A Question Unanswered, When in Church...

[POI]

During the last year or so of attending church, I was still reluctant to ask probing questions for fear of 'rocking the boat'. In the back of each chair were suggestion/question cards, which anyone could fill out and turn in... I asked the same question, about a dozen times, and never received any type of response.

For debate:

Why would an all knowing and all loving God ever place favor towards one specific race, the Jews?

[POI]

POI, no matter how many times you state it, you are just stating your opinion.

Tam, making my many points, about god placing favor, based upon 'accidental properties, is not mere opinion. Refer to post #146 for details.

If you love someone, you also care for those they love. As explained earlier (here or elsewhere, I forget now), God saves entire households.

Already addressed in post #146.

See, the all-knowing part here gets you. Because an all-knowing God knows how this all turns out; knows exactly what is needed. He would know then, that all Israel will turn and repent, say of Christ, "Blessed is He who comes in the name of [the LORD]", and be saved.

And as you already admitted, not all were Israelites. See post #146 for more details, since you are not into rinsing/repeating...

Further, how did God decide who to make his pacts with exactly? Seems He was hyper-focused on the middle east region. And many of them mucked it up, according to you. Did the rest of the globe not yet exist, or was the rest not important enough to address? They were to receive secondary information much later? Again, 'accidental properties."

There are also some who reign as king-priests in the Kingdom with Christ for a thousand years; and some who enter the Kingdom as subjects of that Kingdom. Those who reign as king-priests in the Kingdom with Christ for a thousand years are Christians (regardless of tribe, tongue, nation, people, gender, free, slave, etc). That offer was meant for the nation of Israel (based on the promise/covenant), but Israel (as a nation, though not all the people) rejected Christ. (Although 144 000 places from that nation is reserved from Israel because of the promise to Abraham, but those 144 000 acknowledge Christ and have faith in Him). Since that rejection, the invitation then opened up to anyone, to people from all tribes, nations, tongues.

So those who reign with Christ in His Kingdom as king-priests have both faith and love for Christ and God, and have been chosen by Christ. People are set into place 'just so'; as God and His Son know best. Not everyone will be chosen. (Indeed, many are called, few are chosen.) But many others enter into the Kingdom as subjects if that Kingdom, based upon the conditions set out in the parable of the sheep and goats parable; based on having the law (love) written naturally upon their hearts, as is made manifest by what they DO. And all Israel will be saved.

Faith and love are part and parcel here, and come with blessings.

Nice faith-based sermon. And here you are... Accusing me of offering "opinions"

I admit exactly what I said. ('virgin sex slave' is something you and others are assuming)

Is this a stretch to conclude? And if you wish to redirect me to a link, would you mind cut/pasting the pertinent parts?

How IS anything in [2] an 'accidental property'?

Flipping it right back to me does not absolve you from what I asked.

Nothing was wrong with God's communication. Something was wrong with men hardening their hearts so as not to hear (Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your heart as you did at...); and with the erring pen of the scribes that handled the law falsely. I'm not the person who claims that God must communicate to men through a book. The testimonies in that book state otherwise ("The Word of [the LORD] came to... so and so; "my sheep listen to my VOICE"; etc.)

So if I read anything which misaligns with my own "moral compass", it was the error of the scribe who wrote it down. And if I find it pleasing, the scribe was not in error?

You need to do a little better than that... I ask again, rephrased...

How does Christ coming along, change anything? What criteria is used to determine if the scribe had hardened their heart?

I get how the OT can throw some off though. I had to set the OT (well, the bible itself) aside for a while, and just listen, because I could only see what was written through the 'glasses' that men had given me (and perhaps also my own biases).

Or, to be more logical, dismiss this book as a collection of bronze-aged stores, passed off as god pronouncements. To do what you have done, seems to require mental gymnastics. Sorry to say....

[Clownboat]

For debate:

Why would an all knowing and all loving God ever place favor towards one specific race, the Jews?

When a tribal people invent a tribal god concept to explain the unknown is why that might happen.

[tam]

Peace to you,

POI, no matter how many times you state it, you are just stating your opinion.

