It's Pretty Simple...If You Believe In Right From Wrong - You Believe In God

[xmas1997]

Anyone who takes the OT literally is reaching IMHO.
And the NT to a certain extent too.

[Koolaid_Man]

To Random guy posting all that old testament stuff here is my pastoral response on why God allowed War in the Old Testament

Imagine you're a daycare teacher with a room full of children.

You have grown quite attached to all of your kids and they all have a place in your heart. Most of them get along fine, but others don't seem to be able to play nice with others. These few misbehaving children are hurting other children, taking their toys, hitting them, calling names, spitting, and biting.

Would it be fair to the well-behaved kids to keep the bad kids around? No. You'd at least send them to another room or put them in time-out.

In the stories of the Old Testament, God isn't dealing with kids who couldn't play nice. He was dealing with adults who would steal and murder the Israelites. They were vicious and cruel to God's people. In many cases, the Israelites suffered through their attacks for a long time before God stepped in and put a stop to it. (See Exodus 34:7.)

So these acts of war were actually judgments of God against wicked men. The people who died in those wars, the ones fighting against Israel, had made their decisions. They had rejected God, so God brought judgment upon them. The big picture is, God has to deal with the wicked in order to preserve the righteous.

It is true that all human beings are God's children, but that doesn't save us in the end. Those who reject God's authority will have to die so that those who accept God's authority can live without fear and without pain. The ultimate judgment comes at the end, when all the wicked will be gone.

The destruction of the wicked, a seemingly strange act by a loving God, is actually a loving act for both parties. In fact, Isaiah calls God's retribution on the wicked God's "strange work," because God is, by nature, merciful, gracious, and long-suffering (Isaiah 28:21).

By destroying the wicked, God prevents them from living a life in which they would be miserable under His rule. By destroying the wicked, God saves the righteous too. With nobody wicked around, we can fully enjoy the peace of paradise with no fear.

Love is a two-sided coin: on one side is mercy. He gives the righteous mercy because they have repented of their sins and decided to follow God. The righteous benefit from God's mercy in that they are allowed to live forever in paradise.

The other side of the coin of love is justice. He metes out justice to the wicked because they have decided they don't want to live in God's kingdom. The righteous also benefit from God's justice, in that they will not have to suffer their cruelties.
Pastor Doug

[Blake]

Anyone who takes the OT literally is reaching IMHO.
And the NT to a certain extent too.

cherry pickin'

[mouse]

cherry pickin'

Virgin licking?

[xmas1997]

cherry pickin'

And .........

[ChumpDumper]

Pwd.

You did it to yourself.

The answer is no, it is not moral. I can answer that easily.

You can't.

I can conclude based on an inability to answer that question:

1) You are a lying, dishonest sack of .
--only lying dishonest sack of would run away from that question.

or

2) You think the answer is yes, making you an evil, sick , but don't want to admit to the world you are that sick and twisted.


I have no interest in talking to either lying sacks of , or evil, sick s. I will not answer your question.

Maybe coolaid man can give me an answer.

You're on the list, smart guy.

[Joseph Kony]

That blue book you found on the DNA infested nightstand by the bed at the Super 8 Motel your staying at is called the book of Mormon,
it might not have the same info as the Book they are referring to in this discussion......, let me PM Angel Luv to make sure.

[Joseph Kony]

To Random guy posting all that old testament stuff here is my pastoral response on why God allowed War in the Old Testament

So you have no opinion of your own then and continue to rip off other peoples words? At least it wasn't from bleacherreport this time Think of your own response got, Pastor Doug would probably condemn your ass for being a welshing pussy

[xmas1997]

Oops! Another thread needing a fat potent joint!

[RandomGuy]

I just remembered why I would avoid debating with RG

Well, even you can answer the question:

Is it wrong to slit a child's throat?

[RandomGuy]

And where is any of this crap in the New Testament?

17"Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18"For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.…

Jesus was OK with the old testament.

Sorry.

[RandomGuy]

To Random guy posting all that old testament stuff here is my pastoral response on why God allowed War in the Old Testament

That is some mental gymnastics right there.

My moral system allows me to answer simple questions quite easily. Yours doesn't.

