Greetings and Salutations

[Gallowglass]

Does he? Where does he say that he is "cruel"? And what is your definition of the word? If criminals who defy the law are sentenced to appropriate punishment....is that cruel? If you understand a penalty before you commit a crime, then how can you complain about it?

Well, most translations use the word "evil spirit of God," but given the Hebrew, I feel that cruel is closer. I Sam. 16: 14
יד וְרוּחַ יְהוָה סָרָה, מֵעִם שָׁאוּל; וּבִעֲתַתּוּ רוּחַ-רָעָה, מֵאֵת יְהוָה.
Now the spirit of the LORD had departed from Saul, and the evil spirit of the LORD terrified him.


QUOTE="Deeje, post: 5706605, member: 18814"]"Jealous"? Yes he does say that he is jealous, but it's not the kind of negative jealousy that humans can express. Its more like the protective jealousy a husband feels for his wife, not wanting any harm to come to her. He calls it "Godly jealousy".
Words in one language do not often translate well into another.[/QUOTE]

Good then, that I don't use translations then, isn't it? And the word used in Hebrew is not protective jealousy.

What makes you think that God is not loving and caring? Do you have life, (albeit a difficult one)? Do you have air to breathe? Delicious food to eat and to enjoy the aroma of it cooking? Eyes to see, and beautiful things to look at? Ears to hear and wonderful sounds to hear? Does he exclude the wicked from these things out of spite? Are the ugly problems of this world created by God? Or by people who have abandoned his laws?

None of that shows love or caring. That's rather more like wanting a pretty house when you play The Sims.

Your focus always seems to be on negative things where God is concerned.....there are way more positive things to appreciate. And there are good reasons in the big picture for why he has stood back to allow all humans to make their own choices in everything without his intervention. The Bible is God's record of his dealing with humans, both individually and collectively.....but it all depends on how you interpret that record.
You and I are proof that reading the same book can divide people....that, I believe is its job.

Do you believe God is omnipotent? If he is, and he does not stop horrible things, even the ones that just occur in his name, how can he be called good? How can a God who hardens hearts and chooses some people for salvation and not others? You said yourself it is partially his choice. He knows what it would take to convince everyone and does not do it. I cannot look at all the evil in nature, not even in man, and say that an omnipotent being is benevolent.

Again, it all depends on what you are looking for. If all you see are faults, based on your own interpretation of what 'you' think God should be, then I guess he will disappoint you. Understanding where this is all going, and what the final outcome will be, brings everything into focus. The churches have no idea. It's just heaven or hell....that was never the purpose of our creation.

What do you feel was the purpose of our creation, then?

Jesus is not omniscient. He is not God incarnate, but a created being who worked alongside of his Father in creation. He had the ability to read minds and to discern intentions however....a good quality to have when endowed with holy spirit, which was given to him at his baptism. Until that time he was just Jesus, the carpenter's son....no supernatural abilities.

Ah, my apologies, most people I debate with are trinitarians.

You don't seem to understand why Jesus changed nothing except the Jewish perception of God (which had been corrupted by the Pharisees and their favoured oral traditions,) and he reiterated God's requirements for his people during his brief ministry on earth.

Actually, he rather changed a lot. Even just using the wrong bread at passover changes a lot if he's supposed to be sinless.

I asked you about the time period that Jesus spoke about....."the appointed times of the nations"? Since you ignored that reference, I will assume that you have no knowledge of it. I never heard it mentioned in church either. But these "Gentile times" (as they are sometimes translated) had a beginning and an end.....when Jesus walked the earth the domination of Gentile powers over God's people had not yet concluded. This has reference to Daniel's prophesies regarding the "time of the end" and the last ruling power over mankind before "the end" would come and God would reintroduce his rulership in dramatic fashion. (Daniel 2:44)

We are living in the time of the last ruling world power before God establishes his kingdom on earth....the one Jesus taught us to pray for in The Lord's Prayer.

Oh, I have knowledge of it. I just didn't see the point. I rather see it not as an apocalyptic view, but as one shortly in the future from when he was preaching. He uses the wrong tenses in the primary sources for it to be apocalyptic. It's a nice thought, to be living in the End Times, but the words make no sense.

This is true. But from the Bible's perspective, God invites his people to present his message to others....it is both good news and bad news. Jesus said it would be 'just like the days of Noah'. (Matthew 24:37-39)

Noah was told about God's intentions to eradicate serious demonic influence in the world of that time. Violence, immorality and bloodshed were the order of the day and because it took mankind to the outer limits of wickedness way too soon, God stepped into slow things down, but it was not yet his time to act as the finale of this world ruled by the devil. We are now living in the time when it is his time to act.

Something even more catastrophic than the global flood is coming and it will accomplish the same thing....a total cleansing of this earth....only permanently. That is my belief.

And this is a loving God?

Well you see, I believe that there are only two "gods" in this world competing for our worship. One of them is the only true God, (John 17:3) and the other is a chameleon, masquerading as any god you want him to be. The Bible says that he can 'transform himself into an angel of light' so people can easily be fooled. He is a god who will cater to your every whim, but lead you to nowhere but to death. He knows he cannot win, but he will take as many down with him as he can. Being forewarned is being forearmed.

I offer a thought question for you. Two gods, one good, one evil. Both theoretically have the ability to step in and stop a rape. One does, one does not. Which is the good and which is the evil, and why?

I believe it is how you interpret the exercise of his morality. You are looking for reasons not to find him moral and perhaps your gods are helping you do that......

You say that like I didn't desperately want to believe the Bible was true. I did. No one spends years studyiing Biblical languages if they aren't honestly searching for God. I wanted to believe in a good, benevolent, loving God. I mean, I hated the idea of eternal life, as the concept is completely revolting to me, but I accepted the idea. I wanted to see what you see, but there was just too much in the Bible that I could not get around. Too much stuff to just ignore because "cultural," when all of the Bible is supposed to be good for instruction.

Do you honestly think that this life is how God intended us to live?

I think a good God, a benevolent God, wouldn't have something as horrific as the Garden of Eden as the "perfect" setup.

Do you understand what happened in Eden to warrant the necessity for Jesus' sacrifce to even be required? The original purpose in putting humans on earth was not to train them for heaven. God already had a large family there. He put material creatures on this planet to enjoy life in his creation. He made one of them like himself to act as caretaker for the rest. They were endowed with his qualities so that they would act as his representatives....All he asked was that they obey him in one small but very important command.

But....they were influenced by a third party who made disobeying God seem like the right thing to do. Truth is, he wanted them to treat 'him' like a god....to believe him and to do what he said. By obeying him they set the wheels in motion for mankind to test drive free will in a whole new way....with no brakes. The life we have now is the consequence of their actions. Everything we do is a test of how we use this priceless gift.

Seeing the big picture give us a whole new perspective.....or at least it does for those who 'get it'.

You do realise that Judaism has no concept of original sin, and that the idea of original sin was not originally a Christian concept, right? Here's a quote from Justin Martyr --
We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishments, and chastisements, and good rewards, are rendered according to the merit of each man’s actions. Since if it be not so, but all things happen by fate, neither is anything at all in our own power. For if it be fated that this man, e.g., be good, and this other evil, neither is the former meritorious nor the latter to be blamed. And again, unless the human race have the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their actions, of whatever kind they be.

That is what the very earliest church leaders taught.

People today are not averse to sacrificing their children on the alter of war, are they? Political agendas dressed up with good propaganda always make people proud of their sacrifice.....what is the difference? Does the fact that they volunteer make it OK?
If the cause is seen as just, people will accept the sacrifice and praise it.

True, but people are not a god who claims to abhor human sacrifice, and then uses one later.

That's just the point. God is not cruel and he doesn't torture people in hell for all eternity. Death is all there is. There is nothing to fear if that is what you expect. I'm sure the atheists won't be disappointed, but I can't say the same for worshippers of false gods. There is no soul departing from the body at death to go anywhere, so that means that all who have died in ignorance will be sleeping peacefully in their graves, awaiting the promised resurrection (John 5:28129).....this is what the ancient Jews believed. (Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10)

I certainly don't fear death. The thing I liked least about any religious afterlife as I studied was continued existence after death.

 

[Deeje]

Well, most translations use the word "evil spirit of God," but given the Hebrew, I feel that cruel is closer. I Sam. 16: 14
יד וְרוּחַ יְהוָה סָרָה, מֵעִם שָׁאוּל; וּבִעֲתַתּוּ רוּחַ-רָעָה, מֵאֵת יְהוָה.
Now the spirit of the LORD had departed from Saul, and the evil spirit of the LORD terrified him.

Read that scripture again. Firstly, it says that God's spirit departed from Saul. This was Israel's first King and when he began a course of disobedience to his God, (Israel had been warned about what the downside of having a human king would mean for them, but they chose to have one anyway) God withdrew his holy spirit from this man who was then overtaken by his own mental illness. The scriptures outline what Saul's behavior led to. It was the classic behavior of a mentally ill man. I don't believe that God caused this, but he did not prevent it either. He allowed Saul's own "bad spirit" to overtake him, basically because he had no reason not to.

Are you suggesting that God has good spirits and evil spirits that he can interchangeably implant in people? Seriously?

Once God's spirit was withdrawn, Saul's mental illness took over his actions, which if you read the account, made him extremely unstable...even violent.....classic manic behavior.

Good then, that I don't use translations then, isn't it? And the word used in Hebrew is not protective jealousy.

I'm afraid you do. Most people don't read Hebrew and have to rely on translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into English (or any other language) to understand what was written. Are you a native Hebrew speaker?

