Homestar Runner Wiki Forum :: View topic - Which God do you believe in?

i reject the characterization.

the God of the New Testament will send you to suffer in hell for all eternity just for not believing in him the "right" way.

the God of the Old Testament expects you to behave in a certain way, and there are consequences for not obeying, but everyone also gets rewarded for the good they do in life.

which of those sounds loving, and which sounds vengeful to you?

Cobalt wrote:

I could only draw the conclusion that these writers were just using God as an excuse to have a good old killing spree for themselves.

Doesn't the New Testament God also reward people in heaven for the good they do (Luke 6:35)?

Does the Old Testament God save people who aren't his chosen people?

I believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of his Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried, and the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father. And he will come again with glory to judge both the living and the dead, whose kingdom will have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets. And I believe one holy Christian and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins, and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

In reality, they are the same God. They are just presented differently.

Actually, Dr. Lurve, your question already presupposed the Marcionite Heresy, the belief that the Old Testament God and the New Testament God are different Gods.

I have loved you, saith the Lord. Yet you say, wherein have you loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the Lord: yet I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness

Does the Old Testament God save people who aren't his chosen people?

Didymus wrote:

Actually, Dr. Lurve, your question already presupposed the Marcionite Heresy, the belief that the Old Testament God and the New Testament God are different Gods.

Oh dear. Weeell...... seeing that I kinda held that view, uhh..... looks like I was a heretic since the age of 12. Um..... yay?

But seriously, here's one thing I want to bring up with you, Didymus - the issue of Esau. Of course, he's the alleged forefather of the Romans and Edomites - and the subject of the hatred of God (according to Malachi):

Malachi 1:2-3 wrote:

So from that alone, it's either the case that God is at least capable of hatred, or Malachi was ad lib-bing. (And it does seem to be a bit of a coincidence that the people whom God apparently hates are the same who've been involved in turf wars against Malachi's people.)

That is a very good question, WHF. But, from the context of Malachi, GOd is pronouncing his disdain for the Edomites on account of their arrogance and sin. It's not arbitrary hatred, but focused against those who commit injustice.

On checking the term in Brown Driver Briggs, it appears that שנא has a connotation of "revulsion," and is often an attitude toward perversion and wrong-doing.

Cobalt is an Orthodox Jew, and he doesn't view God as vengeful.

But, to reiterate my previous point, you obviously have not actually READ the Old or New Testaments, because the portrayal of God in the Old Testament is no more vengeful than his portrayal in the New, nor is it any less merciful than the New. This dichotomy is a false one perpetuated mostly by people who haven't even studied the Bible in any depth whatsoever.

Actually I have. My interpretation is different to yours. The punishments handed out in the OT far outweigh the sin. He floods. He turns people into salt. He strikes people down with lightning. He has a severe anger management problem.

The truth is, on account of our sin, we all deserve God's hatred. And yet God has shown mercy to the entire earth by giving his Son. And yet, there are some who do not receive that mercy. Why is that? In all honesty, better theologians than me still do not know the answer. Some think they do, but I'm not sure they're completely honest with themselves about that.

Dr. Lurve wrote:

And you've completely overlooked all the times he's forgiven people, gifted people with blessings they did not deserve, rescued people from oppression and injustice, defended people who were being attacked, protected people who were in danger, etc. Perhaps you've read a chapter or two of Genesis, but the whole of the Old Testament Scripture is still entirely lost to you.

Furthermore, you seem to be overlooking the justice of those acts in which he did punish. The flood was visited upon a human race that had degenerated into all sorts of evil. The same is the case with Sodom and Gomorrah. Who are you to say that those who suffered that destruction did not deserve it? To give you an example of what I mean, the people of Sodom and Gomorrah were intending on raping and killing the two messengers God had sent to Lot, and that was pretty much common behavior among them. If I knew of a city of people who acted like that all the time, I'd probably want them nuked too.

Nevertheless, this same God was also the one who rescued the Israelites from oppressive slavery at the hands of the Egyptians, who protected them as they wondered in the wasteland, and who forgave them when they rebelled against them, even when they deserved his punishment. This same God also kept the Hebrew people as a nation and protected them from enemies, even when they rebelled against him and committed acts of injustice. When his patience wore out, he did not destroy them, but raised them back up again and reestablished them as his holy nation.

Not only that, but what about all the ways in which God either punished or promised to punish those who rebelled against him in the New Testament? What about Annas and Sapphira, who were struck dead because they lied to St. Peter? Or Herod Aggripa, who was eaten by worms because he claimed to be a god? Or the sorceror who called himself Bar-Jesus and was struck blind because he misled the governor of Cypress? Or Jesus chasing the money-changers out of the temple with a whip?

So no, I do not think your assessment of the portrayal of God in either Testament is correct. And this is coming from a man with two degrees in biblical studies. My suggestion to you is to go back and read both Testaments in their entirety, then continue this conversation.

Oh, i'm sorry, I happen to believe that murder is never an acceptable punishment, no matter what the crime.

You're right, he was helping Jews at a time when he was murdering the first born sons of the Egyptians.

two degrees? I am SO impressed! Still don't agree with you pal! I am able to think for myself.

Didymus wrote:

Quote:

Oh, i'm sorry, I happen to believe that murder is never an acceptable punishment, no matter what the crime.

Not murder. Justice. And since you are neither judge nor juror, it is not your place to say.

Not, not justice. Killing people is called murder. Justice implies justness and killing people is never just.

Quote:

You're right, he was helping Jews at a time when he was murdering the first born sons of the Egyptians.

Again, not murder, but justice. The Egyptians brought this upon themselves. Get your facts straight.

Ditto.

Quote:

two degrees? I am SO impressed! Still don't agree with you pal! I am able to think for myself.

But you have not STUDIED. That's my point. Since that is the case, I can only surmise that your faulty conclusions are based on incomplete analysis of the texts in question. Come back when you've taken the time to study the WHOLE Scriptures and are in a better frame of mind to state your case.

In short, your lack of biblical scholarship leaves me entirely unimpressed with your assessment of the situations.

Author:	Dr. Lurve [ Mon Jul 31, 2006 1:40 am ]
Post subject:	Which God do you believe in?
Which God do you believe in?

Author:	Beyond the Grave [ Mon Jul 31, 2006 1:49 am ]
Post subject:
You might want to add the God of the Prophet Mohammed, for any of us who my be Muslim. In reality, they are the same God. They are just presented differently.

Author:	Alexander [ Mon Jul 31, 2006 1:58 am ]
Post subject:
Both. Because he's the same God. I think this topic needs a little more detail.

Author:	PianoManGidley [ Mon Jul 31, 2006 3:04 am ]
Post subject:
I believe in a more Deistic view of our Creator. My beliefs certainly don't come from the Bible's definition of God.

Author:	Cobalt [ Mon Jul 31, 2006 4:43 am ]
Post subject:
i reject the characterization. the God of the New Testament will send you to suffer in hell for all eternity just for not believing in him the "right" way. the God of the Old Testament expects you to behave in a certain way, and there are consequences for not obeying, but everyone also gets rewarded for the good they do in life. which of those sounds loving, and which sounds vengeful to you?

Homestar Runner Wiki Forum http://forum.hrwiki.org/

Which God do you believe in? http://forum.hrwiki.org/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=9303	Page 1 of 2

Author:	What's Her Face [ Mon Jul 31, 2006 10:54 am ]
Post subject:
Cobalt wrote: i reject the characterization. the God of the New Testament will send you to suffer in hell for all eternity just for not believing in him the "right" way. the God of the Old Testament expects you to behave in a certain way, and there are consequences for not obeying, but everyone also gets rewarded for the good they do in life. which of those sounds loving, and which sounds vengeful to you? Huh. I did draw pretty much the same conclusion as Dr Lurve here, but Cobalt's point actually does make sense. But you know, my biggest issue was the kind of people with whom the Old Testament God associated Himself. They're the kind of people (imo) that Christ/New Testament God would never have associated himself. This is just my opinion, you understand. But they were dispicable people in my mind. People like..... Abraham: who abandoned his son Ishmael to die in the desert. Why? Because his wife didn't want him around anymore. Boo hoo. Lot: who offered his daughters up to be gang-raped, and later had sex with them himself. This is the man God chose to save from Sodom? David: who cut the foreskins off the corpses of his Canaanite enemies after one particular battle. O.o I don't care what you call that, I call it a war crime. Not to mention the overt racism against the Canaanites and Samaritans in general. Now, I realise that mores are different then than they are now - but that was a huge stumbling block for me. How can a God of Love want the deaths of Canaanites and the alienation of the Samaritans, like some of these Old Testament writers will have you believe? I could only draw the conclusion that these writers were just using God as an excuse to have a good old killing spree for themselves. I thought that was especially true since Christ actually made it a point to humanise and associate with Samaritans.

Author:	ed 'lim' smilde [ Mon Jul 31, 2006 12:45 pm ]
Post subject:
Cobalt wrote: i reject the characterization. the God of the New Testament will send you to suffer in hell for all eternity just for not believing in him the "right" way. the God of the Old Testament expects you to behave in a certain way, and there are consequences for not obeying, but everyone also gets rewarded for the good they do in life. Doesn't the New Testament God also reward people in heaven for the good they do (Luke 6:35)? And the New Covenant is for all people, not just the Jews. I think they are both loving.

Author:	Dr. Lurve [ Mon Jul 31, 2006 1:30 pm ]
Post subject:
What's Her Face wrote: Cobalt wrote: I could only draw the conclusion that these writers were just using God as an excuse to have a good old killing spree for themselves. Nothing changes!

Author:	Cobalt [ Mon Jul 31, 2006 7:05 pm ]
Post subject:
ed 'lim' smilde wrote: Doesn't the New Testament God also reward people in heaven for the good they do (Luke 6:35)? not if they aren't Christians.

Author:	ed 'lim' smilde [ Mon Jul 31, 2006 7:53 pm ]
Post subject:
Does the Old Testament God save people who aren't his chosen people?

Author:	lahimatoa [ Mon Jul 31, 2006 7:58 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: Does the Old Testament God save people who aren't his chosen people? I believe everyone has a chance to accept God and Jesus Christ, no matter who they are or when they lived.

Author:	Didymus [ Mon Jul 31, 2006 8:25 pm ]
Post subject:
Actually, Dr. Lurve, your question already presupposed the Marcionite Heresy, the belief that the Old Testament God and the New Testament God are different Gods. If this is your view, then you obviously have not read enough of either to see either God's mercy as he demonstrated it over and over again in the Old Testament, or the ways in which Jesus frequently pronounced judgment upon those who continually committed injustice and wrong. My suggestion to you is to actually go back and spend some time reading both the Old and the New Testaments and then see if there this dichotomoy of yours is justified. But to answer the question, here is the God I believe: Council of Nicea wrote: I believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of his Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried, and the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father. And he will come again with glory to judge both the living and the dead, whose kingdom will have no end. And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets. And I believe one holy Christian and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins, and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen. BTG wrote: In reality, they are the same God. They are just presented differently. By some people who stereotypically view the Testaments this way, but not by the Testaments themselves. Anyone who has actually studied both would know that the God of the Old Testament abounds in steadfast love and mercy. (btw, I'm not slamming you, I'm just reiterating that this dichotomy is a false perception of many people).

Author:	Cobalt [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 4:23 am ]
Post subject:
ed 'lim' smilde wrote: Does the Old Testament God save people who aren't his chosen people? the Old Testament God doesn't require that you be "saved" from anything. He just wants you to be good. it's actually easier for gentiles to get to heaven than it is for Jews (and this is according to Judaism), because there are fewer commandments that gentiles have to uphold.

Author:	Didymus [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 4:31 am ]
Post subject:
What's Her Face wrote: Didymus wrote: Actually, Dr. Lurve, your question already presupposed the Marcionite Heresy, the belief that the Old Testament God and the New Testament God are different Gods. Oh dear. Weeell...... seeing that I kinda held that view, uhh..... looks like I was a heretic since the age of 12. Um..... yay? But seriously, here's one thing I want to bring up with you, Didymus - the issue of Esau. Of course, he's the alleged forefather of the Romans and Edomites - and the subject of the hatred of God (according to Malachi): Malachi 1:2-3 wrote: I have loved you, saith the Lord. Yet you say, wherein have you loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the Lord: yet I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness So from that alone, it's either the case that God is at least capable of hatred, or Malachi was ad lib-bing. (And it does seem to be a bit of a coincidence that the people whom God apparently hates are the same who've been involved in turf wars against Malachi's people.) That is a very good question, WHF. But, from the context of Malachi, GOd is pronouncing his disdain for the Edomites on account of their arrogance and sin. It's not arbitrary hatred, but focused against those who commit injustice. On checking the term in Brown Driver Briggs, it appears that שנא has a connotation of "revulsion," and is often an attitude toward perversion and wrong-doing.

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Dr. Lurve [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 7:36 am ]
Post subject:
I'm not saying he's a different god, i'm saying that in the downtime between testemants he must have undertaken some therapy, cos he's a whole different guy. Of course, Jewish people just believe in the vengeful God, any Jews here?

Author:	Didymus [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 7:47 am ]
Post subject:
Cobalt is an Orthodox Jew, and he doesn't view God as vengeful. But, to reiterate my previous point, you obviously have not actually READ the Old or New Testaments, because the portrayal of God in the Old Testament is no more vengeful than his portrayal in the New, nor is it any less merciful than the New. This dichotomy is a false one perpetuated mostly by people who haven't even studied the Bible in any depth whatsoever.

Author:	What's Her Face [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:54 am ]
Post subject:
Didymus wrote: That is a very good question, WHF. But, from the context of Malachi, GOd is pronouncing his disdain for the Edomites on account of their arrogance and sin. It's not arbitrary hatred, but focused against those who commit injustice. On checking the term in Brown Driver Briggs, it appears that שנא has a connotation of "revulsion," and is often an attitude toward perversion and wrong-doing. Fair enough. Though coming back to that verse again...... All through the Old Testament, it's stated that God had admonished Jacob's people several times and Malachi says himself that He was angered by their various sins. So how come Malachi says in that verse that God is repulsed by the sins of Esau's people, but He loves Jacob and his people despite theirs? Was Malachi at least omitting the possibility that God loved Esau's people too?

Author:	Didymus [ Tue Aug 01, 2006 5:20 pm ]
Post subject:
But that's just it. God condemns all sin, especially that of his own people. And yet, the descendent of Esau were not his chosen people, and so he does revile them for their sin. In the Old Testament, when God's people sin, he reviles them too. But there is a recurring theme in the Old Testament: the Remnant. The Remnant are always those select few people of God who remain loyal to him, and whom he sets apart to carry his legacy, even when all the rest fall away. When his people fall away, in a very real sense, they are no longer his people (Isaiah 7 and 8). But there are always those who will remain faithful and continue to carry God's legacy. I think you might have misunderstood me. God does hate those who commit injustice and wrongdoing. And the term "revile" is not meant to sugar-coat that fact. In this passage, his hatred is directed against the nation-state of Edom. But for any individual person, there is always hope of repentance and forgiveness. But so long as there is no repentance, there is no forgiveness. And by repentance, I basically mean the first three steps of the Twelve Steps: (1) recognizing we are helpless and in need, (2) God alone is able to help us, and (3) we must turn to him, trust him, and rely on him. Repentance does not mean instant perfection, but it does mean turning to God and trusting him. I do not agree with Cobalt in this matter. It seems to me that the entire history of Israel is about God saving, not people being basically good and being rewarded. It seems that God rewards not good behavior, but rather trust. After all, look at Jacob, whose very name implies that he's a deceiver, and who was in life a scoundrel. And yet God chose him over his brother Esau. What does this mean? It means that God chose Jacob, most certainly not based on his behavior, but based on his own mercy. But God gave Jacob a new name: Israel. Why? Because in his direst need, Jacob turned to God and fought with him. Some interpreters say this is a metaphor for prayer, and I can certainly understand that, but I think Jacob and God actually got into a knock-down drag-out fight. And although Jacob lost, he could not let go of God. In the end, God changed him from Jacob the Deceiver to Israel, the one who wrestles God. And, as strange as this may sound, I have come to know what it means to fight with God, and it has been a tremendously liberating experience for me. So the easy answer is that God hates Esau because of their evil. But then why doesn't he have the same hatred for Israel when they sin? Furthermore, this answer makes God's love based entirely on who we are or what we do, and the Scriptures clearly teach this is not the case. But the more difficult answer, and one that most people don't like, is that God chooses certain people and sets them apart for his purposes. In the Old Testament, God chose Israel and set them apart for his purposes (and they didn't always live up to them, yet God still loved them). But the people of Esau are not his chosen, and on account of their sin, they deserve his hatred on account of their sins. But keep in mind, this is addressed to the nation-states of Israel and Edom, not necessarily to individual people within those nations. And today, that choosing transcends nations and peoples and languages and encompasses people everywhere. The truth is, on account of our sin, we all deserve God's hatred. And yet God has shown mercy to the entire earth by giving his Son. And yet, there are some who do not receive that mercy. Why is that? In all honesty, better theologians than me still do not know the answer. Some think they do, but I'm not sure they're completely honest with themselves about that.

Author:	Dr. Lurve [ Wed Aug 02, 2006 3:43 pm ]
Post subject:
Didymus wrote: Cobalt is an Orthodox Jew, and he doesn't view God as vengeful. But, to reiterate my previous point, you obviously have not actually READ the Old or New Testaments, because the portrayal of God in the Old Testament is no more vengeful than his portrayal in the New, nor is it any less merciful than the New. This dichotomy is a false one perpetuated mostly by people who haven't even studied the Bible in any depth whatsoever. Actually I have. My interpretation is different to yours. The punishments handed out in the OT far outweigh the sin. He floods. He turns people into salt. He strikes people down with lightning. He has a severe anger management problem.

Author:	Alexander [ Wed Aug 02, 2006 4:04 pm ]
Post subject:
Dr. Lurve wrote: Actually I have. My interpretation is different to yours. The punishments handed out in the OT far outweigh the sin. He floods. He turns people into salt. He strikes people down with lightning. He has a severe anger management problem. And yet he sends his own son to save us from our sins. While we don't even deserve one bit of it. Sin comes with consequence Dr. Lurve, but that doesn't mean that we're doomed to be deytroyed by God.

Author:	Didymus [ Wed Aug 02, 2006 7:13 pm ]
Post subject:
Dr. Lurve wrote: Actually I have. My interpretation is different to yours. The punishments handed out in the OT far outweigh the sin. He floods. He turns people into salt. He strikes people down with lightning. He has a severe anger management problem. And you've completely overlooked all the times he's forgiven people, gifted people with blessings they did not deserve, rescued people from oppression and injustice, defended people who were being attacked, protected people who were in danger, etc. Perhaps you've read a chapter or two of Genesis, but the whole of the Old Testament Scripture is still entirely lost to you. Furthermore, you seem to be overlooking the justice of those acts in which he did punish. The flood was visited upon a human race that had degenerated into all sorts of evil. The same is the case with Sodom and Gomorrah. Who are you to say that those who suffered that destruction did not deserve it? To give you an example of what I mean, the people of Sodom and Gomorrah were intending on raping and killing the two messengers God had sent to Lot, and that was pretty much common behavior among them. If I knew of a city of people who acted like that all the time, I'd probably want them nuked too. Nevertheless, this same God was also the one who rescued the Israelites from oppressive slavery at the hands of the Egyptians, who protected them as they wondered in the wasteland, and who forgave them when they rebelled against them, even when they deserved his punishment. This same God also kept the Hebrew people as a nation and protected them from enemies, even when they rebelled against him and committed acts of injustice. When his patience wore out, he did not destroy them, but raised them back up again and reestablished them as his holy nation. Not only that, but what about all the ways in which God either punished or promised to punish those who rebelled against him in the New Testament? What about Annas and Sapphira, who were struck dead because they lied to St. Peter? Or Herod Aggripa, who was eaten by worms because he claimed to be a god? Or the sorceror who called himself Bar-Jesus and was struck blind because he misled the governor of Cypress? Or Jesus chasing the money-changers out of the temple with a whip? So no, I do not think your assessment of the portrayal of God in either Testament is correct. And this is coming from a man with two degrees in biblical studies. My suggestion to you is to go back and read both Testaments in their entirety, then continue this conversation.

Author:	HHFOV [ Wed Aug 02, 2006 9:33 pm ]
Post subject:
Didymus wrote: The truth is, on account of our sin, we all deserve God's hatred. And yet God has shown mercy to the entire earth by giving his Son. And yet, there are some who do not receive that mercy. Why is that? In all honesty, better theologians than me still do not know the answer. Some think they do, but I'm not sure they're completely honest with themselves about that. So, does this mean that some people, even when they are in need, and trust and turn to God, sometimes he does not give them that forgiveness which they desire? Or am I merely misinterpreting your statement?

Author:	Didymus [ Wed Aug 02, 2006 10:02 pm ]
Post subject:
The Scripture says that we have forgiveness, peace, reconciliation, and all good things through the Son. So I would say that anyone who trusts in the Son receives those things.

