Different priests interpretations of the Bible.

[Jenyar]

Nothing evil about causing someone else misfortune, is there?

If you narrow the definition of evil down to that, then I can see why you would describe God as "evil".

God brings many things over people that they would describe as evil. Job realized this when he said "if we accept the good from God, shall we not also accept the bad?". What he calls bad, you would call evil - that doesn't make it evil, much less God.

To a godless man every evil can be ascribed to "God", because God doesn't exist to him - and the absence of God is the definition of evil.

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, (Isaiah 5:20)

 

[Nehushta]

Originally posted by Jenyar
To a godless man every evil can be ascribed to "God", because God doesn't exist to him - and the absence of God is the definition of evil.

And here we have yet another definition of evil. But I'm not so sure I agree with it, given what God himself considers good and evil. Take Lot, for example - did God not consider him a righteous man? And yet look at how he treated his own virgin daughters - first he offered them to an angry mob of would-be angel-rapers in order to save his guests from this humiliation, and then he later he relieved them both of their virginity himself in a cave where they were hiding out following the destruction of their city (blaming these lecherous acts on them, of course). How evil is that? But apparently God counts this as good.

And to save space, I won't go into the details of King David's own lechery in this post, but suffice it to say he wasn't any better, and yet this is the man whose throne God has allegedly established forever, and through whom the messiah was supposed to descend. God doesn't appear to be a very good judge of character, if you ask me.

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, (Isaiah 5:20)

That's what I'm saying!

 

[Jenyar]

The Bible is full of sinners who are redeemed by their faith in God. Not the least of whom is David himself. That says a lot about them (and us), and about God. Believers are not God, men are not God - and therefore as Jesus said: "not good". That included himself as a man born into the world.

 

[Nehushta]

Originally posted by Jenyar
The Bible is full of sinners who are redeemed by their faith in God. Not the least of whom is David himself. That says a lot about them (and us), and about God. Believers are not God, men are not God - and therefore as Jesus said: "not good". That included himself as a man born into the world.

So if a sinner as vile as David could be redeemed by faith in God alone, what was the purpose of sending Jesus?

 

[okinrus]

This appears to be just another non sequitur of yours.

You have clearly shown on this forum that you are incapable of understanding anything in context. When given a series of words detailing God creating distruption ahat follows with an angel of "ra" where "ra" could mean evil, misfortune, bad, and distruption; you chose to believe the translation with evil , and even then, you believe that the evil spoken of is Satanic in direct opposition to God.

Since when are any of the passages in the book of Isaiah considered Psalms? The link you sent me to was explaining the meaning of Isaiah 45:7, which is what I was commenting on here. You're the one who tossed in the red herring to begin with - did you expect me not to read it or comment on it?

I posted the link about Isaiah 45:7 because it is a similar passage and gives a detailed description of what "ra" means.

 

[Nehushta]

Originally posted by okinrus
When given a series of words detailing God creating distruption ahat follows with an angel of "ra" where "ra" could mean evil, misfortune, bad, and distruption; you chose to believe the translation with evil , and even then, you believe that the evil spoken of is Satanic in direct opposition to God.

Once again you are putting words in my mouth. Read again what I posted earlier:

Who said anything about evil being in opposition to God? Isaiah 45:7 says God created evil - so it is obviously not in opposition to him.

I'm not sure what part of "God created evil" you don't understand.

 

[Jenyar]

Originally posted by Nehushta
So if a sinner as vile as David could be redeemed by faith in God alone, what was the purpose of sending Jesus?

Ah, but you have to ask what (or more precisely, whom) he had faith in. If God didn't bring salvation, David would have had faith in vain - as would we all. Faith in anybody else but God would have died with David.

 

[Jenyar]

Originally posted by Nehushta
I'm not sure what part of "God created evil" you don't understand.

Are you saying that evil is an absolute force?

 

[Nehushta]

Originally posted by Jenyar
Ah, but you have to ask what (or more precisely, whom) he had faith in. If God didn't bring salvation, David would have had faith in vain - as would we all. Faith in anybody else but God would have died with David.

Maybe you should try explaining it to me like I'm 6 years old, because I have no idea what you're saying here.

 

[Nehushta]

Originally posted by Jenyar
Are you saying that evil is an absolute force?

No - I'm saying that if God is indeed the first principle and the foundation of all things, as Christians seem to assert, then it is certain that God must have created both good and evil; furthermore, without God's ongoing complicity, evil would simply cease to exist. Or do you argue that God is not omnipotent after all, and that evil is a force greater than God?

 

[Jenyar]

Originally posted by Nehushta
Maybe you should try explaining it to me like I'm 6 years old, because I have no idea what you're saying here.

A sinner as vile as David can only be redeemed through faith in God. Faith doesn't exist in isolation. David was credited with righteousness because he had faith in God. Consequently, if God did nothing, David would have hoped in vain, trusted God in vain, and had faith in vain - God would have let him down. But God did make good on his promise to bring salvation to all mankind, and He did it through Jesus.

No - I'm saying that if God is indeed the first principle and the foundation of all things, as Christians seem to assert, then it is certain that God must have created both good and evil; furthermore, without God's ongoing complicity, evil would simply cease to exist. Or do you argue that God is not omnipotent after all, and that evil is a force greater than God?

Non sequitur. God created light and separated it from darkness. Similarly it could be said He created good and separated it from evil. If God didn't order things, everything would have remained chaos. So without God's ongoing complicity, evil would be all that exists.

 

[Nehushta]

Originally posted by Jenyar
A sinner as vile as David can only be redeemed through faith in God. Faith doesn't exist in isolation. David was credited with righteousness because he had faith in God. Consequently, if God did nothing, David would have hoped in vain, trusted God in vain, and had faith in vain - God would have let him down. But God did make good on his promise to bring salvation to all mankind, and He did it through Jesus.

This does not answer the question of why Jesus was needed. If a person can be redeemed solely through faith in God, then obviously Jesus is redundant.

Non sequitur. God created light and separated it from darkness. Similarly it could be said He created good and separated it from evil. If God didn't order things, everything would have remained chaos. So without God's ongoing complicity, evil would be all that exists.

Are you saying that chaos is evil? So then who created the chaos?

 

[okinrus]

If by create evil, you mean giving us the ability to disobey God then yes, in God's perfect wisdom he gave us the ability to do evil
thus creating it.

This does not answer the question of why Jesus was needed. If a person can be redeemed solely through faith in God, then obviously Jesus is redundant.

This is sola-fide salvation. Not all christians believe in it.

 

[Nehushta]

Originally posted by okinrus
If by create evil, you mean giving us the ability to disobey God then yes, in God's perfect wisdom he gave us the ability to do evil
thus creating it.

I mean evil. You know, like hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanoes, tornadoes, tsunamis - acts of God that can leave families homeless or dead. I mean plagues and viruses that maim and/or kill. Or how about the fact that animals are designed to kill one another in order to feed themselves and their young? Is any of this the work of a loving God?

This is sola-fide salvation. Not all christians believe in it.

Do you believe in it? If so, then please explain why it was necessary for God to send Jesus to earth to save us? And if not, then please explain what happened to everyone who lived before Jesus' time? Were they all consigned to the flames of hell, regardless of their faith in God? Or do you not believe in hell?

 

[Jenyar]

Originally posted by Nehushta
I mean evil. You know, like hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanoes, tornadoes, tsunamis - acts of God that can leave families homeless or dead. I mean plagues and viruses that maim and/or kill. Or how about the fact that animals are designed to kill one another in order to feed themselves and their young? Is any of this the work of a loving God?

No, that's life, and we have to deal with it. They are traditionally called "acts of God" because people have little or no control over them. But that's why there are other people to help them - they represent the real act of God. Blaming God or not believing in Him isn't going to change your circumstances, but believing in Him does change who you are under the circumstances.

If you really care about people who suffer under predators, hunger and poverty, do something about it: that's God's will. Because God will put an end to death and decay, so should we. Doing good can only make it better - sin will only make it worse.

Do you believe in it? If so, then please explain why it was necessary for God to send Jesus to earth to save us? And if not, then please explain what happened to everyone who lived before Jesus' time? Were they all consigned to the flames of hell, regardless of their faith in God? Or do you not believe in hell?

I think it's an erroneous belief, and probably so does okinrus. Protestants sometimes tend to over-emphasize faith so that works don't seem necessary (I know, I'm one) - but that is not what Jesus taught or Paul said. Faith without works is a shell without substance. And works without faith are meaningless (as far as salvation is concerned).

Before Jesus' time people we looking forward to Jesus' time. They put their faith in God and He rewarded that faith with Jesus. Jesus died for everybody past and present. Their faith connected them with God's salvation, and therefore with Christ's eventual atonement.

That is why the Bible says "Abraham was credited with righteousness because of his faith". His works had nothing to do with his salvation, but it had everything to do with his faith. Do you understand it now?

