Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Again, taking things out of context. Not to mention it is likely that is not even part of original Scripture.Ah, so you're qualified to cast the first stone. I assure you I'm not.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Again, taking things out of context. Not to mention it is likely that is not even part of original Scripture.Ah, so you're qualified to cast the first stone. I assure you I'm not.
Except judgement and justice are not the same word. Take what we actually say, not what you try to make us say.God says He does not take pleasure in the judgment of the wicked. You can listen to Him or you can listen to yourself.
I know who I'm listening to.
That is not what we are talking about. We both agree that God does not take pleasure in casting people to hell.God says He does not take pleasure in the judgment of the wicked. You can listen to Him or you can listen to yourself.
I know who I'm listening to.
Welcome to the Reformation, Dave.Wow...
This thread has a lot of fighting in it.
Time to go.
Except judgement and justice are not the same word. Take what we actually say, not what you try to make us say.
I see. So in your view if Joshua's audience members chose to worship the gods of Egypt or the Amorites instead of the God of Israel they wouldn't be lost?Thank you for this perfect example of eisegesis and mishandling of scripture. May everyone take note.
You assert a fallacy and then attempt to prove it with a verse that addresses the chosen people of God under the Sinai/Mosaic Covenant, which has nothing to do with eternal salvation. Bravo.
No, we are discussing if we will rejoice in watching loved ones suffer eternal conscious torment. God will not be rejoicing, but Gerstner says we will due to sanctification. Sorry, that's not in the Bible.That is not what we are talking about. We both agree that God does not take pleasure in casting people to hell.
We are discussing if God rejoices in His justice. To say no is to say that God doesn't rejoice in his perfection. A just God is perfect. An unjust God is evil.
Therefore God rejoices in His justice and we will rejoice in God's justice.
The context is judging fellow believers. You have shown nothing otherwise, except to indicate that it's OK for you to judge others because you think your own house is in order. I don't share your confidence.Again, taking things out of context. Not to mention it is likely that is not even part of original Scripture.
That is not what Gerstner said.No, we are discussing if we will rejoice in watching loved ones suffer eternal conscious torment. God will not be rejoicing, but Gerstner says we will due to sanctification. Sorry, that's not in the Bible.
Then we disagree on Matthew 7.The context is judging fellow believers. You have shown nothing otherwise, except to indicate that it's OK for you to judge others because you think your own house is in order. I don't share your confidence.
" ... when you are in heaven you will be so sanctified that you could look at your own mother in hell and rejoice in the display of the justice of God."That is not what Gerstner said.
If you don't think Jesus is talking about refraining from judging others, we certainly do disagree. The passage could hardly be clearer.Then we disagree on Matthew 7.
Exactly, but here is what you are making him say: "When you are in heaven you will be so sanctified that you could look at your own mother in hell and rejoice in her suffering." See the difference?" ... when you are in heaven you will be so sanctified that you could look at your own mother in hell and rejoice in the display of the justice of God."
They would die in sins because justification has always been by faith, not by works.I see. So in your view if Joshua's audience members chose to worship the gods of Egypt or the Amorites instead of the God of Israel they wouldn't be lost?
That is not what Gerstner said, nor what I have said.No, we are discussing if we will rejoice in watching loved ones suffer eternal conscious torment. God will not be rejoicing, but Gerstner says we will due to sanctification. Sorry, that's not in the Bible.
I thoroughly rejoice in the justice of God, even while weeping over the unrepentant sinner." ... when you are in heaven you will be so sanctified that you could look at your own mother in hell and rejoice in the display of the justice of God."
This particular display of God's justice IS the mother's suffering. There is no divorcing one from the other. No suffering, no "justice."Exactly, but here is what you are making him say: "When you are in heaven you will be so sanctified that you could look at your own mother in hell and rejoice in her suffering." See the difference?
Your attitude is different than God's in that regard.I thoroughly rejoice in the justice of God, even while weeping over the unrepentant sinner.
It's always back to the second person personal pronouns with you, a telltale pattern when people run short of scriptural support for their views.They would die in sins because justification has always been by faith, not by works.
If you grasped the covenants of God you would do a much better job of interpreting scripture.
That's human reason talking, not the Word of God. You can't offer a single verse of Scripture for being so holy that we "rejoice in the justice of God" as we view it being expressed in eternal conscious torment of our loved ones. That's exactly what Gerstner is talking about, and he's full of beans. The Bible does not say or even suggest such a thing.That is not what Gerstner said, nor what I have said.
Do we rejoice in the justice of God? If not, we declare God imperfect because we despise God's justice.
Gerstner says we will not be weeping, we will be rejoicing WHILE LOOKING AT the unrepentant sinner.I thoroughly rejoice in the justice of God, even while weeping over the unrepentant sinner.