Posts by ros

82

Fables, Farces and Facts

by Farkel in

no, this piece is not about alliteration.

for true believers?

the subject matter is quite serious, and may just possibly affect the quality of the rest of you lives; it may also affect your eternal fate, if there is such a thing.

ros

Hi, Farkel:

Excuse me, in my haste I missed seeing your reply. I didn't mean to ignore it. Let me respond here:

Ros was quoted:

: First the scriptures do not say that God worked only through Israel.

Farkel replied:

Really? How do you know this? How can you tell that to all the civilizations that Israel destroyed ON DIRECT ORDERS FROM GOD according to the O.T. this? ( See the collective works of Moses, the biggest Bible butcherer of all.)

I didn't say I know it. I quoted what the scriptures say about it. Read Amos 9:7 for example.
Again I'll make the point that just because the Israelite writers claimed their wars were God ordered doesn't mean (imo) that they were. Like most religious people, the Bible is full of examples that clearly reveal Israelites were as superstituous as their neighbors.

Where is there any shred of Biblical evidence that God worked to help people or save people in the O.T who were not Jews? Heck, during the time of Jeroboam and Rheoboam and during that wole period of the separation of Judah and Israel, they were not only killing each OTHER, they had their own pet prophets. The Israelites were natural born killers, nurtured by a natural born killer God who appointed natural born Judges and Kings. It was all so, well, just "natural" for them to be murderers and genocidal maniancs.

Like I said, the Israelites were a crude people, although I don't think they were any more butcherous than other nations at the time.

Well, I think we can conclude that God did not exactly help the Israelites against the Assyrians (2Kings 15, 16, 17, 18), and he did not exactly exhalt King Josiah against Pharaoh Neco of Egypt (2Kings 23:29), and one might say that Custer got more help from the Indians than Israel got from their God against Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon. In fact, the only time the Israelites prospered as a nation was under Kings David and Solomon. The rest of the time they were subservient to captors.

I maintain, the way the Israelites are expressed by the Israelite writers (that is, they way things are interpreted by their own writers) in the record, and the actual events recorded, are two different things--the actual events being more viable. Again, I'll refer to the example I wrote before of Judah's two sons being killed. When two of Judah's sons on separate occasions died, Judah (or whomever told the story) concluded that God killed the two sons. The facts would be that two sons died. That God killed them would be the writers interpretation. I maintain that much of what was attributed to the will of God in the OT was the writer's interpretation. Religion is very superstituous. Fundamentalists today still do the same thing in attributing all kinds of things in their lives to God, or God answering their prayers, healing, etc. Fundamentalists will still say that war is God's will, and that one nation or another is God's people. The Israelites were no different.

The only thing about the Israelite nation that is significant is that a certain man was born among them who in a very short lifetime changed the world. Were it not for that fact alone, we likely would never have heard of the Israelites or the Bible. There's really only one life in the Biblical account that has importance for Christian belief.

The religion of the Israelites, aside from being monotheistic, was not much different from their reigious neighbors. Even the temple design was gleened from pagans. Much of their ceremonialism was not that different from paganism, except for being monotheistic. That the events in their history mysteriously culminated in an abstract fulfillment in the man Jesus is most fascinating. But it was not what the Jews were looking for by any stretch.

Take the story of Cinderella--it's not a true story--we know that. But the story has a moral--a message. Look for the message--that's where the truth may be found--in the metaphor or the parable. What does it mean?

The bottom line of the Bible story, imo, is that evil will perish but life will not. I speculate that this existence may be out of the presence of God because it is necessary to experience good and evil in the long run. Mortals are here to experience evil, otherwise how could one ever know good if everything is relative? "Look, they have become like us, knowing good and evil"--Gen.3:22 (Is that a clue?) So I tend to think maybe this is the life of the knowledge of good and evil. Who knows, maybe Eden was not even really on this planet. :-)

Which kingdom of Israel did God prefer back then? If he preferred Israel, then all of Judah's prophets were false. If he preferred Judah, then all of Israel's prophets were false. Yet, those kingdoms each had their own "prophets." All of them lied, by the way, and I can prove it.

Well, neither one of them fared very well from that point on.

Is BibleGod(m) the ultimate God of human invention and confusion? I think so.

Jesus said he made God's name (reputation, nature) known. If Jesus did that, evidently the Israelites didn't understand Him very well. So it would depend on whether you were referring to the God of Jesus, or the Israelite understanding of God.

Some people are looking in the wrong place to find God. I look at caterpillars and butterflies and I wonder. I don't need lying and superstitious books to help me out. The caterpillars help me out. And they do that not by trying to help me out, but by doing what they've always done for 300,000,000 years. (They don't even know they are helping me out, but they are.)

