Salvation is a totally FREE GIFT: (the pearl)

[9-10ths_Penguin]

David committed adultery with Uriah's wife, Bathsheba and she became pregnant. He called Uriah from the battlefield (where David should have been), got him drunk so he would sleep with her, but Uriah refused to sleep with his wife while he had men on the battlefield, so David sent a message to have the men pull back in battle and leave Uriah to be killed by the enemy. Then he married Bathsheba. He was so convicted and distraught with himself he called upon the Lord to forgive him and to restore, not his salvation, but the joy of his salvation in Psalm 51. He did not lose his salvation, although he did suffer the consequences of his actions for years to come.

You're leaving out part of the story: the part I alluded to in my post to InChrist. Before David called upon the Lord to forgive him, God sent him a messenger who told David that his newborn son would be struck down by God because of David's sin.

At this point, God brought a sickness upon the newborn baby. The baby suffered horribly for a full week while David cried and tore his clothes in anguish. Then the baby died... tortured to death by a supposedly loving and moral God.

Edit: my moral sense may not be perfect, but it's damn well good enough that I can condemn the torture and murder of a baby as evil.

 

[javajo]

You're leaving out part of the story: the part I alluded to in my post to InChrist. Before David called upon the Lord to forgive him, God sent him a messenger who told David that his newborn son would be struck down by God because of David's sin.

At this point, God brought a sickness upon the newborn baby. The baby suffered horribly for a full week while David cried and tore his clothes in anguish. Then the baby died... tortured to death by a supposedly loving and moral God.

Edit: my moral sense may not be perfect, but it's damn well good enough that I can condemn the torture and murder of a baby as evil.

I understand your point. I actually was posting in response to Shermana where he said its not adultery if the husband is dead. The husband wasn't dead. I don't believe God is evil at all even if it is hard to understand his actions. I know one reason we have these stories is so we can learn and be warned of the consequence of sin. I'm sure the baby went to Paradise and is happy. And the baby did not have to endure this evil world for long, so who am I to judge God?

For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope. Romans 15:4 (KJV)

Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Romans 9:20

 

[Alceste]

I understand your point. I actually was posting in response to Shermana where he said its not adultery if the husband is dead. The husband wasn't dead. I don't believe God is evil at all even if it is hard to understand his actions. I know one reason we have these stories is so we can learn and be warned of the consequence of sin. I'm sure the baby went to Paradise and is happy. And the baby did not have to endure this evil world for long, so who am I to judge God?

For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope. Romans 15:4 (KJV)

Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Romans 9:20

I would not be comfortable making excuses for anybody who tortured and killed a baby. It doesn't matter whether or not I understand his motives - the act itself is evil on its face. It's not a complicated moral question at all. Every murderer and torturer has his reasons. Pretty much none of these reasons are understandable to a normal, well-adjusted, moral human being. Nevertheless, we do not excuse murderers and torturers on the basis that we can't understand why they did what they did, or that maybe their victims are better off dead than they were alive.

 

[InChrist]

What did he feel sorry for himself for? That he only got 30 pieces of silver? Yeah He couldn't have possibly killed himself because of the remorse that it specifically says he felt, he had to have "felt sorry for himself". Do you know what feeling sorry for yourself means? Was he upset with himself that he hadn't turned Jesus in sooner or something?

Hmmm, this doesn't reveal that you haven't actually read the passage or anything, nope.

I don’t believe the remorse of Judas involved a true repentance toward God, acknowledging his sin and seeking forgiveness from God. Instead, it was remorse at the results of his actions and how it affected him and his life only. He was sorry that things turned out as they had, maybe different than he expected and that he was now guilty of carrying blood money. His concern was for himself and it was not a repentance that looked to God for redemption, restoration, and hope. Rather he wallowed in self-pity and took his own life. This is in sharp contrast with Peter’s repentance after he denied Jesus.

David couldn't have committed adultery if the husband was dead. You don't know if his soul went to Heaven or hell. If the person has to confess for their sins, thats' a "work". Paul even says that one must show their repentance with deeds. Thus, a "Christian" who sins and breaks the law risks losing their salvation. The very meaning of the word "Saved" is vastly misunderstood. The reference is to individual punishments for the individual actions.

