Anything Divine in the Bible?

And? This doesn't mean we can't still do this. In fact we can do it, and do it all the time. Someone being evil can never be determined objectively, this doesn't stop people from finding certain actions evil. No absolute morality is needed for this. Yes, it can never be determined if any action is good or bad absolutely. Again, this doesn't stop people from doing just that. Sure it can, it might not be correct, nut that doesn't matter. If someone from their own values finds something to be evil. Yes, and still we judge, and not even consistently with one another. more proof that it's all subjective, yet not less true to the individual person. I've never said anything different. This still doesn't matter to the individual, who'll still judge things. Sure I do, in fact I do it everyday. It might not mean anything in the long run, but it means something to me, and that's all that's needed for me to do it. So? That doesn't make it less true to me. Sure I can, and in fact do. A duck can't judge, it has nothing to weigh the situation against, only it's instincts. Yes it does. Intelligence allows us to weigh a situation against our opinions, without intelligence, this isn't possible, and we can't judge without this. That's because there is no such thing as objective morality, there is only subjective morality. When you take the objectiveness out of the picture, all the problems go away. All right, let's have them. Only to an observer, and differently for each observer. None, in fact I don't say they are absolutely real, I say they are subjectively real. Yet they aren't, they are fully consistent with that persons morality, showing again that objective morality doesn't exist. Ok. You're basically right, what you fail to account for is a persons own opinions and beliefs, that make him judge regardless of there being an absolute morality. They might be completely wrong, but to them, they are completely right. Put like that, yes. But like I pointed out, you didn't take everything into account. Well, sure, but it is you who claims that's where aboslute morality comes from, and I say there is no such thing. So for you to prove your point, these are the things you'd have to do:
1) Show there is in fact an "objective morality"
2) Show that this morality came from something other then humans themselves.
3) Show this other thing to be god.
4) Show god exists.Now, I'm not asking you to do this, but keep this in mind when you again claim there is an absolute morality. Yes, they are. However objectivity, and that objectivity coming from god are not. Yes, this doesn't stop me from judging them though. Yes, again pointing to the fact there is no objective morality. MY standards. And? You keep repeating this. Why would I need a platform to judge? First you claim god has nothing to do with this, and now you bring up a debate on the existence of god? I'll go watch it, and perhaps even do a reaction to it, but that just depends on what I get to see. yes, as I've always said it was.

---

I hunt for the truth

Because they murdered and raped other human beings, doncha see? We live in a society made up of human beings. That sort of action tends to fragment that sort of society. I subjectively don't approve of that.You can't possibly be that dense, Bertot, witout being made of osmium. You may be that obtuse, I guess, but what's the point?

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

Bertot,If your system of morality is so absolute that you derive from the Bible answer me this.Is slavery wrong? If so why and from where in the Bible do you derive this answer?Don't try to shift the question to me or in anyway try to sidestep this question. You have challenged us on the credibility of our "relative" morality so I would like you to find out how well you do at defending yours.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

The Bertot writes: Huntard writes:Well I think we have all made our points and I think we can put a fork in this one and call it done, atleast from my perspective. Ill leave you with this expression from yourself to demonstrate my point:"It might not mean anything in the long run". Well there ya go. At any rate happy hunting (no pun intended) in your search for what you believe constitutes morality. I am sure we will cross paths again on this very wonderful website, Ive truely enjoyed our exchanges on this topic. Your all great, I dont care what anybody else says about ya, ha ha.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.

C writesAnd certainly you are not so dense to see that murder is a relative term, depending on ones perspective, if ethics and morality are relative. It has to work across the board with and to all species, it cannot be murder for one and simply taking of life for others for some contrived reason. If all species do not have or possess all knowledge, then it would follow that none of them have a standard that is absolute, as all here have indicated.But as I told Huntard you are free presently to believe whatever you choose. If that sort of ideology works for you then I suppose you are happy. Thanks for the excahnge

