khalou

So Jesus is a Good person? What if He were a liar? You haven't really answered the question. Is He merely a Good Teacher or is He God? Or is He the greatest liar and charlatan known to mankind? Can He Truly be both? Peace, Dave If you want to know what I REALLY think, I must ask that no one chastise me for saying it here. After all, you asked- twice! I think that there were many sects within the Jewish faith at the time of Jesus. I think there were other Rabbis like Jesus at the head of these sects. We know that miracles were pretty normal at the time, and that there were many that could perform them. I truly believe that Jesus was very much Jewish, and held the deepest respect for the Jewish religion. There is lots and lots of evidence that this is true. I believe that Saul of Tarsus joined the group after the loss of their leader, and changed his name to Paul. I believe that Paul wanted to bring the religion to gentiles, and I don't believe Paul really treated Jesus as a physical person when he started his churches. Paul seemed to be speaking about a Mystery religion like the ones the gentiles were used to. James and Peter's church disagreed with Paul's treatment of Jesus' truths. It sounds a lot like they didn't like the idea that Paul was trying to make it a non-Jewish religion that was quite outside of the traditions of the Torah, which Jesus absolutely upheld. The people that wrote the Gospels were not Jewish, nor were they eyewitnesses. Even Christian Biblical scholars believe this. Instead, they were re-writing the life of Jesus in order to fit in with this new version of the religion. Of all the gospels, the only ones that were canonized were the ones that went along with this new ideology, and were included in the Bible by the same non-Jews that decided on Dec 25 as the day of His birth, and that Sunday should be the Sabbath. What was that, like in the second century CE?? It's no wonder that the Jews couldn't believe their ears when they heard about Christianity. One of the Ten Commandments, perhaps the easiest one, is to simply remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy, yet these people actually changed it! All of the other gospels that have been found that didn't make it into the cannon, including the documentation of the oral tradition of the sayings of Jesus, are quite Jewish. Meanwhile, the Gospels actually make mistakes about the Hebrew traditions of Jesus' time, and even geographical mistakes as well. k Well, my learned friend, that is all hogwash. There are no mistakes in the Bible---anywhere. Cannon is spelled , "canon". Interesting. If I wanted to point out spelling errors in other people's posts, I don't suppose we'd ever get anywhere, but thank you for reminding me. But are you insinuating that the Pharisees would have had a problem with some of the disciples not washing their hands before eating during Jesus' time? And, just by the way, the Pharisees? They were not in power. They hated the Roman occupation and would have encouraged a Messianic candidate to the last. It was the Sadducees that were placed in power and had something to lose. Why do the gospels make such bad guys out of the enemies of Rome? k

And where do you get that idea from?? Intense study of the facts of the matter where I never assume anything, but just go with where the facts take me. Come on! Even Christian scholars believe this based on the facts. Why do you want to beat me up on something like this? k Never met anyone who believed that...never. And I had never met anyone who believe that sub-atomic entities would act either as a wave or a particle, depending on whether or not they were being observed...never. But it seems they do. k Apparently, the truth doesn't depend on our social interactions. k

And where do you get that idea from?? Intense study of the facts of the matter where I never assume anything, but just go with where the facts take me. Come on! Even Christian scholars believe this based on the facts. Why do you want to beat me up on something like this? k Never met anyone who believed that...never. And I had never met anyone who believe that sub-atomic entities would act either as a wave or a particle, depending on whether or not they were being observed...never. But it seems they do. k

And where do you get that idea from?? Intense study of the facts of the matter where I never assume anything, but just go with where the facts take me. Come on! Even Christian scholars believe this based on the facts. Why do you want to beat me up on something like this? k Edit link*

And where do you get that idea from?? Intense study of the facts of the matter where I never assume anything, but just go with where the facts take me. Come on! Even Christian scholars believe this based on the facts. Why do you want to beat me up on something like this? k