Tam, making my many points, about god pacing favor, based upon 'accidental properties, is not mere opinion. Refer to post #146 for details.

You keep claiming what a "God" would not do, and what you think such a "God" SHOULD do... but how is that more than an opinion? How many 'gods' do you know?

If you love someone, you also care for those they love. As explained earlier (here or elsewhere, I forget now), God saves entire households.

Already addressed in post #146.

And responded to as well.

See, the all-knowing part here gets you. Because an all-knowing God knows how this all turns out; knows exactly what is needed. He would know then, that all Israel will turn and repent, say of Christ, "Blessed is He who comes in the name of [the LORD]", and be saved.

And as you already admitted, not all were Israelites.

I'm sorry, but I don't see how that addresses what I said. What point are you trying to make here?

Further, how did God decide who to make his pacts with exactly?

As has been explained in this thread, faith. Beginning with the faith of Abraham, then Isaac, then Jacob - and the promise to Abraham ensures his household is saved (even if not all will reign as kings and priests in the Kingdom with Christ as they were meant to do); and the new covenant is also based upon faith.

Seems He was hyper-focused on the middle east region.

That just happens to be where Abraham lived (well, actually, Abraham was called out of the East).

And many of them mucked it up, according to you. Did the rest of the globe not yet exist, or was the rest not important enough to address?

Or none showed the faith of Abraham.

They were to receive secondary information much later? Again, 'accidental properties."

Still no accidental properties here, but if any showed the faith of Abraham, then they would have been able to hear God and obey, just as well as Abraham.

There are also some who reign as king-priests in the Kingdom with Christ for a thousand years; and some who enter the Kingdom as subjects of that Kingdom. Those who reign as king-priests in the Kingdom with Christ for a thousand years are Christians (regardless of tribe, tongue, nation, people, gender, free, slave, etc). That offer was meant for the nation of Israel (based on the promise/covenant), but Israel (as a nation, though not all the people) rejected Christ. (Although 144 000 places from that nation is reserved from Israel because of the promise to Abraham, but those 144 000 acknowledge Christ and have faith in Him). Since that rejection, the invitation then opened up to anyone, to people from all tribes, nations, tongues.

So those who reign with Christ in His Kingdom as king-priests have both faith and love for Christ and God, and have been chosen by Christ. People are set into place 'just so'; as God and His Son know best. Not everyone will be chosen. (Indeed, many are called, few are chosen.) But many others enter into the Kingdom as subjects if that Kingdom, based upon the conditions set out in the parable of the sheep and goats parable; based on having the law (love) written naturally upon their hearts, as is made manifest by what they DO. And all Israel will be saved.

Faith and love are part and parcel here, and come with blessings.

Nice faith-based sermon. And here you are... Accusing me of offering "opinions"

Well, I could post the link with all the scriptural backing in it, but I'm sure you can look up the parable of the sheep and goats easily enough for yourself. Reigning in the Kingdom with Christ for a thousand years is written in various sections of Revelation. People of the nations doing the requirements of the law (that is now love), showing that this law is written naturally upon their hearts, is in Romans 2 (13-16, I think).

I admit exactly what I said. ('virgin sex slave' is something you and others are assuming)

Is this a stretch to conclude? And if you wish to redirect me to a link, would you mind cut/pasting the pertinent parts?

I would prefer not to chop it up, sorry. You (or the reader) can look or not, as you choose.

How IS anything in [2] an 'accidental property'?

Flipping it right back to me does not absolve you from what I asked.

I cannot answer what you ask because I see nothing that could be construed as an accidental property in [2]. Hence, I have to ask you to explain your response.

Nothing was wrong with God's communication. Something was wrong with men hardening their hearts so as not to hear (Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your heart as you did at...); and with the erring pen of the scribes that handled the law falsely. I'm not the person who claims that God must communicate to men through a book. The testimonies in that book state otherwise ("The Word of [the LORD] came to... so and so; "my sheep listen to my VOICE"; etc.)

