Page 5 of 33 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 807

Thread: My daughter came into town yesterday.

  1. #101
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Libby View Post
    isn't he also completely responsible?

    .
    God is responsible for the things He does....just as you and I are responsible for the things we do...

  2. #102
    James Banta
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    all sins are equal?
    the correct answer is....'yes and no"



    But you have to make sure you define your context or else you just keep going round and round over nothing...
    I believe this makes it clear..

    "Are all sin equal in the sight of God? YES, unequivocally." IHS jim

  3. #103
    James Banta
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Libby View Post
    Okay, I can't leave while James is still making stuff up.



    I never said that, Jim...and neither did Alan. You are simply not comprehending what is being said.

    Please, at least, read Alan's posts, if you couldn't understand mine (and NO you didn't understand...again!)



    Nice, Jim. You could type that and then put "In His Name"? If that was "In His Name" it was taking his name in vain.

    Maybe I had better stick around for awhile.
    You have the right to be here all you want.. You can continue to pander to the LDS in the name of being nice.. Just understand Jesus NEVER Pandered to the Pharisees.. He even used name calling.. IHS jim

  4. #104
    James Banta
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    Thats a long question...

    What i can see is that Jesus was turning to the guy who just said that he had the "authority" over life and death of him...and Jesus was pointing out that while Pilate is still a guilty party in the murder of an innocent man, his blame is less due to the fact that Pilate was just carrying out Roman law as he had been charged to do by Rome.
    So Jesus is calling Pilate a "middle-man", whereas Caiaphas was simply out to kill Jesus for being Jesus.

    Jesus is telling Pilate, "Your authority?..you dont have any real authority, your so-called 'authority' is actually someone else's"
    This is the reason Jesus was more or less telling Pilate that he was kinda "off the hook" for the blame in killing a known innocent men.



    this is the "For this reason" that is key to understanding the point Jesus is making to Pilate, and why Pilate heard this and right away tried to let Jesus go free.....


    Jesus is also saying that Caiaphas has more blame in this murder of an innocent men.
    Caiaphas is not a middle-man in this story...
    Not that it is a point that makes much difference but I disagree.. I believe that even the authority of Rome was given by God.. All things are done in accordance to God's will either perfect or permissive.. IHS jim

  5. #105
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by James Banta View Post
    Not that it is a point that makes much difference but I disagree.. I believe that even the authority of Rome was given by God.. All things are done in accordance to God's will either perfect or permissive.. IHS jim
    I dont believe that the "from above" Jesus was talking about is God.

    Jesus is not talking about "god" here.

    That would be in the wrong context, it also would destroy the point Jesus is making with the "for this reason" statement he makes to tell why the man who turned him over has the greater sin.


    The "authority" that Pilate was talking about, all came from Rome.
    That is the authority that Pilate had to answer to...

    Jesus points this out to Pilate.


    This statement pointing this out to Pilate by Christ sets the stage for the next comment Jesus made concerning the "for this reason" statement.

    When Jesus says, "for this reason" he connects the idea that Pilate was under someone else's authority himself with the idea that the man who turned him over to him was not under such authority.

    The man who turned him over was not doing so because he was just "following orders of a higher command".
    jesus was pointing out that while Pilate was just attempting to do his *** as best he could under the commands and authority of Rome, the man who turned him over to pilate to be killed was not.

    The man who turned him over was doing so only because he had rejected Jesus...He rejected Jesus and now wanted Jesus killed.

    This is the "greater sin" that Jesus speaks of.

    So Jesus is not saying that Pilate was free of being guilty of sin.

    But Jesus was saying that the sins are not equal, and that there is a degree of sins, and that Pilate's sin is lesser than the sin of the man who turned him over to him.


    ================================================== =

    I believe this is the only correct understanding of this text.


    Pilate makes a statement to Jesus, telling Jesus that he(Pilate) has all the authority he needs to set Jesus free, or put him to death.

    Jesus responds to this by telling Pilate that Pilate actually has no authority on nhis own, but that he had to be given his authority by someone higher up in the Roman chain of command.

    Then Jesus points out that for this reason, (being under the chain of command of Rome) the person who just turned him over to Pilate has a greater amount of sin in this situation.
    This is because the person who turned him over to Pilate was not under the Roman chain of command at all....and was not being ordered to turn Jesus over to anyone!
    Last edited by alanmolstad; 04-17-2014 at 10:02 AM.

  6. #106
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by James Banta View Post
    ..... He even used name calling.. IHS jim
    ....but we must always remember that this forum has rules against name-calling,,,and so doing so is not allowed here no matter who we might want to point to as our example....
    Last edited by alanmolstad; 04-17-2014 at 10:08 AM.

  7. #107
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    731

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    I dont believe that the "from above" Jesus was talking about is God.

    Jesus is not talking about "god" here.

    That would be in the wrong context, it also would destroy the point Jesus is making with the "for this reason" statement he makes to tell why the man who turned him over has the greater sin.


