My computer crashed and I lost the thread and am now having trouble getting into past threads, but...I did look up past tec/tammy posts to make sure and she does very clearly say several times that she asked Jesus about her friend's being so nasty to other posters (auGust) and that Jesus replied that it was okay for auGust to be nasty and mean because others were mean to her first. Which goes directly against the biblical counsel to "return eveil for evil to no one" and "turn the other cheek". This tells me very clearly that the voice she is hearing is not Jesus, it is herself wanting to stick up for her friend. I'm sorry, but she did invite me to test what she was saying, so I did. I was around reading on this site at that time and there was a lot of fundmentalism on the topics at the time. It struck me in the brain and I wondered what the site was really about.
Why does god kill children?
by Comatose 269 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
EntirelyPossible
Gentlemen (and ladies?), it is so much more simple than you are making it out to be.
It is. What you are saying is bunk. Pretty simple.
Want to know God? Look at Christ.
Jesus: "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets"
The Law: "When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property."
Jesus' opinion on slavery?
He does not tell anyone anything that is not from love, or truth. He certainly does not tell anyone to kill another person.
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."
-
humbled
Hello, cofty,
I hope you are well.
Respectfully, the scripture doesn't say "Kill your son" the story has God saying " offer your son as a burnt offering" to Abraham.
The Hebrew word for sacrifice, zebach, was graphic and bloody in its root.
The word for burnt offering, olah, was more spiritual and had no root connecting it to killing or to blood. In fact the two words are so different that they occur side by side frequently in the OT. They are by no means interchangable.
The story of Abraham and Isaac ( it has been said) has been left unedited by whatever person or persons who homogenized most of the OT . If in this God-story the Good One had told Abraham to kill Isaac then there would be nothing to discuss--ever--about the character of God. God would be a rotten, a tricky, lying SOB to his friend, Abraham. He would be no one to trust. It is the pivotal OT story.All the other stories can vanish and for me they largely have.
But in the interest of accuracy ir must be said that God never commanded Abraham to kill and burn his son.
Maeve
ps. thanks for kind thoughts on my bad day.
-
EntirelyPossible
But in the interest of accuracy ir must be said that God never commanded Abraham to kill and burn his son.
Abraham, who spoke the native language, certainly interpreted it that way, as did God after he stopped Abraham.
-
humbled
The word zebach was never used in the entired account. In whatever manner Abraham "heard" God and told the story to posterity it was without the defining word that conveyed the slashing and bleeding of zebach.
I submitted to the elders and to Bethel that there is no grounds to say more than that Abraham struggled with the concept God gave him, misunderstood it.
Abraham only tried to complied and God commends him for his "listening". Listening to god doesn't mean we understand always. If God's ways are higher and his means and motives are strange to us--wouldn't it be hard to understand what he wants of us?
The Abraham story sprung me out of the Organization. I have to listen as best I can, too to God. Abraham had no bible. He had no organization. No one voted on the thoughts that rose up in Abe's head.
The stories are there and they are not.
There is the saying " if you meet the Buddha, kill the buddha".
The FDS liked their version of the Gen 22 story. Kill and burn the boy in their Bible story book. That is sick and not true. If Abe told the story using olah, burnt offering , it's because he learned what God meant. He wasn't tricked. He was learning a new concept and their was no word on earth to reflect it.
Religion and their words are always wrong.
-
EntirelyPossible
Olah involved killing an animal, often cutting it up, and offering the whole animal to God and that is excactly what God praised Abraham for being prepared to do and in fact, the animal that took Issac's place was killed.
God told Abraham to kill his son and Abraham was prepared to do it, therefore God praised him. There is zero wiggle room on this.
-
tec
My computer crashed and I lost the thread and am now having trouble getting into past threads, but...I did look up past tec/tammy posts to make sure and she does very clearly say several times that she asked Jesus about her friend's being so nasty to other posters
(auGust) and that Jesus replied that it was okay for auGust to be nasty and mean because others were mean to her first.
Now, I have to say that I'm quite sure that I never said this. But if you link to it, then I'll be more than happy to go and look and see what I said, and the context that I said it in.
So Tec how are you testing your imagined voice of god in your head?
I do not have an imagined voice in my head.
The voice who does speak to me... in spirit... within me... belongs to Christ.
Yes, there is a difference between Christ and God.
I know my Lord's voice. (My sheep hear my voice; they will run from a strangers voice) He speaks quietly, of love, and of patience, also humor sometimes. He does not get angry, but does speak as to the truth, and while the truth he has shown me about myself is not pleasant... I am glad for having seen them so that I can ask forgiveness and help in mastering those sins, rather than allowing them to master me.
He always speaks to help, to teach, and from love... including the things that He has shown me about His Father, who IS love. Something that He has allowed me to see, in various times when the written account (or the mainstream teaching of a written account) seems to go against love.
He teaches me forgivness, mercy, faith, and love... even when I fail Him, and I do at that. He has never taught me wrong, or spoken anything other than truth to me. He has never taught me to do anything that does not come from love and truth... mercy and forgiveness.That many people take issue with me for my faith in Him, and Him alone... is not in my hands. I hold nothing against any of those people. But there are also people who DO want to hear some things that I am given to share, and so even if it was only one person, that would be enough. Though even that is not in my hands.
You can test anything I share from Him against Him (if you have the faith to go to and then listen to Him), against love regardless of your faith, and against what is written... though this is not a perfect method, but at least there is something 'tangible' for some to see if anything being shared is against what is written, or supported.
I don't expect an intelligent reply just more gibberish that you use to confirm your wishful thinking.
Then why ask at all?
Peace,
tammy
-
Hummingbird001
Now, I have to say that I'm quite sure that I never said this. But if you link to it, then I'll be more than happy to go and look and see what I said, and the context that I said it in.
No, I had to struggle through readingmany of your arguments with other posters here without knowing exactly what was going on. Many times, people told you that your friend was being very mean and nasty and you said every time, that jesus told you that she was allowed to do so, because others were mean to her first. You would accuse others of being mean and when they pointed out to you that you and your friend was no different, this was your excuse every time. I'm sure others here remember it, to
No, you said for us to test your sayings from Jesus. I have done so and found that the voice you hear does not reflect what Jesus taught. I also believe you know you said this. You said it too many times to have just forgotten it. I am sorry about my computer problem and the glitches in the discussion board right now, but I have satisfied myself that you are being disingenuous. I have tested and proved it to myself and I am satisfied.
-
humbled
You are not correct on this, EP. The Slaughter of the animal was one action-- the slashing and the blood.
Olah, the ascent as smoke, the heavenward approach in which nothing was retained by the giver was the great afterward of this Abraham moment.
When the local elders told me that Abraham and God paralled each other , I could only ask if they read John 3:16 thus: "For god so loved the world that he killed his only begtten son..."
But if you, like them, would rather have the story go that the Monster Son-of-a-Bitch told Abe to do Isaac kosher, go ahead.
It doesn't fit. the writing department couldn't make it fit either. But some people are more comfortable with a nasty, tricky god that they can ignore.
I suspect that there is a being out there that is not well understood.
I don't trust the bible either, EP. So we are left to argue our prejudices, perhaps. Because you argue using it, too.
Jesus used it as well.
We are creatures of our time and place, a little bit. I can't help but think God is out there. I can't help but think Jesus had a connection. words get in the way.
It's 1:30 am here. I am really glad for this thread and glad for the discussion.
I hope you and your family are well, EP
and goodnight, tammy
-
tec
No, I had to struggle through readingmany of your arguments with other posters here without knowing exactly what was going on. Many times, people told you that your friend was being very mean and nasty and you said every time, that jesus told you that she was allowed to do so, because others were mean to her first. You would accuse others of being mean and when they pointed out to you that you and your friend was no different, this was your excuse every time. I'm sure others here remember it, to
Without a link, I cannot know what you are speaking of specifically, and so I cannot make a defense... other than to say that I believe you have misunderstood. There is quite the history on this board, and bringing it up again is likely to start another argument. Regardless, there have been many times when my words have been misrepresented. Could be me and how i explain things. But again, without having at least one or two examples to look at, it is hard for me to discuss it now.
I am sure others remember it as you are seeing it; just as I am sure some others remember it from the opposite point of view.
No, you said for us to test your sayings from Jesus. I have done so and found that the voice you hear does not reflect what Jesus taught. I also believe you know you said this. You said it too many times to have just forgotten it. I am sorry about my computer problem and the glitches in the discussion board right now, but I have satisfied myself that you are being disingenuous. I have tested and proved it to myself and I am satisfied.
I have already told you in THIS very thread, that eye for eye is not what Christ teaches, and I know this.
Speaking the truth to someone, without malice or intent to cause harm... or pointing out something that they are doing to others... is not eye for eye.
But... all that being said... if you are satisfied, then you are satisfied. Christ is the one we are to listen to... not tec.
Peace,
tammy