If the Bible is Accurate, why did the Church kill so many?

quote:

---

In Fact:
The word "god" may be simply understood to mean "force."
Thus, whoever wins "obviously" has God on his side.

---

Might makes right, eh?

quote:

---

The holy books say that there is a time to kill; and what's more, they discuss what those times ought to be

---

Of course they do ... they are written by people with the intent
of control. How can one control without sometimes rattling your
sabre and killing a few dozen/hundred/thousand/million people
(often on your own side if you happen to be an american serviceman).

Good question Peter. I suspect this goes to the question of "Who's In Charge." Even biblical prophets risked jail time or worse, if the king didn't like the messages they brought from "God."Then again, there is a political understanding of the term "God." Moses was promoted to the status of god-hood by "The LORD," and all the princes of Israel were considered "gods."One has to read carefully in order to determine whether the writer was discussing the god in heaven (i.e. sun, moon, star or other) OR the god known as King or other royal person. Even civil court judges were called gods on occasion.db------------------
Doesn't anyone graduate Sunday School?

You want to tell me that "THE" people that brought Monotheism into this world as an organized religion (atleast 1200 years before Christianity) were actually idol worshipers? beliving that man can be on the same boat as God?If Moses and princes (Kings) of Israel were considered Gods then tell me why is there no (and never was) any prayers about them? I mean if Israelites consider Moses god-like, why not worship him? Why do they only mention him once in Passover Prayer in tearms of Messiah? Why did through generations they called him Moishe Rabbeinu (Moses our teacher) instead of Moses "the God-like superior".Same thing about the Kings of Israel. If they were considered gods, howcome nobody worshiped them? And in all Rabbinic Literature and Halacha (The Jewish Law) there is no mention or even implication of your satetement being true.Please, elaborate on your statement. I'm having a hard time understanding the concept behind it. You don't mean the Israelite judges (Sanhedrin) do you? Cause this would be just too hilarious.The only jew I know who was calling other entities "gods" on "occasion" was Jesus. And that entity was himself. Who promoted him to god-hood? His own righteousness?[This message has been edited by TheOne, 07-30-2003]

It didn't happen overnight you know. Why do you suppose the prophets haranged them so much about cutting it out?But I am not talking about Idol Worship. I'm talking about how ancient Hebrews used the terms which we translate as god, or God. [when to capitalize it, is up to the translator] This is the essence of Christianity:"Follow me," says Jesus.
"You are my brothers," says Jesus.
"Be perfect like God," says Jesus.
"We can all become sons of God," says the Apostle.
"Be like Jesus," says the devotional hymn.
[scriptural quotes are off the cuff. Send $20.00 for complete reference]Temple authorities tried to shame Jesus for suggesting that he was the Son of God. He defended himself by quoting Psalm 82:6, "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." Then he argued that calling himself the Son of God was no big deal by comparison (John 10:34,35). You're not the only one. It is not an easy thing to understand, especially for those of us who are thoroughly prejudiced by Christian denominational indoctrination. This may also be true for Jewish kids but I don't know about that. Try to think in terms of how the Greeks understood demi-gods. Try to think in terms of how the word god is used in secular speech today. Understand that Jesus was not the first biblical character to be called "saviour."I believe I have given you enough to mull over for the time being. Meanwhile get hold of Young's Analytical Concordance (Best), or Strong's Exhaustive Concordance (best used to augment Young's). Look at the ways in which the word Elohim is translated and the various contexts in which it is used. That little trip was a mind blowing experience for me. I hope it is equally thrilling for you.Ancient Hebrews were neither Christians nor modern Jews, and Jesus, ... well, Jesus had his own take on religion.db------------------
Doesn't anyone graduate Sunday School?

