24 Feb 05
Originally posted by no1marauderConsider this:
No, KellyJay the core of this debate is that a God who would condone or commit the monstrous acts set forth in the Old Testament almost certainly doesn't exist. You believe he does and think we're "judging" him, but we're not: we're simply saying that as between a theory that the ancient Jews created this monster God to justify their own cru ...[text shortened]... Midianites (esp. the innocent boys and girls) then I say you have a serious compassion problem.
1. God creates the universe and fills it with crap. Nice, but not real fulfilling.
2. God gets bored and wants to stir up some $#!@. Creates humans and sticks them on an insignificant mud ball in a backwater galaxy. Less chance of them messing up the rest of the universe.
3. Wisely, God starts small with two humans, Adam and Eve, unfortunately they can't handle simple instructions and escape into the world at large (sort of like lab rats).
4. The little bastards breed like rodents and the first humans just run amock killing, maiming and humping everything insight with no limits.
5. God lays down the law (10 commandments) and gives humans have clear instructions from God as to how to behave.
6. Humans corrupt the rules, deliberately misinterpret them and basically act like a bunch of chimps let loose in a grocery store.
7. God recognizes that humans are a lost cause and never likely to behave so he sends his son to get a handle on them. Jesus lays down a message of peace, love and forgiveness. Amazingly this settles the lab rats down to a great degree. Despite periodic amokedness.
Basically what I'm saying is that much of the Old Testament is an account of a bunch of lab rats running amock and deliberately misinterpreting Gods guidance for their own ends and not necessarily a true refelection of God's desires, actions or instructions. The new testament is God setting the record straight, removing the BS and establishing new ground rules for his zoo. Plus its told from the different perspectives of several witnesses and more likely to be the truth.
25 Feb 05
Originally posted by KellyJaysince you seem to think a new covenant was made
[b]Are you simply stating that as an irrefutable definition?
God created the universe without death for mankind, death is a result
of sin. God setup the universe to behave with the laws of physics we
recognize today, we do not call chemical reactions good or bad, they
are simply the way they are. God according to scripture sets the time
for each ...[text shortened]... Christ as God seeks out each
person now without reguard to race, sex, age, and so on.
Kelly
[/b]
Question: Is Jeremiah's reference to a "new covenant" (Jeremiah 31:31-34) a prophecy fulfilled by the New Testament?
Answer: The term "new covenant" would be meaningless unless what Jeremiah meant by it was the renewing of the old covenant, which will thereby regain its full original vigor. The covenant of old is of eternal duration, never to be rescinded or to be superseded by a new covenant (Leviticus 26:44-45). The covenant between God and Israel is frequently referred to as everlasting (e.g., Genesis 17:7, 13, 19; Psalms 105:8, 10; 1 Chronicles 16:13-18).
The Christian position concerning Jeremiah's covenant is the complete opposite of what the Jewish Scriptures teach. Hebrews 8:13 states: "In that he says, a new covenant, he has made the first obsolete. Now that which is being made obsolete and growing old is near to vanishing away." In stark contrast to this statement, the Scriptures state: "The works of His hands are truth and justice; and His precepts are sure. They are established forever and ever, they are done in truth and uprightness" (Psalms 111:7-8); "The grass withers, the flower fades; but the word of our God shall stand forever" (Isaiah 40:8).
Jeremiah's "new covenant" is not a replacement of the existing covenant, but merely a figure of speech expressing the reinvigoration and revitalization of the existing covenant. The people of Israel possess an old covenant yet a new covenant, truly an everlasting covenant.
http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/web/faq/faq099.html
argue with the people that actually can read the hebrew text.
25 Feb 05
Originally posted by Hand of HecateI find this theology interesting, but it requires an admission that many of the passages in the Old Testament are falsehoods and that the God of Jesus would certainly not have ordered the Midianite Massacre. Of course, why an omnipotent God would even care about what amoebas like us think or do is unresolved by this, but it is a nice try. Kudos to you H of H.
Consider this:
1. God creates the universe and fills it with crap. Nice, but not real fulfilling.
2. God gets bored and wants to stir up some $#!@. Creates humans and sticks them on an insignificant mud ball in a backwater galaxy. Less chance of them messing up the rest of the universe.
3. Wisely, God starts small with two humans, Adam and Eve, ...[text shortened]... s its told from the different perspectives of several witnesses and more likely to be the truth.
25 Feb 05
Originally posted by frogstompIf all of those people died of natural causes, all heart attacks would
you use semantic dodges like answering:
did god authorize mass murders of did he not? "with god doesnt commit murder."
either he did or didnt?
I realize you don't like the idea the bible says he did, and you are wedded to the bible as the word of god.
Well, maybe you should get a divorce,,, oh , wait,, Jesus said "Mo ...[text shortened]... OT you guys dont ..like Man wrote it?
and that's why it says god done what he did.
that be better? What if they all died of some sickness, would that
be alright? God does not murder, period, that is not a dodge it was
an answer you still do not grasp, I guess.
