Does Christ speak and how?

[tam]

May you have peace!

A question that continues to be posed to me is with regard to my bearing witness to a living and speaking Christ. How does He speak? What does that mean? How can we test that?

I imagine that one reason the questions are continually posed to me is because I cannot provide the proof that some are asking me to provide. I can only provide evidence in the form of:

a) Personal testimony from having heard Christ
b) The written testimony of or about others who have heard Christ
c) What Christ Himself is written to have said on the matter


If none of the above are acceptable to someone, then I am not sure what more that person and I would have to talk about on this particular matter. We could hopefully discuss respectfully from a point of love, reason, logic. For those who are interested...


Christ said that His sheep would hear His voice.

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me." John 10:27

"I am the good shepherd, and I know My own and My own know Me, even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. "I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd.…" John 10:14-16



Written testimony about/from others who heard His voice, confirming the truth of what He said:

The Spirit told Philip, "Go to that chariot and stay near it." Acts 8:29

**
In Damascus, there was a disciple named Ananias. The Lord called to him in a vision, "Ananias!"

"Yes Lord," he answered.

The Lord told him, "Go to the house of Judas on Straight Street and ask for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying. In a vision he has seen a man named Ananias come and place his hands on him to restore his sight." (Acts 9:10,11... and it continues)

**
There is Peter's vision telling him that he should eat foods that he considered unclean, and then after his vision:

While Peter was still thinking about the vision, the Spirit (Christ) said to him, "Simon, three men are looking for you. So get up and go downstairs. Do not hesitate to go with them, for I have sent them." (Acts 10: 9-20)

**
There are of course multiple examples from Paul. The entire book of Revelation is from Christ to John. There is a warning against hardening our hearts if we hear His voice.

As has just been said: "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion." Hebrews 3:15

Then of course there are the examples of Abraham, who heard, Noah, who heard, the prophets, who heard, Joseph, who heard, Daniel, who heard, etc, etc. Their faith is based upon the evidence of what they heard.



My own personal testimony


I did not always know that Christ spoke, and I did not always recognize that voice within me as being His. But someone else bore witness to a living speaking Christ, and it bothered me, lol. I had just ended a two year bible study with a certain denomination, and I did not want to get misled by man ever gain. But here was this person claiming that Christ spoke. If I believed this person, that they were from God, then what was wrong with me that I allowed myself to get misled yet again. On the other hand, what was wrong with me if this person did hear Christ, and I rejected them?

But soon into my dilemma (and my asking how I might know, even though I thought I was just asking myself) I heard:

Test WHAT this person is saying. Test the message. Do not pay attention to the person. Test to see if what this person is saying is true, or not. Then you will know who this person is from.


I still did not know this was Christ speaking to me. I just thought, "Oh, of course... that is what I will do."

So that is what I did. Along the way, I saw all these verses and examples and testimony that Christ does indeed speak, that God spoke also, though now speaks through Christ. In dreams, in visions, in direct words, in reminders, in opening eyes and ears to a truth that one might read, see, or hear. Once I realized that Christ is supposed to speak, I asked for ears to hear as well. Even though I did hear Him; I just did not know I heard Him. I needed to learn His voice and recognize Him.

**

I was asked how does He speak

He speaks in words. He speaks in visions (I have never had a vision that I am aware of). He speaks in dreams. He can also bring to mind something learned, read, or experienced in the past to help me see the truth in something He is teaching me. He has opened my eyes to something that is written, if I am reading the bible. He can and has read to me something that He is written to have said, so that I hear it in His voice. That was enlightening.

Sometimes when I am responding to something that someone else has asked, He will give me the words to say, or reveal something to me (as in open my heart and ears to understanding something) that I had not previously understood.


The language that He speaks is truth. He has never spoken anything to me that was not true, and that was not from love. And everything He teaches me deepens my understanding of love: His love and the love of His Father.



(As for testing the inspired expression... anything that is in conflict with what Christ teaches cannot be true. Also Christ (truth) comes from love (God), so nothing that He says will be in conflict with love. Especially since the law that is written upon our hearts in the new covenant is the law of love.)