So if I read anything which misaligns with my own "moral compass", it was the error of the scribe who wrote it down.

Nothing in what I wrote says that your moral compass is a test of truth (or that 'my moral compass' is a test of truth either).

It is not about me, or you. It is about Christ, the Truth.

And if I find it pleasing, the scribe was not in error?

See above.

You need to do a little better than that... I ask again, rephrased...

How does Christ coming along, change anything?

Christ is the Truth. Not the OT. Even the OT points to Him as being the one to whom the people are supposed to listen TO. Even the law was just a tutor until Christ - the TRUE Teacher - came.

And while allowances were made for people in the past, Christ simply speaks what is true - whether others accept or refrain.

What criteria is used to determine if the scribe had hardened their heart?

A scribe is someone who writes or copies things down for/from someone else. Whether the people hardened their hearts (or a scribe did, or a scribe just made an error in copying/transcribing/translating), the 'criteria' to determine if an inspired expression is true is to test it against:

- Christ - since He is the Truth and He speaks what is true and from His Father. If you can hear His voice, then ask Him and listen (and/or ask for ears to hear if indeed you wish to hear His voice and to know what is true)... and if you must look to what is written, at the least put His words in what is written first, and hold the rest up to Him - His word and example. Christ is also the image of God, and He is the One who reveals the Father as the Father truly is. If we see Christ, then we see God. If we know Christ, then we know His Father as well.

- Love - because God is love; the law that is from Him is love; love covers over a multitude of sins; there is no law against love; and what comes from God will also be from love.

I get how the OT can throw some off though. I had to set the OT (well, the bible itself) aside for a while, and just listen, because I could only see what was written through the 'glasses' that men had given me (and perhaps also my own biases).

Or, to be more logical, dismiss this book as a collection of bronze-aged stores, passed off as god pronouncements. To do what you have done, seems to require mental gymnastics. Sorry to say....

It just requires Christ, and faith in Him, and so also in His Father. Looking to Christ to see and to know His Father.



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

[POI]

You keep claiming what a "God" would not do, and what you think such a "God" SHOULD do... but how is that more than an opinion? How many 'gods' do you know?

Allow me to fast forward here a bit, for sake in brevity....

Why wouldn't an all-loving god just communicate with everyone, from "Adam" and beyond? Why wouldn't an all-loving God contact all, and give them all the choice to follow or reject? Surely some would follow. Seems quite 'convenient', that the region who formulated this god, just so happened to also be the same focused region for which god decides to seemingly arbitrarily contact.

What was this god's rubric for deciding who He was going to communicate with...? If He is all-loving, contact ALL. Picking and choosing some, and not others, makes no sense. Sure, you could make 'arguments', but do they logically follow? Or are they instead (ad hoc / post hoc) excuses?

Doesn't it seem quite coincidental, that the ones who formulated this god, just so happened to also receive messages from this god? It is the same sorts of reason(s) we see other parts of the globe, and see stories of visions, interaction, or publications, of their own formulated god(s). Surely you are aware that YHWH is not the only god claim, right? God's 'OT" criteria for anything looks to be based upon bloodline, ethnicity, and geography -- (all of which would be based upon "accidental properties"). Meaning, God was not merely demonstrating his existence to the faithful. He was also only demonstrating His miracles to many n one region. And ignoring the rest of the globe. Some of which may then have decided to follow, and some may not.

Further, again, what is God's rubric for deciding who He's going to touch, and not touch? Meaning, later down the line, He arbitrarily contacts Saul. Saul was not demonstrating any sort of 'faith' beforehand. Sure, he did later. Just like the billions of folks who have ever existed. Some would follow, and some would not. Later, in the "NT", God still bases His decisions upon geography, but no longer bases it upon any demonstrated former "faith", (i.e.) Saul.

The point being, you only have such stories originating from one region. Just like, when you see other god claims, they are emulated or originated from one region, for which it was manifested/concocted/invented/imagined/etc... A picture is worth a thousand words. Why such the concrete divide?

https://vividmaps.com/maps-of-worlds-religions/

Speaking of 'truth', would such truth claims be so neatly divided for math? Case/point, take the axiom of (1 + 1 = 2). Is the consensus still out, distinctly divided, in the same way as the picture?

