It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Lazarus Short
The OP may be on dangerous theo-illogical ground. God is most essentially, Love. However, a good case can be made that both good and evil proceed from God. Check out what Moses said to God in Exodus 32:12, "Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people." Yes, God even repents. Back in Genesis, God even repented that He had made man.
If God made the garden, the tree of Life, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, did He not already know good and evil Himself? Of course, He did! However, Goodness is more essential to His character.edit on 1-11-2011 by Lazarus Short because: lah-de-dah
Originally posted by Akragon
i would assume that said child was of my doing not some entity...
Unless of course said entity told me himself that he infact... did the deed, which i doubt would happen
Originally posted by LeftySinister
Originally posted by Akragon
i would assume that said child was of my doing not some entity...
Unless of course said entity told me himself that he infact... did the deed, which i doubt would happen
Matthew Ch. 1
[20] But while he[Joseph] thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
[21] And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
Originally posted by Akragon
Originally posted by LeftySinister
Originally posted by Akragon
i would assume that said child was of my doing not some entity...
Unless of course said entity told me himself that he infact... did the deed, which i doubt would happen
Matthew Ch. 1
[20] But while he[Joseph] thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
[21] And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
Whats your point, i've had santa claus... Pacman, super Mario... A few of my Warcraft toons... and many other things appear to me in dreams...
It means nothing... And it wasn't even quoted by Jesus.. And if it didn't come from the bible anyone else would disregard it as well
The God who was the entity who became Jesus was a pure spirit being above angels.
Yahweh is Jesus Christ's pre-incarnate form and is also referred to many times in the OT as "the angel of the Lord".
Here, let me go through this list of claims:
Ugh...you lose me with the whole "evil god of the old testament" and "good god of the new testament" for a few reasons.
1) Everyone in the new testament acknowledges them as precisely one and the same - they are following through on the story and the exact same god from the old testament, honoring his words, commands, and will, and acknowledging his truth.
2) This completely disregards the reality of the bible itself - there are more examples and testimonies to god's grace in the old testament than in the entire new testament (the NT being a smaller portion of the bible may play into this somewhat), and by volume, more references to the wrath of god in the new testament as pronounced by Jesus and the apostles.
3) To argue for a distinction between "gods" in the old and new testament completely destroys the basis and justification, and hence the validity, of the entire new testament as it is ENTIRELY rooted in and dependent on god and his claims as presented in the old testament.
Very much smacks of gnosticism and claims of the demiurge, etc., with no recognition of the interconnectedness of the bible. If you're going to throw out the bathwater, you have to chuck out the baby as well.
1. False
Because: No one in the new testament acknowledges them as precisely one and the same.
2. False
Because: There is no evidence for the reality of the bible itself, if you mean the OT when you say, Bible. Now what I mean is there is no evidence for a god going by the name YHWH who was anything but a minor deity who was related to storms from the south. There was a Temple in Jerusalem which was a Jebusite city but no evidence that it was dedicated to a god named YHWH. There was probably a sort of connection made during the Babylonian period between that people and that particular god by picking out one they knew of who had a name which had a similar sound at the beginning.
3. False
Because: The entire new testament as it is NOT ENTIRELY rooted in and dependent on god and his claims as presented in the old testament. There are a couple sketchy parallels between certain dispersed fragments of info in the OT and some aspects of the Christ which did materialize but need no confirmation from an antiquated book, considering there was already a proto-typical Christian-like religion already in existence who the members of readily adopted Christianity when it was presented to them without having to dig through that book.
Obviously God did not all of a sudden come into being when Jesus starting telling people about him. God, by definition, would have always been around. The sort of God Jesus was talking about is a God who cares about us, such as what you see described in that well known verse, John 3:16. But this does not mean that the God described by Jesus is relegated to the definition that priests and theologians of the "Hebrew" tradition created.
. . . the new testament is otherwise full of confirming references to god and his words, prophets, and history from the old testament . . .
Not necessarily.
Who has more authority in interpreting the O T?
The Jews or the Christians who usurped it?
Remember that the Jews thought Eden where man was elevated while Christians reversed this authoritative view to a fall.
More $$$$$$ in guilt I guess.
This kinda proves that we are addicted to tradition and culture and not to a God or religious creed.
The sort of God Jesus was talking about is a God who cares about us, such as what you see described in that well known verse, John 3:16. But this does not mean that the God described by Jesus is relegated to the definition that priests and theologians of the "Hebrew" tradition created.
