SnakeLord said:
Southstar:
What are you trying to say? Do you agree that everything good is because of god and everything shit that happens is because of something else?
//sigh
James 1
17Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who
does not change like shifting shadows.
You must be careful not to call good, evil, or even as you say, "shit", good.
Romans 8
28And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.
Here's a quote from R.C. Sproul to put things into perspective:
"If God is able to make everything that happens to us work together for our good, then ultimately every thing that happens to us is good. We must be careful to stress here the word ultimately. On the earthly plane things that happen to us may indeed be evil. (We must be careful not to call good, evil or evil, good.) We encounter affliction, misery, injustice, and a host of other evils. Yet God in His goodness transcends all of these things and works them to our good. For the Christian, ultimately, there are no tragedies. Ultimately, the providence of God works all these proximate evils for our final benefit."
Excuse me, but I am not the one who said I will punish children upto the 4th generation. Do not try and pass the buck, pal, because it's rude. It's not like he even only said it once, but several times.
Exodus 34:6 "..Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation."
For some reason, god speaks of himself in third person in this portion - just before the shocker above, stating how forgiving and compassionate he is.
How interesting that you should skip this part:
6 And he passed in front of Moses, proclaiming, "The LORD , the LORD , the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness,
It is quite clearly stated by god, that my son might have been "punished" for my wrongdoings, or my great great great grandfathers wrongdoings. Why you try and blame me for the quote is anyones guess.
What you have then proceeded to quote, is what the sane world calls a blatant contradiction.
You must be insane then for there is no contradiction. You are purposely ignoring the reason the proverb in Ezekiel was being used. As I have no interest in typing out any more lengthy explanations today, here is what Matthew Henry says:
-----
Evil manners, we say, beget good laws; and in like manner sometimes unjust reflections occasion just vindications; evil proverbs beget good prophecies. Here is, I. An evil proverb commonly used by the Jews in their captivity. We had one before (ch. 12:22) and a reply to it; here we have another. That sets God’s justice at defiance: "The days are prolonged and every vision fails; the threatenings are a jest.’’ This charges him with injustice, as if the judgments executed were a wrong: "You use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, now that it is laid waste by the judgments of God, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes and the children’s teeth are set on edge; we are punished for the sins of our ancestors, which is as great an absurdity in the divine regimen as if the children should have their teeth set on edge, or stupefied, by the fathers’ eating sour grapes, whereas, in the order of natural causes, if men eat or drink any thing amiss, they only themselves shall suffer by it.’’ Now, 1. It must be owned that there was some occasion given for this proverb. God had often said that he would visit the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, especially the sin of idolatry, intending thereby to express the evil of sin, of that sin, his detestation of it, and just indignation against it, and the heavy punishments he would bring upon idolaters, that parents might be restrained from sin by their affection to their children and that children might not be drawn to sin by their reverence for their parents. He had likewise often declared by his prophets that in bringing the present ruin upon Judah and Jerusalem he had an eye to the sins of Manasseh and other preceding kings; for, looking upon the nation as a body politic, and punishing them with national judgments for national sins, and admitting the maxim in our law that a corporation never dies, reckoning with them now for the iniquities of former ages was but like making a man, when he is old, to possess the iniquities of his youth, Job 13:26. And there is no unrighteousness with God in doing so. But, 2. They intended it as a reflection upon God, and an impeachment of his equity in his proceedings against them. Thus far that is right which is implied in this proverbial saying, That those who are guilty of wilful sin eat sour grapes; they do that which they will feel from, sooner or later. The grapes may look well enough in the temptation, but they will be bitter as bitterness itself in the reflection. They will set the sinner’s teeth on edge. When conscience is awake, and sets the sin in order before them, it will spoil the relish of their comforts as when the teeth are set on edge. But they suggest it as unreasonable that the children should smart for the fathers’ folly and feel the pain of that which they never tasted the pleasure of, and that God was unrighteous in thus taking vengeance and could not justify it. See how wicked the reflection is, how daring the impudence; yet see how witty it is, and how sly the comparison. Many that are impious in their jeers are ingenious in their jests; and thus the malice of hell against God and religion is insinuated and propagated. It is here put into a proverb, and that proverb used, commonly used; they had it up ever and anon. And, though it had plainly a blasphemous meaning, yet they sheltered themselves under the similitude from the imputation of downright blasphemy. Now by this it appears that they were unhumbled under the rod, for, instead of condemning themselves and justifying God, they condemned him and justified themselves
-----
If you actually read the chapter in context, and if you had done so you would have found out that Jerusalem had been compared to a harlot and was even more wickedn than Sodom. This information which you purposely ignored would have prompted you to know that the Jews were NOT at all justified in using that proverb, as you now hopefully see after reading the quote.