In spite of King David’s sins he is listed in Hebrews chapter 11 along with others from the OT as examples of those who lived by faith and pleased God. If David was not in eternity with God, his name would not be on that list as an example. According to the scriptures I know that he is in heaven.

Confessing sins to God is not works, it is being honest about one’s sins, admitting them to God and agreeing with Him that they wrong.

*Edit: This is incorrect and I am guilty of not reviewing the passage myself. David does in fact commit adultery.

You, me, we are all guilty of making mistakes at times.

Why did Jesus tell his own followers who believed in him that it's better to chop off your hand than have it scandalize you and cause you go into the fire?

Do you think Jesus was advocating self-mutilation as a way to prevent or pay for sins?

David went through horrible situations like illnesses and civil war against his sons as his atonement.

[/quote]

Are you saying that King David made atonement for his sins himself by suffering?

 

[javajo]

I would not be comfortable making excuses for anybody who tortured and killed a baby. It doesn't matter whether or not I understand his motives - the act itself is evil on its face. It's not a complicated moral question at all. Every murderer and torturer has his reasons. Pretty much none of these reasons are understandable to a normal, well-adjusted, moral human being. Nevertheless, we do not excuse murderers and torturers on the basis that we can't understand why they did what they did, or that maybe their victims are better off dead than they were alive.

I understand your point of view. While God knew the child would die and he allowed it to die from its sickness, I don't believe God killed or tortured a baby. There are some good articles on the subject online. I do see how upsetting the story can be to people.

 

[Shermana]

I don’t believe the remorse of Judas involved a true repentance toward God, acknowledging his sin and seeking forgiveness from God. Instead, it was remorse at the results of his actions and how it affected him and his life only. He was sorry that things turned out as they had, maybe different than he expected and that he was now guilty of carrying blood money. His concern was for himself and it was not a repentance that looked to God for redemption, restoration, and hope. Rather he wallowed in self-pity and took his own life. This is in sharp contrast with Peter’s repentance after he denied Jesus.

So when Judas says that Jesus was innocent and tried to give back the money, he was really concerned about himself. No need to go by Matthew 27, that's not what REALLY happened......Can you please post scripture to back your claim that proves that what Judas spoke in Matthew was not true repentance, calling Jesus "innocent"? This interpretation goes completely against what scripture says.

In spite of King David’s sins he is listed in Hebrews chapter 11 along with others from the OT as examples of those who lived by faith and pleased God. If David was not in eternity with God, his name would not be on that list as an example. According to the scriptures I know that he is in heaven.

What scriptures say he was in Heaven? Please quote from Hebrews 11 exactly where it says David pleased G-d and thus went to Heaven.

Confessing sins to God is not works, it is being honest about one’s sins, admitting them to God and agreeing with Him that they wrong.

Oh I see. And what is sin exactly? If turning from sins is not an example of how works applies, your definition must be very interesting.

You, me, we are all guilty of making mistakes at times.

The difference is whether we repent or not.

Do you think Jesus was advocating self-mutilation as a way to prevent or pay for sins?

Yes, I think he was literally saying it's better to chop your hand off than do something with it that causes you to go to hell. Either way, the point is that even his own disciples had to watch their behavior or go to hell. That's the point. Regardless of the hand chopping. If you disagree, please state why, and what you think the meaning of the verse is.

Are you saying that King David made atonement for his sins himself by suffering?

What do you suppose he was stricken with so many calamities for?

 

[Awoon]

It is a good analogy, but the whole thing still doesn't make much sense. God is the one who set the cost: It didn't have to cost him his Son. He chose for that to be the price. (And, as Tumbleweed pointed out, he didn't lose Jesus for good.) And the whole idea of a scapegoat-- a whipping boy-- to be punished for our own transgressions, how does that help us to grow? to learn? How does that solve any problems?

It doesnt but that's what people want. Human Sacrifice

People dumped the teachings of Jesus in exchange for Scapegoatism:yes:

 

[Awoon]

You're leaving out part of the story: the part I alluded to in my post to InChrist. Before David called upon the Lord to forgive him, God sent him a messenger who told David that his newborn son would be struck down by God because of David's sin.