Why would I try to shift the question to you, I havent in the past. It was Brians and Cavedivers assertions about God being evil that demonstrated that the obligation was thiers to back that assertion. I will try to provide an answer from what i understand the scriptues to say or not say on the matter. It is my understanding that the scriptures condemns CAPTIVITY and mistreatment of individuals in any form. "Do unto others", etc. Captivity is a more accurate term than slavery, because all captivity could include a form of slavery but all slavery is NOT captivity. Hence Babylonian Captivity, etc.. Slavery is not expressedly condemned because it has a broad meaning. Paul says we are SLAVES to Christ. I am a slave to my job, literally, if I want to eat and survive,but in niether instance am I being held against my will as I would be in captivity.If ones response is that God sent them into captivity at times, then it should be understood that he is the creator and supreme judge, to make such a decision. The willful disobedience and punishment fot that sin is his decision based on an absolute standard or morality.Even an average individual in society does not have the right to hold captive another person, but the judge has such authority to act in this manner as a result of persons breaking the law. however, it is from a Biblical perspective that we believe God gave man the ablity to distinquish between right or wrong action and punish it accordingly. Therefore the magistrates actions are jutified in such cases. "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers for the powers that be are ordained of God. For if you do that which is wrong, fear them, for they weild not the sword (authority) in vain.I dont know if this helps but I am sure you will let me know. ICANT and Jaywill may have a different perspective. We will see.D Bertot Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

Their (and my point as well) point they were making was that against the moral codes of today's modern societies as adopted globally nationally and internationally i.e. the Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, your god would be considered a bloody, murderous, maniacal tyrant who commands slaver, ethnicide, infanticide and other attrocities and who is dangerous to society at large and judged accordingly. And yes we provided specific scripture references throughout the Bible that backs up this point. Where does the Bible scripture say that the Bible condemns captivity? Please provide specific references.The definition of slavery is to remove all inherent rights of an individual and subject that individual to the will of his master. Involentary captivity is slavery.Nowhere in the Bible does it say that these slaves were criminals thus many of these captive people were innocent women and children. There were no jails or prisons in Israel society. Hebrew criminals either paid restitution to redeem their charges or they were executed if the charges were severe enough. Many of these foreign captives/slaves were womem and children from other nations though a few poor Israelites sold themselves or their family members (sons and daughters) into servitude (though not treated the same as foreign slaves).Here are some that specifically indicate that the Israelites and even the Christians condoned slavery: The only place where I see this is where God tells the Israelites to treat their own people sold into slavery (or more accurately indentured servitude) humanely. It is true much later in the early Christian Church, Paul tells the Christians to treat their slaves humanely as in Ephesians 6:9 however in no way does he condemn slavery. By his words he condones slaves and tells them to obey the will of their masters. Nowhere in the OT does it condemn the maltreatment of foreign slaves. Hypothetically, if God came out of the heavens and told you to enslave me and my family as slaves would you do it? Would you question it? This is a valid question which I would like a valid answer for. What laws did the children in the tribes that the Isrealites conquered break? So was it wrong for the American colonoliasts to rebel against England and King George III who was in authority over them? Was it wrong for Ghandi to lead a peacefull rebellion against the tyranical rule of the British in the 1930's and 40's to lead his country to independence? According to this scripture it was.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