I'll stop here. If you feel I need to address anything you stated below, please clarify.

[tam]

Peace to you,

You keep claiming what a "God" would not do, and what you think such a "God" SHOULD do... but how is that more than an opinion? How many 'gods' do you know?

Allow me to fast forward here a bit, for sake in brevity....

Allow me to give you the short answer (for the sake of brevity).

Why wouldn't an all-loving god just communicate with everyone, from "Adam" and beyond?

He DOES.

Not everyone listens; not everyone recognizes or understands that He is speaking to them (directly <- rare in my understanding; or more often via His Son/Word - which is how God speaks to us now); not everyone has the faith to HEAR and BELIEVE and OBEY.

Abraham had that faith.



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

[POI]

He DOES.

Not everyone listens; not everyone recognizes or understands that He is speaking to them (directly <- rare in my understanding; or more often via His Son/Word - which is how God speaks to us now); not everyone has the faith to HEAR and BELIEVE and OBEY.

So God has contacted every human in history, (one way or another), and only one region acknowledged Him? This makes no sense... You have left out a large part. God was not performing these said miracles globally, was He? Only in one region is reported to experience such OT events. Or, is your argument that no one outside of this region wrote about it, and He did indeed contact all, during OT times one way or another? Or maybe still, they have mistaken their fake god(s) for your real god?

Further, you are making a claim about me. You claim that God contacts all. This would include me Okay, I invite you here to demonstrate how. If you opt not to address the link below, I understand

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39652

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to POI in post #156]

I don't want to shortchange you, so I will respond more fully if needed as soon as I am able. (I have to leave for work soon, plus have a 10-12 hour day tomorrow) In the meantime, I will post a link to a thread as to the HOW does Christ speak ( viewtopic.php?p=738377#p738377 ) <- it is not in the debate section, I posted it to address a question that kept coming up; and also direct you to a couple verses from Job (same OT that you are getting much of the rest of your information from):

Why do you complain to him
that he responds to no ones words[a]?
14
For God does speaknow one way, now another
though no one perceives it.
15
In a dream, in a vision of the night,
when deep sleep falls on people
as they slumber in their beds,
16
he may speak in their ears
and terrify them with warnings,
17
to turn them from wrongdoing
and keep them from pride,
18
to preserve them from the pit,
their lives from perishing by the sword.



Peace again to you.

[POI]

Peace to you,

[Replying to POI in post #156]

I don't want to shortchange you, so I will respond more fully if needed as soon as I am able. (I have to leave for work soon, plus have a 10-12 hour day tomorrow) In the meantime, I will post a link to a thread as to the HOW does Christ speak ( viewtopic.php?p=738377#p738377 ) <- it is not in the debate section, I posted it to address a question that kept coming up; and also direct you to a couple verses from Job (same OT that you are getting much of the rest of your information from):

Why do you complain to him
that he responds to no ones words[a]?
14
For God does speaknow one way, now another
though no one perceives it.
15
In a dream, in a vision of the night,
when deep sleep falls on people
as they slumber in their beds,
16
he may speak in their ears
and terrify them with warnings,
17
to turn them from wrongdoing
and keep them from pride,
18
to preserve them from the pit,
their lives from perishing by the sword.



Peace again to you.

I'll cut/paste, and respond to the attachment in the other thread (viewtopic.php?t=39652).

Circling back to this thread, allow us to continue....

Seems quite strange and coincidental that such a claimed all-loving god, would manifest to one region, (as described in the Bible), and ignore all other regions. No one from any other region reported it. However, at some point, other regions made reports of their own god(s) - (before or after). Does this mean:

1) These other accounts are mistaken, and it was actually YHWH? If so, how do you know the OT account is not the one mistaken?
2) Are they lying? If so, why is the OT not lying?
3) Is their god completely imaginary? If so, why is the accounts of the OT not imaginary?

