justcool:

@modupe01

Thanks for your explanations but I don't agree with it. There are no exceptions to the rules of God. God does not change His rules to show mercy to people;

First off, you'e forcing your ideas in here by not being consistent with the texts which modupe01 quoted. You asked a question based on the Bible - and if you want to answer based on the Bible, stay with the Bible. Otherwise, your comments actually sound like you are the one who wants to set bounds for God in the Bible and then dictate to Him what He should do and what He ought not to do. The Biblical answer to such an attitude is Isaiah 40:13 - "Has anyone told the LORD what He must do or given Him advice?" (CEV).

True, many people have come to this idea that God does not 'change' His rules to show mercy to people - but I verily doubt whether those making such statements actually know what the 'rules'  or 'mercy' of God are. Here is what the Bible teaches:

[list](a) the Bible teaches that God has MANIFOLD mercies:
'Yet thou in thy manifold mercies forsookest them not in the wilderness' ~ Neh. 9:19

(b) the Bible teaches that God has MANIFOLD wisdom:
'To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God' ~ Ephesians 3:10

(c) the Bible teaches that the ways of God are MANIFOLD:
'O LORD, how manifold are thy works! in wisdom hast thou made them all: the earth is full of thy riches. ' ~ Psalm 104:24[/list]

There are others; but these three examples of God's manifold mercies, manifold wisdom and manifold ways show us that God is not an automaton that could be boxed by man's dictates about what He could do and what He could not do! And if God in His manifold wisdom, mercies and ways shows His love in various manners to people, who are we to dictate HOW He should do so, of WHAT exactly He ought to or not to do?!?

His mercy lies in His rules.

How did you come to that conclusion?

His rules issue out of Love and Justice which are His mercy.

How did you arrive at that?

Mercy is contained in His rules(laws), which need not be changed to show mercy.

How did you come to that conclusion?

It were better that you say nothing at all where you don't know, than to make assertions that can't be sustained when closely examined.

Changing rules for some people is nothing but partiality. God is impartial.

It is not a matter of 'changing rules' - God is NOT an automaton. If your god is such an automaton that has nothing else to do than what you dictate to him, viaro has no qualms about that I would have zipped it and said nothing, for that would be your god. Yet, if you want to teach others that your god is partial, please be our guest and do so without trying to insinuate the same idea into the worldviews that you don't subscribe to.

God has not led every generation in the same manner, law or rule. That much is clear from the Bible itself: for the Jews were given the Mosaic Law that pertains to Judaism - a very different thing from the belief systems of the Grail Message. If that were not true, why are you not practising Judaism to buttress your claim that God does not 'change' any rule when He leads His people? "He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel. He hath not dealt so with any nation. . ." (Psa. 147:19-20).

There are also circumstances where His Law was violated - such as when the Mosaic law in Judaism required that adulterers and adultresses be put to death where caught within Israel (Lev. 20:10). But when a woman was caught in the act in John 8, rather than put her to death, Jesus showed mercy without changing the Mosaic Law (). His word to the accusers was simple: 'He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her' (verse 7) - and if we carefully think of the weight of that statement, we would find that THEY ALL DESERVED TO BE STONED on the same basis of the legalism they applied to the Law, for none of them was without sin ("there is no man that sinneth not," - 1 Kings 8:46)! But rather than that, Jesus showed them mercy, because it is written: "For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings" (Hos. 6:6).

Such are the manifold ways and mercies and wisdom of God - not that He applies His love to us whimsically, but that He is not tied down to any law, and because he is transcendent, He knows just how to show HIS OWN LOVE to those who stand in need of it.

It is not my intention to force, coerce, or argue with you to accept my perception.

You seem to have done that already by setting limitations on God - as if to tell us what you can dictate Him to do or not to do. I don't see any other ways you can justify that excuse on strong statements like:
  ~ "There are no exceptions to the rules of God"
  ~ "God does not change His rules to show mercy to people"
. .  and even going so far as to tie everything up to the idea of partiality.

