'Mousetrails' and the dark side of the Old Testament

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by EspyderMan

 

Yes, God is unforgiving. Not because He is not good, but because for Him to give a nod and wink to sin would compromise His holiness and righteousness. (That's why I posted the quote from Socrates)

If God forgives sin and unrighteousness freely He compromises His perfect holiness and justice. How to deal with our sin without compromising His natue and character is God's greatest dilemma.

The answer is "Penal Substitutionary Atonement".

Interesting, but if you repent your forgiven then? Seems like the book states he can and will forgive. However, doing so removes his holiness and righteousness?

Seriously how can you defend this? It makes no real sense at all, there is no logic.

Fact: God forgives those who repent
Argument: God cannot forgive sin without comprimising his holiness and righteousness.
Fact: God will punish all against him that sin
Argument: God punishes to prove righteousness and holiness.

Oxymoron much? Pick a side, you can't have them all.

And.... just what is this 'sign' of the 'covenant' with his 'people'

the ritual is called a Bris...
every male individual must go through life wounded and maimed by this Loving Creator (/sarcasm)


of course the fixated clergy extended this inhumane act to include females...yay higher power

After recovery, Keith spent over ten years studying the Old Testament using the following rules:
(A) take the Bible exactly as it is written;
(B) do not change a letter or a syllable;
(C) do not add facts that are not in the Bible;
(D) do not believe one sentence or paragraph and discount
another;
(E) read it as it is, a window to the past - the greatest ancient
history book ever written.

I'm thinking your friend went on a wrong approach.
If you read the bible word by word it will not be understood like it should be, some things in the bible are like parables, and are meant to be understood in a higher light, not as a robot.

(c) do not add facts that are not in the Bible.
Sometimes we need to go into history to verify the stories in the bible, as the bible is formed from many many books and manuscripts from different times, some stories you find in the bible are a rerun of older myths, the way they are presented in the bible do not hold the original meaning, or have lost it since they are stories that are retold from older generations(other civilisations)

Also I would say the bible is translated very bad, sometimes with added versions of the original story that is taken from somewhere else. But overall it's a good book and does bring about the notion of god, that I also support and beilive in. But the bible must be compared and investigated with other sources to get to the truth.

For example I find the god of the old testament and the god of the new testament different as in another god.
The god of the new testament the supreme god, god of all there is worlds etc that we all imagine, picture and beilive in, and the god(lord) of the old testament a lord, not the supreme one.
This can also be seen in the old testament, but because the bible has been translated wrong there is no difference between the most high god and the lord, god of Israel, the goddess asherah has also has been turned into a bush, tree, there are many gods in the OT, but forged into a single one because of bad editing(translation) of the bible.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by traditionaldrummer

 

It's a disaster because the concept is nonsensical. God sets up a rule that requires blood sacrifice. He sends his son to earth and accepts him as a blood sacrifice (instead of just eliminating the sacrifice requirement). It's laughably absurd.

Really, Socrates grasped the seemingly impossible dilemma. Just forgiving without penalty would compromise God's righteousness.


“It may be that the Deity can forgive sins, but I do not see how,” ~ Socrates, BC

You must admit that it's hard to grasp for many, the idea of Jesus death as a neccessary suffering for the artonment of sin or of the ignorance which begets sin and all manner of UNneccessary suffering.

I have a general comment about the bible. I think everyone should remember that "man" wrote the bible. Yes the bible talks of how God instructed his apostles to do so and the events they wrote about were actual events. But when you think about it, how do you know?? I was not there when the great book was written. I don't view my creator or my God as vengeful. I also feel that the creator who gave us free will and choice would not set us up for a fall. How can anybody this century or any be punished for what they have been taught to be right??

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Really, Socrates grasped the seemingly impossible dilemma. Just forgiving without penalty would compromise God's righteousness.

