₦airaland Forum

Here is a command that most modern believers either do not read or would wish it were not in the Bible. However, the Word stands and we do well to examine ourselves:

1 John 2: 15 - 17

15
Do not love or cherish the world or the things that are in the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in him.

16 For all that is in the world—the lust of the flesh [craving for sensual gratification] and the lust of the eyes [greedy longings of the mind] and the pride of life [assurance in one’s own resources or in the stability of earthly things]—these do not come from the Father but are from the world [itself].

17 And the world passes away and disappears, and with it the forbidden cravings (the passionate desires, the lust) of it; but he who does the will of God and carries out His purposes in his life abides (remains) forever.

In an era of christian 'liberty', we do well to remember that at the end, the excuse," Our pastor never told us" will not hold!

Demmzy15:
Who told you that? Early marriages is common among Jews, research that yourself. Stop using today's standard to judge. Men of those days lived older than us today, they were stronger. From Methuselah to Noah, etc. Abraham gave birth to Issac at an old age, so you gat to be factual. Even in this present century, we have men who have given birth at the age of 92-96years. I didn't just pour out their ages from my head, it's found in you guys documents. You guys are claiming it's weak, but you didn't tell me why? Please visit this link http://www.womeninthebible.net/3.2.Major_Events.htm

Per the highlighted, that is why I mentioned David etc Abraham's case was clearly a miracle as he (even at that time age 86) and his wife had given up hope till the promise came.

You don't get it do you? I don't care whether the law is off(but actually the law is still in place)

the Bible chronicles dispensations: Ante- and Post - Deluvian, OT and NT (the latter continues till now). It will be wrong to attribute actions of one disp, that was clearly laid aside to another disp; any conclusion drawn therefrom would be wrong.

, this brutality existed and was commanded and approved by God

It would help to read the whole story and understand the context lest you fight for the guilty against God to Whom belongs Justice and Vengeance!

, remember the soldiers are Israelites so it doesn't matter whether they were soldiers or not. It was done, they were told to keep children virgins for sex. If God didn't approve it, he would have said contrary but...

Once again, read the whole story. For the records:
Numbers 31:18
18 But all the young women who have not had sexual intercourse with a man will be yours.

malvisguy212:
excellent analysis my friend, thank you.

Oh,Glory to God and Father of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ!

Rilwayne001:
I am.



My point is: Perhaps Angels saved jesus from cruxifiction as related in the verses quoted in the link. Man, just browsing my topics last night and I stumble on this. I've really lost a lot during the Nairaland catastrophy.

Angels did not interfere with God's purpose:

Matthew 26:52-55
Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back in its place! For all who take hold of the sword will die by the sword.
53 Or do you think that I cannot call on my Father, and that he would send me more than twelve legions of angels right now?
54 [size=14pt]How then would the scriptures that say it must happen this way be fulfilled?[/size]”
55 At that moment Jesus said to the crowd, “Have you come out with swords and clubs to arrest me like you would an outlaw? Day after day I sat teaching in the temple courts, yet you did not arrest me.

Meaning if angels were called in to save Jesus at that time, prophesies in Scripture would go unfulfilled;
Luke 18:31-34
31 Then Jesus took the twelve aside and said to them, “Look, we are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written about the Son of Man by the prophets will be accomplished.
32 For he will be handed over to the Gentiles; he will be mocked, mistreated, and spat on.
33 They will flog him severely and kill him. Yet on the third day he will rise again.”
34 But the twelve understood none of these things. This saying was hidden from them, and they did not grasp what Jesus meant.

@Demmzy, one of the reason I may not agree with the issue on ages is that before 90yrs old, (as early as Genesis) Abraham (around 86) was past the years of pleasure and Romans described his body as being dead. David died at the age of 70 and before his death, 1Kings 1:2-4 shows how he was totally past the age of sexual pleasure! Therefore, for a man that was many generations after David, pleasure at the age of 90 is totally impossible!!!

Now let's consider Numbers 31:18
18 But all the young women who have not had sexual intercourse with a man will be yours.

Speaker: Moses
Audience: selected soldiers (not all Israel)
Event: After the retaliatory battle (see Num 31:2) against the midianites (the Old testament dispensation allowed tit for tat and the midianites were the initiators this time.)
Tenor of Command: One-off (Not to be continued)
Dispensation: Old
Applicable Today: No. The Old covenant was fulfilled through Christ Who ushered in the New as purposed by the Father

Moreover, 'the emphasis on enduring to the end', 'overcoming to the end', 'faithfulness to the end', 'Holding fast to the end' etc reiterates the need for us, after we have received salvation by faith, to remain steadfast in that faith to the end as a condition for going with , and dwelling with Him for ever and also warns of the possibility of missing these things if we fail to hold fast to the end.

