Neil writes:
I know it is hard talking to liberal theologians. They play fast and loose with the Bible - quoting it when it is convenient and saying how it is full of mistakes, contradictions, etc. when they don’t like what it says.
And they view it as a character flaw if you quote scripture. Seriously. Just try it and see. Seems to me that authentic Christians would be eager to read the Bible in context to ascertain the truth.
Sometimes they just lie. They say how they believe all of God’s word - a typical belief held by orthodox Christians about the Bible - then they undermine it 18 different ways.
They’ll tell you how much they believe in grace, but how they don’t believe in the virgin birth, the resurrection, or other miracles. But try to pin them down on why they think the grace part of the Bible is reliable and the rest isn’t and then watch them squirm. They get hostile and silly pretty quickly.
When it comes to liberal theology commenters, either here or at their blogs, that last sentence has often been the story of my life!
Hostility seems to abound when the truth of God's Word points out the secular, humanistic theological errors of the typical liberal theologian.
However, their arguments and counter arguments usually amount to nothing...quite frankly. Most times they walk away mad, accuse me of "hate" at their blogs and vow never to return.
Why?
Because God's Truth wins out.
Their arguments are not really with me. I'm just your average individual Christian blogger. What gets to them is the fact that they are oftentimes actively involved with arguing against the absolute truth of God's Word in the Bible.
No wonder they resort to anger; or, as Neil points out in his post...sometimes even silliness.
By saying all of this, I am not trying to discourage dialogue with those who believe differently than me. I think it is a healthy endeavor to discuss differences.
If you go over to this post, you will read some comments by a blogger who often disagrees with me. However, in his last post he took note of some errors written by a Unitarian Universalist at her blog and wrote the following:
a couple of straggler thoughts...UU - i think, more and more, i'm considering myself a christian agnostic universalist. want to follow christ's ideal, even believe he died and rose again, but don't believe everything in the nt about him, plus believe everyone will ultimately be saved.
gee - how many evangelical heresies are in that paragraph?... :) :)
you mentioned holiness the other day as "set apart for god."
so if god is holy, who is he set apart for...us?
(previous comment is sarcastic, but legitimate.)
mike rucker
Since this is a conversation-type blog on Christian faith, I expect to read comments from non-believers that wish to challenge orthodox, Biblical Christianity, as well as comments in agreement with what I post from fellow Christian bloggers. I also encourage my fellow Christian bloggers to point out any errors that they spot in my writings! Hey... I'm only human and can make mistakes!
The reality of the situation is this: Sound doctrine is crucial when it comes to sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ with others!!
That is exactly why it is so very important and necessary to utilize the plumb line of Scripture to correct all of us!
The entire Bible is God's Word. Scripture points towards Jesus Christ as the only way of salvation. The first words of Jesus that are recorded in two of the gospels is, "Repent! For the Kingdom of God is here." Jesus told us that we must first repent, which means confessing and turning away from previous sin, believe in Him through faith, and be born again through the power of the Holy Spirit.
Trouble is, many liberal theologians don't like that "r" word (repent). Skipping over that step into the comfort of grace does not a Christian make!
Why?
Because, ultimately, it is a crossless gospel.
But don't take my word for it. Investigate the Scriptures for yourself! For me, personally, it was the only way for me to reach the conclusion that Biblical Christianity is a logical and reasonable faith.
Once you do your investigation, see if you can't help agreeing with what orthodox Christians believe concerning the Bible:
The Bible is God's Word to all mankind. It was written by human authors, under the supernatural guidance of the Holy Spirit. It is the supreme source of truth for Christian beliefs and living. Because it is inspired by God, it is truth without any mixture of error.
2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20, 21; 2 Timothy 1:13; Psalms 12:6; 119:105, 160; Proverbs 30:5
For more, see this page.
HT: 4 Simpsons blog - Eternity Matters
Related post:
What Is Truly At Stake?
Posts
26 comments:
As an "orthodox" theologian, how do you explain your belief in :
1. a "god" who the bible required that the righteous be killed along with the wicked?
2. a "god" who the bible punished many for the acts of one?
3. a "god" who the bible killed a large number of people simply because they couldn't control their curiosity about the contents of the ark of the covenant?
4. a "god" who the bible says punished children severely just for making fun of a bald man?
5. a "god" who the bible says called for the death penalty for all those failing to observe the sabbath commandment? [ This has so many ramifications that we devote a whole web page to it at sabbathobservance.html.]
6. a "god" who the bible says delivered a holy man ( Job }, and most of his family, into Satan's hands, just to prove a point in an argument?
7. a "god" who the bible says is not omnipotent or all powerful, as claimed in the bible?
8. a "god" who the bible says made false and unfulfilled prophecies?
9. a "god" who the bible says couldn't control his temper?
10. a "god" who the bible says was often jealous?
11. a "god" who the bible says played favorites, to the point of causing tremendous strife between one human tribe (the Jews) against many others throughout the world? (a strife now perpetuated between "Christians" - who believe they have been chosen to replace the Jews in God's heart and who are destined for "salvation", while non-Christians are destined for "eternal damnation".)
12. a "god" who the bible says sanctioned human slavery?
13. a "god" who the bible says sanctioned the beating of slaves as long as they could arise at least a day or two after the beating?
14. a "god" who the bible says showed contempt for the handicapped?
15. a "god" who the bible says punished children for their father's sins?
16. a "god" who the bible says not only barred "bastards" from the assembly of the Lord because of their illegitimacy, but extended the same discrimination against ten generations of a "bastard's" descendants as well?
17. a "god" who the bible says demanded 16,000 virgins be given to soldiers as war plunder and?
18. a "god" who the bible says demanded 32 virgins be set aside for himself?
19. a "god" who the bible says required an unbetrothed virgin to marry her seducer?
20. a "god" who the bible says required that a woman found not be a virgin on her wedding night be stoned to death, at her father's front door?
21. a "god" who the bible says sanctioned the degradation of the enemies' women?
22. a "god" who the bible says required a woman to marry her rapist?
23. a "god" who the bible says caused adultery?
24. a "god" who the bible says recommended a barbaric prescription to expose a wife's adultery but nothing comparable for husbands?
25. a "god" who the bible says said that mothers who give birth to a boy are "unclean" for a week ?
26. a "god" who the bible says said that mothers who give birth to a girl are "unclean" for two weeks ?
27. a "god" who the bible says considered women's menstruation disgraceful?
28. a "god" who the bible says broke up families?
29. a "god" who the bible says ordered the taking of a harlot?
30. a "god" who the bible says excused the sins of prostitutes and adulterers?
31. a "god" who the bible says excused a murderer and promised him protection?
32. a "god" who the bible says aided rather than punished a swindler?