Before I begin a response to this subject, let me make one quick note. The discussion we are in engaged in at present is quite diffferent than the one previous, in the respect it should be fully noted thatin that discussion you made it fully aware that morality and ethics was a relative and non-absolute proposition.I on the other hand make no such claims, in fact quite the opposite. I am maintaining that what an omnipotent God does or allows is correct from an omnipotent absolute morality and eternal perspective.Secondly, actions that the individual human involves himself in and what an omnipotent judge involves himself in or allows is quite different. As is the activity that an earthy judge arbitrates verse the average citizen.That being the case it should be obvious that these two discussions have little to do with eachother and any accusation brought against God should be understood in that context, unless you can provide proof that you possess omniptence.Further, it should be understood that I believe that God possess omnipotence to make such decisions in these matters and we are proceeding from that context, atleast from an argument sake as we did with your admission that morality is subjective. I make no such claims and maintain that morality and an eternal God that possess it, is by nature absolute in his judgments. If that is agreeable then we may proceed.In that context we may start here: The entire article may be seen at http:The Bible and Slavery - Apologetics Press As was stated earlier slavery of some types and situations is both reasonable andcorrect, if done from a positon of authority. Your question to me concerning captivity was made in the context of n individual to an individual. Did not God do and let other nations do to the Isrealites the very samething he allowed, them to do with the disobedient. [PlEASE READ Leviticus 26:14-46]. This is justice across the baord my friend.As a matter of fact he was much more harsh at times with his own children concerning disobedience and slavery, than with others. Slavery then becomes more of a tool in Gods hands than captivity as in the case of indiviulas to individuals. [qs]A Mutually Beneficial Relationship
Frequently, “slavery” in Bible times was much more of an employer/employee relationship than an owner/slave situation. Even the words used to delineate between a hired servant and a slave are difficult to separate. As Herbert Lockyer noted:In the ancient world, service and slavery were closely related, so much so that one can scarcely distinguish the one from the other. The original words used for “servants” and “service” carry a variety of meanings between which it is not always easy to determine what is meant (1969, p. 197).Arndt and Gingrich documented that the Greek word doulos meant “slave,” but that it also was used “in a wider sense” to denote “any kind of dependence.” In 2 Corinthians 4:5, the apostles are called the douloi (plural of doulos) of the Christians. Christ took on the form of a doulos, as stated in Philippians 2:7. Paul designates himself as a doulos of Christ in Romans 1:1, Philippians 1:1, Galatians 1:10, and numerous other passages (1967, pp. 205-206). The term can describe a person who is obligated in some way, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, to another person. Due to this broad use, various translations have employed a wide range of words to render the meaning of doulos in English. Using Romans 1:1 as a case in point, the NKJV has “bondservant,” the New Living Translation has “slave,” the KJV and ASV have “servant,” and the Darby Bible has “bondman.”The Hebrew word ebed is similar to the Greek doulos, in that it can be translated as “slave” or “servant.” In Exodus 4:10, Moses referred to himself as the “servant” (ebed) of God. Abraham called himself the ebed of the angels who came to visit him in Genesis 18:3. In Genesis 39:17-19, Potiphar’s wife described Joseph as the Hebrew ebed, and Genesis 24:2 talks about the eldest ebed in Abraham’s house, who “ruled over all he had.”The purpose of including this brief description of the two most common terms for a slave is to show that our modern use of the word slave generally evokes mental images of cruelty, injustice, and bondage against a person’s will. While such ideas could be included in the biblical usage, they do not necessarily fit every time the words are used. Instead, the picture that we often see when the biblical words for “slave” are employed is a mutually beneficial arrangement similar to an employer/employee relationship. Job describes this relationship quite well:If I have despised the cause of my manservant (ebed) or of my maidservant, when they contended with me; what then shall I do when God riseth up? And when he visiteth, what shall I answer him? Did not he that made me in the womb make him? And did not one fashion us in the womb (Job 31:13-15)?Obviously, Job’s dealings with his slaves provided a mutually acceptable situation for master as well as slave."
"Even during New Testament times, slavery often provided a mutually beneficial relationship to both owner and slave. As Paul Copan remarked:During Paul’s time, the master-slave relationship provided sufficient benefits and opportunities, such that it dampened any thoughts of revolutionary behavior. One freed slave had inscribed on his tombstone: “Slavery was never unkind to me....” More often than not, it was the free workers rather than slaves who were abused by foremen and bosses. (After all, an owner stood to have an ongoing loss if he abused his slave.) [2001, p. 172, parenthetical item and emp. in orig.].But suppose a master did abuse his slaves in Old Testament times, and those slaves decided to run away. In Deuteronomy 23:15-16, God made it unlawful for runaway slaves to be returned to their masters. The text states:You shall not give back to his master the slave who has escaped from his master to you. He may dwell with you in your midst, in the place which he chooses within one of your gates, where it seems best to him; you shall not oppress him.This passage is particularly revealing because it shows how costly cruelty to slaves was. It also shows that slaves had the freedom to choose where, and with whom, they wanted to live. Wright noted that this passage proves that
[s]lavery as such is not protected or rendered sacrosanct under Israelite law. At the very least it can be said that such a law probably presumes that runaway slaves will be the exception, not the rule. This lends further weight to the view that normally slavery in Israel was not oppressively harsh. It would certainly not have been, if the spirit of the slavery laws of Exodus and Deuteronomy were put into practice (1983, pp. 181-182).Add to this the fact that kidnapping a man and selling him as a slave was a crime punishable by death, as noted in Exodus 21:16: “He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death.” Certainly, any parallel to slavery in early America can be easily refuted." Same author as above[/qs]Notice that the scriptures makes a distinction between what an omnipotent judge allows and what a man is allowed to do on his own authority.Further: Here is a place for us to start. I will await your response.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