In some respects, I agree with you. I place greater emphasis on God revealed through nature than in writings. My faith in the biblical account in not in a literal acceptance of everything the way it was understood by the Israelites. I think Jesus made that point quite clear. My faith in the Bible is in the Christ and in the moral of the story (well, that's admittedly an over simplification, but what I mean is that my faith is nothing like that of fundamentalists, as you can see. :-)

~Ros

82

Fables, Farces and Facts

by Farkel in

no, this piece is not about alliteration.

for true believers?

the subject matter is quite serious, and may just possibly affect the quality of the rest of you lives; it may also affect your eternal fate, if there is such a thing.

ros

I think I failed to respond to a question whether there was historical proof of Jesus.

There is only circumstantial historical proof of the man Jesus--like most historical characters. Granted some are more circumstantial than others. :-)

Generally speaking, I think there is enough circumstantial historical reference that even most skeptics believe the man existed.

~Ros

82

Fables, Farces and Facts

by Farkel in

no, this piece is not about alliteration.

for true believers?

the subject matter is quite serious, and may just possibly affect the quality of the rest of you lives; it may also affect your eternal fate, if there is such a thing.

ros

SFF:

If taken literally, that would about size it up. :-)

~Ros

82

Fables, Farces and Facts

by Farkel in

no, this piece is not about alliteration.

for true believers?

the subject matter is quite serious, and may just possibly affect the quality of the rest of you lives; it may also affect your eternal fate, if there is such a thing.

ros

Wasa wrote:

As a Christian, Ros, are you offended - as I was - when someone who identifies him/herself with your beliefs using Christianity to spew forth narrow-minded, elitist propaganda? I know when I was a Witness, I really hated it when a fellow Witness was being an obvious prick and offending people.

Yes, it is offensive. I'm not very tolerant of literalist fundamentalism for its abject ignorance because if reflects very negatively on God and Christianity. Fundamentalists are worse than the Watchtower for disowning science and common sense imo, not to mention basic Christian principles such as "judging". I was in born-again fundamentalism before I was a JW, and I'm less tolerant of their doctrinalism than I am of WTism, generally speaking. I've often said: Christianity is wonderful. Too bad man and religion give it such a bad name.

SFF wrote:

As an afterthought though, didn't the old testament God Jehovah have the Israelite's destroy all kinds of what he considered pagan people who worshipped pagan Gods with no consideration many times for women, infants, and children, and even livestock?

Well we can certainly surmise that the scribes of such events believed it was the will of God/Jehovah/Yahweh. That doesn't mean that it was. Remember, the word "pagan" did not mean "idolatry". Pagan, like Gentile, was anything and anyone not Jewish--that's all. Everything not Jewish was pagan. Pagan <i>worship</i> was evil because it was idolatry.

How many times have you known religious people, particularly fundamentalists, who believe that everything that happens to them is God's will, or the answer to some prayer, or punishment because they did something wrong, etc. etc. etc. I have always known educated and intelligent people who happen to also be religious, and they will pray for something to happen--say, recovery from a sickness, or for someone else--and regardless what happens they will interpret it as answer to the prayers. I tend to think people in Biblical times were no different than they are today. Strongly religious people tend to credit and/or blame God for everything. That's how I think some of the Bible writers were at times. I think we can trust that many of the names and events were real, but the writer's religious beliefs strongly sway how the story is told, just like people today. Try to imagine how a political event might be recorded if it were covered by Rush Lindbaugh and Ted Kennedy, respectively. :D)))

Consider the Bible story of Elisha at 2Kings 2:23-25 where children were mocking Elisha, he cursed them in God's name, and two she-bears came out and tore up 42 of the kids. The implication is that God obeyed Elisha's curse to punish the children for chiding him. Well, it doesn't exactly say that. Let's try another scenario:
Elisha, a balding fellow, is wandering up the road toward Bethel near a forest.
A large gang of children from the town see the old man and begin running along the forest road chiding him.
The noisy rambunctious gang of kids get too near a couple of mama bears in the nearby woods, and get attacked.
Elisha, who is cursing them for harrassing him, believes it was God who make the bears do it, so that's the way he wrote about it. (Even then, it doesn't really say that God made it happen.)

Another example from Genesis 38:6-10:
6 And Judah took a wife for Er his first-born, and her name was Tamar.
7 And Er, Judah's first-born, was wicked in the sight of Jehovah. And Jehovah slew him.
8 And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and perform the duty of a husband's brother unto her, and raise up seed to thy brother.
9 And Onan knew that the seed would not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest he should give seed to his brother.
10 And the thing which he did was evil in the sight of Jehovah: and he slew him also.

