Quote:
Originally Posted by zeek
I didn't raise the question ZNP did. He asked, "Is the OT God different from the NT God, or is this the God who is laying the foundation for the one new man?" So, you have misdirected your rebuke toward me.
. . . .
Here you intentionally misquote me. Anyone can read my post and see that I did not say that. Why did you find it necessary to change my words to make your point? Was that a righteous thing to do?
I am aware that this is a strictly moderated site where I am not free to talk about anything I please. It is out of respect for the rules of the forum that I refrained from saying more about how God seems to change from the OT to the NT.
|
Yes. ZNP did raise the question. And a rather weird one at that. So you tack onto an off-the-wall question with he response you gave to Unto. It does not relate to answering ZNP's question, but to griping about the limits being put on the out-of-bounds discussions you tend toward.
In that context, my read of your "you don't know what I believe and you don't want to know" is an attempt to "allow" the off-topic discussion because you meet the criteria of being ex-LCer and believe something different.
We don't want discussions about the belief in some different god. Even one that is a complained-away "different" God of the Bible. It is one thing to discuss how it is hard to reconcile the two sides when looked at through a lens of "God is love" or something like that. But to take on the kind postmodern argument that requires a completely new "read" after 2,000+ years of understanding to the contrary. . . . Let's just say that the position is one that makes us God and the God of the Bible into a naughty student. No sense that it is impossible to have righteous indignation at the actions of the God that defines righteousness.