God is GOOD and I will defend Him. A Challenge for Atheists

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by wx4caster

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by aero56
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

Why would "God" write a book that should not be interpreted literally?

There are over 200 figures of speech and literary devices used by the Holy Spirit in the scriptures.

Example: mountains are sometimes used to describe nations.

and on a side note, why would they use the word for mountain to describe a nation when there is a perfectly good word in thier tongue to say "nation"

poor analagy.

Why does any author use literary devices?

LINK. As I stated from the link to the left, This type of speech is a personification commonly used in allegory. This is the literary device of antiquity. Socrates, Plato...They all used it. We still talk this way today. Pick up any book, it's there. Watch any movie, you will find symbolism, which accomplishes the same thing.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Why does any author use literary devices?

when the text is fictional in order to ge across a feeling of emotion or an idea that words are difficult to describe, nations are pretty easy to describe. and you never rebutted my previous post about old law...

Originally posted by bogomil

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by wx4caster

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
I'll be sure not to ground my children when they are in rebellion in the future in an effort to get their attention. I don't want someone accusing me of using tactics that foster 'Stockholm Syndrome' in my children. Thanks for the insight.

well if you want to follow the word of god exactly, dependant upon the degree of rebellion, you may have to kill your child. the bible says so, and god is all knowing and good, so if he says you should, then why wouldnt you? after all, he killed his only son...

The old covenant applies to those practicing Judaism. Christ gave two commandments for the new covenant, love God and love people, and said that the entire law and prophets were fulfilled with these two commandments. Paul says in Romans that the law was not given for righteousness, it was given so that sin would "abound", that is we would sin MORE. Parents rejected this law in OT times in the same manner that they failed to fulfill any of the other 600+ laws God gave. God gave the law to make men realize they could not merit their own righteousness by being perfect which would (hopefully) drive them to the cross for Christ's imputed righteousness (Grace) free for the asking.

The old/new contract situation is as self-contained, self-proclaimed and self-proving as the rest of extremist christian argumentation. It's just another facet of a long, elaborate circle-argument.

No. It's all there in the Bible. Read it for all it's worth.

Wikipedia

"A key text at issue for the Christian concept of the New Covenant is Hebrews 8:8-12 in the New Testament, with an interpretation in the surrounding text:

7For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second. 8For he finds fault with them when he says: "Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 9not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord. 10For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 11And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. 12For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more." 13In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.—Hebrews 8:7-13"

Originally posted by wx4caster

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

The old covenant applies to those practicing Judaism. Christ gave two commandments for the new covenant, love God and love people, and said that the entire law and prophets were fulfilled with these two commandments. Paul says in Romans that the law was not given for righteousness, it was given so that sin would "abound", that is we would sin MORE. Parents rejected this law in OT times in the same manner that they failed to fulfill any of the other 600+ laws God gave. God gave the law to make men realize they could not merit their own righteousness by being perfect which would (hopefully) drive them to the cross for Christ's imputed righteousness (Grace) free for the asking.

where in the bible does god or jesus himself say that the old covenant is no longer valid?

the apostle paul said this, and there are many scriptures which clearly state that human interpretation of gods words

“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 RSV)

"Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God." (2 Peter 20-21 NAB)

when jesus talks about it he is very clear

"Do not think that I [Jesus] 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 or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)"

so according to you everything is accomplished? but you are human, and i still exist... so now, again, why dont we follow it?

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
LINK. As I stated from the link to the left, This type of speech is a personification commonly used in allegory. This is the literary device of antiquity. Socrates, Plato...They all used it. We still talk this way today. Pick up any book, it's there. Watch any movie, you will find symbolism, which accomplishes the same thing.

BUT your dealing with the word of god, commanded by god and told to be written exactly as told without variance... socrates and plato were philosophers, not deitys

either god is real, and he is infallable, and would not require analagies, he would find the perfect words, or its man made and man used these literary tricks of his own making... you cannot have it both ways, again...

"Do not think that I [Jesus] 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 or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)"

He came to fulfill it because we were incapable. He will not miss one letter of the law in the life He lived. Through his life, we too have access to this accomplishment. This is His love demonstrated for us. This is His ultimate show of love toward us. Would you do the same for your friends and enemies alike?

