| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Eric Brze" |
| Date: |
17 Jul 2006 11:57:57 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Christianity is death worship |
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 04:08:13 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
james.thompson wrote:
colp wrote:
Truth Hunter wrote:
Christianity is death worship
Not exactly, but a testament is the written will of the deceased.
Why are parts of the Bible called the old and new testaments?
Why not call the parts the old and new covenants?
A testament is a covenant, a unilateral one, but still a covenant.
Also, being covenental in my theological perspective, I don't believe
there is a firm distinction between the old and new covenants except in
a historical sense.
While there are several covenants mentioned, I interpret the old one to
mean the one with the twelve tribes which includes the commandments of
the Torah and the new one to be the one with the twelve tribes which was
"written in the heart", with the heart being idiomatic of the mind.
The old covenant is the covenant of fear which is the pact with the
Devil. The new covenant is the covenant of love which is the real
covenant with the loving God. They are never the same. Jesus
sacrificed himself for love. Abraham sacrificed his son in fear. The
difference is between heaven and hell.
I believe the Noadic, Abrahamic and Mosaic
covenants, as well as the new covenant established by Jesus are all one
in function, they are all part of God's Covenant of Grace with His
redeemed people.
What covenant of grace? Jesus came to confirm the covenant, not to
establish a new one.
Wrong. Love is the covenant of grace which is nowhere to be found in
the Old Testament bible.
.
|
|
| User: "colp" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
18 Jul 2006 09:11:07 PM |
|
|
Eric Brze wrote:
The old covenant is the covenant of fear which is the pact with the
Devil.
Is that were the case, them why would Jesus confirm that covenant?
The new covenant is the covenant of love which is the real
covenant with the loving God.
There are two new covenants. The one with Jesus from the last supper and
the one with his Father from the prophet Jeremiah. Which one do you mean?
.. They are never the same. Jesus
sacrificed himself for love.
Apparently the case, but not true.
Abraham sacrificed his son in fear.
No sacrifice took place.
Wrong. Love is the covenant of grace which is nowhere to be found in
the Old Testament bible.
There isn't any covenant of grace except in the minds of some theologians.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
18 Jul 2006 09:08:22 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:11:07 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
The old covenant is the covenant of fear which is the pact with the
Devil.
Is that were the case, them why would Jesus confirm that covenant?
He never did. Show me your proof.
The new covenant is the covenant of love which is the real
covenant with the loving God.
There are two new covenants. The one with Jesus from the last supper and
the one with his Father from the prophet Jeremiah. Which one do you mean?
Faith in the love of Jesus Christ is the only covenant of God for the
salvation of mankind.
. They are never the same. Jesus
sacrificed himself for love.
Apparently the case, but not true.
Then you don't know Jesus yet.
Abraham sacrificed his son in fear.
No sacrifice took place.
But the evil is every bit real.
Wrong. Love is the covenant of grace which is nowhere to be found in
the Old Testament bible.
There isn't any covenant of grace except in the minds of some theologians.
You need to know grace first before you talk about grace.
.
|
|
|
| User: "colp" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
19 Jul 2006 01:05:16 AM |
|
|
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:11:07 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
The old covenant is the covenant of fear which is the pact with the
Devil.
Is that were the case, them why would Jesus confirm that covenant?
He never did. Show me your proof.
And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the
midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease...
Daniel 9:27
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one
tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Matthew 5:18
The new covenant is the covenant of love which is the real
covenant with the loving God.
There are two new covenants. The one with Jesus from the last supper and
the one with his Father from the prophet Jeremiah. Which one do you mean?
Faith in the love of Jesus Christ is the only covenant of God for the
salvation of mankind.
Wrong.
. They are never the same. Jesus
sacrificed himself for love.
Apparently the case, but not true.
Then you don't know Jesus yet.
Wrong.
Abraham sacrificed his son in fear.
No sacrifice took place.
But the evil is every bit real.
In your mind, perhaps.
Wrong. Love is the covenant of grace which is nowhere to be found in
the Old Testament bible.
There isn't any covenant of grace except in the minds of some theologians.
You need to know grace first before you talk about grace.
Yes.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
19 Jul 2006 03:42:26 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 18:05:16 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:11:07 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
The old covenant is the covenant of fear which is the pact with the
Devil.
Is that were the case, them why would Jesus confirm that covenant?
He never did. Show me your proof.
And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the
midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease...
Daniel 9:27
That's the covenant of the Messiah, not the covenant between Abraham
and Jehovah the devil in disguise. Apples and oranges.
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one
tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Matthew 5:18
I think you know heaven and earth will pass so that the new heaven and
new earth can come. Right? I think you also know the Law of God as the
foundation of the Universe is eternal. Right?
Now, with the above two concepts in mind, can you read the verse again
to come up with some new meanings other than the mistaken idea that
Jesus was "confirming" the law of the Old Testament?
The new covenant is the covenant of love which is the real
covenant with the loving God.
There are two new covenants. The one with Jesus from the last supper and
the one with his Father from the prophet Jeremiah. Which one do you mean?
Faith in the love of Jesus Christ is the only covenant of God for the
salvation of mankind.
Wrong.
Why?
. They are never the same. Jesus
sacrificed himself for love.
Apparently the case, but not true.
Then you don't know Jesus yet.
Wrong.
Why?
Abraham sacrificed his son in fear.
No sacrifice took place.
But the evil is every bit real.
In your mind, perhaps.
In every mind that reads it, yes.
Wrong. Love is the covenant of grace which is nowhere to be found in
the Old Testament bible.
There isn't any covenant of grace except in the minds of some theologians.
You need to know grace first before you talk about grace.
Yes.
Good. At least we have something in agreement. That's a good start. Do
you agree?
:-)
.
|
|
|
| User: "colp" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
19 Jul 2006 06:14:46 AM |
|
|
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 18:05:16 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:11:07 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
The old covenant is the covenant of fear which is the pact with the
Devil.
Is that were the case, them why would Jesus confirm that covenant?
He never did. Show me your proof.
And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the
midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease...
Daniel 9:27
That's the covenant of the Messiah, not the covenant between Abraham
and Jehovah the devil in disguise. Apples and oranges.
No, the Messiah talked about his covenant at the last supper, and he
didn't call it the law:
Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup [is] the new
testament in my blood, which is shed for you.
Luke 22:20
Testament is a translation of diatheke, which also means covenant.
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one
tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Matthew 5:18
I think you know heaven and earth will pass so that the new heaven and
new earth can come. Right? I think you also know the Law of God as the
foundation of the Universe is eternal. Right?
