Christians, have you ever considered you might be on the wrong side?

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: vincentdaniel7

Dude... I've been studying the bible for a long time

Jehovah/YHWH... is NOT God... that is the truth

So no I am not on HE/she/it's side

Your book says prove all things and hold fast to that which is good... I've had more then sufficient proof that the entity of the OT is NOT God... confirmed by the very words of Jesus himself...

said OT god is NOT good... but again feel free to "hold fast" to him

SORRY

Ok where does it say in the Bible that Jehovah is not the Almighty Creator of the universe the one true God and that he did not create which says in the Bible" His only begotten Son" meaning that he is the first of all creation?

Again where does it say that Jehovah is not God?

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: vincentdaniel7

Dude... I've been studying the bible for a long time

Jehovah/YHWH... is NOT God... that is the truth

So no I am not on HE/she/it's side

Your book says prove all things and hold fast to that which is good... I've had more then sufficient proof that the entity of the OT is NOT God... confirmed by the very words of Jesus himself...

said OT god is NOT good... but again feel free to "hold fast" to him

So how is it that Jesus own belief in the God of Abraham called Jehovah?

EXAMPLE;
A Sure Purpose of God.

Jesus Christ pointed out to the Sadducees, a sect that did not believe in resurrection, that the writings of Moses in the Hebrew Scriptures, which they possessed and claimed to believe, prove there is a resurrection; Jesus reasoned that when Jehovah said He was “the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob” (who were actually dead), He counted those men as alive because of the resurrection that He, “the God, not of the dead, but of the living,” purposed to give them. God, because of his power, “makes the dead alive and calls the things that are not as though they were.” Paul includes this fact when speaking of Abraham’s faith.—Mt 22:23, 31-33; Ro 4:17.

a reply to: vincentdaniel7

Well first of all "Jehovah" isn't the name of the OT god... this name came about when people started to pronounce the letters given in the book... the name Jehovah wasn't even used until the early 11th century

Second, Jesus didn't ever use a name when HE spoke about God... HE said Father, and I do the same

Third, He called the people who were basically the most knowledgeable people around when it came to the scrolls they used "a generation of vipers, who have never seen nor heard God at any time"

IF Jesus adhered to OT scripture as most Christians believe, he wouldn't have changed rules... he would have stuck to the book, and to the very word of it... he did not.

The OT has 613 laws... Jesus had two...

Theres so much evidence against the OT within the NT its almost unreal that people can't see it... but again, Christians don't usually read the book... they listen to their pastors... and follow blindly without actually looking for the inconsistencies

a reply to: vincentdaniel7

GOD ONLY DECIDED TO CREATE something other than himself for the sole purpose that HE LOVES LIFE so much that he wants others to experience life, with free will, not love there CREATOR because they are programmed to, like a robot, but by choice, meaning they have figured out their Creator and they love him because of who he is,

Sure that's great that you want to see God's purpose for humanity with such nobility but there is nothing noble about murdering your creations because they choose not to take your advice. There's also a clear contradiction of beliefs in your statement, You can't believe that God has made a plan, a destiny for humanity and knows everything that happens in it while also attributing those that deviate away from that plan are somehow capable of exerting free will. That's absurd.

Try to understand this way , YOU have many children, (let's say) , And your neighbors, because of their lifestyles,, they prove to be very dangerous to the health and the life of your children, Now you can try to preach to your neighbors to say hey look can you either go away or please do not come near my children with your lifestyles? because I'm afraid that if you continue, my children will die.

In your example you seem to ignore that fact that the reason the children are dying is not a direct result from the neighbors or their dangerous lifestyle that the Children chose to adopt, but from the parent who refuses to allow his children to live other lifestyles and punishes them with the sentence of death and hardship.

Your children are just like you, they agree with you, they want you to protect them, they go to you for advice and just because you give them that advice, are you going to say that your children are indoctrinated? and had no choice at all? but they only follow your rules, BUT YET YOUR RULES ARE KEEPING THEM ALIVE !!

Yes, yes I would. If a parent refuses to let their child be exposed,learn other lifestyles and or punish questioning the parent's lifestyle and authority, that is in fact a form indoctrination. Doesn't change how much you butter up God's intentions its all the same. If the rules of the lifestyle are adaptable to the flow of time, you might have a point. Knowing the book and its constituents I doubt that very much. Also, honestly a long life of being indoctrinated by a tyrant is hell in comparison to a short life of absolute freedom of choice.

