The new testament and slavery.

.

 

But does it seem plausible to you that if a mob of Jezebel's henchman were coming after Elisha to kill him, the Bible would describe the event in words that seem like a bunch of wiseass punks were just making fun of Elisha's bald head.

 

That's because your first teachings of god, are that he was good.

What happen to love thy enemy??



This is where I don't get it, some things you take literally others you speculate when they don't appease to your teachings of god.

It makes no sense.

 

Not for anything, but it does if the full context is taken into consideration.

Also, I forgot to mention was that these ones weren't just being wiseasses, but trying to laugh at Elisha's distress.

 

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgkMJhcTE1c&feature=channel_video_title

 

How could two bears maul 42 people??

If there wasn't any escape routes, they would have to try and fight the bears back and surely most of them would end up with wounds....

That the bear's were super-bears from god, because it was a curse in gods name and god is capable of doing many things that are immaterial.

God sends fire from the sky on many occasions, it seems plausible to believe that he could send super bears whom were bigger, faster and stronger. The curse already broke the rules anyways; bears hardly ever approach individuals, let alone large groups of them, so it would be unreasonable to believe we could apply the rules of logic that we gain from observing bears in the wild.

Because bears hardly attack large groups we could also say that they got the number off, the translation wasn't correct and that there was only a group of 6. 4+2=6.

Speculation speculation speculation!!!

Either way, the speculation never ends!!!

Ahhh... but there is a contradiction!

Have you forgotten Zepp that we should 'love our enemies'???

I guess this witty little video seems to forget all of this....coudl the video have an agenda???

No way, really? A religious video with an agenda!

Wow, haven't heard of that before!

 

Maybe it can have an agenda but who here doesn't have an agenda? Even God has an agenda

Personally, I don't see how 2 bears would not scatter 42, screaming for their lives. If it was an enclosed area, perhaps, but it doesn't say.

And I don't see any reason to believe they were super bears of some kind, I think the purpose was to demonstrate that they were scared off and that's all.

As for loving our enemies, what exactly is love? Jesus showed love to the hypocrites by telling them that if they didn't change their ways then they would not be able to find peace.

 

Where is this?

Are you referring to him being called the 'child of promise'?

You still haven't prove any of this. Yes you show instances where there may be mistranslation, but they are shaky at best. This doesn't imply that this translation was.

Read my other post, where I speculate what could possibly cause such a situation to occur.

Ofcourse, but those that know little to nothing about the translations, except what a translator tells them should not attempt to compromise translations because you never know which is the correct one. This is a huge weakness for anyone attempting to understand the bible and what it says.

You haven't proven that it is a mistranslation! Tore apart, mauled all seem to have one direction and it is violence!

 

It doesn't say; so what. If you can say thing's that it doesn't say why should we stop at any given place! That the whole point, the bible is an old book with myriad contradictions and logical problems.

Here, lets apply what you said in this post to this and see what happens. If it was an enclosed area( to scare them off), perhaps, but it doesn't say.

Do you see the problem now, friend?

So why didn't elisha tell them to find peace and more importantly, WHY DID GOD ALLOW ELISHA TO CURSE THEM IF HE IS ALL LOVING AND ALL POWERFUL???

:2thumbsup:

 

Galatians 4:28

"Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise." These brothers are of all ages and it's being used to denote sharing of a promise.

I'm just going by what it seems to be saying in context of things said.

I replied to this above. Maybe because I replied at a time while you were still writing your post.

It still does not change how these words are used throughout the Bible.

Maybe not, but the word for torn is used to describe Moses parting the sea.

 

I haven't seen a single contradiction yet

What problem?

Do you think these ones would have listened? I'll let God decide

 

What level of education do you have, if you don't mind me asking?

Have you ever taken practical thinking at a university level?

 

About two years of college. I was in a logic class once. One of the books we were asked to read was "How to Think About Weird Things: Critical Thinking for a New Age".

Why do you ask?

 

I'm afraid I have the same feeling about your post ("it makes no sense") if it's supposed to be a response to the quoted passage. I was just asking why, if the mauled youths were a gang of Jezebel's henchmen it wouldn't just say so in the Bible.

I won't worship monsters, nor am I a Biblidolator, and I think good and evil are not whatever God says they are. Otherwise, it would make no sense to call God good. We might just as well say (S)he is what (S)he is. My solution: if the OT says God is ordering genocide and sending she bears to maul kids, then I need to take a closer look to see if the relevant passages have to be interpreted differently than the literal interpretation. But I have no problem in saying if God is really backing atrocities, which I'd find highly unlikely this is not a God I'd want to worship. I happen to believe that God is good, and therefore the authors of the Old Testament must have got it wrong. The problem I have with your arguments is that they suggest that the real God is the God depicted in the Old Testament. Like most other mainline Protestants, I simply don't believe that. I don't take it literally, and in fact believe that those who do miss the point. A literal reading of Genesis (the book to which I owe my faith) or Job can't comprehend what scripture is meant to convey. Saint Augustine said: "When I understood literally, I was slain spiritually." I think we need to interpret the Bible in a way that, as Augustine insisted, builds up the love of God and the love of our neighbor." (On Christian Doctrine)

Unlike some on this forum, I don't think every word in the Bible is God giving dictation to humans, nor do I regard it as a science or history textbook. The Bible is a record of the efforts of a remarkable people to understand God and their relationship to Him. There are large parts of the Old Testament, as well as the New Testament, that I regard as simply Jewish folktales. The Elisha story is one of them. I don't blame God for sending the she bears because I don't think it ever happened. I think the point of the story, like the Canaanite genocide stories, is to convey the message that Yahweh is a badass that you don't want to mess with. But I think the stories about Elijah and Elisha concern very real problems then and now: idolatry and corruption. I don't know exactly what parts you think I take literally. Clear?

[/QUOTE]

 

I wish I could explain this to you.

Anyways it doesn't matter; did you go to a christian college?

 

[/QUOTE]

Why can't the story of Jesus be a folk-tale then??

There isn't a shred of strong evidence to prove that he existed.

And remember, its been a long ass time since he has supposedly existed.

Finally, why should god, if he is all powerful and benevolent give others a disadvantageous position in believing in him? The people at the times of Jesus get to see a man do incredible feats and claim that he is from god etc. Yet, he still judges us based on our faith in him and how much we follow his commandments? If I got to see Jesus perform miracles, I wouldn't doubt the existence of a god that I can't see/hear. This isn't equality and equality is the basis to compassion and love, the two most fundamental qualities to a benevolent being.

There are many more reason's why I think the god of the bible is fabricated.

But what would you say to that?

 

No, not a Christian college. Asides from that, there's nothing wrong with Christian colleges.

Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I'm unintelligent.

 

score!

[/quote]

 

Occam's Razor is on the side of Jesus existing. There would need to be more explanations to prove Jesus didn't exist than did exist.