Now, with the above two concepts in mind, can you read the verse again
to come up with some new meanings other than the mistaken idea that
Jesus was "confirming" the law of the Old Testament?
The idea that Jesus was confirming the law of the OT is not a mistaken one.
The new covenant is the covenant of love which is the real
covenant with the loving God.
There are two new covenants. The one with Jesus from the last supper and
the one with his Father from the prophet Jeremiah. Which one do you mean?
Faith in the love of Jesus Christ is the only covenant of God for the
salvation of mankind.
Wrong.
Why?
Because of the great commandment.
Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law?
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy
heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
Matt 22:36-38
And thou shalt love YHWH thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy
soul, and with all thy might.
Deuteronomy 6:6
. They are never the same. Jesus
sacrificed himself for love.
Apparently the case, but not true.
Then you don't know Jesus yet.
Wrong.
Why?
Because you don't know me.
Abraham sacrificed his son in fear.
No sacrifice took place.
But the evil is every bit real.
In your mind, perhaps.
In every mind that reads it, yes.
Who reads your mind?
Wrong. Love is the covenant of grace which is nowhere to be found in
the Old Testament bible.
There isn't any covenant of grace except in the minds of some theologians.
You need to know grace first before you talk about grace.
Yes.
Good. At least we have something in agreement. That's a good start. Do
you agree?
:-)
Yes. Sometimes I am suprised by who I find myself in agreement with. :)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
19 Jul 2006 09:16:57 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 23:14:46 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 18:05:16 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:11:07 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
The old covenant is the covenant of fear which is the pact with the
Devil.
Is that were the case, them why would Jesus confirm that covenant?
He never did. Show me your proof.
And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the
midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease...
Daniel 9:27
That's the covenant of the Messiah, not the covenant between Abraham
and Jehovah the devil in disguise. Apples and oranges.
No, the Messiah talked about his covenant at the last supper, and he
didn't call it the law:
Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup [is] the new
testament in my blood, which is shed for you.
Luke 22:20
Testament is a translation of diatheke, which also means covenant.
What's the difference if you believe Jesus is the Messiah?
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one
tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Matthew 5:18
I think you know heaven and earth will pass so that the new heaven and
new earth can come. Right? I think you also know the Law of God as the
foundation of the Universe is eternal. Right?
Now, with the above two concepts in mind, can you read the verse again
to come up with some new meanings other than the mistaken idea that
Jesus was "confirming" the law of the Old Testament?
The idea that Jesus was confirming the law of the OT is not a mistaken one.
Yes, it is. According to Jesus, once all is fulfilled, the OT law will
pass away along with the old heaven and old earth. That is not
confirming it. That is condemning it but few could realize it at the
time.
The new covenant is the covenant of love which is the real
covenant with the loving God.
There are two new covenants. The one with Jesus from the last supper and
the one with his Father from the prophet Jeremiah. Which one do you mean?
Faith in the love of Jesus Christ is the only covenant of God for the
salvation of mankind.
Wrong.
Why?
Because of the great commandment.
Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law?
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy
heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
Matt 22:36-38
Faith is based on love.
And thou shalt love YHWH thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy
soul, and with all thy might.
Deuteronomy 6:6
Love can not be commanded. It has to come from within.
. They are never the same. Jesus
sacrificed himself for love.
Apparently the case, but not true.
Then you don't know Jesus yet.
Wrong.
Why?
Because you don't know me.
True, but when you deny that Jesus sacrificed himself for love, I have
good reason to suspect how much you know Jesus.
Abraham sacrificed his son in fear.
No sacrifice took place.
But the evil is every bit real.
In your mind, perhaps.
In every mind that reads it, yes.
Who reads your mind?
No one has to. It's open for everyone.
Wrong. Love is the covenant of grace which is nowhere to be found in
the Old Testament bible.
There isn't any covenant of grace except in the minds of some theologians.
You need to know grace first before you talk about grace.
Yes.
Good. At least we have something in agreement. That's a good start. Do
you agree?
:-)
Yes. Sometimes I am suprised by who I find myself in agreement with. :)
Life is full of surprises. :-)
.
|
|
|
| User: "colp" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
19 Jul 2006 07:57:01 PM |
|
|
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 23:14:46 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 18:05:16 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:11:07 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
The old covenant is the covenant of fear which is the pact with the
Devil.
Is that were the case, them why would Jesus confirm that covenant?
He never did. Show me your proof.
And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the
midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease...
Daniel 9:27
That's the covenant of the Messiah, not the covenant between Abraham
and Jehovah the devil in disguise. Apples and oranges.
No, the Messiah talked about his covenant at the last supper, and he
didn't call it the law:
Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup [is] the new
testament in my blood, which is shed for you.
Luke 22:20
Testament is a translation of diatheke, which also means covenant.
What's the difference if you believe Jesus is the Messiah?
Jesus said that he was the life.
A covenant involves a living deity.
In law a testmaant is the written will of the deceased.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
19 Jul 2006 08:51:01 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 12:57:01 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 23:14:46 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 18:05:16 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:11:07 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
The old covenant is the covenant of fear which is the pact with the
Devil.
Is that were the case, them why would Jesus confirm that covenant?
He never did. Show me your proof.
And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the
midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease...
Daniel 9:27
That's the covenant of the Messiah, not the covenant between Abraham
and Jehovah the devil in disguise. Apples and oranges.
No, the Messiah talked about his covenant at the last supper, and he
didn't call it the law:
Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup [is] the new
testament in my blood, which is shed for you.
Luke 22:20
Testament is a translation of diatheke, which also means covenant.
What's the difference if you believe Jesus is the Messiah?
Jesus said that he was the life.
A covenant involves a living deity.
In law a testmaant is the written will of the deceased.
I don't get it. Could you explain?
.
|
|
|
| User: "colp" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
20 Jul 2006 04:12:15 AM |
|
|
Eric Brze wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 12:57:01 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Jesus said that he was the life.
A covenant involves a living deity.
In law a testmaant is the written will of the deceased.
I don't get it. Could you explain?
The topic that started this thread was death worship.
Why would the translators translate diatheke as testament in the context
of the last supper but as covenant in any other context?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
20 Jul 2006 07:04:57 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 21:12:15 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 12:57:01 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Jesus said that he was the life.
A covenant involves a living deity.
In law a testmaant is the written will of the deceased.
I don't get it. Could you explain?
The topic that started this thread was death worship.
Why would the translators translate diatheke as testament in the context
of the last supper but as covenant in any other context?
You are deep. I still don't get it.
:-)
.
|
|
|
| User: "colp" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
20 Jul 2006 09:13:53 PM |
|
|
Eric Brze wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 21:12:15 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 12:57:01 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Jesus said that he was the life.