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: vincentdaniel7

Well first of all "Jehovah" isn't the name of the OT god... this name came about when people started to pronounce the letters given in the book... the name Jehovah wasn't even used until the early 11th century

Second, Jesus didn't ever use a name when HE spoke about God... HE said Father, and I do the same

Third, He called the people who were basically the most knowledgeable people around when it came to the scrolls they used "a generation of vipers, who have never seen nor heard God at any time"

IF Jesus adhered to OT scripture as most Christians believe, he wouldn't have changed rules... he would have stuck to the book, and to the very word of it... he did not.

The OT has 613 laws... Jesus had two...

Theres so much evidence against the OT within the NT its almost unreal that people can't see it... but again, Christians don't usually read the book... they listen to their pastors... and follow blindly without actually looking for the inconsistencies

Yes I agree that if I went back in time even Moses pronounced God's name different

It would definitely not sound or be pronounced like any of the current languages that we speak today,

but you have to remember that Jesus was VERY ADAMANT IN MAKING SURE THAT HE MAKES HIS FATHER'S NAME KNOWN
and the reason why today you don't see the name Jehovah in the Gospels is because OF COPYIST, because of their traditions and remember even the Pharisees literally and figuratively stopped using God's name the Pharisees work tyrants and they were only allowed to say God's name secretly because only they were so-called righteous enough.

Remember what Jesus said himself.

[John 17 verse 25 and 26]

25. Righteous Father, the world has, indeed, not come to know you, but I know you, and these have come to know that you sent me. 
26. I have made your NAME KNOWN to them and will make it known,+so that the love with which you loved me may be in them and I in union with them.”

When they wrote the gospel down the first time it had God's name in it a lot and the people responsible for taking his name out of the Bible or the Gospels they will pay for it.

In regards to what you think about Jesus NOT Promoting the Mosaic law,

According to all my research and my understanding of why the Mosaic law appears different from Jesus's revised way of serving his Father is because the Old Testament of God's people,, they needed a TUTOR to the Messiah before he got there to prepare them for the coming Messiah, as you know the Old Testament frequently refers to,
Pointing to the Messiah they are scriptures preparing his people to follow his SON when he gets there.

THE LAWS that you were referring to, IF YOU PICK THEM APART ONE BY ONE, you will find that they were accomplishing (TWO) things.

>#1. REMINDING the need for someone like the MESSIAH to be there ULTIMATE SACRIFICE, SUPERIOR SACRIFICE,
ANIMALS really don't cut it, they were just training, of course an animal can not BLOT OUT YOUR SINS (really) that was a temporary arrangement it was training and God accepted it. it was legally binding but it was just training.

> # 2. FOR staying PURE and UNCONTAMINATED, by the other nations that worshipped Satan, the world needs to know the difference between God's people and Satan's people. It was a protection from the self destructive nature of humanity.

It was always God's will and purpose and plan for Jesus to show a more pure and successful form of commandments knowing that his first version would be training you have to remember that God knows that he is dealing with the human mind and a imperfect mind so you cannot just cram the truth down humans throat you have to feed it to them slowly and thousands of years of the Mosaic law prepare them for the coming Messiah so I do not think there is sufficient evidence that JEHOVAH and JESUS are not a tight-knit companionship.


So basically the whole Bible is like this in the beginning no one believed in Jehovah so all you heard about was.......,
[Jehovah Jehovah Jehovah].

Then comes the second half of the Bible the world had trouble believing in Jesus so all you heard in the second half was.........,
[Jesus Jesus Jesus].

SO THIS IS WHAT YOU GET,,,,,,

[John 17:1-9]

 >1. Jesus spoke these things, and raising his eyes to heaven, he said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify your son so that your son may glorify you,

> 2. just as you have given him authority over all flesh, so that he may give everlasting life to all those whom you have given to him.

> 3. THIS MEANS EVERLASTING LIFE, THEIR COMING TO KNOW YOU, THE ONLY TRUE GOD, AND THE ONE WHOM YOU SENT,
JESUS CHRIST.

> 4. I have glorified you on the earth, having finished the work you have given me to do.

> 5. So now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was.

> 6 .“I have made your name manifesta to the men whom you gave me out of the world. They were yours, and you gave them to me, and they have observed your word.