33. a "god" who the bible says prevented people from hearing his words?
34. a "god" who the bible says required cannibalism?
35. a "god" who the bible says deceived people?
36. a "god" who the bible says trained people for war?
37. a "god" who the bible says intentionally gave out bad laws?
38. a "god" who the bible says violated his own laws on numerous occasions?
39. a "god" who the bible says took credit for creating evil, as well as good?
40. a "god" who the bible says committed injustices?
41. a "god" who the bible says admitted his wrongdoing?
The specific biblical references for the all of the above are completely spelled out at http://www.whatkindofgod.org . If many "bible-believing" people find this list of atrocious behavior attributed to "God" in the bible surprising, perhaps even unbelievable, it is probably because their clergy don't even read the bible themselves and if they do, they don't take the bible as a whole as seriously as they claim. Consider the following, for example, Despite the fact, that conservative clergy claim to believe that the bible is "the Word of God" and that the bible emphasizes that the penalty for breaking Commandment IV is death, no such clergy in living memory has demanded that people failing to observe the sabbath be killed. Yet, that is what the "God's Word" clearly requires, (as I spell out in great detail at http://JesusWouldBeFurious.Org/about/sabbathobservance.html ).
Conservative clergy, on the other hand, do selectively take some parts of the bible very seriously. But remarkably, it is usually in instances when the scripture doesn't strike very close to themselves or people close to them, as when heterosexual clergy proclaim those whose sexual orientation is different from their own (i.e. gays) are hell-bound if they fail to repent and become heterosexuals like themselves (an issue I deal with extensively at God&gays.html).
Hello Liberator Rev,
Welcome to Talk Wisdom.
Your list of 41 objections to the God of the Bible sounds more like a skeptic/agnostic/atheistic view rather than a view that even a genuine liberal Christian would have. I would even have to question whether or not those views would fall under the title of a liberal theologian.
With that said, I will point out a few errors in your thinking.
First, is the error of your thinking regarding God's purpose for Jesus Christ's first visit and mission on this earth. He came to become our Savior and Lord. His destiny, was to change ours!
You don't have a blog, but I checked out your website. Didn't read very far to see your first error:
If Jesus of Nazareth was anything, he was an extraordinary friend of the down- trodden, definitely a Liberal, whose advocacy on their behalf so infuriated the ultra-Conservative religious and political leaders of his day that they had him killed to prevent the public from hearing the very liberal teaching that you will see quoted abundantly in Jesus' own words on this web site !
The bolded part has to be one of the most convoluted explanations I have ever read about why Jesus died on the cross.
Jesus himself told us:
Jhn 10:15 As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.
Jhn 10:17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
He laid down his own life for our sakes, of his own accord, in agreement with the Father who sent him. Contrary to what you believe, no one took his life from Him...He laid his life down willingly to cover the sins of mankind. Being the sinless Son of God, he then was raised up at the Resurrection; accomplishing what no ordinary man ever could. That being, reconciliation between sinful men and Holy and Righteous God.
You apparently have a website called "JesusWouldBeFurious." Well guess what? You appropriately named it such because He would probably be furious with your error spreading, spiritually oblivious, contrived views that terribly skew genuine Christian belief and faith.
Remember when Peter wanted to prevent Jesus Christ from going to the cross? Jesus didn't have very kind words for him:
Mat 16:23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.
Mar 8:33 But when he had turned about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked Peter, saying, Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men.
Luk 4:8 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
Was Jesus calling Peter "Satan"? No. Of course not. But He knew, and recognized that the temptation coming through Peter was from Satan. Even if Peter had the best intentions in mind (to keep his Lord from being crucified), such a view would keep Jesus from fulfilling his mission.
How do we know this? Just look at this previous verse in Matthew where Satan was tempting Jesus in the desert...again...to prevent Him from fulfilling his redemptive mission for mankind.
Mat 4:6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in [their] hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
Jesus' answer?
Mat 4:7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.
Because of what Jesus Christ accomplished at the cross of Calvary, Satan is doomed for all eternity. The enemy of our souls knows that his time is limited here on this earth. His goal is to get as many people as he can to reject the God of the Bible, miss the salvation invitation of Jesus Christ, and die with their own sins upon their own souls in order to join satan in his misery in hell.
And, those who repent, accept Christ's sacrificial death on the cross for their sins, believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and invite Him to indwell their hearts through the power of the Holy Spirit, are saved and will spend eternity with God in heaven.
Satan, as well as all non-believers who die rejecting Christ have sealed their fate for all eternity.
Those who believe in Jesus, have their fate sealed with Him for all eternity.
Jhn 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any [man] pluck them out of my hand.
Christinewjc,
Why does a list of 41 things that "orthodox" theologians like yourself profess to believe about God sound TO YOU "like a skeptic/agnostic/atheistic view'?
Is it that you don't even KNOW what the bible teaches? And how do you answer my original question, i.e. "how do you explain your belief in this god (to yourself, your children, your congretations, etc.)?
I'm not here to debate MY theology. I'm at your site to debate YOUR theology. Come to http://LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/forum, if you want to debate my theology.
By the way, there's no such thing as the "liberal theology", because - unlike the believers of thousands of "orthodox" denominations who are persuaded that they possess the one true faith (while all the others are WRONG) - we liberals believe in the freedom to think for ourselves, which leads to a variety of different "liberal theologies".
Why didn't I address your 41 anti-theses and just tell you that they sound just like a skeptic's view? Because most, if not all, are right out of the Skeptics Annotated Bible.
Plus, you completely ignored what I shared in my last comment. Thus, you did not tell the truth when you falsely claimed the desire to "debate my theology."
It is very telling of your silly need to argue through utilizing deceptive motives. The fact that you did not provide the Bible verse references next to your allegations speaks volumes.
The SAB (as well as several of the silly arguments that you have included above) has been thoroughly refuted. Anyone doing a search can find out the counter arguments.
I have noticed that the real skepticism inherent in many skeptics, like yourself, often stems from anger, pain or hate directed at the God of the Bible. Your 41 condemnations against God are evidence of this truth.
My previous conversations with skeptics reveals a consistent pattern which most often stems from trauma(s) that has (have) come into their lives. They doubt God's goodness and focus on tragedy and their own pride rather than realizing they are sinners desperately in need of the saving grace offered through Jesus Christ.
There was one guy named Jeff who came over to my message board and posted briefly. He was either a homosexual or a supporter of homosexual rights. We had some good convos, however, it appeared that as the conversation turned towards the need for repentance, forgiveness, salvation, and grace regarding the sin of homosexual practice he quickly exited the scene. He said something about the "ick" factor of my posts.
