How to read the Bible - Guide for beginners

Author: Best.Korea

Posts

Total: 200
#91
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,214
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
Ha Ha.

Picturing Zed scratchin his head because he doesn't know what a soul is. 

The soul has been explained to him many times. 
As soon as you start explaining to him , his face goes like ummmm blank. 
He just blank stares off somewhere in the distance. 
His Mouth opens
Then his head starts tilting sidways
He doesn't take it in .    His Dumb Dumb.

So here we find ourselves again.  
#92
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,081
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
A perfect example of personal interpretation.

As was mine.

Though mine was based upon the fairly certain knowledge that we are composed of the stuff of the Universe, and that one day soon, our mass will breakdown and it's parts will return to the universe.

Makes sense I think.


Though, I still think that the general theist/christian interpretation clings on to the notion of some sort of residual immortality that possesses awareness.

Which in some aspects could be interpreted as the same as my notion.....But with an awareness bit added on for peace of mind..


So where exactly do you stand on the issue.

Do we actually agree?

No afterlife awareness.

Albeit, your living soul is a bit more spiritual than mine.

Not that I don't run with the idea that internal electro-chemical processes can produce what might be described as a sensation of spirituality.


#93
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,621
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@zedvictor4
Tradesecret wrote;

@zedvictor4 :
Zed, you don't make a lot of sense. 

The soul is simply a living human being. All humans are souls. They don't have a soul. They are a soul.  

The contradictory idiot doesn't realise that he has just proven what I have been saying all along since the day I came to this forum. Jesus wasn't dead when he was taken down from the cross placed and in the tomb for three days. 
Jesus himself says "just like Noah was ALIVE in the "fish" praying", he too was also ALIVE.

Jonah 2:1From inside the fish [alive ] Jonah prayed to the LORD his God.

Jesus said:  For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth’” (Matthew 12:39-40).
#94
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
let us see what the definition of soul is, the word used for it in scripture.

soul

scripture mentions body, soul and spirit, lets see what words it used.

spirit

body

so the spirit is the breath of life (God) in a creature, but the soul is the sum of will, reasoning and emotions.
its not hard to have a problem discerning them, as the soul is present but unattached to the spirit.
word of God divides soul and spirit.
#95
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
A perfect example of personal interpretation.

As was mine.
Do you know the difference between personal and objective? Personal or subjective is when I come to a conclusion nobody else does. Objective is when the conclusion I come to is the same as many other people.  The fact that we can come to the same conclusion is evidence that a process was used which is objective. 
Though mine was based upon the fairly certain knowledge that we are composed of the stuff of the Universe, and that one day soon, our mass will breakdown and it's parts will return to the universe.
Your view is objective as well. It doesn't make it right, nor wrong. You base it upon what you know but exclude what you don't know. In one sense it is working with the evidence and seeing where it leads, but in another sense it smacks of arrogance and pride. 


Makes sense I think.
For some. 

Though, I still think that the general theist/christian interpretation clings on to the notion of some sort of residual immortality that possesses awareness.
I agree that many Christians hold to the view of residual immortality. This is the remnant of Augustine's influence, it is not Jewish though in particular.  I believed it as I was growing up, but it made less and less sense, so I have put it to one side whilst the explore some of the ancient grounds for it.  


Which in some aspects could be interpreted as the same as my notion.....But with an awareness bit added on for peace of mind..
Perhaps - but I don't think I will give you that just yet.  Peace of mind is not part of your notion. 

So where exactly do you stand on the issue.

Do we actually agree? 

No afterlife awareness.
I don't believe that God created humans immortal. Nor do I think that God created angels immortal.  Yet I do believe that God created humans and angels with the promise of immortality.   

Afterlife is a vague notion.  I certainly hold to the view that our time here on earth is one aspect of life.  Yet I also hold to the view of heaven. Currently, I also hold to the view of Hell. Although I am weighing up the evidence in respect of whether Hell is eternal for humans or not.  I tend to think that it can't be eternal for humans since immortality is not given to all. And certainly not to those who resist God.  

Albeit, your living soul is a bit more spiritual than mine.
I would say that my soul is alive while yours is dead. No offence, but the Spirit has not yet given you life which is one reason why the Spiritual can't make sense to you. 
You are a soul - but a dead soul.  That means once you die physically, you die or sleep until the resurrection. At which point you will be judged for your life.  Hopefully, you can persuade the judge, your life deserves more than to be destroyed completely. I, on the other hand, don't need to do any persuading, since Jesus will be my lawyer. 


Not that I don't run with the idea that internal electro-chemical processes can produce what might be described as a sensation of spirituality.
Truly, you are at least consistent with your views and seek to understand. I can respect that. I don't have to agree. Yet, given your state of existence, it makes sense to me that you might process it this way.  