**

I do not expect anyone to take my word for these things. I do not take the word of others for what they claim came from Christ. I explained above what I did, what I heard from Christ TO do.

If I have shared anything that helps anyone, then great. If not, then no problem. I am not the one people should be listening to if they are following or desiring to follow Christ... I can only point TO that One: Christ Jaheshua, the Holy One of Israel and Holy Spirit, the Chosen One of Jah. Christ, who is Himself, the faithful and true witness of His Father, Jah.



If one wants to know the truth of this matter themselves... then ask Christ. That is how one can confirm for themselves. Ask for ears to hear, and in the meantime DO what He has said to do, so that you prove yourself to Him. He does not have to prove Himself to us.

"If anyone loves me, they will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come and make our home with (in) them."


(Please note that He says that they will obey HIS teaching. Not man's teaching. Not religion or religious leaders, not Paul, not the law, or anyone or anything else over Him. If we love HIM... we will obey HIM. If we love someone or something else more, then we will listen to and obey that one/thing. Including if we love our religion more than Him, although we might not realize it at the time. Including if we think the bible is the Word of God, especially when even that book states that Christ is the Word of God; and Christ himself said, "You diligently search the scriptures because you think that by them you have eternal life. These are the scriptures that testify about ME, yet you refuse to come to me to have life.")



May anyone who wishes them be given ears to hear, to get a sense of these things, and to hear as the Spirit (Christ) and the bride SAY to you, "Come... take the free gift of the water of life."


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[bluedog]

[Replying to post 156 by ttruscott]

Again...let us attempt something that anyone can comprehend. For your "edification" one word "mytonymy". Example: When God declared that He hates a "lying tongue"...do you assume and accuse God of actually hating a literal tongue...or was He coining a phrase easily understood....and projecting the meaning that He hates the lies that tongue produces? Another phrase, "Contextual Integrity". When comprehended throughout the Bible the Love God examples toward ALL MEN in allowing the sacrifice of His only begotten Son for the Worlds forgiveness of SIN.....the verbatim hatred of man by God becomes impossible to comprehend as a literal meaning as you would falsely accuse by presenting a premise based upon less than the entire contextual message that God has revealed. Its called "parroted cherry picking".

The scriptures are filled with examples of God's hate for SIN.... He symbolically projects the hate of that sin toward the people whose actions cause that sin, yet He has stated over and over that He Loves all people and would hope that ALL people come to the knowledge of the truth in order to find salvation. Its not rocket science. All it takes is, "Study" in order to "rightly divide the word of truth". -- 2 Tim.2:15

But....your lack of faith has no effect on anyone who defends the truth found in scripture. As its obvious.....your attack is on FAITH. As I stated, Its YOUR SOUL, not mine. We each must find our own salvation. As the Christ said, Its a waste to cast "pearls among swine". I will admit the "ignorance" that is feigned is somewhat amusing.

[Peds nurse]

Again...let us attempt something that even a 5 year can comprehend. One word "mytonymy". Example: When God declared that He hates a "lying tongue"...do you assume and accuse God of actually hating a literal tongue...or was He coining a phrase easily understood....and projecting the meaning that He hates the lies that tongue produces?

You have a very good point, and I applaud you! However, that being said, sometimes because of the way things are worded, the truth gets lost, and we might as well be a resounding gong.

The scriptures are filled with examples of God's hate for SIN....yet He symbolically projects the hate of that sin toward the people whose actions cause that sin, yet He has stated over and over that He Loves all people and would hope that ALL people come to the knowledge of the truth in order to find salvation. Its not rocket science.

I wonder why he cares so much about our sinning, about us even potentially being separated from Him? I would like to think that it is because of what scripture says, that He loves us and wishes none to perish. Love speaks louder than hate or disrespect anyday!

[bluedog]

[Replying to post 162 by Peds nurse]

Perhaps this will help with your misconception that scripture cannot be comprehended. The Bible interprets itself if allowed. When you come across a subject matter that you find difficult to comprehend...simply look up every instance in scripture, both Old and New testament where the scriptures address that subject matter and it will interpret itself.

