Do you think a God who drowns innocent babies from ppl before the flood is loving?

Imalive · Feb 1, 2018

Snerfle said:
So the Word of God you reject because you demand actual physical evidence...

But speculative propaganda from a
heretical Roman Catholic website you believe?!

Oy! :banghead:

Of course he doesnt believe that, but it makes more sense to then also not believe the flood story. You dont believe whats said in Genesis 6 about angels and women either. Then you can as well just not believe Genesis 6 at all.
You do the same thing. It sounds crazy to your brain so it is not true.

psalms 91 · Feb 1, 2018

Yup I dont even bother anymore accept the bible or not I wont change their minds and why waste my time

Imalive · Feb 1, 2018

The ppl who recently got saved in our church were just being bothered by demons for a long time. You dont fool them that its not true. They experienced it. If ppl who never encountered any of that stuff say it aint so, what do I care? Be happy you don't know.
Maybe I shouldnt have made this thread.

user1234 · Feb 1, 2018

Imalive said:
Of course he doesnt believe that, but it makes more sense to then also not believe the flood story. You dont believe whats said in Genesis 6 about angels and women either. Then you can as well just not believe Genesis 6 at all.
You do the same thing. It sounds crazy to your brain so it is not true.

What [staff edit] are you even talking about?!
What do you even assume to know WHAT I believe about Genesis?, you're talking out of left field.
And the guy ADMITTED he didnt believe the Bible, but was giving heed to that Roman Catholic nonsense site, so what are you talking about?

Imalive · Feb 1, 2018

Snerfle said:
What [staff edit] are you even talking about?!
What do you even assume to know WHAT I believe about Genesis?, you're talking out of left field.
And the guy ADMITTED he didnt believe the Bible, but was giving heed to that Roman Catholic nonsense site, so what are you talking about?

No he doesnt believe that either. Wanna bet?
You make fun of my musings but I see no other explanation. God never created demons and God creating dinosaurs? Wouldnt surprise me if He didnt. They were chickens snerf and thats that. i will write this all down in a book you can buy for 99, 95 and i go to the sid roth show to sell it.

user1234 · Feb 1, 2018

Imalive said:
No he doesnt believe that either. Wanna bet?
You make fun of my musings but I see no other explanation.

I make fun of your musings?????
Have you lost ALL your marbles?????

Imalive · Feb 1, 2018

Snerfle said:
I make fun of your musings?????
Have you lost ALL your marbles?????

Yes gimme more marbles.

Imalive · Feb 1, 2018

Mary got a kid from God. Why cant someone get a kid from the devil? Cloning. It will be like the days of Noah. The ac will not be a regular person.

user1234 · Feb 1, 2018

Imalive said:
Mary got a kid from God. Why cant someone get a kid from the devil? Cloning. It will be like the days of Noah. The ac will not be a regular person.

You're making an awful lot of assumptions regarding what I may or may not believe, and I have no idea what you're basing any of it on except what you're making up in your own head.

Someone posted a recommendation for ppl to read, I checked it out, and when I saw what it was, I recommended against it.
Another person rejected God's Word and said they demanded physical proof, but then seems to believe what that heretical website speculates about, so I questioned that.
Somehow you decided to stand in defense of a Bible-rejector and attack me, a fellow believer, and with unsubstantiated suppositions.
Not sure why you would do that, it doesn't make sense...hence, my wondering if you've lost your marbles, which I'd be HAPPY to share mine with you, if you'll help me find them. :spinningsmilie:

Imalive · Feb 1, 2018

Snerfle said:
You're making an awful lot of assumptions regarding what I may or may not believe, and I have no idea what you're basing any of it on except what you're making up in your own head.

Someone posted a recommendation for ppl to read, I checked it out, and when I saw what it was, I recommended against it.
Another person rejected God's Word and said they demanded physical proof, but then seems to believe what that heretical website speculates about, so I questioned that.
Somehow you decided to stand in defense of a Bible-rejector and attack me, a fellow believer, and with unsubstantiated suppositions.
Not sure why you would do that, it doesn't make sense...hence, my wondering if you've lost your marbles, which I'd be HAPPY to share mine with you, if you'll help me find them. :spinningsmilie:

I threw all my marbles away when I cleaned up. Got so tired of those things on the floor. I might have one bag left. So Snerf, what does you believe? Do you believe demons are bad? Me too. Great. We agree.

ImaginaryDay2 · Feb 1, 2018

Guys, chill.

