What say you

No one's playing your silly game. If you've got a point to make, make it.

 

You won't answer because it might show my meaning in a light you cannot abide. I despise Calvinism, you are a died-in-the-wool Calvinist and that takes precedence over everything else.

In my book this makes you a hypocrite, at least hypocritical in this instance.

I never said God was wrong, although you attempted to make it look that way. I never said what God required in the Old Testament is not just, you attempted to make it look that way.

I said that by today's standards the Old Testament law would be viewed as barbaric, and it would. Maybe this is one of the reasons that although our laws are based on God's law this type of punishment was not incorporated into our system.

Perhaps this is why even the Lord himself did not give these statutes to the church.

Let me repeat myself so you don't misunderstand. You are being hypocritically dishonest, and you know it!

 

I never said what you are accusing me of. And you are calling Ann a liar. Seems like you lie quiet well all by yourself.

 

Leave your lame attack on Calvinism out of this with the rest of your drivel, OK?

I never said you said God was wrong, perhaps I asked you that instead.

You've called Gods Law barbaric. That's what you've done. Deal with it, or perhaps He will with you.

Keep up the name-calling, no matter to me. All of us know that the name-calling is a defensive mechanism employed by losers. But this is your typical way of handling these things here, a slander here, a name there, a denial here, malicious intent, a mix of cynicism here and there, hatred, enmity, deceit; all works of the flesh.

This is your character on display and this is consistent with you here. I sincerely hope God changes your life, because you certainly are in need of this.

You've called Gods Law barbaric.

Anyone and everyone who is honest can take a look and see it.

It looks to me that it is obviously you that is being barbaric here, in your accusations of Gods Law as such, your attitude toward me, and in your name-calling. Hardly Christian behavior at all.

 

If your child became a drunkard would you support public stoning for him?

 

No problem brother. I did not read your posting correctly, I was busy dealing with a liar myself and was busy formulating a posting myself. :love2:

 

Deu 21:18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
Deu 21:19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
Deu 21:20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.
Deu 21:21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

 

I don't disagree. This is what God said at the time, so it is what is correct. My only point is that by today's standards this would appear to be barbaric. P4t knows this, he is just looking for any opportunity to argue. He like nothing better than to argue with someone, especially those who are anti-Calvinist.

I believe God has dealt with mankind differently through different dispensations. I'm not saying that salvation is any different, it is always based on Jesus dying on the cross and the resurrection. There are times that God has dealt differently with other things. For instance, in the law of Moses a man was forbidden from marrying sisters. Yet, before the law Jacob married Rachael and Leah, who were sisters. In fact it is these sisters, along with their handmaidens that produced the twelve tribes of Israel.

 

Maybe Im speaking out of turn Robert but I believe that P4T was up to a yr ago a IFB Preacher (Preach, please correct me if Im wrong) but if thats true, Id say he has grown in faith since then! :smilewinkgrin:

 

And Bob wonders where I got the idea that he calls Gods Law barbaric?

Um? Maybe because he said it? Yes, that would be it!

The thing is, I presented Robert with some good rebuttal here to his perfunctory retort:

Not I never told him he said God was wrong, as he later accused me of falsely, I merely asked the question. He then he tucked tail, became cynical, and started the name-calling drivel here and hereafter:

**take note I never assumed a thing. He called Gods Law "barbaric."

I answered him here:

But he continues his drivel and turnsd it into name-calling and a tirade here which signifies said person as losing:

Robert is a dishonest person, and not only is he dishonest as if that is enough he goes into calling the other person such. Well, the reality is, nothing I've said is a lie nor dishonest. Obviously, Bob can't remember what was said, or; he depends upon those who come along and don't actually read what was written to see he is the one being dishonest, or; Bob's conscience just doesn't care any longer, and he can be untruthful and dishonest and it doesn't phase him or bother his conscience in the slightest to do so.

The thing Robert wants us all to forget and not see, nor will he answer, is that he in fact called Gods Law barbaric. That he won't own up to it, and subsequently goes into his prattle of name-calling, and then attacks calvinism? Well, that is just Roberts nature and who he is and what he does here. Simply put, it is the fruit he bears.

- Peace

 

I would be angry if your weren't predestined to say all this.

If your son were a drunkard, would you support having him stoned to death?

 

The problem I have with it is that God gave those laws to Israel, which was a Theocracy, governed by God who gave His words, laws and revelations to His appointed prophets. We do not live in a Theocracy. Our country is governed by wicked men who seek to please themselves, not God, men/women who have no direct revelation from God as did the OT prophets, and who couldn't care less what God says.

There is a huuuge difference in my opinion.

 

God's requirements for us have changed over the ages.

He has not.

HankD

 

Good Point Amy. :thumbs:

 

Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

Those aren't universal?