Example? The writings of Peter, "And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place until the day dawns and the MORNING STAR rises in your heart?" -- 2 Peter 1:19 About as clear as muddy water....right? What is this "morning star" that should rise in our heart that Peter is speaking of?

Go to every place in scripture where the term is coined and the meaning becomes clear. We find that the King of Babylon is called the morning star. Are the scriptures describing an Old Testament King in the New Testament. No....that king is called a morning star because he was the most powerful ruler during that time period.....just like the morning star it is the brightest light in the morning sky and shines brightest. While Peter is talking about something rising in your heart...something spiritual.

Who is the most powerful king addressed in the New Testament...of course it is the King of Kings, Christ Jesus. Thus....we find a New Testament example that coins that same phrase leaving no doubt as to who Peter was describing, "I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, the Bright and Morning Star." -- Rev. 22:16 Jesus was and remains the most powerful king to ever rule over a kingdom.

The Bible teaches that the entire word of God must be considered before TRUTH can be found.

[Clownboat]

Then you make claims about abortion as though you are not aware about the story of Jephthah where he sacrifices his virgin daughter to your god in return for victory in battle. Why should I take your claims seriously?

Without agreeing with bd, I think it is false logic to assume that GOD allowed them to win over the Ammonites because of this rash vow since that is nowhere stated. GOD planned them to win and Jephthah acted stupidly trying to buy the win from GOD by his promise. That God allowed it to play out as it did was justice. Why the daughter was punished is for her sins between her and her GOD.

If this god is able to instruct Abraham to sacrifice his son, surely he could inform Jephthah that there is no need for him to sacrifice his daughter. He didn't according to the story.

Then we also have verses like this:
Genesis 8:20 â–º
New International Version
Then Noah built an altar to the LORD and, taking some of all the clean animals and clean birds, he sacrificed burnt offerings on it. [21] The LORD smelled the pleasing aroma and said in his heart:....

Perhaps he didn't say anything because if he is pleased by the blood of clean animals, then just imagine the blood of a virgin! Perhaps virgin blood is intoxicating.

Either way, I was replying to Bluedog when he said: "Hands that shed innocent blood (like abortion..what unborn children have no blood?)"

This made me think of the Jephthah story and the irony of his claim.

Perhaps I should have just addressed how his god treats children in the Bible stories.
The Bible places no value on fetuses or infants less than one month old.
And if it be from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy estimation shall be three shekels of silver. -- Leviticus 27:6
Fetuses and infants less than one month old are not considered persons.
Number the children of Levi after the house of their fathers, by their families: every male from a month old and upward shalt thou number them. And Moses numbered them according to the word of the LORD. -- Numbers 3:15-16
God sometimes approves of killing fetuses.
And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? ... Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. -- Numbers 31:15-17
(Some of the non-virgin women must have been pregnant. They would have been killed along with their unborn fetuses.)
God sometimes causes abortions by cursing unfaithful wives.
Numbers 5:21-21, 27-28

Does the ol' speck and log analogy not come in to play when condemning those that have had abortions like he seemed to do?
I think so, and was addressing that. For bluedog to be consistent, his god concept must necessarily hate itself.

[bluedog]

[Replying to post 164 by Clownboat]

Same old "Dan Barker" attempt to equate "righteous justice" with "innocence"? Perhaps you could define the origin of Morality since no one can define Love? Strange that its an atheist that believes nothing is a sin....attempts to suggest that God is immoral and an atheist is moral...don't ya think?

If you are a true atheist....which there actually are none..because they are not capable of proving the negative they demand others to prove...the existence or non-existence of God. They can't define where reality, morality or love comes from (expect to say....it must be nothing...just ask Hawking). But God does not have "innocent" children put to death.....when the entire historical contextual message is "comprehended".

Just a little comprehension for you to wrap your illogical atheistic mind around.

Could it be possible that God's actions were against a people's who actions were LESS THAN INNOCENT? Why omit (once again the full contextual history of these supposed "cruel" stories?

