19 Mar 07
Originally posted by knightmeisterRemember, Christ's first concern was for His people, the Jews.
Interestingly ,you will not find anyone more condemning of the pious and self righteous religious people than Christ himself . Jesus was not a religious man. His hatred of hypocrisy and BS was immense. It makes me wonder if you are closer to God than you dare realise. I think sometimes Atheists are closer to God in their raw honesty than some Christians. I offer you no blessing , if I am right you are already blessed.[/b]
Throughout the Old Testament prophecies of the Messiah abounded, and the ancient Jews hoped in Him. They awaited Him according to the promises of the faithful God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. And when Jesus finally arrived His ministry was exclusively for Jews, just as it was in the OT.
Clearly the God of Jesus Christ was the same God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
God fulfilled His promises to His people, but His people rejected Him. Not all of them, as some were righteous, but most of them rejected Jesus, the Chief Cornerstone. Listen to how Jesus treated a non-Jew who was asking for His help, and tell me if this is not the OT God of Israel:
"Then Jesus left Galilee and went north to the region of Tyre. He didn’t want anyone to know which house he was staying in, but he couldn’t keep it a secret. Right away a woman who had heard about him came and fell at his feet. Her little girl was possessed by an evi spirit, and she begged him to cast out the demon from her daughter.
Since she was a Gentile, born in Syrian Phoenicia, Jesus told her, “First I should feed the children—my own family, the Jews. It isn’t right to take food from the children and throw it to the dogs.”
She replied, “That’s true, Lord, but even the dogs under the table are allowed to eat the scraps from the children’s plates.”
“Good answer!” he said. “Now go home, for the demon has left your daughter.” And when she arrived home, she found her little girl lying quietly in bed, and the demon was gone" (Mark 7:24-29).
This occurred only shortly after Jesus scathingly berated the Pharisees for their hypocrisy:
"You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you, for he wrote, ‘These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship is a farce, for they teach man-made ideas as commands from God. For you ignore God’s law and substitute your own tradition.'" (Mark 7:6-8).
Jesus, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, James, Peter, etc., all quoted liberally from the Old Testament texts. As it has been said, The New Testament is in the Old Testament, concealed; the Old Testament is in the New Testament, revealed. You can't have one without the other; the OT and NT are mutually inclusive.
Also, religion and hypocrisy aren't synonyms. The self-righteous Pharisees were pious deceivers, displaying a hollow religiosity. They were hypocrites and not religious men. By contrast, Jesus Christ truly was a religious man. A law-abiding Jew, during His earthbound ministry He fulfilled all righteousness, and grew in favor with both God and man. You see, it is a good thing to be law-abiding and religious.
Atheists have a keen insight into hypocrisy, and are merciless judges, but unfortunately they are unable to overcome their own self-righteousness, the same self-righteousness they critique in false-religious people. If ever a time were to arise when the Lord of heaven and earth were to require them to submit themselves to His righteousness, they wouldn't be able to submit because they have too much invested in their own righteousness.
So while raw honesty is a good and profitable thing, it is nothing without obedience to Jesus Christ.
19 Mar 07
Originally posted by scottishinnzIf you wish to judge God as being unrighteous, that's your affair. If He is righteous, though, then don't you think He must have had a good reason for what He did?
Your God killed those, or ordered the deaths of those babies? Then he's one evil son of a gun and deserves to be resisted with everything anyone got.
The Midianites, for example, whom God ordered Israel to destroy, were Baal worshipers. Baal is a 'god' (really a demon) symbolized by a bear, because bears are ferocious (war-loving) and love honey (pleasure). Their temples were attended by 'sacred prostitutes' and they ritually sacrificed children, since Baal's chief appetite was for the death of children. The Midianites were idol-worshipers and hated by God, and on top of that they attempted to curse His people, Israel. In this instance, God spared the Midianite women and children, but no one else.
I admit, it's hard to swallow, but we are talking about an omniscient, eternal God, who knows the ends of all things, and who exercises righteous judgments. He created all things, including us, and who are we to question Him or His ways - they are beyond our understanding.
Do you oppose his judgment of the Midianites, and others, on principle, or is it because you imagine they were not entirely corrupted by demon-worship?
Remember, my God is your God.
19 Mar 07
Originally posted by ballsofsteelYada yada yada,
If you wish to judge God as being unrighteous, that's your affair. If He is righteous, though, then don't you think He must have had a good reason for what He did?
The Midianites, for example, whom God ordered Israel to destroy, were Baal worshipers. Baal is a 'god' (really a demon) symbolized by a bear, because bears are ferocious (war-loving) and ...[text shortened]... gine they were not entirely corrupted by demon-worship?
Remember, my God is your God.
Your God is an omni-everything God with the power to control everything and the knowledge of what'll happen. He created those people knowing they'd worship demons, then he killed off innocent babies for what can only be imagined to be his own sick, sadistic pleasure, since an omni-everything God could have handled that situation any way he wanted.
