| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
Our God is not the same God of people who murder women and children in His
name. If you call that close-minded, so be it.
|
Have you EVER EVEN READ the HOLY BIBLE, John?
|
You are kidding, right?
| |
You claimed: “Our God is not the same God of people who murder women and
children in His name.” To which I call BS: your god is PRECISELY a God that
calls for the murder of women and children in His name. Check the quotes,
genius!
|
Hmmm. So you are telling me that you know that exact nature of God?
| |
The rest of what you wrote also showed numerous factual errors -- not that I
mean the bible is based on fact, but that it would be a factual error to
claim that the God of the Old and New Testament is not a champion of slaying
women, children, and animals. The God of the ancient Tribes of Israel was
practically the neutron bomb of the ancient world! I repeat:
|
That they perceived God was and whether God actually was are 2 very different
things.
| |
All you do is spin, spin, spin -- without any regard for prior understanding.
|
What are you implying here? That you understand completely the writings (oral
and written traditions) of a people who existed some 4000 years ago?
First, I am not a literalist. I do not believe that the Bible is a factual
recording of history (a typically ignorant, Western mistake). The Bible is, in
fact, very foreign to Western, rational thought. Any hope of understanding it
requires in-depth analysis through various forms of hermeneutical study, and
even then we have no idea how to get into the mindset of a 4,000 year old
person.
As for God’s nature; man’s comprehension of God has been a process; an evolution
of understanding. From the concept of monotheism, to the final relevation of
God’s true nature through Jesus’ teaching, the Bible has been a recording of our
faith journey with God. It is a book of faith, not a checklist of events or
an ancient chronology. It teaches that God is the same yesterday, today, and
tomorrow. That God’s nature appears to be in conflict merely reflects a fallen
perspective of it (as if it could be grasped in part at all).
So, God, as revealed by Jesus (God incarnate), is a loving God. That is God’s
nature. God never changes, and so any perception of change in the behavior or
nature of God on man’s part indicates a limited or incorrect assessment.
So, any assertion that God wants anybody to murder anyone is simply wrong and
has a mistaken perception of God’s nature. My belief anyway.
JOHN
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: God's Nature
|
| You're so far gone, there is no way to reply to that. No matter what I might state next you will insist that you can "interpret" the Bible in such a way as to reveal either an error in it, or in my interpretation of it. Everyone get that? The Bible (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
220 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
