How Did Satan Convince You Turn Away From God ?

[water_nymph]

Clever wrote:

<quoted text>
You've got to know none of these reasons and you beforehand say "None of the reasons are good". It doesn't positively sound impartially. There is a smell of animosity. Don't you think?

You assume a great deal with your first sentence. You assume that Bob:
1. Hasn't read the Bible
2. Hasn't read it 'correctly' or he would understand it in the same manner you do.
3. Hasn't read the Bible and come to his own conclusions about it.
4. Either has to agree with you or is incorrect
5. Knows nothing about the points being discussed
Animosity? No, IMO it was a decision to believe what he believes without being made feel guilty or 'sinful'.

[NorCal88]

water_nymph wrote:

<quoted text>You assume a great deal with your first sentence. You assume that Bob:
1. Hasn't read the Bible
2. Hasn't read it 'correctly' or he would understand it in the same manner you do.
3. Hasn't read the Bible and come to his own conclusions about it.
4. Either has to agree with you or is incorrect
5. Knows nothing about the points being discussed
Animosity? No, IMO it was a decision to believe what he believes without being made feel guilty or 'sinful'.

Nice of you to stand up for Bob like that Nymph. i like what you said.

Are you still available for the DD of the handbasket? i think its starting back up again.

[water_nymph]

NorCal88 wrote:

<quoted text>
Nice of you to stand up for Bob like that Nymph. i like what you said.
Are you still available for the DD of the handbasket? i think its starting back up again.

Yep, I'm not contagious now. Not that it would really matter considering our destination. Hop on in and we'll get started as soon as dink gets his donuts and coffee.

[NorCal88]

water_nymph wrote:

<quoted text> Yep, I'm not contagious now. Not that it would really matter considering our destination. Hop on in and we'll get started as soon as dink gets his donuts and coffee.

We need to let the rest know that we have our DD.

[Writing in Paradise]

Xcntrik InVidor wrote:

<quoted text>
I think Jesus hated figs too, I'm not sure why.

I think it's cause he didn't have toothpicks.

[Writing in Paradise]

NorCal88 wrote:

<quoted text>
We need to let the rest know that we have our DD.

What's a DD?

[NorCal88]

Writing in Paradise wrote:

<quoted text>
What's a DD?

Designated Driver, we needed one for the handbasket trip to the lake of fire since it may be back on again.

[Slimpunkass]

Satan told me to kill you.

[butter]

Clever wrote:

<quoted text>
Of course, material!!! He offered Jesus ALL the kingdoms in the world. Satan didn't speak about mental or something else, but he did want Jesus to worship him. That would be a gesture of rebellion against God.

So you mean to tell me there is no such thin as a spirtual war....? Everything is not literal

[water_nymph]

butter wrote:

<quoted text>So you mean to tell me there is no such thin as a spirtual war....? Everything is not literal

The Bible speaks of a Spiritual war. However, it is not between humans, but angels.
You may consider yourself having a spiritual war, but it's usually nothing more than people expressing a different point of view. Someone telling you they don't believe the way you, they don't believe in the god of the bible, or even being ugly to you is not a spiritual war. It's a disagreement.

[Writing in Paradise]

water_nymph wrote:

<quoted text>The Bible speaks of a Spiritual war. However, it is not between humans, but angels.
You may consider yourself having a spiritual war, but it's usually nothing more than people expressing a different point of view. Someone telling you they don't believe the way you, they don't believe in the god of the bible, or even being ugly to you is not a spiritual war. It's a disagreement.

Agreed. It's so silly when someone claims that they're in a "spiritual war" every time someone disagrees with their interpretation of the bible.

[Bob of Quantum-Faith]

Clever wrote:

<quoted text>
You've got to know none of these reasons and you beforehand say "None of the reasons are good". It doesn't positively sound impartially. There is a smell of animosity. Don't you think?

I responded to your mysterious "there are reasons for Eden", implying that god is somehow above the common idea of being a good parent.

But.

If god is NOT the very essence of a good parent, who is?

Can not god AT LEAST be an adequate parent?

Also, in my reply, I listed a couple of BAD reasons for the eden story.

You listed none-- you just implied that there might be some "magical" reason why the Eden story played out as it was purported to.