A covenant involves a living deity.
In law a testmaant is the written will of the deceased.
I don't get it. Could you explain?
The topic that started this thread was death worship.
Why would the translators translate diatheke as testament in the context
of the last supper but as covenant in any other context?
You are deep. I still don't get it.
:-)
They are deep issues.
Isaiah 53:10 speaks of his soul being an offering for sin, not a sacrifice.
Daniel 9:27 speaks of him causing sacrifice to cease.
What appears to have happened is that the Pauline interpretation has
been used as a basis of the translation of diatheke.
However the interpretation is at odds with the fact that Jesus was most
certainly alive when he established his covenant, and that he claimed to
be the life.
Biblically, Paul alone said that Jesus was a sacrifice, since there is
no good evidence that anyone other than Paul wrote Hebrews.
But Isaiah and Daniel both say that there was no sacrifice, since an
neither an offering nor the cease of sacrifice involves death.
"at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses,
shall the matter be established." : Deuteronomy 19:15
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
20 Jul 2006 10:05:25 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 14:13:53 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 21:12:15 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 12:57:01 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Jesus said that he was the life.
A covenant involves a living deity.
In law a testmaant is the written will of the deceased.
I don't get it. Could you explain?
The topic that started this thread was death worship.
Why would the translators translate diatheke as testament in the context
of the last supper but as covenant in any other context?
You are deep. I still don't get it.
:-)
They are deep issues.
Yes, if it's not because of the unnecessary confusion caused by Paul.
I think I'm in agreement with you. I have always been against Paul's
teaching especially the book of Hebrews.
Isaiah 53:10 speaks of his soul being an offering for sin, not a sacrifice.
I think an offering for sin is a sacrifice. My understanding of Isaiah
53:10 is as follows:
Isa 53:10 ...when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he
shall see his seed, ...
When we shall sacrifice him for sin, he shall see which of us is his
seed.
Daniel 9:27 speaks of him causing sacrifice to cease.
What appears to have happened is that the Pauline interpretation has
been used as a basis of the translation of diatheke.
However the interpretation is at odds with the fact that Jesus was most
certainly alive when he established his covenant, and that he claimed to
be the life.
Biblically, Paul alone said that Jesus was a sacrifice, since there is
no good evidence that anyone other than Paul wrote Hebrews.
But Isaiah and Daniel both say that there was no sacrifice, since an
neither an offering nor the cease of sacrifice involves death.
"at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses,
shall the matter be established." : Deuteronomy 19:15
.
|
|
|
| User: "colp" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
21 Jul 2006 01:27:23 AM |
|
|
Eric Brze wrote:
I think an offering for sin is a sacrifice. My understanding of Isaiah
53:10 is as follows:
Isa 53:10 ...when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he
shall see his seed, ...
When we shall sacrifice him for sin, he shall see which of us is his
seed.
I think that your idea of the sacrifice is not that far from the norm.
I've even seen texts in which the word sacrifice has been substituted
for offering when I've argued this issue previously, even through
sacrifice and offering are translations of two distinct Hebrew words.
Regarding "he shall see [his] seed, he shall prolong [his] days", seed
means descendants, and thus the ordinary meaning is that he would live a
long life with his family.
The usual argument against that meaning is that being cut off from the
land of the living is interpreted to mean that he died.
8: He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his
generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the
transgression of my people was he stricken.
However the rest of the verse does not fit well into the idea of him
dying a sacrificial death, as nega (stricken) means the wound of a
plague, like a leprosy scab, not death from disease.
Being cut off does not necessarily mean death, as in the following verse:
Waters flowed over mine head; [then] I said, I am cut off
Lamentations 3:54
My interpretation of the phrase "cut of from the land of the living" is
that he departed from the land in which he lived, never to return.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
21 Jul 2006 09:37:12 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 18:27:23 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
I think an offering for sin is a sacrifice. My understanding of Isaiah
53:10 is as follows:
Isa 53:10 ...when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he
shall see his seed, ...
When we shall sacrifice him for sin, he shall see which of us is his
seed.
I think that your idea of the sacrifice is not that far from the norm.
I've even seen texts in which the word sacrifice has been substituted
for offering when I've argued this issue previously, even through
sacrifice and offering are translations of two distinct Hebrew words.
Regarding "he shall see [his] seed, he shall prolong [his] days", seed
means descendants, and thus the ordinary meaning is that he would live a
long life with his family.
The usual argument against that meaning is that being cut off from the
land of the living is interpreted to mean that he died.
8: He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his
generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the
transgression of my people was he stricken.
However the rest of the verse does not fit well into the idea of him
dying a sacrificial death, as nega (stricken) means the wound of a
plague, like a leprosy scab, not death from disease.
Being cut off does not necessarily mean death, as in the following verse:
Waters flowed over mine head; [then] I said, I am cut off
Lamentations 3:54
My interpretation of the phrase "cut of from the land of the living" is
that he departed from the land in which he lived, never to return.
I must say what you have said are mostly way over my head, but thanks
for sharing it with me. I appreciate it very much. At least it tells
me there are still much for me to learn. Thanks!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "james.thompson" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
18 Jul 2006 09:25:31 AM |
|
|
Eric Brze wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 04:08:13 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
james.thompson wrote:
colp wrote:
Truth Hunter wrote:
Christianity is death worship
Not exactly, but a testament is the written will of the deceased.
Why are parts of the Bible called the old and new testaments?
Why not call the parts the old and new covenants?
A testament is a covenant, a unilateral one, but still a covenant.
Also, being covenental in my theological perspective, I don't believe
there is a firm distinction between the old and new covenants except in
a historical sense.
While there are several covenants mentioned, I interpret the old one to
mean the one with the twelve tribes which includes the commandments of
the Torah and the new one to be the one with the twelve tribes which was
"written in the heart", with the heart being idiomatic of the mind.
The old covenant is the covenant of fear which is the pact with the
Devil. The new covenant is the covenant of love which is the real
covenant with the loving God. They are never the same. Jesus
sacrificed himself for love. Abraham sacrificed his son in fear. The
difference is between heaven and hell.
That's absurd, Hosea 11:1. It was for Love that God called Noah and
Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and blessed them. God's love has always
been shown to His people, even in their disobedience. God has always
worked graciously to redeem His people.
I believe the Noadic, Abrahamic and Mosaic
covenants, as well as the new covenant established by Jesus are all one
in function, they are all part of God's Covenant of Grace with His
redeemed people.
What covenant of grace? Jesus came to confirm the covenant, not to
establish a new one.
Wrong. Love is the covenant of grace which is nowhere to be found in
the Old Testament bible.
I'll just regurgitate your words: "Wrong."
