The evolution of the Coca Cola can

Originally posted by finnegan

Finnegan, what do you think you have accomplished here ?
Exactly what do you claim these selected verses demonstrate ?
Scandal?
Is that what you are attempting ? Sensational National Enquirer like scandal .

2 Kings 8:12
Hazael said, "Why does my lord weep?" Then he answered, "Because I know the evil that you will do to the sons of Israel: their strongholds you will set on fire, and their young men you will kill with the sword, and their little ones you will dash in pieces, and their women with child you will rip up."

So the prophet weeps because God reveals to him how evil this man will be, and what he will do in the future.

What's your point? The Bible should not RECORD what evil things some of the kings of Israel did ?

Isaiah 13:16
Their little ones also will be dashed to pieces Before their eyes; Their houses will be plundered And their wives ravished.

Is your point here that the prophet should not predict the terrible things which will befall the Israelites when through their disobedience Babylon overruns their land ?

The prophet should not warn the people how bad things will get? Is that your scandal ?

Hosea 13:16
Samaria will be held guilty, For she has rebelled against her God. They will fall by the sword, Their little ones will be dashed in pieces, And their pregnant women will be ripped open.

Same as above. Are you saying God's prophet should not tell of the terrible misfortune which will befall them ?

Usually, telling people how terribly bad the results of their apostasy from God functioned to give them incentive to remain with God.

God had a protective hedge around His obedient nation. He told them what would happen if through their violation that protective hedge were lifted and they were allowed to go their own way.

Nahum 3:10
Yet she became an exile, She went into captivity; Also her small children were dashed to pieces At the head of every street; They cast lots for her honorable men, And all her great men were bound with fetters.

What sensational scandal is this suppose to represent? Everything the Bible RECORDS as having happened or would happen is not everything the Bible TEACHES should be done.

What have you accomplished ?

Originally posted by sonship
Finnegan, what do you think you have accomplished here ?
Exactly what do you claim these selected verses demonstrate ?
Scandal?
Is that what you are attempting ? Sensational National Enquirer like scandal .

[quote] [b]2 Kings 8:12
Hazael said, "Why does my lord weep?" Then he answered, "Because I know the evil that you will do to the son ...[text shortened]... ppen is not everything the Bible TEACHES should be done.

What have you accomplished ?

I see.

So if we fail to obey God our children wlll be dashed to pieces.

Well then I think we all should obey God pronto.

Otherwise we have only ourselves to blame.

Shoot ourselves in the foot.

Our own worst enemy.

Dashed to pieces is what our children will be.

Unless we obey God.

Blame the parents is what I say!!

We have been warned.

God the baby dasher.

Originally posted by finnegan

I see.

So if we fail to obey God our children wlll be dashed to pieces.

The genuine theocratic nation on the planet was hated by God's enemy. If His protection was lifted from them because of their behaving like the nations they replaced, it could be terrible for them.

Deuteronomy 28:15-68 was a long, even near exhaustive warning of what it would mean to fall into the hands of God's enemies and their enemies.

If you are warned that continued dope usage will cause your children to severely suffer, would that not be an incentive to stop using dope for their sake as well? A fact of life is that one's kids CAN suffer dearly for one's selfish sinful life.

Well then I think we all should obey God pronto.

We need One who was completely obedient to be our Advocate, our Savior, our Mediator, our empowering Grace.

The often pitch black backround of much of the Old Testament condemnation paves the way to appreciate more what God has done for sinners in Jesus Christ.

Otherwise we have only ourselves to blame.

Notice what Jesus said here:

" If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin.

He who hates Me hates My Father also.

If I did not do among them the works which no one else has done, they would not have sin, but now they have both seen and hated both me and My Father. ... 'They hated Me without a cause.' " ( See John 15:22-25)

In the light of Jesus Christ, do you think it is healthy to work on excuses for not being saved by Him ?

Shoot ourselves in the foot.

I'm not sure what this means.

Notice again above. Not anyone calls us to repent and believe God's work. Someone special who has done special things having a cataclysmic moral impact on the human race says we should no hate Him without a cause. We should in fact believe in Him and be saved.

Our own worst enemy.

