God is Dangerous

[loverofhumanity]

Baha'u'llah tells us that God loves us and created us to have close friendship with Him so He could have somebody to share His love and gifts with. God seems to grieve that we do not love Him but He does not force us as then it wouldn't be love anymore.

“O Son of the Wondrous Vision!

I have breathed within thee a breath of My own Spirit, that thou mayest be My lover. Why hast thou forsaken Me and sought a beloved other than Me?”

Bahá'u'lláh. “The Hidden Words.”

 

[ronandcarol]

God is Dangerous
God is Holy.
He seems to have a noted attitude about ....how to live
and though we don't hear much from Him....when we do...
the message can be harsh
His attitude is, He created us, He loves His creation, and He wants us to live lives that honor Him. He is also patient with us sinners and is waiting for us to repent and become His children. You can hear a lot from Him if you open your heart and your Bible. The Book is not harsh, it is a love story for mankind, a complete story of God's plan of redemption, from it's beginning in the Garden all the way to the end of Revelation where we will be taken into His eternal Kingdom, for eternity.

ronandcarol

 

[bobhikes]

Of course you wouldn't. Your needs dictate how you read and and interpret the Bible. It's called cherry picking.


Parsing it a bit we get, as I've already indicated, "I (the Lord) create evil." Now, I'm not going to bother pointing out its grammatical structure because if you can't understand its simple object-subject-verb structure on its own, you won't understand an explanation of it. In any case, If you're inputting some meaning to the words other than their common meanings I'm curious as to what they are and why you've chosen what you have.


.

The whole book of Isaiah is a Vision
It starts

The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah.

chapter 1:4
Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken the LORD, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward.

The first time evil is used and it refers to humans.

Chapter 1:16
Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil;

2 instances of evil and both refer to humans.

Chapter 3:9
The shew of their countenance doth witness against them; and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves.

Yet again humans have rewarded themselves with evil.

There is a pattern and it keeps going. I believe the statement is a error of interpretation. Perhaps he was shown an image of Humans doing evil and he interpreted as evil. Perhaps it is a translation problem. I don't know but reading the whole of Isaiah it does not fit.

 

[Thief]

my song and dance remains the same.....
the Almighty....bigger, faster, stronger, more intelligent and greatly experienced

top of the line life form....in Spirit

as we cross over there will be a judgment
we will be allowed to follow....or left standing where we fell

 

[Skwim]

I believe the statement is a error of interpretation.

Of course you do. How else to deal with its disturbing implication. Thing is, once you admit that some part of the Bible is in error, you're obligated to admit that absolutely any part of it could be in error. So how do you trust a particular passage to be true? By seeing if it fits your theology or not? Fine, but then how did you determined that your particular theology is more valid than any other? That your cherry-picking of he Bible is without error. To do so you have to assume you have some kind of super interpretative abilities. Abilities that exceed those of some of the best Biblical scholars and apologists in the world. Those who saw fit to phrase Isaiah 45:7 exactly as they did. Think that's what you have? No skin off my nose of course, but you have to admit it's a damn arrogant position to take.


.

 

[bobhikes]

Of course you do. How else to deal with its disturbing implication. Thing is, once you admit that some part of the Bible is in error, you're obligated to admit that absolutely any part of it could be in error. So how do you trust a particular passage to be true? By seeing if it fits your theology or not? Fine, but then how did you determined that your particular theology is more valid than any other? That your cherry-picking of he Bible is without error. To do so you have to assume you have some kind of super interpretative abilities. Abilities that exceed those of some of the best Biblical scholars and apologists in the world. Those who saw fit to phrase Isaiah 45:7 exactly as they did. Think that's what you have? No skin off my nose of course, but you have to admit it's a damn arrogant position to take.


.

Its more disturbing in my interpretation. God considers man an evil he made. You are correct that any part of the bible can be interpreted wrong. I must trust in my ability to see the meaning God has provided to me. It is called faith in myself and faith in God. There are many false prophets.

For my part I have read the whole bible. Job and Genesis several times because I enjoyed them. Numbers twice to understand it and because of you Isaiah twice. I have read the new testament fully through and revelations several times trying to interpret myself. By the way Isaiah interprets his vision for us John does not. We can see the true vision John gets and it is a rough thing to interpret. I wish Isaiah did the same. I was also a lector for 4 years reading the various stories from all books and they give you a book that explains the churches interpretation of the story so that you can convey it in your reading.

I don't cherry pick, but I do wonder what your experience is with the Bible. How much of it have you read or do you just use excerpts by googling them.