According to Biblical usage, “jealousy” may be a positive or a negative quality or emotion. (Proverbs 14:30; Zechariah 1:14) The Hebrew noun qin·ʼahʹ variously means “insistence on exclusive devotion; toleration of no rivalry; zeal; ardor; jealousy [righteous or sinful]; envying.” The Greek zeʹlos has a similar meaning. (2 Corinthians 11:2; 12:20)

Jehovah describes himself as “a zealous God" which means he expects exclusive devotion.” (Exodus 20:5; Deuteronomy 4:24; 5:9; 6:15) He does not tolerate the worship of other gods. When Israel fell away to such worship, he punished them.

The Bible also says: “Jehovah, whose name is Jealous, he is a jealous God.” (Exodus 34:14)

The word "Jealous" here is "qanna'" which is a word that pertains only to God (according to Strongs)
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/Lexicon/Lexicon.cfm?strongs=H7067&t=NASB

This is not the envious, selfish jealousy of humans. It is a jealousy, a zeal or ardor for his holy name, concerning which he himself says: “and I will be jealous H7065 for My holy H6944 name. H8034.” (Ezekiel 39:25) That is protective jealousy.

None of that shows love or caring. That's rather more like wanting a pretty house when you play The Sims.

Through your lens perhaps....but certainly not through mine. If you do not see life itself as a gift, then you are behind the 8 ball to start with IMO. The negatives of this life do not outweigh the wonderful gifts that are all still there if you just look for them. "Counting your blessings" is a good thing to do, because focus on selfish concerns can cause them to become lost.

Do you believe God is omnipotent? If he is, and he does not stop horrible things, even the ones that just occur in his name, how can he be called good? How can a God who hardens hearts and chooses some people for salvation and not others? You said yourself it is partially his choice. He knows what it would take to convince everyone and does not do it. I cannot look at all the evil in nature, not even in man, and say that an omnipotent being is benevolent.

This is actually a typical response of those who have no idea what God is doing or why he is doing it.
Man, in the beginning chose to become self determined. He virtually told God he was not needed, so God stepped out of the picture and observed from the sidelines what he knew would happen all along.....that humans could not rule themselves independently of their Creator. He did not design them to. Humans have tried every form of self-government and religion they can dream up....and all of them have failed miserably. History keeps repeating because humans are slow learners...apparently.

What do you feel was the purpose of our creation, then?

Read Genesis and you will see. God never mentioned an "afterlife" of any description for humankind. The deal from the beginning was 'obey and live...disobey and die'...nothing more. The reason why that is, is because God never intended for humans to die. Every creature on this planet is mortal....humans are too but only they had access to "the tree of life".....the means to keep them alive forever. That was God's purpose in putting beings on earth who reflect his own qualities, to take care of everything he had made. But endowing them with free will was not without risks. So he allowed them to test drive it with one simple command that placed no hardship on them whatsoever.....'Eat whatever fruit you like, but don't touch that one...because it belongs to me'. Not at all difficult.
The seriousness of the penalty however, should have alerted them to the seriousness of the violation of that command. It led to death and a propensity to sin. IOW, humans would now "miss the mark" of their original perfection, passing on in their genetics something that has tainted and has plagued the human race ever since. (Romans 5:12)

Ah, my apologies, most people I debate with are trinitarians.

There is no trinity in the Bible. It is another adoption from paganism.

Actually, he rather changed a lot. Even just using the wrong bread at passover changes a lot if he's supposed to be sinless.

You have mentioned this before...it is nonsense. The Passover bread was prescribed in God's word, and was carefully observed by all Jews. No devout Jew would have violated it. (Exodus 12:19-20; Deuteronomy 16:3)
Are you suggesting that Jesus was not a devout Jew?

Oh, I have knowledge of it. I just didn't see the point. I rather see it not as an apocalyptic view, but as one shortly in the future from when he was preaching. He uses the wrong tenses in the primary sources for it to be apocalyptic. It's a nice thought, to be living in the End Times, but the words make no sense.

Perhaps you would like to share what you believe Jesus said about this time period being "fulfilled"?

The "Gentile Times" were to run from the time of the Babylonian domination over Israel to the present time. The march of those world powers was seen in Daniel's prophesy.....beginning with Babylon....to Medo-Persia......to Greece....to Rome...to Britain and then to the amalgamation of Britain and America. There are no other rulers before God brings in the rule of his Kingdom to crush them all out of existence. (Daniel 2:44) We are living in the "time of the end".

 

[Deeje]

And this is a loving God?

You bet! For the sake of the righteous, God will eliminate the wicked without reservation, for the simple reason that his will must be done "on earth as it is in heaven". That is what the Kingdom is for....to bring God's rulership back to this earth where it belongs. God has no place for rebels and dissenters. That is what this whole scenario is for....to separate the human race into "sheep and goats". This was to take place in 'the time of the end' when the good news was to be preached as "a witness to all the nations" before "the end" of this devilish system arrives. (Matthew 24:14; 1 John 5:19) This is the only "witness" or 'testimony' that those living in this "time of the end" will receive. There will not be any who have not taken sides on the issue of God's sovereignty when the end comes. Those who think that they are sitting on a fence, will soon discover that there is no fence. (Matthew 12:30)

I offer a thought question for you. Two gods, one good, one evil. Both theoretically have the ability to step in and stop a rape. One does, one does not. Which is the good and which is the evil, and why?

If that was the scenario, then the answer would be simple....but that is not how the story plays out.
There are two gods, but one is a pretender.....a usurper. The true God allows the usurper to be "god" for a short time (short in universal time that is) to demonstrate his complete ineptitude and to show humanity why it is important to obey their Creator. This way the wisdom of his word is proven and the need of humans to obey him without question, is reinforced. The whole human race is given opportunity to show him who they really are...without any interference from him in their choices. It will be all their own work.....caught in the act of being themselves. (Hebrews 4:12-13) No one today has an excuse for ignorance.

You say that like I didn't desperately want to believe the Bible was true. I did. No one spends years studyiing Biblical languages if they aren't honestly searching for God. I wanted to believe in a good, benevolent, loving God. Too much stuff to just ignore because "cultural," when all of the Bible is supposed to be good for instruction.

You have to view the Bible through a cultural lens. To impute today's standards on people who lived thousands of years ago is ridiculous. God was not going to interfere, remember? He allowed them to make their own decisions on what behavior was appropriate in the culture of the people at the time. Only Israel had God's laws and they alone were judged according to them. Only on rare occasions did the wickedness of men warrant God's intervention.

I mean, I hated the idea of eternal life, as the concept is completely revolting to me, but I accepted the idea. I wanted to see what you see, but there was just too much in the Bible that I could not get around.

Where did you go for guidance? what sources did you consult for information?

Can I ask what is so revolting about everlasting life? And where do you imagine it would be lived?

I think a good God, a benevolent God, wouldn't have something as horrific as the Garden of Eden as the "perfect" setup.

How was the Garden of Eden "horrific"? Tell me what sort of life God was offering humanity in exchange for their obedience and loyalty? You must be reading a different Bible to me.

You do realise that Judaism has no concept of original sin, and that the idea of original sin was not originally a Christian concept, right?

What is the concept of original sin?

Do you know about the "mystery" or the "sacred secret" that was revealed only in Christ? (1 Corinthians 2:6-8; 11-13)

It is knowledge that originates with God, but is withheld until his own time, and is then revealed only to those to whom he chooses to make it known.

The Greek word my·steʹri·on, translated "mystery" or “sacred secret,” and has reference primarily to that which is known by those who are granted such knowledge. The Jews proved unworthy to be given such knowledge. They were serial covenant breakers. (Matthew 23:37-39)

Here's a quote from Justin Martyr --
We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishments, and chastisements, and good rewards, are rendered according to the merit of each man’s actions. Since if it be not so, but all things happen by fate, neither is anything at all in our own power. For if it be fated that this man, e.g., be good, and this other evil, neither is the former meritorious nor the latter to be blamed. And again, unless the human race have the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their actions, of whatever kind they be.

Justin Martyr agrees with the Bible. We are all free willed beings and no person's life is pre-determined. There are two kinds of sin, according to the Bible....the imperfection in our own flesh (that we cannot help) leading us to make bad choices, and the sinful actions we choose to commit. (the ones we can help) Just because we have sinful inclinations, doesn't mean we have to act on them.
Jesus came to remove what causes the sinful inclinations and to forgive repentant ones who are genuinely sorry for the sins committed by the will of the flesh.

We are born as an 'unwritten book' and the person we become at adulthood is the result of what is filled in on the pages of that book....some of it is written by our genetics and some is written by the people and experiences in our lives. Each one has choices to make regarding the spirituality that is inherent in mankind. It is either nurtured and it grows, or it is ignored and it withers and dies. God has nothing to do with the person we are. Life experiences shape who we become, but the heart of individuals is the important part of our personality. No external experience can alter the heart of a person....only God can see that....and 'draws' those ones to his truth.

That is what the very earliest church leaders taught.

I have little interest in what the early church leaders taught. The "weeds" of Jesus illustration were sown very early in the piece. I believe that Christianity was corrupted by men in those early centuries and was never accepted by either God or his Christ. When Jesus says he "never knew" "many" who claim him as their "Lord", he means that he has never recognized them as his own...ever. (Matthew 7:21-23)

True, but people are not a god who claims to abhor human sacrifice, and then uses one later.

Jesus is the "redeemer" and if you know about Jewish law, then you will know what that means.

I certainly don't fear death. The thing I liked least about any religious afterlife as I studied was continued existence after death.

