Originally posted by FeivelWell I will be in the presence of the LORD that is all the JOY I need.
Wow...thank you Hellboy., your gonna have your own spot in heaven so you think your alone up there...that's what god told me. BTW, if all of us non-christians are going to be in hell, heaven is going to be really boring 🙂
Feivel
Originally posted by RBHILLDid I misquote the verses? I thank you for bringing that to my attention. Could you post the correct verses please.
Satan has eyes he can read the Bible to he can trick you into what it says.
Feivel
BTW my forum location is not a made up statement like RBHILL's logo. Saint's In Hell is the title of a Judas Priest song.
I admit I haven't read Kierkegaard (but I will) but Abrahams dilemma is also mentioned in Dan Simmons novel Hyperion where it is alson discussed. To me the imoprtant question is not should you or should you not follow gods order to slay your own son, but how is it possible that a benevolent god tells Abraham to slay his son?
The most common answer is that by following gods will is proving your faith in him ... but for me it is impossible to believe or have faith in anybody who dares order such a sacrifice. Even IF Isaac would go to heaven after being massacred by his own father, I can not imagine any parent finding peace with the fact of having slayed their own child.
Abrahams dillema ... to me ... is one of the most strong reasons to seriously doubt the excistence of god. Defending god by referring to the dillema as it also could have been the devil who told Abraham to kill Isaac, is the lousyest explanation I read so far.
NicS
Originally posted by NicolaiSCultural evolution.
I admit I haven't read Kierkegaard (but I will) but Abrahams dilemma is also mentioned in Dan Simmons novel Hyperion where it is alson discussed. To me the imoprtant question is not should you or should you not follow gods order to slay your own son, but how is it possible that a benevolent god tells Abraham to slay his son?
The most common answe ...[text shortened]... een the devil who told Abraham to kill Isaac, is the lousyest explanation I read so far.
NicS
In my view the Abraham story of slaughtering his son has to do with the widespread practise in human society at that time of human sacrifice. The story is about God putting and end to that practise. Instead of human he asks for an animal sacrifice. It is one step in the proces of civilisation mankind has to go. Later the animal sacrifice is also replaced. God Himself has offered to be the ultimate sacrifice in order to restore the relationship between God and mankind from a closed one into an open one.
Within the context of this reasoning it must be clear that Jesus Christ must have been God, otherwise it would not have been a step forward but a step backwards in civilisation.
Originally posted by ivanhoeexcellent answer, and I would be inclined to agree.
Cultural evolution.
In my view the Abraham story of slaughtering his son has to do with the widespread practise in human society at that time of human sacrifice. The story is about God putting and end to that practise. Instead of human he asks for an animal sacrifice. It is one step in the proces of civilisation mankind has to go. Later the animal sacrif ...[text shortened]... n God, otherwise it would not have been a step forward but a step backwards in civilisation.
Mike
Originally posted by Feivel
And I suppose you can show that through references in the old testament? You are telling me what a commentary and the new testament says. Tell you what, let's make believe there is no new testament. Now show us how Isaiah, Elijah, Noah, Moses, Abraham et al. knew of jesus. Please show us and good luck with your attempt. I am sure there are many people here that would like you to succeed and to be truthful I would really like to see you succeed so lets see...
Feivel
If I cared for your response I would have posted in the topic you created. As such you have still failed to address my question to you, or actually research prophecies I mentioned. Your ludicrous assumption that a particular prophecy has to be unique to be valid I also addressed and if you only accept prophecies that only one man can fulfill, why would I address your posts ?
Originally posted by ivanhoe
Cultural evolution.
In my view the Abraham story of slaughtering his son has to do with the widespread practise in human society at that time of human sacrifice. The story is about God putting and end to that practise. Instead of human he asks for an animal sacrifice. It is one step in the proces of civilisation mankind has to go. Later the animal sacrifice is also replaced. God Himself has offered to be the ultimate sacrifice in order to restore the relationship between God and mankind from a closed one into an open one.
Within the context of this reasoning it must be clear that Jesus Christ must have been God, otherwise it would not have been a step forward but a step backwards in civilisation.
A valid interpretation Ivan, however I don't know if I agree. I believe Abraham's acceptance to sacrifise his son to be synonymous with God's descision to sacrifise His son. Abraham showed that He was willing to sacrifise his son to God (and his son was willing to be sacrifised) just as God was willing to sacrifise his son for man (and Jesus was willing to be sacrifised).
God only had one son and Abraham also only one son (from his wife), thus making the symbolism of the sacrifise even more pertinant.
cheers
Originally posted by pcaspianIf I'm not mistaken, isn't there an implication that Abraham loved his son Isaac more than he loved God?
Originally posted by ivanhoe
[b]Cultural evolution.
In my view the Abraham story of slaughtering his son has to do with the widespread practise in human society at that time of human sacrifice. The story is about God putting and end to that practise. Instead of human he asks for an animal sacrifice. It is one step in the proces of civilisation m ...[text shortened]... n (from his wife), thus making the symbolism of the sacrifise even more pertinant.
cheers