All the covenants of God were established graciously with those who did
not deserve them, it was merely God's love that brought about any of
the covenants. It was love that saved Noah and his family. It was love
that blessed Abraham and his seed. And it was love that eventually sent
Christ into the world at the proper time to redeem all of God's elect
perfectly and effectually. Love is displayed throughout the Old
Testament, it is wrath which is rightley deserved since the time of
Adam that God spares time and time again.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
18 Jul 2006 02:16:57 PM |
|
|
On 18 Jul 2006 07:25:31 -0700, "james.thompson"
<jwthompson2@gmail.com> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 04:08:13 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
james.thompson wrote:
colp wrote:
Truth Hunter wrote:
Christianity is death worship
Not exactly, but a testament is the written will of the deceased.
Why are parts of the Bible called the old and new testaments?
Why not call the parts the old and new covenants?
A testament is a covenant, a unilateral one, but still a covenant.
Also, being covenental in my theological perspective, I don't believe
there is a firm distinction between the old and new covenants except in
a historical sense.
While there are several covenants mentioned, I interpret the old one to
mean the one with the twelve tribes which includes the commandments of
the Torah and the new one to be the one with the twelve tribes which was
"written in the heart", with the heart being idiomatic of the mind.
The old covenant is the covenant of fear which is the pact with the
Devil. The new covenant is the covenant of love which is the real
covenant with the loving God. They are never the same. Jesus
sacrificed himself for love. Abraham sacrificed his son in fear. The
difference is between heaven and hell.
That's absurd, Hosea 11:1. It was for Love that God called Noah and
Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and blessed them.
That maybe the claim, but that is far from fact. A loving God would
never threaten to kill one's only son. A loving God would never allow
"satan" to kill Noah's entire family and torture him.
God's love has always
been shown to His people, even in their disobedience. God has always
worked graciously to redeem His people.
The OT evil lord is the only plague that has been cursing mankind.
It's mankind that needs to be redeemed from the evil jealous Jehovah
instead.
I believe the Noadic, Abrahamic and Mosaic
covenants, as well as the new covenant established by Jesus are all one
in function, they are all part of God's Covenant of Grace with His
redeemed people.
What covenant of grace? Jesus came to confirm the covenant, not to
establish a new one.
Wrong. Love is the covenant of grace which is nowhere to be found in
the Old Testament bible.
I'll just regurgitate your words: "Wrong."
Empty claim with no evidence to support.
All the covenants of God were established graciously with those who did
not deserve them, it was merely God's love that brought about any of
the covenants. It was love that saved Noah and his family.
Lie. It was nothing but a bet for the entertainment of the Devil in
disguise with the name Jehovah. There was never any love involved.
"Obey me even when I'm torturing you" That is the entire message about
the book of Job.
It was love
that blessed Abraham and his seed.
Lie again. Abraham sacrificed his only son to make the deal with the
Devil. It is the most despicable thing a father can do to his son.
Love belongs to the passing by hunter who sacrificed his prey in
saving Isaac by claiming to be the angel of God. By his love, he is
indeed the angel of almighty God of heaven, but that has nothing to do
with the devil in Abraham's head.
And it was love that eventually sent
Christ into the world at the proper time to redeem all of God's elect
perfectly and effectually.
Correct. And the Mission of Christ is to redeem the children of God
from the evil jealous Jehovah the Devil in disguise.
Love is displayed throughout the Old
Testament, it is wrath which is rightley deserved since the time of
Adam that God spares time and time again.
You want to claim love, yet you just can't ignore the death and
suffering under the rule of Jehovah the Devil in disguise.
.
|
|
|
| User: "SheBlewHimDidYouBlowHim" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
18 Jul 2006 06:10:10 PM |
|
|
That's absurd, Hosea 11:1. It was for Love that God called Noah and
Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and blessed them.
That maybe the claim, but that is far from fact. A loving God would
never threaten to kill one's only son. A loving God would never allow
"satan" to kill Noah's entire family and torture him.
God's love has always
been shown to His people, even in their disobedience. God has always
worked graciously to redeem His people.
The OT evil lord is the only plague that has been cursing mankind.
It's mankind that needs to be redeemed from the evil jealous Jehovah
instead.
when christians can't deal with the fact that their god is a COLD-HEARTED
*****, then they
create two versions of their god, one being the cold-hearted ***** and the
other being the feely good
sky pixie
.
|
|
|
| User: "james.thompson" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
18 Jul 2006 09:07:20 PM |
|
|
And when others can't deal with the truth they spout meaningless
insults that don't benefit anyone at all.
SheBlewHimDidYouBlowHim wrote:
That's absurd, Hosea 11:1. It was for Love that God called Noah and
Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and blessed them.
That maybe the claim, but that is far from fact. A loving God would
never threaten to kill one's only son. A loving God would never allow
"satan" to kill Noah's entire family and torture him.
God's love has always
been shown to His people, even in their disobedience. God has always
worked graciously to redeem His people.
The OT evil lord is the only plague that has been cursing mankind.
It's mankind that needs to be redeemed from the evil jealous Jehovah
instead.
when christians can't deal with the fact that their god is a COLD-HEARTED
*****, then they
create two versions of their god, one being the cold-hearted ***** and the
other being the feely good
sky pixie
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "colp" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
18 Jul 2006 09:25:36 PM |
|
|
Eric Brze wrote:
That maybe the claim, but that is far from fact. A loving God would
never threaten to kill one's only son.
No threat to kill was made. A command to sacrifice was made, most likely
as a test of faith.
A loving God would never allow
"satan" to kill Noah's entire family and torture him.
Under what circumstances?
The OT evil lord is the only plague that has been cursing mankind.
There is a problem with the name of "LORD"/Lord/Baal, but it is often a
case of misnomer.
It's mankind that needs to be redeemed from the evil jealous Jehovah
instead.
Such accusations are unwise, even when you get the name wrong.
I believe the Noadic, Abrahamic and Mosaic
covenants, as well as the new covenant established by Jesus are all one
in function, they are all part of God's Covenant of Grace with His
redeemed people.
What covenant of grace? Jesus came to confirm the covenant, not to
establish a new one.
Wrong. Love is the covenant of grace which is nowhere to be found in
the Old Testament bible.
I'll just regurgitate your words: "Wrong."
Empty claim with no evidence to support.
So where is you supporting evidence of the claim that love is the
covenant of grace?
All the covenants of God were established graciously with those who did
not deserve them, it was merely God's love that brought about any of
the covenants. It was love that saved Noah and his family.
Lie. It was nothing but a bet for the entertainment of the Devil in
disguise with the name Jehovah.
