|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,474 Year: 3,731/9,624 Month: 602/974 Week: 215/276 Day: 55/34 Hour: 1/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Jesus/God the same? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
doctrbill Member (Idle past 2786 days) Posts: 1174 From: Eugene, Oregon, USA Joined: |
Now to complete the response which began with my message #28.
doctrbill writes: quote: wmscott writes:
If the creation was not a mistake, then why did he try to wipe the slate clean with Noah’s Flood? And why did that fail? But then, that was the Jehovah god, wasn't it? God does not make mistakes.quote: He doesn't change it in the way you imply,
Your statement may seem to be supported at 1 Samuel 15:29 quote:Do you think this is about Jehovah? I used to think so. But then I noticed that, in this very chapter, Jehovah is repenting: quote:Thus, Jehovah cannot be 'the Strength of Israel.' So: Who is this man? people repent
My point, exactly. So, Who is this man Jehovah?quote: Not a literal sword, a symbol of his power to execute the wicked
He then kills (executes) them with what? A bloody metaphor? A ‘symbolic’ fire?Does he also reward the righteous with a ‘symbolic’ paradise? quote: ... he didn't throw rocks, he threw ice.
I’m sure the dead don’t see a significant difference.
This was just the natural means he used ... in this instance.
There is nothing ‘natural’ about it. Natural hail may damage crops and dent cars but it doesn’t seek out and destroy soldiers.quote: There is a rebellion against God going on,
This does not explain why he has enemies: And he can’t be much of a god if people are dangerous to him.
quote: 2 Thessalonians 1:6-10 " vengeance upon those who do not know God ... "
He kills them because they don’t know him? Isn’t that special!
quote: ... the Israelites had to fight ... God supported them in those battles.
This is simply a reiteration of fact, and does not answer the question.
quote: We are made in his image.
Backward logic. If we are made in his image we should behave like him, not vice versa.
quote: Figure of speech, duh!
Are you sure that calling him ‘God’ is not a figure of speech?
Only Jehovah is God in the absolute sense, Jesus is not almighty God while he is however a 'mighty god' (Isa 9:6).
There is no reason for me to believe that Isaiah had Jesus of Nazareth in mind. Here is the passage in question: Isa. 9:6 KJV quote:I reiterate: Where, in the New Testament, is Jesus called "The mighty God," "The everlasting Father," or "The Prince of Peace"? Nowhere, I think. To explain Isa. 9:6 to you would take too long,
Isn’t it worth it if you can support Jehovah’s claim to godhood? Doesn’t he need you defend his honor? Besides, How could it take longer than your explanation of the Trinitarian fallacy? db
See message 28 reference to Exodus 28:8, should read: Exodus 25:8. [This message has been edited by doctrbill, 12-17-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Abshalom Inactive Member |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Quoting Peter: "I know Jesus reworded the ten-commandments to make them more contemporary." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jesus is credited beginning at Luke 10:25 with regard to the pharisee lawyer's set-up question "which is the most important of all commandments" from among the huge compilation of Law with a concise reply that reduced the approximately 613 commandments down to only 2: "Love God with all your heart, mind, and soul; and love your neighbor as you love yourself." In Luke, this statement is followed with the "Good Samaritan" story wherein the priest on his way to the Temple would not dirty his hands helping the waylaid traveler (to do so would have required a period of ritual cleansing and postponement of the priest's appearance in the Temple). For similar reasons the rich man did not help the unfortunate and bloody victim ... the rich dude would not have been able to make his austentacious appearance at the Temple, etc. It was this parable and others like it that infuriated the pharisees, Temple politicians, and Roman/Herodian suck-butts that ran society in Judah and Israel at the time. Morals of the story: (1) In politics, once you've made your specific legal point, don't follow-up with anecdotes that rub salt in open wounds; or (2) Be a secular humanist and leave all the philosophising to pompous braying asses. You choose. By the way, Rabbi Hillel also is credited with "rewording the ten commandments" within the exact same time frame as is Jesus. Hillel was approached by a student from a Jewish theological school that opposed Hillel's teachings. The student question was a set-up just like the pharisee's question. The student challenged Hillel " if you can teach me the entire Torah (meaning of course the Laws of Moses) while standing on one foot, and I will become your faithful student." Hillel supposedly raised one foot off the ground and replied, "That which hurts you, do not do so to another ... all the rest (of the Torah) is commentary," and set his foot back down. Now this was probably considered more heretical a statement to the pharisees and Temple politicians than even Jesus's little story about the Samaritan. But Hillel survived the ensuing theopolitical debate and went on to accomplish a great deal of "contemporary" sociopolitical and legal reform. You be the judge. ----------------------------------------------------------------------Quoting Peter: "I would guess that after the debacle with Jesus the resistant Jewish leaders would have learned their lesson." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Nope, the Jewish leaders went on debating the Law, nitpicking social issues, and facilitating the Roman occupation while the street seethed with revolutionary turmoil until one particular uprising resulted in the Roman army destroying the Temple in 70 CE, and relocating the Jewish population to distant Roman provinces. ----------------------------------------------------------------------Quoting Peter: "I guess what Jesus was really saying was that you should love/ devote yourself to God ... not to a book." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Again, I would point out that Luke 10:25 - 37 indicates that "devotion to God" is one/half of the equation. [This message has been edited by Abshalom, 12-17-2003] [This message has been edited by Abshalom, 12-17-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