Well, this is the good thing....those who have no desire to live forever won't have to. Those who don't want to live under the rule of God's kingdom won't either. So even the heathens will be granted their request. How could God be any fairer than that? Everyone gets what they want....or what they deserve.

 

[Gallowglass]

Read that scripture again. Firstly, it says that God's spirit departed from Saul. This was Israel's first King and when he began a course of disobedience to his God, (Israel had been warned about what the downside of having a human king would mean for them, but they chose to have one anyway) God withdrew his holy spirit from this man who was then overtaken by his own mental illness. The scriptures outline what Saul's behavior led to. It was the classic behavior of a mentally ill man. I don't believe that God caused this, but he did not prevent it either. He allowed Saul's own "bad spirit" to overtake him, basically because he had no reason not to.

Are you suggesting that God has good spirits and evil spirits that he can interchangeably implant in people? Seriously?

Once God's spirit was withdrawn, Saul's mental illness took over his actions, which if you read the account, made him extremely unstable...even violent.....classic manic behavior.

That is what the scripture says. I put the Hebrew right up there for you to read. You can dislike it if you wish, but it is right there. Let me help you though. I will isolate it for you.

רעה אלהים רוח
Transliterated this is ruach Elohim raah

Now, Ruach is spirit. Elohim you probably know, raah is evil.

I'm afraid you do. Most people don't read Hebrew and have to rely on translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into English (or any other language) to understand what was written. Are you a native Hebrew speaker?

No. I have been studying Biblical languages for twenty-three years now. Even if I was a native Hebrew speaker, Biblical Hebrew and Modern Hebrew are quite different, though related. Even Hebrew-speaking Jews in Israel sometimes have trouble when called to the Bimah because of the differences. I can get along fine in Israel or Greece though. I can get through.

According to Biblical usage, “jealousy” may be a positive or a negative quality or emotion. (Proverbs 14:30; Zechariah 1:14) The Hebrew noun qin·ʼahʹ variously means “insistence on exclusive devotion; toleration of no rivalry; zeal; ardor; jealousy [righteous or sinful]; envying.” The Greek zeʹlos has a similar meaning. (2 Corinthians 11:2; 12:20)

Jehovah describes himself as “a zealous God" which means he expects exclusive devotion.” (Exodus 20:5; Deuteronomy 4:24; 5:9; 6:15) He does not tolerate the worship of other gods. When Israel fell away to such worship, he punished them.

The Bible also says: “Jehovah, whose name is Jealous, he is a jealous God.” (Exodus 34:14)

The word "Jealous" here is "qanna'" which is a word that pertains only to God (according to Strongs)
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/Lexicon/Lexicon.cfm?strongs=H7067&t=NASB

This is not the envious, selfish jealousy of humans. It is a jealousy, a zeal or ardor for his holy name, concerning which he himself says: “and I will be jealous H7065 for My holy H6944 name. H8034.” (Ezekiel 39:25) That is protective jealousy.

Actually, it's not qana is actually derived from a proto-semitic root which means to flush red with emotion, specifically anger. This is why you can find qana used in Hebrew to refer to the jealousy of abusive relationships in modern Hebrew. It's also considered negative jealousy in I Kings 19:9-10, when Elijah is complaining. And why God responds to him with "Who do you think you are?”

Through your lens perhaps....but certainly not through mine. If you do not see life itself as a gift, then you are behind the 8 ball to start with IMO. The negatives of this life do not outweigh the wonderful gifts that are all still there if you just look for them. "Counting your blessings" is a good thing to do, because focus on selfish concerns can cause them to become lost.

Who says that my focus is selfish? I have a decent life. I am exceedingly lucky. But counting my blessings does not take away from the horrors elsewhere in this world, and to me, counting my blessings seems exceedingly selfish. I would rather focus on positive change for the whole.

This is actually a typical response of those who have no idea what God is doing or why he is doing it.
Man, in the beginning chose to become self determined. He virtually told God he was not needed, so God stepped out of the picture and observed from the sidelines what he knew would happen all along.....that humans could not rule themselves independently of their Creator. He did not design them to. Humans have tried every form of self-government and religion they can dream up....and all of them have failed miserably. History keeps repeating because humans are slow learners...apparently.

Then God is cruel to allow him to choose without all the information. Remember, Adam didn't know right from wrong. He had no idea it was wrong to disobey.

Read Genesis and you will see. God never mentioned an "afterlife" of any description for humankind. The deal from the beginning was 'obey and live...disobey and die'...nothing more. The reason why that is, is because God never intended for humans to die. Every creature on this planet is mortal....humans are too but only they had access to "the tree of life".....the means to keep them alive forever. That was God's purpose in putting beings on earth who reflect his own qualities, to take care of everything he had made. But endowing them with free will was not without risks. So he allowed them to test drive it with one simple command that placed no hardship on them whatsoever.....'Eat whatever fruit you like, but don't touch that one...because it belongs to me'. Not at all difficult.
The seriousness of the penalty however, should have alerted them to the seriousness of the violation of that command. It led to death and a propensity to sin. IOW, humans would now "miss the mark" of their original perfection, passing on in their genetics something that has tainted and has plagued the human race ever since. (Romans 5:12)

But they could not know it was wrong. They had no sense of good or evil.

You have mentioned this before...it is nonsense. The Passover bread was prescribed in God's word, and was carefully observed by all Jews. No devout Jew would have violated it. (Exodus 12:19-20; Deuteronomy 16:3)
Are you suggesting that Jesus was not a devout Jew?

I am saying that the primary sources, the earliest versions of the Bible that we have, correctly describe Passover as the Feast of Unleavened Bread (azumos) and yet, mere sentences later, during the last supper, when Jesus takes the bread up, it is not unleavened bread (azumos) but leavened bread (artos.)
Here's the verses:
Matthew 26:17
τη δε πρωτη των [αζυμων] προϲηλ θον οι μαθηται τω ιυ λεγοντεϲ που θελιϲ ετοιμαϲω μεν ϲοι φαγιν το παϲχα

And on the first day of the [unleavened bread] the disciples came to Jesus, saying: Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the Passover?

Then we move on to Matthew 26:26, where the problem comes in.
ϲθιοντων δε αυτων λαβων ο ιϲ [αρτον] και ευλογηϲαϲ εκλαϲεν και εδι δου τοιϲ μαθητεϲ ειπεν λαβετε φα γετε τουτο εϲτιν το ϲωμα μου

But as they were eating, Jesus took [bread] and having blessed he broke, and giving to the disciples he said: Take, eat: This is my body.

Now, you don't have to believe just me! Here is a link to primary sources for the early codexes: http://www.tanachonline.org/codex-vaticanus-and-codex-sinaiticus-septuagint-manuscripts-online/

And here is Matthew 26:17 on BibleGateway in Greek, where they break down every word for you:
http://biblehub.com/text/matthew/26-17.htm
And likewise their breakdown of Matthew 26:26. I think you can at least agree that I'm not handing you un-Christian sources.
http://biblehub.com/text/matthew/26-26.htm

 

[Gallowglass]

Perhaps you would like to share what you believe Jesus said about this time period being "fulfilled"?

I believe it was a reference to the two kings of whom Israel had a fear in Isaiah. He was drawing on imagery from the Tanakh.

You bet! For the sake of the righteous, God will eliminate the wicked without reservation, for the simple reason that his will must be done "on earth as it is in heaven". That is what the Kingdom is for....to bring God's rulership back to this earth where it belongs. God has no place for rebels and dissenters. That is what this whole scenario is for....to separate the human race into "sheep and goats". This was to take place in 'the time of the end' when the good news was to be preached as "a witness to all the nations" before "the end" of this devilish system arrives. (Matthew 24:14; 1 John 5:19) This is the only "witness" or 'testimony' that those living in this "time of the end" will receive. There will not be any who have not taken sides on the issue of God's sovereignty when the end comes. Those who think that they are sitting on a fence, will soon discover that there is no fence. (Matthew 12:30)

So...he's a totalitarian ruler, who will destroy people because he did not choose them to believe. And how do the righteous feel about this?

If that was the scenario, then the answer would be simple....but that is not how the story plays out.

There are two gods, but one is a pretender.....a usurper. The true God allows the usurper to be "god" for a short time (short in universal time that is) to demonstrate his complete ineptitude and to show humanity why it is important to obey their Creator. This way the wisdom of his word is proven and the need of humans to obey him without question, is reinforced. The whole human race is given opportunity to show him who they really are...without any interference from him in their choices. It will be all their own work.....caught in the act of being themselves. (Hebrews 4:12-13) No one today has an excuse for ignorance.

So you admit that if that scenario happened, the victim would be right to choose the god that acted? All the other stuff aside, in that particular scenario, the would-be victim would be right.

You have to view the Bible through a cultural lens. To impute today's standards on people who lived thousands of years ago is ridiculous. God was not going to interfere, remember? He allowed them to make their own decisions on what behavior was appropriate in the culture of the people at the time. Only Israel had God's laws and they alone were judged according to them. Only on rare occasions did the wickedness of men warrant God's intervention.

And I largely do. You make a good point, however. Israel was specifically given God's laws. Laws that were unpopular at the time, correct? Things that were strange and weird for the area, like kashrut and circumcision. Things that were never forbidden or outlawed before then. Heck, Israel's laws set up the first socialistic society, with the requirement to leave grain for the poor and the widows to glean. So why couldn't God say 'don't keep slaves.'? He forbids loads fo other things that were culturally acceptable and normal.

What is the concept of original sin?

That we inherit the sin of Adam.

Jesus is the "redeemer" and if you know about Jewish law, then you will know what that means.

