I have in on authority that Jesus loves the little children: all the children of the world. How do I know? The Bible tells me so. If I have faith, hope and charity, I know I will live successfully. How do I know? The Bible tells me so. I know that the Owl and the Pussycat danced by the light of the moon. How do I know? Edward Lear, writing from the land where the Bong-Tree grows, tells me so.
Slavery is condoned not only in the OT, but also in the NT. There are at least three parables where Jesus elegedly talks about slavery, justifying why slaves were severely punished by their masters. In one passage Jesus elegedly recommended that slaves should obey their masters. --- And no: slavery was not abolished by Catolicism. Slavery was condemned as injustifiable and unacceptable by philosophers of the Enlightment.
Thanks for that! I guess I cannot get much past the problem that out of many Gods the Christian/Jewish one was the right one, it seems a little arrogant. That is without questioning the universe being created in 6 days, a few thousand years ago. That also applies to pretty much any of the Gods out there, they all seem to be ways in which ancient tribes explained the world they were in. But I don't like the evolutionary view either as it doesn't satisfactorily explain how some very complicated interdependent elements of life exist. Maybe we are not smart enough to figure it out; a big brain doesn't automatically increase our ability to reproduce!
I lost some respect for this man when He said Christ did not claim to be God. "Before Abraham was I Am" was about as plain a statment in context as your could possibly get without stating "I am God"
@Greasy__Bear I have no issue with you or anyone for believing the doctrine of the Trinity or the double nature of Christ (these are two different claims), but you identified the problem yourself when you said, "without stating 'I am God.'" Such a statement anywhere in the Bible would have made the idea of Jesus being co-equal easier to accept for fans of the biblical texts, assuming it was a true translation. But there is no direct statement in which Jesus states his equality or co-equality with God (to wit, "My Father is greater than I," which is readily discounted in such discussions. But I will leave you with a fuller picture of the translation, from research I did for the book I had published in 1998. Make you you will of it, and no matter where you come down, losing respect for someone merely because they differ from you on an interpretation or theology is where humanity and discussion break down. The first analysis is from Dr. Frederick Farley's book, "Unitarianism Defined: The Scripture Doctrine of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost" (Boston: American Unitarian Association, 1873): Then as to the declaration of our Lord, recorded in the Gospel of St. John: (John 8:58.) “Before Abraham was, I am.” Why, it may be asked in the outset, why, except for a purpose, have our translators departed here from their usual mode of rendering the exact Greek word so often used by our Lord? Here it reads, “I am”-literally, and without supplement; in other places, “I am he”? (Vid. in this same chapter, vv. 24, 28; also, John 4:26; 13:19. Compare also Matt. 24:5; Mark 13:6, and Luke 21:8; also, John 3:28 and Acts 13:25.) Why not here as there-“I am he”-the Messiah purposed in the counsels of God long before Abraham had being? This is the interpretation of Grotius, and I believe the true one. Trinitarians are accustomed to insist that our Lord meant to declare that he was the “I AM” of the Old Dispensation, who revealed Himself to Moses by the name or appellation, “I am that I am;” but Dr. J. Pye Smith tells us (Scripture Test. vol. 2 p. 161,) that “the words” there “are in the future tense, ‘I will be that which I will be,’ Exod. 3:14; and most probably it was not intended as a name, but as a declaration of a certain fulfillment of all the promises of God.” While Mr. Carlile of the Scotch Kirk says: (“Jesus Christ the Great God our Saviour.” p. 174.) “I do not mean to rest any argument on the expression I am, taken by itself. It occurs repeatedly in this chapter, and is translated I am he.” If then the use of the word was no assumption, as of inherent right by our Lord, of the alleged name or appellation of Jehovah, the rendering of the Common Version is meaningless. What our Lord meant was, that before Abraham was born, God had purposed that he should be the Messiah. So to speak, in allusion to the Divine purposes, was familiar to the Jews. In Jeremiah, (Jer. 1.) God says to the prophet: “Before I formed thee in the womb I knew thee; before thou camest forth at birth I sanctified thee; and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.” Repeatedly in this very chapter he had used the same phrase, “I am;” and as repeatedly our translators render it, as essential to the sense, “I am he,” that is, the Messiah, for whom the Jews had been long looking. That was what they, he had said must believe, or “die in their sins;” that was, as he had just before told them, what they would “know” when they had “lifted him up;” and that was what he now declared himself to have been in the omniscient councils of God, long before the era of the great Patriarch. (Verses 24, 28, 58.) This second ananylsis is from Mary Dana's book, "Letters Addressed to Relatives and Friends" (Boston: James Munroe and Co., 1845): I WILL now consider the import of the phrase “I am,” as presented in the extract which forms the subject of the foregoing letter. You remark that, “considering Christ’s audience, and their familiarity with the phrase, and the sense they invariably attached to it, you can never doubt he designed to declare himself Jehovah, when he said, before ‘Abraham was, I am.’“ It is contended by many learned men that the Greek phrase here translated, “I am,” is invariably used to mean, I am he, that is, the Messiah. Twice before, in this chapter, the same Greek phrase is introduced, and in both instances it is rendered by the translators of our common version, “I am he;” it occurs in the twenty-fourth and twenty-eighth verses. Why King James’s translators saw fit to render this verse differently from the others, it is impossible with certainty to decide, though the reason may be very easily conjectured. It certainly would not have injured the sense of the verse to add, as they had done in the two former verses, the pronoun he, and it would have prevented much controversy. To show that in the 28th verse Christ was speaking of himself as the Messiah, and not as God, he says, “then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself.” The same expression may also be found in John 4:26; 13:19; 18:5, 6, 8, and in every instance it is translated, “I am he.” In Exodus 3:14, the term “I AM,” is used as a proper name, and applied by Jehovah to himself; “thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.” The sentence is perfect and complete. Whereas, if, in the verse under consideration, the phrase is to be understood in the same sense-as a proper name, the sentence is an incomplete and unmeaning one. Read it thus, understanding “I am” as a proper name, and you will discover this, for the proper noun is entirely without its corresponding verb. But read it with the pronoun he understood, and it is a complete sentence; though the use of the present tense in connection with the past strikes the ear of a grammarian singularly and unpleasantly. The biblical critic Wakefield says, “the peculiar use of the present tense in the usage of Scriptural expressions is to imply determination and certainty; as if he had said, ‘my mission was settled and certain before the birth of Abraham.’”