OLAADEGBU:
What law did Adam disobey in the Garden of Eden?

The mention of Law as related to the NT and the Redemption we have in Christ, always points to the Law handed down to Moses.

Did Jesus do away with the OT principles and authority of rule and revelation?

No! He fulfilled the Law and all who believe in Him have the law fulfilled in them by the Spirit of Life. The types under the ceremonial laws were done away with though.

At the same time our Lord Jesus Christ came to establish the Law and demonstrate how it pointed to Him and show us how He lived it perfectly.

Indeed and those who believe on Him as their Saviour and Lord receive His Life!

OLAADEGBU:
Well said.

Glory to God!

abduljabbar4:
Joseph who was 90 years old married a 12 year old mary and im yet to hear any of you hypocrites criticising

Mary was sure older than 12 years then!!! There is not a hint of those ages in the Bible so where did you get them from?!
1. She was cousin (not niece) to an Old woman:Elizabeth.(described as being well-stricken in years Luke 1:7). Hence, it's impossible that she was 12.
2. The angel said to Mary, blessed art thou among women (Luke 1:28) A twelve year-old is still a girl!
3. She already had her own apartment Luke 1:56 else it would have read ,"her father's house".
4. Twelve year olds were still fully subject to their parents authority and care eg Jesus was 12 when Mary and Joseph missed Him after the feast (Luke 2:42) and afterwards, He went with them and was subject to His earthly parents (Luke 2:51)

I am yet to find ANY man in the Bible that got married to one of such a young age! Abraham and Sarah attained ripe old age at the same time meaning the gap between their ages was moderate; likewise Zechariah and Elizabeth, Isaac and Rebecca, David and Abigail, Jacob and Leah/Rachel etc

ifeness:
Who are you to explain their culture to them. Did you not abandon yours ?

There we go! I quoted the writings of a full-blooded Israelite/Jew!
This was the intro to that chapter:
I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
Romans 11:1

This is not surprising!
25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
Romans 11:25

Oh yes He loves us but we have to abide in that Love by keeping His commandments!


9 As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love.

10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned
John 15:9,10,6.

The problem with these calvinists and neo-calvinists is that they indirectly tell us all the time Jesus and His Apostles told us to watch, they were pulling an April fool stunt! They hastily assume we mean we are saved by works!!! We are saved by faith but we are not kept against our will; we choose if we'll hold fast the faith to the end or not!

podosci:
The level of atheism is increasing because of the level of knowledge available to people. It has nothing to do with demons or spirits but rather more to do with Knowledge.

To be sincere, rather than knowledge or threads with original contents promoting knowledge by atheists on NL, all I see is scoffing, blasphemy and a deliberately subjective point of view that sometimes becomes a travesty of reason claimed! For instance if I say God created the world and an atheist disagrees, rather than embarking on an intimidating rendition of facts, what you get is a fiery tirade against He Whom you say is not there and those who believe ! Whither your increased level of knowledge?

Excellent hymn. (Denomination is not the issue)

paxonel:
there are prophecies that were direct and do not need interpretation.
But there are other prophesies like.
Revelation 4:7
And the first beast was like a lion
lion = what?
and the second beast like a calf,
calf = what?
and the third beast had a face as a man
man = what?
, and the fourth beast was like a flying eagle
flying eagle = What?
infact BEAST = what?
You see, when people read these things they become scared. meanwhile, there is nothing there if you get their interpretation

That's not a prophecy!!! It's a description! Ezekiel saw similar Creatures in Ezekiel 1!

Jozzy4:
Brother , Those scripture said all of them died ! Jesus Died not just his flesh . That means the soul excape death theory is FALSE

Take a closer look at the latter part of the first reference. Besides, God Who revealed Himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, was not a God of the dead!

Jozzy4:
Brother , Those scripture said all of them died ! Jesus Died not just his flesh . That means the soul excape death theory is FALSE

Take a closer look at the latter part of the first reference.

A parable is different from a prophecy. The Book of life was also referred to in Exodus 32:33! The coming of Jesus Whose parable you quoted was also prophesied, do you mean those prophecies were parables with another meaning?!