According to Jewish law, he would have been markedly unfit, even if they did accept human sacrifice. He didn't have the right bloodline to be the messiah, he was not unblemished, he was not unblooded, he didn't have children, etc.

Well, this is the good thing....those who have no desire to live forever won't have to. Those who don't want to live under the rule of God's kingdom won't either. So even the heathens will be granted their request. How could God be any fairer than that? Everyone gets what they want....or what they deserve.

Arguable. Unless you think there are unforgivable sins?

 

[Deeje]

That is what the scripture says. I put the Hebrew right up there for you to read. You can dislike it if you wish, but it is right there. Let me help you though. I will isolate it for you.

רעה אלהים רוח
Transliterated this is ruach Elohim raah

Now, Ruach is spirit. Elohim you probably know, raah is evil.

Do you honestly believe that God has both good and evil spirits that he sends to people interchangeably to make them act in a good way or a bad way? If this is what you think God does, then no wonder you despise him.

You give me "words" as if there are no nuances or applications in the whole narrative that allow for the words to have a broader meaning. I see that you do this quite a bit. Use scripture to interpret scripture. God doesn't have evil spirits to do his bidding. Why would he?

Even if I was a native Hebrew speaker, Biblical Hebrew and Modern Hebrew are quite different, though related. Even Hebrew-speaking Jews in Israel sometimes have trouble when called to the Bimah because of the differences.

That speaks volumes.

Who says that my focus is selfish? I have a decent life. I am exceedingly lucky. But counting my blessings does not take away from the horrors elsewhere in this world, and to me, counting my blessings seems exceedingly selfish. I would rather focus on positive change for the whole.

I was speaking generally, not about you specifically. People today do not count their blessings...they would rather whine about their perceived deficiencies.

It amazes me though, to think that you see yourself as more moral than the Creator....that you would "rather focus on positive change for the whole"....what on earth do you think God is doing? You seem to see him as some kind of "Wizard of Oz" character who has flaws that you need to expose. That because of his perceived failings, you could somehow do a better job....? Really?

What if your whole attitude has been shaped by subtle propaganda from the pretender....it worked for Eve, which is why he targeted her. His main target was the man. How did he get Adam to break God's law? He used the persuasive power of the woman. As you may know, the power of suggestion is used widely in the advertising industry today, because if you suggest something to people in a positive way, (no matter how worthless it may be) and if it comes from someone you judge as accredited, they will accept it as truth.
The same is true of "perception management" which is used politically to sway people's opinions on a range of issues from government policy, going to war, or setting up agencies to take care of the big issues. No matter how pathetic the result, people will support what they have been led to believe is right.

Then God is cruel to allow him to choose without all the information. Remember, Adam didn't know right from wrong. He had no idea it was wrong to disobey.

This is where you are misinformed. Adam knew right from wrong and good from evil, "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" represented God's right to distinguish between the two. Because no evil had ever presented itself to humans, they had never 'experienced' evil. If they had continued to obey their Creator, they never would have known what evil was from their own experience. I guess you could say we humans can know a lot about evil things because of what others do, yet many of us have never experienced it ourselves. Still, we see the consequences of the evil practiced in this world and thankfully as decent people, we are repelled by it. We see a complete shift in what is considered good and evil in today's world. (Isaiah 5:20)

But they could not know it was wrong. They had no sense of good or evil.

They knew enough about their God to know that they should respect what was his. As their Sovereign Ruler, they were obligated to obey his commands. Partaking of that fruit was stealing from the one who had provided them with everything they could possibly need. How ungrateful!

The tree in the garden was a simple test, creating no hardship at all....and yet a rebel spirit who was in a guardianship position, saw an opportunity to become a god to these lower beings. So, the first rebel was not human. The angel that turned himself into satan the devil, hijacked the human race for his own selfish ambitions and because free will was given to all of his intelligent creation, God had to deal with its abuse in both realms now.

Instead of just eliminating the three trouble makers, God decided to use the situation as an object lesson for all his 'children', thereby creating precedents that would be recorded in the annals of history for all time to come. At the end of this lesson, no rebel (either in heaven or on earth) will ever be able to derail God's plans again. If God has plans to populate the rest of the Universe, then there will no impediment to that for all eternity.

Free will is a gift and it was meant to be used for the benefit of all....but when it was abused, it became a curse. Only by allowing humans to drive their own will independently of God, could he see who would use it responsibly and who would use it to force their will on others. Every human suffering is the result of the abuse of free will...either their own, or from the consequences of others abusing theirs.

I am saying that the primary sources, the earliest versions of the Bible that we have, correctly describe Passover as the Feast of Unleavened Bread (azumos) and yet, mere sentences later, during the last supper, when Jesus takes the bread up, it is not unleavened bread (azumos) but leavened bread (artos.)

You are again taking one word and ignoring the rest of scripture because you think it gives you ammunition to reject the Creator. That is your prerogative, of course, but you will never be able to say that you weren't told the truth. Jesus, was a devout Jew among other devout Jews.....doesn't it occur to you that a loud complaint might have been heard if someone claiming to be the Messiah used the wrong bread at the Passover?

The unleavened bread was used because the Passover was a yearly reminder of their hasty deliverance from slavery in Egypt. There was no time to wait for the yeast to make the bread rise...it was called "the bread of affliction" and "leaven" came to be used symbolically for sin in Jesus' teachings. He was the real "Passover Lamb". (John 1:29)

He used unleavened bread to symbolize his sinless body given in behalf of his disciples. The wine was used to symbolize his blood, which blood sacrifices in Israel were used for the temporary forgiveness of sins. Jesus' blood was the permanent one.(1 Peter 3:18)

I am really sorry that you have been misled about so many things, and I am trying to see why you would choose your gods over the Creator? What future is there in worshipping your gods?


I noticed that you dodged these questions.....

Can I ask what is so revolting about everlasting life? And where do you imagine it would be lived?

How was the Garden of Eden "horrific"? Tell me what sort of life God was offering humanity in exchange for their obedience and loyalty? You must be reading a different Bible to me.

Is there a reason? I am interested in your response to these.

 

[Deeje]

I believe it was a reference to the two kings of whom Israel had a fear in Isaiah. He was drawing on imagery from the Tanakh.

Care to give us details? How do the "GentileTimes" relate to those two kings.What imagery from the Tanach are you referring to?

So...he's a totalitarian ruler, who will destroy people because he did not choose them to believe. And how do the righteous feel about this?

No.... I'm afraid you have that all twisted. (not surprisingly) He is a benevolent dictator. There is a big difference.
Are parents totalitarian rulers over their children? Should they be? Don't parents always have their children's best interests at heart? When children do wrong, should discipline be administered by a loving parent? Should it be painful in order to teach them not to repeat the action? Discipline is a generational thing. Corporal punishment inflicted physical pain in times past to teach a lesson, based on aversion therapy. Discipline today is nothing like what it used to be. Undisciplined children cause their parents no end of trouble, but somehow we must not inflict pain on them because it's now called child abuse. It's OK for them to inflict no end of emotional pain and anguish on their parents who can no longer lay a hand on them.....so who is happy with that situation? No guesses.

So you admit that if that scenario happened, the victim would be right to choose the god that acted? All the other stuff aside, in that particular scenario, the would-be victim would be right.

No, I am admitting no such thing. Your scenario has two equal gods. There is no equality in the Biblical scenario.
The pretender is given relatively free reign to prove that humankind are better off under his rulership. (1 John 5:19)

He has failed miserably in that quest so far. His success lies in making people think that this mess he created is all God's fault. The pretender acts, whilst the true God responds. Every human on earth is a victim of the pretender's rulership, but the Kingdom that Jesus taught us to pray for will end with God's will being "done on earth as it is in heaven"....all will return to the Edenic conditions that God created in the beginning. Death and sin, suffering and pain will be no more. (Revelation 21:2-4)

Israel was specifically given God's laws. Laws that were unpopular at the time, correct? Things that were strange and weird for the area, like kashrut and circumcision. Things that were never forbidden or outlawed before then. Heck, Israel's laws set up the first socialistic society, with the requirement to leave grain for the poor and the widows to glean. So why couldn't God say 'don't keep slaves.'? He forbids loads fo other things that were culturally acceptable and normal.

And only in later centuries was the wisdom of many of God's laws understood. Apart from identifying a Jewish male, even circumcision has its benefits hygienically speaking.

Slavery in Israel was not without laws governing their treatment. A family member, sold into slavery to pay a debt was obviously a hard decision for any parent, but an older child would appreciate that it freed the father to care for the rest of his family. The one who went into service was provided with food clothing and shelter, so their service was not without merits. There was no social security back then. If they didn't work, they didn't eat. (2 Thessalonians 3:10)

That we inherit the sin of Adam.

The Bible says we inherited sin from Adam. (Romans 5:12) How else do you explain it? Did God create humans with defects? Why would he make them in his own image if he wasn't superior to them?
If they were born only to live a short difficult life, reproduce and then die, what was the point of that exercise? To have children only to repeat the process? What kind of a god would do that?

According to Jewish law, he would have been markedly unfit, even if they did accept human sacrifice. He didn't have the right bloodline to be the messiah, he was not unblemished, he was not unblooded, he didn't have children, etc.

And you got this from Jewish sources? That's a bit like asking Judas what kind of a person Jesus was?
Would you like someone to go to your enemy to ascertain what kind of person you are?

No one fulfilled the Messianic prophesies more than Jesus did. The Jews cannot acknowledge that because that would make them murderers of their own Messiah! Unthinkable! Yet that is what the teachings of the Christian scriptures reveal.
Jesus' words addressed to them say it all.....