    The "authority" that Pilate was talking about, all came from Rome.
    That is the authority that Pilate had to answer to...

    Jesus points this out to Pilate.


    This statement pointing this out to Pilate by Christ sets the stage for the next comment Jesus made concerning the "for this reason" statement.

    When Jesus says, "for this reason" he connects the idea that Pilate was under someone else's authority himself with the idea that the man who turned him over to him was not under such authority.

    The man who turned him over was not doing so because he was just "following orders of a higher command".
    jesus was pointing out that while Pilate was just attempting to do his *** as best he could under the commands and authority of Rome, the man who turned him over to pilate to be killed was not.

    The man who turned him over was doing so only because he had rejected Jesus...He rejected Jesus and now wanted Jesus killed.

    This is the "greater sin" that Jesus speaks of.

    So Jesus is not saying that Pilate was free of being guilty of sin.

    But Jesus was saying that the sins are not equal, and that there is a degree of sins, and that Pilate's sin is lesser than the sin of the man who turned him over to him.


    ================================================== =

    I believe this is the only correct understanding of this text.


    Pilate makes a statement to Jesus, telling Jesus that he(Pilate) has all the authority he needs to set Jesus free, or put him to death.

    Jesus responds to this by telling Pilate that Pilate actually has no authority on nhis own, but that he had to be given his authority by someone higher up in the Roman chain of command.

    Then Jesus points out that for this reason, (being under the chain of command of Rome) the person who just turned him over to Pilate has a greater amount of sin in this situation.
    This is because the person who turned him over to Pilate was not under the Roman chain of command at all....and was not being ordered to turn Jesus over to anyone!
    That is an interesting theory that I hadn't seen or considered before. And you made a good case for it being true, IMO. Thanks for posting it.

  8. #108
    Libby
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    God is responsible for the things He does....just as you and I are responsible for the things we do...
    Yes, I understand that, but when one preaches a completely sovereign God, who has his hand in every aspect of man and the things that go on here, it's more difficult (IMO) to claim man is totally responsible for his actions....and most especially for his unbelief, as God is the only one that can change that. Even further, that God has actually "predestined" a group of believers and left the rest to their own devices.

  9. #109
    RealFakeHair
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    I dont believe that the "from above" Jesus was talking about is God.

    Jesus is not talking about "god" here.

    That would be in the wrong context, it also would destroy the point Jesus is making with the "for this reason" statement he makes to tell why the man who turned him over has the greater sin.


    The "authority" that Pilate was talking about, all came from Rome.
    That is the authority that Pilate had to answer to...

    Jesus points this out to Pilate.


    This statement pointing this out to Pilate by Christ sets the stage for the next comment Jesus made concerning the "for this reason" statement.

    When Jesus says, "for this reason" he connects the idea that Pilate was under someone else's authority himself with the idea that the man who turned him over to him was not under such authority.

    The man who turned him over was not doing so because he was just "following orders of a higher command".
    jesus was pointing out that while Pilate was just attempting to do his *** as best he could under the commands and authority of Rome, the man who turned him over to pilate to be killed was not.

    The man who turned him over was doing so only because he had rejected Jesus...He rejected Jesus and now wanted Jesus killed.

    This is the "greater sin" that Jesus speaks of.

    So Jesus is not saying that Pilate was free of being guilty of sin.

    But Jesus was saying that the sins are not equal, and that there is a degree of sins, and that Pilate's sin is lesser than the sin of the man who turned him over to him.


    ================================================== =

    I believe this is the only correct understanding of this text.


    Pilate makes a statement to Jesus, telling Jesus that he(Pilate) has all the authority he needs to set Jesus free, or put him to death.

    Jesus responds to this by telling Pilate that Pilate actually has no authority on nhis own, but that he had to be given his authority by someone higher up in the Roman chain of command.

    Then Jesus points out that for this reason, (being under the chain of command of Rome) the person who just turned him over to Pilate has a greater amount of sin in this situation.
    This is because the person who turned him over to Pilate was not under the Roman chain of command at all....and was not being ordered to turn Jesus over to anyone!
    Well, I don't quite know about that. Pilate could no more set Jesus free than I could. It just turned out to be his lot in life the same it was with Pharaoh. Remember God had to harden his heart.

  10. #110
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    people have free will...

    that is why we are judged and found guilty.

  11. #111
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealFakeHair View Post
    Well, I don't quite know about that. Pilate could no more set Jesus free than I could. It just turned out to be his lot in life the same it was with Pharaoh. Remember God had to harden his heart.
    if pilate had no way to free jesus...then jesus made an error in agreeing that pilate did have authority....

    jesus even points out that pilates authority over jesus came down to him from above....not that there was none.

