(December 8, 2017 at 4:36 pm)Starhunter Wrote:

(December 8, 2017 at 8:07 am)Whateverist Wrote: Thanks but no thanks.  I prefer to let god be a mystery and spend my reading time on good novels.

God will try to impress you of the truth, regardless. By the novels if he has to. Nature, the circumstances in life, love, people. 
Angels of God have watched over you since you were born, making sure that whatever happened to you was something you could handle, and would not affect your opportunities to connect with God. 
Will God ever give up on you? No. Will he force or manipulate you? No, that wouldn't be love. 
Will he do a miracle to wake you up? Yes if it works. 
Will he miss you if you are not saved? 
I don't know, because if he did, it would be forever, and I don't know whether he could handle that.
I don't have the guts to ask God that question, "will he miss the lost?" because I am afraid the answer is something I could not handle.

Hey, don't you lose any sleep over it. I realize you know exactly what it all means for God as you conceive of Him but that may not be as significant as you imagine. I have an entirely different take on what this god business is all about. I'll be fine but thanks for our concern.

---

(December 8, 2017 at 5:44 pm)Starhunter Wrote:

(December 8, 2017 at 5:42 pm)Khemikal Wrote: They always say that, don't they?

Does anybody really know you and your story?

More importantly, do any two people who claim to know God as well as you do ever agree on who He is?  Rare, very rare.

(December 8, 2017 at 6:55 am)Starhunter Wrote: To the topic, 
"your god" is really the god of your own imagination, it certainly isn't the God of the Bible, and the reason you may disagree, is because you don't know the Bible, just like millions don't... (There is also the possibility that you are a sworn enemy of God, that you know the Bible, but have chosen otherwise.)
So when you are asking how to reconcile "your god" as a mass murderer, you are asking someone to argue from that perspective. 

Then I would have to agree with the 'arguments' put forward. But who wants to stay in the dark?

When I discuss the xtian god, I use the bible as the basis of who he is and what he has done. Yes, I'm an atheist and I know he doesn't exist and that the bible is a fairytale but as the only source text for xtianity, that is the reference. Otherwise I would be discussing/debating with every xtian's idea of what god/xtianity is. With over 2 billion xtians, that is too many ideologies to contend with.

(December 9, 2017 at 8:05 pm)Bow Before Zeus Wrote:

(December 8, 2017 at 6:55 am)Starhunter Wrote: To the topic, 
"your god" is really the god of your own imagination, it certainly isn't the God of the Bible, and the reason you may disagree, is because you don't know the Bible, just like millions don't... (There is also the possibility that you are a sworn enemy of God, that you know the Bible, but have chosen otherwise.)
So when you are asking how to reconcile "your god" as a mass murderer, you are asking someone to argue from that perspective. 

Then I would have to agree with the 'arguments' put forward. But who wants to stay in the dark?

When I discuss the xtian god, I use the bible as the basis of who he is and what he has done. Yes, I'm an atheist and I know he doesn't exist and that the bible is a fairytale but as the only source text for xtianity, that is the reference. Otherwise I would be discussing/debating with every xtian's idea of what god/xtianity is. With over 2 billion xtians, that is too many ideologies to contend with.

That gives you all the more reason to study the Bible personally, to avoid the muddied waters of the world's religions.

(December 9, 2017 at 11:40 pm)Starhunter Wrote: That gives you all the more reason to study the Bible personally, to avoid the muddied waters of the world's religions.

Tell me how should I read 1st Chronicles?

(A merciful snip)

Quote:8 Benjamin was the father of Bela his firstborn,
Ashbel the second son, Aharah the third,
2 Nohah the fourth and Rapha the fifth.
3 The sons of Bela were:
Addar, Gera, Abihud,[a] 4 Abishua, Naaman, Ahoah, 5 Gera, Shephuphan and Huram.
6 These were the descendants of Ehud, who were heads of families of those living in Geba and were deported to Manahath:
7 Naaman, Ahijah, and Gera, who deported them and who was the father of Uzza and Ahihud.
8 Sons were born to Shaharaim in Moab after he had divorced his wives Hushim and Baara. 9 By his wife Hodesh he had Jobab, Zibia, Mesha, Malkam, 10 Jeuz, Sakia and Mirmah. These were his sons, heads of families. 11 By Hushim he had Abitub and Elpaal.
12 The sons of Elpaal:
Eber, Misham, Shemed (who built Ono and Lod with its surrounding villages), 13 and Beriah and Shema, who were heads of families of those living in Aijalon and who drove out the inhabitants of Gath.
14 Ahio, Shashak, Jeremoth, 15 Zebadiah, Arad, Eder, 16 Michael, Ishpah and Joha were the sons of Beriah.
17 Zebadiah, Meshullam, Hizki, Heber, 18 Ishmerai, Izliah and Jobab were the sons of Elpaal.
19 Jakim, Zikri, Zabdi, 20 Elienai, Zillethai, Eliel, 21 Adaiah, Beraiah and Shimrath were the sons of Shimei.
22 Ishpan, Eber, Eliel, 23 Abdon, Zikri, Hanan, 24 Hananiah, Elam, Anthothijah, 25 Iphdeiah and Penuel were the sons of Shashak.
26 Shamsherai, Shehariah, Athaliah, 27 Jaareshiah, Elijah and Zikri were the sons of Jeroham.
28 All these were heads of families, chiefs as listed in their genealogy, and they lived in Jerusalem.
29 Jeiel[b] the father[c] of Gibeon lived in Gibeon.
His wife’s name was Maakah, 30 and his firstborn son was Abdon, followed by Zur, Kish, Baal, Ner,[d] Nadab, 31 Gedor, Ahio, Zeker 32 and Mikloth, who was the father of Shimeah. They too lived near their relatives in Jerusalem.
33 Ner was the father of Kish, Kish the father of Saul, and Saul the father of Jonathan, Malki-Shua, Abinadab and Esh-Baal.[e]
34 The son of Jonathan:
Merib-Baal,[f] who was the father of Micah.
35 The sons of Micah:
Pithon, Melek, Tarea and Ahaz.
36 Ahaz was the father of Jehoaddah, Jehoaddah was the father of Alemeth, Azmaveth and Zimri, and Zimri was the father of Moza. 37 Moza was the father of Binea; Raphah was his son, Eleasah his son and Azel his son.
38 Azel had six sons, and these were their names:
Azrikam, Bokeru, Ishmael, Sheariah, Obadiah and Hanan. All these were the sons of Azel.
39 The sons of his brother Eshek:
Ulam his firstborn, Jeush the second son and Eliphelet the third. 40 The sons of Ulam were brave warriors who could handle the bow. They had many sons and grandsons—150 in all.
All these were the descendants of Benjamin.

Now then. How should I read this, for clarity?

(December 9, 2017 at 11:40 pm)Starhunter Wrote: That gives you all the more reason to study the Bible personally, to avoid the muddied waters of the world's religions.

The bible is -part- of those "muddied waters'.  You can't avoid them by wading around in them.

It's a little weird how some people try to transcend religious thought, saying they believe in god and not religion, or some such. But that just makes them a heretic. They're making up their own religion in their mind. That's not the solution to the problem. If you don't like the religion, or the churches, then stop clinging to their god.

When I read Old Testament scripture, I have to look at the multiple layers of the writing. For me, as a believer (albeit not necessarily the fundamentalist type), two layers pop out at me the most.

The first layer is the historical context. I have to understand that there is a lot of historical and cultural context that can't be ignored. The influence of Canaanite paganism in contrast to the ever separating beliefs of Israel is evident in much of what the writers of the Old Testament attributed to God.

The second layer is the spiritual layer. And, from what I have gathered in my experience reading it, is that in spite of the crazy historical and cultural circumstances that the OT was written, I still find prophecy and type shadows pointing to Christ everywhere.

Granted this is from my own personal studies and experiences with Scripture. You'll get different perspectives from different people.

---

(December 10, 2017 at 10:26 am)Chad32 Wrote: It's a little weird how some people try to transcend religious thought, saying they believe in god and not religion, or some such. But that just makes them a heretic. They're making up their own religion in their mind. That's not the solution to the problem. If you don't like the religion, or the churches, then stop clinging to their god.

Just because that is the way that organized religion has worked in the past, does not mean that that is the way that it should work now or that it should ever have been. Just because it happened does not necessarily make it justified. Just my two cents.

I'm pretty sure the "pointing to Jesus" part was early christians trying to retrofit their boy into the old jewish teachings. Hence why there are still a lot of jews running around. If it was all that clear, there wouldn't be three major groups following the same god. You talk nabout the way things were not needing to be the way things are today, but that kind of defeats the point of having a perfect deity with sacred scriptures. If you have to keep changing the book, or interpretations of it, to keep up with Human progress, then at some point you have to just leave it and its god behind.

(December 10, 2017 at 2:15 pm)Chad32 Wrote: I'm pretty sure the "pointing to Jesus" part was early christians trying to retrofit their boy into the old jewish teachings. Hence why there are still a lot of jews running around. If it was all that clear, there wouldn't be three major groups following the same god. You talk nabout the way things were not needing to be the way things are today, but that kind of defeats the point of having a perfect deity with sacred scriptures. If you have to keep changing the book, or interpretations of it, to keep up with Human progress, then at some point you have to just leave it and its god behind.

And that is an understandable conclusion to come to. The issue is we have a lack of manuscript evidence to prove whether or not said retrofitting happened within the New Testament. So essentially you and I are looking at the same situation and evidences but we come to different conclusions through different mindsets. You may look and ask "why?", while I look and ask "why not?", and then we could go in circles about where the burden of proof lies, et al. 

In my opinion, one of the biggest mistakes of the church was to elevate the Bible to God-like status, even if done so inadvertently.

I'll agree. A lot of times it seems people worship the book more than whatever nice teachings they could find within the book.