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Originally posted by Jenyar
Because God will put an end to death and decay, so should we.
----------
M*W: Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I can see, genetic decay is STILL occurring. Someone was quoted saying, "He who is not busy being born is busy dying." In essence, we are all in a state of "decay" from the moment we're born. As for death, there is no finality of the One Spirit, so I don't see how it would be necessary for "God to put an end to death." The concept of "death" seems to be an issue only with those who believe they need a redeemer to save them from this concept. That's just not necessary if the One Spirit of God is eternal.
---------
Before Jesus' time people we looking forward to Jesus' time. They put their faith in God and He rewarded that faith with Jesus. Jesus died for everybody past and present. Their faith connected them with God's salvation, and therefore with Christ's eventual atonement.
----------
M*W: "Before Jesus' time people were looking forward to" the coming messiah who was not necessarily the Jesus of your belief. Your statement that "Jesus died for everybody past and present" is ambiguous. Aside from my not personally not believing this, I know of umpteen Christians who have adamantly said that ONLY those who believe in Jesus as the Savior are saved, so who is right about this concept, you or the majority of other Christians? The point is, who are all of you to judge anyway? We have the One Spirit of God that indwells within us, so why would our soul need to be redeemed anyway? It wouldn't.
----------
That is why the Bible says "Abraham was credited with righteousness because of his faith". His works had nothing to do with his salvation, but it had everything to do with his faith. Do you understand it now?
----------
M*W: Good point! So those who are "credited with righteousness because of their faith" are eligible to receive salvation according to the Christian concept? That would mean there are many other righteous folks of ALL faiths that are saved per your Christian definition. Statistically speaking, these righteous non-Christian folks would total about 2/3 of the population of the planet who don't believe in or even know who Jesus was. Sounds to me like there is absolutely no need for Christianity to exist, if what you say is true, we would all be saved. So what was the purpose of Jesus if we will be saved on our faith? And who will determine our faith, since faith is something that can't really be seen. It's something that exists in the heart. If faith is seen, then it would be considered to be works. So this concept is contradictory. In our beginning, we were all created the same. It was through the "good works" of man that the divisions of race, nations, religion and gender came to be. Until we return to the One source of creation, these divisions will continue to divide the human race. With God, there are no divisions. God is One.

 

[Jenyar]

if what you say is true, we would all be saved.

Abraham had faith in El Shaddai. El Shaddai was revealed to Moses as YHWH. Jahweh was called Adonai by the Jews out of reverence. The Greek translation of Adonai is LORD. What was Jesus called? Our Lord.

God saved Abraham - just as everybody else who has faith in Him alone - through Jesus. Yes, we are all saved: by the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Hebrews 9
25Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. 26Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people

 

[Nehushta]

Originally posted by Jenyar
Before Jesus' time people we looking forward to Jesus' time. They put their faith in God and He rewarded that faith with Jesus. Jesus died for everybody past and present. Their faith connected them with God's salvation, and therefore with Christ's eventual atonement.

That is why the Bible says "Abraham was credited with righteousness because of his faith". His works had nothing to do with his salvation, but it had everything to do with his faith. Do you understand it now?

No. If people had so much faith in God, they would have taken him at his alleged word, and they never, ever would have expected God to appear on earth as a man. They were looking for a king to rule on the throne of David and to lead them into peace (which Jesus absolutely did not do, by the way) - they were not looking for God incarnate, because this supposedly unchanging God had told them many, many times before to look to him only for their salvation. He also told them God is not a man, and he warned them that he would put stumblingblocks before his people to test their fidelity. People of faith would have believed him.

 

[Jenyar]

Originally posted by Nehushta
No. If people had so much faith in God, they would have taken him at his alleged word, and they never, ever would have expected God to appear on earth as a man. They were looking for a king to rule on the throne of David and to lead them into peace (which Jesus absolutely did not do, by the way) - they were not looking for God incarnate, because this supposedly unchanging God had told them many, many times before to look to him only for their salvation. He also told them God is not a man, and he warned them that he would put stumblingblocks before his people to test their fidelity. People of faith would have believed him.

They never interpreted eveything only literally. Just have a quick look at the Mishnah or the Talmud. Just like you, they only clung to the literal interpretation and legalistic parameters when it suited themselves. But everytime God broke out of their preconceptions they had to redefine the sincerity of their faith.

Which brings us to God's salvation. If you don't believe God already made it possible (or that you need it), your faith stops there. Then God is neither God nor man. On the other hand, there were Jews and gentiles who became convinced of Jesus' authority, and today we call them Christians. People who have faith in God believe in Him. They don't try to get out of it on technicalities.

 

[Nehushta]

Originally posted by Jenyar
People who have faith in God believe in Him. They don't try to get out of it on technicalities.

But what are Christians doing if not trying to get out of the responsibility for their own actions by claiming a "savior" has already taken their punishment for them, and all they have to do is accept this "free gift" and believe in him???