Originally posted by wx4caster

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

The old covenant applies to those practicing Judaism. Christ gave two commandments for the new covenant, love God and love people, and said that the entire law and prophets were fulfilled with these two commandments. Paul says in Romans that the law was not given for righteousness, it was given so that sin would "abound", that is we would sin MORE. Parents rejected this law in OT times in the same manner that they failed to fulfill any of the other 600+ laws God gave. God gave the law to make men realize they could not merit their own righteousness by being perfect which would (hopefully) drive them to the cross for Christ's imputed righteousness (Grace) free for the asking.

where in the bible does god or jesus himself say that the old covenant is no longer valid?

the apostle paul said this, and there are many scriptures which clearly state that human interpretation of gods words

“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 RSV)

"Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God." (2 Peter 20-21 NAB)

when jesus talks about it he is very clear

"Do not think that I [Jesus] 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 or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)"

so according to you everything is accomplished? but you are human, and i still exist... so now, again, why dont we follow it?

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

Wikipedia

"A key text at issue for the Christian concept of the New Covenant is Hebrews 8:8-12 in the New Testament, with an interpretation in the surrounding text:

7For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second. 8For he finds fault with them when he says: "Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 9not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord. 10For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 11And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. 12For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more." 13In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.—Hebrews 8:7-13"

yes but he never says he laws of the old testament are no longer valid, just that the punishments are different

the biggest diff is wether or not we are born with sin.

LINK

This link says it well. You will never find anything in the Bible that is not layered like an onion. Peal back the layers and all you find is more truth. The internet is filled with many of these layers if you only bother to look. Simply ask God to reveal Himself to you and He is faithful to you in your request. Love will follow. He is very easy to love if you get to know Him.

"To Give His Enemies No Ground

The enemies of Jesus were always waiting for him to say something on account of which they might accuse and persecute him (Lke 11:53-54). By speaking in parables, Jesus was making it very hard for them to use his words against him. He could hardly be arrested for telling homely stories!

The parables were evocative not provocative. By couching his teaching in parables, Jesus made certain points much clearer to true-hearted people than even plain language could have made them. At the same time, he was speaking indirectly and figuratively so that lawyers had nothing concrete with which to make a case against him. At times when it would have been counterproductive to speak plainly in public, Jesus spoke in parables —a prudent teaching strategy."

Originally posted by wx4caster

Originally posted by SuperiorEd
LINK. As I stated from the link to the left, This type of speech is a personification commonly used in allegory. This is the literary device of antiquity. Socrates, Plato...They all used it. We still talk this way today. Pick up any book, it's there. Watch any movie, you will find symbolism, which accomplishes the same thing.

BUT your dealing with the word of god, commanded by god and told to be written exactly as told without variance... socrates and plato were philosophers, not deitys

either god is real, and he is infallable, and would not require analagies, he would find the perfect words, or its man made and man used these literary tricks of his own making... you cannot have it both ways, again...

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

LINK

This link says it well. You will never find anything in the Bible that is not layered like an onion. Peal back the layers and all you find is more truth. The internet is filled with many of these layers if you only bother to look. Simply ask God to reveal Himself to you and He is faithful to you in your request. Love will follow. He is very easy to love if you get to know Him.

"To Give His Enemies No Ground

The enemies of Jesus were always waiting for him to say something on account of which they might accuse and persecute him (Lke 11:53-54). By speaking in parables, Jesus was making it very hard for them to use his words against him. He could hardly be arrested for telling homely stories!

when jesus wanted to speak clearly, he would, and he was hardly afraid of being arrested.

the point that i make is that jesus was clear that the laws in the old testament were still very much so relavent, and that the new blood covenant washed our sins, but we still had to follow the law until the end of time. the reason people dont like that idea is because who wants to never eat shrimp? or wear polyester blended fabric...

Originally posted by wx4caster

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

Wikipedia

"A key text at issue for the Christian concept of the New Covenant is Hebrews 8:8-12 in the New Testament, with an interpretation in the surrounding text:

7For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second. 8For he finds fault with them when he says: "Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 9not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord. 10For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 11And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. 12For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more." 13In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.—Hebrews 8:7-13"

yes but he never says he laws of the old testament are no longer valid, just that the punishments are different

the biggest diff is wether or not we are born with sin.

If you dare go back and read all 9 pages of my comments, you will see that love is the fulfillment of the law. Name one thing you can do wrong if you love others more than yourself.

One example: You can say, "I can smoke pot in the privacy of my own home. What's the harm?" I will simply say what I said before. If you take reward, you suffer. What are you taking? First, you take your health. Second, you take resources from your family. Third, you change your reasoning ability. You are what you think about most of the time. If drugs are what you think about most of the time, you will take all actions to fuel your habit. This robs others who depend on you for support and clarity of choice.

The question then becomes this: If I love my family, would I do this to them?

