jaephoenix:

He kills folks for letting the ark slip an inch, didn't he. He killed a man for doing coitus interruptus. He killed children who called Elijah bald. He killed folks that work on sabbath etc
What kind of justifications do you have for these actions?

Were the people involved these unfortunate incidences forwarned of the consequences of their actions? Yes or No.

Or God just felt bored and wanted to kill people.

jaephoenix:

What a weak ass defense of yahweh's cruelty.
So he asked the israelites to retaliate in the OT but the same yahweh 'declared turn the other cheek when slapped' in the NT.
Let’s consider three categories of Old Testament texts that are morally problematic:
the “crimes” for which God prescribes the death penalty,God’s anger and wrath in punishing his people, and God’s command to the Israelites to commit genocide.
The death penalty. There are numerous “crimes” for which God, through the Law of Moses, requires the death penalty. Among these are sacrificing to a god other than Yahweh (Exodus 22:20), persistent rebelliousness on the part of a child (Deuteronomy 21:18–21), a child who hits or curses his or her parents (Exodus 21:15 and 17), working on the Sabbath (Exodus 35:2), premarital sexual intercourse (Deuteronomy 22:13–21), and the requirement for a priest to burn his daughter alive if she became a prostitute (Leviticus 21:9).

God’s anger and wrath. In the Old Testament, God’s anger repeatedly burns against his people for their disobedience. At times, the punishment he dispenses seems particularly harsh, unjust, and disproportionate. Let’s consider just one example.

In 2 Samuel 24, we find that King David decided to take a census of the men of fighting age. The prophet Gad was sent to David to announce God’s displeasure with the taking of the census. The punishment for David’s sin: “The Lord sent a pestilence on Israel from that morning until the appointed time; and seventy thousand of the people died” (2 Samuel 24:15). David makes a decision that does not please God, and God kills 70,000 Israelites for it? How could this action ever be reconciled with a God of mercy, compassion, justice, and love?

Genocide in the name of God. I’ll mention one last category of scriptures related to the violence of God: those that describe the conquest of Canaan. At the time the Israelites entered the land to conquer it, Canaan was populated with small city-states or kingdoms made up of various ethnic groups speaking similar languages. God promised Israel that he would give them this land, but to do so these people had to be displaced.

This is problematic enough, but God wasn’t asking the Israelites to forcibly relocate them to other lands. God instructed the Israelites to kill every man, woman, and child among these Canaanites. In Deuteronomy 20:16–18, Moses gives these instructions: “As for the towns of these peoples that the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, you must not let anything that breathes remain alive. You shall annihilate them—the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites—just as the Lord your God has commanded.”

The Hebrew word for “annihilate” has as its root herem (also transliterated as cherem or sometimes charam). The classic Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon notes the meaning of the word in English is “to exterminate.” It also has the sense of devoting something to God by completely destroying it. This is sometimes translated as “ban”—a word that in this context means “given to God by complete destruction.”

In Joshua 6:20b–21, you can read about what this looked like as the Israelite army entered the town of Jericho: the Israelites “charged straight ahead into the city and captured it. Then they devoted to destruction by the edge of the sword all in the city, both men and women, young and old, oxen, sheep, and donkeys.” After the destruction of Jericho, next would come the people of Ai, then the people of Makkedah and Libnah and Lachish and Eglon and Debir—every man, woman, and child slaughtered and dedicated to God. In the end, the entire population of thirty-one city-states was utterly destroyed.

I suspect that most people who read the Bible either don’t think about this, gloss over these sections, or skip them altogether. I was fourteen years old when I first read the Book of Joshua. The stories didn’t trouble me at that time. They were epic battles with great story lines and heroic figures. Who doesn’t enjoy reading about how the walls of Jericho “came tumbling down”? Behind each story was the idea that God was fighting on behalf of his people. I suspect that’s how most people read these stories today.
Are the above actions of israelites retaliatory? No! So your defense is so weak, it can't form a smoke

Paste the link to this your write up first. So I'm sure there's no plagiarism here.

Busted;
https://www.adamhamilton.com/blog/gods-violence-in-the-old-testament-the-problem/

I'm dealing with someone who isn't;

1. Brave enough to present his ideas.
2. Copy and paste from blogs to present these ideas as his own.

I'd rather argue with the author of this content directly, than someone who can't present their ideas but run around copying and pasting stuff.