What's your argument again? God is cruel and guilty of spilling innocent blood? Really? And that makes it OKIE DOKIE for YOU to spill innocent defenseless blood in the womb?

God had "warned" Israel to avoid a list of things God would surely punish them over. These practices were perverse and used by the peoples who populated the lands that Israel was to traverse, "....for the land is deviled (nations) that I am casting you out among...therefore I will visit the punishment of its iniquity upon it...and the land will vomit out its inhabitants." -- Lev. 18:24-25.

As revealed in the actual history and content.....all the lands that God had punished were guilty of these perverted and evil crimes against humanity. The lands that God brought down punishment upon where found guilty of "stealing" children from Israel in the middle of the night and sacrificing them to pagan gods such as Baal....burning them alive on a sacrificial alter. Yep....having God declare that these people's should wiped form the face of the earth sure is an unrighteous and immoral thingy to do...no?

And the children? Remember...children are innocent? What of the children of these people...should they have been allowed to grow up in a environment were they practiced vile evil sacrifices to a false pagan god...and be sentenced to hell in the end for all eternity.... But on the other hand.....spilling innocent blood in the womb up to the point of having killed more human lives than all the wars of recorded history combined....ABORTION of DEMAND....is OKIE DOKIE? Really? If God....had the land PUKE UP those who worshiped Baal....what do you think He has in store for your guild? Something to ponder...no?


Thus...YOUR ARGUMENT.....you as an atheist should be the one that determines when the death of a child should take place....not God? LM provial AO...again. There we have the entire argument. Atheistic Omniscient Loving Morality is on display by the act of having killed millions upon millions of innocent children...but God is immoral for punishing a people that burned children at the stake? Surely you are more righteous than God

[Clownboat]

[Replying to post 164 by Clownboat]

Same old "Dan Barker" attempt to equate "righteous justice" with "innocence"? Perhaps you could define the origin of Morality since no one can define Love?

I have already defined love for you once. Is this a reading comprehension issue because I find your claim to be demonstrably wrong.

Strange that its an atheist that believes nothing is a sin....attempts to suggest that God is immoral and an atheist is moral...don't ya think?

Who are you talking about? What atheist?
Either way, sin is a Christian concept, therefore, when a non Christian doesn't believe in a sin concept, this should be expected. Yet you call it 'strange'. I find that strange.

If you are a true atheist....which there actually are none..because they are not capable of proving the negative they demand others to prove...the existence or non-existence of God.

I'm not an atheist. It would be wise of you to note that when people disagree with claims you make on behalf of a god concept, that doesn't make them an atheist. This need for an Us vs Them is common cult practices. It provides a group with something to unite against.

They can't define where reality, morality or love comes from (expect to say....it must be nothing...just ask Hawking).

Granted, I'm not an atheist, but I did define love. I have seen atheists define it as well, so your claim is false.

But God does not have "innocent" children put to death.....when the entire historical contextual message is "comprehended".

This is shown false by a reading of the Bible.

Just a little comprehension for you to wrap your illogical atheistic mind around.

I'm not an atheists and I don't find myself to be illogical. Do you have a passion for being wrong?

Could it be possible that God's actions were against a people's who actions were LESS THAN INNOCENT? Why omit (once again the full contextual history of these supposed "cruel" stories?

These stories are history! Please provide evidence for this claim. Are the African god stories about a god vomiting up the earth also to be considered history? Would it not be prudent to first show that such a thing is history before making such a claim?

What's your argument again? God is cruel and guilty of spilling innocent blood? Really? And that makes it OKIE DOKIE for YOU to spill innocent defenseless blood in the womb?

I did not provide an argument bluedog. I pointed out some irony though which I trust is not lost on the readers.

God had "warned" Israel to avoid a list of things God would surely punish them over. These practices were perverse and used by the peoples who populated the lands that Israel was to traverse, "....for the land is deviled (nations) that I am casting you out among...therefore I will visit the punishment of its iniquity upon it...and the land will vomit out its inhabitants." -- Lev. 18:24-25.