wmscott Member (Idle past 6270 days) Posts: 580 From: Sussex, WI USA Joined: |
On Biblical usage of the term 'god' you stated;
quote:1 Corinthians 8:5-6 "just as there are many "gods" and many "lords," there is actually to us one God the Father" quote:Isaiah 42:5 "This is what the [true] God, Jehovah, has said, the Creator of the heavens and the Grand One stretching them out; "Have you not come to know or have you not heard? Jehovah, the Creator of the extremities of the earth" Isaiah 40:28 Which would mean that the God meantioned at Genesis 1:1 is of course Jehovah.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
You've been making good sense and using the quoted texts masterfully, Wmscott! This Genesis 1 thing is like I had a dog in the yard. The dog's name is Butch. I could either say I'm going to feed doggie, or I'm going to feed Butch because Butch is the dog. Jehovah/YHWH is the god/Elohim of Genesis as well as the NT. The text makes it clear that Jehovah is being referenced.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Rei Member (Idle past 7035 days) Posts: 1546 From: Iowa City, IA Joined: |
quote: No. It would mean that people at the time of Isaiah believed YHVH to be the God mentioned in Genesis 1:1 - not the other way around. There's a telling silence on the subject in Genesis. ------------------"Illuminant light, illuminate me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
wmscott Member (Idle past 6270 days) Posts: 580 From: Sussex, WI USA Joined: |
quote:Genesis 1:31 "After that God saw everything he had made and, look! [it was] very good" God's creation was perfect, all the problems started with the rebellion against God's authority. The flood succeeded in it's purpose, see any Nephilim? quote:In the account you mentioned about Saul, he changed, God didn't. Therefore Saul was no longer viewed as worthy of being Israel's king, the change in the relationship was caused by Saul's failure to obey God's commands. Basically if a righteous person turns wicked, God will regret having to punish him. In all the instances in the Bible where God is spoken of as changing his mind or feeling regrets, it is always due to some one else failing him. God never has the need to change his values or his way of thinking. quote:God's sword is a metaphor for the various means and ways he uses in executing his judgments as shown by; 1 Chronicles 21:12-14 "or for three days there is to be the sword of Jehovah, even pestilence, in the land, with Jehovah's angel bringing ruin in all the territory of Israel." quote:Just depends on how you define 'natural' and 'supernatural', the hailstones were natural in that they were just hailstones, the targeting of the hailstones was of course supernatural. God used a natural thing, hailstones, to execute a supernatural intervention. quote:A enemy or opposer doesn't have to be a threat, it is merely a position they take against God, they have no real hope of success. quote:As someone who claims to know the Bible, you should know that in the Bible the word know has different meanings. In this case the word is used like it is at Jeremiah 9:6 ""they have refused to know me," is the utterance of Jehovah." in that they refused to acknowledge Jehovah's authority and obey his laws and serve him. quote:Not teach, taught, past tense, this only applies to David and ancient Israel. The teaching was not a literal instruction in warfare either, in that their success depended on obeying Jehovah and not on their military skills. Jehovah's teaching them warfare is a figure of speech for God giving them victory over the wicked. quote:As I said before, it would take too long to explain this to you, your knowledge at this point is far too limited and your mind too closed for you to accept a scriptural explanation since you reject the interpretation the NT writers give to this verse. On the other points, see my other post, and to clean this thread up, please combine your responses in one post.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
wmscott Member (Idle past 6270 days) Posts: 580 From: Sussex, WI USA Joined: |
Thanks, it is a pretty simple point isn't it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
wmscott Member (Idle past 6270 days) Posts: 580 From: Sussex, WI USA Joined: |
Genesis 2:4 "This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time of their being created, in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Member (Idle past 1501 days) Posts: 2161 From: Cambridgeshire, UK. Joined: |
By 'learned their lesson' I meant realising that
making martyrs is not a great idea. As for the last comment, I think it side-steps the point ...both Jesus and Hillel were basically saying the book is not the important part.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Abshalom Inactive Member |
Peter:
Agreed. Peace.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 4981 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
Hi,
I'd like to say something about:
Genesis 1:31 "After that God saw everything he had made and, look! [it was] very good" God's creation was perfect, all the problems started with the rebellion against God's authority. Can you tell me how you come to the assumption that 'very good' is the same as perfect? Very good is not the same as perfect, it is less than perfect, that is why it is only very good. You are adding to the text here, God never ever claims that He made a perfect creation.