OkCornel:


Were the people involved these unfortunate incidences forwarned of the consequences of their actions? Yes or No.

Or God just felt bored and wanted to kill people.

Obviously you know the answer. They weren't forewarned. The people that let the ark slip weren't forewarned. Even if they were, its an honest mistake, which can happen to anyone of us. The children that taunted Elijah were… well… kids. They didn't know the consequences of their actions. They just saw a bald man and decided to get some fun. Same action we woulda activated as kids. The dude that did coitus interruptus didn’t get any memo that it would be his last act.
So no, yahweh didn’t warn nobody

OkCornel:


Paste the link to this your write up first. So I'm sure there's no plagiarism here.

Busted;
https://www.adamhamilton.com/blog/gods-violence-in-the-old-testament-the-problem/

I'm dealing with someone who isn't;

1. Brave enough to present his ideas.
2. Copy and paste from blogs to present these ideas as his own.

I'd rather argue with the author of this content directly, than someone who can't present their ideas but run around copying and pasting stuff.

Im sure you have copied-pasted stuff here and nobody harassed you. If you decide to use that as an excuse to dodge, be my guest

jaephoenix:

Obviously you know the answer. They weren't forewarned. The people that let the ark slip weren't forewarned. Even if they were, its an honest mistake, which can happen to anyone of us. The children that taunted Elijah were… well… kids. They didn't know the consequences of their actions. They just saw a bald man and decided to get some fun. Same action we woulda activated as kids. The dude that did coitus interruptus didn’t get any memo that it would be his last act.
So no, yahweh didn’t warn nobody

Let's break this down one by one;

1. Uzzah the Israelite that was killed was forewarned not to do so. Given he is not a Kohathite. Only Kohathites were permitted to touch the ark. Whatever his motives were, good or selfish - he was warned, he disobeyed, got the consequences

See Numbers 4 v 15 - “After Aaron and his sons have finished covering the holy furnishings and all the holy articles, and when the camp is ready to move, only then are the Kohathites to come and do the carrying. But they must not touch the holy things or they will die. The Kohathites are to carry those things that are in the tent of meeting.

2. The "children" that mocked Elisha - well you need to learn a thing or two about Jewish culture. I'm not sure of your background if taunting elders is acceptable. There are severe repercussions for mocking God's prophet. Again, the emphasis/context is on what is acceptable or an abomination in ANCIENT JEWISH CULTURE

Leviticus 26 v 21-22;
21 “‘If you remain hostile toward me and refuse to listen to me, I will multiply your afflictions seven times over, as your sins deserve.
22 I will send wild animals against you, and they will rob you of your children, destroy your cattle and make you so few in number that your roads will be deserted.

Mind you, Leviticus 26 v 21-22 is part of the terms of the covenant which the Israelites agreed to in Deuteronomy just before they entered the promised land. Anyone circumcised is bound to the consequences of obedience and disobedience to the covenant.

3. As for the one killed for spilling his seed on the floor. The real issue is wickedness (not willing to continue his deceased brother's lineage - ancient cultural requirement back in the times). If he didn't want to impregnate the woman, why not free her to continue her life elsewhere? Why wed her but not impregnate her? Why keep her in bondage and deny her the joy of motherhood? Not only did his death liberate her, she was technically free to bear kids elsewhere (for her Father in Law - Judah). Understand the ancient culture and traditions vis-a-vis the historic accounts, it will make sense. Don't study it with today's mindset which has evolved from the norms of the ancient times.

If you do not study the scripture in light and context of evolving culture and traditions over the timespan of the Old Testament and New Testament, you will hastily arrive at a wrong conclusion. Almost all scripture readers are guilty of this.

jaephoenix:

Im sure you have copied-pasted stuff here and nobody harassed you. If you decide to use that as an excuse to dodge, be my guest

Yes I have copied and pasted stuff. But I also include links to give credit to the author and for the benefit of those who want to study indepth.

It's not appropriate to just paste them and give the impression it's my idea. It reeks of dishonesty.

Perhaps that wasn't your intention. But something you should consider going forward.

It's not a crime to copy and paste stuff. Just give credit to the author especially where it's copied word for word.

jaephoenix:

So he changes during dispensations. So then he aint the Unchangeable Changer.Simple
And one more thing, didn't he foresee all those events as an omniscient being?