"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the killer of the prophets and stoner of those sent to her—how often I wanted to gather your children together the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings! But you did not want it. 38 Look! Your house is abandoned to you. 39 For I say to you, you will by no means see me from now until you say, ‘Blessed is the one who comes in Jehovah’s name!’”

Have the Jews as a nation ever acknowledged the one who came in the name of Jehovah? (YHWH) Are they ever likely to? They can't even bring themselves to utter his name. No Bible writer ever had a problem with the reverential mention of God's name.

To modern Jews, the Messiah is still somewhere in the future.....many have given up waiting.There are those who do accept that Jesus was the one, but they refuse to be called Christians.

Arguable. Unless you think there are unforgivable sins?

Can sin ever be unforgivable? Yes, Jesus said....

"Truly I say to you that all things will be forgiven the sons of men, no matter what sins they commit and what blasphemies they speak. 29 But whoever blasphemes against the holy spirit has no forgiveness forever but is guilty of everlasting sin.” (Mark 3:28-29)

Judas would have been guilty of this kind of sin. He was in constant company with the son of God and saw and participated in the works of God's spirit, yet he allowed satan to corrupt his heart.

In the final judgment however, at the conclusion of this system of things Jesus told John.....

"But as for the cowards and those without faith and those who are disgusting in their filth and murderers and the sexually immoral and those practicing spiritism and idolaters and all the liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur. This means the second death.” (Revelation 21:8)

The "lake of fire" is the symbol of the "second death". (It corresponds to "gehenna") The first death allows individuals to sleep in their graves and be resurrected....righteous ones to life and unrighteous ones for a period of judgment. (John 5:28-29)

But the second death has no resurrection. It is the opposite of everlasting life....which is everlasting death.

Those who face the finale in this "time of the end" if they are unrepentantly guilty of the kinds of sin mentioned in the Revelation, will have their lives taken from them, permanently. They will have no place in the "the new heaven" or "the new earth". (2 Peter 3:13) Their eviction will be permanent.

"For if we practice sin willfully after having received the accurate knowledge of the truth, there is no longer any sacrifice for sins left, but there is a certain fearful expectation of judgment and a burning indignation that is going to consume those in opposition." (Hebrews 10:26-27)

People can evaluate this on a 'take it or leave it' basis. They either accept what God is offering on his terms, or they can reject it all, and go on their merry way. God does not require our approval to carry out his will.

 

[Gallowglass]

Do you honestly believe that God has both good and evil spirits that he sends to people interchangeably to make them act in a good way or a bad way? If this is what you think God does, then no wonder you despise him.

You give me "words" as if there are no nuances or applications in the whole narrative that allow for the words to have a broader meaning. I see that you do this quite a bit. Use scripture to interpret scripture. God doesn't have evil spirits to do his bidding. Why would he?

There is quite a bit of nuance. I could right for an hour on why the word choices should amount to cruel over evil. There are pages that can be written on those three words -- but none of those nuances make the Hebrew, the original Biblical Hebrew, say that those spirits come anywhere but from God.

This is not the only place this occurs. In I Kings 22:23 we see the "lying spirit of God" and they talk about this in 2 Chronicles, where we see the behind the scenes and God actively telling the spirit to go.
וְעַתָּה, הִנֵּה נָתַן יְהוָה רוּחַ שֶׁקֶר, בְּפִי, כָּל-נְבִיאֶיךָ אֵלֶּה;
וַיהוָה, דִּבֶּר עָלֶיךָ רָעָה.
Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets; and the LORD hath spoken evil concerning thee.' I Kings 22:23

That speaks volumes. But I don't know why you are surprised. After all, if you judge scripture by scripture, you see things like this again. If you look at the exodus, there are many times when Pharaoh hardens his heart, but there are a number of times where God explicitly says that he hardened Pharaoh's heart, mostly so he could show off.

And the LORD said unto Moses: 'Go in unto Pharaoh; for I have hardened his heart, and the heart of his servants, that I might show these My signs in the midst of them; and that thou mayest tell in the ears of thy son, and of thy son's son, what I have wrought upon Egypt, and My signs which I have done among them; that ye may know that I am the LORD.' (Exodus 10:1-2.)

Now, I might be able to overlook this, maybe, because the last verse of 9 says that Pharaoh hardened his heart himself, depending on interpretation.

However in 10:20, it full-on says that time it is God that does the hardening.
But the LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart, and he did not let the children of Israel go.
And again in 10:27, where you see he is about to let them go, with what could amount to restitution, and once again, God hardens his heart. Not Pharaoh, like in the earlier verses, but God alone.

Look at Exodus 11. We get the warning about the final plague. This is right after God alone hardens Pharaoh's heart. What do we see?

And the LORD said unto Moses: 'Pharaoh will not hearken unto you; that My wonders may be multiplied in the land of Egypt.' And Moses and Aaron did all these wonders before Pharaoh; and the LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart, and he did not let the children of Israel go out of his land.

So why would he do such things? To show his power. He says it. So that neither the Egyptians or the Israelites would be able to doubt. However, in chapter 10, we see that if God let it be, if he had not done the hardening, as scripture says he does, they would have been released earlier, because in these later chapters, it is not "and Pharaoh hardened his heart."

I was speaking generally, not about you specifically. People today do not count their blessings...they would rather whine about their perceived deficiencies.

I agree. That is largely very annoying and useless.

It amazes me though, to think that you see yourself as more moral than the Creator....that you would "rather focus on positive change for the whole"....what on earth do you think God is doing? You seem to see him as some kind of "Wizard of Oz" character who has flaws that you need to expose. That because of his perceived failings, you could somehow do a better job....? Really?

I think you misunderstand my stance, or at least what I am trying to say. I find God, as portrayed in the Bible, to be immoral. Because of many of his actions, I would find it difficult to worship him. I certainly could not trust Him. I judge Him by the book he gave us. Do I think I could do better? No. I, however, would never claim to be perfect, or want anyone to worship me. I would never want the power of a deity, because I know that power can corrupt, and I do not feel I am necessarily good enough that I would not be corrupted.

Now, do I believe a god can make mistakes, and then repent of those actions? Yes. Would I judge a deity for those actions? Maybe, depending on the severity, but trying to make things right goes a long way. Now God, in the Bible, claims to be perfect. He claims to make no mistakes. So therefore, he must consider the things done good and moral. The only time he repents of his actions is after the flood.

Creating something is a responsibility. That does not make us property. That does not mean we cannot judge what we are given to judge by. There's a very interesting episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation, where a human says that the android on the Enterprise must be refitted. That it is a thing, created by man, it is not a person, but property. They create this whole court case around it. Captain Picard says a very interesting thing. He says that eventually someone will make another android, and that we will be judged by how we treat it. We were given the Bible to know God, or to know his actions and choices. We have to look at it and judge from it.

What if your whole attitude has been shaped by subtle propaganda from the pretender....it worked for Eve, which is why he targeted her. His main target was the man. How did he get Adam to break God's law? He used the persuasive power of the woman. As you may know, the power of suggestion is used widely in the advertising industry today, because if you suggest something to people in a positive way, (no matter how worthless it may be) and if it comes from someone you judge as accredited, they will accept it as truth.
The same is true of "perception management" which is used politically to sway people's opinions on a range of issues from government policy, going to war, or setting up agencies to take care of the big issues. No matter how pathetic the result, people will support what they have been led to believe is right.

What propaganda? Have I quoted anything about God outside of scripture? Is the Bible now propaganda of the pretender?

 

[Gallowglass]

This is where you are misinformed. Adam knew right from wrong and good from evil, "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" represented God's right to distinguish between the two. Because no evil had ever presented itself to humans, they had never 'experienced' evil. If they had continued to obey their Creator, they never would have known what evil was from their own experience. I guess you could say we humans can know a lot about evil things because of what others do, yet many of us have never experienced it ourselves. Still, we see the consequences of the evil practiced in this world and thankfully as decent people, we are repelled by it. We see a complete shift in what is considered good and evil in today's world. (Isaiah 5:20)

They knew enough about their God to know that they should respect what was his. As their Sovereign Ruler, they were obligated to obey his commands. Partaking of that fruit was stealing from the one who had provided them with everything they could possibly need. How ungrateful!

Where do you get that information? It certainly isn't in scripture. How could they know? You said yourself they had never experienced evil. Someone who has never experienced evil has no concept of it.

The tree in the garden was a simple test, creating no hardship at all....and yet a rebel spirit who was in a guardianship position, saw an opportunity to become a god to these lower beings. So, the first rebel was not human. The angel that turned himself into satan the devil, hijacked the human race for his own selfish ambitions and because free will was given to all of his intelligent creation, God had to deal with its abuse in both realms now.

Instead of just eliminating the three trouble makers, God decided to use the situation as an object lesson for all his 'children', thereby creating precedents that would be recorded in the annals of history for all time to come. At the end of this lesson, no rebel (either in heaven or on earth) will ever be able to derail God's plans again. If God has plans to populate the rest of the Universe, then there will no impediment to that for all eternity.

Free will is a gift and it was meant to be used for the benefit of all....but when it was abused, it became a curse. Only by allowing humans to drive their own will independently of God, could he see who would use it responsibly and who would use it to force their will on others. Every human suffering is the result of the abuse of free will...either their own, or from the consequences of others abusing theirs.

How does this make God good?

You are again taking one word and ignoring the rest of scripture because you think it gives you ammunition to reject the Creator. That is your prerogative, of course, but you will never be able to say that you weren't told the truth. Jesus, was a devout Jew among other devout Jews.....doesn't it occur to you that a loud complaint might have been heard if someone claiming to be the Messiah used the wrong bread at the Passover?

ANd yet, scripture tells us he did. And who would complain? There were only twelve others in the room. Twelve others who had followed him through many things. Who believed him divine or blessed by it.

The unleavened bread was used because the Passover was a yearly reminder of their hasty deliverance from slavery in Egypt. There was no time to wait for the yeast to make the bread rise...it was called "the bread of affliction" and "leaven" came to be used symbolically for sin in Jesus' teachings. He was the real "Passover Lamb". (John 1:29)

He used unleavened bread to symbolize his sinless body given in behalf of his disciples. The wine was used to symbolize his blood, which blood sacrifices in Israel were used for the temporary forgiveness of sins. Jesus' blood was the permanent one.(1 Peter 3:18)

But he did not use unleavened bread. The scripture explicitly tells us that he did not.

I am really sorry that you have been misled about so many things, and I am trying to see why you would choose your gods over the Creator? What future is there in worshipping your gods?

I don't necessarily understand the question. What do you mean by what future? This isn't me deflecting, I'm tuly trying to understand what you mean by what future. Do you mean the afterlife?

I noticed that you dodged these questions.....

Is there a reason? I am interested in your response to these.

Honestly? I missed them. It's a bit wall-of-text with our posts. I'll address them now.

Can I ask what is so revolting about everlasting life? And where do you imagine it would be lived?

It doesn't matter where it would be lived, really. The idea of existence, of any life, just going on and on and on and on ...what is the point? What growth would there be? How could we learn? And even if we had the chance to screw up and make mistakes and learn, again, just the fact that there would be no respite seems utterly, completely torturous.

How was the Garden of Eden "horrific"? Tell me what sort of life God was offering humanity in exchange for their obedience and loyalty? You must be reading a different Bible to me.

They are just handed paradise. A perfect garden. Adam is literally handed his soul mate. They are given everything.

 

[Gallowglass]

Care to give us details? How do the "GentileTimes" relate to those two kings.What imagery from the Tanach are you referring to?

Jesus is referring to the Roman Empire, and to bot the Herods and the Emperor above him. He was referring to the rule over Israel by Gentiles, and the Immanuel prophecy in Isaiah, and the historical destruction in that period of Ephraim and Syria. Israel under the Jews as a pure Jewish state has always been referred to as the land of milk and honey, or the land of curds and honey. It was a reference any Jew of the time would have gotten.

No.... I'm afraid you have that all twisted. (not surprisingly) He is a benevolent dictator. There is a big difference.
Are parents totalitarian rulers over their children? Should they be? Don't parents always have their children's best interests at heart? When children do wrong, should discipline be administered by a loving parent? Should it be painful in order to teach them not to repeat the action? Discipline is a generational thing. Corporal punishment inflicted physical pain in times past to teach a lesson, based on aversion therapy. Discipline today is nothing like what it used to be. Undisciplined children cause their parents no end of trouble, but somehow we must not inflict pain on them because it's now called child abuse. It's OK for them to inflict no end of emotional pain and anguish on their parents who can no longer lay a hand on them.....so who is happy with that situation? No guesses.

Wow. I don't know where to start, the fact that you're suggesting that parents should be benevolent dictators, the part where you suggest this is a good thing, the part where you suggest that all corporeal punishment is child abuse when it's not, or the idea that you seem to think corporeal punishment is the only effective form of discipline. I'm just going to let this here for now, because I need to think over how to respond to that.

No, I am admitting no such thing. Your scenario has two equal gods. There is no equality in the Biblical scenario.
The pretender is given relatively free reign to prove that humankind are better off under his rulership. (1 John 5:19)

He has failed miserably in that quest so far. His success lies in making people think that this mess he created is all God's fault. The pretender acts, whilst the true God responds. Every human on earth is a victim of the pretender's rulership, but the Kingdom that Jesus taught us to pray for will end with God's will being "done on earth as it is in heaven"....all will return to the Edenic conditions that God created in the beginning. Death and sin, suffering and pain will be no more. (Revelation 21:2-4)

What is the purpose of such a life as you are suggesting? What's the point? What kind of people would we be?

And only in later centuries was the wisdom of many of God's laws understood. Apart from identifying a Jewish male, even circumcision has its benefits hygienically speaking.

Slavery in Israel was not without laws governing their treatment. A family member, sold into slavery to pay a debt was obviously a hard decision for any parent, but an older child would appreciate that it freed the father to care for the rest of his family. The one who went into service was provided with food clothing and shelter, so their service was not without merits. There was no social security back then. If they didn't work, they didn't eat. (2 Thessalonians 3:10)

But the laws still allowed it. Israel had laws governing how to feed and care for the poor. It's right there in the Tanakh. In a very real way, they did have "social security." The "If they didn't work, they didn't eat," only applied to later societies which had either been conquered or fallen away from the law. Look at the story of Ruth. Boaz literally was legally required to leave grain for the poor, the unemployed, those who couldn't feed their families or themselves to glean. We're talking about the God who sent manna and birds every day in the wilderness. of course he gave options for those who could not work.

The Bible says we inherited sin from Adam. (Romans 5:12) How else do you explain it? Did God create humans with defects? Why would he make them in his own image if he wasn't superior to them?
If they were born only to live a short difficult life, reproduce and then die, what was the point of that exercise? To have children only to repeat the process? What kind of a god would do that?

Most interpret it as the curse of the condition of the world, the lack of Eden.

To learn, to grow, to become better. To experience a great many things an see how those things change us.

And you got this from Jewish sources? That's a bit like asking Judas what kind of a person Jesus was?

Not in reference to Jesus. That would be quite ridiculous. No, I studied what the Jews consider the messianic prophecies.

No one fulfilled the Messianic prophesies more than Jesus did.

So why was he from a bloodline cursed by God to never prosper in Israel? I would say bearing the Messiah would be a great boon to any family line.


Without quoting a million more times on the secondary part, thank you for sharing your views. It is quite educational as to the way you think.

 

[Deeje]

These responses are getting longer and longer, but they are educational, I feel.

There is quite a bit of nuance. I could right for an hour on why the word choices should amount to cruel over evil. There are pages that can be written on those three words -- but none of those nuances make the Hebrew, the original Biblical Hebrew, say that those spirits come anywhere but from God.

There are times in scripture where God is spoken of as the doer of some action, when he merely predicted it.

At Isaiah 6:9, 10, for example, where Jehovah appears to Isaiah and says.... “Go, and say to this people:

‘You will hear again and again, But you will not understand;
You will see again and again, But you will not get any knowledge.’

Make the heart of this people unreceptive, Make their ears unresponsive,
And paste their eyes together, So that they may not see with their eyes
And hear with their ears, So that their heart may not understand
And they may not turn back and be healed.”

Now, God did not mean for Isaiah to actually go and fatten their hearts and stop up their ears and close their eyes to forestall any repentance; but he was predicting that that would be the effect of the message that Isaiah had been commanded to go tell the people, that the people themselves would show closed eyes and unhearing ears and fatty hearts, that they would not repent and turn to Jehovah for healing spiritually.

If you look at the exodus, there are many times when Pharaoh hardens his heart, but there are a number of times where God explicitly says that he hardened Pharaoh's heart, mostly so he could show off.

That rather controversial text says Jehovah hardened the heart of Pharaoh. But did he?

He said: “I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt. But Pharaoh shall not hearken unto you.” (Exodus 7:3, 4) Now, did Jehovah really harden the heart of Pharaoh, or was he merely predicting that Pharaoh’s heart would be hardened as a result of the message sent to him by Moses and Aaron?....and that the repeated extension of God’s mercy to him would not soften him but would cause his heart to harden even more. What did the scenario of the 10 plagues prove? Jehovah was right. The hard heart was Pharaoh's all along, and God did not soften it because there was something to prove...even to the Egyptians. Every one of those plagues was designed to humiliate one of Egypt's gods. Jehovah was proving that Israel's God was the real one.
As a result a vast mixed multitude came out of Egypt with the Israelites. (Exodus 12:37-39) Pharaoh's prideful actions thereafter got his whole military force killed.

It is not unusual for wicked men to interpret Jehovah’s long-suffering as a sign of weakness and thus become more set in their evil ways, thinking the time of reckoning will never come. This is shown in Ecclesiastes 8:11: “Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.”

I think you misunderstand my stance, or at least what I am trying to say. I find God, as portrayed in the Bible, to be immoral. Because of many of his actions, I would find it difficult to worship him. I certainly could not trust Him. I judge Him by the book he gave us.

Well, actually I believe you judge him by your interpretation of the book he gave us. I do not subscribe to your interpretation.

I trust him implicitly because he has guided me most of my adult life. My relationship with my God is based on trust. I am sad that you have never experienced his hand in your life. But then God can read hearts, so he is choosing citizens for his kingdom who display that kind of trust, not imitating the complaining spirit that the Israelites did in the wilderness. Those who did not trust their God, did nothing but find fault. (Numbers 14:2-3) They never made it into the Promised Land. That is how I see it. God has nothing to prove to anyone. He is simply who he is, and his plans will not be derailed by anyone. We either agree with them and want to be included or we don't.

Do I think I could do better? No. I, however, would never claim to be perfect, or want anyone to worship me. I would never want the power of a deity, because I know that power can corrupt, and I do not feel I am necessarily good enough that I would not be corrupted.

Jehovah is incorruptible. That is why he can wield absolute power.
He authorized his son as King of his incoming Kingdom because he is not corruptible either. Only humans are corrupted by power because God did not give them the capacity for self rule. This is why the world is in such a mess.
Jesus rejected rulership as a human, but as a spirit creature, tried and tested as to faithfulness, he has his Father's trust. He will be the best ruler the world has ever seen.

God, in the Bible, claims to be perfect. He claims to make no mistakes. So therefore, he must consider the things done good and moral. The only time he repents of his actions is after the flood.

God has nothing to repent over. Unlike the false gods of this world, he has no imperfections to impeded his conduct.
As in the case of Nineveh, he can feel "regret" over a proposed action when he sees repentance on the part of humans, but God does not need to "repent" over anything. Nineveh was later destroyed for their wickedness, so their reprieve was short lived. Jehovah showed that he is not a heartless despot. If humans are willing to humbly listen and obey, he will respond accordingly.

Creating something is a responsibility. That does not make us property.

The Bible makes it clear that we are the clay in the hands of the Potter. Does the clay have the right to complain about what shape the Potter makes him? Is the clay the property of the Potter....I believe it is. And if the clay hardens in the wrong shape, the Potter is within his rights to discard what is useless to him. (Isaiah 64:8)
You want to argue with him about that?

We were given the Bible to know God, or to know his actions and choices. We have to look at it and judge from it.

And you and I judge in opposite ways reading the same book....it has everything to do with the heart.... and what it wants.

What propaganda? Have I quoted anything about God outside of scripture? Is the Bible now propaganda of the pretender?

That's the interesting thing about propaganda.....no one knows that's what it is until the truth comes crashing down on them.

The pretender can twist scripture too....remember the devil's temptation of Jesus? (Luke 4:1-13) And if you recall, Jesus countered his scripture quotations with other scripture to refute everything he said.

 

[Deeje]

Where do you get that information? It certainly isn't in scripture. How could they know? You said yourself they had never experienced evil. Someone who has never experienced evil has no concept of it.

If you recall, God spent quite some considerable time educating Adam about many things before the creation of the woman. As part of that education, God had him name all the animals and also gave him the command about the "tree of the knowledge of good and bad". You think that every single thing that transpired between God and man is recorded in the Bible? How would God give a command like that with such a heavy penalty if he had not given him advance warning and explaining what evil was?

How does this make God good?

It makes him "good" because for the benefit of the faithful, he rids the earth of the all who cannot be told what to do. Getting a handle on the appropriate use of free will makes the future more secure for everyone. There will never be a reason for rebellion to ever raise its ugly head again. Whatever God has planned for his vast universe, it can go ahead with no dramas. I call that brilliant.

ANd yet, scripture tells us he did. And who would complain? There were only twelve others in the room. Twelve others who had followed him through many things. Who believed him divine or blessed by it.

No it doesn't. You take one word to imagine that it can undo all other scripture, without regard for anything but what you want to see.

The day following Passover marked the beginning of the festival of unleavened bread, which ran for seven days, from Nisan 15 to 21. During these seven days the Israelites continued to eat unleavened bread; in fact, no fermentation was to be found in their homes. This law was very strict; anyone found eating what was leavened was to be cut off from the people, put to death. (Deuteronomy 16:3)

Do you honestly believe that devout Jews, under penalty of death would violate God's law and eat leavened bread on one of their most important commemorations? Seriously?

I don't necessarily understand the question. What do you mean by what future? This isn't me deflecting, I'm tuly trying to understand what you mean by what future. Do you mean the afterlife?

Yes, "future"....meaning beyond this poor excuse for a life? Who has a break from life's problems long enough to enjoy anything?

I have no belief in an "afterlife" (i.e. a spiritual existence beyond death) as some believe, but I do have the same hope as the ancient Jews were taught, that a restoration of life is what God promised, right here on earth. Do you have hope beyond this life? Or is it all over at death? If your life was impeded or cut short in some way by disability or chronic illness....or extreme poverty, abuse or accident...that's it? Now that to me is a complete waste of life. What is it good for? And how do your gods figure in this?

It doesn't matter where it would be lived, really. The idea of existence, of any life, just going on and on and on and on ...what is the point? What growth would there be? How could we learn? And even if we had the chance to screw up and make mistakes and learn, again, just the fact that there would be no respite seems utterly, completely torturous.

Then you must be rejoicing in the fact that you will get exactly what you want?....nothing. Nothing is not torture....but it isn't a future either.

They are just handed paradise. A perfect garden. Adam is literally handed his soul mate. They are given everything.

LOL...how awful!

 

[Deeje]

Jesus is referring to the Roman Empire, and to bot the Herods and the Emperor above him. He was referring to the rule over Israel by Gentiles, and the Immanuel prophecy in Isaiah, and the historical destruction in that period of Ephraim and Syria. Israel under the Jews as a pure Jewish state has always been referred to as the land of milk and honey, or the land of curds and honey. It was a reference any Jew of the time would have gotten.

The Gentile Times fit exactly what Daniel recorded. The dream image that Nebuchadnezzar was given and interpreted by Daniel shows the march of world powers who had dominion over God's people. It began with Babylon and ends with the last ruling entity....the Anglo-American dual world power. There are no other rulers before God reintroduced his own rulership in the hands of his Christ. (Daniel Ch 2)

Wow. I don't know where to start, the fact that you're suggesting that parents should be benevolent dictators, the part where you suggest this is a good thing, the part where you suggest that all corporeal punishment is child abuse when it's not, or the idea that you seem to think corporeal punishment is the only effective form of discipline. I'm just going to let this here for now, because I need to think over how to respond to that.

Hmmm...I too don't know where to start. Parents are benevolent dictators to their young children....and it is a good thing. Children need firm boundaries in order to thrive. If those boundaries are not enforced, then a child will become a whining unhappy little dictator. We have all seen them...and didn't we want to take them down behind the woodshed?

But corporal punishment where I live is against the law. A parent caught physically chastising their child can be arrested and charged with child abuse. Is that not so where you live?

The Bible does not limit discipline to something physically painful, but discipline can be with words as well. In my family growing up, one child responded well to physical discipline, whilst another needed more subtle measures to get a point across. Another was very sensitive and a look was all that was required. Discipline can take many forms.

What is the purpose of such a life as you are suggesting? What's the point? What kind of people would we be?

The kind of people God intended us to be. We are a mere shadow of what God intended. Our brain capacity is so stunted that for many, education is a complete waste of time. Imagine having full brain capacity and being able to build knowledge and retain it. Some scientists devote a whole lifetime to the study of just one species.....imagine what could be studied in many lifetimes? Imagine also if space travel became available and other planets could be colonized? What is to prevent our wildest imaginings from becoming reality. I look to the future with eager anticipation.

Most interpret it as the curse of the condition of the world, the lack of Eden.

Most of who? Who cursed the world then? What is this "lack of Eden"? A dream that no one can realize? That sounds pointless.

To learn, to grow, to become better. To experience a great many things an see how those things change us.

And then you die and what was it good for? Sounds ridiculous to me.

No, I studied what the Jews consider the messianic prophecies.

And of course Jews have no possible agenda in claiming that Jesus fulfilled no Messianic prophesy....?

 

[Deeje]

So why was he from a bloodline cursed by God to never prosper in Israel? I would say bearing the Messiah would be a great boon to any family line.

Would you like a list of the Messianic prophesies fulfilled by Jesus?

Here you go.....

Micah 5:2 Jesus born in Bethlehem Matthew 2:1-6

Genesis 49:10 Out of tribe of Judah Luke 3:23-33

Isaiah 7:14 Of a virgin Matthew 1:23-25

Isaiah 9:7 Descendant, heir of David Matthew 1:1, 6-17

Jeremiah 31:15 Babes killed after birth Matthew 2:16-18

Hosea 11:1 Called out of Egypt (refuge) Matthew 2:14, 15

Daniel 9:25 Appears at end of 69 “weeks” Luke 3:1, 21, 22

Psalm 40:7, 8 Presents self to do God’s will Matthew 3:13-15

Isaiah 61:1, 2 Spirit anointed to preach Luke 4:16-21

Psalm 2:7 Jehovah declares Jesus “Son” Matthew 3:17

Isaiah 9:1, 2 Light in region of Galilee Matthew 4:13-16

Psalm 40:9 Boldly preaches “good news” Matthew 4:17, 23

Psalm 69:9 Zealous for Jehovah’s house John 2:13-17

Isaiah 53:1, 2 Jews do not put faith in him John 12:37, 38

Psalm 78:2 Speaks in illustrations Matthew 13:34, 35

Zechariah 9:9 Enters city on colt of *** Matthew 21:1-9

Psalm 69:4 Hated without a cause John 15:24, 25

Isaiah 42:1-4 Hope of nations; no wrangling Matthew 12:14-21

Psalm 41:9 Unfaithful apostle betrays John 13:18, 21-30

Zechariah 11:12 For 30 pieces of silver Matthew 26:14-16

Psalm 2:1, 2 Rulers act against anointed Matthew 27:1, 2

Psalm 118:22 Rejected, but sure foundation Matthew 21:42, 43

Isaiah 8:14, 15 Becomes stone of stumbling Luke 20:18

Psalm 27:12 False witnesses against him Matthew 26:59-61

Isaiah 53:7 Silent before his accusers Matthew 27:11-14

Psalm 22:16 Impaled by hands and feet John 20:25

Isaiah 53:12 Counted with transgressors Luke 22:36, 37

Psalm 22:7, 8 Is reviled while on stake Matthew 27:39-43

Psalm 69:21 Given wine drugged with myrrh Mark 15:23, 36

Zechariah 12:10 Pierced while on stake John 19:34

Psalm 22:18 Lots cast for his garments Matthew 27:35

Psalm 34:20 None of his bones broken John 19:33, 36

Psalm 22:1 Forsaken to enemies by God Matthew 27:46

Daniel 9:26, 27 Cut off after 3 1/2 years* John 19:14-16

Zechariah 13:7 Shepherd struck, flock scattered Matthew 26:31,56

Jeremiah 31:31 New covenant, sins removed Luke 22:20

Isaiah 53:11 Bears the errors of many Matthew 20:28

Isaiah 53:4 Carries sicknesses of mankind Matthew 8:16, 17

Isaiah 53:9 Burial place with the rich Matthew 27:57-60

Psalm 16:10 Raised before corruption Acts 2:24, 27

Jonah 1:17 Resurrected on third day Matthew 12:40

Psalm 110:1 Exalted to God’s right hand Acts 7:56

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101981007#h=60:0-107:0

Now are you going to tell me the Jews had no basis for considering Jesus as the Messiah?
How much proof do you need?