I found his verbiage profoundly similar to the following Bible verse:
Jhn3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
Your beliefs are examples of "rebellious ideas" today that are being held up against the knowledge of God.
See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition
and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ. Colossians 2:8
Claiming to know about the Bible is not the same as knowing the Person in Whom the Bible points to; namely, Jesus Christ. You are attempting to make Jesus into an idol of your own design...into the image of what you wish him to be not who he is revealed to be in the pages of the Bible.
You wrote: By the way, there's no such thing as the "liberal theology", because - unlike the believers of thousands of "orthodox" denominations who are persuaded that they possess the one true faith (while all the others are WRONG) - we liberals believe in the freedom to think for ourselves, which leads to a variety of different "liberal theologies".
Bingo!
In the bolded part, you have admitted to rejecting the absolute truth of God and instead, cling to making idols into your own desires and image for yourselves.
Christinewjc,
When you say, " I didn't address your 41 anti-theses because most, if not all, are right out of the Skeptics Annotated Bible" what's your point? Of course the Skeptics and I are reporting the same thing, because we are reading THE SAME BIBLE.
And when you say "The fact that you did not provide the Bible verse references next to your allegations speaks volumes" I ask again, What's your point? I made all of the precise Bible verse references available to anyone interested in them AT THE CLICK OF A MOUSE. Even if I put them "next to" the passages in question that wouldn't help anyone who DIDN'T WANT TO LOOK AT THEM. I am doing what I can to make the references available, but as they used to say, "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink."
HERE are SOME of the references that I quote at http://www.whatkindofgod.org/ :
"Although one of his principal commandments is "Thou shalt not kill," this God does an awful lot of killing himself, and often directs m any human beings to kill many other human beings :
(According to Genesis 9:6)
"Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God has God made man."
(According to Leviticus 27:29)
"No person devoted to destruction may be ransomed; he must be put to death."
(According to Exodus 34: 6-7)
"The Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. . . does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sins of the fathers to the third and fourth generation."
(According to Leviticus 26:14-22 :)
" If you continue hostile to me, and will not obey me, I will continue to plague you sevenfold for your sins. I will let loose wild animals against you, and they shall kill your children."
(According to Hosea 13:16 :)
"Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up."
# See all of these instances of God being portrayed as killing himself, or ordering human beings to kill other human beings ( not all of whom have done anything to earn capital punishment ): Num. 16:35, Num. 11:1, Num. 21:6, Deut. 32:39-43, Psalms 135:10, Isaiah 66:16, Jer. 13:14, Joshua 10:10-11, 1 Sam. 5:9, Psalms 136:17-18, Hosea 9:16, Amos 2:3, Ex. 4:24, 2 Sam. 6:6-7 , and 2 Kings 5:7 . Lev. 26:7-8, Num. 25:4-5, Num. 25:17, Deut. 20:16-17, Joshua 10:40, Ezek. 9:5-6, 1 Sam. 15:3,18 Also note: Ex. 32:27-28, Num. 21:34-35, Num. 31:7-8, Num. 35:19-21, and Jer. 48:10. And God supposedly killed the righteous along with the wicked : Ezek. 21:3-4 and killed a large number of people simply because they couldn't control their curiosity about the contents of the ark of the covenant : 1 Sam. 6:19-20.
# a "god" who the bible says made the penalty for not failing to observe the IVth Commandment (to honor the sabbath) death, This has so many ramifications that we devote a whole web page to it at sabbathobservance.html.
When he wasn't promoting "the death penalty", our bible says that God favored the following:
# He mandated unlimited punishment for limited sins: Matt. 25:46. Also Rev. 14:11 and Mark 9:43-48.
# He takes credit for creating evil (as well as GOOD), Isaiah. 45:7.
# He deceives: Jer. 20:7.
# He delivers a holy man ( JOB }, and his entire family, into Satan's hands, just to prove a point : Job 2:6.
# He is not omnipotent or all powerful: Judges 1:19.
# He made false and unfulfilled prophecies:
In Gen. 17:3, 8 and Ex. 32:13.
God told Abraham that he would give to him and his descendants all of Canaan for an eternal possession. But Acts 7:5 says, "He gave him ( Abraham) no inheritance here, not even a foot of ground. But God promised him that he and his descendants after him would possess the land, even though at that time Abraham had no child" and Heb. 11:13 says, "All these people. . . did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance." The Bible itself admits that God's promise to Abraham failed.
In Gen. 35:10 God said to Jacob, "thy name shall not be called any more Jacob,Yet, Gen. 46:2 says, "God spoke to Israel in the visions of the night, and said, 'Jacob, Jacob'.
Lastly, 1 Sam. 23:12 says, "David asked, 'Will the citizens of Keilah surrender me and my men to Saul?' And the Lord said, 'They will'." This prophecy never occurred, because the opposite happened. Saul was delivered into David's hands, not once but twice.
# He causes adultery: 2 Sam. 12:11-12.
# He orders the taking of a harlot: Hosea 1:2.
# He loses his temper: Deut. 13:17 Hosea 1:2, Judges 3:8, Psalm 21:9, 2 Sam. 24:1, 1 Kings 16:26, Nahum 1:2, 2 Kings 13:3, Ex. 32:10, Num. 11:1, Num. 16:46 , Num. 32:13-14 , 1 Kings 14:9, 1 Kings 15:30, 1 Kings 16:2, 1 Kings 16:7, 1 Kings 16:13, 2 Chron. 34:25, Psalm 18:7 and Jer. 44:6.
# He is often jealous: "I the Lord thy God am a jealous God. . ." Deut. 5:9, Ex. 20:5 . "For the Lord thy God is a jealous God among you. . ." Deut. 6:15 .See also: Ex. 34:14, Deut. 4:24, Deut. 29:20, Psalms 78:58, Ezek. 16:38, Ezek. 36:5-6 and Joshua 24:19.
# He repents. Even though 1 Sam. 15:29 ( "the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent" says that god never repents, the following verses say the opposite. it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at this heart" Gen. 6:6, Ex. 32:14, 1 Sam. 15:11 1 Sam. 15:35, Jer. 26:3, Jer. 18:8
# He practices injustice: Ex. 4:22-23, Num. 14:18, Deut. 23:2, Deut. 28:32, Joshua 22:20, 2 Sam. 12:14 .
# He plays favorites: We are told in 2 Chron. 19:7 that, ". . .there is no iniquity with the Lord our God, nor respect of persons, nor taking of gifts." Yet, that is clearly disproved by the following comments. "For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God: the Lord thy God has chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth" Deut. 7:6, Deut.14:2, 1 Sam. 12:22, 1 Chron. 17:22, Isaiah. 52:6, Matt. 15:24, John 4:22, Gen. 4:4-5.
