Generational Sin

[walterpthefirst]

Posted 12 hours ago

  12 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

For the record, I've been called much worse names by much better men.  Carry on. 

See you won't stop....better man.

 

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Sadly, this exchange illustrates one of the main impediments to having a meaningful dialogue with Edgarcito.

 

He often reacts emotionally to what he thinks a post means without understanding what it actually means.

 

Here he thinks that the Professor is saying that he is a better man than him.

 

Hence the barb, 'better man' directed at the Prof.

 

But what the Prof actually wrote was that he (the Prof) has been called much worse names (than Edgarcito called me) by much better men than Edgarcito.

 

Nowhere did the Prof say that he was a better man than Edgarcito.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[freshstart]

On 11/5/2022 at 4:00 PM, Edgarcito said:

I guess it depends on how you interpret the verse

Thus begins every Christian argument for everything under the sun . . .interpreting the same verses with completely different outcomes. . . . . .pre-destination vs. free-will . . . .literal vs. analogy  . . . . faith alone vs. faith+works. . . . baptism required vs. not required . . . .women allowed as religious teachers vs. not allowed,  . . . .etc., etc.,

 

On 11/5/2022 at 5:18 PM, Edgarcito said:

Your admitted sole purpose is not what you profess but rather a not very nice purpose given one potentially ends you in eternal distress.  I'd rather continue to win souls even if I lost my faith.  Thanks but no thanks.

While this makes no sense, what it does point to is a deep fear of "eternal distress," threatened by an "all-loving" god.  I have to remind myself of the deep psychological brain twist this must cause so many Christians.  They spend their lives "sinning" just like the rest of us, but when watching their non-believing friends and loved ones - who are no worse of a person than they are (maybe even better) -  head towards eternal damnation, they are (often) riddled with anxiety trying to win souls.  Funny how Christians feel compelled to try to win souls, when their god cannot do that on his own! 

 

Pardon the interruption.

[Edgarcito]

19 hours ago, freshstart said:

Thus begins every Christian argument for everything under the sun . . .interpreting the same verses with completely different outcomes. . . . . .pre-destination vs. free-will . . . .literal vs. analogy  . . . . faith alone vs. faith+works. . . . baptism required vs. not required . . . .women allowed as religious teachers vs. not allowed,  . . . .etc., etc.,

 

While this makes no sense, what it does point to is a deep fear of "eternal distress," threatened by an "all-loving" god.  I have to remind myself of the deep psychological brain twist this must cause so many Christians.  They spend their lives "sinning" just like the rest of us, but when watching their non-believing friends and loved ones - who are no worse of a person than they are (maybe even better) -  head towards eternal damnation, they are (often) riddled with anxiety trying to win souls.  Funny how Christians feel compelled to try to win souls, when their god cannot do that on his own! 

 

Pardon the interruption.

A good person wouldn't want eternal damnation for their fellow man....and it should cause anxiety given the description.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

1 minute ago, Edgarcito said:

A good person wouldn't want eternal damnation for their fellow man....and it should cause anxiety given the description.

Are you working on your rebuttal Ed? 

[Edgarcito]

10 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

Are you working on your rebuttal Ed? 

No sir.  I see things differently than do you.  Not a biggie.  As I recall Ezekiel says that the sins will potentially last a few generations and also says, if I'm not mistaken, that each soul belongs to God.  The NT seems to say that each soul will be judged individually.  But I don't see this as the potential to hand down sin is gone.  I realize you don't see it that way,  Not trying to be disrespectful.....I will look one more time as Ezekiel.  Thx.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

38 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

No sir.  I see things differently than do you.  Not a biggie.  As I recall Ezekiel says that the sins will potentially last a few generations and also says, if I'm not mistaken, that each soul belongs to God.  The NT seems to say that each soul will be judged individually.  But I don't see this as the potential to hand down sin is gone.  I realize you don't see it that way,  Not trying to be disrespectful.....I will look one more time as Ezekiel.  Thx.

Ed,

 

From an argumentive standpoint do you think that I made a well supported argument against the curse of the law not being valid after Jesus Christ fulfilled the law in sending the Holy ghost to write his laws in your heart and mind? Ezekiel wasn't the only scripture I used during this argument or did you forget that? I don't want you to look at what I said about Ezekiel. I'm way past that now. 

 

DB

[Edgarcito]

Maybe we are talking about two different things DB.  There is the mechanism for sin and then two remedies for atonement.  

 

Maybe we could discuss one at a time a see why we are not connecting here.  

Yes sir, I think you did a fine job per your interpretation.  From my standpoint, I don't see the same interpretation.

 

The Law had sacrifices that atoned for sin.  Man sinned, sacrificed/atoned through priests, and went on apparently.  I'm believing sin, at that time, could be passed down as it states, through generations...or also just individual sin.  Keeping the Law was more immediate and kept the sin/holy balance in check in a timelier fashion as God was immediately present.  Kind of like A&E in my mind.... that we have to remedy the situation, or we can't reside together.  

 

Until then Jesus fulfilled the Law and brought the New Covenant....then the Holy Spirit and Grace.  But I can still sin individually and also effect my children's bodies with my sin today.

 

So I don't think the mechanism for sin has changed, just the how God is atoning for our sins.  I don't see at all where the New Covenant removes generational sin except through accepting Christ.  But even in accepting Jesus, I can still sin daily, knowingly or unknowingly.

 

I hope that helps.

[Edgarcito]

Let me restate something.  That sin is always individual, but that it could have an effect on the progeny, their bodies. NOT that it made the progeny a sinner automatically.  Thx.  And I honestly believe that, that we have individual forgiveness in Christ despite the bias playing field when we are born.....probably even moreso.