One of the things one realizes from following Christ is that He certainly can save one from himself. Because in many things we are our worst enemy.

Jesus can save us from ourselves - our fallen corrupted, damaged, degraded selves.

Dashed to pieces is what our children will be.

The exact same thing may not always befall our children.
Very harsh examples are given on that end of the spectrum.

By the way, it is not only God who warns that your wrong doings may adversely effect other people, including your children. I don't think you can blame God for alone showing that we are interconnected.

Unless we obey God.

You are lampooning something which is not meant to be jocular.
Even if you have no children - sins can ruin, sins can defile, sins can leave scares and damage and stains on one's life.

Blame the parents is what I say!!

We have been warned.

Salvation in Jesus Christ is good for single people too or for those who have no children.

God the baby dasher.

Man the baby aborter, and that for convenience too often.
Do you have a similar feeling about the millions of babies "dashed" because of secular philosophies "proving" a fetus is not really human?

Are you pro life with an equal amount of sarcasm and vitriol against the genocide of millions of murdered babies ?

Where's your sarcasm then ?
That's different huh?

So let's imagine these prophetic warnings in a modern context:

2 Kings 8:12
Hazael said, "Why does my lord weep?" Then he answered, "Because I know the evil that you will do to the sons of Israel: their strongholds you will set on fire, and their young men you will kill with the sword, and their little ones you will dash in pieces, and their women with child you will rip up."

Suppose God warned that if an evil godless ruler arose you babies would be dashed in abortion mills.

Is that God's fault ?

Let's say God sends a prophet to warn that of a godless nation continues its craving for drugs, its children will die my multitudes by psychodelic drugs and synthetic drugs.
So we blame God like finnigan?

Isaiah 13:16
Their little ones also will be dashed to pieces Before their eyes; Their houses will be plundered And their wives ravished.

So God warns a nation that if it continues its craving for pornography its women will be ravished. And if it continues on its embrace of denying God as Creator its children will be slain in abortion clinics by the millions.

So we blame God then like finnigen with sarcasm ?

Hosea 13:16
Samaria will be held guilty, For she has rebelled against her God. They will fall by the sword, Their little ones will be dashed in pieces, And their pregnant women will be ripped open.

Say God sends a prophet to warn a nation set apart from all others for His testimony, not to rebel against God. If they do millions of little ones will be chopped up, sliced up, extracted from women's wombs "ripped up" by highly paid abortion mills.

For this departure and rebellion and subsequent genocide upon that nation's children we should then blame on God ?

Nahum 3:10
Yet she became an exile, She went into captivity; Also her small children were dashed to pieces At the head of every street; They cast lots for her honorable men, And all her great men were bound with fetters.

So if God warns a nation set apart for Himself not to fall into captivity to mammon, greed, convenience, Atheist philosophy through their disobedience, their children will be slaughtered, "dashed" to pieces even by their own parents, so they can live their lives without the burden of such, God is to be blamed ?

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
There are no moral absolutes. Your examples just validate this.

It really is like talking to Plasticine. (No offense intended. Well, not absolutely no offense intended).

There are no moral absolutes.

That means you believe there ARE circumstances whereby it would be acceptable to torture babies for fun. Just as I thought.

Your examples just validate this.

Yes according to your belief system there aren't.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
The bible also says 'Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.' Psalm 137:9

(There goes your moral absolute about torturing babies for fun).

Checkmate I believe.

Seems you have no grasp of poetry.

The Psalmist is in exile and had probably witnessed the atrocities committed against his people, babies included. In the revenge-style that was so common at the time, he wishes the same upon his enemy as a description of their utter destruction. Nowhere does it say that God approves of the Psalmist’s request or that he fulfilled it. Just because it is recorded that the Psalmist wrote the imprecation, doesn’t mean it was approved by God.

There are many other instances where the Bible does clearly state that you shall not kill.

Originally posted by twhitehead
No, I disagree that what people think is irrelevant. If everybody, yourself included, thought that torturing babies for fun was OK, then surely it would be OK, and you would agree (as that is one of the conditions).

[b]In a classroom, the teacher's rules with regards to behaviour are the ones that matter.
On what basis?

That's what I think.[ ...[text shortened]... ant to know why you think it. How did you decide that that was what was 'right'? Is it Biblical?