#96
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,081
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
Well.

Within the context of our discussion I regard our individual input as personal.

And if you read my stuff here on DebateArt you will find that I have a consistent view with regard to internal data processing, wherein all output is subject to interpretation. That is to say always subjective, despite the collectively agreed veracity of certain data.


I would say that my soul is alive while yours is dead.
There you go again with another frustrated and highly subjective dig Trade.


I would simply say:
That the energy contained within a living organism is just that. You, Me and the Dog all the same.


So to sum up:
Your views when compared to a more pious Christian, indicate a questioning uncertainty, which inevitably outs as contradiction.

Afterlife is a vague notion.

Yet you hold to the view of heaven and hell.

Hell might or might not be eternal for some.

Immortality is not given to all.

Hmmmmmmm.
#97
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,081
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
Who's Melchy talking to.

Certainly can't be me or you.

Must be Trade.
#98
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,081
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
I want an avatar.

Head,

Blank,

Agape.

Tilting,

Scratched.


Hmmmmmmm.

There's a certain irony in wanting an avatar.

But I'm not a Hindu either.
#99
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
You asked me what my view was:
So where exactly do you stand on the issue. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/9056/posts/381101
So what is the point of reiterating that it was personal or subjective? Of course, it is - as based on my beliefs. It was neither frustrating nor a dig. I was simply putting it as it is. 

The Bible - indicates that people who do not have the Spirit of Life in them are dead souls.  Ephesians 1 flows on from the notion that God told Adam he would surely die on the day he ate the fruit - what Christians call the original sin - for humanity and which plunged them all into the estate of death. 

This is objective Christian doctrine and understanding from the Scriptures.  Many people - have come to the same conclusion. It's not just subjective - it has merit and is a valid objective reading.

You have made it clear on many occasions that you are an atheist.  Hence, I am not clear as to why you call this a dig or even frustrated.  That really makes no sense. given your previous comments. 




#100
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,214
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
The OP asks .
How to read a bible.?

After some close inspection of others reading holy books 
It appears that , to read the jewish  and  Muslim books , ,
One must rock back and forth,  
It is odd to say the least.

After years of study im no closer to finding out why 
Im guessing this rocking  B and F creates an electrical current strong enough for the book to run smoothly. 

Who thinks the quran  could read lying down in bed  ? 

The jury's out . 

I find this difficult doing .
I cant read at the best of times and dyslex. 
So rocking back and forth makes READING A BOOK MORE"  POWERFUL". / MEANINGFUL 
BAMMMMMMMMMMNM. 

So the B and F rocking.  is like , so you know you a reading a pretty darn special book.  
Very well played.


Picture reading neo-geo's and Dolly Doctor.  rocking back and forth. 

WANKERS. 

What about reading the quran in one of the old school shoping mall rides that go back and forth.
Like a rocket ship .  Zooooommmmmm

I ve just got around it hey. 
Thanks. 
Thank you.
I Outwited allah . 

 
#101
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,621
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@zedvictor4
Who's Melchy talking to.   Certainly can't be me or you.

Must be Trade.

Which is like talking to a tin of beans, Vic.


#102
DavidAZ
DavidAZ's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 345
1
2
8
DavidAZ's avatar
DavidAZ
1
2
8
-->
@Stephen
It may sound like I'm splitting hairs here, but God knows our thoughts and intents, NOT our actions.  I believe that God can see every possible future depending on our actions.  The book of Revelation is talking about the future as a whole and not us individually.

God had a plan through Abraham and if he couldn't follow thru with God's directions, then his plan would not be fulfilled.  Abraham wasn't calling a bluff, he was given orders and he was going to do it, knowing that God will make things right because God loved Abraham.  Did God allow Isaac to be slain? Obviously not, AND there was a ram in the thicket not too far off.  God even did not plan to have Isaac killed.  It was only a test for Abraham.

You view of a brutal God demanding the blood of our children comes from a weird perspective and this proves my point of a tainted view of God will then skew your interpretation of the Bible.  There was no malice or intent of malice in God's test to Abraham and Abraham was willing to perform the action out of respect to God.  I agree that Job's kids were treated as a dime a dozen, but it's also possible that Job's kids were adults and wicked.  There is no reference of how old they were and if they were righteous like Job. 
#103
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@DavidAZ
 God knows our thoughts and intents, NOT our actions.  
Interesting, this means he's sometimes surprised by what we do, which makes sense based on some of the stuff in the old testament (if he's all knowing, then what's the point of the Abraham exercise at all, as you point out), but flies in the face of the version in the new testament. How do you square the difference between what you believe (that god is not all knowing) and the vast majority of Christian orthodoxy that says he indeed IS all knowing? I'm wondering if there's some biblical basis, if you've had such discussions with your fellow christians, etc. 
#104
DavidAZ
DavidAZ's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 345
1
2
8
DavidAZ's avatar
DavidAZ
1
2
8
-->
@ludofl3x
Knowing all things means he knows everything.  If an action is not performed, then he doesn't know about it since this thing has not happened yet.  He can predict the future but he doesn't know our freewill choices.  That is the whole reason why humans were created.  Someone to choose to love him or not.  If he knew who would be saved, then why bother dealing with those people and just work with the ones who will love him in the end?  