Kelly
25 Feb 05
Originally posted by no1marauderWhat is the age where people do not die on this planet, is there a
No, KellyJay the core of this debate is that a God who would condone or commit the monstrous acts set forth in the Old Testament almost certainly doesn't exist. You believe he does and think we're "judging" him, but we're not: we're simply saying that as between a theory that the ancient Jews created this monster God to justify their own cru ...[text shortened]... Midianites (esp. the innocent boys and girls) then I say you have a serious compassion problem.
cut off age where people are to young or to old? I'm not talking
about when people kill them, but when people die no matter what the cause. What happens to them after they die?
Kelly
25 Feb 05
Originally posted by KellyJayI don't know. If you saw a man stick a sword through a child would you be horrified or not?
What is the age where people do not die on this planet, is there a
cut off age where people are to young or to old? I'm not talking
about when people kill them, but when people die no matter what the cause. What happens to them after they die?
Kelly
25 Feb 05
Originally posted by KellyJay
I did ask if God has both masculine and feminine traits, I asked for
a verse where God is referred to as a she, do the Jewish people refer
to God as a she? Secret books aside, I don't care what they say! There
are several translations written after the Council of Nices, any of them
that are not PC driven have God being referred to as a she? I'm aware ...[text shortened]... those that want a
certain segment of our society pleased over what was really written.
Kelly
You fail to understand that the early Church DELIBERATELY removed the reference to the female side of God. That is why there are no references in the Bible to God being a 'she'. God is HE, because the Church FATHERS got together and struck out the feminine. There is nothing PC about this debate. I call God she because Yaweh always had a feminine side called Asherah. Asherah was expunged by the OT Jews and the Council of Nicea removed all other references to women in the Bible where they were not handmaidens to men or prostitutes.
This is not some 21st Century revisionism to please feminists. It is Christian and Jewish history.
25 Feb 05
Originally posted by no1marauderThat's sort of my point though. I feel that God exists and is, to the limits of our understanding, a kind yet somewhat indifferent being.
I find this theology interesting, but it requires an admission that many of the passages in the Old Testament are falsehoods and that the God of Jesus would certainly not have ordered the Midianite Massacre. Of course, why an omnipotent God would even care about what amoebas like us think or do is unresolved by this, but it is a nice try. Kudos to you H of H.
Humans are inherently violent and brutal lab animals who buggered up the OT to justify beating up on their neighboring humans in the name of God. God was very specific and direct in laying out commandments which we still try to weasel out of. Humans are crafty little evil bastards. For example, I wouldn't think twice about macing you, kicking you in the ol' twig and fun berries, and taking your wallet if I thought I had a reasonable chance of getting away with it. This would obviously be condoned by God as I have it on good authority that he doesn't like you.
God takes his time correcting the problem of humans %$#ing up his lab as he has other things brewing. Eventually he sends Jesus to kick some @$$ and take some names. Basically try to be nice to each other and don't #@%& around because the next time I have to come back and straighten you out its going to be with the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse in tow. Oh and try not to take your creator for granted. While we've still done an admirable job of pooching up this message and corrupting it for our own petty ends its still a reasonably good account.
There are useful parts of the OT, good words of guidance, peace and faith that can help. The Psalms and Proverbs have always interested me as well. The bible taken literally with no room for reason can be folly.
Hecate 25:4
"I say unto you, be not mean spirited little bitches as surely I will cometh back and kick your @$$. Be good to each other, don't take life too seriously as your just going to die anyway and don't #$@! up my planet." So Sayeth The Lord.
25 Feb 05
Originally posted by no1marauderi have read the passage, and it does not mention rape. the slight fact that rape is against the law of moses...they could have been for servants etc. but certainly not for rape.
The LORD spoke to Moses and ordered the divvying up of the booty, including the Midianite girls who were spoils of war. He most certainly did not order them killed and Moses followed exactly his commands (the rest of the chapter has tedious details of how the booty was divided up; read it). Nowhere is the word "marry"; they were given to be done with as these men willed i.e. raped.
and okay so the lord didn't tell them to kill everyone, but moses was angry that they didn't kill the non-virgins. this was because it was them who caused the israelites to sin at Peor. that was the reason for the vengance - the sexual immortality of the midanite people and their seduction of the israelites. so it follows that they are not going to have sex with them, as it was that that started the whole affair! (numbers 25)
25 Feb 05
Originally posted by MaustrauserI guess I'll stick with the OT Jews and early church and disagree with
You fail to understand that the early Church DELIBERATELY removed the reference to the female side of God. That is why there are no references in the Bible to God being a 'she'. God is HE, because the Church FATHERS got together and struck out the feminine. There is nothing PC about this debate. I call God she because Yaweh always had a feminine ...[text shortened]... is not some 21st Century revisionism to please feminists. It is Christian and Jewish history.
you, but I no longer feel like you were taking a cheap shot.
Kelly
25 Feb 05
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayGod can't claim to be 'good' if he won't follow the laws that he imposes on man. If the laws are moral, then why won't God follow them?
You are comparing God to a man, again stupid thing to do.
Kelly
Edit - If God is the one who sets the beginning and end of our lives, then those dates are predetermined. If I murder someone, it is therefore not my fault; it is destiny.