Devil means slanderer. If you can't prove your claim then it is you who
looks like is the devil.
There was never any love involved.
"Obey me even when I'm torturing you" That is the entire message about
the book of Job.
You missed the bit about the sacrifice.
The sacrifice of the wicked [is] an abomination : Proverbs 15:8
Lie again. Abraham sacrificed his only son to make the deal with the
Devil.
No sacrifice was made.
It is the most despicable thing a father can do to his son.
Love belongs to the passing by hunter who sacrificed his prey in
saving Isaac by claiming to be the angel of God. By his love, he is
indeed the angel of almighty God of heaven, but that has nothing to do
with the devil in Abraham's head.
Again, devil means slanderer. Best get your facts right before you start
making accusations.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
19 Jul 2006 12:48:58 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:25:36 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
That maybe the claim, but that is far from fact. A loving God would
never threaten to kill one's only son.
No threat to kill was made. A command to sacrifice was made, most likely
as a test of faith.
I'm sorry you can not recognize the evil in your own statement. Maybe
when your number is up, you will recognize it. I just hope it will not
be too late for your own sake.
A loving God would never allow
"satan" to kill Noah's entire family and torture him.
Under what circumstances?
Under all circumstances.
The OT evil lord is the only plague that has been cursing mankind.
There is a problem with the name of "LORD"/Lord/Baal, but it is often a
case of misnomer.
How does the word "Devil" or "Devil in disguise" sound?
It's mankind that needs to be redeemed from the evil jealous Jehovah
instead.
Such accusations are unwise, even when you get the name wrong.
Not any accusation. It's the truth I am sharing with you. You have
mistakenly taken the devil/devil in disguise as your father, but you
are forgiven because you did not know better.
I believe the Noadic, Abrahamic and Mosaic
covenants, as well as the new covenant established by Jesus are all one
in function, they are all part of God's Covenant of Grace with His
redeemed people.
What covenant of grace? Jesus came to confirm the covenant, not to
establish a new one.
Wrong. Love is the covenant of grace which is nowhere to be found in
the Old Testament bible.
I'll just regurgitate your words: "Wrong."
Empty claim with no evidence to support.
So where is you supporting evidence of the claim that love is the
covenant of grace?
My own life.
All the covenants of God were established graciously with those who did
not deserve them, it was merely God's love that brought about any of
the covenants. It was love that saved Noah and his family.
Lie. It was nothing but a bet for the entertainment of the Devil in
disguise with the name Jehovah.
Devil means slanderer. If you can't prove your claim then it is you who
looks like is the devil.
I am human. I am not that evil spirit without flesh and blood but
always thirsty for blood and hunger for flesh. Read the OT and you can
see with your own eyes.
There was never any love involved.
"Obey me even when I'm torturing you" That is the entire message about
the book of Job.
You missed the bit about the sacrifice.
The sacrifice of the wicked [is] an abomination : Proverbs 15:8
What are you talking about? I'm talking about the book of Job. Can you
stay on topic?
Lie again. Abraham sacrificed his only son to make the deal with the
Devil.
No sacrifice was made.
Yes, there was. It was Abraham's soul. He sold his soul to the devil
by willing to kill his own son.
It is the most despicable thing a father can do to his son.
Love belongs to the passing by hunter who sacrificed his prey in
saving Isaac by claiming to be the angel of God. By his love, he is
indeed the angel of almighty God of heaven, but that has nothing to do
with the devil in Abraham's head.
Again, devil means slanderer. Best get your facts right before you start
making accusations.
Not accusations. All are fully supported by the Holy Bible.
.
|
|
|
| User: "colp" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
19 Jul 2006 06:52:48 AM |
|
|
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:25:36 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
That maybe the claim, but that is far from fact. A loving God would
never threaten to kill one's only son.
No threat to kill was made. A command to sacrifice was made, most likely
as a test of faith.
I'm sorry you can not recognize the evil in your own statement. Maybe
when your number is up, you will recognize it. I just hope it will not
be too late for your own sake.
Abraham already owed his life to his deity, having been in a fierce fire
for days. He had more reason to believe in miracles than most.
A loving God would never allow
"satan" to kill Noah's entire family and torture him.
Under what circumstances?
Under all circumstances.
I mean, what where the3 cirumstances of the the death of Noah's family?
References, please.
The OT evil lord is the only plague that has been cursing mankind.
There is a problem with the name of "LORD"/Lord/Baal, but it is often a
case of misnomer.
How does the word "Devil" or "Devil in disguise" sound?
Like slanderer.
It's mankind that needs to be redeemed from the evil jealous Jehovah
instead.
Such accusations are unwise, even when you get the name wrong.
Not any accusation. It's the truth I am sharing with you. You have
mistakenly taken the devil/devil in disguise as your father, but you
are forgiven because you did not know better.
Unless you can prove it it's only your opinion.
I believe the Noadic, Abrahamic and Mosaic
covenants, as well as the new covenant established by Jesus are all one
in function, they are all part of God's Covenant of Grace with His
redeemed people.
What covenant of grace? Jesus came to confirm the covenant, not to
establish a new one.
Wrong. Love is the covenant of grace which is nowhere to be found in
the Old Testament bible.
I'll just regurgitate your words: "Wrong."
Empty claim with no evidence to support.
So where is you supporting evidence of the claim that love is the
covenant of grace?
My own life.
That's nice, but I don't think it would convince a skeptic.
All the covenants of God were established graciously with those who did
not deserve them, it was merely God's love that brought about any of
the covenants. It was love that saved Noah and his family.
Lie. It was nothing but a bet for the entertainment of the Devil in
disguise with the name Jehovah.
Devil means slanderer. If you can't prove your claim then it is you who
looks like is the devil.
I am human. I am not that evil spirit without flesh and blood but
always thirsty for blood and hunger for flesh. Read the OT and you can
see with your own eyes.
I have read it, and the deity of Abraham appeared as flesh and blood and
ate with him as a man. They ate goat, from memory.
There was never any love involved.
"Obey me even when I'm torturing you" That is the entire message about
the book of Job.
You missed the bit about the sacrifice.
The sacrifice of the wicked [is] an abomination : Proverbs 15:8
What are you talking about? I'm talking about the book of Job. Can you
stay on topic?
Yes. In the first chapter of Job, what was unusual about the sacrifice
which happened immediately before the narrative moved to the
conversation with the adversary?
Lie again. Abraham sacrificed his only son to make the deal with the
Devil.
No sacrifice was made.
Yes, there was. It was Abraham's soul. He sold his soul to the devil
by willing to kill his own son.
He would not have had a son if his life had not been saved previously.
It is the most despicable thing a father can do to his son.