[Bob of Quantum-Faith]

water_nymph wrote:

<quoted text>You assume a great deal with your first sentence. You assume that Bob:
1. Hasn't read the Bible
2. Hasn't read it 'correctly' or he would understand it in the same manner you do.
3. Hasn't read the Bible and come to his own conclusions about it.
4. Either has to agree with you or is incorrect
5. Knows nothing about the points being discussed
Animosity? No, IMO it was a decision to believe what he believes without being made feel guilty or 'sinful'.

Thank you, WN.

You're eloquence is a delight to read.

And, you seem to've understood the response better than I-- I missed completely that she was implying ignorance on my part.

You have to admit, the poster is not the most apt at written communication... <grin>

[Bob of Quantum-Faith]

Writing in Paradise wrote:

<quoted text>
Agreed. It's so silly when someone claims that they're in a "spiritual war" every time someone disagrees with their interpretation of the bible.

Too true.

Or they call you "stupid" or "dimwit" or worse.

It's almost amusing, really.

One poster over on Evolution, always calls ANYONE who disagrees with him "illogical" and calls ANYTHING that agrees with him, "logical".

Methinks he dost not know the true meaning of "logic". <heh>

[Xcntrik InVidor]

Writing in Paradise wrote:

<quoted text>
I think it's cause he didn't have toothpicks.

That could explain it !

[Bob of Quantum-Faith]

Slimpunkass wrote:

Satan told me to kill you.

Okay.

Have at it.

But, don't expect me to sit passively still, like a little sheep.

I tend towards being a wolf.

In wolf's clothing, too.

[mdbuilder]

Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:

<quoted text>
Okay.
Have at it.
But, don't expect me to sit passively still, like a little sheep.
I tend towards being a wolf.
In wolf's clothing, too.

Oh, what bravery the absent warrior shows.

[Bob of Quantum-Faith]

mdbuilder wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh, what bravery the absent warrior shows.

Indeed. He posts a bit and flees for parts unknown.

[Clever]

Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:

<quoted text>
I responded to your mysterious "there are reasons for Eden", implying that god is somehow above the common idea of being a good parent.
But.
If god is NOT the very essence of a good parent, who is?
Can not god AT LEAST be an adequate parent?
Also, in my reply, I listed a couple of BAD reasons for the eden story.

You listed none-- you just implied that there might be some "magical" reason why the Eden story played out as it was purported to.

The Issue of God’s Sovereignty

The answer to this question is related to the issue of sovereignty. As we have seen, the Creator has the right to rule over the earth and all those dwelling in it.(Psalm 24:1; Revelation 4:11) Early in human history, however, God’s sovereignty was challenged. How did this come about? God commanded the first man, Adam, not to eat from a certain tree in the garden that was his Paradise home. And if he disobeyed?“You will positively die,” God told him.(Genesis 2:17) God’s command worked no hardship on Adam or his wife, Eve. Nevertheless, Satan convinced Eve that God was being unduly restrictive. What if she did eat from the tree? Satan told Eve outright:“You positively will not die. For God knows that in the very day of your eating from it your eyes are bound to be opened and you are bound to be like God, knowing good and bad.”—Genesis 3:1-5.

In this statement Satan implied not only that God had withheld crucial information from Eve but also that He had lied to her. Satan was careful not to question the fact of God’s sovereignty. But he did challenge the rightfulness, deservedness, and righteousness of it. In other words, he maintained that God was not exercising His sovereignty in a righteous way and in the best interests of His subjects.

Subsequently, both Adam and Eve disobeyed God by eating from the forbidden tree. Their disobedience put them in line to receive the punishment of death, just as God had decreed. Satan’s lie raised some vital questions. Does God truly have the right to rule mankind, or should man rule himself? Does God exercise his sovereignty in the best possible way? God could have used his almighty power to destroy the rebels right then and there. But the questions raised pertained to God’s rulership, not his power. So eliminating Adam, Eve, and Satan would not have affirmed the righteousness of God’s rule. If anything, it might have called his rulership into question even further. The only way to determine whether humans could successfully rule themselves, independent of God, was to let time pass.