Why is that?

The Bible/Torah God is a sick , and you are apologizing for him drowning babies, and massacring children.

If God told you to slit the throats of everyone in a city men, women, and children, would you?

[RandomGuy]

So these acts of war were actually judgments of God against wicked men.

All God would have to do, is simply pinch off some carotid arteries, and have the righteous sweep in, collect and adopt the children, so that they may grow up in righteousness.

Pretty simple for a being that created the universe, one would think. My limited, flawed brain thought of a solution to the problem that didn't involve hacking kids to death.

I am now both smarter, and more moral than the Bible/Torah God.

[Koolaid_Man]

All God would have to do, is simply pinch off some carotid arteries, and have the righteous sweep in, collect and adopt the children, so that they may grow up in righteousness.

Pretty simple for a being that created the universe, one would think. My limited, flawed brain thought of a solution to the problem that didn't involve hacking kids to death.

I am now both smarter, and more moral than the Bible/Torah God.

He created (key word) the universe...he didn't just snap his fingers and it appeared even though he could have...creation takes time...so too with wars he could cause someone to just die instantly but he "allowed" his people to do their work....listen if he can create the universe I have to believe there's a good and just reason for his decisions....another thing...their is not that much chance in the world to say that the human body just evolved to have that much balance...and harmonious function..brain, heart, liver, kidneys, blood, venous system, reproductive system, eyes, ears, tongue, etc...and the animals have their own but similar structure... if you want to make a case that god is unjust then fine...but don't try to sell me on his non-existence...there's not that much chance in the universe that we could live and exist the way we do...the sun just 1 inch or degree closer to earth and we're all dead...that's design not chance....just because we don't understand WHY doesn't mean he's not there...

similiar to feeling the wind or looking at a crecent moon...you can see the crescent but you can't see the rest of the moon..doesn't mean it's not there...

[Blake]

And .........

If you're discarding some of the Bible, then you're also discarding the clear verse(s) that says the Bible is the infallible word of God.

Just sayin

[xmas1997]

Jesus was OK with the old testament.

Sorry.

I seriously doubt Jesus interpreted the OT in the same way you do.
And if you read His words concerning the OT as reported by His Apostles, then you would already be aware of that.

[Blake]

I seriously doubt Jesus interpreted the OT in the same way you do.
And if you read His words concerning the OT as reported by His Apostles, then you would already be aware of that.

I think it's pretty clear that Jesus took the OT literally.

some people like to claim he saw it as parables so that they excuse themselves from the crazy, bloodthirsty .

[Blake]

similiar to feeling the wind or looking at a crecent moon...you can see the crescent but you can't see the rest of the moon..doesn't mean it's not there...

I'm God. I created you so that you would take dumps in the nba forum.

[Koolaid_Man]

I think it's pretty clear that Jesus took the OT literally.

some people like to claim he saw it as parables so that they excuse themselves from the crazy, bloodthirsty .

prove it...just as with everything...some things literal, some figurative, some parables just like in the new testament...some anecdotes some personifications....you're fighting a losing battle on this one

[xmas1997]

If you're discarding some of the Bible, then you're also discarding the clear verse(s) that says the Bible is the infallible word of God.

Just sayin

I know you're "just saying", but making a claim that is clearly false to a rational thinking person.
1. You have no idea what I am discarding or not. Instead you are projecting what you think I am doing to satisfy your own biases.
2. You need to clarify what exactly "the bible" is, or more specifically which bible, before you determine what is or isn't the infallibility part of it.
I don't doubt that Gods word are infallible, and I don't doubt that much of His word is in the bible.
I do however doubt that our understanding of it Is infallible. I do doubt our interpretations of it are infallible. And I do doubt that the bible in its present format is complete and conclusive of ALL of Gods word, and that it has not been tampered with in order to confuse and influence many agendas besides Gods.

[DMC]

Anyone who takes the OT literally is reaching IMHO.
And the NT to a certain extent too.

That's progress for atheism when theists don't take the infallible word of their omniscient invisible sky buddy seriously.