He also knows the future as a whole since he will have his plan carried out, but as an individual basis, we choose our fate.  God will only direct.  I do not believe he will jump into our freewill EXCEPT only to make sure his plan will be done.  This example is done with Pharoah and the Exodus where God hardens Pharoah's heart after he was willing to let the Israelites go.  There was so much to be shown in his plan for Christ and the church through the Exodus that he had to make sure it ran according to plan.

Orthodoxy and the Bible are usually different.  For the new testament, please give an example for what you are referring to.
#105
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,617
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@DavidAZ

Genesis 6:17
And behold, I Myself am bringing floodwaters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall die.

Isn't God saying he is pro-abortion?
#106
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,621
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@DavidAZ
It may sound like I'm splitting hairs here, but God knows our thoughts and intents, NOT our actions.  I believe that God can see every possible future depending on our actions.
Well now that wasn't your initial comment. Stop moving the goal posts.

This was your comment;

DavidAZ wrote:   Now, why did God feel he had to tempt Abraham is because God knows our hearts but he cannot tell our future actions.#79

You changed your tune when I pointed out a biblical verse to the contrary And now you are saying it all "depends on our actions".

But if you want to put it that way, then so can I.  And I am not a god. Every one of us can tell where someone's actions may/will lead depending on what those actions are.

  And you have purposefully missed the word "intent"  of out and the word "THOUGHTS" in the verse.

" for the Lord searches all hearts, and understands every intent of the thoughts” 1 Chronicles 28:9 << i.e that will be BEFORE the fact. He knows here where just our thoughts will lead.


DavidAZ wrote: Abraham wasn't calling a bluff, he was given orders and he was going to do it, knowing that God will make things right because God loved Abraham.
You are doing it again!  If he knew the out come then it wasn't a fkn test at all then, was it? 

And again, you have totally ignored your own belief, or have you forgotten. You went into the mind of Abraham and said this:

DavidAZ wrote: [C]    I personally believe Abraham didn't think God was going to have him follow thru with it OR if he were to kill his son, God would revive him.

I replied:


Stephen wrote: Then again, are you trying to tell us that  Abraham somehow called the almighty, all powerful god's bluff?  That he just went through the motions while knowing all the time that god wouldn't allow him to kill his son?  So didn't god know that Abraham knew all long that  god would halt this murder and that he  was only bluffing?  Well it was hardly a fkn test then was it.#82
That is all you are good for when stumped for clear cut answers from the BIBLE. But every time you do this simply raises further questions and paint yourself into a corner.


  Did God allow Isaac to be slain? Obviously not, AND there was a ram in the thicket not too far off.  God even did not plan to have Isaac killed.  It was only a test for Abraham.
All irrelevant to the question/s.


You view of a brutal God demanding the blood of our children comes from a weird perspective and this proves my point of a tainted view of God will then skew your interpretation of the Bible. 

Well like it or not, it is not my perspective at all is it? It is directedly from the bibles  authors perspective. I wasn't there and neither were you.


There was no malice or intent of malice in God's test to Abraham and Abraham was willing to perform the action out of respect to God.

Then what was the "TEST"  all about"?  I keep asking you and you cannot answer. And how many times!!!? it was out of "fear!.

I have told you, the BIBLE clearly states what the TEST was all about and you have ignored it. here>
That answer comes at verse 12 >>>>  "for now I know that you fear God". Genesis 22:12 English Standard Version.   So there was no need for you to go into the mind of Abraham or god.


I agree that Job's kids were treated as a dime a dozen, but it's also possible that Job's kids were adults and wicked. 

Again you are scraping the barrel of excuses and reasons.  The BIBLE makes it more than clear why god sanctioned these murders and mentions nothing of  Job's children being wicked.
 Was his house wicked too? What about all his live stock, were they wicked too? And the servants, were they also wicked?
   Well  "the righteous Job" certainly surrounded himself with the scum of the earth, didn't he? Makes you wonder why god  would allow his loyal and righteous servant Job to be surrounded with so much iniquity and for so long, doesn't it?