The Flood succeeded in it's purpose, see any Nephilim? Seen any unicorns? However there are references to the nephilim after the flood: Numbers 13:33 ' We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them . It seems to me that God has always been pretty hopeless, is there anything that He can do? Brian.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Abshalom Inactive Member |
Brian asks: "Can you tell me how you come to the assumption that 'very good' is the same as perfect? Very good is not the same as perfect, it is less than perfect, that is why it is only very good. You are adding to the text here, God never ever claims that He made a perfect creation."
Different scholars interpret the "it was good" passage different ways. Ibn Ezra fairly consistently interprets it from Hebrew "God understood that it was good." RAMBAM (Moses Maimonides) consistently interprets it "God confirmed them in their existence in God's will" at the end of each "day." (It's interesting that RAMBAM and Ibn Ezra disagree on the measure of days with Ibn Ezra saying the day begins at dawn and RAMBAM saying it begins at evening, but that's another topic.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
doctrbill Member (Idle past 2786 days) Posts: 1174 From: Eugene, Oregon, USA Joined: |
mscott writes:
The purpose of the flood was to eliminate evil men; because, as Jehovah says, The flood succeeded in it's purpose, ... I am sorry that I have made them. Genesis 6:6,7 RSV In other words, he is repentant. And when his plan doesn't work, He says, "I will never do it again ... man's bent is always toward evil ..." Genesis 8:21 LB So, you see, Jehovah learns a lesson: You can't eliminate evil by killing 'evil' men. quote: wmscott writes:
First you say he doesn't change his mind. Then you say people make him change his mind. You contradict yourself from one sentence to the next.
... In all the instances in the Bible where God is spoken of as changing his mind or feeling regrets, it is always due to some one else failing him. God never has the need to change his values or his way of thinking. God's sword is a metaphor for the various means and ways he uses in executing A gun by any other name ... God used a natural thing, hailstones, to execute ...
So he kills people. But why do you say, ‘God’? The text says ‘Jehovah’.
A enemy or opposer doesn't have to be a threat, it is merely a position they take against God, they have no real hope of success.
If they are not a threat, then why does he kill them?
they refused to acknowledge Jehovah's authority ...
So do I, but it's not Jehovah who threatens me; it's his little band of dark angels.
quote: The teaching was not a literal instruction in warfare ...
Is there anything about Jehovah which you DO take literally?
As I said before, it would take too long to explain this to you,
Yes, I see you are having difficulty with it.
your knowledge at this point is far too limited and your mind too closed for you to accept a scriptural explanation
And you are a citadel of intellect, who limits himself to a single translation!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
doctrbill Member (Idle past 2786 days) Posts: 1174 From: Eugene, Oregon, USA Joined: |
I believe Rei meant to say, "There's a telling silence on the subject in Genesis chapter one."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 4981 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
Hi,
Thanks for your reply, it is interesting. I still do not see where the word 'perfect' comes in, wmscott has added this to the translation that he is apparently quoting from, I have bever read in any bIble that I have used any claim that God said all his creation was perfect. If Adam and Eve were perfect then they couldnt sin, even the free will (yawn) excuse doesn't make sense here. For Adam and Eve to be able to choose to commit a sin there needs to be the existence of sin in the first place. So God must have created sin, and therefore He created imperfection. It is amazig that anyone over the age of 5 takes the Bible literally, some people are so afraid of reality. Brian.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024