@fmf saidNo, I am pointing out that I do not see a man who is objective or presents reasonable arguments is what I am saying.
I see something different based on how you engage the topic of Christianity.
The way I "engage the topic of Christianity" hurts your feelings ~ and makes you want to lash out?
@philokalia saidYou have sidestepped the meat of what I put to you: that you so often behave like a snowflake lashing out at people for not believing the same thing as you by characterizing the difference of opinion to "hate".
I am rather left wing in many ways. It is fine by me if people say it.
I also believe in the importance of identity, as racism persists in being a problem to this very day.
@fmf saidlol k
You blabbering on about "a guru behind a computer screen" in an effort to land some sort of feeble blow in a message board conversation smacks of an inferiority complex.
It reminds me of how you once "dealt" with stuff I believe that you disagreed with by abandoning the conversation and suggesting, instead, that I had a "neckbeard". Just calm down a bit.
@philokalia saidYou claimed that I "hate Christ".
No, I am pointing out that I do not see a man who is objective or presents reasonable arguments is what I am saying.
@philokalia saidThis claim you are making is duly noted.
There are, of course, many genuine miracles - I have been able to be a witness, and know others who have witnessed them.
@fmf saidOK, not true.
You have sidestepped the meat of what I put to you: that you so often behave like a snowflake lashing out at people for not believing the same thing as you by characterizing the difference of opinion to "hate".
@philokalia saidI think it is highly possible that Paul's assignment as a Roman "zealot Jewish persecutor of Christians" was changed by his superiors. Much more plausible, surely, than the scenario in which he meets Christ on the road to Damascus.
St. Paul was not there for Christ's ministry on earth. Rather, he was a zealot Jewish persecutor of Christians who had a conversion moment from God.
@philokalia saidWhat do you mean "not true"? You have accused me of "hate" - or other personal deficiencies - umpteen times in the course of our conversations. You have started whole threads about my supposed personal deficiencies having pulled the rip cord on conversations that were going on.
OK, not true.
@pettytalk saidWhat are your thoughts on this apparent dichotomy?
If Jesus is God, the Father, the Lord Almighty, and people also claim God never changes, how to explain the 180 degrees change of direction?
@philokalia saidThis comment by you has reminded me to ask you if you ever married your pregnant girlfriend which you told the forum about a few years ago?
But people will believe unflattering things about Christ whenever they can because it justifies a lifetime of their poor decisions.
@pettytalk saidFor all the ideological rhetoric about "New" and "Old" "Covenants" and "prophesies fulfilled", I think it's a case of a new offshoot religion piggybacking on the old one ~ and one of the inconvenient and incoherent upshots attendant thereto.
If Jesus is God, the Father, the Lord Almighty, and people also claim God never changes, how to explain the 180 degrees change of direction?
- Joined
- 14 Jan 19
- Moves
- 4277
I began this thread to address the apparent contradictions between a love-oriented Jesus, the Messiah and Savior, and the "bloodthirsty" Old Testament God, the Lord Almighty.
I provided a few examples to illustrate the clear contrast in sentiments. For instance, Jesus taught us to love our enemies, yet the Old Testament God commanded the extermination of certain groups to seize their land, women, children, and livestock.
This thread is not intended to debate the authenticity or factual details surrounding the writing of the New Testament, nor to question the existence of Jesus, the historical figure.
Instead, it challenges those who assert that their God never changes. It's clear that God, the Lord Almighty, underwent physical transformation, as has been proposed. If God is immortal, the claim of Jesus' death represents a significant change. Moreover, there is an emotional shift and a change in policy and instructions between the Lord Almighty and Jesus. The sentiments of loving one's enemies seem to be the crowning glory of this transformation. If these are not recognized as signs of change, then the term 'change' must be redefined.
This thread presents the concept of a changing God to those who insist that their God never changes and is always the same.
Without speaking for others, I would speculate that we are all amateur scholars here, expressing opinions that have likely been shaped by higher-level academic sources.
- Joined
- 14 Jan 19
- Moves
- 4277
@fmf saidI disagree on your suggestion of a new offshoot religion piggybacking on the old one.
For all the ideological rhetoric about "New" and "Old" "Covenants" and "prophesies fulfilled", I think it's a case of a new offshoot religion piggybacking on the old one ~ and one of the inconvenient and incoherent upshots attendant thereto.
@pettytalk saidI think it answers this... "If Jesus is God, the Father, the Lord Almighty, and people also claim God never changes, how to explain the 180 degrees change of direction?" ...more plausibly than any contorted theological explanation will.
I disagree on your suggestion of a new offshoot religion piggybacking on the old one.
- Joined
- 14 Jan 19
- Moves
- 4277
@philokalia saidI could address all that you said, but I'm not going to be so charitable to you. However, I will address politics. A kingdom is indeed a political state, as evidenced by the presence of a king within the title of politicians. It's one of the five major forms of government, typically referred to as a monarchy. Jesus is often described as the King of Kings within God's kingdom.
Your OT quote starts with Joshua 1:9. and then it devolves. The Egyptians are allowed to remain in Egypt and there is no conquest of Egypt. The wars of the Israelites are about self-preservation and the conquest of Canaan is about acquiring land that has been promised to them by God. Many would say this is about displacing the Nephilim, which are clasically understood as t ...[text shortened]... k it's not that hard if you want to understand - you are just being uncharitable to the Bible there.
It's clear that you didn't fully understand the intent of the thread, which is to explore the concept of God's change. Additionally, for your information, Jesus is reported to have been a human sacrifice. I suppose genocide and taking slaves in the name of Lord justifies these acts?
Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’”