Christian insanity

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

At 02:34 PM 5/31/99 +0100, you wrote:

>> >> TILL

>> >> I certainly don't think that the Bible teaches that infants will

>> >> go to hell either, so if you believe in original sin, what is 

>> >> your position on the fate of infants?  

>> >

>> >Matthew Bell

>> >My position is that they are in the hands of the Judge of all the 

>> >earth who will do right. 

>> 

>> TILL

>> Yeah right!  The "judge of all the earth" may order the extermination of

>> entire civilian populations because they didn't belong to the right

>ethnic

>> group, the judge of all the earth may approve the rape of children, the

>> judge of all the earth may approve the massacre of babies, the judge of

>all

>> the earth may send a pestilence to kill 70,000 people for the offense of

>> just one person, the judge of all the earth may kill a baby because its

>> parents committed adultery but let their parents off scott free, but the

>> judge of all the earth will always do that which is right.  Get a life,

>Matt.

>

>Matthew Bell

>You need to substantiate the above charges with texts. I am more than sure

>that they are to be relied on more than your own colourful interpretation

>of them. 

>> 


TILL
The rape of children: Numbers 31:17-18.
The massacre of children: Numbers 31:17-18; 1 Sam. 15:2-3; Genesis 6:17;
Deuteronomy 20:16; Joshua 10:40; 11:10-23.
Killing 70 thousand for the offense of another person: 2 Samuel 24:15-17.
Killing a baby because of its parents' adultery: 2 Samuel 12:14-23

Let me know if you need any more help finding other references to biblical
events that are commonly known to everyone who has spent any time at all
seriously studying the Bible.


>>>>TILL

>>>>At any rate, what you are now saying seems to be 

>>>>inconsistent with the position you have taken in the past.

>>>>Do you remember the issue over the NT statement that

>>>>those who are not for me are against me?  I recall that

>>>>your argument was that children who were intellectually

>>>>incapable of being "for Jesus" are nevertheless against

>>>>him by virtue of original sin.  Have youchanged that position?

>>>

>>>Matthew Bell

>>>No, that has not changed. All are born in sin and at enmity to 

>>>God. Any salvation from hell which would extend to infants 

>>>who die is purely through the mercy and grace of God, not in 

>>>any merits of the infant/child. 

>>>

>> 

>>TILL

>>When I find time, I think I'll go back and check your postings in

>>my files to see what you really said at that time.  Yes, I have 

>>kept everything that far back.  It was in 1997, wasn't it?

>

>Matthew Bell

>Am I suppossed to be impressed or shaking in my boots because you keep

>files from way back? If so, I am sorry to disappoint you, but I am neither.

>As for when the discussion you refer to took place I don't know the year,

>only that it was fairly early on after I joined the list. 

>


TILL
It's hard to remember when you joined the list.  It seems as if you have
been around forever, ducking and dodging and evading and backpedaling.  It's
hard to remember what positions you have taken and retreated from.

Farrell Till
Skepticism, Inc.
jftill@midwest.net

• Previous message: Christian insanity
• Next message: Christian insanity
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]