Christians: Kill family who mentions other beliefs to you?

[angellous_evangellous]

OK, I will try to elaborate better...

If God is all knowing and all powerfull, why not give us the final version of the "rules" of their word? Why change the rules, and if the rules are changing due to us, then are we not the gods? It's confusing to think this, and makes me not beleive in god. It's too much a contradiction.....

So why would god give different rules to these evolving humans? Why was it ok to stone children and women could not speak in church then, but now that we see the errors of those ways , so God's word has changed. It has evolved as we evolve....

It makes it obvious that god did not create us, rather we created god and change god when it suits our needs/wants.....

Maybe God knows how we operate - we thrive on change and unpredictability. In very, very few parts of the bible does God say, "for all time," and it's never in a commandment but in promises.

No, I don't think that we are the gods. I don't think that you're familiar with the Orthodox churches (Roman, Greek, Chinese, and Coptic), who all have traditions of "Scripture" and "Tradition" which allow authoritative changes in interpretation according to the needs of the Church and the world, but to not go in and change the Scriptures themselves. So they say "this is what it says" and "this is what it means."

And I don't recall women and children being stoned, but I can tell you that if it's in the OT, I don't think that it was ever enforced. In early times, so much of what we don't like in the OT was written from the perspective of exiled people trying to make sense out of their woes. The perspective was - this would have pleased God and we would have not been enslaved.

Later rabbis interpret these texts as anything but a literal stoning, etc.

Finally, *if God exists*, it is abundantly clear that God allowed humans to participate completely in the writing and peaching of God's word... so it's just as much human, or more, than it is divine. However, that divinity is so compelling that it has attracted devotion for at least 3000 years.

 

[MW0082]

Maybe God knows how we operate - we thrive on change and unpredictability. In very, very few parts of the bible does God say, "for all time," and it's never in a commandment but in promises.

No, I don't think that we are the gods. I don't think that you're familiar with the Orthodox churches (Roman, Greek, Chinese, and Coptic), who all have traditions of "Scripture" and "Tradition" which allow authoritative changes in interpretation according to the needs of the Church and the world, but to not go in and change the Scriptures themselves. So they say "this is what it says" and "this is what it means."

And I don't recall women and children being stoned, but I can tell you that if it's in the OT, I don't think that it was ever enforced. In early times, so much of what we don't like in the OT was written from the perspective of exiled people trying to make sense out of their woes. The perspective was - this would have pleased God and we would have not been enslaved.

Later rabbis interpret these texts as anything but a literal stoning, etc.

Finally, *if God exists*, it is abundantly clear that God allowed humans to participate completely in the writing and peaching of God's word... so it's just as much human, or more, than it is divine. However, that divinity is so compelling that it has attracted devotion for at least 3000 years.

It said a disobedient child should be stoned, not women I don't think I said that. It said women could not speak in church though, that is what I was referring to.

So let me get this straight, the bible changes because it is part word of god part word of man. So some of man's influences at the time are in the word. As we change we change our part of the word. Is that correct?

 

[atanu]

Another one below

Personal comm. (Onkarah)

Idolatry in the Temple
1 In the sixth year, in the sixth month on the fifth day, while I was sitting in my house and the elders of Judah were sitting before me, the hand of the Sovereign LORD came upon me there. 2 I looked, and I saw a figure like that of a man. [a] From what appeared to be his waist down he was like fire, and from there up his appearance was as bright as glowing metal. 3 He stretched out what looked like a hand and took me by the hair of my head. The Spirit lifted me up between earth and heaven and in visions of God he took me to Jerusalem, to the entrance to the north gate of the inner court, where the idol that provokes to jealousy stood. 4 And there before me was the glory of the God of Israel, as in the vision I had seen in the plain.
5 Then he said to me, "Son of man, look toward the north." So I looked, and in the entrance north of the gate of the altar I saw this idol of jealousy.
6 And he said to me, "Son of man, do you see what they are doing—the utterly detestable things the house of Israel is doing here, things that will drive me far from my sanctuary? But you will see things that are even more detestable."
7 Then he brought me to the entrance to the court. I looked, and I saw a hole in the wall. 8 He said to me, "Son of man, now dig into the wall." So I dug into the wall and saw a doorway there.
9 And he said to me, "Go in and see the wicked and detestable things they are doing here." 10 So I went in and looked, and I saw portrayed all over the walls all kinds of crawling things and detestable animals and all the idols of the house of Israel. 11 In front of them stood seventy elders of the house of Israel, and Jaazaniah son of Shaphan was standing among them. Each had a censer in his hand, and a fragrant cloud of incense was rising.
12 He said to me, "Son of man, have you seen what the elders of the house of Israel are doing in the darkness, each at the shrine of his own idol? They say, 'The LORD does not see us; the LORD has forsaken the land.' " 13 Again, he said, "You will see them doing things that are even more detestable."
14 Then he brought me to the entrance to the north gate of the house of the LORD, and I saw women sitting there, mourning for Tammuz. 15 He said to me, "Do you see this, son of man? You will see things that are even more detestable than this."
16 He then brought me into the inner court of the house of the LORD, and there at the entrance to the temple, between the portico and the altar, were about twenty-five men. With their backs toward the temple of the LORD and their faces toward the east, they were bowing down to the sun in the east.
17 He said to me, "Have you seen this, son of man? Is it a trivial matter for the house of Judah to do the detestable things they are doing here? Must they also fill the land with violence and continually provoke me to anger? Look at them putting the branch to their nose! 18 Therefore I will deal with them in anger; I will not look on them with pity or spare them. Although they shout in my ears, I will not listen to them."