Actually it would help prove it. Especially if the usual fare is to dole out infinite punishment for finite crimes - something wholly unjust, merciless and unrighteous.

reply to post by jjkenobi


The passage I quoted was for example purposes, it is just one of numerous in the OT that shows the 'genocidal' nature of this God character. Please don't use my only quoting one passage as any kind of lack of research on my part - it would have been a very long thread if I'd decided to include all applicable passages from the OT.

God/gods of the bible.

The CEO of this operation is above board, and beyond reproach. He is a loving Father and true to his Word.

His Managers, however, who have administered countless and varied corners of this grand and unimaginably vast universe, seen and unseen; have , on occasion, let the power of thier duties, go to thier head.

One former, favorite son has been relegated, and is now known, mainly because of his infamous pride.
This former favorite son/Manager, had a team working for him in this particular, special section of the grand and unimaginably vast universe. Some were 'roped-in' to administer the new and different 'orders' from above. They became, with thier 'splinter group', what we sometimes see described in the annals of certain, particular versions of the history of the operation.

Much later (in earth time) another favorite son...one more trustworthy and true would, take it upon himself to cross the boundary of this 'matrix' to restore the original plan, or at least to re-affirm the original intent to this special section of the grand and unimaginably vast universe.

Posters are correct. There are/were many god/gods. What you now read IS a mish/mash of what happened...hence, all the usual, predictable unanswerable questions.
The same goes basically for all other major religions. They ALL tell the same story. Some creation myths from around the globe, focus on particular events...a flood, the annihilation of a large group of people, many gods, one god...etc.etc.etc...

Wrap them all together, take out the religious aspect (the red herring), find the common denominators...and you have what is expressed in the paragraphs above.

We are part of a Greater Plan...the likes of which, is nigh on impossible for us to understand with the equipment we have to 'judge' it. The janitor is never really privvy to the intent of the CEO of the company he works for. He may know the nature of the operation, but, the details and workings of it are not his/our domain.

Akushla

reply to post by traditionaldrummer

Surely you must also admit that true Justice, to be just, must make no compromise with sin and evil, and that for everything a price must be paid, and in the case of JC, as the embodiment of the Spirit of the living God (spirit of life, spirit of the universe etc.), what a costly price indeed..

reply to post by bigjib


The bible used by Keith Stephens was the 'Confraternity Bible' which is described, in Wiki, as 'a somewhat broad term that refers to any edition of the Catholic Bible translated under the auspices of the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine ("C.C.D.") between 1941 and 1969. The Confraternity Bible is known, and appreciated, for the balance it strikes between accessibility and authenticity. That is, many feel that the translation is neither too loose and friendly, nor too stilted and slavish. It was supplanted in 1970 by the New American Bible and is no longer in widespread use.'

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by traditionaldrummer

 

Surely you must also admit that true Justice, to be just, must make no compromise with sin and evil, and that for everything a price must be paid, and in the case of JC, as the embodiment of the Spirit of the living God (spirit of life, spirit of the universe etc.), what a costly price indeed..

Maybe, but then we must account for God's acts which were unjust and immoral, why, for example, thousands of others were punished for David's deeds, why the torment of Job, why the demands on Abraham to sacrifice his son, Jepthah's sacrifice, all of the genocides, infinite punishments for finite crimes, etc. This god is not meting out justice in any way.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by traditionaldrummer

 

Surely you must also admit that true Justice, to be just, must make no compromise with sin and evil, and that for everything a price must be paid, and in the case of JC, as the embodiment of the Spirit of the living God (spirit of life, spirit of the universe etc.), what a costly price indeed..

If 'justice' were a condition of proper operation on this plane...coupled with the free will gifted to us (also a condition of proper operation on this plane), the 'no compromise' follows from the fact that it is a condition of this plane, like gravity, like a law of something.
The rules of the game are clear, they are followed by players and referees alike.
Akushla

Originally posted by EspyderMan

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by EspyderMan

 

Yes, God is unforgiving. Not because He is not good, but because for Him to give a nod and wink to sin would compromise His holiness and righteousness. (That's why I posted the quote from Socrates)

If God forgives sin and unrighteousness freely He compromises His perfect holiness and justice. How to deal with our sin without compromising His natue and character is God's greatest dilemma.