So Jesus is a Good person? What if He were a liar? You haven't really answered the question. Is He merely a Good Teacher or is He God? Or is He the greatest liar and charlatan known to mankind? Can He Truly be both? Peace, Dave If you want to know what I REALLY think, I must ask that no one chastise me for saying it here. After all, you asked- twice! I think that there were many sects within the Jewish faith at the time of Jesus. I think there were other Rabbis like Jesus at the head of these sects. We know that miracles were pretty normal at the time, and that there were many that could perform them. I truly believe that Jesus was very much Jewish, and held the deepest respect for the Jewish religion. There is lots and lots of evidence that this is true. I believe that Saul of Tarsus joined the group after the loss of their leader, and changed his name to Paul. I believe that Paul wanted to bring the religion to gentiles, and I don't believe Paul really treated Jesus as a physical person when he started his churches. Paul seemed to be speaking about a Mystery religion like the ones the gentiles were used to. James and Peter's church disagreed with Paul's treatment of Jesus' truths. It sounds a lot like they didn't like the idea that Paul was trying to make it a non-Jewish religion that was quite outside of the traditions of the Torah, which Jesus absolutely upheld. The people that wrote the Gospels were not Jewish, nor were they eyewitnesses. Even Christian Biblical scholars believe this. Instead, they were re-writing the life of Jesus in order to fit in with this new version of the religion. Of all the gospels, the only ones that were canonized were the ones that went along with this new ideology, and were included in the Bible by the same non-Jews that decided on Dec 25 as the day of His birth, and that Sunday should be the Sabbath. What was that, like in the second century CE?? It's no wonder that the Jews couldn't believe their ears when they heard about Christianity. One of the Ten Commandments, perhaps the easiest one, is to simply remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy, yet these people actually changed it! All of the other gospels that have been found that didn't make it into the cannon, including the documentation of the oral tradition of the sayings of Jesus, are quite Jewish. Meanwhile, the Gospels actually make mistakes about the Hebrew traditions of Jesus' time, and even geographical mistakes as well. k