And no, I don't have a God.
19 Mar 07
BTW, please excuse my unfortunate moniker, 'ballsofsteel.' 🙂 Originally I adopted it in an attempt to hustle other chess players into thinking I might be an easy match. That's before I discovered these neat little forums. Now I wish I had picked something a little less crass. Oh well.
Take care, all.
19 Mar 07
Originally posted by scottishinnzThat's a valid point. 😕
Yada yada yada,
Your God is an omni-everything God with the power to control everything and the knowledge of what'll happen. He created those people knowing they'd worship demons, then he killed off innocent babies for what can only be imagined to be his own sick, sadistic pleasure, since an omni-everything God could have handled that situation any way he wanted.
And no, I don't have a God.
21 Mar 07
Originally posted by wittywonkaI'd say that the majority of Christians that I know share the belief that there is no hell and that the Genesis story is metaphorical.
Although it may be considered radical in Christianity, I sincerely believe that...
-Hell doesn't exist, and that God's unconditional love will result in everyone going to heaven even if they don't repent.
-The story of Adam and Eve, as well as many others in the Old Testament, are metaphoric and not literal.
I'll post other i ...[text shortened]... omething...as I say in my profile, I'm strongly opinionated but willing to debate...
21 Mar 07
Originally posted by wittywonkathe plot was to scare the simple people with talk of hell fire and stuff, and entice them with talk of love and heaven and all that. its full of illogical ideas suitable only for simpletons. i think the film: Life of Brian showed clearly how some of that stuff came about. Worth seeing.
Although it may be considered radical in Christianity, I sincerely believe that...
-Hell doesn't exist, and that God's unconditional love will result in everyone going to heaven even if they don't repent.
-The story of Adam and Eve, as well as many others in the Old Testament, are metaphoric and not literal.
I'll post other i ...[text shortened]... omething...as I say in my profile, I'm strongly opinionated but willing to debate...
21 Mar 07
Originally posted by ballsofsteel1) History is told by the winners. The Jewish accounts report that they
Do you oppose his judgment of the Midianites, and others, on principle, or is it because you imagine they were not entirely corrupted by demon-worship?
were bloodthirsty demonworshipers. You assume that these reports are
factual representations rather that slanted perspectives.
2) The slaughter of children who are too young to have been enculturated
by the demon worship is an extreme punishment by any standards.
The keeping of virgin women seems morally suspect, at best.
I do not 'oppose His judgment' because I do not believe it was His
judgment. I believe the Israeli people imposed their own perverse
beliefs upon God and justified it in their mind by saying 'God commanded
it.'
Nemesio
21 Mar 07
Originally posted by NemesioExcellent point.
1) History is told by the winners. The Jewish accounts report that they
were bloodthirsty demonworshipers. You assume that these reports are
factual representations rather that slanted perspectives.
2) The slaughter of children who are too young to have been enculturated
by the demon worship is an extreme punishment by any standards.
The keepi ...[text shortened]...
beliefs upon God and justified it in their mind by saying 'God commanded
it.'
Nemesio
22 Mar 07
Originally posted by scottishinnzAmen. The Jews kept all of the old myths and stories (and doubtless some history too)—the good the bad and the ugly. Years of rabbinical teaching (which mostly takes the form of arguments among diverse views, generally with no final, definitive answer) has stressed that one needs to bring one’s own intellect and moral sensibilities to the texts. To try to turn it all into the literal “word of God” does them no justice either...
Excellent point.
I remember some Jewish teenagers who visited the church I was attending at the time. In response to their giving their own interpretations of some texts, someone asked: “Where did you learn this?” One of the youths replied: “Oh, we’re taught to question everything.” After some years of studying rabbinical Judaism, I understand what she meant.
I, on the other hand, was taught to “believe”...
22 Mar 07
1 edit
Originally posted by scottishinnzNow, now... 😛 🙂 Rabbinical midrashic tradition has stood as a bulwark of sorts against biblical literalism, and what one scholar called "the idolatry of the one right meaning."
One wonders if this has the same etymological root as "rabid"?!
EDIT: Why do I end up getting bananas thrown at me by both sides whenever I start to talk about religious texts as mythology, allegory, story, poetry, etc.?
Not to worry, Scott—your intentions I trust. I’m just in a funky mood tonight.
22 Mar 07
Originally posted by wittywonkaThat's not Christianity. The whole point of Christianity is Christ, and his role in "saving us from our sins" whatever that means.
Although it may be considered radical in Christianity, I sincerely believe that...
-Hell doesn't exist, and that God's unconditional love will result in everyone going to heaven even if they don't repent.
-The story of Adam and Eve, as well as many others in the Old Testament, are metaphoric and not literal.
I'll post other i ...[text shortened]... omething...as I say in my profile, I'm strongly opinionated but willing to debate...