The one thing that amazes me is that when people try to dictate to others what they should believe, then make subscripts about not trying top force this and that. A nice discussion would do, rather than setting bounds about what God does or does not do.

viaro, thats the problem I often have with seeklove and his mentor justcool (i.e. If they are not even the same person!), they impose various limitations on their god, and then turn around and say that is the one and same Boundless God that adopted me as His Son. I only have problems with the 2nd part, I am not bothered about whoever other people worship.

viaro:

First off, you'e forcing your ideas in here by not being consistent with the texts which modupe01 quoted. You asked a question based on the Bible - and if you want to answer based on the Bible, stay with the Bible. Otherwise, your comments actually sound like you are the one who wants to set bounds for God in the Bible and then dictate to Him what He should do and what He ought not to do. The Biblical answer to such an attitude is Isaiah 40:13 - "Has anyone told the LORD what He must do or given Him advice?" (CEV).

True, many people have come to this idea that God does not 'change' His rules to show mercy to people - but I verily doubt whether those making such statements actually know what the 'rules' or 'mercy' of God are. Here is what the Bible teaches:

[list](a) the Bible teaches that God has MANIFOLD mercies:
'Yet thou in thy manifold mercies forsookest them not in the wilderness' ~ Neh. 9:19

(b) the Bible teaches that God has MANIFOLD wisdom:
'To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God' ~ Ephesians 3:10

(c) the Bible teaches that the ways of God are MANIFOLD:
'O LORD, how manifold are thy works! in wisdom hast thou made them all: the earth is full of thy riches. ' ~ Psalm 104:24[/list]

There are others; but these three examples of God's manifold mercies, manifold wisdom and manifold ways show us that God is not an automaton that could be boxed by man's dictates about what He could do and what He could not do! And if God in His manifold wisdom, mercies and ways shows His love in various manners to people, who are we to dictate HOW He should do so, of WHAT exactly He ought to or not to do?!?
How did you come to that conclusion?
How did you arrive at that?
How did you come to that conclusion?

It were better that you say nothing at all where you don't know, than to make assertions that can't be sustained when closely examined.
It is not a matter of 'changing rules' - God is NOT an automaton. If your god is such an automaton that has nothing else to do than what you dictate to him, viaro has no qualms about that I would have zipped it and said nothing, for that would be your god. Yet, if you want to teach others that your god is partial, please be our guest and do so without trying to insinuate the same idea into the worldviews that you don't subscribe to.

God has not led every generation in the same manner, law or rule. That much is clear from the Bible itself: for the Jews were given the Mosaic Law that pertains to Judaism - a very different thing from the belief systems of the Grail Message. If that were not true, why are you not practising Judaism to buttress your claim that God does not 'change' any rule when He leads His people? "He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel. He hath not dealt so with any nation. . ." (Psa. 147:19-20).

There are also circumstances where His Law was violated - such as when the Mosaic law in Judaism required that adulterers and adultresses be put to death where caught within Israel (Lev. 20:10). But when a woman was caught in the act in John 8, rather than put her to death, Jesus showed mercy without changing the Mosaic Law (). His word to the accusers was simple: 'He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her' (verse 7) - and if we carefully think of the weight of that statement, we would find that THEY ALL DESERVED TO BE STONED on the same basis of the legalism they applied to the Law, for none of them was without sin ("there is no man that sinneth not," - 1 Kings 8:46)! But rather than that, Jesus showed them mercy, because it is written: "For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings" (Hos. 6:6).

Such are the manifold ways and mercies and wisdom of God - not that He applies His love to us whimsically, but that He is not tied down to any law, and because he is transcendent, He knows just how to show HIS OWN LOVE to those who stand in need of it.

You seem to have done that already by setting limitations on God - as if to tell us what you can dictate Him to do or not to do. I don't see any other ways you can justify that excuse on strong statements like:
~ "There are no exceptions to the rules of God"
~ "God does not change His rules to show mercy to people"
. . and even going so far as to tie everything up to the idea of partiality.