You are mixing things up. When you draws up a plan and execute it accordingly does it means you change?
God's nature is that he is a covenant keeping God. That means he is faithful to his plan. That's an an attribute of unchangeable God. Gerrit?

Tboy222:


He didn't find any fault in the law,he only came to fulfill the law.

Exactly.

Someone should refer the OP to Matthew 5 v 17-20;

17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus even expects more from his followers. More than what the law requires. People can only achieve this by walking in the spirit to bear the fruit of the spirit (love, joy, peace, goodness, longsuffering etc)

OkCornel:


Let's break this down one by one;

1. Uzzah the Israelite that was killed was forewarned not to do so. Given he is not a Kohathite. Only Kohathites were permitted to touch the ark. Whatever his motives were, good or selfish - he was warned, he disobeyed, got the consequences

See Numbers 4 v 15 - “After Aaron and his sons have finished covering the holy furnishings and all the holy articles, and when the camp is ready to move, only then are the Kohathites to come and do the carrying. But they must not touch the holy things or they will die. The Kohathites are to carry those things that are in the tent of meeting.

2. The children that mocked Elisha - well you need to learn a thing or two about Jewish culture. I'm not sure of your background if taunting elders is acceptable. There are severe repercussions for mocking God's prophet. Again, the emphasis/context is on what is acceptable or an abomination in JEWISH CULTURE

Leviticus 26 v 21-22;
21 “‘If you remain [b]hostile toward me[/b] and refuse to listen to me, I will multiply your afflictions seven times over, as your sins deserve.
22 I will send wild animals against you, and they will rob you of your children, destroy your cattle and make you so few in number that your roads will be deserted.

Mind you, Leviticus 26 v 21-22 is part of the terms of the covenant which the Israelites agreed to in Deuteronomy just before they entered the promised land. Anyone circumcised is bound to the consequences of obedience and disobedience to the covenant.

3. As for the one killed for spilling his seed on the floor. The real issue is wickedness (not willing to continue his deceased brother's lineage - ancient cultural requirement back in the times). If he didn't want to impregnate the woman, why not free her to continue her life elsewhere? Why wed her but not impregnate her? Why keep her in bondage and deny her the joy of motherhood?

If you do not study the scripture in light and context of evolving culture and traditions over the timespan of the Old Testament and New Testament, you will hastily arrive at a wrong conclusion. Almost all scripture readers are guilty of this.

I believe those kids were derisive and not hostile. 2 different emotions. And most importantly, they are kids. If you judge kids that way, then I assure you, their generation woulda died off, because yahweh woulda slaughtered all of them on one whim or other.
I believe you know what coitus interruptus is. We practiced it in our single days and even married folks do that. So why did yahweh kill a man for that. I mean, he coulda warned them earlier.
And Er did not wed his sister in law, get it. He was just ordered by his dad to Bleep her.
Next question. Why did yahweh want to kill moses?
Why did he help Samson murder 30 random dudes just for their clothes, so Samson can pay off his bet?
And why were yahweh killing off his own people for complaining about food or other whim?
Isnt all this bloodthirsty?

jaephoenix:

I believe those kids were derisive and not hostile. 2 different emotions. And most importantly, they are kids. If you judge kids that way, then I assure you, their generation woulda died off, because yahweh woulda slaughtered all of them on one whim or other.
I believe you know what coitus interruptus is. We practiced it in our single days and even married folks do that. So why did yahweh kill a man for that. I mean, he coulda warned them earlier.
And Er did not wed his sister in law, get it. He was just ordered by his dad to Bleep her.
Next question. Why did yahweh want to kill moses?
Why did he help Samson murder 30 random dudes just for their clothes, so Samson can pay off his bet?
And why were yahweh killing off his own people for complaining about food or other whim?
Isnt all this bloodthirsty?

First off, have you done your research into the Elisha incident? Are you certain for sure they were "kids"? or you're just going off what's written in the English Bible. Different from the context of the Jewish scriptures. Did some study somewhere, the age range of the so called "kids" in context of Jewish culture ranges between 12-30 years.

Anyways, that's beside the point. They are bound to terms and conditions of a covenant they entered into. It's not God's fault. If they knew the consequences of their disobedience, why blame God for being "bloodthirsty"?

As for Er, if he didn't want the responsiblity of impregnating his dead brother's wife, why not say NO, and free her? By the way, Er wasn't the only man to have done coitus interruptus, did God kill other people for doing it? Think about it, Why Er? It's simple - wickedness.