Jozzy4:
, brother are you saying you dont belive that soul is immortal ?

Oh, why not? Now decide which of these died and who did not:

Genesis 49:33
And when Jacob had made an end of commanding his sons, he gathered up his feet into the bed, and yielded up the ghost, [size=14pt]and was gathered unto his people[/size]

Matthew 27:50
Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost

Acts 5:5-10
And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great fear came on all them that heard these things.

6 And the young men arose, wound him up, and carried him out, and buried him.

10 Then fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the ghost: and the young men came in, and found her dead, and, carrying her forth, buried her by her husband.

Based on the final authority- the Bible-all of the above died!

mustymatic:
Do Christians really practice this anywhere today?

To start with, rape is a sin and a crime against the law of the country meaning if a christian yields to the temptation and rough handles a lady, he sins against God and he will also face the consequences of his crime.

The question is, how many rapists will willingly ascent to pay dowry? At a time when virginity is despised, even the rapist may claim he was not the first! And like I said, since the willingness of the lady will be sought, most will reject the man (most times, the rapist is usually a person disliked,!)

cold:
Oh yes and in your haste to jump in your god's defence you justify rapè as a means of punishment

You sow a seed, you reap a basket.

cold:
^^^ no element of force indeed. Then what do you make of god using rapè as means of punishment? Is that not the application of force?

I'm afraid you were too hasty, like the op!

King James Bible
Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun. 2 Samuel 12:11
How can a 'loving god' even think of this? Really pathetic.
.

Why would a Righteous Judge not punish a man that slept with his subordinate's wife and murdered her husband!!!

Mr,This is Theophobia not atheism!

frosbel:
no element of force ??

I'll assume you misunderstood. I was referring to force where you used it in your conclusion in the op!!!

Imagine a girl recovering from the trauma and shame of rape , then forced to live with the criminal and bear his children.

okay, and then why is the rapist who forced himself on the woman forced to marry her against her will ?

Just like it happened for Rebecca, the father's decision to either give her out or not will not be sans the daughter's willingness!

so the solution is to marry the abuser to align with societal norms ?

Who said so?

frosbel:
Deuteronomy 22:28-29

" If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives."

Did God really command this ?

Imagine a girl recovering from the trauma and shame of rape , then forced to live with the criminal and bear his children.

Floor open.....................

Exodus 22:17 shows that there is no element of force! (Why not do a thorough study before coming out?)

If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins.Exodus 22:17

Meaning the money will be paid as a compensation to the father!
Unlike today's shamelessness, virginity was highly esteemed in those days and such woman thus violated will prefer to be married to the rapist! Why? she may not get any one to marry and the shame will be unbearable. Even if she got married, the security of the union will be very uncertain. Note that the verse you quoted refer only to a rapist not married. If he was already married... read Deuteronomy 22:23-27

For further studies, read 2 Samuel 13:1-20; Deuteronomy 22:13-21

When a man says, "what have I to do with You Jesus of Nazareth", it's not hard to know who is talking!

F00028:
you can find it yourself and see if what you are looking for is there

Where is the aramaic for John 3:16,17 in that place?

Jozzy4:
Brother , forget this grammar ; what she wrote is exactly what the majority of our pastors belive

That's for those whose final authority is their pastor

dalaman:
The difference between me and you is that I see all these things for what they are but you are stuck in the ideas and conceptions of primitive Jews. You rely and accept the ideas and way of life of primitive Jews as something sacrosanct. These men that lived at that time and wrote down these things were living in a very different ear from ours. Their culture should not be promoted and viewed as something spectacular because they used God(and idea they invented) to cover up for everything. Slavery was OK to them and there was there God giving out injunctions on how to go about it.

Morality did not come from any God. It came as a result of human experimentation and consensus, a lot of people used God as an enforcing mechanism but in reality it did not come from and God but Humans.

Jesus in the bible we are told gave a story of the good Samaritan that went out of his way to help another person. The Samaritan wasn't a Christian, he wasn't even a Jew. But he still did good, that is enough to show that morality didn't come from the bible God as the OP is trying to say. Were the ancient Jews killing, pillaging, raping and stealing from each other before Moses decided to drop the ten commandments from the mountain assuming the story was true? Were the ancient Egyptians doing same? Didn't they have an organized society?