  12. #112
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealFakeHair View Post
    Well, I don't quite know about that. Pilate could no more set Jesus free than I could. It just turned out to be his lot in life the same it was with Pharaoh. Remember God had to harden his heart.
    pharaoh always had his own free will

  13. #113
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,854

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Libby View Post
    Yes, I understand that, but when one preaches a completely sovereign God, who has his hand in every aspect of man and the things that go on here, it's more difficult (IMO) to claim man is totally responsible for his actions....and most especially for his unbelief, as God is the only one that can change that. Even further, that God has actually "predestined" a group of believers and left the rest to their own devices.
    Man is responsible for his own unbelief. Someone who chooses to obey Joseph Smith and not Christ will be judged on that choice. No many can come to Christ without the Father drawing him. That is the teaching of Scripture, and nobody will have an excuse.
    Oath formerly taken by Mormons promising not to reveal secret Mormon temple rituals: "Should we do so, we agree to have our breasts cut open and our hearts and vitals torn from our bodies and given to the birds of the air and the beasts of the field."

  14. #114
    RealFakeHair
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    pharaoh always had his own free will
    No matter how much Pharaoh wanted to release the Jews, God was going to harden his heart. Not must of a choice for Pharaoh after all.

  15. #115
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealFakeHair View Post
    No matter how much Pharaoh wanted to release the Jews, God was going to harden his heart. Not must of a choice for Pharaoh after all.

    Try this thought out for size..... if God forced someone to do something evil , then God cant hold them guilty of doing it right?...

    So the fact that we have free will eliminates the idea that god will force us to do things against our will....if that were the case then god would be guilty of what we could call, "forced-possession" of a person... (forced-possession as in the movie Exorcist)

    So this means that god's plans took into full account the fact that at all times Pharaoh had always free will.
    Last edited by alanmolstad; 04-17-2014 at 05:09 PM.

  16. #116
    RealFakeHair
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    Try this thought out for size..... if God forced someone to do something evil , then God cant hold them guilty of doing it right?...

    So the fact that we have free will eliminates the idea that god will force us to do things against our will....if that were the case then god would be guilty of what we could call, "forced-possession" of a person... (forced-possession as in the movie Exorcist)

    So this means that god's plans took into full account the fact that at all times Pharaoh had always free will.
    Sometime we just gotta realize, God's ways, are not our ways.

  17. #117
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealFakeHair View Post
    Sometime we just gotta realize, God's ways, are not our ways.
    whatever....

    My point is that God never took away the free will of us....He does not need to do that just to perform in this world his will....

  18. #118
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,854

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    whatever....

    My point is that God never took away the free will of us....He does not need to do that just to perform in this world his will....
    However, before we are saved we have NO free will, because we are dead in our tressp***es and sins, and in bondage to Satan.
    Oath formerly taken by Mormons promising not to reveal secret Mormon temple rituals: "Should we do so, we agree to have our breasts cut open and our hearts and vitals torn from our bodies and given to the birds of the air and the beasts of the field."

  19. #119
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Apologette View Post
    However, before we are saved we have NO free will, because we are dead in our tressp***es and sins, and in bondage to Satan.
    the human free will was not affected

  20. #120
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    the human free will was not affected

    Possessed people are not held accountable...
    If a person stands condemned, it is only because they are guilty ....
    If they are guilty it is only because they had a true choice....


    If you had no choice, if you were forced/coerced into breaking a law against your will, then you are innocent.

    If you simply did not know any better, (a child or handicapped), then your sins are overlooked.

  21. #121
    Libby
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Apologette View Post
    However, before we are saved we have NO free will, because we are dead in our tressp***es and sins, and in bondage to Satan.
    See, though....that is exactly what I'm talking about. If we have no free will (we are only free to sin) and we can only become believers, if God draws us and changes our heart...how could one possibly be responsible for not believing? It just doesn't make sense.

  22. #122
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Libby View Post
    See, though....that is exactly what I'm talking about. If we have no free will (we are only free to sin) and we can only become believers, if God draws us and changes our heart...how could one possibly be responsible for not believing? It just doesn't make sense.

    I guess I should explain it then......

    but first....got to make a beer run to the fridge!

  23. #123
    Libby
    Guest

    Default

    We might both need a drink for this one. ;-)

  24. #124
    RealFakeHair
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Libby View Post
    See, though....that is exactly what I'm talking about. If we have no free will (we are only free to sin) and we can only become believers, if God draws us and changes our heart...how could one possibly be responsible for not believing? It just doesn't make sense.
    That is the catch 22 we'er in. I just leave it in God's hands. It will all make sense to us one day, just not today.
    Remember God knows who is the believer before the believer even knows. However we know not so it is up to us to tell the Good news, and let God do the rest.

  25. #125
    Libby
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealFakeHair View Post
    That is the catch 22 we'er in. I just leave it in God's hands. It will all make sense to us one day, just not today.
    Remember God knows who is the believer before the believer even knows. However we know not so it is up to us to tell the Good news, and let God do the rest.
    Well, to take Calvinist interpretation of scripture one step further, God doesn't just "know"....He chooses.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •