Protestantism

» Brian Tubbs - Bottom line

If God is who the Bible claims Him to be, then....

God is all-knowing, everywhere present, and all-powerful. He is also the ultimate decider of the hearts of people and the ultimate arbiter of Truth.

That being the case, God's actions - as unsettling and upsetting as they may be to us (and please know that I find many of the OT passages we've been discussing to be personally troubling) - are not subject to our approval or disapproval. He is God - and He decides Right from Wrong, Truth from Falsehood, etc., etc.

If God decided that a particular nation or tribe is so wicked that it must be utterly destroyed, that's God's call. And IF He is all-knowing (truly all-knowing), then -- LOGICALLY -- He would know if that's indeed the case or not.

Migisi correctly challenges us on what these OT passages do to the frequently repeated cry that "God is love." Well, it's clear that the biblical God is NOT all-approving. He doesn't just approve of people's actions and/or allow people the freedom to decide their own way without consequence. It's basically: Follow Him or be destroyed.

In this age, this modern dispensation, it's NOT my call or any other Christian's call to decide who will be "destroyed" or who is "following" God. I believe God measures the heart and knows the heart. I don't. No other human being does. So....I have nothing to say in personal judgment of anyone here. And I most certainly will NEVER take it upon myself to carry out God's judgment on this earth. And I will passionately oppose any supposed follower of God who DOES take it upon himself or herself to do this.

Bottom line...I don't have all the answers. I only have what's recorded in Scripture. But if God is who the Bible claims Him to be, then I have a choice to make.

Either I trust that He knew what He was doing - or I reject Him for offending my 21st century sensibilities and conscience. I understand and appreciate the fact that Migisi, Oliver, and others here have made their choice. I hope you can understand and respect that I've made mine.

» pink101 - Bottom line

In response to Bottom line posted by BrianTubbs:
.
Generally, it seems like you do a fair job of being open minded. Generally.
.
It seems to be that the idea so many biblicists have that the Bible is a closed book and that everything in it is just okay witht hem is a big mistake.
.
I cannot imagine that Jesus would have been happy with much of what was taught during Old Testament days . I'm sure he would have raled against many of the supposed proclamations of God just as he raled against the priests in the Gospel of Matthew for example.
.
So, I think it's too bad that Christian leaders cannot come out against the kind of stuff that Ollie rales against.
.
The very idea of a "NEW" Testament tells us there was something about the "OLD" Testament that was not satisfactory. It wasn't just a change for the sake of getting over the boredom on racial hatred and genocidal massacres and punishments. There had to be something much deeper. I think the Gospel of Paul indicts O.T. theology and proves the point.
.
But, loyalty to tradition disallows us thinking along those lines. Excommunication follows. Too bad.
.

-- posted by pink101

» BJ78 - What if?

Hi,

Just wondering what if? What if God's answer to the sin of Adam and Eve and their children really is the promised Seed that would destroy the works of the devil? Death then is not the end nor is it out of character with the God that saves teaching about His justice.

God's justice and mercy kiss at the cross, Psalm 85.

Peace,

BJ

-- posted by BJ78

» HeadZenCards - What if?

.
What if the infants and suckling that the LORD GOD inspired to be utterly destroyed were your infants and sucklings?
.
Seems like an all-powerful, all-loving "God" would have a greater imagination than to inspire such a horrid example for good people like us to be agonizing over thousands of years later.

-- posted by HeadZenCards

» Migisi - Bottom line

In response to Bottom line posted by BrianTubbs:
.
Either I trust that He knew what He was doing - or I reject Him for offending my 21st century sensibilities and conscience. I understand and appreciate the fact that Migisi, Oliver, and others here have made their choice. I hope you can understand and respect that I've made mine.
.
Well, I certainly do respect one's right to believe what they wish. However, ~understanding~ their reasoning behind their choice is another matter.
.
What I do understand is the dictionary definition of 'faith': a belief that doesn't rest on logical proof or material evidence. So, how can anyone expect that rational deductions and material proofs would be acknowledged, considered, or accepted by the faithful.
.
I also understand how difficult it is for people of faith to reject the fantasies they've created and guarded all or most of their lives. Their fantasies have become reality for them.

