Your choice of Jeremiah as an example is great since he, of all the prophets, directs broad accusation of sinfulness to particular people(s) in particular circumstances – and yet he also makes universal declarations of wickedness.
2 Likes
Non sequitor.
Whether God is controlling or not is down to God not us.
Why not take a single sentence of mine out of context and change the meaning? I mean you do it with Scripture.
Of course He expects us to sin. Not because we must but because it is almost unavoidable So the provision is to prove that He does not expect us not to sin, but also that He is not goin to hold that against us.
The whole problem is that you think God must have perfection. That is a purely human concept of God, not Scripture. Humans think that God is perfect and therefore must expect perfection. God shows us otherwise and you refuse to believe it!
hallelujah! (Except you were being incredulous!)
He doesn’t want us to feel guilty when we fail, as long as we are trying! The Jews weren’t trying!
???
what has that got to do with it? Is assessing your own behaviour boring to you?
And who says that we are always being selfish?
That is simplistic to say the least.
So you think sin is something we can do accidentally yet still it is intentional?
The whole point of knowing good and evil is the knowing part
We are back to this idea of God needing perfection for perfection’s sake. Nowhere in Scripture does God claim that.
That would mean God taking control of us. He doesn’t.
Oh, because Jesus said that it is impossible for us, you think That He meant we have to be under God’s control? He doesn’t say that. He just says that it is impossible for us, but not for God. (AKA Him!)
You misconstrue Scripture to keep you view of human imperfection alive while maintaining that God requires perfection.
Is that God talking? I don’t think so. Why would God make us incapable of repenting? That is self defeating.
Um, err. You have just contradicted yourself.
You ae still claiming that God is directly helping. How?
No, that is the human belief that God wants perfection. That is not what Scripture says. Scripture shows us what perfection is. That is not the same thing.
Forgiveness is the proof that God does not need or want perfection.
No they do not.
You are just reading that into the text.
At a single place in time. And only on the people the Psalmist knows about.
You are making it Universal.
Only Israel. Isaiah is not speaking to anyone else.
Non sequitor.
A universal cure does not indicate Universal corruption, only that any sin is covered, not just Israel.
Are you talking of Eccesisatese?
That does not mean that everyone is corrupt. It just means that perfection is virtually impossible and we are vane if we think otherwise.
???
No it doesn’t. It claims no one is righteous.
And it doesn’t say that matters to God.
I am not going to respond to that. I now what you will claim if I do.
Only in the human mind. That is how humans conceive God.
Which is what forgiveness is for!
You just do not get it.
OOh circular reasoning!
Rubbish.
God does not eliminate the standard, but He does not require it either. That is what forgiveness is for. The standard is there, but we do not have to achieve it . However we need to know it exists, It keeps us humble.
You really do not understand forgiveness, especially when it comes from Grace. All you can see is perfection.(And redemption_)
You have God all wrong. And you have humanity all wrong. And you have the meaning of life all wrong. Still, if you want to strive for this perfection, go right ahead. That is part of free will and choice. But it is for you, not God that you are striving.
Richard
That adds to the text something that is not there.
Failure to always to do is what corruption is.
I.e. all righteous men sin.
This is tiresome. You show no respect for scripture, twisting everything that comes along to fit what you think, regardless of logic or principles or context, you deny that something is true but then turn around and affirm it . . . . there’s no consistency
I lifted that from Paul. Oh course we already knew that you think that what Paul wrote is rubbish, so no surprise here.
1 Like
No more than you are. The text does not specify space and time, other than Now.
No it is fallibility.
Corruption dictates, fallibility is vulnerable.
That is not what it says. it says no one is righteous.
If you are going to define righteous as without sin, I can agree. if you are going to define righteous as adhering to faith, I would not.
Back to that are we?
I must read Scripture as you dictate?
sorry, I do not.
Paul was a human. He had human understanding. Paul was not God. He did not speak any more for God that any other human does. Scripture is not God’s words. Until or unless you get that into your head we cannot discuss rationally.
You cannot dictate what Scripture means or says. That is above your remit.
Richard
So you think Peter and Paul were lying about how the scriptures came to be.
Fine – but don’t expect me to respect that.
Yes, Pope Richard.
No.
So it makes no difference.
euorting to insults now?
Is your argument that week?
Richard
Then your statement that Paul’s writings are no different from those of any other human is false since the only way they are not different is if Peter and Paul lied.
One again you cut and paste the scriptures to your preference.
No insults, just a description of your communication technique – you never back things up, you just make pronouncements and expect us all to accept them.
Talk about the ot calling the kettle black.
You have a basic flawed view of what scripture is.
You have a singular and false view of how to read and interpret it.
You have made Gods out of the writers
And you have a conviction that yours is the only understanding possible.
Anything else?
Richard
I do not demand that you agree with me or that I am right, unlike some other I could mention.
(edited by moderator-Phil)
Reading it for what it says from within the worldview & context in which it was written, and according to the testimony of the apostles that the Holy Spirit is behind it, is a “singular and false view”?
Fine, Richard.
No, I have made God out of the Holy Spirit.
If you have differences, argue them from the text! Set out the grammar and syntax and vocabulary!
Otherwise you’re little different from those who used to say the NT was written in “Holy Ghost Greek” that was invented by God just to write the NT in – grasping at straws for lack of any solid ground.
That would validate your methodology.
Richard
My methodology is to treat scripture as inspired and as conforming to human use of language and thus that scripture has actual meaning.
1 Like
Except that you don’t. You don’t treat Genesis 1 in that manner. Instead you claim ANE, but when I claim Judaism you object.
So don’t get all high and mighty on me
Scripture has more meaning than just textual.
That is claiming that the Holy Spirit authored the text.
I have never even heard of that and as usual your analogy illustrates your view not mine.
Scripture is what it is, but you re making it more than just sacrosanct, you are claiming inerrancy and God’s own words, two of the worse heresies in Christendom.
And you are imposing that view on me (and all of Christendom).
Richard