[Edgarcito]

I guess another question we could ask is if epigenetic changes are a protective mechanism from the parent's behaviors....how that might relate to the scripture.  Just a thought.

[walterpthefirst]

2 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

A good person wouldn't want eternal damnation for their fellow man....and it should cause anxiety given the description.

 

A good person wouldn't ignore the wrong they'd done to another person.

 

It should cause them anxiety and they should want to put it right.

 

By making peace with the person they have wronged.

 

You wronged the Professor by misreading his words and replying to him with a barbed comment.

 

That's not paying back evil for evil because the Prof did you no evil, Edgarcito.

 

You did evil to him because you misread his words.

 

Would a good person let that stand?

 

 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

2 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

Maybe we are talking about two different things DB.  There is the mechanism for sin and then two remedies for atonement.  

 

Maybe we could discuss one at a time a see why we are not connecting here.  

Yes sir, I think you did a fine job per your interpretation.  From my standpoint, I don't see the same interpretation.

 

The Law had sacrifices that atoned for sin.  Man sinned, sacrificed/atoned through priests, and went on apparently.  I'm believing sin, at that time, could be passed down as it states, through generations...or also just individual sin.  Keeping the Law was more immediate and kept the sin/holy balance in check in a timelier fashion as God was immediately present.  Kind of like A&E in my mind.... that we have to remedy the situation, or we can't reside together.  

 

Until then Jesus fulfilled the Law and brought the New Covenant....then the Holy Spirit and Grace.  But I can still sin individually and also effect my children's bodies with my sin today.

 

So I don't think the mechanism for sin has changed, just the how God is atoning for our sins.  I don't see at all where the New Covenant removes generational sin except through accepting Christ.  But even in accepting Jesus, I can still sin daily, knowingly or unknowingly.

 

I hope that helps.

Ok. 

 

Then find all the scriptures in YOUR Bible to prove that out. Because maybe you can. The Bible says multiple things. So actually study ed. The Bible says to study and show yourself approved. A good workman. Rightly dividing the word of God. 

 

It is fine if you have a different interpretation. There are over 45,000 Christian denominations. In the Bible you can probably find the scripture to justify your stance. Just as I found the scripture to justify mine. So do it. Get in your Bible. Thats what I'm asking you to do.

 

If your Christian than the Bible is your tool for everlasting life and to win people to christ. How many people are you going to win if you don't study. I'm serious. If your a Christian than BE A CHRISTIAN. Use the tool your God gave you. I do not doubt that you can find it if you want to. Then I will make a rebuttal against your findings. Thats how this works. Otherwise you just look like a dumb ass, that knows nothing about the bible. You said these discussions strengthen your faith. Then let it strengthen your faith. 

 

DB

[Edgarcito]

Where did sin go?  Can I still not sin in Christ?  You want me to find a quick verse to support that?

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

14 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Where did sin go?  Can I still not sin in Christ?  You want me to find a quick verse to support that?

No I want you to define a comprehensive argument that hereditary sin and being accountable for your fathers sin applies after christ. I want to see verses from the old testament and new. Several verses to fully support that view. One "quick verse" won't do. 

 

I proved my argument out from the old testament to the new. And if your argument is an argument support by the Bible which is the foundation of your faith as a Christian. Then you shod be able to do that. 

 

DB

[freshstart]

5 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

A good person wouldn't want eternal damnation for their fellow man....and it should cause anxiety given the description.

On this we agree.  Since god wants eternal damnation for a certain portion of the population - and it causes him no anxiety to do so - it looks like that makes god the opposite of a good person. 

[Edgarcito]

13 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

No I want you to define a comprehensive argument that hereditary sin and being accountable for your fathers sin applies after christ. I want to see verses from the old testament and new. Several verses to fully support that view. One "quick verse" won't do. 

 

I proved my argument out from the old testament to the new. And if your argument is an argument support by the Bible which is the foundation of your faith as a Christian. Then you shod be able to do that. 

 

DB

I’m not going to participate in that DB.  The entire NT suggests we may sin in Christ.  If you don’t want to make the connection between epigenetics and the OT\NT, that’s fine.  Thx. 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

7 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

If you don’t want to make the connection between epigenetics and the OT\NT, that’s fine.

You haven't done that yourself, Ed.  Still not getting involved, just pointing out that you haven't made that connection either.  You've asserted that there's a connection; but you have not established it.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

@TheRedneckProfessor I have asserted that I believe according to my christian view that it is not still applicable. Do you think I supported my assertion? (using the Bible)

 

DB

[TheRedneckProfessor]

19 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

@TheRedneckProfessor I have asserted that I believe according to my christian view that it is not still applicable. Do you think I supported my assertion? (using the Bible)

 

DB

As much as such an assertion can be supported.  You were a fine preacher, I'll warrant. 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

8 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

As much as such an assertion can be supported.  You were a fine preacher, I'll warrant. 

Thank you.

 

I just wanted to go on record to show that an Exchristian could support their argument with the Bible, better than a (sort of) practicing Christian could. I would welcome a more studied Christian to come make a better argument on any of the topics discussed in this forum. Becuase this was bullshit!

 

Ed does not know a Goddamn thing about the bible. And can't support his own assertions. Damn look at God's power working through Ed. 

 

SMH!!!! I kinda expected a little more Ed, since I used your book to justify my argument. 

 

But whatever. Can we just lock this?  I was really hoping for more of a debate and a comprehensive argument on both sides. But thats not what we are getting, so fuck it. 

 

DB

[TheRedneckProfessor]

24 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

But whatever. Can we just lock this?  I was really hoping for more of a debate and a comprehensive argument on both sides. But thats not what we are getting, so fuck it.