Worse things than disbelief?

Worse things than disbelief?

Spirituality

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
07 Feb 18

Originally posted by @fmf
Does being "worse than an unbeliever" mean that such a believer in Christ [who does not provide for his or her relatives] faces "damnation" [according to 1 Timothy 5:8 ] ?
I would say no.

But many times I have written about discipline during the millennial age before the age of eternity.

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
117373
07 Feb 18

Originally posted by @sonship
But many times I have written about discipline during the millennial age before the age of eternity.
Leaving aside the “many times you have written” piousness for the moment....what are these “ages” you are talking about?

Millennial age....
Age of eternity....

Where do you get these from?

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
07 Feb 18
2 edits

Originally posted by @divegeester
Leaving aside the “many times you have written” piousness for the moment....what are these “ages” you are talking about?


How else would you have liked me to state this?
Do you think I could have indicated that I have written about it in words less annoying to you?

Okay, give me an example.


Millennial age....
Age of eternity....

Where do you get these from?


Not to sound too "pious", I get it from reading carefully especially Revelation chapters 20, then chapters 21,22.

Read chapter 20 and count the number of times John says "thousand years" or "the thousand years".

I count about six mentions.
Revelation 21,22 is about the age of eternity afterwards with a new heaven and a new earth and this New Jerusalem in completion.

That means that no saved person is left immature and underdeveloped. All have commonly arrived at full sonship.
Some arrived latter. Some arrived on time. All eventually arrive.

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
07 Feb 18
1 edit

Oh Divegeester ...

How else would you have liked me to state this?
Do you think I could have indicated that I have written about it in words less annoying to you?

Okay, give me an example.


A less pious, less sanctimonious way how to say I wrote about something many times ... ??

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
117373
07 Feb 18

Originally posted by @sonship
I get it from reading carefully especially [b]Revelation chapters 20, then chapters 21,22.

Read chapter 20 and count the number of times John says "thousand years" or "the thousand years".

I count about six mentions.
Revelation 21,22 is about the age of eternity afterwards with a new heaven and a new earth and this New Jerusalem in completion. [/b]
The 1000 years is not and “age” in the way you are referencing it. I’m not convinced there are “ages” in the bible, but if there are, this is not one of them.

The Age of eternity is made up term by you.

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
117373
07 Feb 18
1 edit

Originally posted by @sonship
A less pious, less sanctimonious way how to say I wrote about something many times ... ??
It’s the way you come across, I’m not the only one to comment on this. It’s up to you wether or not you take it on board or not.

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
07 Feb 18

Originally posted by @divegeester
The 1000 years is not and “age” in the way you are referencing it. I’m not convinced there are “ages” in the bible, but if there are, this is not one of them.

The Age of eternity is made up term by you.
Hmm. Sounds kind of "pious" there.
Could you write it again in a less annoying way to me?

" not only in this age but also in that which is to come." (Eph. 1:21)


How do you understand that?

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
117373
07 Feb 18

Originally posted by @sonship
Hmm. Sounds kind of "pious" there.
Could you write it again in a less annoying way to me?

[b] " not only in this age but also in that which is to come." (Eph. 1:21)


How do you understand that?[/b]
OK I acknowledge that there is a mention of "age" at least once. But it really is just referring to this life and the next. The 1000 years is not an "age".

Kali

PenTesting

Joined
04 Apr 04
Moves
251225
07 Feb 18

Originally posted by @romans1009
In other words, a Christian’s “good works,” because they are directed by God’s Holy Spirit to accomplish God’s purposes and will, are different than a non-Christian’s “good works,” which are not directed by God and presumably do not have the effect of accomplishing His will and purposes.
More mumbo jumbo nonsensical doctrine. You clearly do not have a clue what good works is all about especially if you continue to claim that looking after your mother is good works.

There is evil works and at the other end of the works spectrum there is good works. In the middle there is your normal duty to those around you... neither good nor bad. Looking after your mother is YOUR DUTY.

Jesus wants good works of the kind he described throughout his teachings and listed clearly in Matt 25, and according to HIM it is this what determines whether or not you are welcomed into the Kingdom of God.

If you do not this kind of good works you are out.

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
31 Jan 18
Moves
3456
07 Feb 18

“There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.

For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.“

(Romans 8:1-14)

Kali

PenTesting

Joined
04 Apr 04
Moves
251225
07 Feb 18

Originally posted by @romans1009
“There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful fles ...[text shortened]... e.

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.“

(Romans 8:1-14)
Practice saying this, you might need it :

..Lord, when saw we thee an hungred,
or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick,
or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

Misfit Queen

Isle of Misfit Toys

Joined
08 Aug 03
Moves
36793
07 Feb 18
1 edit

Originally posted by @fmf
You didn't get away with the little bit of message board deceit. I called you on it. Further debate about it is certainly not necessary.
"message board deceit"?

That's a little harsh for something you do on a regular basis, isn't it?

How many times have you cut out half of my post when replying to me?

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
07 Feb 18

Originally posted by @suzianne
"message board deceit"?

That's a little harsh for something you do on a regular basis, isn't it?

How many times have you cut out half of my post when replying to me?
I often cut the same old same old diatribe about my supposed personal faults and just leave the bit that's on topic if there is any. I have never removed any words from a sentence of yours to change the content or meaning of the sentence.

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
31 Jan 18
Moves
3456
07 Feb 18

Originally posted by @fmf
I often cut the same old same old diatribe about my supposed personal faults and just leave the bit that's on topic if there is any. I have never removed any words from a sentence of yours to change the content or meaning of the sentence.
You take these forums wayyyyy too seriously.

It was obvious that the three words I quoted from your post did not represent the entirety of your post as it was directly above what I had excerpted - in all its resplendent, pontificating glory!

If I were trying to be deceitful, I would have deleted words from your post instead of simply excerpting them or I would have done that to a post of yours from pages earlier.

You’re so desperate to attack me, you’re latching onto anything you can find and feigning outrage over it.

Sad!

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
07 Feb 18

Originally posted by @romans1009
You take these forums wayyyyy too seriously.

It was obvious that the three words I quoted from your post did not represent the entirety of your post as it was directly above what I had excerpted - in all its resplendent, pontificating glory!

If I were trying to be deceitful, I would have deleted words from your post instead of simply excerpting the ...[text shortened]... e to attack me, you’re latching onto anything you can find and feigning outrage over it.

Sad!
More off-topic banter. Our conversation about the Timothy quote went pear shaped for you. Page after page of banter, no "substance" from you.