You honestly need to learn and accept what the bible actually states and stop trying to play down the vile actions of your god. Making up unfounded excuses and or reasons on the hoof because you don't like  my questions or cannot accept  my opinions is not the way to hold a conversation or conduct and argument. and neither is moving the goal posts when you initial reasonings are put into check.

You assert far too much and far too confidently. IMO.

#107
DavidAZ
DavidAZ's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 345
1
2
8
DavidAZ's avatar
DavidAZ
1
2
8
-->
@FLRW
How are you getting pro-abortion on this?  From the life of children and the unborn in the womb being snuffed out from the flood waters?

Judgement doesn't equal a "pro" or "con" one topic.  The problem was the whole earth was wicked and God brought judgement.  Look at it in the whole context.
#108
DavidAZ
DavidAZ's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 345
1
2
8
DavidAZ's avatar
DavidAZ
1
2
8
-->
@Stephen
I think I didn't communicate this clearly.  Let me try again.  I do not believe in "moving the goal post".

I do believe that God knows what you are thinking and what you are intending, BUT your actions will determine what really happens.  Your thoughts and intentions can change and therefore you will not always act out those thoughts and intentions.  God will not know what you do until you actually do it, hence the need for God to know if Abraham will follow through on his directive.  Actions speak louder than words or thoughts in this case.

So for what God knows of the future is every possible outcome you could have with any action you perform.  I do not believe that our lives play out like a movie that there is no changing from the script.

As for Abraham knowing God wasn't going to follow thru, Abraham was given orders and he is carrying them out.  What he supposed to do?  Turn to God and say "oh yeah right God!  You aren't really going to want me to kill my boy.  Come on.  Do I really have to do what you ask?"  Besides, have you not had the intentions to perform some sort of stunt, say skydiving?  You really want to go, but just never followed thru and signed up?  Same concept here. 

You are really hanging on the whole idea that Abraham feared God and and trying to drive home that is what the test was for.  I agree that God wanted to know if Abraham feared God and the ultimate test would be to sacrifice his son.  BTW, the "fear" here is referring to reverence.  Something like a feeling from a son to a father.  Respect that this person could really whoop you if they wanted to.

As for Job, I agree that the death of others for the sake of God's bragging rights sounds brutal.  I cannot tell you why this happened.  I do know it wasn't because God is "wicked" and mean and such.   

As for me grasping at straws, you fail to recognize any other aspects of the bible where God does deliver someone out of trouble, does help a widow, does revive a child and gives Job twice as much in the end of his affliction.  You are only focused on the "bad" of God and will spit nails at anyone who says God is just, righteous or good to them.  A repeating "no it doesn't" is also no way to have a conversation.  And in my opinion, you are showing your elite mind set by telling me I am too confident in my beliefs.   I know your opinions are rooted in a tainted view of God and the bible and pastors and church leadership, but have you ever been involved in any of that? 

This is why I want to know your religious background.  Your views are very ignorant if you only cherry pick the scriptures and don't understand the God of the bible.  So if it sounds like I'm not listening or moving the goal post, that's not the case.  If you have no background with the Bible, then we are not on the same playing field.   
#109
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@DavidAZ
Knowing all things means he knows everything.  If an action is not performed, then he doesn't know about it since this thing has not happened yet.  He can predict the future but he doesn't know our freewill choices.  That is the whole reason why humans were created.  Someone to choose to love him or not.  If he knew who would be saved, then why bother dealing with those people and just work with the ones who will love him in the end?  

He also knows the future as a whole since he will have his plan carried out, but as an individual basis, we choose our fate.  God will only direct.  I do not believe he will jump into our freewill EXCEPT only to make sure his plan will be done.  This example is done with Pharoah and the Exodus where God hardens Pharoah's heart after he was willing to let the Israelites go.  There was so much to be shown in his plan for Christ and the church through the Exodus that he had to make sure it ran according to plan.

I'm sorry, I'm pretty confused here, let me see if breaking down what you're saying helps. 

Knowing all things means he knows everything.  If an action is not performed, then he doesn't know about it since this thing has not happened yet.  
So is this another way of saying he only knows all things that have already happened, and "everything" excludes the future? 

He can predict the future but he doesn't know our freewill choices.
Is it possible for god to predict the future incorrectly then? That would mean he doesn't know anything about the future, but he's guessing. Because later on you say this:

He also knows the future as a whole since he will have his plan carried out, but as an individual basis, we choose our fate.
So he DOES know the future? In that case he's not really predicting, as you said above. Are you saying that he knows the outcome but doesn't know the path people would take to get there? 