If everybody, yourself included, thought that torturing babies for fun was OK, then surely it would be OK

No it wouldn't. Reality does not change according to what people think.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
No it wouldn't.

But you would think it would.

Now, I am still waiting for a full explanation for why you believe the teacher is always right.

Originally posted by twhitehead
But you would think it would.

Now, I am still waiting for a full explanation for why you believe the teacher is always right.

But you would think it would.

But thinking that something happens doesn't mean that it actually happens.

Now, I am still waiting for a full explanation for why you believe the teacher is always right.

When did I say the teacher is always right?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
But thinking that something happens doesn't mean that it actually happens.

We are not talking about 'happening' as well you know. We are talking about right and wrong. You would think that torturing babies for fun was 'right'.

When did I say the teacher is always right?
Stop acting the fool and just answer the question. You know perfectly well that you stated that children should not talk in class because the teacher says so, and you stated that this is 'right' because the teacher is in charge and what the teacher says is 'right'.
I want a full explanation for how you came to this conclusion. Instead you dodge the question over and over. This suggests that you are not confident in your position or simply have no clue why you think following what the teacher says is 'right'.

Perhaps you could also explain why you believe torturing babies for fun is 'wrong'?

Originally posted by twhitehead
We are not talking about 'happening' as well you know. We are talking about right and wrong. You would think that torturing babies for fun was 'right'.

[b]When did I say the teacher is always right?
Stop acting the fool and just answer the question. You know perfectly well that you stated that children should not talk in class because the teacher ...[text shortened]... 'right'.

Perhaps you could also explain why you believe torturing babies for fun is 'wrong'?[/b]

We are not talking about 'happening' as well you know. We are talking about right and wrong. You would think that torturing babies for fun was 'right'.

My point is even if I or anyone else thought torturing babies for fun was 'right' it would still be 'wrong'. If everyone believed the world was flat, would that make it flat?

Stop acting the fool and just answer the question. You know perfectly well that you stated that children should not talk in class because the teacher says so, and you stated that this is 'right' because the teacher is in charge and what the teacher says is 'right'.

If you actually bothered to read the thread you would notice that I used the teacher and the class as one example of the doing the right thing even if everyone else was not doing the right thing and you know that. I ask you again, where did I say the teacher is always right?

You are just trying to use a red herring to deflect from the fact that you cannot explain why it is ALWAYS wrong to torture babies for fun.

Perhaps you could also explain why you believe torturing babies for fun is 'wrong'

Are you seriously saying you have no idea why torturing babies for fun is wrong?

Originally posted by sonship

I see.

So if we fail to obey God our children wlll be dashed to pieces.

The genuine theocratic nation on the planet was hated by God's enemy. If His protection was lifted from them because of their behaving like the nations they replaced, it could be terrible for them.

[b]Deuteronomy 28:15-68 was a long, even near exhaustive w ...[text shortened]... genocide of millions of murdered babies ?

Where's your sarcasm then ?
That's different huh?[/b]

The genuine theocratic nation on the planet was hated by God's enemy. If His protection was lifted from them because of their behaving like the nations they replaced, it could be terrible for them.

We have had quite a number of theocratic nations on this planet and there is a lot of interest in imposing something of that kind in the US under the leadership of the American Taliban. I do not find the precedents encouraging.

The often pitch black backround of much of the Old Testament condemnation paves the way to appreciate more what God has done for sinners in Jesus Christ.

The Old Testament remains integral to the three major monotheist faith groups and their countless splinters and sects. Selective quotation, selective interpretation, selective extrapolation is the order of the day. Just because you quote an ancient text when you make a pronouncement does not sanctify your statements with the authority of great age and ancient wisdom. Not only can the Old Testament be interpreted in any way we damn well want, but it routinely is. Appealing to ancient scripture lends a spurious authority to the half baked spitting of contemporary bigots.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
My point is even if I or anyone else thought torturing babies for fun was 'right' it would still be 'wrong'.

But why would it be wrong? Because God says so? How do you know that it is wrong or that it would still be wrong even if you didn't think it was?

If everyone believed the world was flat, would that make it flat?
Yes, but the shape of the earth is an objective fact that can be determined through science. How do you determine right and wrong through science?

