If The God of The Bible is evil (Elohim, Yahweh) why do you still talk to angels like "Michael"?

page: 5
2
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
So what was your point in trying to correct me?


Because had Moses not done what Moses had done in your instance he would not have done what God had wanted him to do in his later life. It was a necessary learning experience in Mose's life and why "Thou Shalt not Kill" is in the commandments. So that those who keep them do not have to endure the trials that Moses did learning on their own.

Thus, even the murder that Moses did was God's will.

He had to learn his way.

Blessed are those who believe having not seen.

edit on 24-8-2012 by Nooneimparticular because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by RomeByFire

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Akragon
 


It doesn't matter what you believe, that's subjective. It matters what is true. [snip]


Seriously, take your own advice.



I definitely do, my subjective opinions are likewise irrelevant, exactly why I am advocating objectively looking at the Hebrew word the Bible uses in the text which implies premeditated murder, not a killing.


I always suggest referencing a few exegetical commentaries when reading over scripture. Most of the "problem" verses make sense when historical and cultural contexts are taken into account. Which coincidentally is the very first rule of Biblical hermeneutics. 9 times out of 10 people fail to apply sound hermeneutics when reading scripture.

edit on 24-8-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Nooneimparticular
 


I'm not arguing whether or not it was God's will, it was just a simple example of murder, nothing more.



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Nooneimparticular
 


I'm not arguing whether or not it was God's will, it was just a simple example of murder, nothing more.


Murder which was forgiven.

That's my point.



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nooneimparticular

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Nooneimparticular
 


I'm not arguing whether or not it was God's will, it was just a simple example of murder, nothing more.


Murder which was forgiven.

That's my point.


Irrelevant! I know it was, no one was discussing whether or not it was forgiven, and while the act was being committed it wasn't yet forgiven, it was murder. And Moses' entire life had to he lived as a murderer from that point on. Why are you bringing up numerous irrelevant details to the discussion? It was merely an example of a murder in the Bible.



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Nooneimparticular

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Nooneimparticular
 


I'm not arguing whether or not it was God's will, it was just a simple example of murder, nothing more.


Murder which was forgiven.

That's my point.


Irrelevant! I know it was, no one was discussing whether or not it was forgiven, and while the act was being committed it wasn't yet forgiven, it was murder. And Moses' entire life had to he lived as a murderer from that point on. Why are you bringing up numerous irrelevant details to the discussion? It was merely an example of a murder in the Bible.


It was an example of forgiveness of even a murderer.

Why is that not important to you?

If you agree with my words, then it isn't a correction but an elaboration on your point.



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Nooneimparticular
 


It's not important to me because it's not what we are discussing, that's a "red herring" in philosophy. In a discussion about redemption it would be relevant, but we aren't discussing redemption right now.



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
That has nothing to do with carrying out a death penalty dully arrived at by a conviction under a lawful trial under the law.


So if say, hypothetically speaking of course, Obama passed a Law put forth by congress that stated that ALL Christians were enemies of the state and subject to summary execution, this would be ok with you?

My point is, who is the JUDGE?



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nooneimparticular

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
That has nothing to do with carrying out a death penalty dully arrived at by a conviction under a lawful trial under the law.


So if say, hypothetically speaking of course, Obama passed a Law put forth by congress that stated that ALL Christians were enemies of the state and subject to summary execution, this would be ok with you?

My point is, who is the JUDGE?


Your example is irrelevant on numerous points. For starters Obama is not a Sovereign God of the universe.



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 

Yes, but isn't "ba'al" in Ancient Hebrew mean "husband?" I remember reading that.



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Nooneimparticular

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
That has nothing to do with carrying out a death penalty dully arrived at by a conviction under a lawful trial under the law.


So if say, hypothetically speaking of course, Obama passed a Law put forth by congress that stated that ALL Christians were enemies of the state and subject to summary execution, this would be ok with you?

My point is, who is the JUDGE?


Your example is irrelevant on numerous points. For starters Obama is not a Sovereign God of the universe.


Fine. A Jewish tribunal establishes this Law.

Then what?

Or if they haven't the authority then who on earth does.

If no one on earth does, then who enforces the Law which you are bringing into the discussion.

Now if the Law isn't relevant, then why are you bringing up?
edit on 24-8-2012 by Nooneimparticular because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by arpgme
It doesn't make sense to me. If The god of The Bible is evil, why do these New Age people still talk to MichaEL, GabriEL, or any of the other "-el" Angels? These are all beings related to the god of The Bible, right?


You see these people who are Wiccan or Pagan claiming to not be Christian and they are still summoning these angels. We also see some New Age people who claim that The God of The Bible wasn't Good and they still summon angels like Michael and the others. If you thought the god was bad, why would you be talking to his angels?