I do not believe he will jump into our freewill EXCEPT only to make sure his plan will be done.
This is even more confusing. If he'd only interrupt our free will to make sure whatever his plan is is the outcome, then how is that "free will"? If my free will says go left and his plan says go right, and god intervenes to change my mind to go right, then it's not free will at all, you see that right?

This example is done with Pharoah and the Exodus where God hardens Pharoah's heart after he was willing to let the Israelites go.
So in this case, the Pharoah had already exercised his free will to liberate the Israelites, and god was like "hold on, I'm not done torturing everyone yet"? Again this is a problem for free will. That he needed to do so to set up the end game seems odd, as it involved further torment of his chosen people AND if he's all powerful there's objectively every other possible way to do something, and he picked the one that kept people enslaved. Praise be, I guess. 
#110
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,621
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@DavidAZ
I think I didn't communicate this clearly.  Let me try again.  I do not believe in "moving the goal post".
 Which is what you do and have done and are about to do it for a third time. here>


I do believe that God knows what you are thinking and what you are intending, BUT your actions will determine what really happens.  Your thoughts and intentions can change and therefore you will not always act out those thoughts and intentions.  God will not know what you do until you actually do it, hence the need for God to know if Abraham will follow through on his directive.  Actions speak louder than words or thoughts in this case.


 Some serious backpaddling going on there.  And you have told us that Abraham "knew god wouldn't let him kill his son". So if they both knew one another's thoughts and actions, then there it wasn't a test at all, was it.  Please let that sink in. It is not that difficult to work out using your own fkn logic.




You are really hanging on the whole idea that Abraham feared God and and trying to drive home that is what the test was for.

 No. The BIBLE makes that clear. Not me. otherwise again, what was the test all about. Why are you denying that which the bible clearly states?



As for Job, I agree that the death of others for the sake of God's bragging rights sounds brutal.  I cannot tell you why this happened.  I do know it wasn't because God is "wicked" and mean and such.   

So what was the whole reason for putting his loyal and righteous servant through all of that pain , misery and sorrowful grief?


, you fail to recognize any other aspects of the bible where God
Look, we are not on about "other aspects" here are we? We are talking Abraham and now Job, where you have failed miserably to defend the actions of god  towards two of his most loyal ,faithful and righteous servants. And you cannot give us a reason either.  It was fear.  and it is hardly "free will" if fear is attached.

If you wish to discuss "other aspects"  then start a thread. I will be more pleased to engage you. But I know you won't be doing that anytime soon.


Tell me. What would have been god's reaction had Abraham refused to kill his son Isaac?


This is why I want to know your religious background. 

  None of your business. You have kept your own private so don't be so rude as to enquire of mine.


Your views are very ignorant if you only cherry pick the scriptures and don't understand the God of the bible. If you have no background with the Bible, then we are not on the same playing field.   

 Opinion counts for nothing and neither does what you think of me. So can you leave the slights and veiled insults right here.


If you have no background with the Bible, then we are not on the same playing field.   

I see. Well I am always ready to learn something new from you about scripture and religion in general.....as long as you don't mind me questioning you on what you may have to teach me. I look forward to it.


And  I shall be looking out for your thread on the "other aspects of god". 

   


#111
DavidAZ
DavidAZ's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 345
1
2
8
DavidAZ's avatar
DavidAZ
1
2
8
-->
@ludofl3x
I do not believe anybody's life is on a set course like a movie.  They have freewill to decide what they want to do.  Every action will alter the future in God's mind.  So if I start to go left, God will see all the outcomes that will happen with that direction.

For any scripture referring to future events AS A WHOLE, God does know this and will alter ideas or mindsets to make sure this happens.  So specifically, the Exodus.  He has a grand plan for the Exodus and the tabernacle to be representing his coming and later his church.  So he made sure this was shown through the plagues and pass over night, then the passing through the red sea, etc.  Now if someone maybe tripped crossing over the red sea, that didn't destroy God's plan.  It was being acted out as a whole.  The individual decisions of the people and of the Egyptians in this event didn't affect the overall outcome of the Israelites crossing over and Pharoah's army drowning as the red sea passage closed.

So, in this case, God decided to use the Egyptian people as an example and the fact that he rained judgement on them for killing his people is God's business.  The fact that he kept the Israelites there longer than you think was needed was also his business.

I guess when you get a chance to run the universe, you could make some different decisions, but as it stands, this is what he decided to do.  
#112
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@DavidAZ
They have freewill to decide what they want to do.
Well, unless what they want to do is depart from God's plan, right? "You can do whatever you want until it's different from something I want" doesn't sound like free will as I understand it. 

For any scripture referring to future events AS A WHOLE, God does know this and will alter ideas or mindsets to make sure this happens.
This is not free will either.  Kinda sounds like we only have free will in cases where that will is god's will, and on stuff he doesn't give a shit about, like which shoes I wear. 

