The Word of God?

[Idolater]

In other words, what you're saying is that it's possible to love your enemies while killing them if it is in the prevention of a crime or in self-defense?

How am I loving my neighbor if I just sit on my hands while a murderer tries to murder them?

OK....but Jesus himself said this...."But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also."

How does 'turn the other cheek' mean to "permit a murderer to attempt to murder your neighbor, without trying to stop them?"

 

[Idolater]

When you believe the Bible, you must understand that it is not Ok for you to beat you slaves until they become blind. You may beat them as much as you like as long as you don’t cause permanent damage, search it. Then come back here and say something.

Christ's Resurrection is the lens through which to understand all of this, Guyver. That's what I've told you from the start. If you don't believe in His Resurrection as nonfiction historical fact, then you're not going to really understand the Christian faith, because believing in the Resurrection Is the Christian faith.

You've every right to not believe that Jesus of Nazareth is risen from the dead, and you've every right to criticize and impugn the belief as well. And we have the right to our view, and to defend it. And to try to convince you to believe it too, but you still possess the right to reject it, and we will defend your right to not believe, if we are good Christians.

 

[k0de]

Christ's Resurrection is the lens through which to understand all of this, Guyver. That's what I've told you from the start. If you don't believe in His Resurrection as nonfiction historical fact, then you're not going to really understand the Christian faith, because believing in the Resurrection Is the Christian faith.

You've every right to not believe that Jesus of Nazareth is risen from the dead, and you've every right to criticize and impugn the belief as well. And we have the right to our view, and to defend it. And to try to convince you to believe it too, but you still possess the right to reject it, and we will defend your right to not believe, if we are good Christians.

"Does our law condemn a man without first hearing him to find out what he has been doing?" (John 7:51)

Guys the OP clearly stated at the beginning that he start this thread to share and to learn about what other people beliefs about the word of God. He never said that he will accepted what you believe for himself. But to debate on the word of God.

I think even if his understanding is different we should listen to it. But you don't have to believe it if you don't want to.

Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

 

[k0de]

Greetings. I have recently returned to this site after a long time. As I have been reading your posts, I hear people often referring to the Bible as the Word of God. I’d like to ask you to help me understand what you mean by that.

Does that mean you believe God wrote the Bible? If I read the Bible, am I reading the words that God himself has spoken?

Or is it just a religious platitude that people use because they some satisfaction in believing it or discussing it with other religious people?

I should say that I am very interested in hearing the words of God. I want to know what God says, because that will allow me to understand what God thinks. Will you please post some words of God that I can read so that I can know what God has said? Thank you in advance.

OP is INTERESTED IN HEARING THE WORDS OF GOD.

Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

 

[k0de]

First of all, thank you for answering the question in the manner you did. Good for you for not following what many people offer as the norm on this site, with their disgusting and misguided insults. That speaks to their fail and hypocrisy.

Anyway, no...I do not accept your explanation at all and find it the stuff of religious delusion. But I respect that you treated the question with respect, and answered to the best of your ability. I also appreciate that you asked me for my opinion, and thoughts on the matter, because that shows wisdom and understanding.

Huh... First you thank me. Then you insult me. Saying that I'm religious delutional. Take no to my answer. And then you thank me again. That doesn't make any sense.

Anyhow. Before we move any further. You didn't explain why you don't accept my explanation. And no I'm not accepting your answer because of religious delution. Please explain more in detail....




Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

 

[Guyver]

Huh... First you thank me. Then you insult me. Saying that I'm religious delutional. Take no to my answer. And then you thank me again. That doesn't make any sense.

Anyhow. Before we move any further. You didn't explain why you don't accept my explanation. And no I'm not accepting your answer because of religious delution. Please explain more in detail....




Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

I apologize for insulting you. I should have found a better word to use.

 

[Guyver]

Christ's Resurrection is the lens through which to understand all of this, Guyver. That's what I've told you from the start. If you don't believe in His Resurrection as nonfiction historical fact, then you're not going to really understand the Christian faith, because believing in the Resurrection Is the Christian faith.

You've every right to not believe that Jesus of Nazareth is risen from the dead, and you've every right to criticize and impugn the belief as well. And we have the right to our view, and to defend it. And to try to convince you to believe it too, but you still possess the right to reject it, and we will defend your right to not believe, if we are good Christians.

OK. I understand your point. What I don't understand is what in the world Christ's resurrection has to do with the proper way to beat your slaves. I was referring to the bible verses that instruct a Jew how to beat their slaves properly, and how it is improper to beat slaves.