# He sanctions slavery: Deut. 15:17, Titus 2:9.
# According to Leviticus 21:16-23, God doesn't want the handicapped near him: " The LORD spoke to Moses, saying:
'Speak to Aaron and say: No one of your offspring throughout their generations who has a blemish may approach to offer the food of his God. For no one who has a blemish shall draw near, one who is blind or lame, or one who has a mutilated face or a limb too long, or one who has a broken foot or a broken hand, or a hunchback, or a dwarf, or a man with a blemish in his eyes or an itching disease or scabs or crushed testicles. No descendant of Aaron the priest who has a blemish shall come near to offer the Lord's offerings by fire; since he has a blemish, he shall not come near to offer the food of his God. He may eat the food of his God, of the most holy as well as of the holy. But he shall not come near the curtain or approach the altar, because he has a blemish, that he may not profane my sanctuaries; for I am the LORD.'
# He punishes children for their father's sins: Ex. 34:7.
# He promotes the physical abuse of children. ( The following quotations come from the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible: )
* Prov 13:24: "He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes (diligently)."
* Prov 19:18: "Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying."
* Prov 22:15: "Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him."
* Prov 23:13: "Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die."
* Prov 23:14: "Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell (Shoel)."
* Prov 29:15: "The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame."
* An additional verse from the New Testament is occasionally cited as justification for physical punishment of children: Hebrews 12:6-7: "...the Lord disciplines those he loves, and he punishes everyone he accepts as a son. Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as sons. For what son is not disciplined by his father?"
http://nospank.net/floggers.htm is a web site featuring examples of Conservative Christians being motivated by the bible to abuse children.
# Not only does this God bar "bastards" from the assembly of the Lord because of their illegitimacy, but he extends the same discrimination against ten generations of their offspring as well : Deut. 23:2. [*see implications below.]
# He punishes many for the acts of one: Gen. 3:16, Gen. 20:18.
# He prevents people from hearing his words: Isaiah 6:10, Rom. 9:18, Matt. 13: 13-14.
# He orders cannibalism: Isaiah 49:26 says, "I will make your oppressors eat their own flesh; they will be drunk on their own blood, as with wine. Then all mankind will know that I, the LORD, am your Savior, your Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob." Lev. 26: 28-29 , Jer. 19:9, Ezek. 5: 9-10.
# He demanded 16,000 virgins be given to soldiers as war plunder and 32 be set aside for himself: Num. 31:31-40.
# He requires an unbetrothed virgin to marry her seducer: Ex. 22:16.
# He sanctions the degradation of the enemies' women: Deut. 21:10-13.
# He sanctions the beating of slaves as long as they can arise at least a day or two after the beating: Ex. 21:20-21.
# He required that a woman found not be a virgin on her wedding night be stoned to death, at her father's front door; Deut. 22:20-21.
# He requires a woman to marry her rapist: Deut. 22:28-29.
# He trains people for war: Psalm 144:1 says, "Praise be to the Lord, my Rock, who trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle."
# He intentionally gave out bad laws: Ezek. 20:25 says, "I also gave them over to statutes that were not good and laws they could not live by. . ."
# He orders gambling: Joshua 14:2, Num. 26:52-56.
# He excused the sins of prostitutes and adulterers: Hosea 4:14.
# He excused a murderer and promised him protection:Gen. 4:13-15.
# He aided rather than punished a swindler: In Gen. 28:14-15.
# He breaks up families: Ex. 21:2-4 "
Liberal Rev,
There is a huge library of counter-arguments HERE.
You will discover how badly you have taken out of context several verses.
You will discover how false your allegations against the character of God in the Bible really are.
You will realize that your finite mind cannot compete with God's infinite mind and glory as it is revealed in the pages of the Bible.
When you get to the site, all you do is click in a letter of the alphabet regarding what you are researching. Then, in the next space click in a book of the Bible. You will then be able to scroll down to read any number of counter points in this encyclopedia of apologetics.
The Bible tells us not to get into foolish debates and arguments with non-believers. It's too time consuming and unnecessary.
However, I will share with you an article written by an individual with the screen name of "utopian indigent."
It is a profound essay entitled, A Right-Brained Case for Jesus.
It was posted back in 2004 at my message board. Unfortunately, the links contained within the article no longer work. That is why I am so glad that I copied the entire text (with permission from UI) to my message board.) It is long, but well worth the read.
Not that I would expect this (or anything else) to change your skeptical mind and/or your contempt against the God of the Bible.
Despite the fact that I can already predict your rejection of what is written, I still decided to post these things for the benefit of the audience out there in cyberspace.
May it bless, and confirm the faith of all the Christians who come here and decide to read it.
The passion of the Christian is a great article, too.
Sadly I know plenty of Christians who tend to overlook parts of scripture because they don't like what it tells them, but that's not all of us. Everything the Bible says is true, regardless of if is about people who are well removed from us, or if it nails us personally right between the eyes.
Christinewjc ,
Thanks for your offer of "a huge library of counter-arguments HERE. "
But I didn't send you on a wild goose chase to find problems in the bible that "Orthodox" people like yourself ignore while claiming like Mark W. "Everything the Bible says is true, regardless of if is about people who are well removed from us, or if it nails us personally right between the eyes."
I spelled out PRECISELY what those PROBLEMS were, and I would your explanations being just as direct and precise. Let me narrow it down a bit by offering you just a fews samples from my initial list, How do you explain to yourself and to any children or followers why you and they should respect this kind of "god", i.e.
a "god" who the bible says sanctioned the beating of slaves as long as they could arise at least a day or two after the beating? ( Ex. 21:20-21. & Deut. 22:20-21)
a "god" who the bible says showed contempt for the handicapped? ( See details below )
a "god" who the bible says punished children for their father's sins? ( Ex. 34:7 )
a "god" who the bible says not only barred "bastards" from the assembly of the Lord because of their illegitimacy, but extended the same discrimination against ten generations of a "bastard's" descendants as well? ( See details below )
a "god" who the bible says demanded 16,000 virgins be given to soldiers as war plunder ? and
a "god" who the bible says demanded 16 virgins be set aside for himself?(Num. 31:31-40)
a "god" who the bible says required an unbetrothed virgin to marry her seducer? (Ex. 22:16)
a "god" who the bible says required a woman to marry her rapist? ( Deut. 22:28-29)
a "god" who the bible says required that a woman found not be a virgin on her wedding night be stoned to death, at her father's front door? (Deut. 22:20-21.)
a "god" who the bible says sanctioned the degradation of the enemies' women? ( Deut. 21:10-13)
a "god" who the bible says caused adultery? (2 Sam. 12:11-12)
Liberator Rev,
If I did all that work and countered your arguments, would it change your mind one bit?
I don't think so.