Without quoting a million more times on the secondary part, thank you for sharing your views. It is quite educational as to the way you think.

Ditto, I'm sure.

 

[Gallowglass]

These responses are getting longer and longer, but they are educational, I feel.

I hope that we are both learning something. I sometimes feel you are judging me, but I hope that is just me being oversensitive. I have a tendency to do that.

There are times in scripture where God is spoken of as the doer of some action, when he merely predicted it.

At Isaiah 6:9, 10, for example, where Jehovah appears to Isaiah and says.... “Go, and say to this people:

‘You will hear again and again, But you will not understand;
You will see again and again, But you will not get any knowledge.’

Make the heart of this people unreceptive, Make their ears unresponsive,
And paste their eyes together, So that they may not see with their eyes
And hear with their ears, So that their heart may not understand
And they may not turn back and be healed.”

Now, God did not mean for Isaiah to actually go and fatten their hearts and stop up their ears and close their eyes to forestall any repentance; but he was predicting that that would be the effect of the message that Isaiah had been commanded to go tell the people, that the people themselves would show closed eyes and unhearing ears and fatty hearts, that they would not repent and turn to Jehovah for healing spiritually.



That rather controversial text says Jehovah hardened the heart of Pharaoh. But did he?

He said: “I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt. But Pharaoh shall not hearken unto you.” (Exodus 7:3, 4) Now, did Jehovah really harden the heart of Pharaoh, or was he merely predicting that Pharaoh’s heart would be hardened as a result of the message sent to him by Moses and Aaron?....and that the repeated extension of God’s mercy to him would not soften him but would cause his heart to harden even more. What did the scenario of the 10 plagues prove? Jehovah was right. The hard heart was Pharaoh's all along, and God did not soften it because there was something to prove...even to the Egyptians. Every one of those plagues was designed to humiliate one of Egypt's gods. Jehovah was proving that Israel's God was the real one.
As a result a vast mixed multitude came out of Egypt with the Israelites. (Exodus 12:37-39) Pharaoh's prideful actions thereafter got his whole military force killed.

Except the scripture is quite clear in differentiating when Pharaoh hardened his heart and when God did it. When he did it, you see it twice, or it says he did it.

Well, actually I believe you judge him by your interpretation of the book he gave us. I do not subscribe to your interpretation.

And I believe you judge based on what you were taught and what you were told.

I trust him implicitly because he has guided me most of my adult life. My relationship with my God is based on trust. I am sad that you have never experienced his hand in your life. But then God can read hearts, so he is choosing citizens for his kingdom who display that kind of trust, not imitating the complaining spirit that the Israelites did in the wilderness. Those who did not trust their God, did nothing but find fault. (Numbers 14:2-3) They never made it into the Promised Land. That is how I see it. God has nothing to prove to anyone. He is simply who he is, and his plans will not be derailed by anyone. We either agree with them and want to be included or we don't.

I like the way you have phrased this, or at least part of it. I trust and believe in my gods implicitly because of what they have done for me in my lfe, and how they have guided and helped me in mine. I do not blame you for your belief for those reasons. I will never say someone is wrong to walk with the deity who has walked with them. who has been there for them, who has held them and comforted them. I do the same.

Jehovah is incorruptible. That is why he can wield absolute power.
He authorized his son as King of his incoming Kingdom because he is not corruptible either. Only humans are corrupted by power because God did not give them the capacity for self rule. This is why the world is in such a mess.
Jesus rejected rulership as a human, but as a spirit creature, tried and tested as to faithfulness, he has his Father's trust. He will be the best ruler the world has ever seen.

I do not see this in scripture. Look at the flood. God repents of what he has done and swears never o do it again. That's no the actions of someone incorruptible.

God has nothing to repent over. Unlike the false gods of this world, he has no imperfections to impeded his conduct.
As in the case of Nineveh, he can feel "regret" over a proposed action when he sees repentance on the part of humans, but God does not need to "repent" over anything. Nineveh was later destroyed for their wickedness, so their reprieve was short lived. Jehovah showed that he is not a heartless despot. If humans are willing to humbly listen and obey, he will respond accordingly.

Except for when he does repent. Genesis 6:6-7 and 1 Samuel 15:11. Eleven times it says he repented or would repent of something he was about to do in the future (Exodus 32:12-14; 2 Samuel 24:16; 1 Chronicles 21:15; Psalm 106:45; Jeremiah 4:28; 18:8; 26:3, 13, 19; 42:10; Joel 2:13-14; Amos 7:3, 6; Jonah 3:9-10; 4:2).

The Bible makes it clear that we are the clay in the hands of the Potter. Does the clay have the right to complain about what shape the Potter makes him? Is the clay the property of the Potter....I believe it is. And if the clay hardens in the wrong shape, the Potter is within his rights to discard what is useless to him. (Isaiah 64:8)
You want to argue with him about that?

When the potter is making sentient beings with feelings, souls, and emotions? Yes. To do otherwise is immoral. It is another life. A mother cannot kill a six year old because the six-year-old disobeys. The six-year-old is an independent person.

And you and I judge in opposite ways reading the same book....it has everything to do with the heart.... and what it wants.

When I started, I wanted to believe like you. The Bible made that impossible for me.

That's the interesting thing about propaganda.....no one knows that's what it is until the truth comes crashing down on them.

The pretender can twist scripture too....remember the devil's temptation of Jesus? (Luke 4:1-13) And if you recall, Jesus countered his scripture quotations with other scripture to refute everything he said.

Yes, indeed. And every Christian denomination will tell you the other's theology is the propaganda. You can never know when you're only reading translations. This is why I feel it is of the utmost importance, if you're going to even consider devoting your life to a religion with a sacred text; that you learn to read the original languages and study the primary sources (or as close as we can get.)

Translations are literally you trusting the translators, all of whom have their agendas and biases that they place in their translations and versions.

I will answer more later, but I hope you have a good day.

 

[Deeje]

I hope that we are both learning something. I sometimes feel you are judging me, but I hope that is just me being oversensitive. I have a tendency to do that.

I am sorry if I made you feel that way...it was not intentional. If you know any Aussies, you will be aware that we don't tip-toe around people's emotions very well. We tend to tell it like it is, and we don't expect that adults will fall away all wounded if we hurt their feelings. We can suck it up, so we expect that others can too. Telling the truth shouldn't be a brutal experience. Speaking to Americans in particular, I find emotions basically rule their lives. This is sad IMO. It makes talking about difficult subjects harder than it needs to be.

Except the scripture is quite clear in differentiating when Pharaoh hardened his heart and when God did it. When he did it, you see it twice, or it says he did it.

Again, there are many scriptures where God is said to actively do something, but other scripture points out that he either said something through a representative or he merely permitted an action without preventing it.

Take for example the Egyptians who gave the Israelites gold and silver and clothing before they departed from Egypt. It says that God softened the hearts of the Egyptians to be generous to them. He didn't soften Pharaoh's heart because he could read this proud man like a book. Pharaoh himself was a prime deity in Egypt, and the last plague was designed to show him that his god status was worthless against the God of Israel. Egypt's gods were completely impotent when dealing with the true God on every occasion. After each of the 10 plagues, Pharaoh promised to agree to Moses' request to send Israel away, but each time he reneged. The last plague was personal, touching the deity of Pharaoh himself. Even then he was defiant to his miserable end.

And I believe you judge based on what you were taught and what you were told.

Of course. We all choose our teachers based on whether we are drawn to what they say. The appeal to our heart tells Jehovah who we are, and what we are. It lets him know what we are looking for in life....the level of our spirituality....and in what direction we allow it to be taken.

I like the way you have phrased this, or at least part of it. I trust and believe in my gods implicitly because of what they have done for me in my lfe, and how they have guided and helped me in mine. I do not blame you for your belief for those reasons. I will never say someone is wrong to walk with the deity who has walked with them. who has been there for them, who has held them and comforted them. I do the same.

You are free to choose your deities, as am I. What we need to ask is which deity are we walking with? And where is he taking us? The 'pretender' presents himself as "an angel of light", so he does not show his true self unless you leave him and turn to worship the true God....then he will show his true colors. I have seen this many times. He's a sore loser.

I do not see this in scripture. Look at the flood. God repents of what he has done and swears never o do it again. That's no the actions of someone incorruptible.

I see no "repentance"....that means that he did something wrong and was sorry that he did it.

I see "regret" at having to do what he did under those circumstances.....and a promise that he will never deal all living things a blow like he did then....but I still think it was necessary, otherwise he wouldn't have done it.

I am curious as to why you think God brought the flood in the first place? Why did every living thing outside the ark have to die? And why did Jesus use it as an example of what would occur again....this time not by water? (Matthew 24:37-39)

Your thoughts?