Profound Question

[MassageGirl]

WHAT??????????????

Hey OP:

God already saved them.

His messenger, Jesus Christ, died for them. Maybe you didnt know that already, I dunno- but Jesus even died for the bad people, too. Hes our savior. He died, even for you.

*BTW, Nobody has a great life, you know. We all have times when we would rather be dead than to have to put up with the evil in this world. I dont want to minimize these kids plight, or anything, it sucks, but God has already doen all he can. Even if the kids die, they are already saved, so it doesnt matter.

 

[rOckNrOllsCar11]

The Old Testament tells some pretty vicious tales. There is something about children having their heads smashed against rocks. There are stories about not letting a single person from the opposing side live. Then, in the New Testament, the Bible often speaks of loving your enemy and turning the other cheek. I guess that once God’s chosen people were in a relatively comfortable position of power, they could afford to be nice. I guess that all that I am saying is that, basically, the Bible just does not seem to make sense.

Read Romans. It will give you a better understanding of the difference between the Old Testament and New and also show you what little it takes to be "saved".

And the Jews have very little to nothing to do with the New Testament. In fact, the message of Christ and salvation was/ is for the Gentiles because the Jews rejected the message and the savior Jesus.

 

[Foxfyre]

Read Romans. It will give you a better understanding of the difference between the Old Testament and New and also show you what little it takes to be "saved".

And the Jews have very little to nothing to do with the New Testament. In fact, the message of Christ and salvation was/ is for the Gentiles because the Jews rejected the message and the savior Jesus.

Well, actually most of the New Testament was most likely written by Jews who had become disciples of Jesus Christ. Because of the heavy influence of Old Testament content and Jewish tradition, the New Testament reads like a continuation of the old, and certainly those writing it assumed their readers knew their Jewish scriptures. Jesus himself was a Jew as were the twelve Apostles, the Apostle Paul, and most of the other disciples who responded to him.

The New Testament cannot be taught competently without a solid grounding in Old Testament content.

Remember recently when Ann Coulter caught hell when she referred to Jews being 'perfected'? She was blasted for an 'anti-semitic' reference; however, it was in no way anti-semitic as it is the Christian belief that all, including Jews, benefit by knowing and accepting Christ, and in fact become 'perfected' when they do that. (And hold on guys--I'm not suggesting that Christians are in any way superior or sinless or incapable of sin, and I agree some can be major a-holes. "Perfected" in Christian-ese has a much different connotation that it does in the general vernacular.)

 

[rOckNrOllsCar11]

Well, actually most of the New Testament was most likely written by Jews who had become disciples of Jesus Christ. Because of the heavy influence of Old Testament content and Jewish tradition, the New Testament reads like a continuation of the old, and certainly those writing it assumed their readers knew their Jewish scriptures. Jesus himself was a Jew as were the twelve Apostles, the Apostle Paul, and most of the other disciples who responded to him.

The New Testament cannot be taught competently without a solid grounding in Old Testament content.

Remember recently when Ann Coulter caught hell when she referred to Jews being 'perfected'? She was blasted for an 'anti-semitic' reference; however, it was in no way anti-semitic as it is the Christian belief that all, including Jews, benefit by knowing and accepting Christ, and in fact become 'perfected' when they do that. (And hold on guys--I'm not suggesting that Christians are in any way superior or sinless or incapable of sin, and I agree some can be major a-holes. "Perfected" in Christian-ese has a much different connotation that it does in the general vernacular.)

Before I comment I just want to say that I've had a pretty unique life and experiences. I suffered a lot of abuses growing up, was abandoned by my family when I was 14 and have been in several different forms of institution (group homes, foster care, even jail). I've struggled with drug, alcohol and sex addictions most of my adult life so I in no way claim to be a "holy" man, just honest. I'd appreciate if the personal things I do ever share here are respected.

