don't know if this has been touched on before, but where did evil originate?
yes, some may answer satan.
but think about this: god created all things, and god is perfect.
>>well in the beginning god created everything,<<
What is meant by "everything?" All living things.
Did He predestine some living things to be evil?
Where does it say God created evil? I am sure you know it isn't written. Rather it says He hates evil. So, if God created evil, then God is evil and...
God hates Himself over something He in fact is and created?
I believe this train of logic is flawed.
don't know if this has been touched on before, but where did evil originate?
yes, some may answer satan.
but think about this: god created all things, and god is perfect.
>>How they can take the bad and say that didn't come from him as well,<<
So, just because THERE IS evil, means God is the source of evil?
How so?
the 1 chronicles author lists the descendents of david; some of these, in order, are jehoshaphat, jehoram, ahaziah, joash, amaziah, azariah, jotham, ahaz, hezekiah, manasseh (1 chronicles 3:10-13 niv).
the matthew author contradicts this genealogy; he leaves out the four consecutive descendents underlined above, and in their place puts uzziah, who he says is jehorams son.
(matthew 1:8-10 niv).
d0rkyd00d,
When you get "edumucated", and know how to debate the issue at hand rather than attack the person, I'll be here waiting, OK?
**************
>>While I agree with that, I DON'T agree that is true of children while they are children.<<
Are you saying sin is accomplished by a first action(s) and not an inherited condition?
So you do not believe this passage:
Rom 5:14
14 Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command,
Isn't the above saying that death is a result of a sinful condition, and is not sin that is a result of a bad action or doing something wrong (breaking a command)? Rather, inherited sin, the type shown to be passed down from Adam to Moses? Even babies and children are subject to death, and death is because of "sin." If babies and children were not in sin, there would be an immunity of babies and children dying until they committed their first "sin."
Yet, babies and young children die. If they die, they must be in sin, as sin and death are bound to each other.
>>NOT because of anything that GOD put into them.<<
I don't believe sin is something God put in us, as sin is bad. That thinking makes God bad. I believe sin is a condition resulting of something that God has removed from us, as a result of the actions of the first two, influenced by the first one.
in luke 13:20,21 it says: "and again he said: 'with what shall i compare the kingdom of god?
it is like leaven, which a woman took and his in three large measures of flour until the whole mass was fermented.".
i've been thinking about this.
And you call yourself a skeptic?
in luke 13:20,21 it says: "and again he said: 'with what shall i compare the kingdom of god?
it is like leaven, which a woman took and his in three large measures of flour until the whole mass was fermented.".
i've been thinking about this.
I agree
in luke 13:20,21 it says: "and again he said: 'with what shall i compare the kingdom of god?
it is like leaven, which a woman took and his in three large measures of flour until the whole mass was fermented.".
i've been thinking about this.
>>This, to me signifies a corrupting of the Good News,<<
Really?
...the kingdom of God? It is like leaven...
...the Kingdom of God like? It is like yeast...
...the reign of God? It is like leaven...
It does NOT say the kingdom of God is like flour
It dos NOT say the kingdom of God is like the woman
It does NOT say the kingdom of God is like three vessels
It DOES say the kingdom of God is like leaven.
I believe the leaven cannot be bad as the kingdom is not bad. Comparison is for GOOD. We have a definite COMPARISON happening here. We do not have a CONTRAST happening.
Next, I do not see leaven likened to corruption anywhere in the context. I see in the context leaven as likened to the Kingdom of God, by comparison.
Actually, where does it mention corruption ANYWHERE in the context? The only thing mentioned in the context is the kingdom, the woman, the yeast and the three containers of flour. Which, may I ask is the corruption? Nothing contextual, correct? Well, Obviously NOT the kingdom. Is the woman corruption? Nothing in the context says so. Is the yeast corruption? Well, the yeast has been compared to the kingdom, if the yeast is corrupttion, so is God's kingdom
...the kingdom of God? it is like leaven...PERMEATES.
I believe the "leaven of God" will permeate when the time is right.
I believe the three vessels are important too.
************
The Greek, word for word translation:
And (kai) again (palin) he said (eipen) what (tini) shall I liken (homoioosoo) the (teen) kingdom (basileian) of God (Theou)?
like (homoia) it is (estin) leaven (zumee) which (heen) took (labousa) woman (gunee) hid (enekrupsen) in (es) flour (aleurou), measures (sata) three (tria), til (heeos) was leavened (ezumoothee) whole (holon).
I don't get "stolen" contextually out of either translation you quoted or the word for word Greek.
I hide eggs for my kids on Easter. Just because I hid them, I swear, I didn't steal them.
********************
>>My intent was simply to offer a reference I had at hand, one I thought might be of interest to you in deciding for yourself how the passages should be interpreted.<<
Your intent was never revealed by you on your original post. As you can see, that lack of not knowing your intent even made me believe you beleived what you posted from that reference.
My mistake? OK by me.