If you love God and love others, you will still make mistakes. The point isn't that you are capable of the law. The point is, apart from God's help with the law of love, you are dead in you sins. Love God and love your fellow man and you are free from the law. Your attempt at love is all that is required. You can never succeed here. Once you are back in the arms of God, you will be just fine. The earth is not your home.

reply to post by SuperiorEd


again, with faith, it is personal. what you believe, no matter how strongly, is not fact. it simply cannot be supported as such.

reply to post by SuperiorEd


You’re saying the bible can be used to reveal the character of god – I agree

Link

not pretty is it

and based on the text I provided – yes I am morally superior to the entity shown in these text- in fact I would say all human’s who have been here on earth so far are also morally superior to bible god

I would like to quote Spiderman if I may:
With great power come great responsibility

A super powerful super intelligence would have found a better way than

Exodus 32:27
Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side ... and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbor.
Numbers 15:35
And the Lord said unto Moses, The man [who was found picking up sticks on the sabbath] shall be surely put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones.
1 Samuel 15:2-3
Thus saith the Lord of hosts ... go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare him not; but slay both man and woman, infant and
suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

Originally posted by wx4caster

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Why does any author use literary devices?

when the text is fictional in order to ge across a feeling of emotion or an idea that words are difficult to describe, nations are pretty easy to describe. and you never rebutted my previous post about old law...

Yes I did, you missed it.

Sure it can. I am no different than a non-believer. Before I knew how life can be in faith, I wished religion was not true. I wished God was not there. Why? Same reason as anyone. I want this life to be about me and I want to experience all that life can offer. All the pleasures and all the goods money can buy. This is anyone's desire apart from God.

There is trouble with this. As I have said, taking reward leads to suffering. This can be demonstrated if you are honest about your choices. Smoke and you get cancer. This is clear. Suffering leads to reward. Get a degree and you get a better job. This reward is earned and can be spent on a car. Did the job money ever stop when you bought the car? Only if you stop suffering work. The car brings yet another reward as you suffer the payment. The extra time you have as a reward from the car gives you a chance to take some time off to surf ATS. Suffer through this thread and you get yet another reward. You figure out the direction of suffering.

Choose suffering and you find real, lasting reward. You still get all that this life has to offer. The difference is, you do it in loving for others. You get reward you earn. You avoid suffering for the wrong reasons. Loving God requires a price. In the end, His reward is proof of His love to you. How can you know unless you test Him. I can only point you in the right direction.

Originally posted by wx4caster
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

again, with faith, it is personal. what you believe, no matter how strongly, is not fact. it simply cannot be supported as such.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Yes I did, you missed it.

your right, and i went through and checked again and missed it again... maybe its not working on my end? either way, would you please be so kind as to repost?

reply to post by wx4caster


Found it, I missed your reply, nevermind...

where in the bible does god or jesus himself say that the old covenant is no longer valid?

Christ instituted the new covenant at the last supper.

And secondly, we Christians believe the author of the Bible from cover to cover was the Holy Spirit. Various humans only held the pen to the paper. So if the Spirit through Paul says the old covenant is over then that's what we agree with. It's the doctrine of 'Sola Scriptura'. Jeremiah prophesied the old covenant would pass away.

Jesus said the law would never pass away until it was fulfilled, then goes on to say that He came "to fulfill." Jesus doesn't say "The law will never, ever, ever, ever pass away.." He said 'the law would never pass away until it be fulfilled, and I came to fulfill it'.

Example: Your teacher says, "I'll never let you students get out of your seats until I finish with my lesson, and I came to school today to finish my lesson."

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

Originally posted by bogomil

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by wx4caster

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
I'll be sure not to ground my children when they are in rebellion in the future in an effort to get their attention. I don't want someone accusing me of using tactics that foster 'Stockholm Syndrome' in my children. Thanks for the insight.

well if you want to follow the word of god exactly, dependant upon the degree of rebellion, you may have to kill your child. the bible says so, and god is all knowing and good, so if he says you should, then why wouldnt you? after all, he killed his only son...

The old covenant applies to those practicing Judaism. Christ gave two commandments for the new covenant, love God and love people, and said that the entire law and prophets were fulfilled with these two commandments. Paul says in Romans that the law was not given for righteousness, it was given so that sin would "abound", that is we would sin MORE. Parents rejected this law in OT times in the same manner that they failed to fulfill any of the other 600+ laws God gave. God gave the law to make men realize they could not merit their own righteousness by being perfect which would (hopefully) drive them to the cross for Christ's imputed righteousness (Grace) free for the asking.