We know that tribal man warred with its competing tribes. For a ruler or a shaman to convince their followers to die for a cause, such as to expand their tribal borders because a god desires it should be expected. When they suffer a defeat by a warring tribe, I would also offer up this useful god concept as an explanation. Yet this impresses you for some reason. Perhaps if we both lived thousands of years ago, I would have been your shaman?

As revealed in the actual history and content.....all the lands that God had punished were guilty of these perverted and evil crimes against humanity. The lands that God brought down punishment upon where found guilty of "stealing" children from Israel in the middle of the night and sacrificing them to pagan gods such as Baal....burning them alive on a sacrificial alter.

You need to learn that history is written by the victors. Just imagine a shaman yelling to his followers about how their evil neighbors are going to steal their babies in the night and then eat them. And how their chosen god concept wants them to destroy these evil baby eaters.
All this can be said and done without the neighbors being actual baby eaters. Surely you realize this?

Yep....having God declare that these people's should wiped form the face of the earth sure is an unrighteous and immoral thingy to do...no? And the children? Remember...children are innocent? What of the children of these people...should they have been allowed to grow up in a environment were they practiced vile evil sacrifices to a false pagan god...and be sentenced to hell in the end for all eternity....

I have laugh at you (in a sympathetic kind of way). You are literally defending genocide. Isn't your god great!
I personally find the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation to be evil. Your mileage obviously varies.

Thus...YOUR ARGUMENT.....you as an atheist should be the one that determines when the death of a child should take place....not God? LM provial AO...again. There we have the entire argument. Atheistic Omniscient Loving Morality.

You really should try being less wrong in your posts and also more civil. If you are an angry Christian, they don't last long around here, and since there is a shortage of Christians to debate (they have a history of not being able to follow the rules they agreed to here as well as non Christians can), it would be nice if you could stay within forum rules so you don't become just another stat.

[bluedog]

[Replying to Clownboat]

Sure....I am angry because I presented the actual history as recorded "IN THE BIBLE? Truth is anger? I suppose is might be...if you don't like that truth..no?

YOU PEOPLE sure are quick to establish a false premise and then attempt to proceed as if that self established premise is TRUTH without providing nothing but MORE DEMANDS on the part of those you disagree with.....

And if you are not an atheist....you are worshiping the wrong god, as its clear that you defend the murder of "innocent" children in the womb....no? The God in the Bible does not support the unjustified spilling of blood.

Again....talking ad nauseam is not debating especially when you continue to demand answers but continue to dismiss them when you don't agree with them when they are pointed out by book chapter and verse.

The scriptures pointed out the false premise concerning GOD'S MURDERING (un-justified death) of the innocent.

Surprise....but defining the traits of LOVE is not defining LOVE OR ITS ORIGINS no more than defining the law of gravity defines the origins of gravity. The law does not make gravity....it simply accepts its reality based upon its quantifiable effects. Again....please provide the origins of morality and love...without the premise of a law giver...as suggested by Darwinian cultists, nature has no morality, no love...only instinct, the survival of the fittest.....so murder is fine no? If not...why not...how do you know that murder is not acceptable...if people are nothing more than animals? What....morality evolved? Prove it!


FYI: You do realize the entire system of US Government, Jurisprudence, Division of power (Checks and Balances) are all based upon Blackstone and his writings...to include the majority of Constitutional premises? And Blackstone used Scripture as precedence? Other than that...Biblical morality does not work...no?

www.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Blackstone


Read and comprehend his legacy

[Clownboat]

Sure....I am angry because I presented the actual history as recorded "IN THE BIBLE? Truth is anger? I suppose is might be...if you don't like that truth..no?

It's false to call something actual history until it is confirmed to be. You have not done so.

YOU PEOPLE sure are quick to establish a false premise and then attempt to proceed as if that self established premise is TRUTH without providing nothing but MORE DEMANDS on the part of those you disagree with.....

We are to debate ideas here, not people (I often struggle with this one).

And if you are not an atheist....you are worshiping the wrong god, as its clear that you defend the murder of "innocent" children in the womb....no? The God in the Bible does not support the unjustified spilling of blood.