> 7. Now they have come to know that all the things you gave me are from you;

> 8. because I have given them the sayings that you gave me, and they have accepted them and have certainly come to know that I came as your representative, and they have believed that you sent me.
                                          

a reply to: vincentdaniel7

You assume far to much about someone you do not know brother...

What makes you believe I haven't "picked though the 613 laws" in detail?

the question is have you?

Not all of the laws are even agreeable to what Jesus taught... of course im sure you know that

originally posted by: NateTheAnimator
a reply to: vincentdaniel7

GOD ONLY DECIDED TO CREATE something other than himself for the sole purpose that HE LOVES LIFE so much that he wants others to experience life, with free will, not love there CREATOR because they are programmed to, like a robot, but by choice, meaning they have figured out their Creator and they love him because of who he is,

Sure that's great that you want to see God's purpose for humanity with such nobility but there is nothing noble about murdering your creations because they choose not to take your advice. There's also a clear contradiction of beliefs in your statement, You can't believe that God has made a plan, a destiny for humanity and knows everything that happens in it while also attributing those that deviate away from that plan are somehow capable of exerting free will. That's absurd.

Try to understand this way , YOU have many children, (let's say) , And your neighbors, because of their lifestyles,, they prove to be very dangerous to the health and the life of your children, Now you can try to preach to your neighbors to say hey look can you either go away or please do not come near my children with your lifestyles? because I'm afraid that if you continue, my children will die.

In your example you seem to ignore that fact that the reason the children are dying is not a direct result from the neighbors or their dangerous lifestyle that the Children chose to adopt, but from the parent who refuses to allow his children to live other lifestyles and punishes them with the sentence of death and hardship.

Your children are just like you, they agree with you, they want you to protect them, they go to you for advice and just because you give them that advice, are you going to say that your children are indoctrinated? and had no choice at all? but they only follow your rules, BUT YET YOUR RULES ARE KEEPING THEM ALIVE !!

Yes, yes I would. If a parent refuses to let their child be exposed,learn other lifestyles and or punish questioning the parent's lifestyle and authority, that is in fact a form indoctrination. Doesn't change how much you butter up God's intentions its all the same. If the rules of the lifestyle are adaptable to the flow of time, you might have a point. Knowing the book and its constituents I doubt that very much. Also, honestly a long life of being indoctrinated by a tyrant is hell in comparison to a short life of absolute freedom of choice.

Well I learned the hard way and experienced YOUR HELL,
SO EXCUSE ME if I did not LIKE IT

TO ME doing what I did, living on your side. WAS NOT FREEDOM AT ALL
I HAD THE TYRANICAL EXTREME PRESSURE of the CONSEQUENCES OF MY ACTIONS .

AND maybe you don't realize that yet.
but I guarantee you and I am staking my life on it, that you will find this out sooner or later like I did.

originally posted by: NateTheAnimator
a reply to: vincentdaniel7

GOD ONLY DECIDED TO CREATE something other than himself for the sole purpose that HE LOVES LIFE so much that he wants others to experience life, with free will, not love there CREATOR because they are programmed to, like a robot, but by choice, meaning they have figured out their Creator and they love him because of who he is,

Sure that's great that you want to see God's purpose for humanity with such nobility but there is nothing noble about murdering your creations because they choose not to take your advice. There's also a clear contradiction of beliefs in your statement, You can't believe that God has made a plan, a destiny for humanity and knows everything that happens in it while also attributing those that deviate away from that plan are somehow capable of exerting free will. That's absurd.

Try to understand this way , YOU have many children, (let's say) , And your neighbors, because of their lifestyles,, they prove to be very dangerous to the health and the life of your children, Now you can try to preach to your neighbors to say hey look can you either go away or please do not come near my children with your lifestyles? because I'm afraid that if you continue, my children will die.

In your example you seem to ignore that fact that the reason the children are dying is not a direct result from the neighbors or their dangerous lifestyle that the Children chose to adopt, but from the parent who refuses to allow his children to live other lifestyles and punishes them with the sentence of death and hardship.

Your children are just like you, they agree with you, they want you to protect them, they go to you for advice and just because you give them that advice, are you going to say that your children are indoctrinated? and had no choice at all? but they only follow your rules, BUT YET YOUR RULES ARE KEEPING THEM ALIVE !!

