Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Wow! Your ramblings are so obtuse and circumspect, it is not possible to deliberately retort what you are saying.
What sort of assumption makes one think.......
- Thread starter quietthinker
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Wow! Your ramblings are so obtuse and circumspect, it is not possible to deliberately retort what you are saying.
Brakelite
Well-Known Member
Some of you have brought up some good points, others ignore context. For example. @Grailhunter
What is the context behind stoning the raped woman?
What is the context behind the warning to Israel that if they step upon the mountain while He's talking with Moses they be either stoned or shot through?
What is the context behind the warning to Adam and Eve, if you eat of the tree you will die?
What is the context behind his declaration through His prophet
KJV Isaiah 28:21
21 For the LORD shall rise up as in mount Perazim, he shall be wroth as in the valley of Gibeon, that he may do his work, his strange work; and bring to pass his act, his strange act.
Why is God's wrath described as a strange work...a strange act? Many of you are contending that God finds pleasure in the death and destruction of the wicked, that there is no love in His justice. You don't know God, and you don't know scripture.
What is the context behind stoning the raped woman?
What is the context behind the warning to Israel that if they step upon the mountain while He's talking with Moses they be either stoned or shot through?
What is the context behind the warning to Adam and Eve, if you eat of the tree you will die?
What is the context behind his declaration through His prophet
KJV Isaiah 28:21
21 For the LORD shall rise up as in mount Perazim, he shall be wroth as in the valley of Gibeon, that he may do his work, his strange work; and bring to pass his act, his strange act.
Why is God's wrath described as a strange work...a strange act? Many of you are contending that God finds pleasure in the death and destruction of the wicked, that there is no love in His justice. You don't know God, and you don't know scripture.
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
It is more than a context it is Mosaic Law. Certain violation required execution. Not executing the person is also breaking the law.
Deuteronomy 22:23-24
If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you. KJV
If there is a girl who is a virgin betrothed to a man, and another man finds her in the city and sleeps with her, then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city and you shall stone them to death: the girl, because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man, because he has violated his neighbor’s wife. So you shall eliminate the evil from among you. NASB
You can compare the word verbiage to other scripture around that and other places in the OT that describe rape....there is no description of willingness nor is the word adultery used.
Brakelite
Well-Known Member
There's your context. Simple judicial requirement even in modern courts of law. Evidence of rape... Evidence of non consensual.
God demands investigation in every issue. Witnesses. Testimony. It was never as cut and dried as you are presenting it. Even God Himself, before destroying Sodom, came down in person to investigate whether what was reported to him was true. And he was willing to show mercy for the sake of even a few righteous, and even those He arranged to take out...Lot and his family.
I am not arguing that God doesn't require action to curb evil. What my argument is against is everyone's inference that this is part and parcel of His character and nature. That Jesus is different. Jesus is not different. Sin will be expunged from the universe, and it will be with great and intense regret on the part of God that so many people adamantly refuse to part themselves from their sin and be destroyed along with it. It is sin and evil that God is destroying, and constantly pleads, begs, is to separate ourselves from sin and evil lest we also are destroyed.
Please reread the old testment laws with a commentary. you say thay are not christian.
Who do you think dictated those laws to Mosses?
we may not be bound to follow the ceremonial laws or the social laws that Israel hadto obey, but just what do you understand Jesus meant when he said if you love me obey my commands?
What was the purpose of the OT laws?
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
LOL Simple judicial requirement LOL kill the girl that got raped! Oh My! There is more to the story, but if you did not grasp the scripture the rest would just confuse you.
LOL You are hilarious! Do you think it would be likely for Him to support a law....kill all that breaths and don't forget the little ones and kill all the women that had known men and keep the virgins for yourself....LOL
LOL You guys are funny tonight. College educated on Judaism thank you. Hebrew Studies at American University in Washington DC and course out of Hebrew University in Jerusalem.
Is there any question where those Laws came from? That is not the point. 613 Mosaic Laws and very few Christians know them or understand them. Most and I mean most think the Ten Commandment are the ten in chapter 20 of Exodus. What God did in the Old Testament and the Laws He set in place, I am sure He had a good reason. But it makes no sense to judge them by Christian standards or for Christians to try to justify them, or defend them, or explain them away, or reinterpret them. or sugar coat them. They are what they are. God's Laws in the Old Testament....Not our covenant and not our Laws and not our religion. If you truly understood the Mosaic Law and the reality it generated you would thank Christ everyday for freeing you from it.
There is a reason that Paul....who was fully educated on the Mosaic Law said it was a ministry of death engraved with letters on stones and called it a curse that Christ freed us from.
If you think Christ was talking about the Mosaic Law...you could not be more wrong. Can you picture Christ counselling one of the Jewish fathers during His ministry on how to sell his daughter as a sex slave....in accordance with the Mosaic Law? People read the Bible and this is what they get out of it. Oh my gosh! It is no wonder and I mean it makes complete sense that there are over 30,000 Protestant denominations. One guy picks up the Bible and starts a religion...then the next guy picks up the Bible and starts a religion, over and over again. Considering how people interpret what they read...if the Bible was a traffic manual, it would not be safe to drive.