Ezekiel 9
Idolaters Killed
1 Then I heard him call out in a loud voice, "Bring the guards of the city here, each with a weapon in his hand." 2 And I saw six men coming from the direction of the upper gate, which faces north, each with a deadly weapon in his hand. With them was a man clothed in linen who had a writing kit at his side. They came in and stood beside the bronze altar.
3 Now the glory of the God of Israel went up from above the cherubim, where it had been, and moved to the threshold of the temple. Then the LORD called to the man clothed in linen who had the writing kit at his side 4 and said to him, "Go throughout the city of Jerusalem and put a mark on the foreheads of those who grieve and lament over all the detestable things that are done in it."
5 As I listened, he said to the others, "Follow him through the city and kill, without showing pity or compassion. 6 Slaughter old men, young men and maidens, women and children, but do not touch anyone who has the mark. Begin at my sanctuary." So they began with the elders who were in front of the temple.
7 Then he said to them, "Defile the temple and fill the courts with the slain. Go!" So they went out and began killing throughout the city. 8 While they were killing and I was left alone, I fell facedown, crying out, "Ah, Sovereign LORD! Are you going to destroy the entire remnant of Israel in this outpouring of your wrath on Jerusalem?"
9 He answered me, "The sin of the house of Israel and Judah is exceedingly great; the land is full of bloodshed and the city is full of injustice. They say, 'The LORD has forsaken the land; the LORD does not see.' 10 So I will not look on them with pity or spare them, but I will bring down on their own heads what they have done."
11 Then the man in linen with the writing kit at his side brought back word, saying, "I have done as you commanded."

 

[angellous_evangellous]

It said a disobedient child should be stoned, not women I don't think I said that. It said women could not speak in church though, that is what I was referring to.

So let me get this straight, the bible changes because it is part word of god part word of man. So some of man's influences at the time are in the word. As we change we change our part of the word. Is that correct?

Dude, just look at your post -

Why was it ok to stone children and women could not speak in church then,

But in any case, if you're thinking that the NT has any command to stone women for anything, I believe that you're wrong.

Secondly, I think that the Bible changes for several reasons, but that depends on which church one is a part of. All churches are re-writing the Bible and adjusting it as they see fit. In this sense, the Bible is 100% the "word of man."

I think that the "word of God" is the spoken word of God to the world that everyone can participate in. In the church, this participation is sometimes codified into laws and traditions, and others it is accepted through prophets, and to others it is in service, and so on.

When the "word of God" is experienced through the reading of the Bible and its interpretation (whether free or codified), then the Bible is a vehicle of the word of God. This is the divine kernel that I think is in the Bible, but I don't think that the Bible is the "word of God" but it may be a vehicle by which the "word of God" is experienced.

 

[atanu]

My view

We Hindus know Brahman as the father of all devouring Time, whose methods, on reflection, all will find horryfying. But that is a mistake due to idolatry -- false worship of the body-mind as 'Me'. The body-mind has to persish whether one likes it or not. So, death is cruel when the consciousness is rooted in the body as 'Me'.

So, when some Seers see the actions of time and speak or write about it, they horrify us, since Time (known as kAla-Death to Hindus) is ruthless.

How will a non-Hindu react to Markandeya Purana, wherein Shiva, Vishnu and all divinities equip Durga, so that she may slaughter all asuras? She slaughters them for 9 or 10 days. During the process she also turns into a monstrous figure with a red protruded tongue and laps up asuras as soon as they are born and before they can fall to the ground and grow.

Was Durga lapping up the unwholesome thoughts before they could take root or was Durga killing people in flesh? I do not know but I am inclined to believe that She is the pure consciousness of the Self, which on growth (as agni) purifies our minds. There are supporting shruti, which says that 'this agni when lit lights up pervades the full heaven'. There are shruti that indicate the protruding tougue to be a flame. The protruding tongue is Jihva-Jiva.

Jiva (man) has to kill the unwholesome worries and tendencies.