Yes, yes I would. If a parent refuses to let their child be exposed,learn other lifestyles and or punish questioning the parent's lifestyle and authority, that is in fact a form indoctrination. Doesn't change how much you butter up God's intentions its all the same. If the rules of the lifestyle are adaptable to the flow of time, you might have a point. Knowing the book and its constituents I doubt that very much. Also, honestly a long life of being indoctrinated by a tyrant is hell in comparison to a short life of absolute freedom of choice.

AND I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT THE CHILDREN THAT DISAGREE WITH THE PARENTS AND CHOOSE TO ADOPT THE NEIGHBORS LIFESTYLE.

I was talking about the children who are like the parents and agree,,,

THAT THE NEIGHBORS LIFESTYLE,
based on medical science and facts.
THAT those lifestyles can end up killing,
YOU.

AND THE CHILDREN AGREE WITH THE PARENTS.

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: vincentdaniel7

You assume far to much about someone you do not know brother...

What makes you believe I haven't "picked though the 613 laws" in detail?

the question is have you?

Not all of the laws are even agreeable to what Jesus taught... of course im sure you know that

I have checked every single one of them and I disagree with you I believe Jesus is in lockstep with his Heavenly Father Jehovah.

a reply to: vincentdaniel7

Why am I not shocked...

Sigh... dietary laws?

Said OT god gave his people rules about their diet to stay "pure"... Jesus dismissed them

Pretty much shows you haven't looked though them in the detail you claim

originally posted by: NateTheAnimator
a reply to: vincentdaniel7

GOD ONLY DECIDED TO CREATE something other than himself for the sole purpose that HE LOVES LIFE so much that he wants others to experience life, with free will, not love there CREATOR because they are programmed to, like a robot, but by choice, meaning they have figured out their Creator and they love him because of who he is,

Sure that's great that you want to see God's purpose for humanity with such nobility but there is nothing noble about murdering your creations because they choose not to take your advice. There's also a clear contradiction of beliefs in your statement, You can't believe that God has made a plan, a destiny for humanity and knows everything that happens in it while also attributing those that deviate away from that plan are somehow capable of exerting free will. That's absurd.

.

.

Okay so if you had children in your house and there were people coming to linch your children

Murder and rape your children.

You mean to tell me you would ,NOT,
BE JUST LIKE GOD,

KILL THEM BEFORE THEY WIPE YOUR WHOLE FAMILY OUT?

If you did kill them before they can get to your family.

THEN under your logic you yourself would be a MURDERER.

IT IS NOT MURDER TO PROTECT YOUR CHILDREN.

then why do you call God a murderer?

And God either uses his power to see the future and sometimes he does not use it.

So no I do not believe in destiny.

I believe that God has such great intelligence this is why I commented the way I did in the previous quote that you're referring to.

So No absolutely no contradictions.

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: vincentdaniel7

Why am I not shocked...

Sigh... dietary laws?

Said OT god gave his people rules about their diet to stay "pure"... Jesus dismissed them

Pretty much shows you haven't looked though them in the detail you claim

Many of the laws Jesus dismiss them because the training was over or they had already gotten the of the long exercise that prepare them for the coming Messiah.

Look, again it was TRAINING

For example they had to set an example for the rest of the nations that God's Way of life was cleaner than theirs.

FOR EXAMPLE;

The pig they have proven that in the old days on a majority level the pig could not be cooked good enough a lot of the times to have the result of not making people sick.

SO when the other nations said Wow there god really tries to protect them maybe we should do the same and stop eating pig or even try to figure out how to cook it better,
I'm just saying,

SO it looks like you do not understand the connection or you do not understand both Jehovah's personality or Jesus personality and why they do and say the things recorded in the Bible

SO THIS PRETTY MUCH SHOWS THAT YOU HAVE NOT STUDIED THE LAWS IN DETAIL LIKE YOU CLAIM,

a reply to: vincentdaniel7

The point being... "god" gave a rule... Jesus over turned it, along with many others

So I can actually use a typical Christian argument here...

IF Jesus overturned even one of gods laws, why not just toss the entire book out... I get that crap all the time lol

The people of the OT were conquerers... they pillaged and plundered their way through the country side after being "released" from bondage, which theres actually no evidence of in the first place.