At 19 I became a Christian having had what I would call now "a moment of absolute clarity". To this day I don't doubt it was supernatural. I often have said that if I had been born and raised in Iraq, India or some place where the national faith is other than Christian, than I would have gone to that in response. I only desired to learn more about God and truly wanted to life for Him at that time.
Anyways, I went a few years totally saturated in its dogma, learning as much as possible. Nothing I read, watched, or listened to musically was secular. I would read the Bible, Bible commentaries, Bible concordances. Some things happened in my life when I was about 22 that made me do a 180, but it wasn't without keeping my faith but believe me when I tell you, I've done almost anything and everything to test the love and patience of God. I've got over 100 scars to prove that. My knowledge of the Bible is not nearly as keen as it was back in those days but my understanding of it is more founded and grounded by my maturity. I've been able to see things from many different sides and have come away from those experiences with a better understanding of what principals it is that God works in. Now I just try to live accountably. I could do "bad" things and get away with them on human terms perhaps but there's no honor in that. I just try to live true. Gunslinger code if you will.

I'm very aware of the Old Testaments influence on the New. What I was saying though was that the message of salvation through Christ went to the Gentiles (which was also a prophecy in the Old Testament; Psalms if I remember correctly). The predominate subject of The Book Of Romans are letters from Paul attempting to squash the feeble arguments among the church members of who is a better Christian and why. Paul explains that it's not about food you may or may not eat, good works are any of that kind of stuff. The Jews that were Christian thought themselves better than Gentiles because they had the Law before Christ but Paul makes it clear that he did not know sin except through the Law. All this is in chapter 7 of Romans.

I think considering Jews a race is stupid. It's a faith not a race, that's how I see it. If anything, the concept that Jews are a race is elitist in it self. I never heard about that comment made by Ann Coulter but it's a pretty stupid thing to say in the least. I don't think it's anti-semitic but very irrelevant if anything in regards to gods view of people and the relationship He supposedly wants to have with them. I don't feel convictions for things that someone else may. I don't think it's because I'm above certain teachings. I think it re-enforces the idea that people are unique and each of us struggle with different things. The older and more experienced I've gotten I've come to realize why some things are taught. I don't often realize enough how much some of the things taught are for our good and happiness.

Hope I didn't rant too long for y'all.

 

[jillian]

Before I comment I just want to say that I've had a pretty unique life and experiences. I suffered a lot of abuses growing up, was abandoned by my family when I was 14 and have been in several different forms of institution (group homes, foster care, even jail). I've struggled with drug, alcohol and sex addictions most of my adult life so I in no way claim to be a "holy" man, just honest. I'd appreciate if the personal things I do ever share here are respected.

At 19 I became a Christian having had what I would call now "a moment of absolute clarity". To this day I don't doubt it was supernatural. I often have said that if I had been born and raised in Iraq, India or some place where the national faith is other than Christian, than I would have gone to that in response. I only desired to learn more about God and truly wanted to life for Him at that time.
Anyways, I went a few years totally saturated in its dogma, learning as much as possible. Nothing I read, watched, or listened to musically was secular. I would read the Bible, Bible commentaries, Bible concordances. Some things happened in my life when I was about 22 that made me do a 180, but it wasn't without keeping my faith but believe me when I tell you, I've done almost anything and everything to test the love and patience of God. I've got over 100 scars to prove that. My knowledge of the Bible is not nearly as keen as it was back in those days but my understanding of it is more founded and grounded by my maturity. I've been able to see things from many different sides and have come away from those experiences with a better understanding of what principals it is that God works in. Now I just try to live accountably. I could do "bad" things and get away with them on human terms perhaps but there's no honor in that. I just try to live true. Gunslinger code if you will.

I'm very aware of the Old Testaments influence on the New. What I was saying though was that the message of salvation through Christ went to the Gentiles (which was also a prophecy in the Old Testament; Psalms if I remember correctly). The predominate subject of The Book Of Romans are letters from Paul attempting to squash the feeble arguments among the church members of who is a better Christian and why. Paul explains that it's not about food you may or may not eat, good works are any of that kind of stuff. The Jews that were Christian thought themselves better than Gentiles because they had the Law before Christ but Paul makes it clear that he did not know sin except through the Law. All this is in chapter 7 of Romans.

I think considering Jews a race is stupid. It's a faith not a race, that's how I see it. If anything, the concept that Jews are a race is elitist in it self. I never heard about that comment made by Ann Coulter but it's a pretty stupid thing to say in the least. I don't think it's anti-semitic but very irrelevant if anything in regards to gods view of people and the relationship He supposedly wants to have with them. I don't feel convictions for things that someone else may. I don't think it's because I'm above certain teachings. I think it re-enforces the idea that people are unique and each of us struggle with different things. The older and more experienced I've gotten I've come to realize why some things are taught. I don't often realize enough how much some of the things taught are for our good and happiness.