************************
>>Ok. I thought you were a 'lawkeeper' too.<<<
Maybe the former, not the latter. That's not for me to decide.
in luke 13:20,21 it says: "and again he said: 'with what shall i compare the kingdom of god?
it is like leaven, which a woman took and his in three large measures of flour until the whole mass was fermented.".
i've been thinking about this.
>>I am not a Bible believer, so I frankly don't care what it means. I thought the commentary might be helpful to y'all in trying to determine what Jesus may have meant by it.<<
Hmm. A non-believer in the Bible showing believers in the Bible what to believe about the Bible.
That's interesting.
*************************
>>People living by spirit are as people without law, and so appear lawless/corrupt by your lawkeepers.<<
I believe you have that wrong. Here, let me fix it for you:
People living by spirit are as people without law, and so appear lawless/corrupt by MY lawkeepers.
>>The above may be a truth that has survived the writers and the church.<<
Now with the correction it is. Especially with you being Satan and all.
in luke 13:20,21 it says: "and again he said: 'with what shall i compare the kingdom of god?
it is like leaven, which a woman took and his in three large measures of flour until the whole mass was fermented.".
i've been thinking about this.
That's nice, but what do YOU think it means?
in luke 13:20,21 it says: "and again he said: 'with what shall i compare the kingdom of god?
it is like leaven, which a woman took and his in three large measures of flour until the whole mass was fermented.".
i've been thinking about this.
RR,
You really think Christ is comparing the kingdon of heaven to sin?
"And again He said: 'With what shall I compare the kingdom of God?"
To sin??? I'll compare God's kingdom to sin!?!?!
Would Jesus really be saying the kingdom of heaven is like sin???
God's kingdom is GOOD, so Jesus must be meaning the leaven is GOOD and doing something GOOD.
I personally do not believe that Jesus is comparing his kingdom to sin.
I believe the "kingdom of heaven" is like leaven in that it will "infect" (like leaven) for good.
Sin as leaven (lies/hypocrisy) is bad, it corrupts the whole.
The kingdom of heaven as leaven (truth) is good, it exposes the three.
>>Consider what 1 Corinthians 5:7 says: "Purge out, therefore, the old leaven [sin, malice, hatred, strife, etc.], that ye may be a new lump."<<
Notice Paul says to purge out "the OLD leaven?"
I believe the kingdom of heaven is the NEW leaven.
Become a new lump and bring on the new leaven, the kingdon of heaven.
That's what I believe it means.
the 1 chronicles author lists the descendents of david; some of these, in order, are jehoshaphat, jehoram, ahaziah, joash, amaziah, azariah, jotham, ahaz, hezekiah, manasseh (1 chronicles 3:10-13 niv).
the matthew author contradicts this genealogy; he leaves out the four consecutive descendents underlined above, and in their place puts uzziah, who he says is jehorams son.
(matthew 1:8-10 niv).
>>Tell you what, you kneel at the feet of that disgusting blood-stained tribal diety who punishes the innocent. I'll just stare in amasement.<<
No one is innocent. Just like you. You're as guilty as sin too.
>>Let's make a big fat assumption in the face of no evidence, let's assume that this god actually exists.<<
No evidence? Did you pass your bowels today? There is a God.
>>Do you consider worshipping a god who punishes innocent people to be in any way morally justifiable?<<
There is no such thing as innocent people. People are born guilty.
>>Isn't it a little like worshipping Hitler just so he doesn't punish you?<<
No, Hitler didn't give me my life, so your example is in the dumpster.
>>Faced with worshipping such a being or being punished by such a being, I'd go with the being punished any day. I have some morals.<<
Maybe you'll get your wish, and you having morals is you blowing your own horn.
>>Being god does not automatically give one the right to be worshipped.<<
From what book does that come from? The book of YOU? Only a false "god" would make such an ignorant statement.
>>One has to earn the worship by one's qualitites.<<
Yeah. Right. The one who gave the life is instantly deserving of the worship. Yet you piss on the life giver?
>>And child murderers and accesories to the rape of children don't have those qualities, not even if they did make the Universe.<<
Really? God gives life but has has no right to take it away if He so desires for those that piss on Him? You're bass akwards. Every single time life was extinguished in the Bible, God was fully warranted and justified. (Show me God being an accessory to raping children.)
>>If this is the nature of god, can we believe what it says about Satan in this being's propoganda tract? Maybe Satan is not a terrorist, but is actually a freedom fighter!<<
Yeah baby. You just made you line in the sand. You sure you like that side of it?
>>Of course, that sounds absurd.<<
No it doesn't. You believe it to be true.
>>But then so is your idea of god Pom. Make sure you wipe the blood off when you get off your knees!!<<
The only blood on my knees is my own.
>>Of course Pom, you probably have some distorted jusitification for worshipping such a being...<<
Well, it's called people like you. Are you distorted?
>>People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...<<
Then, put down your rocks.