Why did Yahweh want to kill Moses? The answer is in the scriptures

Still typing...

gotta head out this morning, so we'll continue our discussion later today. Bear in mind the nuances of ancient cultures and traditions prevalent in areas covered during the scripture era. That will be really helpful.

OkCornel:


Yes I have copied and pasted stuff. But I also include links to give credit to the author and for the benefit of those who want to study indepth.

It's not appropriate to just paste them and give the impression it's my idea. It reeks of dishonesty.

Perhaps that wasn't your intention. But something you should consider going forward.

It's not a crime to copy and paste stuff. Just give credit to the author especially where it's copied word for word.

I give credit to authors. Just that I was in a hurry at that moment. I always give my sources especially in my topics. Thanks for the correction tho

waldigit:

You are mixing things up. When you draws up a plan and execute it accordingly does it means you change?
God's nature is that he is a covenant keeping God. That means he is faithful to his plan. That's an an attribute of unchangeable God. Gerrit?

In the OT, he says an eye for an eye. In the NT, he says turn the other cheek.
Is there anything more fickle than that. Which covenant is he keeping? How does this depict an omniscient being if he's all knowing but doesn't know that his laws would change years down the line?

OkCornel:


First off, have you done your research into the Elisha incident? Are you certain for sure they were "kids"? or you're just going off what's written in the English Bible. Different from the context of the Jewish scriptures. Did some study somewhere, the age range of the so called "kids" in context of Jewish culture ranges between 12-30 years.

Anyways, that's beside the point. They are bound to terms and conditions of a covenant they entered into. It's not God's fault. If they knew the consequences of their disobedience, why blame God for being "bloodthirsty"?

As for Er, if he didn't want the responsiblity of impregnating his dead brother's wife, why not say NO, and free her? By the way, Er wasn't the only man to have done coitus interruptus, did God kill other people for doing it? Think about it, Why Er? It's simple - wickedness.

Why did Yahweh want to kill Moses? The answer is in the scriptures

Still typing...

gotta head out this morning, so we'll continue our discussion later today. Bear in mind the nuances of ancient cultures and traditions prevalent in areas covered during the scripture era. That will be really helpful.

This KJV
And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head
These were children. So you can't escape that.
And no, they didn't enter into any covenant with yahweh. They're kids, remember.
He was instructed by his father Judah, so he had to obey and that's caused his death. By the way, if he had disobeyed his old man, he'd have been stoned for disobedience, which was a law given by your yahweh. Which other people had coitus interruptus in the Bible?
No problem

jaephoenix:

This KJV
And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head
These were children. So you can't escape that.
And no, they didn't enter into any covenant with yahweh. They're kids, remember.
He was instructed by his father Judah, so he had to obey and that's caused his death. By the way, if he had disobeyed his old man, he'd have been stoned for disobedience, which was a law given by your yahweh. Which other people had coitus interruptus in the Bible?
No problem

Go to the Hebrew Scriptures and prove to me it was kids that mocked Elisha.

The original authors wrote the scriptures in English abi?

jaephoenix:

I give credit to authors. Just that I was in a hurry at that moment. I always give my sources especially in my topics. Thanks for the correction tho

Cheers, no probs.

OkCornel:


Go to the Hebrew Scriptures and prove to me it was kids that mocked Elisha.

The original authors wrote the scriptures in English abi?

Are you amongst those christians like Dtruthspeaker that believe Satan wrote most versions of the Bible? And this is KJV youre casting aside like this

jaephoenix:

Are you amongst those christians like Dtruthspeaker that believe Satan wrote most versions of the Bible? And this is KJV youre casting aside like this

Lol, Satan wrote versions of the Bible? That’s news to me.

All I’m asking is to go to the original language the scriptures were written and translate directly to English from there.

There are bible study tools that can help with that.

OkCornel:


Go to the Hebrew Scriptures and prove to me it was kids that mocked Elisha.

The original authors wrote the scriptures in English abi?

These are the translations. Most used 'boys' few used 'children'

OkCornel:


Lol, Satan wrote versions of the Bible? That’s news to me.

All I’m asking is to go to the original language the scriptures were written and translate directly to English from there.

There are bible study tools that can help with that.