My conclusion: Two of Judah's sons died. Judah believed God did it, so that's the way he wrote about it. We don't know why they died.

Abraham's descendents, the Israelites, were a crude, tribal, nomadic people on the outskirts of the first cities of what we call western civilization. The "sons of Abraham" were unsophisticated, uneducated, wanderers, shepherds, bedouin, unlike the people in the new city states where science, arts, math, writing, banking, trade and commerce were suddenly developing on the world scene.
The fact that it is the history of the uneducated nomads that survived the milleniums, more than any of the others, is one of the marvels that I find most fascinating. Nevertheless, they were people with human nature, not different than people are today. How much of what we read today is 100% accurate. (Interestingly, it was bedouin shepherd boys who discovered the "Dead Sea Scrolls" that have brought light to some of the Bible mysteries today.)

I can tell you I know some very educated people that when they get on subjects of politics or religion, you can't trust their interpretation of almost anything. I think some of the Bible writers were pretty human. They gave God credit/blame for a lot of their actions because that is how they believed.

That's why I think Jesus said, speaking to His Father:
"I have revealed you [or, "your name"] to those whom you gave me out of the world. They were yours; you gave them to me and they have obeyed your word."--John 17:6

The Israelites never did really understand God. They understood Law. Christ rejected their understanding of God. Christ revealed His nature--that is, to the extent possible to humans.

Jmo,
~Ros

47

The Case For God

by Farkel in

a caterpillar.

although there are many more examples in nature for wonderment, the caterpillar is spectacularly unique.

imagine one animal changing into an entirely different species in just a few months;from a multi-legged ugly grub into a stunningly beautiful winged insect.

ros

Ah, well . . . who was it who said:

Some people wonder why roses have thorns. I'm just grateful that thorns have roses.

~Ros

82

Fables, Farces and Facts

by Farkel in

no, this piece is not about alliteration.

for true believers?

the subject matter is quite serious, and may just possibly affect the quality of the rest of you lives; it may also affect your eternal fate, if there is such a thing.

ros

SFF wrote:

I would be interested to know why you think that scripture shows atheists and agnostics will not perish? Isnt it a requirement/statement of scripture that one must believe in Jesus Christ in order to be saved?

Well then how do you account for the hundreds of millions of people all over the world before Jesus, as well as the vast vast vast majority of mankind since Jesus over most parts of the world who never heard of Jesus or the Bible. Are they lost just because they were not accidently born in a "Christian" culture? That would make no sense at all. So how do I derive an alternative from scripture? Well, there are many points and its difficult to be brief, but I'll try.

First the scriptures do not say that God worked only through Israel. Examples:

* Almost the entire known world lay between Mesapotamia/Babylonia/Assyria and Egypt when Isaiah was written. Read Isaiah 19:18-24.
* Also Amos 9:7, which I'll quote here: "Are you not like the Ethiopians to me, O people of Israel? says the Lord. Did I not bring Israel up from the land of Egypt, and the Philistines from Caphtor and the Arameans from Kir?

There are a number of scripture texts that refer to salvation for all men. Examples:

John 12:32
But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself."

Romans 11:32
For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

And my favorite:

1 Timothy 4:10
(and for this we labor and strive), that we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, and especially of those who believe.

The Bible story does not say the dead in Christ will be the only ones to rise. It says they will rise first. (1Thes.4:16.)
Revelation 20 speaks of two distinct resurrections. Those in Christ rise at the beginning of the thousand years, and the rest of the dead rise after the thousand years. Those of the "first resurrection" it in effect says are already judged for their commitment to Christ. The "rest of the dead" rise after the thousand years and are to be judged--not according to what they believed, but--according to their works/deeds/actions/what they did (depending on what translation you read). This agrees with the words of Jesus at Matt.16:27 and Rev.22:12.

The way I read it, only the intentionally evil will be destroyed.
If you believe that Christ's followers represent New Jerusalem and the "bride of Christ", then if you read Rev.21:1-5, it sounds like those of the first resurrection join those who survive the "rest-of-the-dead" resurrection, and all will share the same existence in the end.

That's the way I get the metaphor.

~Ros

82

Fables, Farces and Facts

by Farkel in

no, this piece is not about alliteration.

for true believers?

the subject matter is quite serious, and may just possibly affect the quality of the rest of you lives; it may also affect your eternal fate, if there is such a thing.

ros

Farkel:

I'm quite delighted to know you do have a godly faith. :-)
I can understand deism.

What I believe (in fact derive even from scripture) is that people of all faiths, including decent atheists and agnostics, will not perish.