I have never heard of 'children' being in a womb. You're not a war with language by chance are you?

Again....talking ad nauseam is not debating especially when you continue to demand answers but continue to dismiss them when you don't agree with them when they are pointed out by book chapter and verse.

Did you have a point? This seems like noise.

The scriptures pointed out the false premise concerning GOD'S MURDERING (un-justified death) of the innocent.

They did huh? What is this false premise you allude to?

Surprise....but defining the traits of LOVE is not defining LOVE OR ITS ORIGINS no more than defining the law of gravity defines the origins of gravity.

The origins of love were in my definition. I'm sorry you missed it.

The law does not make gravity....it simply accepts its reality based upon its quantifiable effects. Again....please provide the origins of morality and love...without the premise of a law giver...as suggested by Darwinian cultists, nature has no morality, no love...only instinct, the survival of the fittest.....

The chemical reaction I defined as love takes place in the mind as well as the chemicals themselves. There is your origin.
Even if you had a point, which you don't, your argument is one born out of ignorance. "I don't understand where love comes from, so I'll insert a god." Do you still credit gods with creating thunder and lighting? I would assume not since you have received an education about such things (I assume).

so murder is fine no? If not...why not...how do you know that murder is not acceptable...if people are nothing more than animals? What....morality evolved? Prove it!

Simple, I treat others how I would like to be treated. I don't want to be murdered.
A society that was OK with murder is a society that will not succeed IMO. That is probably why altruism is present in humans.

FYI: You do realize the entire system of US Government, Jurisprudence, Division of power (Checks and Balances) are all based upon Blackstone and his writings...to include the majority of Constitutional premises? And Blackstone used Scripture as precedence? Other than that...Biblical morality does not work...no?

Please convey your point if you had one.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 165 by bluedog]

They can't define where reality, morality or love comes from (expect to say....it must be nothing...just ask Hawking).

I wasn't aware that as an atheist, I'm required to find out where reality, morality or love come from. How do you figure this?
An atheist is someone who doesn't believe there's a god. There is nothing for an atheist to do or prove, in order for him to be an atheist. An atheist could be wrong, there very well could be a god, but that doesn't stop him from being an atheist.

But God does not have "innocent" children put to death.....when the entire historical contextual message is "comprehended".

If we are to believe from religious folk such as you that the Old Testament describes God in some way, then there are stories that describe God as having children being put to death...unless you like to subscribe to the theory that people are born guilty of sin? Why do you need an entire understanding of history before you can pronounce a person or person innocent or guilty?

Strange that its an atheist that believes nothing is a sin

Not really, since sin is more or less a religious concept, and an atheist is unlikely to be religious (at least, not if he's buddhist or pantheist or whatever).

What's your argument again? God is cruel and guilty of spilling innocent blood? Really? And that makes it OKIE DOKIE for YOU to spill innocent defenseless blood in the womb?

Are you accusing us atheists here of aborting? Have you actually asked us whether or not we have, first? Or are you just going to paint us all with a broad brush to save time?

The lands that God brought down punishment upon where found guilty of "stealing" children from Israel in the middle of the night and sacrificing them to pagan gods such as Baal....burning them alive on a sacrificial alter.

And I suppose in your eyes, these activities were so evil that it merited the Hebrew armies marching in and killing everyone, children included and keeping only the women alive as sex slaves?
Because that is what is described as happening in these histories you hold so dear. Genocide and conquest. Your god's hands are not any cleaner than the Baal-worshipper's you rant on about.

should they have been allowed to grow up in a environment were they practiced vile evil sacrifices to a false pagan god

So you switch from ranting how evil it is to kill innocent defenceless children...to advocating for it, almost in the same breath.

you as an atheist should be the one that determines when the death of a child should take place....not God?

Unlike your god, we don't play hide and seek. We're here, we can be talked to, reasoned with. Your god doesn't show himself, he might as well not exist for all the effect he has on the real world. So in the complete absence of your god, we humans are pretty much the only ones who do get to decide.