Hope I didn't rant too long for y'all.

It does sound like you have an interesting story and that your faith is hard won. I hope your beliefs bring you comfort and I wouldn't even begin to question them.

I only wanted to make a couple of comments, the first being that Annie Coultergeist did not say Jews are "perfected", she said we're NOT perfected. Me? I think she can keep her concept of "perfection" to herself. And the statement, if not anti-semitic, per se, certainly made it clear that she considers her own beliefs superior. That's fine. Everyone thinks their own beliefs are superior or they wouldn't hold to them. The problem is when someone uses those beliefs to support some pretense that they are somehow better than anyone else.

The other thing is that the main reason Jews are considered a race/ethnicity is that is how we've been defined by others for a very long time. It's been the basis for a lot of pretty sick and descriminatory laws. So, when you live in disaspora, then it is a means of defining oneself. Plus, Jews, as you know, are Jews by birth, not by baptism or such. Yes, there is the bris, as a passage, but mostly, it's defined based on the religion of the mother. So, is that religion? Race? Ethnicity? It's actually a bit of each, particularly given that many Jews are "secular" Jews who identify more strongly with the cultural referance points than the religious ones.

Does that make sense?

 

[midcan5]

I remember a parallel in an apologetics book. It said that we understand why things happen to us like a dog understands why it gets taken to the veterinarian. It is an interesting comparison. The dog does not understand why its master is taking it to the vet or why the veterinarian seems to be hurting it so much. Yet, the vet knows. He must hurt the dog to heal the dog. A dog may be to a man as a man is to God. I still don’t fully “buy” the comparison but I think about it some times.

Not being smart but how do you know the dog does not understand the particular situation? I am often amazed at how a dog looks and reacts to different situations. Just as a child comes to understand slowly, this is good for me, this I don't like, a dog may learn the same.

 

[mattskramer]

Not being smart but how do you know the dog does not understand the particular situation? I am often amazed at how a dog looks and reacts to different situations. Just as a child comes to understand slowly, this is good for me, this I don't like, a dog may learn the same.

I think that many animals don't understand. Anyway, I made some mistakes. Here is the comparison:

http://jesusfreak88.proboards23.com/index.cgi?board=biblestudy&action=display&thread=1105143909

Imagine a bear in a trap when a hunter sees him and, out of sympathy, wants to set him fee. This hunter tries to win the bears confidence, but with no avail. He is forced to shoot the bear full of tranquilizers. The bear, however, believes this to be an attack and tries to wrestle the hunter away. After the bear settles down a bit the hunter retries to set the bear free; yet, he finds that in order to free the bear he has to push the bear's paw into the trap even more in order to release the tension on the spring. If the bear were semi-conscious at this point, he would be fully convienced that the hunter was an enemy, who was inevitably trying to cause him suffering, pain, harm, and eventual death.

However, the bear would reach this incorrect assumption (or prehaps "fact" to the bear) because the bear is not the man who knows the bigger picture. Thus, the bear reaches this incorrect conclusion because the bear is simply not man.

By the way, I’m an undecided agnostic – I’m leaning a tiny bit toward theism.

 

[midcan5]

The Penn State story and the OP below brought this topic back to me. While the religious right defends cellular life, the Congress removes - or doesn't even try to help - the supports that help children's nutrition and their health and well being. And then there is the world in which a child dies ever few seconds from a preventable disease or lack of food. So the question becomes is the world, all of us, guilty too of walking out of the room? It is too easy to point over there.

"Here’s what I think about that, right now. I’m a science fiction writer, and one of the great stories of science fiction is “The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas,” which was written by Ursula K. Le Guin. The story posits a fantastic utopian city, where everything is beautiful, with one catch: In order for all this comfort and beauty to exist, one child must be kept in filth and misery. Every citizen of Omelas, when they come of age, is told about that one blameless child being put through hell. And they have a choice: Accept that is the price for their perfect lives in Omelas, or walk away from that paradise, into uncertainty and possibly chaos.

At Pennsylvania State University, a grown man found a blameless child being put through hell. Other grown men learned of it. Each of them had to make their choice, and decide, fundamentally, whether the continuation of their utopia — or at very least the illusion of their utopia — was worth the pain and suffering of that one child. Through their actions, and their inactions, we know the choice they made." Omelas State University