The one thing that amazes me is that when people try to dictate to others what they should believe, then make subscripts about not trying top force this and that. A nice discussion would do, rather than setting bounds about what God does or does not do.

@Viaro
Thanks for your explanations but for the sake of cordiality, I don't want to reply. Your views are well appreciated, maybe sometimes in another thread we may be able to exchange more ideas. I hope you understand what I mean.

Mavenb0x:

viaro, thats the problem I often have with seeklove and his mentor justcool (i.e. If they are not even the same person!), they impose various limitations on their god, and then turn around and say that is the one and same Boundless God that adopted me as His Son. I only have problems with the 2nd part, I am not bothered about whoever other people worship.

@Mavenbox
I never said in any part of my post in the Nairaland that God adopted me as his son. I can speak for myself, I don't know if seeklove ever said that. You are free to believe whatever you want to believe about seeklove and me being the same person. I can see that you are bent on starting a fight with me; therefore I withdraw from this thread.

May God bless you.

Mavenb0x:

viaro, thats the problem I often have with seeklove and his mentor justcool (i.e. If they are not even the same person!), they impose various limitations on their god, and then turn around and say that is the one and same Boundless God that adopted me as His Son. I only have problems with the 2nd part, I am not bothered about whoever other people worship.

Well, what could I say? I was reactive there in my response to justcool because my day has been hectic indeed. The one thing that irks me is a comment or post that tells the Christian how to believe in the ways of God when such a poster does not even subscribe to the Christian worldview. Ha! But I'd already hit the reply botton before I calmed down and felt I should've been a lil genial and gentle towards justcool.

justcool:

@Viaro
Thanks for your explanations but for the sake of cordiality, I don't want to reply. Your views are well appreciated, maybe sometimes in another thread we may be able to exchange more ideas. I hope you understand what I mean.

That's fine, and sorry about my tone earlier. Maybe another day and another thread then. Enjoy.

Maven said:

viaro, thats the problem I often have with seeklove and his mentor justcool (i.e. If they are not even the same person!), they impose various limitations on their god, and then turn around and say that is the one and same Boundless God that adopted me as His Son. I only have problems with the 2nd part, I am not bothered about whoever other people worship.

Justcool replied:

@Mavenbox
I never said in any part of my post in the Nairaland that God adopted me as his son. I can speak for myself, I don't know if seeklove ever said that. You are free to believe whatever you want to believe about seeklove and me being the same person. I can see that you are bent on starting a fight with me; therefore I withdraw from this thread.

May God bless you.

Cheese! I never said you said that God adopted you as His son. I said

the one and same Boundless God that adopted [size=18pt]me[/size] as His Son

I, Maven, am a Son of God (Son being irrespective of gender, there is no "spiritual gender". And I never said seeklove said that either! I don't think you read what I wrote carefully, mister. Why I am so often misunderstood on NL?

About seeklove and you being the same person, I sincerely am not bothered! I have said here on NL that the important thing is to rub minds together. If I am rubbing minds and exchanging ideas with 1 person on a thread, and the person is using 5 user-names in turn on that same thread, I don't mind. The important thing is to see that the information is adequately transferred. I am here to exchange knowledge, not to witch-hunt. Sometimes my curiosity gets the better of me, and I want to know who is behind the mask. But most times I am not bothered.

I was not bent on starting a fight with you, I was only sorely displeased. Have a great weekend, Justcool.

One person says God is impartial and thus CANNOT bring some back to life therefore it is wrong that men die once!

All this based on your own definition of impartiality, your attempt to put God into a box (where He cannot do some things you decide) and all because Jesus raised someone back to life! Could you please then discuss Elijah and Enoch? And let us know your own TRUE knowledge of what actually happened to them since they did not die according to the Bible and that would again make God 'partial"?

m_nwankwo says Jesus is the Incarnate Word of God - what does this mean? He was the Word and re-incarnated as the Son or what? I ask because I remember reading that a man cannot re-incarnate as a dog etc or is it okay if the shift is from Word to Flesh? I'm not being "funny", just confused at the moving goal post

Why I am so often misunderstood on NL?

Maybe you might want to re examine your convictions.

Or the way you put them across.

My personal view is that you are quite reactive and judgmental on others: notwithstanding that the ideas you yourself advance rank among the most outlandish. It is very difficult to stomach the idea of a person who advances some of your ideas (i.e: paradise is in Hades, the Tree of Life is in Hades; the Tree of Life will be moved to heaven) barking down others and telling them how ridiculous they are in their beliefs.

Just my two cents: sincerely meant.

Two disciples were arguing about a hoisted flag.

FIRST DISCIPLE: 'The flag is moving.'

SECOND DISCIPLE:  'No, the wind is moving the flag'

MASTER:  'Not the wind, Not the flag; mind is moving.'

nuclearboy:

One person says God is impartial and thus CANNOT bring some back to life therefore it is wrong that men die once!

All this based on your own definition of impartiality, your attempt to put God into a box (where He cannot do some things you decide) and all because Jesus raised someone back to life! Could you please then discuss Elijah and Enoch? And let us know your own TRUE knowledge of what actually happened to them since they did not die according to the Bible and that would again make God 'partial"?

m_nwankwo says Jesus is the Incarnate Word of God - what does this mean? He was the Word and re-incarnated as the Son or what? I ask because I remember reading that a man cannot re-incarnate as a dog etc or is it okay if the shift is from Word to Flesh? I'm not being "funny", just confused at the moving goal post

Hi Nuclearboy. I will reply to your last paragraph as that is where my name is mentioned. I have offered in many threads who I percieve Jesus to be. I have also said some where in this thread that Jesus is not a reincarnation of anybody but an incarnation of God. Simply put, Jesus is the incarnate living word of God. Jesus is the son of God. Jesus is God the son. All these designations are correct and in reality mean the same thing and those whose spiritually faculties are open will clearly see that all these designations are identical. No person in the past, present and in the future can be Jesus and so all claims that this and that person is Jesus is nonsense. There is only one Jesus, the son of God and he was incarnated for the first and last time on earth about 2000 years ago. He accomplished the mission that God the father sent him to do and after his death, he  went back to his father. Stay blessed.

Thanks for the clarification. It just seemed contradictory then. Your clarification has put my mind to rest

As an aside, whist I don't subscribe to some of your stated beliefs, I remain one of those who have a deep respect for you.

And the other sage is now here: welcome Imhotep

nuclearboy:

Thanks for the clarification. It just seemed contradictory then. Your clarification has put my mind to rest

As an aside, whist I don't subscribe to some of your stated beliefs, I remain one of those who have a deep respect for you.

And the other sage is now here: welcome Imhotep

Hi nuclearboy. Thanks for your kind words. Stay blessed.

Deep Sight, why is your judgment so biased? Is this how you practise law? Cant you see that there is a difference between understanding someones view on a matter, and understanding the English that the person spoke? I told justcool that I am a Son of God and he replies that he never said he is a Son of God. And I retorted that he misunderstood me, only for you to jump in and blame the misunderstanding on what I believe in and how I express it. Is that correct judgment? And by the way, since Olabowale and Abuzola and myself fell out on a thread in the Muslim section few days after I joined NL, i have stopped discussing other people's beliefs, as long as they are not wrapping them around my God and His Word. That is disinformation, geared to deform and not inform, and I will always endeavour to say my bit. As for you, Deep Sight, your OOI theory looked interesting cos I love Maths. When I saw you murdering Maths, i spoke up. When it showed strife, i retreated. The thread has not come alive since.

viaro:

That's fine, and sorry about my tone earlier. Maybe another day and another thread then. Enjoy.

That's fine. You have done nothing wrong to ask forgiveness for. I was not offended, I have known you to be a gentleman.

So lets carry on here:

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-390145.0.html#msg5416886

@ poster
No bible account suggest reincanation, Say rather "bible accounts that I dont understand"
Because re incanation is a fallacy