How does phrase translates to ???"Beliving that man can be on the same boat as God.
This is the essence of Christianity."
In Judaism as well. I didn't phrase myself correctly. I meant to say - "Beliving that man can be worshiped like God"As far as thank you but I'll keep the $20.00 and you can hold on to your quotes, you'll need them. Yeh... Temple authorities did try to shame Jesus. Let's look at some of their reasons and see how Jesus could defend them. First of all, lets agree that New Testament was not written until few years after Jesus died. So, the idea about God and idea about a Messiah was only to be found in Hebrew Bible (Old Testament). So let's see what Hebrew Bible says about the Messiah (or Christ in greek):1. The Messiah(Christ) is to be a human being born naturally to husband and wife. Nowhere does the Old Testament say that the Messiah would be a God or God like.2. Nowhere does the OT predict that Christ will be born to a virgin. In fact, virgins never give birth anywhere in the Bible (OT). This idea is to be found only in pagan mythology. To Israelites the very idea that God would plant a seed in a woman is unnecessary and unnatural. After all, what is accomplished by this claim? What positive purpose does it serve? The claim that Mary did not have natural relations with her husband must have made the Jews of that time suspect her of wrong doing. The New Testament admits as much when it says "Then Joseph her (Mary's) husband, being a just man, and not willing to shame her in public, decided to divorce her quietly." (Matthew 1:19) The idea of virgin birth serves no purpose, except to attract pagans to Christianity.3. The Messiah of OT is expected to return the Jews to their land. Jesus was born while the Jews still lived in the land.4.The Messiah is to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem - but Jesus leaved while the Temple was still standing.5. The Messiah is to reign as King of the Jews. Jesus' career as describedin the NT lasted all of three years, at end of which he was crucified by the Romans as a common criminal. He never functioned as anything but a wandering preacher and "faith healer", certainly he held no official position or excersiced any rule of any kind.6. During the time of the Messiah, prophecy will return to the Jewish people and the presence of God will dwell amongst them. (Check out Ezekeil 37:27) These are yet to be fulfilled.7. The NT itself claims that the prophecies concerning the Messiah were to be realized in Jesus' own generation. Check out Mark 13:30. And in Matthew 4, Jesus is quoted saying "The Kingdom of of Heaven is at hand." Well, 2000 years later... is it at hand now?8. Nowhere does the OT say that the Messiah would come once then be killed and return again in a "Second Coming". The idea of a second coming is pure ratiolization of Jesus' failure to function in any way as a Messiah, or to fulfill any of the prophesies of the OT and the Prophets. The idea is purely Christian invention, with no foundation in the Bible (OT).9. The Bible (OT) says that the Messiah would be descended in a direct line from King David. However, if God was Jesus' "father", is it not somewhat ridiculous to claim that he is descended from King David on his father's side?If Jesus really was the Messiah, why did the overwhelming majority of his own people, the Jews living at that time, rejected him? Why did his followers consist of a handful of people, almost all of whome were barely educated? Why was there not one man of learning, nor one prominent leader who accepted him? Why did his own family turn against him?Who was in a position to judge if he was or was not the Messiah? His own people, who anxiously awaited the arrival of the Messiah or pagan peoples who had no understanding of what the concept really meant?You know... I'll leave it up to you to defend Jesus. I want you to tell me why you have chosen a Jewish guy as your Saviour and Son of God. And what stops you from serving your God without extra help. Ancient Hebrews were defenately not Christians. However there was a time when pagans converting to Christianity had to accept Judaism first and only then they could become Christians. Christianity was just another sect of Judaism. (I guess I won't catch you teaching that in the Sunday School). This was changed only later by St. Paul. As far as Ancient and "Modern" Hebrews... Same God, Same Torah, Same Land of Israel. Close to 4000 years and counting, and branching out religions like your own on the way. Enjoy. [This message has been edited by TheOne, 07-31-2003]

TheOne writes:

quote:

---

How does phrase:

quote:

---

"...and all the princes of Israel were considered 'gods'."

---

​

translate to:

​

quote:

---

"But I am not talking about Idol Worship. I'm talking about how ancient Hebrews used the terms which we translate as god, or God. [when to capitalize it, is up to the translator]"

---

​

???

---

I'm afraid I don't understand what it is you're asking. Was Jesus a man? Was he, Is he, worshipped like a god? The royals were presumed, or expected, to be god-like {read godly}, and, according to the psalm I quoted, were called 'gods' by Jehovah (AKA Yahweh; AKA the LORD). This was not a 'classless' society; not a democratic republic.Messiah {< Greek messias < Hebrew mashiach} is a way of saying 'anointed'. Kings, and prophets, were "anointed." It was a ceremony, and a sign, of authorization. The oil used for anointing was an apothecary formula with a distinctive odor. It was illegal for anyone but the state to make the stuff. Wearing it without authorization was tantamount to impersonating an officer of the kings court. Kings, and prophets, were referred to as: "the LORD's anointed." ???!!! Never thought about that but I'm sure it is correct. Could you point me to a source of more information on the subject? That's exactly what I teach in my Sun-day School although that particular point is not raised online, yet. I suspect they may have fewer problems with polytheism and/or idol worship today. You have assumed a great deal based on what little I have written here. I think you'll find that I am not the whom you think.db------------------
Doesn't anyone graduate Sunday School?

quote:

---

Never thought about that but I'm sure it is correct. Could you point me to a source of more information on the subject?

---

There is a book titled "Desire of the Everlasting Hills" by Thomas Cahill, which at least touches on the subject. Overall it is a very good read.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

Thanks John.I am hoping that TheOne has a Jewish source for this.db------------------
Doesn't anyone graduate Sunday School?

If by Jewish source you mean - Jewish author, sure, here's one book I think you'll enjoy. It has a chapter on a gradual split between Judaism and Christianity and key players in it."Jews, God and History", by Max Dimont.

quote:

---

I am hoping that TheOne has a Jewish source for this.