Love belongs to the passing by hunter who sacrificed his prey in
saving Isaac by claiming to be the angel of God. By his love, he is
indeed the angel of almighty God of heaven, but that has nothing to do
with the devil in Abraham's head.
Again, devil means slanderer. Best get your facts right before you start
making accusations.
Not accusations. All are fully supported by the Holy Bible.
An accusation is a claim against someones character, for example "he is
evil".
The Bible is a collection of translations of books, some inspired, some
not. It should be read carefully to avoid jumping to conclusions about
the nature of deities.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
19 Jul 2006 08:55:50 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 23:52:48 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:25:36 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
That maybe the claim, but that is far from fact. A loving God would
never threaten to kill one's only son.
No threat to kill was made. A command to sacrifice was made, most likely
as a test of faith.
I'm sorry you can not recognize the evil in your own statement. Maybe
when your number is up, you will recognize it. I just hope it will not
be too late for your own sake.
Abraham already owed his life to his deity, having been in a fierce fire
for days. He had more reason to believe in miracles than most.
First, what are you talking about? Although my ignorance of the Bible
is well known here in alt.religion.christian, I do not believe there
is such a thing that Abraham surviving "in a fierce fire for days".
Secondly, there can not be miracle of good when one is obeying the
order of evil. That is simple logic and common sense. When a person
does evil, he can not expect any good result.
A loving God would never allow
"satan" to kill Noah's entire family and torture him.
Under what circumstances?
Under all circumstances.
I mean, what where the3 cirumstances of the the death of Noah's family?
References, please.
Oops, my mistake. I was thinking Job's family when I wrote Noah's
family.
The OT evil lord is the only plague that has been cursing mankind.
There is a problem with the name of "LORD"/Lord/Baal, but it is often a
case of misnomer.
How does the word "Devil" or "Devil in disguise" sound?
Like slanderer.
The Devil in disguise is a self confessed liar, yes. In Exodus 6:3, it
openly admits that Abraham never knew its real name "Jehovah".
It's mankind that needs to be redeemed from the evil jealous Jehovah
instead.
Such accusations are unwise, even when you get the name wrong.
Not any accusation. It's the truth I am sharing with you. You have
mistakenly taken the devil/devil in disguise as your father, but you
are forgiven because you did not know better.
Unless you can prove it it's only your opinion.
I am proving it for you.
I believe the Noadic, Abrahamic and Mosaic
covenants, as well as the new covenant established by Jesus are all one
in function, they are all part of God's Covenant of Grace with His
redeemed people.
What covenant of grace? Jesus came to confirm the covenant, not to
establish a new one.
Wrong. Love is the covenant of grace which is nowhere to be found in
the Old Testament bible.
I'll just regurgitate your words: "Wrong."
Empty claim with no evidence to support.
So where is you supporting evidence of the claim that love is the
covenant of grace?
My own life.
That's nice, but I don't think it would convince a skeptic.
I'm open for questions.
All the covenants of God were established graciously with those who did
not deserve them, it was merely God's love that brought about any of
the covenants. It was love that saved Noah and his family.
Lie. It was nothing but a bet for the entertainment of the Devil in
disguise with the name Jehovah.
Devil means slanderer. If you can't prove your claim then it is you who
looks like is the devil.
I am human. I am not that evil spirit without flesh and blood but
always thirsty for blood and hunger for flesh. Read the OT and you can
see with your own eyes.
I have read it, and the deity of Abraham appeared as flesh and blood and
ate with him as a man. They ate goat, from memory.
Can you show me the relevant verse please?
There was never any love involved.
"Obey me even when I'm torturing you" That is the entire message about
the book of Job.
You missed the bit about the sacrifice.
The sacrifice of the wicked [is] an abomination : Proverbs 15:8
What are you talking about? I'm talking about the book of Job. Can you
stay on topic?
Yes. In the first chapter of Job, what was unusual about the sacrifice
which happened immediately before the narrative moved to the
conversation with the adversary?
Huh? don't ask me. I don't read the Bible. Can you answer my question
more directly?
Lie again. Abraham sacrificed his only son to make the deal with the
Devil.
No sacrifice was made.
Yes, there was. It was Abraham's soul. He sold his soul to the devil
by willing to kill his own son.
He would not have had a son if his life had not been saved previously.
For example?
It is the most despicable thing a father can do to his son.
Love belongs to the passing by hunter who sacrificed his prey in
saving Isaac by claiming to be the angel of God. By his love, he is
indeed the angel of almighty God of heaven, but that has nothing to do
with the devil in Abraham's head.
Again, devil means slanderer. Best get your facts right before you start
making accusations.
Not accusations. All are fully supported by the Holy Bible.
An accusation is a claim against someones character, for example "he is
evil".
Ordering someone to kill one's own son is evil. That is simple
statement of fact. It is not an accusation.
The Bible is a collection of translations of books, some inspired, some
not. It should be read carefully to avoid jumping to conclusions about
the nature of deities.
That does not work for me. I don't interpret the Bible. I explain the
Bible.
.
|
|
|
| User: "colp" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
19 Jul 2006 07:52:02 PM |
|
|
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 23:52:48 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:25:36 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
That maybe the claim, but that is far from fact. A loving God would
never threaten to kill one's only son.
No threat to kill was made. A command to sacrifice was made, most likely
as a test of faith.
I'm sorry you can not recognize the evil in your own statement. Maybe
when your number is up, you will recognize it. I just hope it will not
be too late for your own sake.
Abraham already owed his life to his deity, having been in a fierce fire
for days. He had more reason to believe in miracles than most.
First, what are you talking about?
An account in the book of Jasher is referred to by the OT, but is not
included amongst it.
Although my ignorance of the Bible
is well known here in alt.religion.christian, I do not believe there
is such a thing that Abraham surviving "in a fierce fire for days".
Yes, Jasher isn't well known. It is however, a good account of the
historical events of the books of Moses.
Secondly, there can not be miracle of good when one is obeying the
order of evil. That is simple logic and common sense. When a person
does evil, he can not expect any good result.
I agree.
<snip>
The OT evil lord is the only plague that has been cursing mankind.
There is a problem with the name of "LORD"/Lord/Baal, but it is often a
case of misnomer.
How does the word "Devil" or "Devil in disguise" sound?
Like slanderer.
The Devil in disguise is a self confessed liar, yes. In Exodus 6:3, it
openly admits that Abraham never knew its real name "Jehovah".
No, the essential quality of the devil is slander. Ignorance is not a
sin, so the statement about Abraham was not an accusation.
diabolos {dee-ab'-ol-os} from Strongs
1) prone to slander, slanderous, accusing falsely
a) a calumniator, false accuser, slanderer,
2) metaph. applied to a man who, by opposing the cause of God, may be
said to act the part of the devil or to side with him
It's mankind that needs to be redeemed from the evil jealous Jehovah
instead.