Similarly, before a physical Jerusalem city was created (or rather conceptualised), the 'Jerusalem' or 'Zion' meant "City of Joy", similar as our body-self is called a city of nine gates. It is surely the function of terrible Rudra to keep this city joyful.

The worries and doubts dwelling and growing in the City of Joy must be ruthlessly annhilated.

I see the whole thing this way. I may be grossly wrong but who stops me from seeing the good picture?


Om Namah Shivaya

Note: Wanted to add that Kurukhestra, where the terrible Mahabharata battle, guided by Lord Shri Krishna takes place, also means city of joy with 9 gates -- the human body.

 

[MW0082]

Dude, just look at your post -



But in any case, if you're thinking that the NT has any command to stone women for anything, I believe that you're wrong.

1) Boorish
2) I never said that women were stoned, I said disobedient children... Dude, just look at my post.......
3) Again, I will repeat. the OT said women could not speak in church...

 

[smokydot]

How convenient for you. :sarcastic

It's an ill wind that doesn't blow some good. . .

Orly? I was not aware that 1Corinthians had been moved to the OT...

Seems that's not all your not aware of.

The text reads, "if a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off (shorn)."

That's not a requirement to shave one's head.
Every woman in the assembly can choose to be in compliance with the rule without cutting her hair.

So much for your superior knowledge of the Bible...:cover:
wa:do

The text is the best answer to that remark.

 

[smokydot]

"Not so. Faith is not the result of reason and logic."
Your "faith" may not be, but for real faith reason and logic is necessary.

It's necessary to inform it, but it's not necessary to receive it.

"True faith can rest on the foundation of God."
"God" is a rationalization.

Not according to the Jewish Scriptures and Jesus.

"But reason is not its master, it is only its servant, the intention for which it was given. . .to inform faith."

"Faith" is not an excuse to be stupid and the only master reason has is reason itself.

In the world of unbelief, yes. . .in the world of belief, no.
God's revelation transcends reason.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

1) Boorish
2) I never said that women were stoned, I said disobedient children... Dude, just look at my post.......
3) Again, I will repeat. the OT said women could not speak in church...

I misread you... sorry

 

[MW0082]

I misread you... sorry

It happens

 

[painted wolf]

It's an ill wind that doesn't blow some good. . .

Seems that's not all your not aware of.

The text reads, "if a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off (shorn)."

That's not a requirement to shave one's head.
Every woman in the assembly can choose to be in compliance with the rule without cutting her hair.

The text is the best answer to that remark.

it is a requirement to shave the head of a woman who refuses to cover her hair.
1Corinthians: 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
11:6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.

No cover = a head shaving

I'm also curious how you thought Corinthians was OT

wa:do

 

[Primordial Annihilator]

Fundamentalsim is nothing more than what its name means:
belief in the fundamentals of faith and evangelical Christianity, which are

inspiration and infallibility of Scripture,
the deity of Christ,
his virgin birth and miracles,
his penal death for our sin,
his physical resurrection and personal return.

Fundamentalism is simply orthodox Christianity.

Those are the beliefs of true Christians.

Articles of Faith basically...and thus cannot be taken seriously. (by me)

 

[jtartar]

"If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;

Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage” (Deuteronomy 13:6-10, KJV).

Can any Christians help me understand the context of this?

Meow Mix,
Here is a truth that most people who call themselves christian do not know.
NO Christian has ever been under the Law you copied from the Bible. This was from the Mosaic Law Covenant, which was given to the Israelites,Jews. Consiuder what is said about who was under the Law, Deut 5:1-3. Notice the words here, The law was for the ones gathered there. Notice also other scriptures that say the same thing, Ps 147:19,20.
The nation of Israel were under a Covenant with God. They were to obey His laws and He would protect them and shower them with blessings. The book of Deuteronomy is full of the things God promised to the Israelites if they obeyed Him, especially chapters 5-10. Consider Deut Chapter 7:6, 14:2, Ex 19:5,6.
Consider Jere 31:31-34, which tells us that the law of Moses was an interim Covenant, it was not to be forever, but only until the coming of the Messiah, Jesus, Gal 3:23-25.
Jesus and all other Israelites were under the Law of Moses, Gal 4:4.
Notice what Paul said about himself. He said that he was not under the law, 1Cor 9:20, Rom 6:14,15. The point here is; if the Mosaic Law was still in effect, Paul and the other Jews would still be under it.
Think about this; Does any Christian obey the Laws of the Mosaic Covenant?? If we were still under the Mosaic Covenant every one who calls himself a Christian would have to be stoned, because that is the penalty for breaking many of the laws, such as the Sabbath Law, Deut 31:13-17.
The Law Covenant ended, became OBSOLETE at the death of Jesus,The Messiah, Christ, Heb 8:5-13, Col 2:13,14. One of the reasons that Jesus came to earth was to give his life to remove the Mosaic Law Covenant because it was a Law of sin and death, a curse to men because they cannot obey the Mosaic Law perfectly, Acts 15:10,11. Rom 7:6, 6:23, Gal 3:10-14, 2Cor 3:6,7.
On the night before his death Jesus instituted The New Covenant, the one Christians have always been under, Luke 22:19,20, 1Cor 11:23-25. Jesus and Paul both said that Love for fellow believers and love for God fulfills the whole lae covenant, because the person who loves does not do bad to his neighbor, Matt 22:36-40, Rom 13:8-10.
This Covenant was much better than the Mosaic Law Covenant, because it is based on the blood of Jesus instead of the blood of bulls and goats, Heb 9:11-15. The Mosaic Law condemned to death, but theNew Covenant keeps people alive, because their sins are no longer charged to them, but are stopped by the Great Ransom Sacrifice of Jesus Christ, Heb 10:14-18, 2Cor 3:7-14, Eph 1:7, Acts 13:38,39 , Matt 20:28.

