Love vs Tyranny

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

What are morals based on other than emotions?

Here is an example. Is it moral to put down your dog who is in pain and dying a slow death? It's morally right, but emotionally it rips one's heart out. Now oftentimes the morally correct thing to do also is joyful to do, other times it's very sad. In either case, it's morality isn't defined by emotion. Emotion is never the basis to appeal to in determining truth or morality.

Why did god tell us "thou shalt not kill" then turn around and order the Hebrews to kill? Were the Hebrews somehow exempt from the law of those times?

Because the Hebrew word used in that command is the word for murder. A premeditated slaying of someone without due process.

How convenient for the Hebrews

Except all those times God used their enemies to judge them for their wickedness and rebellion.

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Nice try, but no.

Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

What are you getting at? And don't forget the context, He was speaking of His followers and believers. The same folk He previously said were His brothers and sisters. Let's not forget that He told the Pharisees that their father was satan.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Who in the OT called god Father? I was under the impression that Jesus was gods son and no one else.

Jesus told people to pray saying "OUR father thou art in heaven" - "OUR" father not "MY" father. So according to Jesus - he is NOT the only son of God.

Jesus said the God that the Jews followed was "Satan" , but we KNOW that the followed the Old Testament worshiping "Yahweh"...

reply to post by NOTurTypical

What are you getting at?

What I'm getting at is that Jesus introduced his "Father God", Abba, and it was a revolutional concept to mainstay Jews, so much so that they wanted to stone him for blasphemy. So, no, the father image of Yahweh wasn't a common rule of thought.

And don't forget the context, He was speaking of His followers and believers. The same folk He previously said were His brothers and sisters.

Are you saying that only some of Jesus' words and teachings are for the masses, while some of them were only meant for his "brothers and sisters"? Is Abba not meant to be everyone's Father God?

Let's not forget that He told the Pharisees that their father was satan.

Right! Because they had corrupted the Torah and were worshiping the wrong God, and were outside of the true Law, which Jesus sought to restore.

Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

 

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Who in the OT called god Father? I was under the impression that Jesus was gods son and no one else.

Jesus told people to pray saying "OUR father thou art in heaven" - "OUR" father not "MY" father. So according to Jesus - he is NOT the only son of God.

It's appalling how often people trot out the "stupid" card when they come across something that they think supports their dislike of something. At least I assume it's a ploy, because you'd have to be as thick as a whale omelet not to understand something as basic as that.

Christ is teaching other people how to pray -- it specifically says that's what he's doing. And, while Jesus' relationship to the Father is obviously different, we're all the spiritual children of God -- it says that in the Bible, what, about a million times? So for a group of people, being taught by Jesus to pray to their collective father, what word would you expect him to use?

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

What are you getting at?

What I'm getting at is that Jesus introduced his "Father God", Abba, and it was a revolutional concept to mainstay Jews, so much so that they wanted to stone him for blasphemy. So, no, the father image of Yahweh wasn't a common rule of thought.

Again, if you were more familiar with the Hebrew Bible, you'd know that is incorrect.

Yet you, Lord, are our Father.
We are the clay, you are the potter;
we are all the work of your hand.” (Isaiah 64:8 NIV)

There are other verses that depict God as Father, so, no, the Pharisees would be well aware of the concept in a general sense. They were angry because Jesus clearly was not depicting his relationship in the same manner that they would accept.

Blasphemy is a crime against God, not against the Pharisees, so they wouldn't even consider stoning someone for merely repeating a concept that was in Scripture.

reply to post by adjensen


And yet they did!

Jesus never claimed to be God, but sent by God, his father and our father. Jesus made it very clear that we are all sons (and daughters) of the God of which he said he represented.

Jesus claimed to be a prophet of his father God. He claimed that all he taught was taught to him by his father God. He claimed that his father was greater than he was. He prayed to do the will of God and not his own.