I think you approached the root of the entire problem, indeed all human problems. I truly and deeply believe that God gave us one rule at the beginning. "Trust in Yahweh with all your heart and do not trust in your own intelligence," Proverbs 3:5. To trust in God is the tree of life. To trust in our own intelligence is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and by extension everything in between. If our finite minds could understand an infinite God He would cease to be God. By definition, if there must be one, God is simply incomprehensible.
"Don't use your intelligence" is a very bad idea, and is the same logic that is used to keep people in dangerous cults. A good idea, a TRUE idea, can withstand scrutiny and deconstruction.
Peter wrote that God is not slow as people count slowness. I often thank God that He has not given me all the evil I deserve for my thoughts alone, not to mention my actions, He made us viceroys of this planet and we have corrupted it until even the animal and plant life suffer for our sins. See my comment below. He is patiently waiting until we reach the point of admitting our dependence on Him or die in out corruption.
![CHRISTIAN APOLOGIST ON WHY GOD DIDN'T PREVENT LUCIFER'S EXISTENCE [ANALYSIS]](/img/n.gif)
I have in on authority that Jesus loves the little children: all the children of the world. How do I know? The Bible tells me so. If I have faith, hope and charity, I know I will live successfully. How do I know? The Bible tells me so. I know that the Owl and the Pussycat danced by the light of the moon. How do I know? Edward Lear, writing from the land where the Bong-Tree grows, tells me so.
God has a wonderful plan for your life. If you are one of the elect. Otherwise, you will burn in hell forever! What a loving god!
Slavery is condoned not only in the OT, but also in the NT.
There are at least three parables where Jesus elegedly talks about slavery, justifying why slaves were severely punished by their masters.
In one passage Jesus elegedly recommended that slaves should obey their masters.
---
And no: slavery was not abolished by Catolicism.
Slavery was condemned as injustifiable and unacceptable by philosophers of the Enlightment.
God has the power to give and take life. He just doesn’t do it. Because he is the ultimate good and not a corruptable human.
Thanks for that! I guess I cannot get much past the problem that out of many Gods the Christian/Jewish one was the right one, it seems a little arrogant. That is without questioning the universe being created in 6 days, a few thousand years ago. That also applies to pretty much any of the Gods out there, they all seem to be ways in which ancient tribes explained the world they were in.
But I don't like the evolutionary view either as it doesn't satisfactorily explain how some very complicated interdependent elements of life exist.
Maybe we are not smart enough to figure it out; a big brain doesn't automatically increase our ability to reproduce!
Yes but what do you believe?
I lost some respect for this man when He said Christ did not claim to be God. "Before Abraham was I Am" was about as plain a statment in context as your could possibly get without stating "I am God"
@Greasy__Bear I have no issue with you or anyone for believing the doctrine of the Trinity or the double nature of Christ (these are two different claims), but you identified the problem yourself when you said, "without stating 'I am God.'" Such a statement anywhere in the Bible would have made the idea of Jesus being co-equal easier to accept for fans of the biblical texts, assuming it was a true translation. But there is no direct statement in which Jesus states his equality or co-equality with God (to wit, "My Father is greater than I," which is readily discounted in such discussions. But I will leave you with a fuller picture of the translation, from research I did for the book I had published in 1998. Make you you will of it, and no matter where you come down, losing respect for someone merely because they differ from you on an interpretation or theology is where humanity and discussion break down.