 

[smokydot]

it is a requirement to shave the head of a woman who refuses to cover her hair.
1Corinthians: 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
11:6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.

No cover = a head shaving

Yep, that's conditional, not absolute.

I'm also curious how you thought Corinthians was OT
wa:do

You didn't hear that from me.

 

[smokydot]

Articles of Faith basically...and thus cannot be taken seriously. (by me)

And that is your privilege.

 

[painted wolf]

Yep, that's conditional, not absolute.
You didn't hear that from me.

What part of it is conditional?

As it is commanded so let it be done.... if a woman is uncovered so let her be shorn.

It seems pretty straightforward... just like, don't let women talk in church and don't let her have any position of authority over a man.

I'm curious, why if these rules are absolute, you don't have to actually follow them?
Surely you can do something about keeping Gods rules... ?

Go to a church where women aren't allowed to talk and must cover their heads for example. Never work for a woman... or have one as a teacher...

What makes these NT commands not worth following?

wa:do

 

[Meow Mix]

Meow Mix,
Here is a truth that most people who call themselves christian do not know.
NO Christian has ever been under the Law you copied from the Bible. .

Oh, what a relief. As long as God was telling OTHER people to kill their families then that's ok. I guess God's a good guy after all.

 

[McBell]

However, how do you conclude what is flawwed logic from actual logic?

Far to many people think that just because an argument is logically sound, it has to be correct.
That is something that is just not true.


Take smokeydot for example.
He claims that his beliefs are facts.
So based upon this faulty premise, he presents logically sound arguments.
But because the foundation of said arguments are based upon beliefs, not facts, his conclusions are not necessarily true, they are merely logically sound.

 

[MW0082]

Far to many people think that just because an argument is logically sound, it has to be correct.
That is something that is just not true.


Take smokeydot for example.
He claims that his beliefs are facts.
So based upon this faulty premise, he presents logically sound arguments.
But because the foundation of said arguments are based upon beliefs, not facts, his conclusions are not necessarily true, they are merely logically sound.

But cannot facts be construed as well,..??

What defines sound logic?

 

[smokydot]

What part of it is conditional?
As it is commanded so let it be done.... if a woman is uncovered so let her be shorn.

It is conditioned on her having her head uncovered.
That makes it conditional.

It seems pretty straightforward... just like, don't let women talk in church
and don't let her have any position of authority ove a man.

Paul does not forbid women to "speak" in church. They speak in prayer and praise (1 Co 11:5).

Paul is doing two things:
1) he is establishing the God-ordained order that is to be the basis for administration and authority in the church. Women are not to have authority over men in the church, but are to be in submission to their husbands both at home (Eph 5:22) and in the church (1 Co 5:34, 1 Tim 2:11-12). And
2) he is dealing with propriety in worship, which should take into account accepted social practices. Within this social order, it was disgraceful for a woman to speak out in church (1 Co 11:35), doing so was disrespectful, so she should remain silent.

The first is why the Catholic Church and many Protestant churches do not ordain women.
The second is not a prohibition to speak, but a regulation on when to speak.

I'm curious, why if these rules are absolute, you don't have to actually follow them?

Legitimate question.

Surely you can do smething about keeping Gods rules... ?
Go to a church where women aren't allowed to talk and must cover their heads for example.

Up until about 50 or so years ago, the Catholic Church required a head covering for women.

Never work for a woman...

The NT regulations are not given to the world, they are given only to the church. Men are not forbidden to work for women outside the church.

or have one as a teacher...

The NT regulations do not allow women to teach men in the church, they are to teach the women.

What makes these NT commands not worth following?
wa:do

All are followed, but for the most part not in one church. They are scattered throughout the denominations.
They are all "worth following" and should be, but Christ's church is not perfect. . .it is made up of sinners.
So it's better to focus on the majors, rather than the minors.