The way you guys throw everything away in order to make the writings of ancient people that see nothing wrong in stoning their disobedient children to death for disobedience and drunkenness is actually ridiculous to me. The bible is the simply the expression, conception and reasoning of primitive men including their moral principles, you are supposed to accept the expression, conception and reasoning of 21st century humans and their moral principles not that of the primitive men.

Noted.

MizJanet:
Opinion of the MAJORITY rules .

Single interview with one ? Buhahaha , are u denying it that the christian theology belives their real self is the soul and it never dies ?

Vast majority of christians hold to that view .
.

Now she attempts to restructure her sentence! Vast majority! Source?!
James 2:26
For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.
That's how we define death. The separation process may be peaceful or violent and with excruciating pain.The latter was what Jesus bore for you ma'am! He even bore the unfathomable of them all: separation from God (no living being can imagine this!.)

MizJanet:
Ask your christian brothers like oladegbu , and vast majority of them to do that .


Probably you are among those who agree that death is the opposite of life ! When you die , u became exactly like a plank of wood . Am happy uv get past the delusion of afterlife .

Another hasty conclusion ma'am!

dalaman:
"Christians claim that Lukes account is Marys fathers genealogy through Heli and Matthews account is Josephs genealogy. This is very unlikely, as we shall soon see. If David was a common ancestor of both Marys fathers line and Josephs line then obviously the two genealogies split from David into his two sons, Nathan carried Mary's fathers line and Solomon carried Josephs line. All good to start off with, but we run into a major problem when we get to the name Salathiel and his son Zorobabel which are shared by both lists. See Mary's fathers line says that Salathiel was the son of Neri whereas Josephs line says that he was the son of Jechonias. Unless Neri and Jechonias were homosexual parents to Salathiel, there is no possible way to resolve this conflict. Even trying to go the way of father-inlaw like with Josephs father (both Heli and Jacob) doesnt work because if Salathiel wife's father was Neri and Salathiel's father was Jechonias then the Mary's fathers line would be broken. The only way to resolve the two accounts on this point is to say that one of the genealogies is wrong"

http://antecessor.hubpages.com/hub/Bible-Contradictions-The-Geneology-of-Jesus

You accuse me of assumptions but thank GOD you cannot deny the antecedence of the principles being referred to. Besides, there were a number of practices that are no longer in use today!

Therefore, it will be anachronistic to analyse these genealogies with the eyes of today's principles! The principle below is no longer in practise today:
Genesis 3:7,8

7 And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the Lord; and the Lord slew him.

8 And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.
Also:
Deuterenomy 25:5,6



Per vs 8, the child (if he had been born) will be named in Er and Onan's genealogy as the son of both men for genealogical and inheritance purposes! (This practise is key to understanding issues like Salathiel and Zerrubabel in Luke and Matthew's genealogy etc)

Another example is Obed the son of Boaz; Obed the son of Elimelech:
Ruth 4:5-10
5 Then Boaz said, “When you acquire the field from Naomi, you must also acquire Ruth the Moabite, the wife of our deceased relative, in order to [size=14pt]preserve his family name by raising up a descendant who will inherit his property[/size].”
6 The guardian said, “Then I am unable to redeem it, for I would ruin my own inheritance in that case. You may exercise my redemption option, for I am unable to redeem it.”
7 (Now this used to be the customary way to finalize a transaction involving redemption in Israel: A man would remove his sandal and give it to the other party. This was a legally binding act in Israel.)
8 So the guardian said to Boaz, “You may acquire it,” and he removed his sandal.
9 Then Boaz said to the leaders and all the people, “You are witnesses today that I have acquired from Naomi all that belonged to Elimelech, Kilion, and Mahlon.
10 I have also acquired Ruth the Moabite, the wife of Mahlon, as my wife to [size=14pt]raise up a descendant who will inherit his property so the name of the deceased might not disappear from among his relatives[/size] and from his village. You are witnesses today.”

[size=13pt]Meaning Obed's name will appear in both Boaz and Elimelech's genealogies and the reason is crystal clear. Furthermore, if we were to trace Naomi's genealogy, Elimelech will appear in her place and next will be Mahlon and Chilion and then Obed! People today will rejoice at the 'contradiction' but rather they will be expressing there ignorance of peculiarities of that epoch![/size] Note that unlike the first example, the person, Boaz was not a blood brother but a relative from the same tribe.

Having established that principle, I wont be wrong if I say that the same thing accounts for Salathiel and Zerrubabel. If you call this an unfounded assumption too, give us your reasons based on principles from the same epoch