Joh

I have. I wasn't talking about Jews who believe that now. I was talking about Abraham, David, Moses, Noah, people like that. None of them had ever heard of a devil or hell. k How do you know they hadnt?? How do I know? Well, because they hadn't, I guess. The ideas of a devil or hell crept in after the Babylonian captivity which took the intellectuals, which included the priesthood, to Babylon where such things were believed in. You think that they believed in such things? Maybe I should ask you, then, how do you know they had? k The Book of Job is one of the oldest books in the Bible. The first 2 chapters include conversations between God and satan. Satan means adversary (amongst other meanings). Whoever wrote Job was well aware of an adversary of God. The may not have 'classifeid' it as "the devil" but they were aware of a fallen angel who was opposed to God and mankind. David was aware of Sheol. The book of Jude in the NT records a consversation (well a dispute) between Archangel Micheal and Satan over the body of Moses. These passages in the book of Jude about this dispute are taken from The book of Enoch, which is not a canonical book of the Bible (though some scholars believe it should be) but has its roots and authorship deep into the early biblical times. Again, the Book of enoch records the adversary; the devil or satan. Although the beliefs of the devil/sheol are not to prevelant in most of the OT writings, they certainly knew about Sheol, and satan. And these writings ie the book of Job, Enoch and the Psalms of David which mention Sheol a couple times, were well before the Babylonian period Hope this helps Jai Patel The ancient Hebrews never believe what you're telling me. You don't get to change that just because you want to, you know. I have had many meaningful conversations with Christians who are well educated in history that assure me that God didn't reveal the nature of Satan to the Hebrews of the time. If you are a historian of any sort, you need to publish a paper, because you would be accepted as a trailblazer among them. Did you miss my post about these things? Satan in Job was an emissary of the God of Abraham who brought both good and evil. Nothing happened to a man except by the will of God. This Satan was a member of God's court and was loyal to God. David held that census because of Satan in one version in the Bible, and because of God Himself in an earlier version. Those ancient Hebrews believed that no supernatural entity was capable of disobeying God. God is all powerful according to them. You need to read more. k Hello K Thank you for your reply As far as i read in the Bible, particularly the book of Job, there was a specific day when the sons of God (meaning the fallen angels) had to present themselves infornt of the LORD, and even God asked Satan "where have you come form?" (Job 1.6-7). I dont see anywhere that this indicates satan was a member of Gods court. In fact he was summoned to Gods court and told to give a report about his activites. Nowhere is satan a loyal member of GodsCourt/Heaven since Genesis 3.14 when the serpent {satan} is cursed by God to crawl on its belly feeding off the dust of the earth (a reference to create disharmony between God and man). So our sources from the Bible clearly show satan is not an active member of Gods Court. As i read thourgh the Bible, although the direct nature of satan isnt revealed completely until Jesus arrives, you can clearly see satans 'handiwork' lurking in the background: E.g tempting Adam & Eve to sin, God brings the promise of the Messiah (Gen 3.15). satan doesnt know the Messiah will be from a Jewish background, only that He will be born form mankind, so satan proceeds to contaminate the human-race with the 'sons-of-God' or Nephilim {race of unknown origin) during Gen 6. GOd destroys all the human race, save Noah and family, for its violence and contamination (of the human race and genepool) because of inter-breeding with this Nephilim race.... LATER: Next God reveals the Messianic line through Abraham, so satan creates disharmony with the birth of Ishmael. Yet God allows the birth of Isaac to carry on the Messianic line. Then we can go through the birth of Moses: satan through Egypt's Pharoah gives orders for all male Israelites babies to be killed, yet Moses is saved as a baby. Moses gives the Law which is eventually to be fullfilled perfectly through the Messiah, and Moses predicts the coming of Jesus (Duet 18.15-18) This is the first idea to the Hebrews that God will give them someone better than Moses, a 'super' Prophet in the later times. Thus after the Judges and the battles and satans attempts to 'disqualify' the Messianic line through the Israelites behaviour (chasing after idols and pagan religions that involved human sacrifice, sexual rituals, etc) God allows Kings to Rule over Israel, and Judah. If you read through Chronicles and Kings, Apart from King David- who was still carrying the Messianic Line- and a few others, many kings went against Gods Will. THis is also satan working behind the scenes to stop the Messiah being born? Certain kings were killed and even cursed that were involved in the Messianic line and this does all boil down to satan working behind the scenes to stop the Messiah from being born... yet God always provided an 'escape' from a certain king or person from the Messianic Line.... Can you see the pattern devoping? God states the Messiah will be born from Mankind, then from Abrahams descent, then from a specific tribe (Judah) then from a specific line of Kings (King David, etc.. Each time God reveals more specifics about where the Messiah will come from, satan narrows down his attacks onto those specifics... yet God is always infront and there is alwasy someone from the Messianic Line who 'got away' in order that this line will be protected. And indeed it was all the way to Mary and Joseph. So as you can see, although satans nature wasnt revealed more throroughly until the N.T, his plans and his evil intents to go against Gods will have always been the same from the beginning. (So how is satan being loyal to God in light of this?) Im sure you have had many meaningful and intellectual conversations with Christians. Yet i do not know they background of these Christians. Atheists are more likely to speak to liberal Christians as they are more inclined to agree with Atheists on issues such as scholarship, denial of authorship of certain books, etc. So if you could be so kind to point out sources i will take up your offer " to read more" God Bless Jai I'm only saying one thing and one thing only with regard to a fallen angel in the Old Testament and that is that the Hebrews of the time didn't have any idea about the concept, and still don't believe in it. I'm referring to their belief at the time, not your current intrepretation. They believed that the Satan in Job was one of God's loyal servants. Whoever wrote the story meant in that way. That's all. k

Wow. Didn't understand any of that, but thanks for responding. k

I appreciate that and all, but after over forty years of being a Christain, it is pretty basic. Thank you for confirming my opinion of what Christianity truely is, but I didn't really have any doubt to begin with. k

Your opinion is based on an absolute void of experience. You haven't been an atheist as far as I know, and if you ever were, then I can't imagine what your atheism was based on, except perhaps a hatred of God, which would indicate that you weren't really an atheist to begin with. You are not willing to apologize for saying that atheists want to take people with them to hell, which suggests that atheists are hateful and willfully antagonistic towards other people for no reason that makes any sense at all. Fine. That doesn't bother me nearly as much as your suggesting that atheists even conceive of the concept of hell. In all the world's religions, only a very few believe in that concept. That being said, how can you even marginally entertain the idea that an atheist would do so? I know it is hard for a believer to relate to a universe that doesn't include a God (believe me, I know the difference, and it is profound!). But as long as believers judge non-believers according to their worldview, then they will never be able to even engage non-believers in conversation, because Jesus was absolutely correct in His treatment of people. That's right, an atheist agrees with Jesus' treatment of non-believers, and if Christians actually adopted His treatment of non-believers, then there would be a discernible impact on the non-believers' opinion of Christians. But that's not what we get. All we get is a very human aggressiveness and assertion according to human emotion and interpretation that we are outsiders. Especially in America, there is a most pointed paranoia that if people don't agree immediately just because of an argument or two, then those people are evil and destined for hell. Paranoia? Why? Love your enemy can't be done in light of this paranoia. Christians can't have non-Christians posting on the boards at large, or someone might turn away. Can you imagine any other site deciding that if someone doesn't subscribe to the dogma of that board, then they can't post on all the available boards? A board about planting trees could, once determining that someone doesn't agree with the shaking off of the original dirt from the roots before planting, could make that poster only post on a few boards because they don't want those evil ideas to permeate the population. Did Jesus go to Zacheus's house or didn't He? Wasn't that seen by the population as being "not done"? Did He care what the people thought? Was He inclusive? or exclusive? Well, this site is exclusive. That tells me that Christianity is either paranoid about what it may hear, and therefore paranoid about its position, and unfaithful in its faith in God's ability to love and keep who is His, or has lost the good sensibilities that Jesus originally taught. Love conquers all. I'm thinking that it isn't the fear of what atheists might say that makes this board exclusive, but what Christians might say because they don't seem to understand the purpose of Christianity. Good idea. True Christians are few and far between. I was one, but have recently seen that there is no God, but in the meantime, I can't believe what I'm seeing from supposed Christians with regard to Jesus' truth. Your message must, at the very least, transcend human intellect in favor of love. If it doesn't, you might as well be Sadducees. k I think you meant Pharisees....Saducees simply failed to believe in the ressurrection. I was referring to the historical makeup of the Saudecees and the Pharisees. The Pharisees were not friends of Rome like the Saudecees. The Pharisees were the party of the people and would have taken a "wait and see" attitude in the case of Jesus and wouldn't have seen Him as an enemy. The Saducees were placed in power by Rome and would have had problems with a possible messianic candidate because that would have meant their downfall as the power in charge. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever that the Pharisees would have treated Jesus as they were depicted to have in the Gospels. Fortunately, the Gospels were written way after the fact, after Rome had destroyed the Temple at Jerusalem, so it makes sense that the Pharisees were depicted as the bad guys. But it would take an incredible imagination indeed to believe that the Pharisees would have treated Jesus as the Gospels say they did. I harbor no ill will towards you, but, are you kidding? I suppose you didn't know that I was a Christian for over forty years. I am grateful that you have shared this with me. I will read it, and re-read it just to make sure I understand what you have said. Thank you. But my atheism isn't based on what you might think it is. k

Atheists are atheists because they don't want to be "shackled" by moral dilemnas I thought we've gone over this before. You can't really accuse atheists of being immoral or not law abiding as the statistics show that atheists comprise less of the prison population as a percentage as compared to society and stay married longer than theists. (Check Gallup) Now to answer your charge of not wanting to be shackled that is simply not the case. Christianity is the best game in town if it were true. Come on you tow the line for a short period here on earth and Kazam! you live forever with no worries. It's a piece of cake. Who would deny that offer? No, you will find that most atheists were once involved in religion and after trying to validate what was put to them found the evidence as not being supportable. You will also find that most atheists are far more learned in Christianity than most "born agains" or Evangelicals. atheism is a convenient religion where you make all the rules and every person is a law unto themself. I don't doubt that the average atheist has greater knowledge of the history of various religions since atheism is more of an intellectual pursuit than spiritual. But I'm curious about what you have tried to validate and found unsupportable? . No. Christianity is a conveinient religion where you make all the rules and every person is a law unto themselves. The Holy Spirit tells you one thing, and tells another Christian something different. Know why? Because interpretation isn't a very good way to determine truth. Atheism isn't a religion at all. Well, unless bald is a hair color. k