The Bible spans thousands of years and was written thousands of years ago and this is the down fall of Fundamentalism. They do not study the time period or the religious literary style of of the New Testament. Whether it was the Old or New Testament if you transported in time to that era it would seem like an alien world. And I do not understand why people at least do not pay attention. You see people here debating New Testament scriptures and they can throw scriptures at each other from the same Apostle in an attempt to prove their point and never stop to ask themselves, why and how can that be?
Overall, the same reason we have civil laws today, to stabilize their society...but the religious side of it is still being debated, even by the Jews. Some say to lead us to where we are at now. I do not agree because even the cruel spirit of the Mosaic Law has no place in Christianity. In the New Testament you see references to some of the moral Laws of the Old Testament but not the cruel aspects of it. That topic gets pretty deep. But taking into account the whole storyline of the Old Testament.....it is kind of like the kid that had horrible parents, that learns from them, what not to do!
Last edited:
Shows that despite having a college education you don't know what the purpose of the OT laws were for.
They had two purposes in that they pointed to Jesus and they were to enable Israel to be an example of Godliness.
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
It is my college education that makes it so that I disagree with both of those purposes. Both as an intent and as a result.
Desire Of All Nations
Well-Known Member
Deut. 13 concretely stated that any false prophets who attempted to lead Israel into the worship of false gods were to be put to death without mercy or pity.
“Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill."
There is literally nothing about that statement that says Christ had any intention whatsoever to start a new religion that was divorced from the laws He gave as the OT God.
“And now, Israel, what does the LORD your God require of you, but to fear the LORD your God, to walk in all His ways and to love Him, to serve the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, “and to keep the commandments of the LORD and His statutes which I command you today for your good?" - Deut. 10:12-13
“Observe and obey all these words which I command you, that it may go well with you and your children after you forever, when you do what is good and right in the sight of the LORD your God." - Deut. 12:28
“You shall therefore keep His statutes and His commandments which I command you today, that it may go well with you and with your children after you, and that you may prolong your days in the land which the LORD your God is giving you for all time.” - Deut. 4:40
‘Oh, that they had such a heart in them that they would fear Me and always keep all My commandments, that it might be well with them and with their children forever!" - Deut. 5:29
"Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”)," - Gal. 3:13
Antinomians always dishonestly read that passage as "Christ has redeemed us from the curse that is the Law", which is not a shocker because they seek any shallow justification for divorcing themselves from God's authority. Paul clearly taught here that Christ redeems a Christian from the death penalty that is required by the Law when they violate it. Paul not only established Christ's sacrifice as being the way of acquiring total atonement through faith in this passage, he is also reinforcing the fact that the Law still has authority in the Christian life like he said in Rom. 3:31. The required punishment for sin has always been death, and that has not changed(Rom. 6:23). As Christ plainly said in Matt. 5, not 1 word or stroke in the Law will cease having authority until all has been fulfilled.
The commandment actually reads "you will not murder", not "kill". It makes all the difference because God prohibited taking the life of another person when He didn't authorize it or command it.
What you claim here sounds a lot different from what Christ Himself says in Matt. 5:17:
“Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill."
There is literally nothing about that statement that says Christ had any intention whatsoever to start a new religion that was divorced from the laws He gave as the OT God.
Again, this sounds completely different from what is actually taught in the Bible:
“And now, Israel, what does the LORD your God require of you, but to fear the LORD your God, to walk in all His ways and to love Him, to serve the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, “and to keep the commandments of the LORD and His statutes which I command you today for your good?" - Deut. 10:12-13
“Observe and obey all these words which I command you, that it may go well with you and your children after you forever, when you do what is good and right in the sight of the LORD your God." - Deut. 12:28
“You shall therefore keep His statutes and His commandments which I command you today, that it may go well with you and with your children after you, and that you may prolong your days in the land which the LORD your God is giving you for all time.” - Deut. 4:40
‘Oh, that they had such a heart in them that they would fear Me and always keep all My commandments, that it might be well with them and with their children forever!" - Deut. 5:29
Paul described the OT enforcement of the Law as a ministry of death because of the death penalty that was enforced for certain violations, not because the Law itself was bad. A lot of people fail to understand this monumental difference, and it leads them to foolishly conclude Paul must have been teaching against the idea that the Law should be kept. Furthermore, Paul never said Christ freed anybody from the Law:
"Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”)," - Gal. 3:13
Antinomians always dishonestly read that passage as "Christ has redeemed us from the curse that is the Law", which is not a shocker because they seek any shallow justification for divorcing themselves from God's authority. Paul clearly taught here that Christ redeems a Christian from the death penalty that is required by the Law when they violate it. Paul not only established Christ's sacrifice as being the way of acquiring total atonement through faith in this passage, he is also reinforcing the fact that the Law still has authority in the Christian life like he said in Rom. 3:31. The required punishment for sin has always been death, and that has not changed(Rom. 6:23). As Christ plainly said in Matt. 5, not 1 word or stroke in the Law will cease having authority until all has been fulfilled.