The first analysis is from Dr. Frederick Farley's book, "Unitarianism Defined: The Scripture Doctrine of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost" (Boston: American Unitarian Association, 1873):
Then as to the declaration of our Lord, recorded in the Gospel of St. John: (John 8:58.) “Before Abraham was, I am.” Why, it may be asked in the outset, why, except for a purpose, have our translators departed here from their usual mode of rendering the exact Greek word so often used by our Lord? Here it reads, “I am”-literally, and without supplement; in other places, “I am he”? (Vid. in this same chapter, vv. 24, 28; also, John 4:26; 13:19. Compare also Matt. 24:5; Mark 13:6, and Luke 21:8; also, John 3:28 and Acts 13:25.) Why not here as there-“I am he”-the Messiah purposed in the counsels of God long before Abraham had being? This is the interpretation of Grotius, and I believe the true one. Trinitarians are accustomed to insist that our Lord meant to declare that he was the “I AM” of the Old Dispensation, who revealed Himself to Moses by the name or appellation, “I am that I am;” but Dr. J. Pye Smith tells us (Scripture Test. vol. 2 p. 161,) that “the words” there “are in the future tense, ‘I will be that which I will be,’ Exod. 3:14; and most probably it was not intended as a name, but as a declaration of a certain fulfillment of all the promises of God.” While Mr. Carlile of the Scotch Kirk says: (“Jesus Christ the Great God our Saviour.” p. 174.) “I do not mean to rest any argument on the expression I am, taken by itself. It occurs repeatedly in this chapter, and is translated I am he.”
If then the use of the word was no assumption, as of inherent right by our Lord, of the alleged name or appellation of Jehovah, the rendering of the Common Version is meaningless. What our Lord meant was, that before Abraham was born, God had purposed that he should be the Messiah. So to speak, in allusion to the Divine purposes, was familiar to the Jews. In Jeremiah, (Jer. 1.) God says to the prophet: “Before I formed thee in the womb I knew thee; before thou camest forth at birth I sanctified thee; and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.” Repeatedly in this very chapter he had used the same phrase, “I am;” and as repeatedly our translators render it, as essential to the sense, “I am he,” that is, the Messiah, for whom the Jews had been long looking. That was what they, he had said must believe, or “die in their sins;” that was, as he had just before told them, what they would “know” when they had “lifted him up;” and that was what he now declared himself to have been in the omniscient councils of God, long before the era of the great Patriarch. (Verses 24, 28, 58.)
This second ananylsis is from Mary Dana's book, "Letters Addressed to Relatives and Friends" (Boston: James Munroe and Co., 1845):
I WILL now consider the import of the phrase “I am,” as presented in the extract which forms the subject of the foregoing letter. You remark that, “considering Christ’s audience, and their familiarity with the phrase, and the sense they invariably attached to it, you can never doubt he designed to declare himself Jehovah, when he said, before ‘Abraham was, I am.’“ It is contended by many learned men that the Greek phrase here translated, “I am,” is invariably used to mean, I am he, that is, the Messiah. Twice before, in this chapter, the same Greek phrase is introduced, and in both instances it is rendered by the translators of our common version, “I am he;” it occurs in the twenty-fourth and twenty-eighth verses. Why King James’s translators saw fit to render this verse differently from the others, it is impossible with certainty to decide, though the reason may be very easily conjectured. It certainly would not have injured the sense of the verse to add, as they had done in the two former verses, the pronoun he, and it would have prevented much controversy. To show that in the 28th verse Christ was speaking of himself as the Messiah, and not as God, he says, “then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself.” The same expression may also be found in John 4:26; 13:19; 18:5, 6, 8, and in every instance it is translated, “I am he.”
In Exodus 3:14, the term “I AM,” is used as a proper name, and applied by Jehovah to himself; “thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.” The sentence is perfect and complete. Whereas, if, in the verse under consideration, the phrase is to be understood in the same sense-as a proper name, the sentence is an incomplete and unmeaning one. Read it thus, understanding “I am” as a proper name, and you will discover this, for the proper noun is entirely without its corresponding verb. But read it with the pronoun he understood, and it is a complete sentence; though the use of the present tense in connection with the past strikes the ear of a grammarian singularly and unpleasantly. The biblical critic Wakefield says, “the peculiar use of the present tense in the usage of Scriptural expressions is to imply determination and certainty; as if he had said, ‘my mission was settled and certain before the birth of Abraham.’”
I think you approached the root of the entire problem, indeed all human problems. I truly and deeply believe that God gave us one rule at the beginning. "Trust in Yahweh with all your heart and do not trust in your own intelligence," Proverbs 3:5. To trust in God is the tree of life. To trust in our own intelligence is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and by extension everything in between. If our finite minds could understand an infinite God He would cease to be God. By definition, if there must be one, God is simply incomprehensible.
what a fantastic thought process to push whatever bullshit "god" wants down your throat. so i must believe god and NOT myself?
@@burger116 You, as I am, are a fallen, broken, fallible creature you or I will screw it up as we have and caused all the pain in the world.
"Don't use your intelligence" is a very bad idea, and is the same logic that is used to keep people in dangerous cults. A good idea, a TRUE idea, can withstand scrutiny and deconstruction.
Peter wrote that God is not slow as people count slowness. I often thank God that He has not given me all the evil I deserve for my thoughts alone, not to mention my actions, He made us viceroys of this planet and we have corrupted it until even the animal and plant life suffer for our sins. See my comment below. He is patiently waiting until we reach the point of admitting our dependence on Him or die in out corruption.