You appear to have your mind made up and no matter what I would post, you won't accept it.
In fact, I don't think that you even read any of the links I shared...did you.
a "god" who the bible says sanctioned the beating of slaves as long as they could arise at least a day or two after the beating? ( Ex. 21:20-21. & Deut. 22:20-21)
These were laws established to settle disputes. Notice that the "punishment was to fit the crime." If the slave (more like servant) was killed, then the owner (employer) must be punished. If the injuries required rest and the servant was able to get up "in a day or two," then the owner (employer) would not be punished.
Just to let you know - the Bible acknowledges the existence of slavery but never encourages it. Some of the reasons why people were slaves (servants) was because of poverty, debt, or even crime. Also, keep in mind that Hebrew slaves were to be treated as humans, not property, and were allowed to work their way to freedom (unlike when the Israelites were held captive in Egypt indefinitely).
a "god" who the bible says punished children for their father's sins? ( Ex. 34:7 )
This is no arbitrary punishment. Children still suffer for the sins of their parents. Consider child abuse or alcoholism, for example. There are also the "not so obvious" sins like selfishness and greed which can be passed along as well. The dire consequences of sin are not limited to the individual family member. Sin isn't to be treated casually (but, unfortunately, often is in this day and age). It is to be repented of and turned from.
There is a saying, "children learn what they live." Often, the cycle of abuse, violence, alcohol/drug abuse etc. is passed on from parents to children.
You keep writing "details below" but I don't see the verses.
a "god" who the bible says demanded 16,000 virgins be given to soldiers as war plunder ? and
a "god" who the bible says demanded 16 virgins be set aside for himself?(Num. 31:31-40)
a "god" who the bible says required an unbetrothed virgin to marry her seducer? (Ex. 22:16)
Contrary to what you think all of these verses mean, they are actually acts of mercy. If the men of the women were killed in battle, then, the women would be left destitute. The Lord provided instructions for them to be provided for.
a "god" who the bible says required a woman to marry her rapist? ( Deut. 22:28-29)
This was a marriage violation case. Notice that the verse states that the man "can never divorce her as long as he lives." This is proof that God values marriage for life. The main concern here (as in the above objections you posted) is for care for the women so that they aren't left alone, husbandless, homeless, income-less, and starving. You must keep in mind that the culture of that day was far different than today.
You, of all people, should like the fact that Jesus treated women very highly compared to the men of that day. Also, women were treated to being the first to see the risen Lord!
a "god" who the bible says required that a woman found not be a virgin on her wedding night be stoned to death, at her father's front door? (Deut. 22:20-21.)
This was meant as a deterent to avoid sexual sins. Instructions about sexual behavior would have been vital during the exodus of three million people over 40 years. They would be equally important after entering the Promised Land. The Israelites were to be "set apart for God" and not indulge in the sexual perversions of their pagan neighbors.
Just as the death penalty is considered a deterrent for murder, so was the stoning penalty to be was considered as a deterrent for sexual sins. Most people find it unthinkable to murder another person. In those days, the women would find it unthinkable (Israelites, that is) to have premarital sex.
Sexual sins have the power to disrupt and destroy the church.
Today, look at what is happening with the reprobate "gay" christian movement. Their heresy knows no bounds! See this post as well as many others at gcmWatch to see how sexual sin can escalate into heresy that leads to apostasy.
When the boundaries set down by God are broken...all hell breaks loose...literally!
a "god" who the bible says sanctioned the degradation of the enemies' women? ( Deut. 21:10-13)
You left out important portions of the passage. Contrary to degradation of the woman, the instructions for her to shave her head, trim nails etc. were signs to indicate that she was mourning her father's death. After the mourning period, then the man can marry her (and thus, have proper sexual relations with her.)
a "god" who the bible says caused adultery? (2 Sam. 12:11-12)
I don't know how you came to that conclusion through reading these verses. This was about punishment to David for his adulterous sin with Bathsheba and the murder of her former husband. There is nothing there that says "God caused adultery."
Liberator Rev,
Can you please copy your comment to the clipboard, and repost it in a new comment. Before you publish it this time PLEASE COMPLETELY ELIMINATE THE === BECAUSE IT IS CAUSING THIS ENTIRE THREAD TO SKEW DOWN TO THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE.
Thank you.
Also, be sure to delete the old comment.
I am involved with preparing dinner so I am not able to respond to your post right now.
However, I refuse to respond until you give me your word that you have read the link A Right-Brained Case for Jesus
Also, like I told you before, all of your objections have been refuted at that Tektonics Apologetics Encyclopedia site. If you really want answers to your objections, then I suggest that you go there and research them.
My answers were not "my or scholars opinions." Inductive Bible studies are very valuable to get to the truth of these matters. I'm sure that you didn't even think about the idea that the women would have been left desolate if not taken in by the Israelite soldiers. Still, you reject the explanation because you don't want to accept the fact that you are hopelessly wrong and skewed in your thinking about the God of the Bible. You appear to be here to "argue for arguments sake" - just as I had suspected all along.
Tell you what. You do the research and post what you find out at the Tektonics site...K?
Happy reading!
Christinewjc In response to your question: "If I did all that work and countered your arguments, would it change your mind one bit? You appear to have your mind made up and no matter what I would post, you won't accept it."
I won't know until I READ your work. but if you go through the effort of actually addressing my questions, I guarantee you that I will read what you have to say :
So here we go : (it's great that you have already provided the problem verses in italic, and made your comments in normal font. Now I will post my responses in bold font)
Are you sure that you want to promote the idea of :
a "god" who the bible says sanctioned the beating of slaves as long as they could arise at least a day or two after the beating? ( Ex. 21:20-21. & Deut. 22:20-21)
Christinewjc writes: "
These were laws established to settle disputes. Notice that the "punishment was to fit the crime." If the slave (more like servant) was killed, then the owner (employer) must be punished. If the injuries required rest and the servant was able to get up "in a day or two," then the owner (employer) would not be punished.
Just to let you know - the Bible acknowledges the existence of slavery but never encourages it. Some of the reasons why people were slaves (servants) was because of poverty, debt, or even crime.. Also, keep in mind that Hebrew slaves were to be treated as humans, not property, and were allowed to work their way to freedom (unlike when the Israelites were held captive in Egypt indefinitely).
Liberator_Rev responds: I never cease to be amazed at how comfortable "Orthodox Christians" are with suffering, so long as THEY aren't the ones experiencing it. The most "Orthodox Christians" in America are the one's whose "bible belt" heritage is 300 years or so of enslaving their brothers and sisters who happened to have been born of the wrong persuasion, i.e. black!!!
Are you sure that you want to promote the idea of :
a "god" who the bible says punished children for their father's sins? ( Ex. 34:7 )
Christinewjc writes: " This is no arbitrary punishment. Children still suffer for the sins of their parents. Consider child abuse or alcoholism, for example. There are also the "not so obvious" sins like selfishness and greed which can be passed along as well. The dire consequences of sin are not limited to the individual family member. Sin isn't to be treated casually (but, unfortunately, often is in this day and age). It is to be repented of and turned from.
There is a saying, "children learn what they live." Often, the cycle of abuse, violence, alcohol/drug abuse etc. is passed on from parents to children."
Liberator_Rev responds: Christinewjc, Just because "Orthodox theologians" call such explanations "answers" doesn't make them true answers. It is clear from the actual passages that the suffering of the children is neither incidental nor unintended as claimed in this "explanation", but directly INTENDED by this god of yours. And even if it WERE unintended, MY liberal idea of god would not allow the innocent to be punished for the sins of others.
Are you sure that you want to promote the idea of : a "god" who the bible says required an unbetrothed virgin to marry her seducer? (Ex.. 22:16)
Christinewjc writes: "Contrary to what you think all of these verses mean, they are actually acts of mercy. If the men of the women were killed in battle, then, the women would be left destitute. The Lord provided instructions for them to be provided for.
Liberator_Rev responds: Just because your friends SAY "Contrary to what you think all of these verses mean, they are actually acts of mercy." doesn't make them right and the rest of mankind that read what the verses actually say, as opposed to what you would LIKE them to say. . Your "Orthodox theologians are speaking foolishness. And if this explanation of theirs made any sense, why would this orthodox god of yours speak of "virgins" raither than "widows" ? MY liberal idea of god would instruct his followers to take care of the innocent women and children survivors, not to take them for plunder and ravage them.
Are you sure that you want to promote the idea of
a "god" who the bible says required a woman to marry her rapist? ( Deut. 22:28-29)
Christinewjc writes: "This was a marriage violation case. Notice that the verse states that the man "can never divorce her as long as he lives." This is proof that God values marriage for life. The main concern here (as in the above objections you posted) is for care for the women so that they aren't left alone, husbandless, homeless, income-less, and starving.
Liberator_Rev responds: When your "Orthodox theologians" say " This is proof that God values marriage for life." they are counting on people not noticing that in this very same paragraph this orthodox god instructs people to stone a woman to death if he husband claims that she was not a virgin on their wedding night and she can't prove that she was. MY liberal idea of god doesn't want women's lives to end just because a penis may have penetrated their unmarried vaginas.
Christinewjc writes: "You must keep in mind that the culture of that day was far different than today."
If we are to believe the bible, THAT was a time and a place where THEOCRACY ruled, as opposed to our secular age.
Are these "Orthodox theologians" saying that the times and the people of those days were miserable, as opposed to our secular age and place where people are much better off?
Are you sure that you want to promote the idea of
a "god" who the bible says required that a woman found not be a virgin on her wedding night be stoned to death, at her father's front door? (Deut. 22:20-21.)
Christinewjc writes: "This was meant as a deterent to avoid sexual sins. Instructions about sexual behavior would have been vital during the exodus of three million people over 40 years. They would be equally important after entering the Promised Land. The Israelites were to be "set apart for God" and not indulge in the sexual perversions of their pagan neighbors.
Just as the death penalty is considered a deterrent for murder, so was the stoning penalty to be was considered as a deterrent for sexual sins. Most people find it unthinkable to murder another person. In those days, the women would find it unthinkable (Israelites, that is) to have premarital sex.
Sexual sins have the power to disrupt and destroy the church."
Liberator_Rev responds: If, as your "Orthodox theologians" say, "This was meant as a deterent to avoid sexual sins." why is there no instruction to find and execute the MALE who defiled this virgin? And if you are satisfied with the portrayal by your "Orthodox theologians" of god as someone who KILLS some people to prevent OTHER people from having sex before marriage, then you can keep that god to yourself. We "Liberals Like Christ" want no part of such a sex-obsessed god!
When your "Orthodox theologians" dragged the poor woman "caught in the very act of adultery" before Jesus and challenged him to obey what their god had told them must be done to such sinners, what was his response?
Are you sure that you want to promote the idea of
a "god" who the bible says sanctioned the degradation of the enemies' women? ( Deut. 21:10-13)
" When you go to war against your enemies and the LORD your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives, if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her as your wife. Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month, then you may go to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife."
Christinewjc writes: "You left out important portions of the passage. Contrary to degradation of the woman, the instructions for her to shave her head, trim nails etc. were signs to indicate that she was mourning her father's death. After the mourning period, then the man can marry her (and thus, have proper sexual relations with her.)
Liberator_Rev responds: I'm sorry, Christinewjc, that you think the important parts of this passage have to do with her hair and nails. The parts that are important in my limited liberal brain is that God is portrayed as the one who first delivers the girl's parents into the hands of their killers, and then delivers the girls into the beds of their killers and according to your your "Orthodox theologians" these girls are supposed to consider themselves lucky.
Are you sure that you want to promote the idea of
a "god" who the bible says caused adultery? (2 Sam. 12:11-12)
"This is what the LORD says: 'Out of your own household I am going to bring calamity upon you. Before your very eyes I will take your wives and give them to one who is close to you, and he will lie with your wives in broad daylight. You did it in secret, but I will do this thing in broad daylight before all Israel.' "
Christinewjc writes: "I don't know how you came to that conclusion through reading these verses. This was about punishment to David for his adulterous sin with Bathsheba and the murder of her former husband. There is nothing there that says "God caused adultery."
Liberator_Rev responds: I'm sorry, Christinewjc, if you can't see what is placed right in front of you, there's nothing more that I can do!!!!
Rather than eliminating these problems, all your "orthodox theologians" have done is show what genuine problems they are.
Liberator Rev,
After you have read the link I provided (A Right-Brained Case for Jesus), next, go here and read about a gay "cleric" who claims that Jesus' sacrificial death on the cross is "insane."
Then, tell me which ideology lines up closer to what you truly believe about Jesus Christ.
Hi Matt W.,
Welcome to Talk Wisdom!
Very well said!
Sin does hit us "right between the eyes" and repentance through Jesus Christ's sacrificial death at the cross is needed to be reconciled back unto the Father.
Sadly, that word "repentance" is missing in the gay christian movement, as well as in many of the new age emergent churches.
Steve over at Camp On This has a great post about the need for repentance.
Then, compare what is written there with this post called Oprah and Friends to Teach Course on New Age Christ
Next, check out Gay christian cleric rejects christs sacrifice as "insane."
When comparing what the Bible truly teaches against the errors and heresies that all of these articles reveal regarding the new age and reprobate theologies out there, we can clearly see that the prophecies in Jude about heresy creeping into the churches as we approach the end times are certainly coming to fruition at an alarming rate today.
Wow! Just read C.H. Spurgeon's morning and evening devotionals for today.
Take a look at the evening devotional and notice what it says about how our Savior was despised and mistreated. Plus, notice the fact that we should realize that they will despise what we share about our spiritual lives in Christ. We should expect that "we should be more hated by His enemies."
This is where the "it's all about love, grace, and mercy" crowd have gone wrong. They want to skip over the need for the cross and repentance for salvation!
C.H. Spurgeon's Morning and Evening Devotional
Saturday November 10, 2007
Christians Unite Devotionals
Evening
"It is enough for the disciple that he be as His Master."-Matthew 10:25
No one will dispute this statement, for it would be unseemly for the servant to be exalted above his Master. When our Lord was on earth, what was the treatment He received? Were His claims acknowledged, His instructions followed, His perfections worshipped, by those whom He came to bless? No; "He was despised and rejected of men." Outside the camp was His place: cross-bearing was His occupation. Did the world yield Him solace and rest? "Foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay His head."
This inhospitable country afforded Him no shelter: it cast Him out and crucified Him. Such-if you are a follower of Jesus, and maintain a consistent, Christ-like walk and conversation-you must expect to be the lot of that part of your spiritual life which, in its outward development, comes under the observation of men. They will treat it as they treated the Saviour-they will despise it. Dream not that worldlings will admire you, or that the more holy and the more Christ-like you are, the more peaceably people will
act towards you. They prized not the polished gem, how should they value the jewel in the rough? "If they have called the Master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of His household?" If we were more like Christ, we should be more hated by His enemies. It were a sad dishonour to a child of God to be the world's favourite. It is a very ill omen to hear a wicked world clap its hands and shout "Well done" to the Christian man. He may begin to look to his character, and wonder whether he has not been doing wrong, when the
unrighteous give him their approbation. Let us be true to our Master, and have no friendship with a blind and base world which scorns and rejects Him. Far be it from us to seek a crown of honour where our Lord found a coronet of thorn.
Chris,
I can see why you don't want to defend the simplistic beliefs of "orthodox theologians" in a bible which attributes atrocious behavior to god and expects people to approve of such a god and act accordingly.
I'm sorry, but I have better things to do like attending to my own web sites, which had 18,105 unique visitors during the month just ended. up incidentally from 14827 in Sept.
So, if you should ever want a more grown up view of Jesus of Nazareth and the bible, remember to Google "Liberals Like Christ" .
Ah...I see. Don't want to answer the difficult questions? You sound a LOT like Hillary Clinton!!
Lets see...so far you -
1. Don't want to read the links.
2. Therefore, avoid the need to answer the questions I posed to you.
3. Change the subject.
4. Put forth lame excuses.
5. Brag about something that isn't even very important.
6. Use another excuse in order to avoid the real points in this discussion.
What is your parting gift? Typical liberal left loonie excuses!
Some brilliant parting words borrowed from my friend Susan Smith:
"Religion is man trying to reach God. Christianity is God reaching man. This blog is not "religious." However, it shows true LIFE in Jesus the Messiah. When we accept the way and understand the truth, then we have the LIFE."
Christinewjc says of Liberator_Rev:
"Ah...I see. Don't want to answer the difficult questions? You sound a LOT like Hillary Clinton!!
Lets see...so far you -
1. Don't want to read the links.
2. Therefore, avoid the need to answer the questions I posed to you.
3. Change the subject.
4. Put forth lame excuses.
5. Brag about something that isn't even very important.
6. Use another excuse in order to avoid the real points in this discussion.
What is your parting gift? Typical liberal left loonie excuses!
Liberator_Rev didn't come to
Christinewjc's blog to discuss everything under the sun but simply to make ONE point,
i.e. that it is foolist for her and her "orthodox theologians" to treat the bible as inspired inerrant "word of God"
when that bible often says some very foolish things about God, as in the many examples I asked her to defend.
After giving her many chances to make her case, I am giving up and
Christinewjc now says of Liberator_Rev:
"Ah...I see. Don't want to answer the difficult questions? You sound a LOT like Hillary Clinton!!
Lets see...so far you -
1. Don't want to read the links.
2. Therefore, avoid the need to answer the questions I posed to you.
3. Change the subject.
4. Put forth lame excuses.
5. Brag about something that isn't even very important.
6. Use another excuse in order to avoid the real points in this discussion.
What is your parting gift? Typical liberal left loonie excuses!"
Liberator_Rev final response is:
Christinewjc, I commend you for finally making an effort to answer the difficult questions I posed to you.
1. Getting you to read the difficult verses, Christinewjc, was like pulling teeth.
2. Although you finally made an effort to deal with some of the many problem verses I put forth,
as I showed, your "answers" were answers in name only.
3. Christinewjc, put your hand on the bible and swear that it wasn't YOU who kept trying to change the subject !
4. and that that it wasn't YOU who provided nothing but lame explanations of the troublesome verses!
5. Do I detect a bit of envy in your response to the fact that 18000 people find my work important enough to read, while you can only "brag" of ?
6. "Use another excuse in order to avoid the real points in this discussion.
What is your parting gift? Typical liberal left loonie excuses!"
Christinewjc, What good does it do to profess to be a follower of Christ and ignore what he taught, such as "You have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, 'You shall not murder'; and 'whoever murders shall be liable to judgment.' But I say to you that if you are angry with a brother or sister, you will be liable to judgment; and if you insult a brother or sister, you will be liable to the council; and if you say, 'You fool,' you will be liable to the hell of fire."
And finally, if you think that comparing me to the next president of the U.S. is an insult. Think again. If you will recall, one of the ten commandments is "Thou shalt not bear false witness". You seem to think that it is virtuous to bear false witness if the target is a political opponent,
Rev. Ray Dubuque, creator of http://LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/
Liberator Rev,
What you fail to see is that God's Word provides the ultimate point and counters what you, a skeptic who places his finite wisdom above the infinite wisdom of the God of the universe in order to point people away from the purpose of the Scriptures to make your one point.
I told you from the very beginning that "I've been there...done that" with many a skeptic in the past. It is a total waste of time unless and that's a HUGE UNLESS, such skeptic is genuinely searching for truth...that being the absolute truth that Jesus IS and TAUGHT. He said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except by Me."
Jhn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
Jesus also said to the Father during his prayer to God the Father, "Your Word (the Father's Holy Word - the Bible) is truth, sanctify them by your truth."
Jhn 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
Sanctify means:
"To Be Sacred and Set Apart."
Your theology so closely resembles the secular humanistic morality and worldview that it is obvious to me that you are not following Jesus' prayer about being "sanctified by God's truth."
Your theology is an example of what NOT TO FOLLOW:
See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ. Colossians 2:8 (NIV)
Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. Colossians 2:8 (NKJV)
Don't let anyone lead you astray with empty philosophy and high-sounding nonsense that come from human thinking and from the evil powers of this world, and not from Christ. Colossians 2:8 (NLT)
Footnote:
Or from the basic principles of this world; also in 2:20.
So, your bashing of the Bible directly counters what Jesus claims about the Bible. Do you think that you, a finite human being, have the right to do that to your Creator God?
Got another suggestion for you. Go to a Christian bookstore and get the many books written about Bible difficulties. Norman Geisler's is good. In the front of the book, he lists the 7 (if I recall correctly) mistakes that people make when making claims of Bible errors and/or passages that skeptics claim make God unworshippable.
The Bible is the inerrant Word of God. It is finite man's, fallible reading of it that causes the problems and perceived discrepancies.
Some verses to get you started -
About The Bible:
The Bible is God's Word to all mankind. It was written by human authors, under the supernatural guidance of the Holy Spirit. It is the supreme source of truth for Christian beliefs and living. Because it is inspired by God, it is truth without any mixture of error.
2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20, 21; 2 Timothy 1:13; Psalms 12:6; 119:105, 160; Proverbs 30:5
If you had answered my one question about whether you would agree with Utopian Indigent's essay or the gay cleric who claims that Jesus' sacrificial death at the cross is "insane," then all who read here would know what your "theology" is really all about.
That would answer your "insult a brother or sister" comment, as well.
Tell me Lib Rev, do you agree with Paul's admonition "to teach Jesus Christ and Him crucified?"
Everything else is trivial in comparison to how one answers Jesus' question, "Who do you say that I am."
Making an observation about someone is not "bearing false witness." Get a Bible concordance and read it.
About the 18,000 "followers" of yours. I feel very bad for them for they are being led astray by you.
God knows who they are. I pray that they will one day know the truth. It shall set them free; first from you and your reprobate theology, but most importantly of all, from the penalty for their sins.
Wow. Watching apparently intelligent people argue over their imaginary friends in certainly entertaining. Truth be told, liberal theology has the same problem as "orthodox" theology -- their adherence to theism. Religion has been loosing the war against science for nearly 300 years now. It has only been with the decline of religion's influence that enabled the Reformation, the Enlightenment, and eventually liberal democratic governments. There is nothing in history to suggest this trajectory is going to change. At present, only 10-30% of children raised in Christian homes remain in the religion as adults. America will become as secular as Western Europe within two generations. Until then, we are faced with the same obstructionism presented by religion when trying to solve social problems. It is no coincidence that the areas of the world which are the most secular are also the most free, healthy, educated, and longest living.
Hi Christine,
You sure are patient!
As a Methodist I'm embarrassed the Liberator Rev. was an ordained pastor in the denomination. I'm not surprised, as we have many false teachers. He is one of the reasons I always wrestle with whether to stay and fight or to just leave to a more orthodox place. We have horrible church discipline in that people like him got in and can stay.
David's comments sound familiar. There was a "David" who used to comment at my site who pretended to be a believer and a UCC member, then said he liked the UU "church" then admitted later to being an atheist. He would use the same foolish "imaginary friends" argument.
Good idea to just refer people to Tektonics - what a great web site! The questions on the Rev's list were the typical arguments from outrage and betray his ethnocentricity and lack of understanding of the culture and context of the passages he refers to.
I don't spend much time with such stubborn skeptics. They are entitled to their beliefs.
My only plea to them is to be intellectually honest and to stop referring to themselves as Christians! It mocks the cross and the blood of the martyrs.
Hi Neil,
Thanks for the heads up on David. I am guessing that his troll comment will end up being just a "one hit wonder" after you have exposed him here.
When I briefly glanced at his website, I didn't even notice that Liberator Rev is an ordained pastor in the Methodist denomination.
No need to be embarrassed. I have recently experienced finding out that a formerly trusted pastor is now actively engaged with the likes of Joel Osteen! What a disappointment...to say the least.
The heresy going on today within various Christian denominations is astounding to me. How do people get led astray so easily? I think that it is because they do not study the Scriptures for themselves. Therefore, when questionable and non-biblical ideas are introduced to their congregations, they can't even recognize them!! That's a sad and dangerous place to be!
I agree that the Tektonics website is most valuable. Who has time to individually answer these skeptics? Who wants to waste time doing so anyway?
No matter what you personally decide to do about your church situation, I truly admire your honesty, steadfast faith in Jesus Christ and willingness to fight to bring back genuine orthodoxy within your church denomination. That's not an easy thing to do!
I can still recall the moment (during the PDL craze) when I realized that my former church may be vulnerable to the errant "Emergent church" movement. When I voiced my concern, it was basically dismissed and ignored by one of the assistant pastors (at the time).
Three years later, I have heard that hundreds of formerly devoted church attendees there have left for other churches!!
I never even dreamed that this particular pastor could have been deceived in such a way.
What's even worse is that now, the deception is growing deeper through getting involved with the likes of Osteen. It chills me to the bone.
You wrote:
"My only plea to them is to be intellectually honest and to stop referring to themselves as Christians! It mocks the cross and the blood of the martyrs."
That is an excellent goal, Neil!! They are so far from Christ's true gospel that it just doesn't make sense for them to call themselves "Christians." Pseudo-Christian is more like it.
Have you ever read the book "The Way of the Master" by Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron? It's really good. Hits a person right between the eyes with the truth. When I read it a few years back, it was the first time that I ever heard of "false converts."
I always knew that there were fake converts. But the descriptive term of false actually describes the fact that, as you stated, such a person can't hide their unsaved condition and is likely to be the type who "mocks the cross and the blood of the martyrs.
I see that you have mentioned Joel Osteen. I wanted to briefly explain my situation and ask a question.
My wife and I are in a church Small Group, with some good Christians, and all of us had talked briefly about Osteen, and all of us had seen enough of him to know that he is bad news. However, a new couple recently joined the group, and the husband is all about Joel Osteen. I started checking a little deeper, and just from getting his daily "devotional" by email I can see where he is leading people astray, but is there a good resource I can look at that digs deeper into this guy?
Thanks.
Here's a great link for you, Christine. It shows how endogenous retroviruses prove, beyond any doubt, that humans and apes descended from a common evolutionary ancestor. I'd LOVE to hear the ID answer to this one. :)
http://godbegone.blogspot.com/2007/10/how-endogenous-retroviruses-prove.html
I'll consider your silence on this to be tacit acceptance of defeat. Congratulations!! You're well on your way towards rational thought! ;)
Post a Comment