Quote Gutenberg in here and impress me!
|
You're not having a very good run, are you. Where exactly do you think the expression "set in stone" originates? What was it applied to? This is sufficiently well known not to require a suggestion where to look in the Gutenberg text; please address in your next post. On the subject of stone becoming corrupted in the time since 1450, which is 570 years incidentally, perhaps you'd like to check out this historical record from approx. 3150
BC? That's 5,169 years ago and no particular deterioration that I can see. In your reply a description of the historical event recorded will be appreciated. Stone. Pretty good record keeping method or what?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 