I'm still confused. Is there or isn't there free will, and does god know or not know the entire future? If it's not the entire future, then how does he have an "ON THE WHOLE" plan?
#113
DavidAZ
DavidAZ's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 345
1
2
8
DavidAZ's avatar
DavidAZ
1
2
8
-->
@Stephen
I feel we are running rabbit trails here, so let me try to straighten this out. 

Some serious backpaddling going on there.  And you have told us that Abraham "knew god wouldn't let him kill his son". So if they both knew one another's thoughts and actions, then there it wasn't a test at all, was it.  Please let that sink in. It is not that difficult to work out using your own fkn logic.

You have accused me of backpaddling twice now but I thought I have been clear on the difference of a thought or intent and the action that follows through.  Where is the backpaddling?  

As for Abraham "knew".  Knew probably wasn't the term I was looking for because my intention was to show that Abraham believed that God wouldn't allow it to happen.  But, if your definition of "knew" is that Abraham could read God's thoughts, then yes, it would be a dumb test.  That is not what I was trying to convey.

No. The BIBLE makes that clear. Not me. otherwise again, what was the test all about. Why are you denying that which the bible clearly states?
Of course the bible states at the end that God says that he knows that Abraham fears him, but what is your point?  Are you saying that you think God is interested/wanting/desiring that everyone fears him?

So what was the whole reason for putting his loyal and righteous servant through all of that pain , misery and sorrowful grief?
It is a reason that I cannot understand, but you would know that God and Satan were debating whether Job would serve God if all his goods and family were taken away.  God believed that Job loved him more than all the things and family he has and Satan didn't, so the test was on.

Tell me. What would have been god's reaction had Abraham refused to kill his son Isaac?
Good question.  If I were to speculate, he would have been punished somehow, just like Moses striking the rock twice out of anger.

What do you think would have happened?

You have kept your own private so don't be so rude as to enquire of mine.
My profile is filled out.  Yours is all unknown.  Also, you never asked me so I never divulged.

Opinion counts for nothing and neither does what you think of me. So can you leave the slights and veiled insults right here.  I see. Well I am always ready to learn something new from you about scripture and religion in general.....as long as you don't mind me questioning you on what you may have to teach me. I look forward to it.
Relax.  There was no veiled insult here.  I'm not afraid of my beliefs being questioned either.  We have already had a small discourse in the "lord's prayer" thread that you have given me something to think about.  

My "even playing field" was referring to how much bible knowledge you have and how much you know of God and the scriptures as a Christian.  If I know where you come from, then I can adjust my answers to make more sense to you, but all I'm doing now is taking stabs in the dark about how you would accept my answers.  Our dialogue recently tells me that we are arguing over some miscommunication too.

I hate the "exact word" debate because it doesn't tell of the whole that is trying to be conveyed.



#114
DavidAZ
DavidAZ's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 345
1
2
8
DavidAZ's avatar
DavidAZ
1
2
8
-->
@ludofl3x
Well, unless what they want to do is depart from God's plan, right? "You can do whatever you want until it's different from something I want" doesn't sound like free will as I understand it. 
I think our definition of "God's plan" needs to be defined. When I say God's plan, I mean an over-all thing, like the book of revelation stuff.  Where you or I would fit in this book is more than likely irrelevant, but he will use a few key people to get this thing done.  For the vast, vast majority of people, he will not override our freewill.  For the few that he will use, he will place thoughts in their mind to have them do what he wants.  This typically is done with leaders of nations but I can't find the reference off hand.

I'm still confused. Is there or isn't there free will, and does god know or not know the entire future? If it's not the entire future, then how does he have an "ON THE WHOLE" plan?
Yes there is a free-will and God can decide to override it to work his plan as I discussed above.  I'm not sure why an exception to the rule to too hard to understand.  

Please keep in mind that God is more powerful in every aspect that we have, so when I say he can see every possible future, it's not that far fetched.  So yes, he can see every possible future for every person and within those possibilities is his plan embedded in it.
#115
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
Yes there is a free-will and God can decide to override it to work his plan as I discussed above.  I'm not sure why an exception to the rule to too hard to understand.  
Well, it isn't hard to understand unless you bring free will into the mix. You don't have free will if some unseen entity can override it if you depart from whatever they had planned for you. You're just a 'programmed asset' serving the plan, not someone with free will. 

When I say God's plan, I mean an over-all thing, like the book of revelation stuff. Where you or I would fit in this book is more than likely irrelevant
Then what's he care what we're doing so much for? If we're irrelevant to the plan I mean. 
#116
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,621
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@DavidAZ

Some serious backpaddling going on there.  And you have told us that Abraham "knew god wouldn't let him kill his son". So if they both knew one another's thoughts and actions, then there it wasn't a test at all, was it.  Please let that sink in. It is not that difficult to work out using your own fkn logic.