Clearly, Jesus was introducing a different God concept than the pharisees wanted to see promoted and disseminated. He empowered individuals to look within and listen to their inner God, not lean to the pharisees for guidance.

reply to post by adjensen


You're trying to insinuate that Jesus had different meanings when saying "MY Father" opposed to "OUR Father". What leads you to that conclusion? How are you SO sure he meant it a different way? Did Jesus ever say his Father was different from those who believe his message? I don't think he ever did, so correct me if I'm wrong.

reply to post by adjensen


I pointed out earlier that Isaiah was the first to introduce God as the Father of the Jews/Israel. Jesus was different. He declared God was His paternal Father, stating His divinity.

That's why they wanted Him murdered.

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by adjensen

 

And yet they did!

Jesus never claimed to be God, but sent by God, his father and our father.

Again, you don't know what you're talking about.

Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and obey his word. Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”

“You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”

“Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds. (John 8:54-59 NIV)

They were stoning him because he had committed blasphemy.

What is blasphemous about saying "before Abraham was born, I am!" Do you know?

reply to post by windword

Are you saying that only some of Jesus' words and teachings are for the masses, while some of them were only meant for his "brothers and sisters"? Is Abba not meant to be everyone's Father God?

Of course He taught differently to the masses compared to His believers. He instructed openly to those who loved Him and believed in Him, and to the masses He spoke in parables in order to hide spiritual truths from them.

reply to post by windword

Right! Because they had corrupted the Torah and were worshiping the wrong God, and were outside of the true Law, which Jesus sought to restore.

Not a "wrong" God. They were trying to worship God the wrong way. And had become religious hypocrites.

reply to post by adjensen


Jesus taught that the spirit doesn't die, so of course, he was talking about his pre-existence. But he wasn't claiming to be God, or the only son of God.

Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are gods'?

Jesus was correcting their interpretation and the teachings of the Torah.

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by adjensen

 

Jesus taught that the spirit doesn't die, so of course, he was talking about his pre-existence.

The Jews believe in the pre-existence of the soul, so he would have not been stoned for that. Blasphemy is a crime against God, it isn't a crime against the Pharisees.

You clearly do not know what you're talking about. Read the Hebrew Bible and ask a Rabbi to help clarify your questions, or you will continue to argue from ignorance.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by windword

 

Right! Because they had corrupted the Torah and were worshiping the wrong God, and were outside of the true Law, which Jesus sought to restore.

Not a "wrong" God. They were trying to worship God the wrong way. And had become religious hypocrites.

The wrong God was Mammon. Isn't that what Jesus said?

And the Essenes are a group that literally abandoned Jerusalem, it seems, in protest... against the way the Temple was being run. So here's a group that went out in the desert to prepare the way of the Lord, following the commands, as they saw it, of the prophet Isaiah. And they go to the desert to get away from what they see to be the worldliness of Jerusalem and the worldliness of the Temple. Now the Essenes aren't a new group in Jesus' day.

And, in the meantime, while the wicked priests are still off in Jerusalem, following the wrong calendar, following the wrong purity rules and officiating improperly before the Lord, in the meantime, pure purity and true holiness resided only among themselves, in their own community, off near the Dead Sea.... The community itself was a surrogate temple....

www.pbs.org...

What does this discussion have to do with the topic?

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
What does this discussion have to do with the topic?

I dunno. Last I dealt with you, I was asking how you equate God with a repressive human government.

reply to post by windword


Mammon is the pagan god of materialism/wealth.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
What does this discussion have to do with the topic?

No idea. Red herrings suck majorly don't they?

reply to post by AfterInfinity


I know, it's convoluted. But, Paul, the murderer of Christians, corrupted the teachings of Jesus and defined Christianity, as we know it today, differently than the actual teachings of Jesus.

It is my contention, as well as others, that Jesus' mission was to restore the Torah, which Paul has made obsolete.
Yet, he keeps the tyrannical God figure and turns him into Jesus!