Peace to you!
TJ “said” - God said, "bring your best" and that's what he did.
SJ “said” - Ahhhh, here is the problem: you are in error in your understanding! It was not ABOUT the offering itself... but about what was in CAIN... when he BROUGHT it. Cain... had a problem... that he didn't FIX... BEFORE he offered up HIS gift. Matthew 5:22-24; now, we don't know the circumstances of what it was Cain didn't fix, but...
And then TJ “said” - Shelby, I don't know the reason for your quoting Matthew
I brought it in, dear TJ, because if you want to KNOW God… you must FIRST… know CHRIST. So, on the subject of “offerings”… what did Christ SAY?
but for you I think it clouds the issue.
Perhaps, for YOU. For ME, it helps me understand what was “wrong” with Cain’s offering.
You cannot make the mistake of reading more into the passage than what it actually says.
And I didn’t: the passage says that Abel’s offering was worth more than Cain’s. Well, I needed to know WHY that was. And I asked. And I “received” what was stated by my Lord at Matthew 5:22-24. And when I went there and read it, I understood what the issue was: Cain did not make peace before attempting to make his offerings. Easy. But… if you all want to MAKE it “rocket science”, go ahead. For the LIFE of me, though, I cannot understand WHY…
Look at what Genesis (not Matthew) says:
I DID look at Genesis, dear Teej. Again, I wanted to know WHY “The LORD looked with favor on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor.”
Do you see where it says, "But Able brought fat portions..."? The word "BUT"? To me, that clearly infers that Abel's offering was automatically more acceptable to god at the time it was offered.
Um-hmmmm. But the TRUTH is that there is no such word there, dear Teej… either the word “but” which some versions include… OR the word “and” which other versions include. The word there is only “Hebel”, which, in English, is “Abel” (the "H" in Hebrew is silent, which is why the word that WE pronounce as "haa-lay-loo-yuh" is REALLY "aa-lay-loo-yah"!) I digress.
Why is it like that? Because “and”, “but” and “or” are CONJUNCTIONS… which the ENGLISH language includes… to begin a sentence that seemed fragmented before such inclusion. And such inclusion… in this case and many others… is quite misleading. “Tampering”… always is.
(NOTE: I IMPLORE you… if you won’t go directly to the SOURCE (John 5:39, 40)… then at least… STUDY LANGUAGE. It will help you a GREAT deal when reading ANY version of the Bible. Or… you can leave it those who believe that you WON’T study language… and thus WILL believe everything you SEE “written”… and/or are told by earthling man.)
Without giving any explanation, the passage goes on to say that god did not look with favor on Cain's.
No explanation is needed. All on needs to do is understand the “protocol” for offering up gifts… either under the Law Covenant, as given by Moses… or pursuant to the NEW Covenant, as given by Christ. E asy. Certain things are “antitypical” of other certain things, dear Teejay. Truly, there is NOTHING NEW… under the sun. Religion, however, does not teach you that… because RELIGION… does not KNOW it.
"So" (or then) Cain became angry.
Not quite. Tell you what, let’s look at the HEBREW, if you will permit me, because there are some pretty important things to note:
...
Okay, well, I TRIED to cut and paste the actual Hebrew words that are on record… but I couldn’t do it. Ah, well… here is the ENGLISH translation of them… and I want you to NOTICE something:
Do you see the words that are blue... or purple links? Those are the HEBREW words. Do you see the ones that are black? Those are the words ADDED… to make the HEBREW words… “make sense”. My point? “But” is NOT included in original Hebrew of verse 3 (nor is “And”)… and “So” is not a true part of verse 5. Do you SEE that? SCRIBES… have added such words… based on THEIR understanding. And THAT is why… I do NOT rely on what is “written”… but instead… go to the SOURCE, my Lord. (John 5:39, 40)
As far as I'm concerned, Cain had every right to be angry. God showed callous favoritism -- a conditional love that hurt Cain's spirit.
You are in error, dear Teejay. You are basing your position on what you THINK happened… rather than what DID occur. But, now , with regard to the verses... let me share with you what my Lord has revealed it to ME:
(Before I continue – for those of you will want to clutch your hearts in utter disbelief… and begin ripping your garments, throwing ashes in the air and weeping and gnashing your teeth… over the fact that I have “red-lettered” some changes here, I must say to you that what I have done here is nothing more than every other Bible “translator”… many of whom you respect, but who have made purposeful, erroneous changes… which is why each version says things slightly different from another version. I do not intend to publish this – although it IS what I have heard from my Lord – nor to I intend to attempt to persuade you as to it truth. I do not “push” what is “written” and therefore, there is NO benefit to me one way or another. I will tell you as I always have – go to the SOURCE… Christ. Hear HIM… and get the sense and TRUTH of it… from him.)
Now the account does NOT say that it was due to ABEL that Cain was angry of his countenance had fallen. No, we ASSUME that Cain was angry AT GOD... but killed ABEL... because GOD rejected his (Cain’s) offering. Yet, it was ABEL that he killed. Why do we NOT assume that he was angry... with ABEL? What if he was angry with ABEL... so much that he wanted to KILL him? For that is the TRUTH… God rejected his offering BECAUSE he was angry… BECAUSE he had murder… in his HEART. It had not yet been “born”… and God tried to WARN Cain… because He... saw... it... coming. But if God had stopped Cain from doing what CAIN wanted to do... how then can we call Cain a FREE "moral agent"? And IF a free moral agent, why didn't Cain... STOP HIMSELF?
You can try to explain away the mistake god made, but I won't excuse god's guilt in the events that later unfolded. God was wrong. Period.
Okay. If YOU say so, dear Teej. You were there, of course… and my Lord was not. So, what HE says took place… is not correct, but what earthling man has PRESUMED took place is. Okay. I’m “easy”…
SJ “said” - Cain... did not... do his "best". Far from it. He thought God couldn't tell.
TJ "said" - Please show me where it says that.
It SAYS… that “murders” come from within the HEART, yes? And that sin is RESULT of what is IN us, our DESIRES, yes? And Cain… murdered Abel. Yes? So, such "murder" was IN him, yes? In his HEART? Which heart God SEES, yes? So that God saw Cain’s HEART… what was IN it... and so REJECTED Cain’s offering… and told Cain to get the “master” over it. Yes? Cain, though, rather than own up to what was IN him… let his anger take over… and a result… the DESIRE… gave birth… to SIN. That is how it WORKS, dear Teejay.
I think you misunderstood me when I said: "I will not chastise her for it because I was personally expecting something else".
No, I understood you… and stand by my comment: say what you will and will not do now, but come back in a few years and tell me what you DID. Because right now, you truly have NO idea.
But that's just it. I do have an idea.
Uh-huh. We shall see. But I tell you, I know many fathers… many, MANY fathers… who think they know at age 3, 4 or 5… what they… and their daughters… will or will not do… when she is 13, 14, 15, etc. You are confusing the issue, I think.
Nope, I didn’t. I just have a 25-year-old daughter… and many friends with daughters… and sons… of ALL ages... and we ALL said what we were going to do and not do. And we’ve all… at some point or another... “eaten crow.” And you will, too. But nevermind…
God told his two sons to bring an offering. They did, based on their livelihoods.
I agree. Nothing wrong, there.
God liked one and not the other without stating why.
I disagree that it had anything to do with "liking" one or the other. Rather, it was Cain's OFFERING for which He had no respect. I think your assumption is an error, based on misunderstanding... and misinformation.
Cain got angry and, without explaining himself or showing Cain how he could improve on his initial offering, god chastised Cain even more.
Now, I CERTAINLY disagree: If Cain knew to BRING offerings… most likely he knew the “rules” of bringing them. And God DID tell Cain how he could “improve”. That one, we KNOW. And God did not chastise CAIN more… rather, CAIN… killed his brother! Cain… punished ABEL. Where is the “right” in THAT?!
It was as if god stooped down and gave Abel a big hug and shot an angry look at Cain.
Wow! As a mother of two… I guess I better be careful, huh? Better not praise one and discipline the other, ever, even if it is warranted, yes? Cause one of ‘em might just KILL the other one… and that would be MY fault, right? How many kids you got, Teej?
God was wrong.
Your opinion. And you’re quite entitled to it, no matter how erroneous it may be.
Confusing what god did with me being unhappy with my daughter dating a thug are two totally different things. Surely you see that.
Not really. I do see that you completely overlooked the purpose of my comparison, but be that as it may…
I understand. If god tells someone to murder, then it's good.