I can't imagine that Jesus would wish anyone to even have slaves, let alone establishing the proper guidelines on how they can be lawfully mistreated.

 

[Guyver]

The way God can be the God of love and peace AND still command His people to go kill others is that He is their Creator, and has the inherent right to bring about the end of their earthly existence however He sees fit.

Especially since God designed man to live life in two stages, the first stage on this earth, and the second stage in the afterlife.

Thank you for addressing the question. So, God can kill whomever he wishes and still be the God of Love and Peace, because he is the Creator of All Things. So, might makes right?

I would like to offer another opinion. Throughout time and ages past, people kill other people. Some people attempt to justify their brutal actions by claiming God told them to do it.

The real God of Love and Peace would actually uphold the principles and values of love and peace at all cost, and without wavering.

However.....if it were required that "some people needed killing" then he would handle the business himself in stead of asking inferior type humans to do the killing. As I see it. FWIW.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Thank you for addressing the question. So, God can kill whomever he wishes and still be the God of Love and Peace, because he is the Creator of All Things. So, might makes right?

Loaded question.

God DOESN'T wish to kill anyone. (Ezekiel 18:23; Ezekiel 33:11)

But, when He does kill someone, He has the right to do so because He is their Creator.

I would like to offer another opinion. Throughout time and ages past, people kill other people. Some people attempt to justify their brutal actions by claiming God told them to do it.

The real God of Love and Peace would actually uphold the principles and values of love and peace at all cost, and without wavering.

However.....if it were required that "some people needed killing" then he would handle the business himself in stead of asking inferior type humans to do the killing. As I see it. FWIW.

Perhaps this is better answered through another, somewhat related topic.

Question for you, Guyver:

1) Is something (like humility) good because God recognizes it as good? Or,
2) Is something good because God commands that it is good (as Socrates put it, because God loves it)?

 

[Idolater]

OK. I understand your point. What I don't understand is what in the world Christ's resurrection has to do with the proper way to beat your slaves. I was referring to the bible verses that instruct a Jew how to beat their slaves properly, and how it is improper to beat slaves.

I can't imagine that Jesus would wish anyone to even have slaves, let alone establishing the proper guidelines on how they can be lawfully mistreated.

Then you're wanting to go down the Christian path, which begins at Calvary and the empty tomb. Christ commissioned His Apostles to teach what He taught them, to reveal Him to the world as His authorized teachers. These men instituted the office of Bishop (1Ti3:1KJV), and taught them to teach others (2Ti2:2KJV). These men today teach against slavery. They are for us today the only authentic teachers of the one Christian faith (Eph4:5KJV).

What you're doing is beginning at a questionable at best premise, that Christians are to discern for themselves, using only the Bible and their own minds, what it is that God wants us to know, but this premise is questionable because of what we read within the Bible itself, namely about the bishops whom the Apostles themselves consecrated through the imposition of their own hands.

This college of valid bishops exists to this day, and they all teach uniformly what is taught in the 'Catechism of the Catholic Church.'

Your argument isn't against all Christians in what you're trying to do here, in bringing up slaves, and killing, etc. from what you read in the Bible, but only against those Christians who believe your premise, which as I said, is at best a questionable one. Certainly not one beyond dispute. Seeing as how a majority of Christians are not Protestants, and don't believe what Protestants teach about the role of Scripture in the life of the Christian.

 

[Guyver]

This is my take for your first question after carefully searching the scriptures. I conclude that God’s command was against murder, not killing, and to eradicate Sin. See Numbers 25:8-13 which is one of many Biblical accounts where killing was required to eradicate sin. And yes the atrocities committed in the name of Christianity are true. How can we forget the historical account of the Crusades, the Pogroms, the Holocaust, and the Inquisitions. I also agree that there is no justification for these actions. But this is not what Jesus teaches who is the God of the Bible.

However, the bottom line is that while the God of the Bible is a righteous judge, He is also a God of love and mercy Who detests the shedding of innocent human blood.

That is my final answer. What is your take take on this question?

I agree with you that the atrocities you mentioned are inexcusable. I agree that God had nothing to do with it because he would never tell a person to go kill another person. I disagree that Jesus is the God of the Bible. The bible says that Jesus' God is God of the bible.

In any event, I do not accept your first point. If God wished there to be no sin in the world, then he wouldn't have made people. If he really detested it as some parts of the bible claim, then he would have wiped out everything and been done with all of us. We would simply not exist.