They did this in the name of their god... then suddenly 400 years of silence

Jesus come along, and again quite suddenly God was a peaceful entity... the plundering and killing stopped

its obvious that these are not the same God's

blatantly obvious... but this is just my opinion

SO it looks like you do not understand the connection or you do not understand both Jehovah's personality or Jesus personality and why they do and say the things recorded in the Bible

SO THIS PRETTY MUCH SHOWS THAT YOU HAVE NOT STUDIED THE LAWS IN DETAIL LIKE YOU CLAIM,

oh but I have, which is why I've come to this conclusion... and many others have as well... im far from solo in this

I understand the "LACK" of connection between the two entities... One was a violent terrorist, if not the original terrorist/tyrant...

The Father is merciful, forgiving, and peaceful...

There is no connection between the two... ONE is LOVE... the other is a jealous, envious, wrathful critter... not worthy of worship

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: vincentdaniel7

The point being... "god" gave a rule... Jesus over turned it, along with many others

So I can actually use a typical Christian argument here...

IF Jesus overturned even one of gods laws, why not just toss the entire book out... I get that crap all the time lol

The people of the OT were conquers... they pillaged and plundered their way through the country side after being "released" from bondage, which theres actually no evidence of in the first place.

They did this in the name of their god... then suddenly 400 years of silence

Jesus come along, and again quite suddenly God was a peaceful entity... the plundering and killing stopped

its obvious that these are not the same God's

blatantly obvious... but this is just my opinion

SO it looks like you do not understand the connection or you do not understand both Jehovah's personality or Jesus personality and why they do and say the things recorded in the Bible

SO THIS PRETTY MUCH SHOWS THAT YOU HAVE NOT STUDIED THE LAWS IN DETAIL LIKE YOU CLAIM,

oh but I have, which is why I've come to this conclusion... and many others have as well... im far from solo in this

I understand the "LACK" of connection between the two entities... One was a violent terrorist, if not the original terrorist/tyrant...

The Father is merciful, forgiving, and peaceful...

There is no connection between the two... ONE is LOVE... the other is a jealous, envious, wrathful critter... not worthy of worship

I understand every few points that you have seriously I WAS PRACTICALLY YOU

But again, then,, I was shown more clarity.

For example when God's people were allowed to participate in war it was for this reason

Protecting God's promise that he would protect the Abrahamic SEED which not only included his best human friend ABRAHAM but his children, it would also help protect the line of King David to the eventual arrival of the Messiah the laws that you call very harsh those over 600 laws that was also their purpose.

Now remember that there were heavy restrictions involved and a checking and rechecking for the permission to be involved with war I mean serious permission from their God Jehovah before they can proceed in protecting the Abrahamic seed to the Christ.
Through WAR or SELF DEFENSE.

Also God could see into every heart of every hater and worshipper of Satan and Jehovah is the revealer of hearts of men and he can tell if given the chance would they ever change their way like the record history of the nation (Nineveh) these were some SERIOUS BADAS***!!
They used to conquer for no reason other than for sport they were really destructive people feared by most every nation they used to play kickball with the heads of their conquered and even though Jonah had no mercy for the nation of Nineveh God did after Nineveh showed true and strong repentance God explains to Jonah that the nation of Nineveh was ignorant to right and wrong and even though Jonah wanted God to annihilate them God said no they have repented sincerely so I'm going to give them another 300 years to prove their repentance.

Then Later THE OT God "Jehovah" took away the privilege to protect the Messiah and sense God's people REJECTED HIS OWN SON he would no longer be with them if they ever decide to go to war ever again,

Besides no need to protect the SEED anymore, "the MESSIAH", because he had already arrived.

SO THIS IS WHERE I DISAGREE WITH THE MAJORITY OF CHRISTIANITY ...

TO fight their own wars even if it is to protect the ideology of the Messiah and his way of life for his followers.

I believe that this temporary arrangement that God gave his people in the Old Testament would end it was scheduled to end when the Messiah was to arrive then when God's people broke their contract and eventually those representing the nation of Israel killed his son God the (OT God) took the kingdom away from them this is discuss in Jesus parable about the cultivators saying that the kingdom would be taken away from them so as a nation they no longer represent the OT.GOD.

Again God protecting his children from other murderous nation.

Law, Mosaic law to protect the nation from falling apart before the nation produces the promised seed the Messiah,

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: vincentdaniel7

The point being... "god" gave a rule... Jesus over turned it, along with many others

So I can actually use a typical Christian argument here...

IF Jesus overturned even one of gods laws, why not just toss the entire book out... I get that crap all the time lol

The people of the OT were conquerers... they pillaged and plundered their way through the country side after being "released" from bondage, which theres actually no evidence of in the first place.