Author:	Dr. Lurve [ Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:59 pm ]
Post subject:
Didymus wrote: Dr. Lurve wrote: Actually I have. My interpretation is different to yours. The punishments handed out in the OT far outweigh the sin. He floods. He turns people into salt. He strikes people down with lightning. He has a severe anger management problem. And you've completely overlooked all the times he's forgiven people, gifted people with blessings they did not deserve, rescued people from oppression and injustice, defended people who were being attacked, protected people who were in danger, etc. Perhaps you've read a chapter or two of Genesis, but the whole of the Old Testament Scripture is still entirely lost to you. Furthermore, you seem to be overlooking the justice of those acts in which he did punish. The flood was visited upon a human race that had degenerated into all sorts of evil. The same is the case with Sodom and Gomorrah. Who are you to say that those who suffered that destruction did not deserve it? To give you an example of what I mean, the people of Sodom and Gomorrah were intending on raping and killing the two messengers God had sent to Lot, and that was pretty much common behavior among them. If I knew of a city of people who acted like that all the time, I'd probably want them nuked too. Oh, i'm sorry, I happen to believe that murder is never an acceptable punishment, no matter what the crime. Quote: Nevertheless, this same God was also the one who rescued the Israelites from oppressive slavery at the hands of the Egyptians, who protected them as they wondered in the wasteland, and who forgave them when they rebelled against them, even when they deserved his punishment. This same God also kept the Hebrew people as a nation and protected them from enemies, even when they rebelled against him and committed acts of injustice. When his patience wore out, he did not destroy them, but raised them back up again and reestablished them as his holy nation. You're right, he was helping Jews at a time when he was murdering the first born sons of the Egyptians. Quote: Not only that, but what about all the ways in which God either punished or promised to punish those who rebelled against him in the New Testament? What about Annas and Sapphira, who were struck dead because they lied to St. Peter? Or Herod Aggripa, who was eaten by worms because he claimed to be a god? Or the sorceror who called himself Bar-Jesus and was struck blind because he misled the governor of Cypress? Or Jesus chasing the money-changers out of the temple with a whip? Whip it good. Quote: So no, I do not think your assessment of the portrayal of God in either Testament is correct. And this is coming from a man with two degrees in biblical studies. My suggestion to you is to go back and read both Testaments in their entirety, then continue this conversation. Quote: two degrees? I am SO impressed! Still don't agree with you pal! I am able to think for myself.

Author:	ed 'lim' smilde [ Fri Aug 04, 2006 5:10 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: Oh, i'm sorry, I happen to believe that murder is never an acceptable punishment, no matter what the crime. Both the 'Old Testament God' and the 'New Testament God' both punished people by killing them, though. He created them and allowed them to exist in the first place, didn't he?

Author:	Beyond the Grave [ Fri Aug 04, 2006 5:14 pm ]
Post subject:
Eventhough in my view they are the same person, to satisfy the requirments of this poll I will offer this clue. I believe in God, the Father Almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord: Who was conceived of the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended into hell. The third day He arose again from the dead. He ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty, whence He shall come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and life everlasting. Amen.

Author:	Didymus [ Fri Aug 04, 2006 7:28 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: Oh, i'm sorry, I happen to believe that murder is never an acceptable punishment, no matter what the crime. Not murder. Justice. And since you are neither judge nor juror, it is not your place to say. Quote: You're right, he was helping Jews at a time when he was murdering the first born sons of the Egyptians. Again, not murder, but justice. The Egyptians brought this upon themselves. Get your facts straight. Quote: two degrees? I am SO impressed! Still don't agree with you pal! I am able to think for myself. But you have not STUDIED. That's my point. Since that is the case, I can only surmise that your faulty conclusions are based on incomplete analysis of the texts in question. Come back when you've taken the time to study the WHOLE Scriptures and are in a better frame of mind to state your case. In short, your lack of biblical scholarship leaves me entirely unimpressed with your assessment of the situations.

Author:	Dr. Lurve [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 4:43 am ]
Post subject:
Quote: Didymus wrote: Quote: Oh, i'm sorry, I happen to believe that murder is never an acceptable punishment, no matter what the crime. Not murder. Justice. And since you are neither judge nor juror, it is not your place to say. Not, not justice. Killing people is called murder. Justice implies justness and killing people is never just. Quote: Quote: You're right, he was helping Jews at a time when he was murdering the first born sons of the Egyptians. Again, not murder, but justice. The Egyptians brought this upon themselves. Get your facts straight. Ditto. Quote: Quote: two degrees? I am SO impressed! Still don't agree with you pal! I am able to think for myself. But you have not STUDIED. That's my point. Since that is the case, I can only surmise that your faulty conclusions are based on incomplete analysis of the texts in question. Come back when you've taken the time to study the WHOLE Scriptures and are in a better frame of mind to state your case. In short, your lack of biblical scholarship leaves me entirely unimpressed with your assessment of the situations. So are you saying that in order to disagree with you I need two degrees?

Author:	Didymus [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 4:57 am ]
Post subject:
I'm saying that you need to do some thorough reading, Dr. Lurve. I cite my degrees only to point out that, as a part of my training, I have done that thorough reading.