Touche Bertot, as suspected I got dragged down the hole of the relativism of "absolute morality" of religious dogma and got wrapped up in trying to clarify your justification for God condoning slavery/captivity.Let me get back on track of what my original question was: Is slavery right or wrong.First lets define terms. Slavery as defined by most civilizations and even indirectly in the Bible itself is "the ownership of a person or persons by another or others" also a slave is defined as "a person who is the property of another." Wikipedia gives a more thorough and universal definition of slavery: "a legal or informal institution under which a person (called "a slave") is compelled to work for another (sometimes called "the master" or "slave owner")...Slaves are held against their will from the time of their capture, purchase, or birth, and are deprived of the right to leave, to refuse to work, or to receive compensation (such as wages) in return for their labour...Today freedom from slavery is an internationally recognised human right. Article 4 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms."Additionally, slavery is also considered an unjustifiable and immoral behavior by the world at large as shown above in the UN Declaration of Human Right. Enslavement does not take in consideration the guilt of the offended party (the slave) it is merely a means of oppressing one group of people by another group of people. Thus, criminals in jail are not slaves, enemy prisoners of war held in captivity are not necessarily slaves but they can be as indicated in the Bible and other ancient civilizations (and sometimes even modern ones as in the case of American prisioners of war in German and Japanese work camps in WWII), indentured servents are not technically slaves as they usually can buy back their freedom.Would you not agree to this definition of slavery? So again is it right or is it wrong to command or even condone slavery as defined above to occur? Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

Where did God command that the Israelites were to rape people?Do you have a chapter and verse for such a divine command for the Hebrews to rape women?Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I changed "thousands upon thousands" to something more realistic - thousands.I pretty sure all my posts here concerning God's full salvation could far exceed a thousand words. And in may of those paragraphs there was no mention of retribution.Now if you haven't read them, I don't hold that against you too much. But they are there. And if you were familiar with my posts you'd know that usually I am not speaking about retribution. Technically, you do have a question mark, however these questions sound like you trying pretty hard to put words in my mouth. You are responding to a post I wrote to someone, the subject matter of which included the terrible things that someone did to other people. My response included a remedy that assured the poster of this "shocking" crime that the criminals themselves were fools to think that they were getting away with anything in God's universe.That was not an indication that there is no other side to the God. That was not and indication that revenge is the only subject in the Bible. That was one appropriate aspect to the discussion.There are consequences in God's universe for people who are not repented.If you would like to discuss the matter from the angle of God's mercy and love I can surely speak to that. There are two places where you, me, and all other sinners will be judged. We can take our pick which place we would prefer to be judged.1.) We can accept that all our sins were judged on the cross of Christ at Calvary. That is where the Son of God in His great love became a propitiatory substitute on our behalf. He took into Himself the penalty which was due us. Justice was imputed on our behalf in His death.That would include even the sins of those rapists that the shocking post discribed.2.) Or we can disbelieve and reject that God has caused the Son to die on behalf of the sins of the world. Then we can receive eternal justice upon our own person when God judges the secrets of men at the end of the age.I think number 1 shows a great deal of forebearance and love of God. Christ was righteous and innocent. Yet He died on our behalf. We can agree with God or reject His plan.Now you may call this "petty". But you have a sloppy idea of divine justice. You may think that God should just forget it in a permissive way.No, God will forgive our sins. He is eager to do so. But He will do so in a way which upholds His righteous procedure. He will do so in a way that manifests His glory.When a theif desires money, he doesn't care how he gets it as long as he gets it. The thief does not care about the procedure. He only cares that he obtains the money. How he got it doesn't matter. Only that he got it matters irregardless of the procedure.We humans are like that with God's pardon and forgiveness. We don't care HOW we get saved just as long as we get saved. The procedure doesn't matter to us. As long as God forgets what we did we don't care.God cares for the procedure. He will save us. He loves us and wants to save us. But He will do so in a way that matches His righteous procedure and upholds His honor. Because of our sins there must be punishment. He will not simply say "I know you didn't mean it. Let's jus forget about it."No, for our sins, there will either be the vengence upon Jesus His Son on the cross or there will be the vengence upon us in the damnation of eternal retribution. Christ has already died. We can choose to accept God's way or to reject it.So the love of God and the justice of God are manifest in His work on Christ's cross. And I don't regard this as petty.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