I COULD say this two (2) ways, dear Teej: I COULD say, like Bill Cosby… if God brought us INTO the world… He can take us out. But while that could be construed as true… it is not, entirely. In the case of Abraham and Isaac, God gave Abraham a directive… which HE… GOD… remedied.
But again, you miss my point. Earlier in this thread you made the statement that if god kills people who are about to do something wrong, people would complain about god's unfairness.
Yes.
To solve that problem while still putting a stop to wrongdoing, I mention the incident involving the murder sacrifice of Isaac to point out that god does not have to kill people to stop bad things from happening.
Yes. And you missed MY point: the incident involving Isaac is something GOD… put into action. Yes? However, my example of Ted Bundy is regarding something that GOD… did NOT put into action. As I said, you missed MY point.
He can also send angels to simply stop the activity – whatever the activity is. He can stop a murderer from committing murder without killing the murderer. Just like he stopped Abraham from murdering sacrificing Issac.
But with the exception of Israel, with whom He has a COVENANT to protect, why is He OBLIGATED to? Where is it WRITTEN that HE… is OBLIGATED… to stop US… from harming one ANOTHER… when HE… had nothing to DO… with the bringing ON of such harm… in the FIRST place? THAT… is my point. (Hey, how did you do that “line-through” thing?
SJ “said” - Please... tell me, Teejay, dear... how would YOU stop bad things from happening? And please don't say, "Put all the bad people on an island." 'Cause sooner or later... they'd find their way back...
And TJ "said" - I think the issue is not: what would teejay do to stop the evil from happening; but: why isn't god doing anything to stop evil from happening. That, to me, is a much better question.
And to ME… it is THE most HYPOCRITICAL question we can ask. Which is my POINT, too! You, we, cannot answer what WE would do – all we can DO… is concern ourselves with what GOD does and doesn’t do? How is that? And, again, what would YOU... have HIM... do? But t his is the entire “RAFTER/straw” thing, isn’t it, Teej, right here, in a nutshell? And we’re DAMN GOOD at it, too, aren’t we? Why IS that?
SJ “said” - May I ask you: What is right? What was Abraham pleading for and what was the OUTCOME of that "debate"?
TJ "said" - As far as I can tell, Abraham was pleading for god to not allow the two angels to murder innocent people.
Innocent?! They wanted to RAPE ANGELS!!! LOLOLOLOLOLOL! And women were OFFERED to them, which women they rejected! Either way... women OR angels... they had a PROBLEM! You can't see that?!
You tell me... what do YOU think Abraham was pleading for?
Abraham could not believe that everyone in those cities were “corrupt”. He just couldn’t. His mind said that Lot and his family were there, so surely there were others like them. ‘Cause who was Lot hanging out with, if there weren’t? And it would seem that there WERE… ‘cause Lot’s daughters had husbands (”fiancés”?)… who were INVITED to go along. Counting Lot, his two daughters, his wife, and the "fiances"... that made at least five "righteous" people right there, yes? But... the "deal"... was for TEN. God said that if there were TEN... He would save the city. And there weren't even ten. Even the fiances CHOSE… to stay behind. Thought “old” Lot… was a “fool”. Yes?
Genesis 19:12-14
(Wait, Teej, can’t you just see ‘em today? ---> “Go on ‘wit ‘dat, ‘ol man… we ain’t tryin’ to hear nuthin’ ‘bout no fire and sulpha’. Man, you’s ta-rippin’… talkin’ ‘bout God and all ‘dat. I’m ‘bout to blow it UP!! Hizzup to the cri-zeezy, cop the “bling-bling”, pick up my sho’ty in the Escalade, and run by my dawg Snoop’s for an 8-ball and a blunt!!!)
LOLOLOLOLOL! And y our daughter’s HOW old now, dear Teej? LOLOLOLOLOLOL! Oh, yeah, you just wait…
And what is YOUR definition of "right"?
Not completely ignoring that you didn't answer when I asked YOU...
I would say that "right"... is w hatever comes into existence… whether it be action or an item… due to, by means of, or as the result of... love, joy, peace, faith, goodness, kindness, mildness, patience or self-control. And I think my Lord would agree, that s uch things are ALWAYS right… for there is no “law” against such things.
With all of that said, I wish you the GREATEST of love and peace to you, dear Teejay, my brother!!
YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,
SJ