Imalive · Feb 1, 2018

ImaginaryDay2 said:
Guys, chill.

Chill and drown a baby demon LOL. I hope this thread gets nominated for the best thread ever.

Imalive · Feb 1, 2018

Btw Snerfie, have you been taking care of our cute innocent baby?

user1234 · Feb 1, 2018

Imalive said:
I threw all my marbles away when I cleaned up. Got so tired of those things on the floor. I might have one bag left. So Snerf, what does you believe? Do you believe demons are bad? Me too. Great. We agree.

I have no idea what you're on about here, but I'm glad we agree. :mug: :friends:

ImaginaryDay2 said:
Guys, chill.

I have no need to chill...I'm not in a bother about anything. I was merely commenting on someone else claiming the Bible isnt true but yet they said some heretical RCatholic website should be heeded, and I was questioning the rationale behind that thinking, and I got lambasted for it for some reason. Makes no sense to me, but all is 'chill' ... :thumbsup:

Imalive said:
Btw Snerfie, have you been taking care of our cute innocent baby?

View attachment 1034

Yes, he's coming along quite nicely, but he misses his mommy a bit, and still hopes for reconciliation, poor kid.
He takes after you too, a little.
He snarls in tongues!

:drool:

Pedrito · Feb 2, 2018

Reading this thread takes Pedrito back to the superficial teaching he received from the pulpits of his past.

With one notable exception, all that was lacking then was any semblance of proper in-depth teaching about the Bible. Denominational dogma and practice were the emphasis, as was the encouragement of loyalty to the organisation (because it was the right one). Even the “Bible studies” were cleverly manipulated to emphasise only the veracity of the particular denomination and what it stood for.

Pedrito seems to have detected a measure of information lack about a number of issues in this thread. He will offer some thoughts for consideration spread over a few Posts.

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

From Post #1:

I said: if those sweet innocent babies were the offspring of fallen angels and women, then you'd better drown these little demons.

Pedrito asks, what about the babies that were not descended from the union of fallen angels and women?

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

From Post #1:

Where do those disembodied demons and unclean spirits who search for bodies to posess come from?
They are not fallen angels. Fallen angels from before the flood are in hell says Peter and angels dont need a body to work through.

If the fallen angels were tempted by Satan to sample the physical pleasures of the animate human life form (for reasons of his own), and if they enjoyed the experience, the desire for physical embodiment would naturally remain with them. They are not actually in “hell”, but in a state of restriction. (We know from observation that they can no longer generate physical forms, for instance. However, they still can inhabit physical life forms.) 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 1:6 describe that restriction. The word translated “hell” is the closest Greek word Peter could find to picture that restriction.

Imalive · Feb 2, 2018

Pedrito said:
Reading this thread takes Pedrito back to the superficial teaching he received from the pulpits of his past.

With one notable exception, all that was lacking then was any semblance of proper in-depth teaching about the Bible. Denominational dogma and practice were the emphasis, as was the encouragement of loyalty to the organisation (because it was the right one). Even the “Bible studies” were cleverly manipulated to emphasise only the veracity of the particular denomination and what it stood for.

Pedrito seems to have detected a measure of information lack about a number of issues in this thread. He will offer some thoughts for consideration spread over a few Posts.

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

From Post #1:

Pedrito asks, what about the babies that were not descended from the union of fallen angels and women?

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

From Post #1:

If the fallen angels were tempted by Satan to sample the physical pleasures of the animate human life form (for reasons of his own), and if they enjoyed the experience, the desire for physical embodiment would naturally remain with them. They are not actually in “hell”, but in a state of restriction. (We know from observation that they can no longer generate physical forms, for instance. However, they still can inhabit physical life forms.) 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 1:6 describe that restriction. The word translated “hell” is the closest Greek word Peter could find to picture that restriction.

Yes and they're then also on earth and they still try to have sex. That's why I believe it's true, cause those unclean demons do that all the time.
Those other kids? The Bible says:

Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. 12 So God looked upon the earth, and indeed it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth.

All flesh, thats babies and animals too. Thats why I think dinosaurs.
Those kids in Sodom were not innocent. They went out and wanted to rape the angels, from young to old, totally corrupt.

user1234 · Feb 2, 2018

Imalive said:
Chill and drown a baby demon LOL. I hope this thread gets nominated for the best thread ever.