They did this in the name of their god... then suddenly 400 years of silence

Jesus come along, and again quite suddenly God was a peaceful entity... the plundering and killing stopped

its obvious that these are not the same God's

blatantly obvious... but this is just my opinion

SO it looks like you do not understand the connection or you do not understand both Jehovah's personality or Jesus personality and why they do and say the things recorded in the Bible

SO THIS PRETTY MUCH SHOWS THAT YOU HAVE NOT STUDIED THE LAWS IN DETAIL LIKE YOU CLAIM,

oh but I have, which is why I've come to this conclusion... and many others have as well... im far from solo in this

I understand the "LACK" of connection between the two entities... One was a violent terrorist, if not the original terrorist/tyrant...

The Father is merciful, forgiving, and peaceful...

There is no connection between the two... ONE is LOVE... the other is a jealous, envious, wrathful critter... not worthy of worship

Jesus learned his love from the OT God Jehovah

All of his ingenious plans to protect his children from destroying themselves I call that love with or coupled, with genius

And all of his ingenious plans to protect is children from other murderous nations.

Maybe if you did not have a repelling view of the Old Testament you might realize that there are many recordings where God actually thought for them showing his great love and sparing them the battle.

There was one recorded history that I particularly like where God told the nation to bring only a few min to smash great big jars a glass and blow trumpets and that they were not to fight at all instead God wipe out the murderous Nation that wanted to wipe out his children.

a reply to: vincentdaniel7

Jesus learned his love from the OT God Jehovah

no he did not...

Jesus and the Father are one... This does not mean one and the same, it means one mind... same motivation

The OT god was a killer... Jesus didn't harm a fly

He learned love from the Father... Not from the OT tyrant

a reply to: Akragon

IF Jesus adhered to OT scripture as most Christians believe, he wouldn't have changed rules... he would have stuck to the book, and to the very word of it... he did not.

One could argue he did. All according to scripture.

“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass The Law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” — Matthew 5:18-19

“It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the Law to become invalid.” (Luke 16:17)

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." (Matthew 5:17-18)

“Did not Moses give you the Law, and yet none of you keepeth the Law.” (John7:19)

It seems there are three positions most Christians have on this.
1. All the OT Laws are still binding.
2. Some remain, some do not
3. As you said, Christians shouldn't adhere to OT.

#3 is incompatible with these verses. It reads that way to me at least..

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: vincentdaniel7

Jesus learned his love from the OT God Jehovah

no he did not...

Jesus and the Father are one... This does not mean one and the same, it means one mind... same motivation

The OT god was a killer... Jesus didn't harm a fly

He learned love from the Father... Not from the OT tyrant

SORRY you just don't understand that all the evidence that I have and all the research that I have done for 30 years has pointed me to the fact that he is ingenious in all he was doing was protecting Jesus and his people of old.

And to protect once children is to show them love.

THE "OT" GOD’S VIEW OF WAR IN THE ANCIENT PAST BEFORE CHRIST.

The people were being oppressed. They repeatedly prayed to God for relief, but none came—at least not right away. The people were the Israelites, God’s people in ancient times. The oppressor was the mighty nation of Egypt. (Exodus 1:13, 14)

For years, the Israelites waited for God to bring an end to the Egyptian tyranny. Eventually, God’s due time for action arrived. (Exodus 3:7-10) The Bible reports that God personally waged war against the Egyptians. He beset Egypt with a series of devastating plagues, and then he destroyed Egypt’s king and his army in the Red Sea. (Psalm 136:15)

Jehovah God proved to be “a powerful warrior” in behalf of his people.—Exodus 15:3, 4.

The fact that God himself waged war against the Egyptians shows that he is not against all warfare. On other occasions, he authorized his people Israel to wage war. For example, he commanded them to wage war against the Canaanites, who were exceedingly wicked. (Deuteronomy 9:5; 20:17, 18)

He directed Israel’s King David to war against the oppressive Philistines. God even provided David with a battle strategy that ensured victory.—2 Samuel 5:17-25.

Those Bible accounts reveal that when certain forms of wickedness and oppression threatened the Israelites, God authorized warfare for the protection of his people and the preservation of true worship. But note the following three key points about such God-ordained warfare.

GOD ALONE DETERMINED WHOWOULD ENGAGE IN WARFARE.

