God's Children

[Flat Earth Kyle]

All throughout the Bible we are repeatedly reminded that we are children of our Heavenly Father, why is it that so many denominations who read the Bible read that and do not believe it?
God has never referred to us as his pets, nor his mere creations, nor will He ever, Jesus taught us that we are all God's children. What does that mean to you?

 

[Storm]

Well, to me it means that God has the obligation to be a good parent. There are other implications, of course, but that's the big one.

 

[Tellurian]

All throughout the Bible we are repeatedly reminded that we are children of our Heavenly Father, why is it that so many denominations who read the Bible read that and do not believe it?
God has never referred to us as his pets, nor his mere creations, nor will He ever, Jesus taught us that we are all God's children. What does that mean to you?

That was the alleged Jewish god supposedly referring to the Jews. Remember that the alleged biblical Jesus supposedly said that he came only to the lost sheep of Israel.

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

So the both of you are referring to God as a parent? So that you believe that you and God are the same species?

 

[Storm]

yaddoe, I should have asked before responding, but did you intend this to be restricted to Christians/ Abrahamics?

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

yaddoe, I should have asked before responding, but did you intend this to be restricted to Christians/ Abrahamics?

it doesn't matter

 

[Storm]

OK, then.

So the both of you are referring to God as a parent? So that you believe that you and God are the same species?

No, not the same species. Species is a function of biological life, which I do not believe applies to God, even when speaking in theistic terms.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

All throughout the Bible we are repeatedly reminded that we are children of our Heavenly Father, why is it that so many denominations who read the Bible read that and do not believe it?

Because they're familiar with the idea of metaphor, maybe?

God has never referred to us as his pets, nor his mere creations, nor will He ever, Jesus taught us that we are all God's children. What does that mean to you?

OTOH, he does refer to human beings as "pots" that the "potmaker" can appoint to any purpose - or perhaps just smash - as he sees fit with the pot having no right to complain.

If this describes a parent-child relationship, I would say that it's probably an abusive one.

 

[JacobEzra.]

That was the alleged Jewish god supposedly referring to the Jews. Remember that the alleged biblical Jesus supposedly said that he came only to the lost sheep of Israel.

Try reading the Gospel the whole way through

 

[heretic]

(I suppose this is a religious debate , if not tell me to edit)

I think God's fatherhood to people in the bibles is a metaphorical expression to indicate God's love and care to us , I once read but I don't remember where , that people in the first biblical years ,used the term "father" not as a biological parent but as "the lord" , "the controller" , and the one who takes care of his beloved

I think jesus and the apostles used this term to express to people the image of God in a gentle and close way to our minds and hearts.

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

OK, then.

No, not the same species. Species is a function of biological life, which I do not believe applies to God, even when speaking in theistic terms.

Then how can God be your parent?

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

OK, then.

No, not the same species. Species is a function of biological life, which I do not believe applies to God, even when speaking in theistic terms.

So you don't believe God is "Biologically" a living being?
Do you believe God can have children? Do you believe he would want to have children? Why or why not

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

Because they're familiar with the idea of metaphor, maybe?

Did God ever call this a big metaphor? or is this a big assumption that people call doctrine?

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

So you don't believe God is "Biologically" a living being?
Do you believe God can have children? Do you believe he would want to have children? Why or why not

Also, do you believe Jesus was literally the Son of God, or do you believe this was a metaphor, or do you believe in Jesus at all?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Did God ever call this a big metaphor? or is this a big assumption that people call doctrine?

Did Jesus ever say "feed my lambs" was a metaphor?

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

So you are stating that because Jesus gave the parable of the Lost sheep, we assume "feed my lambs is a metaphor, and because Jesus also gave the parable of the prodigal son we assume "Our Father in Heaven" is a metaphor?

I find it uncomfortable that "the worlds most important book" is the also the most highly debated book in the world, and I also find it uncomfortable how many denominations base their religions on Biblical assumptions, such as what is a metaphor and what isn't.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

So you are stating that because Jesus gave the parable of the Lost sheep, we assume "feed my lambs is a metaphor, and because Jesus also gave the parable of the prodigal son we assume "Our Father in Heaven" is a metaphor?

No, I'm stating that the Bible does use metaphor without putting a big warning saying "HEY, EVERYONE! THIS IS A METAPHOR!" in front of it.

But as for the "Our Father in Heaven" thing, let me put it this way: do you have an actual father? As in an Earthly, human father?

Now... do human beings have multiple fathers, or only one?

It seems to me that a common sense approach to the text excludes a literal interpretation.

I find it uncomfortable that "the worlds most important book" is the also the most highly debated book in the world,

Yes, it is inconvenient for anyone claiming one particular interpretation of the Bible above all others that the actual text allows so many.

and I also find it uncomfortable how many denominations base their religions on Biblical assumptions, such as what is a metaphor and what isn't.

But you're doing exactly that: you're making a Biblical assumption that this phrase isn't a metaphor.

 

[9Westy9]

All throughout the Bible we are repeatedly reminded that we are children of our Heavenly Father, why is it that so many denominations who read the Bible read that and do not believe it?
God has never referred to us as his pets, nor his mere creations, nor will He ever, Jesus taught us that we are all God's children. What does that mean to you?

people interpret the bible in many different ways.

being God's children? That'd be weird. I guess it'd be like having a father who ran away from home and has ditched his responsibilities as we can't have direct contact.

 

[Penumbra]

OTOH, he does refer to human beings as "pots" that the "potmaker" can appoint to any purpose - or perhaps just smash - as he sees fit with the pot having no right to complain.

If this describes a parent-child relationship, I would say that it's probably an abusive one.

That's mostly how it works throughout the set of narratives- pot and potmaker.

Or a tree that's cut down if it doesn't produce fruit, with axes ready at all of them.

 

[Katzpur]

All throughout the Bible we are repeatedly reminded that we are children of our Heavenly Father, why is it that so many denominations who read the Bible read that and do not believe it?
God has never referred to us as his pets, nor his mere creations, nor will He ever, Jesus taught us that we are all God's children. What does that mean to you?

It means that we're all brothers and sisters and, because we are all sons and daughters of God, He loves us all equally.