 

[Thief]

Of course you do. How else to deal with its disturbing implication. Thing is, once you admit that some part of the Bible is in error, you're obligated to admit that absolutely any part of it could be in error. So how do you trust a particular passage to be true? By seeing if it fits your theology or not? Fine, but then how did you determined that your particular theology is more valid than any other? That your cherry-picking of he Bible is without error. To do so you have to assume you have some kind of super interpretative abilities. Abilities that exceed those of some of the best Biblical scholars and apologists in the world. Those who saw fit to phrase Isaiah 45:7 exactly as they did. Think that's what you have? No skin off my nose of course, but you have to admit it's a damn arrogant position to take.


.

we all interpret what we read

my take on Genesis is greatly different than the typical believer

i like cherries

 

[LuisDantas]

not doubt, many of you agree...but....

I don't think He is human...in mind and heart

He seems to have a noted attitude about ....how to live

and though we don't hear much from Him....when we do...
the message can be harsh

perhaps living in the spirit....is difficult

I don't think that makes much internal sense, let alone external.

 

[Thief]

I don't think that makes much internal sense, let alone external.

in your head?
or everyone else's?

 

[LuisDantas]

in your head?
or everyone else's?

Such a dichotomy. Do you want to answer your own question?

 

[Thief]

Such a dichotomy. Do you want to answer your own question?

no...i might find your's more entertaining

 

[LuisDantas]

My answer? "You are talking nonsense" sounds just about right.

 

[Thief]

not very helpful to your expression of your understanding

too bad we don't have an emoticon for that

 

[LuisDantas]

not very helpful to your expression of your understanding

Indeed. But you are not giving me a whole lot to work with.

There is a reason why I call it "nonsense", you know.

 

[Thief]

well....in keeping to the discussion....you might try....

picturing yourself standing before God and heaven

are you safe?

 

[Skwim]

we all interpret what we read

my take on Genesis is greatly different than the typical believer

i like cherries

Fine, but I would really question any interpretation of Isaiah 45:7

"I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil. I am Jehovah, that doeth all these things."​

to mean, among other things, anything other than God's claim that he creates evil. What else could one conclude from "I create evil" other than God creates evil?

But this particular issue aside, I have to wonder what kind of basis you use in interpreting scripture. If it does not require a passage to be in accord with your theology,

what basis do you use?


.

 

[Acim]

Nothing real can be threatened.
Nothing unreal exists.
Herein lies the peace of God

If something unreal is perceived to exist, and the fundamental nature of that thing is belief/conviction in death, darkness, despair - and along comes Light, then to that thing (that is unreal), Light is very dangerous. In fact, that thing would wish to have it known to all that would listen that death, darkness and despair are inevitable outcomes of going with (to, in) the Light.

 

[Acim]

Fine, but I would really question any interpretation of Isaiah 45:7

"I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil. I am Jehovah, that doeth all these things."​

to mean, among other things, anything other than God's claim that he creates evil. What else could one conclude from "I create evil" other than God creates evil?
.

That Jehovah is a demiurge.

 

[Thief]

Fine, but I would really question any interpretation of Isaiah 45:7

"I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil. I am Jehovah, that doeth all these things."​

to mean, among other things, anything other than God's claim that he creates evil. What else could one conclude from "I create evil" other than God creates evil?

But this particular issue aside, I have to wonder what kind of basis you use in interpreting scripture. If it does not require a passage to be in accord with your theology,

what basis do you use?


.

i read 'evil'....as 'harm'

a good deal of harm dealt is credited to God
and as the Lord God....He would do so

like reducing the sum of Man to lesser numbers
reducing a trend that will undo the grace that Man might achieve

to prevent a total loss of life.....some life will perish

the peace of heaven, I believe, is guarded
many will fail.....even at the Gate

 

[Thief]

Nothing real can be threatened.
Nothing unreal exists.
Herein lies the peace of God

If something unreal is perceived to exist, and the fundamental nature of that thing is belief/conviction in death, darkness, despair - and along comes Light, then to that thing (that is unreal), Light is very dangerous. In fact, that thing would wish to have it known to all that would listen that death, darkness and despair are inevitable outcomes of going with (to, in) the Light.

indeed!

before the creation.....no light, no shadow
no heat ....no cold
no Voice.....no Echo

all was perfect and uniform.....having no form

then Light (God's first creation).....is an aberration.
a location.....'where'......nothing has location

the ability to say....I AM!.....when no one else will hear
absolute solitude.....another aberration