What has the passing of time revealed? Throughout the millenniums, people have experimented with many forms of government, including autocracy, democracy, socialism, and communism. The sum total of them all is epitomized in the Bible’s frank comment:“Man has dominated man to his injury.”(Ecclesiastes 8:9) With good reason, the prophet Jeremiah stated:“I well know, O God, that to earthling man his way does not belong. It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step.”—Jeremiah 10:23.

God knew from the beginning that mankind’s independence, or self-rule, would result in much suffering. Was it unjust of him, then, to allow the inevitable to run its course? Not at all! To illustrate: Suppose you have a child who needs surgery to cure a life-threatening ailment. You realize that the operation will cause your child a degree of suffering, and this deeply grieves you. At the same time, you know that the procedure will enable your child to enjoy better health later in life. Similarly, God knew—and even foretold—that his allowance of human rule would bring along with it a measure of pain and suffering.(Genesis 3:16-19) But he also knew that lasting and meaningful relief would be possible only if he allowed all mankind to see the bad fruitage produced by rebellion. In this way the issue could be settled permanently, for all eternity.

[Clever]

Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:

<quoted text>
I responded to your mysterious "there are reasons for Eden", implying that god is somehow above the common idea of being a good parent.
But.
If god is NOT the very essence of a good parent, who is?
Can not god AT LEAST be an adequate parent?
Also, in my reply, I listed a couple of BAD reasons for the eden story.
You listed none-- you just implied that there might be some "magical" reason why the Eden story played out as it was purported to.

The Issue of God’s Sovereignty

The answer to this question is related to the issue of sovereignty. As we have seen, the Creator has the right to rule over the earth and all those dwelling in it.(Psalm 24:1; Revelation 4:11) Early in human history, however, God’s sovereignty was challenged. How did this come about? God commanded the first man, Adam, not to eat from a certain tree in the garden that was his Paradise home. And if he disobeyed?“You will positively die,” God told him.(Genesis 2:17) God’s command worked no hardship on Adam or his wife, Eve. Nevertheless, Satan convinced Eve that God was being unduly restrictive. What if she did eat from the tree? Satan told Eve outright:“You positively will not die. For God knows that in the very day of your eating from it your eyes are bound to be opened and you are bound to be like God, knowing good and bad.”—Genesis 3:1-5.

In this statement Satan implied not only that God had withheld crucial information from Eve but also that He had lied to her. Satan was careful not to question the fact of God’s sovereignty. But he did challenge the rightfulness, deservedness, and righteousness of it. In other words, he maintained that God was not exercising His sovereignty in a righteous way and in the best interests of His subjects.

Subsequently, both Adam and Eve disobeyed God by eating from the forbidden tree. Their disobedience put them in line to receive the punishment of death, just as God had decreed. Satan’s lie raised some vital questions. Does God truly have the right to rule mankind, or should man rule himself? Does God exercise his sovereignty in the best possible way? God could have used his almighty power to destroy the rebels right then and there. But the questions raised pertained to God’s rulership, not his power. So eliminating Adam, Eve, and Satan would not have affirmed the righteousness of God’s rule. If anything, it might have called his rulership into question even further. The only way to determine whether humans could successfully rule themselves, independent of God, was to let time pass.

What has the passing of time revealed? Throughout the millenniums, people have experimented with many forms of government, including autocracy, democracy, socialism, and communism. The sum total of them all is epitomized in the Bible’s frank comment:“Man has dominated man to his injury.”(Ecclesiastes 8:9) With good reason, the prophet Jeremiah stated:“I well know, O God, that to earthling man his way does not belong. It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step.”—Jeremiah 10:23.

God knew from the beginning that mankind’s independence, or self-rule, would result in much suffering. Was it unjust of him, then, to allow the inevitable to run its course? Not at all! To illustrate: Suppose you have a child who needs surgery to cure a life-threatening ailment. You realize that the operation will cause your child a degree of suffering, and this deeply grieves you. At the same time, you know that the procedure will enable your child to enjoy better health later in life. Similarly, God knew—and even foretold—that his allowance of human rule would bring along with it a measure of pain and suffering.(Genesis 3:16-19) But he also knew that lasting and meaningful relief would be possible only if he allowed all mankind to see the bad fruitage produced by rebellion. In this way the issue could be settled permanently, for all eternity.