Again, this god looks to pick and choose, based upon 'accidental properties' -- region, bloodline, ethnicity.

Such a God is very sloppy and haphazard, if they wish to convey truth, by telling a few in the Middle East, and then waiting for these anecdotal stories to spread globally. Just confront all, in the same convincing way He is said to contact the ones listed all though the Bible. Playing hide-and-go-seek, and/or being easily mistaken for something else, is nonsensical. They would all still have the ability to follow or reject.

At some point, your argument demonstrates nothing beyond blind faith. And as I continue to repeat, blind faith can just as easily be applied to any arbitrary claim, for which you hope is true.

[tam]

Peace to you and thank you for your patience!

Peace to you,

[Replying to POI in post #156]

I don't want to shortchange you, so I will respond more fully if needed as soon as I am able. (I have to leave for work soon, plus have a 10-12 hour day tomorrow) In the meantime, I will post a link to a thread as to the HOW does Christ speak ( viewtopic.php?p=738377#p738377 ) <- it is not in the debate section, I posted it to address a question that kept coming up; and also direct you to a couple verses from Job (same OT that you are getting much of the rest of your information from):

Why do you complain to him
that he responds to no ones words[a]?
14
For God does speaknow one way, now another
though no one perceives it.
15
In a dream, in a vision of the night,
when deep sleep falls on people
as they slumber in their beds,
16
he may speak in their ears
and terrify them with warnings,
17
to turn them from wrongdoing
and keep them from pride,
18
to preserve them from the pit,
their lives from perishing by the sword.



Peace again to you.

I'll cut/paste, and respond to the attachment in the other thread (viewtopic.php?t=39652).

Circling back to this thread, allow us to continue....

In this thread, the above is important because you are basing many of your accusations on the idea that God never spoke to/contacted/performed miracles, etc, with any nation or people other than Israel (though also Isaac and Abraham, Noah before that, etc.) But that is not true. Therefore, the answer that you have been given - that you seem to keep dismissing - is that it is not 'accidental properties' but FAITH and LOVE. Beginning with Abraham (whose faith was in God, and God loved him and blessed him and his entire household, as God does. The promises are for us and for our children; entire households are saved. Just as Rahab saved herself and her household; just as Noah and his household were on the ark; just as the blood of the lamb on the doorpost caused Death to pass over the entire house; just as Lot was told to gather everyone who belonged to him to leave the city before it could be destroyed. That is from love for us, and so also for our loved ones.)

However, on the topic of God speaking to more than just Israel, even in the bible that you are using to base your claims about God upon, God spoke to people in nations other than Israel.

He spoke to Nebuchadnezzar (from the book of Daniel), and also to at the Pharaoh of Egypt (at the time that Joseph was in Egypt) to give him dreams about the coming famine (which Joseph interpreted and advised the Pharaoh on how to survive that famine; Genesis 41). God also warned Pilate's wife in a dream about Christ. These are just a few examples from what is written.

In your other thread, you asked 'why dreams'; 'why in deep sleep'. Because that tends to be when men are quietest and listening (when they are not listening while awake).

Seems quite strange and coincidental that such a claimed all-loving god, would manifest to one region, (as described in the Bible), and ignore all other regions. No one from any other region reported it. However, at some point, other regions made reports of their own god(s) - (before or after). Does this mean:

Who says He ignored other people or regions rather than the other way around... or that others once knew Him, but turned away from Him, started looking to other men or even just themselves, listening not to the Word/Truth, but instead listening to others who perhaps 'tickled their ears' and told them what they wanted to hear rather than what was true. Others who added to or took away from what is true. Then that gets passed on to their children (and the cycle continues).

Just think about Christ for a moment.

There is the real person (whose name is not now and never was "Jesus"), the Messiah, the Son of God.

But how many versions of "Jesus" exist today? How many various religions in various regions exist, built around "Jesus", but are completely different and even contradictory?

It didn't take even take two thousand years for that to happen.


Apply that same kind of thing with God.


It is people who turned away from God (and His Son), by turning toward something or someone else (men, religion, oneself, anything else).




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