[DMC]

I know you're "just saying", but making a claim that is clearly false to a rational thinking person.

holy

Use Holy in a sentence
ho·ly

[hoh-lee] Show IPA adjective, ho·li·er, ho·li·est, noun, plural ho·lies.
adjective 1. specially recognized as or declared sacred by religious use or authority; consecrated: holy ground.

2. dedicated or devoted to the service of God, the church, or religion: a holy man.

3. saintly; godly; pious; devout: a holy life.

4. having a spiritually pure quality: a holy love.

5. en led to worship or veneration as or as if sacred: a holy relic.

If the Bible is holy, how can it also have errors? Are you trying to use ordinary standards to support extraordinary claims?

1. You have no idea what I am discarding or not. Instead you are projecting what you think I am doing to satisfy your own biases.

If you discount any of the Bible, you've discounted the Bible.

2. You need to clarify what exactly "the bible" is, or more specifically which bible, before you determine what is or isn't the infallibility part of it.

I am sure it's which ever bible you're referring to.

I don't doubt that Gods word are infallible, and I don't doubt that much of His word is in the bible.
I do however doubt that our understanding of it Is infallible. I do doubt our interpretations of it are infallible. And I do doubt that the bible in its present format is complete and conclusive of ALL of Gods word, and that it has not been tampered with in order to confuse and influence many agendas besides Gods.

Wouldn't that be God's will though?

[xmas1997]

That's progress for atheism when theists don't take the infallible word of their omniscient invisible sky buddy seriously.

So says you. That is purely your opinion.
And to argue over opinions is fruitless.
I never once said I didn't take His word as not being infallible.
If you were reading I said I did not take mans' word as being infallible, because it isn't.

[DMC]

He created (key word) the universe...he didn't just snap his fingers and it appeared even though he could have...creation takes time...so too with wars he could cause someone to just die instantly but he "allowed" his people to do their work....listen if he can create the universe I have to believe there's a good and just reason for his decisions....another thing...their is not that much chance in the world to say that the human body just evolved to have that much balance...and harmonious function..brain, heart, liver, kidneys, blood, venous system, reproductive system, eyes, ears, tongue, etc...and the animals have their own but similar structure... if you want to make a case that god is unjust then fine...but don't try to sell me on his non-existence...there's not that much chance in the universe that we could live and exist the way we do...the sun just 1 inch or degree closer to earth and we're all dead...that's design not chance....just because we don't understand WHY doesn't mean he's not there...

similiar to feeling the wind or looking at a crecent moon...you can see the crescent but you can't see the rest of the moon..doesn't mean it's not there...

What standard do you rely on to say "creation takes time"? Do you understand the concept of space/time? (stupid question). If so, you'd understand that time began to exist when space began to exist.

Where do you get this exclusive information about the beginning of the universe? Do you realize it's going to eventually reach heat death (entropy)? Is that God's perfect plan for the Earth (who's surface is mostly uninhabitable) or will the Earth be spared and given to the meek, as the Bible states?

Do you realize mankind existed 100K years or more prior to the earliest Christian writings? Did you know the Chinese were writing before that? Was God sitting around waiting for something for hundreds of thousands of years prior to saying "well, enough of that... let's flood this place and kill everything except these few people and let's do it in the middle east"?

I realize you're a really desperate troll of someone who posts here under another name, but I don't think either of your accounts knows about any of it.

[DMC]

So says you. That is purely your opinion.

It's not just an opinion. 100 years ago the bible was considered to be inerrant. Today people who claim to be theists admit the bible has errors. They've moved their god back to a more nebulous area to protect their faith in it.

And to argue over opinions is fruitless.

That the bible contains errors and cannot be taken literally (because it makes extraordinary, ridiculous claims and claims that are counter to current moral codes) is not an opinion. It's not a value statement. You only label it as such so you can attack it as such, ergo you made a strawman.

I never once said I didn't take His word as not being infallible.

Let's look at it:

God's word is infallible
If the bible is Gods word, then the Bible is infallible
The bible is God's word
The bible is infallible

What part of that is illogical? Which premise do you disagree with?

If you were reading I said I did not take mans' word as being infallible, because it isn't.

But then you said the bible is God's word.

Does God make mistakes? If not, how did God create a system where his word has been misrepresented for most of recorded civilization?