Pythagorean12
Active Member
Murder is the killing of human beings. I don't find it necessary to juggle words to justify not loving.
If we want to use the general OT view of seeing and doing we are effectually trumping how Jesus saw and did.
My question is how is it that God authorised murder in OT times.....or, is it valid to say, he didn't?
Frankly, we can't have it both ways. If we say God authorised murder (call it by any name you want) and then hear Jesus who we are told is the image of God, saying 'don't resist an evil man' and 'love your enemies'.
If we choose to have it both ways we become what James says 'unstable in all our ways'.
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
In order to understand the scriptures, you have to at least understand what words mean. Murder is unjustified killing. 613 Mosaic Laws quite a few when broken commanded execution...plain and simple. That did not constitute murder. The Mosaic Law that said when God gave them a land....and when He gave it to them, it was up to them to serve the eviction notice....when He gave them land they were to kill all that breathed all the children, all the pregnant women, all the women that had known men and keep the virgins for themselves ....that was not murder. God does not do wrong....we might not like it or understand it from the Christian perspective. And trying to Christianize the Hebrew Bible is a fool's folly.
There will be nothing but confusion in your head if you keep trying to mix Judaism with Christianity.
The morals and compassion and love taught by Christ and the Apostles stand as a testimony to the superior nature of Christianity over Judaism.
Last edited:
Then, what God calls justified you call unjustified, and expect us to receive your judgment over God's. In my case you can consider that not very likely.
You don't want to look at meanings of words, but you want to use them in your argument. Speaking of wanting things both ways . . .
?
Much love!
God said he would drive the inhabitants out with hornets but the people wanted to fight...they wanted blood...that was their program after being under the rule of Pharaoh for 400 yrs.....however, God gave them a concession.
God gave many concessions one of those being divorce. Do we now use those concessions 'against' God? Do we justify what God never intended? ....that is what fallen humans do in spite of God clearly revealing his character in Jesus.
Paul says in 1 Corinthians 13 that love holds no record of wrongs. Yes, you've read it correctly...but of course this view is totally inconvenient for those who love a God who evens scores.
Jesus is not taken seriously when the fundamental urge of men to pursue revenge is negated....in fact, they would rather get rid of one who demonstrates this truth....they would rather demonise and mock and uphold their pseudo learning in favour of one who is symbolised as a lamb....harmless and undefiled.
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
Who is using concessions against God?
Justify what? and What is...what God never intended? It is simple, do not mix Judaism with Christianity.
God does not change. Have you forgotten who it is that is 'the same yesterday, today and tomorrow'
God is the same today as he was when he created Adam....he is the life giver, not the life taker. We know who the life taker is from Jesus' own lips.
and have you forgotten who said 'I have come that they might have life and life more abundantly' ...also from Jesus' lips.
or do you prefer to use Jesus name to rubber stamp the practices and twisted theories of him who is come to 'steal and kill and destroy'?
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
God does not change. Why would Yahweh God the Father change? Why would Yeshua the Son of God change? Why would the Holy Spirit change? How many Covenants in the OT. The Covenants changed but Yahweh, God the Father did not change. Yahweh, God the Father gave the authority to Yeshua, God the Son to establish our Covenant with Christ, the New Covenant. With the New Covenant Yahweh, God the Father did not change. He still has zero tolerance for those that sin. That was the whole symbolism of the veil. That is why the Grace of Christ presents us before Yahweh, God the Father as perfect and sinless. It is the only way we could have a relationship with God the Father.
First off I do not really use the name Jesus because there can be no one named with a J in the Bible. Names Yeshua, Yahweh, Yob, Yacob, Yoshua, Yohn...etc....no J's
No rubberstamp in the Bible and who's twisted theories?
Brakelite
Well-Known Member
KJV Hebrews 1:3
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
You are trusting the fear and belief of Adam and Eve, that God would kill them if He found out their sin... So they hid.
Death is the wages of sin... Not because God is intolerant and vengeful and grumpy because he's not getting His own way... But because He's holy, and in His presence nothing can survive that isn't equally holy, therefore be ye holy even as I am holy.
Last edited by a moderator:
GEN2REV
Well-Known Member
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
No I do not think He would have killed them. And neither one of us know what they were thinking...just feeling fear.
The frame work of Yahweh's Law showed no indication that the Mosaic Law was a suggestion. Intolerance to sin was the rule. He could not be in the congregation of men. It does not matter if it was out in desert or in the temple there was always something to separate them. A lot of the Mosaic Laws that called for executions were ended with the statement....So you shall purge the evil from your midst.
Yahweh never offered Heaven as a reward...or as an abode for men. Nothing in the OT that explains a tolerance for sin or that He could mingle among men.
Exodus 19:12 “And you shall set bounds for the people all around, saying, ‘Beware that you do not go up on the mountain or touch the border of it; whoever touches the mountain shall surely be put to death.
Exodus 19:23 And Moses said to the LORD, “The people cannot come up to Mount Sinai, for Thou didst warn us, saying, ‘Set bounds about the mountain and consecrate it.’”
Exodus 19:15 And he said to the people, "Be ready for the third day; do not go near a woman."
Similar threads