DA writes:Lets try this again DA. There are numerous things that an omnipotent God can and will do that are not allowable for the average human being. While it may be jutifiable for him from an eternal perspective to take the life of a child, it is not for me. If I were able to create a Mr. Data, ther are certain things I would allow him to do. However, Idoubt I wold allow him to discipline or correct my childrens action, even if both he and my children are under my control. I have the charge and rule over both of them, correct? Your problem is that you are trying to compare human actions with omnipotence. It simply cannot be done.To answer your question directly NO, slavery is not wrong according to the Bibe. However, before you get hyperactive let me explain. I do not indorse salvery from a human standpoint anymore than I do say homosexuality. While the current laws allow homosexuality and gay marriage, God specifically condems it. So while the current societys abhor the idea of slavery, Gods view is that there are many forms of slavery and how we act or treat people within that context is what is at issue. You may contend as much as you wish that the above examples are not really slavery but they are. I would not agree to this limited definition of slavery although the thoughts expressed in it are valid. However, did you notice the very first word "Legal". Now, within that definition you cited it specifically uses words ( thier capture), and others to which your argument say that slavery is not. How do you explain that?Further, the Biblical guidlines specifically reject some of the guidliness expressed in that definition.D Bertot Again slavery has a broad meaning. What is condemned in both the OT and NT is the mistreatment of such people in those situations. God allowed slavery for many reasons, but never the mistreatment of people. God conducts and participates in actions that are not allowable for his creation, in the same way a father would not allow his children to participate in the discipline of a brother or a sister.Further, there are certain things that God allows man to dictate and slavery is one of them. If man from his God give authority as a government decides to abolish slavery, then that is OK with God as well. God has not made an arbitration on the category of slavery, because slavery has a very broad meaning and there are may reason to which one finds themselves in that conditionEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

Hi Bertot, That is not an answer to DA's question at all, let alone a direct one.DA asked if slavery is right or wrong, not what the Bible says about it. We all know that the Bible fails to condemn slavery.I am more interested in whether you think slavery is right or wrong and, if you say it is wrong, how you got this from the Bible.For the record, I find it shocking that anyone could equivocate about the immorality of slavery.Mutate and Survive

