spurly

He is God, you know. He can do that.

winstonjen

If morality means an act is good because of who does it, not the act itself, then morality is irrelevant, pointless and is completely arbitrary. Which is exactly the way it is in the bible. God never has to pay for his sins, does he? I guess that makes him a hypocrite of the grandest scale.

spurly

We weren't talking about morality, we were talking about the means of being justified and brought back to a right relationship with God - that must be through blood.

Just as an aside, this entire universe is God's creation. It is an extension of himself. So what is righteous in a universe that is an extension of God - the things that line up with his character and bring harmony to that universe and to the relationship between the people and the creator. What is evil? Those things that contradict or go against the nature of God. So yes, one awe inspiring being does determine what is righteous and what is evil. And it is determined by his very nature and character.

Kevin

Queen of Swords

Originally posted by spurly
When Adam and Eve had to leave the presence of God, God was being extremely merciful. If they had stayed in his presence as sinners, they would have been blown away by his holiness, literally.

How is it that Satan was able to come into god's presence and talk to him about Job, then?

So in his mercy he did something incredible. He himself provided the first sacrifice for their sin. He slew an animal and clothed them with the skins.

Well, then, he didn't provide the first sacrifice, some poor animal who never had a choice about the whole thing provided the sacrifice.

God's expulsion of Adam and Eve was an act of extreme mercy on hyis part. He didn't put them to death on the spot, and he even covered their sin so that they would not be disintegrated in the presence of his holiness.

God punished Adam and Eve for one mistake, made before they even had the knowledge of good and evil. This is not merciful. He also levied on them penalties which applied to their descendants, and that's not merciful either.

Queen of Swords

Originally posted by spurly
We weren't talking about morality, we were talking about the means of being justified and brought back to a right relationship with God - that must be through blood.

Why must it be through blood? Why does God want blood so much?

Would it have been at all possible for him to decide, "well, forgiveness could be granted for sincere repentance, no blood needs to be involved"?

long winded fool

I agree. Whenever I read the Bible, I wonder where some of the crazy ideas come from that zealously religious people often conjure up. While they may be obeying the letter of a part of the Bible, all too often they defy the spirit of the context in which it seems to have been written in, (IMHO.) When something doesn't seem to make any literal sense to me (which is most of the text) I try to contemplate what the author was thinking and try to imagine analogies and symbolism that might turn it into a piece of understandable writing. Much of it (more than I'd ever thought) makes perfect sense when you allow the supernatural things to be symbolic of natural emotions and common sense wisdom. (And allow for discrepancies in historical fact which are inconsequential to the allegorical meaning of the story.) While I can't comment on the stuff that still doesn't make sense to me, I stop short of assuming that it must just be literal and divinely miraculous, and at the same token, I stop short of assuming it's worthless tripe just because I don't understand it. (I don't understand most abstract art either ) But someone obviously thought it was worth something to take the time to put it down on paper. And why would you read anything unless it's to understand what someone was trying to say?

But, I suppose, like the Pharisees someone mentioned earlier, certain kinds of people can't or won't apply critical thinking and simply do things because "that's what it says in this book and that's how it's always been done," or else "that's what it says in this book and that's how obviously irrational and unreasonable people do it, so therefore the book must be wrong." Poetry in my experience is not so easily judged one way or another, and as even the Bible itself makes clear, dogma at either end of the spectrum is unwise. There may yet be a method to the supernatural madness of the Bible. After all, "A poet utterly clear is a trifle glaring." - E.B. White

Queen of Swords

Originally posted by spurly
When Adam and Eve had to leave the presence of God, God was being extremely merciful. If they had stayed in his presence as sinners, they would have been blown away by his holiness, literally.

Further point : did god later tone down this blowing-away power so that Jesus could hang out with tax collectors and other sinners? Or was Jesus's holiness less than his father's?

spurly

Jesus emptied himself of much of his deity and became a man. When Moses came back from meeting with God he would put a veil over his face so the Israelites would not be terrified from the glory of God that he reflected.

In the same way, the deity of Jesus was veiled in a human body. There was one time when he was given a taste of his former glory - on the mount of transfiguration - but other than that, during his life, manyof the aspects of his deity were veiled behind skin.

Kevin

Queen of Swords

Originally posted by spurly
Jesus emptied himself of much of his deity and became a man.

Could you please provide biblical support which says that Jesus "emptied himself of much of his deity" so that the sinners would not be blown away?

Where did this emptied-off portion of his deity go? How much is "much of his deity" - was the remaining portion just enough to, for example, raise the dead but not enough to create a galaxy? I didn't even know deity was one of those things that could be poured in and out of a vessel like water, so you'll understand my interested questions on the subject.

In the same way, the deity of Jesus was veiled in a human body.

You mean the little remaining deity of Jesus that he didn't up, right?

There was one time when he was given a taste of his former glory - on the mount of transfiguration - but other than that, during his life, manyof the aspects of his deity were veiled behind skin.

Wouldn't it have been more merciful of god to empty himself of the blowing-away portion of his deity or veil himself in skin and thereby give Adam and Eve a second chance instead of kicking them out the first time they made a mistake? After all, they weren't even tax collectors like the ones Jesus ate with.

Also, how did Satan appear in god's presence to talk to him about Job? Did god have to veil himself in skin for Satan to do that?

Radorth

Well I must admit you and Biff are anomalies. Of course Biff apparently locked himself in an impenetrable fortress at an early age. In your case, I can't find a rationale, I must confess.

No I'm not right every time. Just 8 out of 10.

Kids can't make important distinctions. They are too intellectually immature or lazy and only learn to over time (if they are fortunate).

Rad