---

I think the best Jewish source for this would be the NT itself, though you have to read between the lines a little. Remember the split between Paul and the other disciples? It was essentially about how Jewish one had to be in order to join the church. "Do converts have to follow the dietary laws, etc.?" Paul said no. The others held onto Judaism much more strongly.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

You are right.Since the Jews would not have Christianity, Paul took it to the pagans. To make it easier for them to join his new religion, he made a decision to abandon Jewish dietary laws and the rite of circumision. Also he decided to substitute Christ for the Torah (OT), and this was the most crucial one. It caused the final and unalterable break between the Father and Son religions. The Jews belived then, as they do now, that man can know God only through word of God as revealed in the Old Testament. The Pauline doctrine stated that man could know God only throgh Christ. The schism between Jew and Christian was total.

Thank you. Between this and John's suggestion, I should have adequate references to demonstrate validity of the claim.db------------------
Doesn't anyone graduate Sunday School?

I write already the answer to the dillema of killing in the Old Testament.Everything in old Testament was part of a plan of salvation made by God .Basically Adam and Eve sinned(PLEASE STOP THE LONG DISCUSSION ABOUT THEIR INOCENCE AND READ THIS TEXT TILL THE END AND YOU WILL UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING) and are forbidden to take the Tree of Life(Jesus Christ).Then God called the people of Israel to overtake the Flame Sword(Israel Enemies),enter the Garden of Eden(Canaan) and still battle till the time Christ has to come and die to save our sins(i.e till they reach the Tree of Life).Israelites are sons of Abraham .Abraham was the father of Faith although he sinned a little(when he said Sarah was his sister for example).His faith pleasures God and that was the very reason that He choses Israel.God said to Abraham "All nations will be blessed through you " meaning his descendant(Jesus) will bring the SPIRITUAL salvation of humanity.
Understand this:If Jesus are not to come God would never call Israel to be his people .Jesus was the very reason for the Old Testament
Israelites were so arrogant that they even didnt realized that and then most of them rejected Jesus .All the killing in the old Testament has a Cosmic importance(You have to see Gods plan as a Whole)All the gods of that time were gods to that especific nation
with the exception of God who is the God of the entire world.Every God in this world seems not to worry very much with people outside the nation who worship them(i.e they dont order people to be missonaires).The devil and his demons are behind the gods of another nations .Adam and Eve had given the world authority to Satan very easily.But reconquer people to God is more difficult(requires the Israel story(a sacrificing one) to lead to Jesus sacrifice that had to be telled to people through evangelization) .This makes sense to me because I received Jesus like my saviour and have the Holy Spirit and I experienced the power of the cross.

I write already the answer to the dillema of killing in the Old Testament.Everything in old Testament was part of a plan of salvation made by God .Basically Adam and Eve sinned(PLEASE STOP THE LONG DISCUSSION ABOUT THEIR INOCENCE AND READ THIS TEXT TILL THE END AND YOU WILL UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING) and are forbidden to take the Tree of Life(Jesus Christ).Then God called the people of Israel to overtake the Flame Sword(Israel Enemies),enter the Garden of Eden(Canaan) and still battle till the time Christ has to come and die to save our sins(i.e till they reach the Tree of Life).Israelites are sons of Abraham .Abraham was the father of Faith although he sinned a little(when he said Sarah was his sister for example).His faith pleasures God and that was the very reason that He choses Israel.God said to Abraham "All nations will be blessed through you " meaning his descendant(Jesus) will bring the SPIRITUAL salvation of humanity.
Understand this:If Jesus are not to come God would never call Israel to be his people .Jesus was the very reason for the Old Testament
Israelites were so arrogant that they even didnt realized that and then most of them rejected Jesus .All the killing in the old Testament has a Cosmic importance(You have to see Gods plan as a Whole)All the gods of that time were gods to that especific nation
with the exception of God who is the God of the entire world.Every God in this world seems not to worry very much with people outside the nation who worship them(i.e they dont order people to be missonaires).The devil and his demons are behind the gods of another nations .Adam and Eve had given the world authority to Satan very easily.But reconquer people to God is more difficult(requires the Israel story(a sacrificing one) to lead to Jesus sacrifice that had to be telled to people through evangelization) .This makes sense to me because I received Jesus like my saviour and have the Holy Spirit and I experienced the power of the cross.

Newborn writes:

quote:

---

Israelites were so arrogant that they even didnt realized that and then most of them rejected Jesus

---

Anti-Semitism always leaves a rotten odor, I find....

quote:

---

Adam and Eve had given the world authority to Satan very easily.

---

Um, the serpent was not the devil.At any rate, I read everything you wrote and I still don't understand. After all, Adam and Eve were innocent. God set them up to fail and when they did, not being able to do anything else, god throws a hissy fit.Why would anybody want to follow such a petty, obviously evil being?------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!