At this point, God brought a sickness upon the newborn baby. The baby suffered horribly for a full week while David cried and tore his clothes in anguish. Then the baby died... tortured to death by a supposedly loving and moral God.

Edit: my moral sense may not be perfect, but it's damn well good enough that I can condemn the torture and murder of a baby as evil.

The ancients attributed EVERYTHING to their G-d, God, god.

Some ancient thinkers today on the religious and political platforms do the same.:yes:

 

[Alceste]

I understand your point of view. While God knew the child would die and he allowed it to die from its sickness, I don't believe God killed or tortured a baby. There are some good articles on the subject online. I do see how upsetting the story can be to people.

Interesting take. Do you believe god commanded Abraham to kill his son?

I will pass on reading articles on the subject. My reading comprehension skills are very good. I'll take my impressions directly from the source.

 

[javajo]

Interesting take. Do you believe god commanded Abraham to kill his son?

I will pass on reading articles on the subject. My reading comprehension skills are very good. I'll take my impressions directly from the source.

Here is what I believe. Yes, I believe he did command him to do that. Again, a difficult passage to understand. Thankfully he did not make him go through with it. But he saw how much Abraham loved him to the point that he would obey him in such a thing. He also saw Abraham's faith, which God had imputed unto him for righteousness unto salvation some thirty years earlier, manifest in his works. Abraham believed God would raise Isaac from the dead according to Hebrews 11. He believed this because God promised that through his seed, through Isaac, all nations would be blessed. And it is through Isaac who begat Joseph, who begat the twelve sons who made up the tribe of Israel, who gave us Jesus Christ, who paid for our sins, that all who believe in him are blessed with eternal life. Perhaps since God saw Abraham's willingness to sacrifice his own son, God was willing to give his to pay the penalty (death) of our sins. It is interesting to note that Mount Moriah is at Jerusalem, where God gave His own son to redeem mankind on a tree on Mount Golgotha. Oh, well, that is a little bit of what I believe.

 

[Alceste]

Here is what I believe. Yes, I believe he did command him to do that. Again, a difficult passage to understand. Thankfully he did not make him go through with it. But he saw how much Abraham loved him to the point that he would obey him in such a thing. He also saw Abraham's faith, which God had imputed unto him for righteousness unto salvation some thirty years earlier, manifest in his works. Abraham believed God would raise Isaac from the dead according to Hebrews 11. He believed this because God promised that through his seed, through Isaac, all nations would be blessed. And it is through Isaac who begat Joseph, who begat the twelve sons who made up the tribe of Israel, who gave us Jesus Christ, who paid for our sins, that all who believe in him are blessed with eternal life. Perhaps since God saw Abraham's willingness to sacrifice his own son, God was willing to give his to pay the penalty (death) of our sins. It is interesting to note that Mount Moriah is at Jerusalem, where God gave His own son to redeem mankind on a tree on Mount Golgotha. Oh, well, that is a little bit of what I believe.

OK. If my salvation depends on being able to craft such convoluted, bizarre and rationally incomprehensible excuses for God's evil acts, it's a price I can not afford to pay. I don't know if I could even come up with something like this if I tried.

Wouldn't it be simpler to just acknowledge that commanding a subordinate to murder his son to test his loyalty is a dickish move?

 

[Awoon]

Interesting take. Do you believe god commanded Abraham to kill his son?

I will pass on reading articles on the subject. My reading comprehension skills are very good. I'll take my impressions directly from the source.

Abraham was dreaming when he was told to sacrifice his son Issac.

Human sacrifice was happening with the peoples during that time. Abraham was no different from those who believed in it, yet during his dream Abraham realized that Human Sacrifice was NOT what his God wanted, so an animal appeared as a substitute.

People attempt to make Jesus that same sacrifice not knowing Semitic culture or the writing styles of Semites.

Scholars know it was a personal dream for Abraham because the Whole tribe and surrounding tribes would have been invited to witness the sacrifice of his son to his God.