Such accusations are unwise, even when you get the name wrong.
Not any accusation. It's the truth I am sharing with you. You have
mistakenly taken the devil/devil in disguise as your father, but you
are forgiven because you did not know better.
Unless you can prove it it's only your opinion.
I am proving it for you.
Where, exactly?
I believe the Noadic, Abrahamic and Mosaic
covenants, as well as the new covenant established by Jesus are all one
in function, they are all part of God's Covenant of Grace with His
redeemed people.
What covenant of grace? Jesus came to confirm the covenant, not to
establish a new one.
Wrong. Love is the covenant of grace which is nowhere to be found in
the Old Testament bible.
I'll just regurgitate your words: "Wrong."
Empty claim with no evidence to support.
So where is you supporting evidence of the claim that love is the
covenant of grace?
My own life.
That's nice, but I don't think it would convince a skeptic.
I'm open for questions.
Fair enough, but I'd rather stick to verifiable facts such as scripture.
All the covenants of God were established graciously with those who did
not deserve them, it was merely God's love that brought about any of
the covenants. It was love that saved Noah and his family.
Lie. It was nothing but a bet for the entertainment of the Devil in
disguise with the name Jehovah.
Devil means slanderer. If you can't prove your claim then it is you who
looks like is the devil.
I am human. I am not that evil spirit without flesh and blood but
always thirsty for blood and hunger for flesh. Read the OT and you can
see with your own eyes.
I have read it, and the deity of Abraham appeared as flesh and blood and
ate with him as a man. They ate goat, from memory.
Can you show me the relevant verse please?
Sorry, it was calf not goat. Here are the verses from Genesis 18:
1: And YHWH appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the
tent door in the heat of the day;
2: And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him:
and when he saw [them], he ran to meet them from the tent door, and
bowed himself toward the ground,
7: And Abraham ran unto the herd, and fetcht a calf tender and good, and
gave [it] unto a young man; and he hasted to dress it.
8: And he took butter, and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and
set [it] before them; and he stood by them under the tree, and they did eat.
There was never any love involved.
"Obey me even when I'm torturing you" That is the entire message about
the book of Job.
You missed the bit about the sacrifice.
The sacrifice of the wicked [is] an abomination : Proverbs 15:8
What are you talking about? I'm talking about the book of Job. Can you
stay on topic?
Yes. In the first chapter of Job, what was unusual about the sacrifice
which happened immediately before the narrative moved to the
conversation with the adversary?
Huh? don't ask me. I don't read the Bible. Can you answer my question
more directly?
My interpretation of the reason for Job's misfortune is that an
unnecessary sacrfice is an abomination.
Lie again. Abraham sacrificed his only son to make the deal with the
Devil.
No sacrifice was made.
Yes, there was. It was Abraham's soul. He sold his soul to the devil
by willing to kill his own son.
He would not have had a son if his life had not been saved previously.
For example?
The account in Jasher:
24 And the Lord loved Abram and he had compassion over him, and the Lord
came down and delivered Abram from the fire and he was not burned.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/apo/jasher/12.htm
It is the most despicable thing a father can do to his son.
Love belongs to the passing by hunter who sacrificed his prey in
saving Isaac by claiming to be the angel of God. By his love, he is
indeed the angel of almighty God of heaven, but that has nothing to do
with the devil in Abraham's head.
Again, devil means slanderer. Best get your facts right before you start
making accusations.
Not accusations. All are fully supported by the Holy Bible.
An accusation is a claim against someones character, for example "he is
evil".
Ordering someone to kill one's own son is evil. That is simple
statement of fact. It is not an accusation.
No action in itself is evil. It is the intent which makes it evil.
The Bible is a collection of translations of books, some inspired, some
not. It should be read carefully to avoid jumping to conclusions about
the nature of deities.
That does not work for me. I don't interpret the Bible. I explain the
Bible.
Yet you claim to be ignorant of it?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
19 Jul 2006 08:50:09 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 12:52:02 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 23:52:48 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:25:36 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
That maybe the claim, but that is far from fact. A loving God would
never threaten to kill one's only son.
No threat to kill was made. A command to sacrifice was made, most likely
as a test of faith.
I'm sorry you can not recognize the evil in your own statement. Maybe
when your number is up, you will recognize it. I just hope it will not
be too late for your own sake.
Abraham already owed his life to his deity, having been in a fierce fire
for days. He had more reason to believe in miracles than most.
First, what are you talking about?
An account in the book of Jasher is referred to by the OT, but is not
included amongst it.
Oh, you are not talking about the Bible account. Thank you for the
clarification.
:-)
Although my ignorance of the Bible
is well known here in alt.religion.christian, I do not believe there
is such a thing that Abraham surviving "in a fierce fire for days".
Yes, Jasher isn't well known. It is however, a good account of the
historical events of the books of Moses.
According to modern history, there was no evidence of historical Moses
ever found. Don't you know that?
Secondly, there can not be miracle of good when one is obeying the
order of evil. That is simple logic and common sense. When a person
does evil, he can not expect any good result.
I agree.
Good. I see you have an open mind for logic and reason. That is very
important for a believer of truth, thank you.
<snip>
The OT evil lord is the only plague that has been cursing mankind.
There is a problem with the name of "LORD"/Lord/Baal, but it is often a
case of misnomer.
How does the word "Devil" or "Devil in disguise" sound?
Like slanderer.
The Devil in disguise is a self confessed liar, yes. In Exodus 6:3, it
openly admits that Abraham never knew its real name "Jehovah".
No, the essential quality of the devil is slander.
The devil is the source of all evil, the prince of darkness. Lying and
deceiving are the essential part of its evil tricks, yes, I agree.
Ignorance is not a
sin,
Ignorance is not a sin, but ignorance leads to sin. It's because we
don't know better, we are deceived by the devil to forsake God. Deep
down in all of us, we really don't want to forsake God.
so the statement about Abraham was not an accusation.
Sorry, I have lost track what we are talking about.
diabolos {dee-ab'-ol-os} from Strongs
1) prone to slander, slanderous, accusing falsely
a) a calumniator, false accuser, slanderer,
2) metaph. applied to a man who, by opposing the cause of God, may be
said to act the part of the devil or to side with him
It's mankind that needs to be redeemed from the evil jealous Jehovah
instead.
Such accusations are unwise, even when you get the name wrong.
Not any accusation. It's the truth I am sharing with you. You have
mistakenly taken the devil/devil in disguise as your father, but you
are forgiven because you did not know better.