It doesn't make sense...


I have had extensive experience in the Pagan community. To get back on track here, I'll give you a two hand account.

On the one hand Pagans and Wiccans are so gullible that they will worship and call anything that they can be duped into calling for power and gain. Yes, even characters out of said tales as Harry Potter will be called down in circle and they will canter around under the spell as if the being were actually there and living it up with them.

On the other hand, God is everything thus can be addressed by everything and will present himself as his children desire.

edit on 24-8-2012 by Nooneimparticular because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by arpgme
 

Yes, but isn't "ba'al" in Ancient Hebrew mean "husband?" I remember reading that.


You're right, but take a look at this:




Ba'al speaking - The Ugarit Tables (Around 1345BC)
"So, my father, EL the bull, won't you bless him? Creator of all, won't you show him your favor?"





These tablets were dictated by the chief priest of Ugarit to a scribe between 1375 and 1345 BC. The city itself was destroyed around 1200 BC by the Sea Peoples at nearly the same time that the Israelites emerged into history. [1]



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 03:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Nooneimparticular
 


You tell me, what is the process for convicting a condemned person under the Mosaic Law? And is God entitled to Sovereignty as Creator of the universe or not?



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 06:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Nooneimparticular
 


You tell me, what is the process for convicting a condemned person under the Mosaic Law? And is God entitled to Sovereignty as Creator of the universe or not?


I will explain Mosaic Law to those who it applies to. Are you a Jew?

Yes, God is entitled to Sovereignty as creator of the Universe. Are you God?



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 06:40 AM
link   
Just as the Vulgate listed "Lucifer" and "lucifer", as case sensitive, with Jesus being the latter. There is "God" and "god" in the issues of the Bible's Narrative. The Elohim are gods, small case.

The God, capital G, is the entity or concept, which has no image, that created the universe millions of years ago. The God is the concept for light and the mass to energy concepts of particles and waves. Nobody knows which came first or even how. Even the "Big Bang" concept is conjecture. No Earthy human understands the universe and its black holes, nor do they understand the tiny concepts of atoms and the God Particle (Higgs-Boson) that allows mass.

In the case for the "gods" of more recent times, of only thousands of years, these were part of the created universe of God from the millions of years earlier. Millions of years allowed for evolutionary periods and the more recent creator god them does not allow time for evolution themes, only that for outside Earth intelligence blending with Earth's life. The so called creator gods were who Abraham walked with in the City of Ur, and they were only called god in name because they didn't age like humans, had vast science knowledge, and invented man to be slave to their purposes.


Thus, when it gets down to Moses the question is that Moses was defending another from a terrible beating of a slave by an Egyptian. Then the issue becomes if Moses was defending the slave from being beaten to death, and the moral defence then was his justification. It is a concept of law.

In that case, the Egyptian was playing god in perhaps beating the slaves to death, and Moses defended the slave(s) from the unjust person playing god. Just as the Egyptian had no right to play god, neither does the gods of Elohim, which is what the Bible speaks about in the case for Abraham's gods that he walked with in Ur and the ones that gave the lands of Israel to Abraham.

Simple enough concepts. Yet, so elusive to the Christian's mind.

edit on 25-8-2012 by MagnumOpus because: Lucifers and lucifer, akin to God and god concepts, alike to true and false or pseudo



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nooneimparticular

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Nooneimparticular
 


You tell me, what is the process for convicting a condemned person under the Mosaic Law? And is God entitled to Sovereignty as Creator of the universe or not?


I will explain Mosaic Law to those who it applies to. Are you a Jew?

Yes, God is entitled to Sovereignty as creator of the Universe. Are you God?


Me being a Jew or not is irrelevant. The notion was brought up that God violated His own command to not murder by ordering death as a punishment for certain sins. This pertained to the Jews under the law.



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 



The notion was brought up that God violated His own command to not murder by ordering death as a punishment for certain sins. This pertained to the Jews under the law.


Where in the ten commandments are Jews excepted in any shape or form? Where is "God" excepted, in any shape or form?

Last I knew, there were no exceptions. Breaking the rules is breaking the rules. Yet more evidence that your "God" is a hypocrite. Either than, or your image of him is that of a hypocrite. Either way, it works out the same. And you worship this guy? You must be desperate for control and solace.
edit on 25-8-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Does the meaning of the word "hypothetical" escape you?

You are dodging questions you can't answer sufficiently, and it is obvious. Stop avoiding the meat of these matters and either answer the questions or admit your fallacy.



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


I never said Jews were excluded… im correcting the idea that carrying out a death sentence under the law is the same thing as premeditated murder without a trial.





new topics
top topics
 
2
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join