On one occasion, God told the Israelites: “You will not need to fight this battle.” The reason? God himself would wage war in their behalf.
(2 Chronicles 20:17;32:7, 8)

He did so many times, such as on the occasion mentioned at the outset of this article. At other times, God commanded his people in ancient Israel to fight in wars that he approved, namely, those that involved securing and defending their Promised Land.—Deuteronomy 7:1, 2; Joshua 10:40.

GOD ALONE DETERMINEDWHEN SUCH WARFARE WOULD TAKE PLACE. 

God’s servants were to wait patiently for God’s appointed time to war against the oppression and wickedness that surrounded  them. Until then, they were not to take it upon themselves to engage in war. When they did, they lost divine approval. In fact, the Bible shows that when the Israelites presumed to engage in warfare that God had not authorized, the results were often disastrous. *

Though God waged war against the Canaanites, he spared some, such as Rahab and her family

GOD TAKES NO PLEASURE IN THE DEATH OF HUMANS, INCLUDING THE WICKED.

Jehovah God is the Source of life and the Creator of humankind. (Psalm 36:9)

Therefore, he does not desire to see people die. Sadly, though, there are people who wickedly scheme to oppress and even kill others. (Psalm 37:12, 14)

To halt such evil, God has at times authorized warfare against the wicked. And yet, throughout the years that he had the Israelites engage in such wars, he was still “merciful” and “slow to anger” toward Israel’s oppressors. (Psalm 86:15)

FOR EXAMPLE; he decreed that before the Israelites warred against a city, they were to “announce to it terms of peace,” in order to give the inhabitants an opportunity to change their ways and avoid war. (Deuteronomy 20:10-13)

In this way, God showed that he takes “no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that someone wicked changes his way and keeps living.”—Ezekiel 33:11, 14-16. 

From the foregoing we see that in the ancient past, God viewed warfare as a legitimate means of bringing an end to various forms of oppression and wickedness. But it was God—not humans—who rightfully determined when such warfare was to take place and whowas to be involved. And did God wage war eagerly, in a bloodthirsty way? Quite the contrary. He actually hates violence. (Psalm 11:5)

Did God’s view of war change when his Son, Jesus Christ, began his ministry in the FIRST CENTURY?

God’s View of War in the FIRST CENTURY

The people were being oppressed. Like their ancestors, first-century Jews no doubt prayed repeatedly to God for relief, this time from the oppressive yoke of the Roman Empire. Then they heard of Jesus. Would he prove to be the foretold Messiah? Not surprisingly, many “were hoping that this man was the one who was going to deliver Israel” from their Roman oppressors. (Luke 24:21) But no relief came. Instead, in 70 C.E., Roman armies came and destroyed Jerusalem and its temple.

What happened? Why did God not fight for the Jews, as he had in the past? Or why did he not authorize them to engage in warfare to free themselves from oppression? Had God’s view of war changed? No. But something had drastically changed regarding the Jews. They had rejected God’s Son, Jesus, as the Messiah. (Acts 2:36) Therefore, as a nation, they lost their special relationship with God.—Matthew 23:37, 38.

The Jewish nation and its Promised Land no longer enjoyed divine protection, nor could the Jews ever again rightly claim to engage in warfare that had God’s approval or backing. As Jesus foretold, the blessings associated with having God’s favor had been transferred from the fleshly nation of Israel to a new nation, a spiritual nation, later referred to in the Bible as “the Israel of God.” (Galatians 6:16; Matthew 21:43) The congregation of spirit-anointed Christians proved to be the spiritual Israel of God. Pointedly, in the first century, they were told: “Now you are God’s people.”—1 Peter 2:9, 10.

Since first-century Christians were now “God’s people,” did God fight in their behalf, so as to free them from Roman oppression? Or did he authorize them to wage war against their oppressors? No, he did not. Why not? When it comes to God-ordained warfare, God alone determines when such warfare is to take place, as the preceding article showed. God did not fight battles for first-century Christians, nor did he authorize them to engage in secular warfare. Clearly, the first century was not God’s time to war against wickedness and oppression.

Continue.......

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

I understand why one would believe this and most do... but ask yourself a question

What "law" was he speaking of?

Was it the many "laws" that were written in the scrolls at the time which he didn't entirely agree with, making him a hypocrite...

OR

was it something else?

If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well

Which was something HE kept entirely... perfectly