-- posted by Migisi

» pink101 - Bottom line

In response to Bottom line posted by Migisi:
.
Now you know why people of faith are so opposed to sociology.
.
You are tapping on that door with this last post of yours.
.
[ :~ )
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - Faith distinctions

In response to Bottom line posted by Migisi:

I am absolutely 100% convinced of the existence of God. When I say it would take more "Faith" to be an atheist, that's not a line or a cliche for me. It's the truth. I am totally and utterly convinced of the reality of God. (And that comes after going through two rather extended periods of serious doubt in my adult life).

I am also 100% convinced that Jesus of Nazareth was a bona fide historical figure of 1st century Judeo-Palestine. And the evidence is overwhelming that he was a unique figure -- who made enough of an impression through his ministry and his death (and, I believe, resurrection) to spark an entirely new religion.

My faith is solid on God and Jesus. Pretty unshakable. No fantasy here.

Where I have entertained most of my doubts - and where I respect the doubts that some people here have - is when it comes to the Bible. And that's what we're talking about here...the biblical depiction of the Hebrew God of the Old Testament.

Now, I'm not opening the door here for wholesale doubt. And I certainly don't want my readers to misunderstand me. But I think most Christians have given very little time, attention, and study to the mystery of divine inspiration of the Bible. For that matter, many Christians (as you all have said) have very little knowledge of the Bible in general.

In my case, I admit to some uncertainty and discomfort with the Old Testament passages we're talking about. But this does NOT mean that I'm having some crisis of faith in my overall relationship with God or in my fundamental Christian beliefs. I'm not just saying that for my audience. It's the truth.

» EvilChihuahua - Faith distinctions

In response to Faith distinctions posted by BrianTubbs:

When I say it would take more "Faith" to be an atheist, that's not a line or a cliche for me. It's the truth.

When I say it takes more faith to be an Atheist I am basing that on my own experiences. When I was 17 I turned my back on God and tried so hard to believe He wasn't real. I couldn't. I didn't have the faith to be an Atheist. I had seen people healed, had prayers answered, experienced God first hand. I just couldn't believe He was fictional.

It's easy to believe is the words of Buddha, the "prophet" Mohammad, Anton LeVay, Joseph Smith, L. Ron Hubbard or Richard Dawkins when life is going smooth, but when the going gets tough, the words of Buddha, Mohammad, LeVay, Smith, Hubbard and Dawkins are empty and don't mean jack. Buddha, Allah, Satan, Moroni, Xenu and the "god" Dawkins serves are nowhere to be found (well, maybe Satan, but not to help), but God is always there, and is always ready to help us through these times, and the Word of God helps a great deal more than the empty words of man.

My faith is solid on God and Jesus. Pretty unshakable. No fantasy here.

And it's that solid faith in God and Jesus that has made you the powerful man of God you are today. Some will say you are deluded, but this "delusion" has obviously worked wonders in your life.

Keep up the good work.:)

-- posted by EvilChihuahua

» Migisi - Faith distinctions

In response to Faith distinctions posted by BrianTubbs:

I admit to some uncertainty and discomfort with the Old Testament passages we're talking about. But this does NOT mean that I'm having some crisis of faith in my overall relationship with God or in my fundamental Christian beliefs.
.
Fundamental Christian beliefs = Jesus is Lord - Jesus IS God. Apologists quote John 1:1 as proof that Jesus (the Word) was with God, and ~was~ God from the beginning (of eternity, I assume). They also love to quote Jesus saying "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30) as proof that Jesus was/is God. Given these fundamental Christian beliefs, one can't pretend that Jesus wasn't around during the OT era (he existed from the beginning), or that Jesus was innocent of the OT God's atrocities (Jesus IS the OT God).
.
From what I've been told repeatedly, if one doesn't believe that Jesus is God, then (s)he is not a 'true' Christian.

-- posted by Migisi

» paper_turtle - redback

In response to redback posted by BrianTubbs:

.
you wrote:
"Paper Turtle and Brian are on a hiding to nothing here."
.
Brian wrote:
My brain must not be working too well - it sometimes doesn't. What did you mean by this.
.
I'm curious, too.
.
peace and love,
Paper Turtle

-- posted by paper_turtle