I just believe that morality is a product of human intelligence not of some unproven supernatural entity. Whether you want to call it relative or not I care less. That is your personal opinion, which itself is subjective and subject to scrutiny and skepticism whether you like it or not. Our claim is that even in your own bible your morals are relative. Why do you no longer follow the rest of the 613+ other commandements in the Torah? Why do you no longer practice slavery as perscribed in the Bible? Why is ethnicide no longer practiced? Christians cherry pick their way through the Bible, discarding commands and laws that no longer fit the moral conventions of modern society. Incorrect, if a judge makes a ruling that oversteps his bounds and goes against the moral standards of modern society i.e. orders the execution of a boy who curses his father or mother, than he is subject to being disbarred (under charges such as “causing incalculable harm to the public perception of the judiciary and attorneys”) or even arrested as well as being publicly ridiculed. No one, including the President of the United States is above the law. The same applies to your god. When you provide evidence of your god's existence.And what does power have anything to do with being good? Just because someone or something is all-powerful (omnipotent) does not equate to that entity being all-good. Even if I did agree the your god is omnipotent for the sake of argument, omnipotence does not equal all-benovelent. What do you mean by "absolute in his judgements"? Does god change his mind? It sure indicates this in the Bible, so how can he be absolute in his judgements? Modern society does not consider this situations to be slavery. It is captivity for the safety of society.Slavery in a historical context very rarely if ever considered the guiltiness or innocence of the people being oppressed. Many innocent people were enslaved soley due to the color of their skin, their religion, their ethnicity, their sex (sex slaves), or the weak political and military power (as in the case of Israel capturing Canaanite men, women, and children as slaves). In no way am I saying that Israel was the only guilty party. I am saying that in none of these contextes is slavery considered right by the global majority of human beings on this planet. No one calls criminal imprisonment, slavery. Go tell an African-American that his ancestors were enslaved because they were criminals and see what happens. Basically you are implying that all the people the Hebrews made slaves deserved it including children and babies (the ones who were not slaughtered). The slavery you define and that defined by everyone else is totally different. This gives God the right to commit ethnicide, infantcide, raping, pillaging and slavery? How is that any better than any of the acts commited by the Canaanites? What a crock of shit. So why don't you practice this today? Why has your moral compass changed Bertot? Why don't you go out and slaughter us pagans and enslave our wives and children? Why don't you pillage my house and take my belongings? Over and over we have pointed to evidence from the Bible about how the MASSACRED the enemy and you APPROVE of this. Your god is a piece of work isn't he! Why keep the women children instead of murdering them like the male children? Most likely to rape and impregnate! These words gave justification to mediaeval Christian Crusaders who slaughtered men, women and children and pillaged the cities and villages along their way to Jerusalem. If I knew nothing of Christianity or the Bible and read this I would think that your god was a sadistic, egotestical, bloodthirst, murderous, maniachal, bloodthirst evil tyrant not the loving god Christians portray him to be! Is this why these verses never come up in sunday school or sunday sermons much less to new converts? Your god not only condones but COMMANDS infanticide, rape, murder and other attrocities. And if you condone it than you are a sick fuck and just as guilty!What would happen today if God did this? Would you still defend him? You have to be fucking kidding me! Slavery is not a mutually beneficial relationship. Your blatant stupidity, arrogance, hypocricy and blind belief is disgusting. Go tell a former slave that he shouldn't complain because it was a mutually beneficial relationship. You are real piece of work Bertot!Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

DevilsADvocate,I have read some of your tirades about morality and the supposed abominable behavior of God.But the fact that you want to call yourself "the Devil's Advocate" makes me think that these are Crocodile Tears you are shedding.You know the job of the Devil is to be a Slanderer and Accuser, incessantly, day and night.You know the Bible is a progressive revelation. It did not stop with the book of Joshua. Neither at the end of Joshua does it turn to the reader and say:"Okay, there you have it. Now you know what to do. Go out now and serve God by plundering, fighting, driving out, and killing anybody who you'd like to call Canaanites."The Bible didn't end at the Conquest of Canaan and then instruct everyone to go do likewise.Do you have Jesus teaching His disciples about military conquest? So I think you have to consider the progressive revelation of the Bible. The New Testament's main teaching is not "Okay, now go out and gather slaves. And then you have done the will of God."You have the teaching to abide in Christ and allow Him to abide in you. And He is quite a splendid example of wisdom, love, mercy, grace, peace.I wish you took a little more seriously the progressive nature of the Bible's teaching. This God finally was incarnated - "The Word became flesh".I don't mean that the God of the New Testament is a different God from that found in Exodus, Leviticus, and Joshua. But we have a fuller and more rounded picture of what He is after.That ruthlessness with which Joshua was commanded to route the Canaanites speaks to us in this wise today:When we receive this Person, Jesus the Son of God, into our being, we should be absolute to allow Him to transform our old nature into the new nature. We should be strict towards ourselves to allow the transforming Spirit to root out all the old habits of the fallen Adamic nature of rebellion. And we should allow the Spirit to conquer us, saturate us, fully sanctify us, so that we may enjoy our real Good Land. That is the All-inclusive and All-extensive Christ.I am saying to you that in some sense the Old Testament was the picture. And the New Testament is the caption under the picture.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.