If you actually bothered to read the thread you would notice that I used the teacher and the class as one example of the doing the right thing even if everyone else was not doing the right thing and you know that.
Yes, I know that. How does that get you out of answering the question again?

I ask you again, where did I say the teacher is always right?
And I ask you again, to stop trying to doge the question.

You are just trying to use a red herring to deflect from the fact that you cannot explain why it is ALWAYS wrong to torture babies for fun.
It is not a red herring at all. I want you to explain how you know right from wrong in the classroom situation and you clearly don't want to give a straight answer.

Are you seriously saying you have no idea why torturing babies for fun is wrong?
I know why, but apparently you don't.

Originally posted by finnegan

We have had quite a number of theocratic nations on this planet and there is a lot of interest in imposing something of that kind in the US under the leadership of the American Taliban. I do not find the precedents encouraging.

I think we have had one genuine theocractic nation on earth's history, the nation of Israel.

Now there have been more than one nation God has utilized for a period of time for some special purpose. But I believe only one nation with God as her Governor and King has existed - Israel.

Now I assume that you may immediately push back by saying something like - "Oh, you think everything Israel has done and is doing has been absolutely ordained and sanctioned by God ??"

To which my reply would be, no. And both the Old and New Testaments would teach us that. In fact their own Hebrew Bible, the Tanakh (Old Testament) would clearly spell that out, and that from her own prophets.

sonship:
The often pitch black backround of much of the Old Testament condemnation paves the way to appreciate more what God has done for sinners in Jesus Christ.

finnigan:
The Old Testament remains integral to the three major monotheist faith groups and their countless splinters and sects.

well, the Old Testament does not "integrat" very well into Islam. When you say an "integral part" I would say that Mohammed had to insert quite a few lies in order to force some kind of "cashing in" on a divine Scripture already written.

You might say that in jealously, Islam attempts to erect Mahammed as kind of an Arabian Moses, a Law Giver dedicated to Arabs.

Some connection to the Hebrew Bible for Islam ? Yes, but modified in order to propagate some lies.

The Hebrew Bible is surely an "integral part" of Judaism.

The Hebrew Bible is surely an "integral part" of its own predicted "new covenant" - the New Testament.

Selective quotation, selective interpretation, selective extrapolation is the order of the day.

This is something like a man I heard talk about the city of Jerusalem. He said that in Jerusalem history is like an obedient little donkey. Which ever way you directed it to turn, it turned.

I think this concept can be over played. Should we throw up our hands in despair and say " Oh, Its all selective quoting and selective interpretation !!"

Some people think to throw in the towel with that attitude. I don't want to adopt that kind of rationale over much. No, the Bible cannot, in fact, be made to teach anything.

And how come you can select passages to make a point about God concerning children being dashed? But when I examine them carefully, suddenly its "Oh, selective interpretation, selective extrapolation is the order of the day."

it didn't seem to halt your seizing upon verses to show God in the worst possible light you intended to demonstrate His killing of children.

Just because you quote an ancient text when you make a pronouncement does not sanctify your statements with the authority of great age and ancient wisdom.

No, I personally do not bestow authority on the words of the Bible.
But I still believe I should quote it when appropriate.

Not only can the Old Testament be interpreted in any way we damn well want, but it routinely is.

This is usually the argument of people who do not read the Bible.
The less they read it, the more they think they are experts on it.

I am not too bothered by this concept because I believe that there is a living God behind the words. I believe that some teaching directly from God in men's hearts will, as He sees fit, use words from the Bible.

You may reason by taking into account the absence of God.
I include the existence of the living God in my reasoning.
He is there to help us through His book.
He is there to illuminate portions of it through which He can speak to us.

Granted, those portions may not, and probably WILL not always be the ones I think a person should hear. But regardless, from my experience, the living God will illuminate those parts of the Bible to a man's conscience which God wants him to hear.

This of course, does not preclude that that person will respond with turning to God.
However, he will never be able to say to God on that day "You never told me."

To which God may reply something like - "No, I told you. Here, let me rerun the moment in your life in which I told you. But you didn't want to listen because you see, you hated Me. But I loved you and informed you. "