The answer is "Penal Substitutionary Atonement".

Interesting, but if you repent your forgiven then? Seems like the book states he can and will forgive. However, doing so removes his holiness and righteousness?

Seriously how can you defend this? It makes no real sense at all, there is no logic.

Fact: God forgives those who repent
Argument: God cannot forgive sin without comprimising his holiness and righteousness.
Fact: God will punish all against him that sin
Argument: God punishes to prove righteousness and holiness.

Oxymoron much? Pick a side, you can't have them all.

Did you read the last line in my post? Google "Penal Substitutionary Atonement".

Originally posted by akushla99
If 'justice' were a condition of proper operation on this plane...coupled with the free will gifted to us (also a condition of proper operation on this plane), the 'no compromise' follows from the fact that it is a condition of this plane, like gravity, like a law of something.

No, because the punishments are arbitrary and differ from crime to crime or depending on whether god favors you. Also, your theory would refute the concept of god's omnipotence (though I don't know if that's your belief).

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by akushla99
If 'justice' were a condition of proper operation on this plane...coupled with the free will gifted to us (also a condition of proper operation on this plane), the 'no compromise' follows from the fact that it is a condition of this plane, like gravity, like a law of something.

No, because the punishments are arbitrary and differ from crime to crime or depending on whether god favors you. Also, your theory would refute the concept of god's omnipotence (though I don't know if that's your belief).

Wrong, my friend...what you call 'punishments' are merely rules of the game, in this locum. They way you see them at a temporal and bound level is similar to the way a child would react to being slapped away from putting its finger in a powerpoint socket.
Akushla

Originally posted by akushla99
Wrong, my friend...what you call 'punishments' are merely rules of the game, in this locum. They way you see them at a temporal and bound level is similar to the way a child would react to being slapped away from putting its finger in a powerpoint socket.
Akushla

No, you've described god's punishments as similar to a natural consequence. If you believe the god of the bible is this god, the bible shows god operating in ways your theory doesn't account for.

Originally posted by akushla99

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by akushla99
If 'justice' were a condition of proper operation on this plane...coupled with the free will gifted to us (also a condition of proper operation on this plane), the 'no compromise' follows from the fact that it is a condition of this plane, like gravity, like a law of something.

No, because the punishments are arbitrary and differ from crime to crime or depending on whether god favors you. Also, your theory would refute the concept of god's omnipotence (though I don't know if that's your belief).

Wrong, my friend...what you call 'punishments' are merely rules of the game, in this locum. They way you see them at a temporal and bound level is similar to the way a child would react to being slapped away from putting its finger in a powerpoint socket.


Akushla

...and i fail to see how gods omnipotence could be 'judged' at this level.
Akushla

Originally posted by akushla99
...and i fail to see how gods omnipotence could be 'judged' at this level.
Akushla

Don't worry.
There's plenty of other levels in which the alleged omnipotence of the biblical god can be "judged"

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by akushla99
Wrong, my friend...what you call 'punishments' are merely rules of the game, in this locum. They way you see them at a temporal and bound level is similar to the way a child would react to being slapped away from putting its finger in a powerpoint socket.
Akushla

No, you've described god's punishments as similar to a natural consequence. If you believe the god of the bible is this god, the bible shows god operating in ways your theory doesn't account for.

No, I've described the 'conditions', 'rules' of operation. The 'theory' (as you call it) fits perfectly.
Akushla

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by akushla99
...and i fail to see how gods omnipotence could be 'judged' at this level.
Akushla

Don't worry.
There's plenty of other levels in which the alleged omnipotence of the biblical god can be "judged"

I'm sorry...you are the one who seems to have a problem understanding it.
Akushla