The Hebrew phrase translated as “little children” here in the King James Version is קָטָן (qatan) נַעַר (naar) which carries the meaning of “small boys, young men, youth.” In 1 Kings 3:7 Solomon says, “And now, O LORD my God, thou hast made thy servant king instead of David my father: and I am but a little child (qatan naar).” Some suggest that Solomon was in his mid-twenties while an ancient book called, Apostolical Constitutions II (Ed. Lagarde 14, 17) suggest that he may have been as young as twelve: “Solomon was King of Israel when twelve years old.” Other places in Scripture seem to indicate that qatan naar refers to “young men” (1 Samuel 20:35; 1 Kings 11:17).

Source https://lastmessageofmercy.com/article/view/2-kings-223-25-did-god-kill-children-as-a-result-of-elishas-curse

OkCornel:


You didn’t understand Dtruthspeaker’s analogy.

He’s explaining “ONE” in the context of unity, and not a literal number.

For example, a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife and they shall be ONE flesh.

ONE in this context is unity.

Jesus prayed in John 17 v 22 that all believers should be ONE (be United) just as he and the Father are ONE (United).

It doesn’t mean believer A is the same person as believer B. It actually means they are working together in unity.

John 17 v 22-23
22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one—
23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.



So to clear up the confusion, Jesus is not the same person as the Father. He is one with the Father because he works in unity with the Father.

Thanks Okcornel. Very easy and simple to understand but I now appreciate that most Muslims are devils and devils must have perverted and twisted minds.

jaephoenix:

In the OT, he says an eye for an eye. In the NT, he says turn the other cheek.
Is there anything more fickle than that. Which covenant is he keeping? How does this depict an omniscient being if he's all knowing but doesn't know that his laws would change years down the line?

Don't forget He is God and not a man. As heaven is far from earth so is his ways from man.

waldigit:

Don't forget He is God and not a man. As heaven is far from earth so is his ways from man.

Whoa.
Now that is a quick dodge technique.
… only that you won't escape that easily.
Few hours ago you were sure about 'the ways of the lord' and were dishing advices. Suddenly you can't defend him again, and you landed on that much used cliche which has been used by Christians when they get stumped. So if the way of the lord is so mysterious why do y'all claim that he loves you? Why do you think he doesn't hate your guts?

jaephoenix:

Whoa.
Now that is a quick dodge technique.
… only that you won't escape that easily.
Few hours ago you were sure about 'the ways of the lord' and were dishing advices. Suddenly you can't defend him again, and you landed on that much used cliche which has been used by Christians when they get stumped. So if the way of the lord is so mysterious why do y'all claim that he loves you? Why do you think he doesn't hate your guts?

I only remind you. Anyway you may not understand if you don't believe He is.

famozine1:
Jesus is God according to the Bible

Yes! Our own God!

But He is not The Highest. It is His Father That is The One!

waldigit:

I only remind you. Anyway you may not understand if you don't believe He is.

No need to remind me, I know all that bullshit. And it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. That's why your comment lacks convincing power

jaephoenix:

No need to remind me, I know all that bullshit. And it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. That's why your comment lacks convincing power

Natural man can't be easily convinced with things of Spirit, but I have a special ministry of doing that for willing mind.

waldigit:

Natural man can't be easily convinced with things of Spirit, but I have a special ministry of doing that for willing mind.

Translation

---

I don't have any data to convince you, so lemme take a quick break and give one of our regular excuses

Ah yes, forgot there was an interesting discussion on this thread.

It's back on my radar.

divinemichael:
Note; I don't misunderstand the trinity, I clearly understand that Christ is God in the sense that he is one of the trinity, and consubstantial with God and is infact God's word, and thus God.
My question is how come he gave laws to Moses, and later came to earth to find fault in some of those same laws? Isn't that inconsistent?

Isaiah 28.13 But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.

1 Corinthians 13:12
For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

Do these verses answer your question?

AntiChristian:
Abeg how is Jesus Christ God and one of trinity of three Gods often called one?

You are a Muslim you don't have any right in this matter. Your contribution is toxic.

Ephesians 2:12
That at that time (even now, Antichristian) ye were without Christ, [/b]being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and [b]strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world(and the world to come):

MightySparrow:


You are a Muslim you don't have any right in this matter. Your contribution is toxic.

Ephesians 2:12
That at that time (even now, Antichristian) ye were without Christ, [/b]being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and [b]strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world(and the world to come):

Ephesians was written by someone who never met Jesus.
How do you want me to believe it?