You have accused me of backpaddling twice now but I thought I have been clear on the difference of a thought or intent and the action that follows through.  Where is the backpaddling?  
No I have accused you of moving the goal posts three time and backpaddling once.


As for Abraham "knew".  Knew probably wasn't the term I was looking for because my intention was to show that Abraham believed that God wouldn't allow it to happen.  But, if your definition of "knew" is that Abraham could read God's thoughts, then yes, it would be a dumb test.  That is not what I was trying to convey.

Nothing to do with me or my definition, but all to do with YOU telling Me what you believe Abraham knew. 


That is not what I was trying to convey.

Well have another try. What was the point of the test? If as you say they both knew one another's minds?




No. The BIBLE makes that clear. Not me. otherwise again, what was the test all about. Why are you denying that which the bible clearly states?
Of course the bible states at the end that God says that he knows that Abraham fears him, but what is your point? 

Here again you are not reading your bible. God didn't say anything after the test, it was the angel.


Are you saying that you think God is interested/wanting/desiring that everyone fears him?

Well you tell me;
Deuteronomy : "Fear the LORD your God, serve him only and take your oaths in his name"
Proverbs: "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction."
Ecclesiastes: " Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man."
Peter: " Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor"



So what was the whole reason for putting his loyal and righteous servant through all of that pain , misery and sorrowful grief?
It is a reason that I cannot understand, but you would know that God and Satan were debating whether Job would serve God if all his goods and family were taken away.  God believed that Job loved him more than all the things and family he has and Satan didn't, so the test was on.

Well here again. The BIBLE makes it clear that it was a bet FFS!



Tell me. What would have been god's reaction had Abraham refused to kill his son Isaac?
Good question.  If I were to speculate, he would have been punished somehow, just like Moses striking the rock twice out of anger.

What do you think would have happened?
Maybe something like Leviticus 26:14-46. he doesn't take to kindly towards those that refuse his commands.



You have kept your own private so don't be so rude as to enquire of mine.
My profile is filled out.  Yours is all unknown.  Also, you never asked me so I never divulged.
It mentions nothing of your religious persuasion and I don't care what you are, hence that is why I haven't asked. 


Opinion counts for nothing and neither does what you think of me. So can you leave the slights and veiled insults right here.  I see. Well I am always ready to learn something new from you about scripture and religion in general.....as long as you don't mind me questioning you on what you may have to teach me. I look forward to it.
My "even playing field" was referring to how much bible knowledge you have and how much you know of God and the scriptures as a Christian. 

I was christened at birth but I am not a practicing Christian.


If I know where you come from, then I can adjust my answers to make more sense to you, but all I'm doing now is taking stabs in the dark about how you would accept my answers.  Our dialogue recently tells me that we are arguing over some miscommunication too.

Stop talking nonsense . You make a comment or claim and I question it. You reply to your capability.  And the same goes for me. There is nothing to "adjust" for my sake  or my mental capacity on religion, the bible or anything else. That is another fkn patronising insult! You just don't realise it. Hence exposing your haughty arrogance.

I hate the "exact word" debate because it doesn't tell of the whole that is trying to be conveyed.

You mean you want to change the meaning and definitions of words when they turn out not to agree with or support your own argument.

That is a  Reverend Tradesecret speciality. But it has never worked for that thick bible dunce and it won't work for you.


#117
hey-yo
hey-yo's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 382
1
2
4
hey-yo's avatar
hey-yo
1
2
4
-->
@Stephen
Yeah those are some tuff passages to understand. I do not know how to articulate a response. I will need more study to look at important aspects that are still missing from your conclusions.  Like context, culture, tradition, and translation to name primary concerns.  

I am not a scholar. most are not. So to be asked about complex aspects in the bible will not produce an easy quick fix answer. 

I always viewed the puzzle as something similar to a puzzle where various parts need to be looked at and combined before making an assesment. 

From what I have been able to gather thus far, there are a small mix in potential responses. I will provide what I can along with my understanding. 

Psalms 137:9

The opening two verses of Psalm 137 reveal that this song is sung by Jewish captives in the city of Babylon. As I read it, the Psalm appears to be a refection on human desire not an implementation of God's will. 




1 samuel  15




This will require more time to read. 


Isaiah 13 16

Prophecy is tricky. I've always understood prophecy to be a declaration as to what will happen not a moral guide as to what should happen. 