Originally posted by Akragon
Originally posted by Greatest I am
Originally posted by Akragon
"You can judge whoever you like, though it is to my knowledge... Not our place to judge others. Though christians seem to think they can "judge rightiously"... i disagree."
If man did not judge what is good or evil, as shown in this clip, do you think you would like to live there?
www.bing.com...#
If someone raped your wife, would you still think it to not be your place to judge the perpetrator as evil, or would you just not judge and watch?
Regards
DL
Why do people always have to throw that at me...
IF i had a wife, said person would have to kill me before that happening. A husband is there to protect his wife.
Theres no need to judge such blatant evil, its quite obvious... and in such extreme circumstances certian rules are thrown out the window... At least for me...
Im not one to stand there and let violence happen, though i will take the responsibility of such actions if someone tried to screw with my friends/family...
Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by Greatest I am
Jesus Christ is the tree of life.
The other tree of the duality leads to destruction.
Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by Greatest I am
Not necessarily.
Who has more authority in interpreting the O T?
The Jews or the Christians who usurped it?
Remember that the Jews thought Eden where man was elevated while Christians reversed this authoritative view to a fall.
More $$$$$$ in guilt I guess.
Apologies, not sure I'm following this line of reasoning - all of the "christians" who wrote the new testament were in fact israelites/jews themselves. Even Paul who primarily taught on this fall of Adam was a pharisee and apparently pretty strict in his following of jewish traditions and lines of thought until after his conversion.
As far as the Jews' views on Eden, I'd have to make a point of looking into that directly, but the old testament is also quite well stocked with god's condemnation of man's general wickedness (as well as an account of all of mankind becoming so generally corrupt and polluted as to have to effectively wipe the slate clean and start again with just the family of Noah...), but I will agree with the unstated in that I don't believe in inherited original sin - mankind is just generally predisposed to not walk according to the will of god.
This kinda proves that we are addicted to tradition and culture and not to a God or religious creed.
I can understand the argument, but I also can understand that god is effectively alien to us (as are, by extension, his purposes and needs for what he has done - a lacking but working correlation is human scientists working with lab animals - the animals would likely view a good bit of the work as wicked and cruel, even if it's for a misunderstood or otherwise greater good of which they aren't or can't be aware), and that most of the referenced cases can easily apply to enforcing the needed history of Israel & teachings of god as well as ensuring the bloodlines required for the fulfillment of Christ's redemptive work.
So, while one can argue that god was evil in the old testament, you have to equally extend the same claim to the god of the new testament as they are part & parcel - and even the new testament is not free of the wrath of god as I already mentioned. The new testament is NOT just the sugar, spice, and everything nice of the bible - plenty of references to judgement, rejection, destruction, and the righteous accounting of god...confirmed throughout as the same god recorded in the OT.
As an alien, he should be rejected as man's prime example.
Man should lead men. Not some klingon or Ferengy.
Do you not think it immoral to line up to try to profit from his murder?
God set all the conditions for his death and I call that murder and here you are trying to profit from a horrendous and immoral act. Tsk tsk. Shame on you.
Originally posted by Greatest I am
Originally posted by Akragon
Originally posted by Greatest I am
Originally posted by Akragon
"You can judge whoever you like, though it is to my knowledge... Not our place to judge others. Though christians seem to think they can "judge rightiously"... i disagree."
If man did not judge what is good or evil, as shown in this clip, do you think you would like to live there?
www.bing.com...#
If someone raped your wife, would you still think it to not be your place to judge the perpetrator as evil, or would you just not judge and watch?
Regards
DL
Why do people always have to throw that at me...
IF i had a wife, said person would have to kill me before that happening. A husband is there to protect his wife.
Theres no need to judge such blatant evil, its quite obvious... and in such extreme circumstances certian rules are thrown out the window... At least for me...
Im not one to stand there and let violence happen, though i will take the responsibility of such actions if someone tried to screw with my friends/family...
Yes. Based on the judgment or judging that you say you do not do.
Regards
DL
According to what?
Fair enough, and true - and to say that this same god is not the one taught of and preached in the old testament is without merit as it discounts all of god's grace, forgiveness, compassion and desires also relayed in the OT.
The sort of God Jesus was talking about is a God who cares about us, such as what you see described in that well known verse, John 3:16...