So yes. Something very fishy is afoot here with the religious people.

 

[k0de]

I agree with you that the atrocities you mentioned are inexcusable. I agree that God had nothing to do with it because he would never tell a person to go kill another person. I disagree that Jesus is the God of the Bible. The bible says that Jesus' God is God of the bible.

In any event, I do not accept your first point. If God wished there to be no sin in the world, then he wouldn't have made people. If he really detested it as some parts of the bible claim, then he would have wiped out everything and been done with all of us. We would simply not exist.

So yes. Something very fishy is afoot here with the religious people.

You're a tough one. If Christ used Paul I'm certain he can use you too.

Let's ask you some questions.

How did Sin enter into the world?

And did God ever destroy the because of Sin before?


Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

 

[k0de]

And How is The Father Jesus God?

Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

 

[Idolater]

And How is The Father Jesus God?

Who ever said that?

 

[Guyver]

Question for you, Guyver:

1) Is something (like humility) good because God recognizes it as good? Or,
2) Is something good because God commands that it is good (as Socrates put it, because God loves it)?

Also a loaded question JudgeRightly, because you’ve offered me the answers to choose from. I like the question in a sense, but I think it should be phrased more succinctly. How do we know what is good? I a better way to ask it.

But, I’ll answer both ways. It’s just such a big question that I may have to answer it later because I have golf practice now.

I say the question as you have put it is impossible to know. The reason it’s impossible is because we don’t know what God thinks about anything. We know what people think God thinks about something, and we know what the Bible says about things.

The problem with using the Bible to establish what we think God thinks is that the Bible says different things about the same things, almost every time. That makes it unreliable or inconsistent with respect to establishing principles that would help us decide how to answer the question.

 

[Guyver]

How did Sin enter into the world?

What is sin?

 

[Guyver]

Your argument isn't against all Christians in what you're trying to do here, in bringing up slaves, and killing, etc. from what you read in the Bible, but only against those Christians who believe your premise, which as I said, is at best a questionable one. Certainly not one beyond dispute. Seeing as how a majority of Christians are not Protestants, and don't believe what Protestants teach about the role of Scripture in the life of the Christian.

If being a Christian means believing the whole bible is the word of God, and especially the words in the gospels and epistles as they represent Christ and his doctrine, then I guess it should be said that all Christians should believe in slavery. The treatment of slaves was first covered in the OT, then reiterated in the NT. Have you read Philemon and St. Paul’s epistles? Slavery as an institution is supported by the Bible.

 

[Idolater]

If being a Christian means believing the whole bible is the word of God, and especially the words in the gospels and epistles as they represent Christ and his doctrine, then I guess it should be said that all Christians should believe in slavery.

There's something to that, but leave out Catholics and Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox and a cluster of smaller ancient Christian traditions, who do not agree with Protestants about the role of private interpretation of the Bible, and its impact on what we Christians are believing, in believing our one faith (Eph4:5KJV). We all don't believe the premise you're again now just presuming without justification, that it's a correct view of our faith. Every Christian who identifies in some way as an ancient Christian rejects what the Protestants are teaching in this matter, and you are unjustified in lumping together us ancient Christians with Protestants in this particular regard.

The treatment of slaves was first covered in the OT, then reiterated in the NT. Have you read Philemon and St. Paul’s epistles? Slavery as an institution is supported by the Bible.

You're giving me the distinct impression that I'm not connecting with you. This above is completely unconnected to what we ancient Christians believe. We don't believe in slavery. Our bishops don't believe in slavery. Slavery is grave sin for us. I speak only for Catholics in the latter. Who knows What all the other ancient Christians believe. None of them have anything like the 'Catechism of the Catholic Church,' where literally everything we'd ever want to know the authoritative verbal expression of, that pertains to the Christian faith in matters of faith and morals, is explicated in our own language, and available on the internet all the time, free of charge. Just the Catholics have that.

 

[Guyver]

Idolator, regarding your post above; are you familiar with what the Catholics did to the Chumash people in California during the Spanish Mission Period? If what you are saying about Catholics and slavery is true, then it is a relatively recent change.

During the Spanish Mission Period In California, the Catholics literally enslaved and eliminated an entire race of human beings.

 

[k0de]

Who ever said that?

Guyver said Jesus is not God of the Bible. He said the God of the Bible is Jesus's
God.

Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk