Originally posted by stellspalfiedo murders seek repentance from their victims, no, well you are talking pants, you could not cite a single example where persons were not warned and given the opportunity to make amends.
oooh so its okay to be a mass murderer if you pre-warn your victims. thats what you seem to be saying.
Originally posted by Proper Knobnope it stands to reason that if you take the Biblical example, the communities of the earth would have been much smaller and more centralised at the time, I am not sure exactly, but i dont think Noah is so many generations removed from Adam, but I am sure such reasoning will not prevent you from creating straw anyway.
So Noah had the time to build the Ark and also travel the globe warning people about the impending doom?
Originally posted by sonshipAhh yes, the worldwide flood which wasn't in fact worldwide. 🙂 I forgot you were a believer in the local flood.
I do not know what constituted "the world" in Noah's time.
I write here and things are read over the world without me traveling.
Longevity of life, technology of which we know little of ?
There are too many possibilities to make this a serious show stopper, I think.
Did you ever believe in true global flood? And if you did what was it that changed your mind to accept the local flood? I'm only curious.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIt stands to reason?! LOL!!
nope it stands to reason that if you take the Biblical example, the communities of the earth would have been much smaller and more centralised at the time, I am not sure exactly, but i dont think Noah is so many generations removed from Adam, but I am sure such reasoning will not prevent you from creating straw anyway.
I think you and I may have a different view on what 'reason' means.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou made the claim that people were warned, and you have not substantiated it. You have merely assumed it.
it doesn't say you should not take a shotgun and spray the neighbourhood windows with 12 gauge shot either.
Mere opinion masquerading as fact, as a wise man once said.
1 edit
Originally posted by Rank outsiderrobbie can (and will) claim whatever he wants, but I don't believe 'all of man' were warned about the flood. He chose Noah and his sons and their wives with one thing in mind, to repopulate after it was done. By this time, God had 'written off' humanity for their sins, and it was a 'done deal'. One could say that God gave man a 'second chance' by letting mankind live on, but only if they could do so 'by their own hand' by building the ark. This is the message of the Bible story of Noah.
You made the claim that people were warned, and you have not substantiated it. You have merely assumed it.
Mere opinion masquerading as fact, as a wise man once said.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI think Paul was very artful. I expect his conscience couldn't bear the thought of all those women and gay men being murdered in the name of his 'loving' God and he decided to do something about it, without giving the game away that the OT was written by heterosexual men, for heterosexual men.
the Mosiac Law is no longer binding upon Christians in practice, the principles remain, adultery is still a moral transgression, as Paul demonstrates.
1 edit
Originally posted by Rank outsiderYour conversing with me now and not Robbie. I don't know what he would reply
I mean that the interpretation is skewed to fit preconceived perceptions, rather than taken and analysed at face value.
For example, the fact that a super-powerful entity capable of creating life is, by definition, good, irrespective of how it behaves.
If God had never said anything against adultery, and I went around stoning women to death for i all of a sudden I am one of the righteous, and you would be queuing up behind me stone in hand.
If God had never said anything against adultery, and I went around stoning women to death for it, you would have thought I was mass murdering psychopath, as you are a good person who (but for God's word) would have worked out by yourself that it is an abhorrent and despicable thing to do, which has no basis is a civilised world.
God's revelation is progressive. And in the NT and the teachings of Jesus there is no command to do any stoning to death.
Remember the story of the woman caught in the act of adultery. They brought her to Jesus in John chapter 8 and wanted to stone her on the spot according to the law of Moses.
What did Jesus say ? Whoever is without sin among you start the stoning. No one threw a stone because they all knew they were all similarly guilty. The OLD ones caught on first and slipped away out of the mob - " That's not me. I'm outta here."
Then the younger brasher ones eventually caught on and left also.
Jesus is ruthless against sinning as the God of the Old Testament. But He turns man's dealing in upon himself first. Strick with one's self and lenient towards one's neighbor.
Now maybe I am not addressing your thought exactly. But I consider these additional data in reading the OT.
1.) This was the one and only real theocratic nation that ever existed. That is its major laws directly from God. So the harsh penalties pertained to Israel and not to world at large at that time.
2.) Along with these penalties were various offerings for repentance - sin offering, trespass offering, peace offering.
It should be more obvious to you that God prescribed remedies in the offerings for errors committed by the sinner.
3.) Though I will not hunt and quote verses now- you should know indications that "hard cases" would occur is evident. That is why a Moses said if a case was too hard for the priests they should bring it to him personally.
Other sections recognized that some cases would be difficult to determine.
Now I don't know if in reading this you will accuse me of skewing to fit some preconceived perceptions. But these passages are there as well and I take them in with the others.
The next day, however, God comes along and imposes Mosaic Law, all of a sudden I am one of the righteous, and you would be queuing up behind me stone in hand.
The other atoning sacrifices were just as much divinely instituted. And the guilty sinner could say "I have sinned. I will go and confess my sin to God and offer the appropriate offering."
I do not dispute that the law of Moses had some harsh penalties. I take along with this data that God also prescribed means of repentance, reconciliation, atonement for sins. Had He NOT, then I might agree with your criticism more.
But He did. And we also see that all these finally met their fulfillment in the redemptive death of the Son of God for the sins of the whole world through all human history.
This is not skewing. This is trying to be balanced according to ALL that is written.
Originally posted by Proper KnobI do not claim to speak for jaywill, but there were far less people in the earth in those days. It's possible that a 'local' flood, or a series of 'local' floods could indeed be considered 'worldwide' as far as the extinction of man is considered.
Ahh yes, the worldwide flood which wasn't in fact worldwide. 🙂 I forgot you were a believer in the local flood.
Did you ever believe in true global flood? And if you did what was it that changed your mind to accept the local flood? I'm only curious.