I don't know about the whole thread, but that post ↑ should win something! :disgonbegood:

And I definitely nominate the thread TITLE for Title of the Year!

arty019: :first:

"Do you think a God who drowns innocent babies from ppl before the flood is loving?"

:heart: :baby: How cute, the little devil :smlove2:

ound: CLASSIC! :yourock:

Pedrito · Feb 2, 2018

As indirectly requested in Post #2 in the “Thoughts on the 'annihilationism' Thread” thread, Pedrito will now revert to the “first person” presentation style from now on. I ask for understanding if I lapse into the third person at times due to force of habit. The reason I felt compelled to use the third person style, is explained in Post #4 of that thread.

From Post #1:

I used to believe GAP theory and thought they were from before creation, but God created the heavens and earth in 7 days. When He laid the cornerstone of the earth the sons of God rejoiced.
I always thought satan fell ages before that.

From Post #5:

He fell before man. Did he fall immediately out of jealousy or something, cause angels have to serve ppl and can never become like God, like we can?

There are two passages in the Bible (that ~~Pedrito is~~ I am aware of) that are understood to point to the downfall of a super-angel – the one who became Satan. They are Ezekiel 28:11-19 and Isaiah 14:12-14. Both act as windows into the past, within passages about the then-present. They describe the ultimate power behind a contemporary evil.

Ezekiel 28:11-19 is instructive in this instance [emphasis added]:

11 And the Word of the LORD came to me, saying,
12 Son of man, lift up a lament over the king of Tyre, and say to him, So says the Lord Jehovah: You seal the measure, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
13 You have been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone [was] your covering, the ruby, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the turquoise, and the emerald, and gold. The workmanship of your tambourines and of your flutes was prepared in you in the day that you were created.
14 You [were] the anointed cherub that covers, and I had put you in the holy height of God [where] you were.; you have walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.
15 You [were] perfect in your ways from the day that you were created, until iniquity was found in you.
16 By the multitude of your goods they have filled your midst [with] violence, and you have sinned. So I cast you profaned from the height of God, and I destroy you, O covering cherub, from among the stones of fire.
17 Your heart was lifted up because of your beauty; you have spoiled your wisdom because of your brightness. I will cast you to the ground; I will put you before kings, that they may behold you.
18 By the host of your iniquities, by the iniquity of your trade, you have profaned your holy places; so I brought a fire from your midst; it shall devour you, and I will give you for ashes on the earth, before the eyes of all who see you.
19 All who know you among the peoples shall be astonished at you; you shall be terrors, and you [will] not [be] forever.

We learn that the being that became Satan had the privilege of being in the Garden of Eden prior to iniquity taking control of him. His privilege apparently included direct communication with the pinnacle of God’s sentient physical creation. We learn from Isaiah 14:12-14 that the iniquity mentioned was pride and ambition:

12 How you are fallen from the heavens, O shining star, son of the morning! [How] you are cut down to the ground, you who weakened the nations!
13 For you have said in your heart, I will go up [to] the heavens, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God; I will also sit on the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north.
14 I will go up above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the Most High.

So that mighty angelic being became Satan during his God-appointed sojourn in the Garden.

Pedrito · Feb 11, 2018

From Post #2:

This is what happens when a mythology gets taken too seriously.

From Post #7:

The myth of Noah is firmly based on earlier Sumerian and Akkadian myths.

Well, it could very well be the other way around.

The pagan myths may simply be distortions of the original history.

It didn’t take man long to fall into idolatry even prior to Noah’s declining years. It never does.

(Don’t forget that the lives of Noah and Abram (Abraham) overlapped by around 50 or 60 years – I have forgotten which).

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

If the early chapters of Genesis are to be considered mythical, one very big problematic hurdle has to be overcome:

How could the author of Genesis have been able to so accurately record the phases through which the Earth went during its formation and its progressive population with life – phases which were unknown until relatively recently in human history?

If one looks carefully at the record, especially at the highly summarised introductory chapters, and asks the right questions, then the results just might be surprising. Questions that could be asked include: “How did the author know?” and “Should ‘rib’ be translated ‘side’? If translated ‘side’, could that passage actually be a significant, coded message meaningful to only modern readers?”

When investigated thus, the record just might be seen in a whole new light.

atpollard · Feb 13, 2018

kiwimac said:
Actual, physical evidence.

You want physical evidence of metaphysical Truth ... good luck with that one.
So what color IS gravity?
How much does a thought weigh?

Do you think a God who drowns innocent babies from ppl before the flood is loving?

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member