Harold Turner observed that just about any Bible doctrine or concept can be completely devastated, insofar as any practical value is concerned, with a "what if". The following exchange, while not actual, makes a valid point set forth in Prov. 26:4-5, as to the proper response to a ‘what if-er’, regardless of motive. “Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.”
Found—ancient document detailing the following exchange:
Joshua: “God requires holiness from His people. He requires us to offer sacrifices in the place He chose to put His name to atone for our sins.”
Nameless Israelite: “Sacrifices cannot be necessary. What if a man is on his way to offer a sacrifice and a tree falls on him and kills him?”
Joshua’s reply: “God requires holiness from His people. He requires us to offer sacrifices in the place He chose to put His name to atone for our sins.”
Found—modern document detailing the following exchange:
Peter: “God requires repentance and baptism for remission of sins.”
Nameless believer: “Repentance cannot be necessary. What if a man is contemplating repentance and a tree falls on him and kills him?”
Peter’s reply: “God requires repentance and baptism for remission of sins.”
Nameless believer: “Baptism cannot be necessary. What if a man is on his way to be baptized and a tree falls on him and kills him?”
Peter’s reply: “God requires repentance and baptism for remission of sins.”
“If thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul.” ~ Ezekiel 3:19
No comments:
Post a Comment