~Ros

82

Fables, Farces and Facts

by Farkel in

no, this piece is not about alliteration.

for true believers?

the subject matter is quite serious, and may just possibly affect the quality of the rest of you lives; it may also affect your eternal fate, if there is such a thing.

ros

jayhawk1 and pseudoxristos seem like they may not have actually read my and jst2laws posts. It seems they are still locked into 100% literal interpretation.

How should we know the answers to these questions? Maybe in the heat of battle it seemed like a whole day--I don't know. You're asking question that can only be speculated. Do I believe the earth literally stopped for a day? --No. Do I think the writer of the account might have exaggerated. Maybe. Do I think it's critical to the message? No.

Wasa and Farkel:

I do understand where you are coming from. I don't discount your logic. On the other hand, its the same as for jayhawk1 and pseudoxristos: All I or anyone could do is speculate on these specific questions. There is no way to know another person's mind.

The reasons for my faith cannot be answered in a short post. There are too many details.

I hope it doesn't seem like a cop-out reply, but the best way I can summarize it briefly is that my independent study of the Bible leads me to see an underlying message, that some of it is inspired, or at least the story is inspired, because there are too many coincidences that culminate in the man Jesus, particularly in the last week of his life. And, for me, I cannot conceive that the universe came from nothing. I've heard the logical arguments on both sides of that question, and for me, it couldn't happen without a supreme intelligence. In the Bible, some of the things I am fascinated by, I discovered by my own observation. Things that are not readily evident without looking for it. I'll give you one example (one of many):

Skeptics will say that the Gospels were probably written after the fact, designed to make it look like Jesus fulfilled prophecy. Then I have a question for them. But first, a little background of Israelite tradition:

As you know the story of Moses coming down from the mountain with the two stone tablets, and upon finding the Israelites committing idolatry, he threw down the tablets and commanded the Levites to execute them. It says that 3000 were slain. (For this point, forget whether it was literally 3000, or whether this was a loving God, etc. It's the story here.) In Jesus' day, tradition held that this occasion was the first Pentecost.

PENTECOST Thereafter, the celebration of Pentecost was to be observed 50 days after the first day of the week following Passover (i.e., the day after the Sabbath that followed Passover). See Ex..334:22; Lev.23:15-17; Deut.16:8-10

That first day of the week following Passover was known as the celebration of "First Fruits". It was also known as the "Festival of Weeks" which began the counting of 50 days to Pentecost, another festival. (Incidentally, I happen to be in agreement with the Bible scholars who determine that Jesus was executed on Friday, the day before Passover began that evening after sundown, and followed through the day of Saturday (Sabbath) until sundown.

NOW THE QUESTION: How is it that all four of the Gospel writers failed to observe this very important point in all of their accounts: That not only did Jesus die at the 9th hour when the first lamb was slaughtered in the temple by the high priest for the sins of Israel, but he was risen on the first day of the week following passover, i.e., the day of the festival of "first fruits"?

This is what was required to make this happen: 1) Passover had to fall on the Sabbath that year so it would be "parts of three days" from the Sabbath to their Festival of First Fruits.
(And btw, that is how the Israelites did count (a part of a day or a year counted as one)--we know from the way they counted the years of reigns of kings compared to the way the Babylonans counted. This point is covered in COJ's book Gentile Times Reconsidered.) 2) Jesus had to be executed on the day before Sabbath.

50 days later, on Pentecost, it says that 3000 were converted. Acts 2:41
The first Pentecost 3000 died, that last Pentecost 3000 saved. =============================

Please realize I'm not trying to sway anyone, but you might at the very least find the coincidences interesting.

~Ros

82

Fables, Farces and Facts

by Farkel in

no, this piece is not about alliteration.

for true believers?

the subject matter is quite serious, and may just possibly affect the quality of the rest of you lives; it may also affect your eternal fate, if there is such a thing.

ros

So, how do we really know WHAT HAPPENED BACK THEN, if the Bible is not WHOLE, ENTIRE and FLAWLESS

Why from history and anthropology books that are whole, entire and flawless, of course.

~Ros

82

Fables, Farces and Facts

by Farkel in

no, this piece is not about alliteration.

for true believers?

the subject matter is quite serious, and may just possibly affect the quality of the rest of you lives; it may also affect your eternal fate, if there is such a thing.

ros

jayhawk1 asked:

Just a question;
If I remember correctly the Earth rotates at roughly 1000 miles per hour, so if the Earth was stopped from rotating for 1 day, wouldn't all creation be thrown to the East at 1000 miles per hour? (See Newton's laws for gravity/motion.)

No. Only what is on the earth. (Or do you believe, as your comment might imply, that the universe revolves around the earth?)
~Ros