Unless you can prove it it's only your opinion.
I am proving it for you.
Where, exactly?
Right here in every one of my posts.
I believe the Noadic, Abrahamic and Mosaic
covenants, as well as the new covenant established by Jesus are all one
in function, they are all part of God's Covenant of Grace with His
redeemed people.
What covenant of grace? Jesus came to confirm the covenant, not to
establish a new one.
Wrong. Love is the covenant of grace which is nowhere to be found in
the Old Testament bible.
I'll just regurgitate your words: "Wrong."
Empty claim with no evidence to support.
So where is you supporting evidence of the claim that love is the
covenant of grace?
My own life.
That's nice, but I don't think it would convince a skeptic.
I'm open for questions.
Fair enough, but I'd rather stick to verifiable facts such as scripture.
The scripture needs to be practiced in life in order to be understood.
Simply reading and memorizing the scripture means nothing.
All the covenants of God were established graciously with those who did
not deserve them, it was merely God's love that brought about any of
the covenants. It was love that saved Noah and his family.
Lie. It was nothing but a bet for the entertainment of the Devil in
disguise with the name Jehovah.
Devil means slanderer. If you can't prove your claim then it is you who
looks like is the devil.
I am human. I am not that evil spirit without flesh and blood but
always thirsty for blood and hunger for flesh. Read the OT and you can
see with your own eyes.
I have read it, and the deity of Abraham appeared as flesh and blood and
ate with him as a man. They ate goat, from memory.
Can you show me the relevant verse please?
Sorry, it was calf not goat. Here are the verses from Genesis 18:
Thank you. Pastor Dave has pointed me to Genesis 17~18. Thanks for his
knowledgeable advice, I have found out that Genesis 17:1 is a lie
which shows Abraham was deceived right from the beginning. Do you want
me to show it to you too, or you want to read my discussion with
Pastor Dave in alt.religion.christian by yourself? I don't want to
repeat myself too much.
1: And YHWH appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the
tent door in the heat of the day;
2: And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him:
and when he saw [them], he ran to meet them from the tent door, and
bowed himself toward the ground,
7: And Abraham ran unto the herd, and fetcht a calf tender and good, and
gave [it] unto a young man; and he hasted to dress it.
8: And he took butter, and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and
set [it] before them; and he stood by them under the tree, and they did eat.
There was never any love involved.
"Obey me even when I'm torturing you" That is the entire message about
the book of Job.
You missed the bit about the sacrifice.
The sacrifice of the wicked [is] an abomination : Proverbs 15:8
What are you talking about? I'm talking about the book of Job. Can you
stay on topic?
Yes. In the first chapter of Job, what was unusual about the sacrifice
which happened immediately before the narrative moved to the
conversation with the adversary?
Huh? don't ask me. I don't read the Bible. Can you answer my question
more directly?
My interpretation of the reason for Job's misfortune is that an
unnecessary sacrfice is an abomination.
So the devil not only demands sacrifice, it even picks and chooses
sacrifice. What a horrible thing for the ignorant powerless slaves
under its evil control. Do you know that God of heaven never demands
sacrifice but is always ready to offer forgiveness waiting patiently
for us to repent?
Lie again. Abraham sacrificed his only son to make the deal with the
Devil.
No sacrifice was made.
Yes, there was. It was Abraham's soul. He sold his soul to the devil
by willing to kill his own son.
He would not have had a son if his life had not been saved previously.
For example?
The account in Jasher:
24 And the Lord loved Abram and he had compassion over him, and the Lord
came down and delivered Abram from the fire and he was not burned.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/apo/jasher/12.htm
Oops, if it's not in the Bible, it's not sacred texts to me, sorry.
It is the most despicable thing a father can do to his son.
Love belongs to the passing by hunter who sacrificed his prey in
saving Isaac by claiming to be the angel of God. By his love, he is
indeed the angel of almighty God of heaven, but that has nothing to do
with the devil in Abraham's head.
Again, devil means slanderer. Best get your facts right before you start
making accusations.
Not accusations. All are fully supported by the Holy Bible.
An accusation is a claim against someones character, for example "he is
evil".
Ordering someone to kill one's own son is evil. That is simple
statement of fact. It is not an accusation.
No action in itself is evil. It is the intent which makes it evil.
And the intent to have someone killing his own son is evil.
The Bible is a collection of translations of books, some inspired, some
not. It should be read carefully to avoid jumping to conclusions about
the nature of deities.
That does not work for me. I don't interpret the Bible. I explain the
Bible.
Yet you claim to be ignorant of it?
I maybe ignorant of the Bible, but I have learned one or two things
about the truth.
:-)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "james.thompson" |
|
| Title: Re: Christianity is death worship |
18 Jul 2006 09:05:18 PM |
|
|
You sound like a Marcionite regurgitating old heresies. I will not
particpate in a argument with someone who is clearly well outside the
stream of historic and orthodox Christianity and no friend to the
truth.
Eric Brze wrote:
On 18 Jul 2006 07:25:31 -0700, "james.thompson"
<jwthompson2@gmail.com> wrote:
Eric Brze wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 04:08:13 +1200, colp <colp@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
james.thompson wrote:
colp wrote:
Truth Hunter wrote:
Christianity is death worship
Not exactly, but a testament is the written will of the deceased.
Why are parts of the Bible called the old and new testaments?
Why not call the parts the old and new covenants?
A testament is a covenant, a unilateral one, but still a covenant.
Also, being covenental in my theological perspective, I don't believe
there is a firm distinction between the old and new covenants except in
a historical sense.
While there are several covenants mentioned, I interpret the old one to
mean the one with the twelve tribes which includes the commandments of
the Torah and the new one to be the one with the twelve tribes which was
"written in the heart", with the heart being idiomatic of the mind.
The old covenant is the covenant of fear which is the pact with the
Devil. The new covenant is the covenant of love which is the real
covenant with the loving God. They are never the same. Jesus
sacrificed himself for love. Abraham sacrificed his son in fear. The
difference is between heaven and hell.
That's absurd, Hosea 11:1. It was for Love that God called Noah and
Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and blessed them.
That maybe the claim, but that is far from fact. A loving God would
never threaten to kill one's only son. A loving God would never allow
"satan" to kill Noah's entire family and torture him.
God's love has always
been shown to His people, even in their disobedience. God has always
worked graciously to redeem His people.
The OT evil lord is the only plague that has been cursing mankind.
It's mankind that needs to be redeemed from the evil jealous Jehovah
instead.
I believe the Noadic, Abrahamic and Mosaic
covenants, as well as the new covenant established by Jesus are all one
in function, they are all part of God's | | | |