So you see, Unless you're a raving lunatic, you have to concur that god clearly states he will punish the children for the sins of their fathers etc, because god does clearly state that he will.
Ezekiel 18
25 "Yet you say, 'The way of the Lord is not just.' Hear, O house of Israel: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26 If a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits sin, he will die for it; because of the sin he has committed he will die. 27 But if a wicked man turns away from the wickedness he has committed and does what is just and right, he will save his life. 28 Because he considers all the offenses he has committed and turns away from them, he will surely live; he will not die. 29 Yet the house of Israel says, 'The way of the Lord is not just.' Are my ways unjust, O house of Israel? Is it not your ways that are unjust?
30 "Therefore, O house of Israel, I will judge you, each one according to his ways, declares the Sovereign LORD . Repent! Turn away from all your offenses; then sin will not be your downfall. 31 Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, O house of Israel? 32 For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign LORD . Repent and live!
Are you a "raving lunatic" or have you entirely missed this as well?
No, the entire chapter is devoted to proving beyond any reasonable doubt that the bible is so contradictory it's beyond the realms of stupidity.
Well you must be the maestro of the said realm since you have ignored the texts..
Once again: I was not the one who said I would punish children for the sins of their fathers upto the 4th generation, and you trying to pass it on to me is quite simply disgusting.
"Once again" I never claimed you said you would "punish children for the sins of their fathers upto the 4th generation"
Deut 21:18 If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders of his town. They shall say to the elders, "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard." Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death.
----------
Here is, I. A law for the punishing of a rebellious son. Having in the former law provided that parents should not deprive their children of their right, it was fit that it should next be provided that children withdraw not the honour and duty which are owing to their parents, for there is no partiality in the divine law. Observe, 1. How the criminal is here described. He is a stubborn and rebellious son, v. 18. No child was to fare the worse for the weakness of his capacity, the slowness or dulness of his understanding, but for his wilfulness and obstinacy. If he carry himself proudly and insolently towards his parents, contemn their authority, slight their reproofs and admonitions, disobey the express commands they give him for his own good, hate to be reformed by the correction they give him, shame their family, grieve their hearts, waste their substance, and threaten to ruin their estate by riotous living—this is a stubborn and rebellious son. He is particularly supposed (v. 20) to be a glutton or a drunkard. This intimates either, (1.) That these were sins which his parents did in a particular manner warn him against, and therefore that in these instances there was a plain evidence that he did not obey their voice. Lemuel had this charge from his mother, Prov. 31:4. Note, In the education of children, great care should be taken to suppress all inclinations to drunkenness, and to keep them out of the way of temptations to it; in order hereunto they should be possessed betimes with a dread and detestation of that beastly sin, and taught betimes to deny themselves. Or, (2.) That his being a glutton and a drunkard was the cause of his insolence and obstinacy towards his parents. Note, There is nothing that draws men into all manner of wickedness, and hardens them in it, more certainly and fatally than drunkenness does. When men take to drink they forget the law, they forget all law (Prov. 31:5), even that fundamental law of honouring parents. 2. How this criminal is to be proceeded against. His own father and mother are to be his prosecutors, v. 19, 20. They might not put him to death themselves, but they must complain of him to the elders of the city, and the complaint must needs be made with a sad heart: This our son is stubborn and rebellious. Note, Those that give up themselves to vice and wickedness, and will not be reclaimed, forfeit their interest in the natural affections of the nearest relations; the instruments of their being justly become the instruments of their destruction. The children that forget their duty must thank themselves and not blame their parents if they are regarded with less and less affection.
---------------------
This is what god said to do.. He didn't say "only do it for the next 10 years then progress beyond such barbaric methods" - so why doesn't everyone still stone their rebellious sons to death? They don't agree with gods command or what?
That's why they have the electric chair and lethal injection these days. More efficient.
And if you are claiming that it is so horrible, you must be forgetting the cultural context, which is different from lewd western culture.
And in case you have been living under a rock, Christ came to die for our sins that we be freed from the curse of the Law.
The bible writers are not the "we" I was referring to. Have you never heard a christian telling you how hard life was, how he almost killed himself or died or was on drugs etc etc and then got reborn? It is those who have the hard life that need god..
Is that the best excuse you have for your generalization?
Those who stumble upon tragedy say "why god, why", whereas those who win the lottery just go and buy armani suits and champagne. Happy people have no need for god.
I'm guessing you haven't noticed the suicide rates among "happy" lottery winners..
