I don’t see how anyone could read the Bible and come away with that conclusion.
Seems rather ad hoc and arbitrary.
“Everyone in the OT got what they deserved
For me the OT God is the ultimate figure showing what justice should look like.”–NickolaosPappas
So everyone in the OT got what they deserved, except for the stuff that seems unjust which must have been made up. And the OT God is the ultimate figure of justice, except for those parts that seem unjust which just had to be made up.
It seems that you are projecting your own judgements of what is just onto the OT.
Ehmmm. Why ddoesnt God helping the starving children now?
Same thing different period.When has God directly interacted with us humans expect when Jesus came down?
[quote=“T_aquaticus, post:21, topic:50527”
OT got what they deserved, except for the stuff that seems unjust which must have been made up. And the OT God is the ultimate figure of justice, except for those parts that seem unjust which just had to be made up.
[/quote]
Exaclty
Are you that slow? Ive stated my opinion above so of course these are my own judgments
Indeed, why doesn’t he. He saw fit to given manna to the people wandering the desert for 40 years. God even miraculously had water spring from rock to slake their thirst. God supplied a pillar of smoke during the day and a pillar of fire at night to guide the people. God ransacked the walls of Jericho. God rained down fire and brimstone onto Sodom and Gomorrah. I could go on and on.
Then any deity could be the figure of justice, no matter what people have claimed the deity has done.
News flash we are talking about the Christian God.
If you want to beleive in some other deity to be the figure of justice go ahead. Your statement is irrelevant
I would be careful in not adding blanket labels to biblical writings based on the idea since we cant prove God, some of its writings may therefore be in error. That is not a supported theological position by biblical scholars and for very good reason…either you believe the word of God in its entirety and accept that there are reasons we simply cannot understand as to why seemingly barbaric things by modern standards happened to seemingly innocent people, or you throw out the entire book and become an agnostic or atheist.
I would start by looking at the big picture of the Bible…its overall theme. Always use that as ones guiding principle and work inwards from there. When things don’t agree with that overall guiding principle, one has an errant doctrine and needs to investigate where one has gone wrong.
Or what? What are you gonna do ? Because as you’ve realized I’m a “heretic” in your view and have a whole theology for myself ,and my personal view on the Bible or God.
Generic protestant evangelical preaching. Useless in its nature. Moving along
Klax
(The only thing that matters is faith expressed in love.)
28
There are, also, a lot of folks who know Jack Diddly and occasionally. one finds their way into the BioLogos forum.
An observation that my mother gave me long ago; [I think she got it from Mark Twain]: “Don’t mud-wrestle with a pig, you both end up dirty and the pig likes it.”
Should a parent do anything different when his/her child is two years old from when the child is a teen? If these are different, then is the parent of the two year old a false parent?
Exactly! And thus there is no New Testament without the Old Testament. Accepting the NT in exclusion of the OT is just plain nonsensical. What we can sensibly say instead, is that Jesus (and the NT) is the lens through which we (Christians) should read and understand the OT.
1 Like
Klax
(The only thing that matters is faith expressed in love.)
36
To the OP, there is nothing new since about 400 BCE. Apart from C1st AD ‘take’.
The OT has a lot of different things in it, and it is worth trying to collect them together. For example, Ezekiel 18 says first, that children won’t be punished for the sins of their parents, and also that those who repent and change their lives will be spared. The opposite applies to those who start off well and then collapse into evil ways. This looks more like character development than a simple list of good deeds and sins to be rewarded or punished . But in other places it’s more like this latter. Overall, I think it’s unwise to generalise too much about the OT. But remember the Transfiguration - Jesus appears with Moses and Elijah, thereby vindicating them if you had any doubts about their importance.
Dont be sorry for me.Be sorry that i havent met one person in my life to understand and bear some of it.A shoulder to cry upon.
Not even God seems here anymore
The Ebionites were a Jewish group that accepted some of Jesus’s teaching but seem not to have accepted Jesus as fully divine. The only information that we have is claims about them (including short quotations from a document attributed to them, seemingly a version of Matthew edited to be more Jewish) from writings by Christians who were criticizing them. It is not clear to what extent all the references to Ebionites, such as they are, refer to the same group. The movement died out, seeming to be an example of trying to keep new wine in old wineskins. Speculative claims by various modern critics try to make something substantial out of the limited information.
Gnosticism is a rather flexible category of syncretistic views. The name refers to the claim to have secret insight not available to everyone. Typically, various Christian or Jewish elements were combined with ideas from Greek philosophy. In particular, the Greek idea of matter=bad, spirit=good was generally a component of such views. This clashes with the biblical principle that God made the physical world and declared it good, as well as with the idea of Jesus being fully human, including full participation in our physical nature as made of matter. Ideas about deities involved in creation of matter being inferior or secondary to the ultimate pure spirit or existence already had some presence in Greek philosophy (e.g., Platonic demiurge) before the specific syncretism of Christian beliefs into gnosticism. As already pointed out, Marcion was a particularly prominent proponent of the idea that the Old Testament god was different and inferior to that of the new, in a sort of theological antisemitism, but not specifically in the gnostic tradition.