 

[Alceste]

Abraham was dreaming when he was told to sacrifice his son Issac.

Human sacrifice was happening with the peoples during that time. Abraham was no different from those who believed in it, yet during his dream Abraham realized that Human Sacrifice was NOT what his God wanted, so an animal appeared as a substitute.

Scholars know it was a personal dream for Abraham because the Whole tribe and surrounding tribes would have been invited to witness the sacrifice of his son to his God.

That's funny, the actual text says nothing about it being a dream. In the Bible, it is very clear that god commands Abraham to sacrifice his son.

So if that clear, lucid, unambiguous text is really a "dream", how much of the rest of the bible ought to be interpreted as the delusions of followers of the Christian god?

I don't know about you, but I'm going with "all of it".

 

[Awoon]

That's funny, the actual text says nothing about it being a dream. In the Bible, it is very clear that god commands Abraham to sacrifice his son.

So if that clear, lucid, unambiguous text is really a "dream", how much of the rest of the bible ought to be interpreted as the delusions of followers of the Christian god?

I don't know about you, but I'm going with "all of it".

40% - 60% of the Bible are dreams and visions.:yes:

 

[Alceste]

40% - 60% of the Bible are dreams and visions.:yes:

And how do you determine which is which (without deferring to the opinions of other fallible humans like yourself)?

 

[Awoon]

And how do you determine which is which (without deferring to the opinions of other fallible humans like yourself)?

The whole book of Revelation is a dream by the authors own words..."I was in the spirit on the lords Day." In the spirit refers to visions and dreams. So you can take it from there.:yes:

 

[javajo]

OK. If my salvation depends on being able to craft such convoluted, bizarre and rationally incomprehensible excuses for God's evil acts, it's a price I can not afford to pay. I don't know if I could even come up with something like this if I tried.

Wouldn't it be simpler to just acknowledge that commanding a subordinate to murder his son to test his loyalty is a dickish move?

I understand your viewpoint even though I see it differently, it is a difficult passage, to be sure.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I understand your point. I actually was posting in response to Shermana where he said its not adultery if the husband is dead. The husband wasn't dead. I don't believe God is evil at all even if it is hard to understand his actions. I know one reason we have these stories is so we can learn and be warned of the consequence of sin. I'm sure the baby went to Paradise and is happy. And the baby did not have to endure this evil world for long, so who am I to judge God?

He didn't have to endure "this evil world" for long? The only thing the baby endured was the wrath of God for a crime he didn't commit.

But maybe you're right: maybe a child is better off when he only has to suffer for a week instead of having to endure a full lifetime of suffering. Maybe up is down, black is white, and torturing a baby to death is actually a moral act. If that's the case, though, then isn't God cruel by letting all of us live? The story illustrates that God is able to intervene and "mercifully" cut a life short; so why doesn't he extend that mercy to the rest of us? What sick pleasure does he get from watching our long, suffering-filled lives?

 

[Alceste]

I understand your viewpoint even though I see it differently, it is a difficult passage, to be sure.

It does not seem difficult to me.

Perhaps that is because I don't assume my conclusion. IOW, first I looked at the text with an open mind, interpreted what it was saying about the nature of god, then I concluded whether the character in the story (God) was moral or immoral based on the text I had just read.

It only becomes complicated if you first decide your god is always good, then you read the text that depicts this character up to His elbows in terrible criminality and evil. Only then must you create a "difficult" rationale to explain why your divine, infallible scripture very often depicts your god enthusiastically engaging in what appear to be unquestionably evil acts.

Was Moses dreaming when God told him to kill all the adults and boy children of a conquered people but keep all the virgin girls for themselves as sex slaves?

I know from your point of view this is just one more "difficult passage" which doesn't mean what it very obviously means, but to say to someone like me that there is no cost associated with becoming a Christian is pure foolishness. I simply can not do what you do for your god: I can not excuse evil. I don't have the constitution for it, or the mental agility.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I understand your viewpoint even though I see it differently, it is a difficult passage, to be sure.

In that story, even if God knew that he'd intervene before Isaac was killed, it still describes some rather nasty psychological torture of Abraham.

The story reminds me of Sophie's Choice.