You missed this too:
Luke 22: 42-44
43 "And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven and strengthened him".
No I addressed it. 
People can be stregnthened or get a morale boost when we see people. There is nothing in the passage that demonstrates a supernatual act where an angel is giving Jesus power. 

Also, this does not express that Jesus needed a morale boost but that Jesus responded to seeing an angel. 

#118
DavidAZ
DavidAZ's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 345
1
2
8
DavidAZ's avatar
DavidAZ
1
2
8
-->
@Stephen
I meant no offense by any of this and if my actions caused me to look haughty, then I apologize.  I really felt my responses were not catching right with you as if I was speaking another language.  I guess I am not communicating well and I wanted to make sure I can see where you are coming from also.

So lets try this again...

No I have accused you of moving the goal posts three time and backpaddling once.
Please articulate where this has happened.  I don't see where the of moving goal posts and back paddling is warranted.  I know this was in reference to the whole God knows the thoughts and intents, but I'm not sure what I had said anything different than I had before.  I tried to expound on what I meant, but I never changed my position.

Here again you are not reading your bible. God didn't say anything after the test, it was the angel.
Touché

Well you tell me;
Deuteronomy : "Fear the LORD your God, serve him only and take your oaths in his name"
Proverbs: "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction."
Ecclesiastes: " Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man."
Peter: " Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor"
Okay, again, why are you trying to drive that point home?

Well here again. The BIBLE makes it clear that it was a bet FFS!
Okay.  What is your point?  I think I explained that.

You mean you want to change the meaning and definitions of words when they turn out not to agree with or support your own argument.
I mean that I want to make sure I understand your conclusions as a whole and not try to trap you on a single word.  If the definition of a word is vague due to overuse or the time in history that it was used, I want to make sure we both come to the same idea of what is being said. If I flip flop on a point, then by all means, bust my chops, but if I try to expound on what I am trying to say, relax. 

#119
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,621
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@DavidAZ
>>>[A]<<<

Well you tell me;
Deuteronomy : "Fear the LORD your God, serve him only and take your oaths in his name"
Proverbs: "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction."
Ecclesiastes: " Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man."
Peter: " Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor"
Okay, again, why are you trying to drive that point home?

Jesus!  Are you serious !?
It was YOU that asked ME this>

DavidAZ wrote: Are you saying that you think God is interested/wanting/desiring that everyone fears him?#113

YESSSSS,   the BIBLE makes it quite clear throughout. Did you fail to see >>>[A]<<< above.

 So, now that I have had to show you something else  you didn't know from the bible WHY don't you tell me WHY  "god is interested in wanting/desiring people to fear  him" .



You mean you want to change the meaning and definitions of words when they turn out not to agree with or support your own argument. That is a  Reverend Tradesecret speciality. But it has never worked for that thick bible dunce and it won't work for you.

I mean that I want to make sure I understand your conclusions as a whole and not try to trap you on a single word.
Well don't you be too concerned about "trapping me". I will usually ask for clarity if I don't understand something.  Even if it means asking you to define a word supported by your sources before engaging. ..

  If the definition of a word is vague due to overuse or the time in history that it was used,

Well you appear to be claiming some kind of authority on the matter of words used in the bible. That is all well and good as long as you can support you claims with evidence and sources and not something made up in the spur of the moment after finding yourself on the back foot.

And you have use the word "vague" . Will you define that word "vague" for us?


And some words may need clarity but this doesn't give you, or anyone  literary licence to put any meaning or definition  that suits you simply to win an argument or get yourself out of a self excavated hole.


I want to make sure we both come to the same idea of what is being said.

Ok then is all you have to do is make yourself clear from the off instead of attempting to alter the definition or meaning of a word half way through a discussion.

 Anyway. I think I have done this conversation to death. My point was Abraham didn't challenge god on this occasion, and that the test was a test of his fear of god, the ANGEL makes that clear enough. And a pointless test at that considering you have told us all that "god knows what is in our hearts".  

I look forward to you new thread.




#120
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,621
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@hey-yo
You missed this too:
Luke 22: 42-44
43 "And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven and strengthened him".
No I addressed it. 

No you have not stop lying. You have said Jesus is god.

 I asked you why would god need and underling angel to strengthen him"
 HERE>#55

Jesus is God, so God did not "refuse" Himself.

Yes, it is quite a quandary. The bible clears states  that Jesus was praying to his father:

Luke 22: 42-44
42 Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.
43 And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.
44 And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.

Don't make me laugh.
So Jesus is god that needed assistance from an angelic underling "to strengthen him!? 

Did any angels appear to those devout praying Christians to " strengthen" them while they watched their children die?  
And Jesus prayed to himself knowing all along that he would refuse himself?#55
So are you going to answer that simply question? You have swerved it twice already.