Yeah, about that: Are you a prophet now? If you see pronouncing someone as losing their faith as an insult, then you must think it is a bad thing. Was is a good thing for you, then? Hmmmmmmmm? Just don't look too closely at the evidence and you'll be fine. k

Joh

I have. I wasn't talking about Jews who believe that now. I was talking about Abraham, David, Moses, Noah, people like that. None of them had ever heard of a devil or hell. k How do you know they hadnt?? How do I know? Well, because they hadn't, I guess. The ideas of a devil or hell crept in after the Babylonian captivity which took the intellectuals, which included the priesthood, to Babylon where such things were believed in. You think that they believed in such things? Maybe I should ask you, then, how do you know they had? k The Book of Job is one of the oldest books in the Bible. The first 2 chapters include conversations between God and satan. Satan means adversary (amongst other meanings). Whoever wrote Job was well aware of an adversary of God. The may not have 'classifeid' it as "the devil" but they were aware of a fallen angel who was opposed to God and mankind. David was aware of Sheol. The book of Jude in the NT records a consversation (well a dispute) between Archangel Micheal and Satan over the body of Moses. These passages in the book of Jude about this dispute are taken from The book of Enoch, which is not a canonical book of the Bible (though some scholars believe it should be) but has its roots and authorship deep into the early biblical times. Again, the Book of enoch records the adversary; the devil or satan. Although the beliefs of the devil/sheol are not to prevelant in most of the OT writings, they certainly knew about Sheol, and satan. And these writings ie the book of Job, Enoch and the Psalms of David which mention Sheol a couple times, were well before the Babylonian period Hope this helps Jai Patel The ancient Hebrews never believe what you're telling me. You don't get to change that just because you want to, you know. I have had many meaningful conversations with Christians who are well educated in history that assure me that God didn't reveal the nature of Satan to the Hebrews of the time. If you are a historian of any sort, you need to publish a paper, because you would be accepted as a trailblazer among them. Did you miss my post about these things? Satan in Job was an emissary of the God of Abraham who brought both good and evil. Nothing happened to a man except by the will of God. This Satan was a member of God's court and was loyal to God. David held that census because of Satan in one version in the Bible, and because of God Himself in an earlier version. Those ancient Hebrews believed that no supernatural entity was capable of disobeying God. God is all powerful according to them. You need to read more. k

Atheists are atheists because they don't want to be "shackled" by moral dilemnas I thought we've gone over this before. You can't really accuse atheists of being immoral or not law abiding as the statistics show that atheists comprise less of the prison population as a percentage as compared to society and stay married longer than theists. (Check Gallup) Now to answer your charge of not wanting to be shackled that is simply not the case. Christianity is the best game in town if it were true. Come on you tow the line for a short period here on earth and Kazam! you live forever with no worries. It's a piece of cake. Who would deny that offer? No, you will find that most atheists were once involved in religion and after trying to validate what was put to them found the evidence as not being supportable. You will also find that most atheists are far more learned in Christianity than most "born agains" or Evangelicals. So far, you are absolutely correct. I have not found many Christians who understand the Bible and the history of the Bible. It is apparent in their responses to questions I've asked. Christians: Don't get all mad at me for saying this. If I ask a question about Biblical scholarship, and your answer shows that you have never heard of what I'm talking about, you can't blame me for supposing that you haven't even studied Biblical scholarship. While Christians spend a lot of time looking at reasons to believe what they believe, they don't seem interested in what shows that they might be wrong about this or that. Even apologists like Josh don't seem interested in the arguments, but only in creating pseudo-science in the support of Christianity. At least, I would expect that whatever I bring up has already been considered, and has an answer. That's why I ask. Makes sense, doesn't it? But instead of being seen as a seeker, I am told that I am arguing for the sake of argument, and am a bad guy because I'm trying to hurt the faith. This only leads me to believe that Christians don't have any idea what's going on in the sciences, and don't want to know. I believe that Christianity is faith-based, and would easily retreat in the face of such an admission, but that's not what I get. What I get is that scientific evidence shows that the Christian God is real, and that any scientific evidence that goes against some individual interpretation of the Bible is wrong because science is biased, but without any explanation of how this is possible. When I present evidence that global science couldn't possibly be biased because scientists all over the world have very different beliefs and very different politics, I'm told... well, I haven't been able to figure out what I'm told. "Science is wrong" basically, I guess. But no one can tell me how this works. k