Here's what you should do. ASK US whether or not we support abortion, before you go on a rant against us over us supposedly supporting it.
On a personal level, no I do not support abortion. On a legal level, yes I do. I would not impose my own morality on the rest of the populace.

[bluedog]

[Replying to post 169 by rikuoamero]

Splitting hairs...no? You don't support the killing of innocent children but you support the legal right for others to engage in murder. And the law makes it moral?

Again....I simply demonstrate the truth....if you support something you are just as guilty of it. There is a sin of omission as well as commission. You can't defend something and claim that you don't believe in it.

Just like the truth of making these accusations about the origin of Christianity...the Holy Bible and God. Those charges are made in an attempt to invoke emotion. Poor little children...cry me a river....I am mad as hell...those poor innocent children. Is that the response you are looking for? Or am I angry because you don't like the truth found in the Bible? The first charge out of your mouth...YOU ARE AN ANGRY CHRISTIAN. Why? That is the fished for response...no? But the truth is not concerned with emotion.

The truth of the matter is All LIFE EXISTS because of God...we are all allowed to live because He allows us to live....people die at every stage of life. Therefore if its wrong for God to allow children to die...its wrong for God to allow everyone to die. Everyone dies...no? WE BELONG TO GOD -- Ez. 18:4

Death exists because man disobeyed the Law of God, God did not want man to die, man dies because of sin -- Gen. 2:17.

God allowed these children to die because their parents were given an opportunity to change their pagan worshiping, fire burning sacrificial ways...and they refused.

Consider the world and the flood and the innocent children killed. God gave the world 120 years to turn from its sin (Gen. 6:3). He even sent Noah out and preached to them hoping they would turn as God does not even want the wicked to die before having a change to turn from their evil ways (Ez. 18:21-23).....That's why God sent Noah out in hopes of seeing some form of repentance (2 Peter 2:49)....yet, He found it just because He offered and they refused.

Why did the children die? Because of their evil parents. The children will spend eternity with God...they were innocent. Now consider the children of the Canaanites, Amorites....take note as revealed in scripture...they were EVIL and WICKED they were even burning their own children as a sacrifices to pagan gods....and the reason why God allowed anyone that offered up their child...after being warned not to engage in such activity....to be punished (Deut. 12:29-31) God warned HIS PEOPLE ISRAEL not to become ensnared in such wicked practices as offering up your own children to please some god.

Yet as wicked as these people were...God gave them 4 generations to repent and leave the land promised to Abraham (Gen. 15:16) The practice of offering children up to pagan gods was considered an abomination by God (Lev. 18:24-25)

The scriptures enlighten us that God did not want Israel to profit from any of the evil deeds after the punishment was carried out after they refused to turn from their wicked practices. He ordered Israel to kill the seed, and even the property. Yet...they did not destroy all the cattle, sheep, etc., and even brought the evil king back without executing him. God chastised Israel for not killing everyone and destroying all their ill-gotten property.

Why allow the children to die? If the wicked parents were killed...because of their evil practices, who would take care of the children (should they have been allowed to starve to death?) What about Israel taking them in? God had ordered that Israel was not to profit....if these children were allowed to raised, they would cause a profit to be made from the evil deeds of the parents....in the grown children could be used as farm hands..etc.

So....God decided to bring the Children Home to Him they were not charged for the sins of their parents, they were innocent, they were allowed to die...before they could be taught the evil of their parents.

I still find it strange that you support legalized death to the unborn...but make charges of wrong doing against God. Again...me thinks you are somewhat hypocritical and insincere...as YOU REALLY DON'T CARE how many children die...when you support the right to do it. Why do you even care about some supposed "story" that happened thousands of years ago....if not to invoke emotion in the hopes of destroying the faith of someone? I find that somewhat WICKED myself...just saying.

Is that not one of the things God finds to be abomination? "Causing discourse among brethren?" -- Prov. 6:16-19 That's 2 out of the 7....you "LEGALLY" (wink, wink) support the spilling of innocent blood. Indeed a strange god you worship...or don't....if you are agnostic. Me thinks the god most people worship is SELF.