@ghost-of-a-dukesaid So the God of the OT who sends 2 bears to rip children apart (2 Kings 2:23-25) is perfectly in keeping with the God of the NT?
(Fasten your seatbelt kelly, it's going to be a bumpy ride).
This isn't quite what the Bible says:
23 And he went up from thence unto Beth-el: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. 24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
2 Kings 2:23-24 AKJV
Elisha curses the children in the name of the Lord. Then two bears appear and maul forty two of them. The Authorized King James Version of the Bible does not state that God sent the bears, just that the children were mauled by a couple of female bears [1]. We can interpret that as meaning that God sent the bears, but we can also interpret that as meaning that the curse removed protection. Meaning that the consequence of mocking the prophet was that divine protection was lifted and some event of that type was liable to happen. The Bible is silent on the question of their survival.
@kellyjaysaid If you don't grasp this yet, every life is here, and all of our deaths are by divine decree. There is an appointed time for each one of our deaths; without exception, there are no promised tomorrows for anyone. With God, righteousness and Holiness are of the highest essential things in this life this over everything.
Your judgment on scripture I'm not all that impressed with yet for this reason.
Yes, yes, God can send bears to rip children apart if he so wishes and remains righteous and holy.
@deepthoughtsaid This isn't quite what the Bible says:[quote]23 And he went up from thence unto Beth-el: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. 24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears o ...[text shortened]... s silent on the question of their survival.
The only reasonable interpretation is that God sent the bears, following His prophet cursing them in His name. The other explanations given are just daft.
'Some' Christians will try to villanize the children, saying they were unruly youths etc threatening his chosen prophet, but we are still left with a deity who forfeits any claim to holiness or righteousness.
@kellyjaysaid every life is here, and all of our deaths are by divine decree. There is an appointed time for each one of our deaths; without exception, there are no promised tomorrows for anyone.
Were the deaths during, for example, the mid-C20th Holocaust in accordance with "divine decree"?
@ghost-of-a-dukesaid 'Some' Christians will try to villanize the children, saying they were unruly youths etc threatening his chosen prophet, but we are still left with a deity who forfeits any claim to holiness or righteousness.
'Some' Christians here - sumydid and Fetchmyjunk come to mind - asserted strongly that babies crying for milk is a sign of the in-built "evil" of human beings.
@ghost-of-a-dukesaid The only reasonable interpretation is that God sent the bears, following His prophet cursing them in His name. The other explanations given are just daft.
'Some' Christians will try to villanize the children, saying they were unruly youths etc threatening his chosen prophet, but we are still left with a deity who forfeits any claim to holiness or righteousness.
Why is that the only reasonable interpretation, and you really should stick with the explanations given here. "Some Christians" are not talking to you, who cares what someone else may say or not?
@kellyjaysaid Why is that the only reasonable interpretation, and you really should stick with the explanations given here. "Some Christians" are not talking to you, who cares what someone else may say or not?
'Some Christians' is used to avoid generalizations. Perhaps try that with 'atheists' sometime.
@ghost-of-a-dukesaid 'Some Christians' is used to avoid generalizations. Perhaps try that with 'atheists' sometime.
You just spew generalizations out while complaining about them, be specific. If it isn't to much to ask, why is your interpretation the only good one and all others are whatever it was you called them, daft?
@kellyjaysaid You just spew generalizations out while complaining about them, be specific. If it isn't to much to ask, why is your interpretation the only good one and all others are whatever it was you called them, daft?
You seem recently kelly to have lost your chi. When you find it again let me know and we can talk.
@ghost-of-a-dukesaid You seem recently kelly to have lost your chi. When you find it again let me know and we can talk.
You claim that some Christians, not anyone specific at all, making that nothing but a general swipe. You then go to belittle other possible interpretations as daft, and you now beg off the conversation because of me? Is this because once again, you can not be wrong, so anyone disagreeing with you has to be in error?
@kellyjaysaid You claim that some Christians, not anyone specific at all, making that nothing but a general swipe. You then go to belittle other possible interpretations as daft, and you now beg off the conversation because of me? Is this because once again, you can not be wrong, so anyone disagreeing with you has to be in error?
You constantly talk about being "belittled" and "demeaned" when talking to regular, intellectually curious folk here. You mention it over and over and over again. Has it ever occurred to you that it's you who has the interpersonal and pride problem and not the regular folk who try to discuss things with you?
18 Jan '20 23:50
Hebrews 1:3
Back to Top