The old/new contract situation is as self-contained, self-proclaimed and self-proving as the rest of extremist christian argumentation. It's just another facet of a long, elaborate circle-argument.

No. It's all there in the Bible. Read it for all it's worth.

I am familiar enough about the old/new contracts to be able to form opinions on them. Maybe even more than the average christian, who seems to take it all from a rather passive and bible-ignorant position. But NuT has a tendency to bring in sidetracks on threads. Something which I don't complain about, though I won't always follow them up to any great extent.

Referring to the bible as THE self-proclaimed 'authority' is only a valid argument for believers. You ought to have noticed that by now. Or are you just repeating yourself out of missionary habits, in the hope that this will tire oui opposition?

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Found it, I missed your reply, nevermind...

no problems it gets hectic!

Christ instituted the new covenant at the last supper.

a good starting point here because i agree... (good sign?)

And secondly, we Christians believe the author of the Bible from cover to cover was the Holy Spirit. Various humans only held the pen to the paper. So if the Spirit through Paul says the old covenant is over then that's what we agree with.

well, that may not be necessarily so. there are some minor but irrefuteable differences in the books of the deciples which would be more likely the same story as witnessed by several different people. whether or not the words were gods is up to personal belief but logically if an all powerful being had all these people writing the story down, it should come out the same, because unless god changed his dictating practices, when he charged someone to write holy scripture it was to be word for word... anyway...

It's the doctrine of 'Sola Scriptura'. Jeremiah prophesied the old covenant would pass away.

Jesus said the law would never pass away until it was fulfilled,

no he says "Do not think that I [Jesus] 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 or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)"

until heaven and earth disappear? i am very much so still here... jesus marked the change from the old to new covenant, but the old laws still apply...

then goes on to say that He came "to fulfill." Jesus doesn't say "The law will never, ever, ever, ever pass away.." He said 'the law would never pass away until it be fulfilled, and I came to fulfill it'.

see above, until heaven and earth disappear sounds alot like never never never. yes jesus came to fulfill the prophecy according to the bible, but never does it say from god's mouth that the old laws are to be stricken from the record so to speak.

Example: Your teacher says, "I'll never let you students get out of your seats until I finish with my lesson, and I came to school today to finish my lesson."

its more like Example: father says to son, "see that star up there? it and all others are bound by laws of gravitational attraction forever." son asks "but what if that star blows up?" and father replies, "new star same rules..."

reply to post by SuperiorEd


To the list of hijacked and twisted material you 'borrow' from other truth-seeking systems and fit to your own purpose, you included 'koans' from zen-buddhism in a recent post (on page 6) and before that an 'inductive category' argument to equalize asian religions with your interpretation of the bible (not surprisingly DISREGARDING the basic differences between the compared systems, and with little or no knowledge of the real bases of such alternative systems).


Your present efforts of 'arranging' material and the use of a diffuse and undefined private methodology has been tried time and again here on ATS, and always ends with the refusal of the claimant of such an approach to relate to anything, which possibly could be a reality-check.

Attacking, or as you call it 'sharing' or 'giving testimony', from as many (unsupported) directions as you can cook up, only results in the end-result of a big verbal gordic knot, which I honestly doubt you yourself can find any start or end of.

Except ofcourse by eventually falling back on the self-proclaimed 'authority' of your bible-interpretation. And while such a position can be beneficial for you, you are NOT the norm of mankind, and there is no reason whatsoever, that your preachings will have any value at all except for your subjective existence.

So please start calling things by their proper names, and start using them as they self-defined are meant to be used. Then we can preach at each other.

I'm just hanging around, until you restrict yourself to what's you're best at: Preaching bible-'absolutes' from your own bible-interpretation.

reply to post by wx4caster

there are some minor but irrefuteable differences in the books of the deciples which would be more likely the same story as witnessed by several different people.

That actual lends credibility. If all the eye-witnesses for the prosecution are on the witness stand and say the exact same thing detail for detail the defense attorney would object for collusion. Varying minor details is actually an argument for truth from eye-witnesses.

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

Sorry, you'd have a clear argument if "till all be fulfilled" were not in the text. Jesus came to fulfill the law, He fulfilled it.

But not to give the appearance of cherry-picking, Jesus also says the law and the prophets are summed up in two commands: 1. Love God, 2. Love people. That's why He said "My yoke is easy and my burden is light".

The entire OT law is fulfilled with love for all men and love towards God in spirit and in truth. Paul says in Romans that the law was only given so that men would sin more, it was never given so that men could earn their own righteousness.