I will get in the middle of this because I can. Let me start with a question. Does the atheist community believe that there is or will be a time when all of humankind can or will achieve life forevermore? Can humankind achieve a place where there is no death? The Bible teaches about a kingdom that is coming. In this kingdom, there is no death. The Bible tells us that when we have preached this good news to every nation (ethnos=ethnic group) the end of the world as we know it, a world full of death, will be there. The Bible, in context, leads me to believe that this place can be achieved by literally keeping and "doing" the commandments of Jesus Christ

I have to pair this down so it's not so huge!!! I'm not a theologian by any stretch of the imagination, but I will give it a shot. As an aside, the 'lack of understanding' comment was not meant as a dig, or insult in any way, shape or form. You are trying to mix the Mosaic dispensation, from Moses to Christ with the age of grace dispensation, from Christ to present day. God dealt with/deals with people very differently during these different dispensations. The Israelites were/are His chosen people, i.e., they were the people by which He would teach the world about Himself. I know it sounds cruel, but He instructed Israel to destroy certain groups of people, to the last person, because they were morally and spiritually corrupt, totally. God also knew that if these people were not eliminated, they would lead the Hebrews into idol worship and polytheism, which after failing to heed and carry out God's instructions, is exactly what happened. This lack of obedience lead to the Jews being lead into captivity and subjugated numerous times, each time they failed to totally obey God. Funny thing is, the Jews just would not assimilate and fade out of history, because they were stubborn, and it wasn't part of God's plan. With Christ's death and resurrection, the sin debt was paid, in full, and the group of people that would now fulfill God's plan to tell the world about Him, and salvation was the Gentiles. God gives us chance, after chance after chance to turn to Him in repentance. But man is stubborn and keeps on wanting to think he has all the answers. If you take a look around at our world today, I think it is pretty clear that man obviously does not have the answer. I keep hearing people that say we can build a better world without religion or God, if we just try a little harder. Well, that sounds good, but obviously, if we could, we would have already done it. I will leave you with this scripture, penned by the prophet Zechariah, in approx. 520 BCE. Ponder it and ask yourself if this was just a lucky guess, because it could be taken out of todays newspaper, yet it was written 2500 years ago: Zechariah 12:2 "I am going to make Jerusalem a cup that sends all the surrounding peoples reeling. Judah will be besieged as well as Jerusalem. 3 On that day, when all the nations of the earth are gathered against her, I will make Jerusalem an immovable rock for all the nations. All who try to move it will injure themselves. Just imagine what an awesome christian you would make, because it is so much harder to believe that God does not exist. Christians who would make America a Christian nation invariably rely on the Old Testament treatment of the Old Testament Hebrews and their laws and stuff. I agree that the Christian ideal is no longer based on nations, but individual souls. If you agree also, then I think it important that we, together, fight against this notion as it can only lead to totalitarianism and a human interpretation of government. But, as far as it being so much harder to believe that God does not exist, I would ask that you provide any evidence whatsoever that He does. Speaking as a person that doesn't do eternal pain well, I would appreciate any help in believing in your God. Since you hold this opinion, I'm sure you can do that. k

Yes, it doesn't come naturally--that is why it is a command from Jesus Himself, the one with all authority---and it is a behaviour we can only do by the power of the Holy Spirit. Before the Holy Spirit came, we had the Son: same person! Those who heard the command from Jesus' own lips would certainly have been surprised by it, as it was not in the commandments given to Moses, but they would have been spurred on to obedience by the Son Himself! I know, I sure would have, if I was sitting at His feet and He told me that! When are you going to answer the post that's presented without going off on a tangent that has nothing to do with what I said? I said that 'Love your enemy' is an ancient concept that pre-dates Christ. You, in your incredibly ignorant response, say that Jesus said it, I believe it, and that settles it. How does that even begin to address my question? The concept PRE-DATES Christ's words. Might that not mean that "Love your enemy' might come naturally by observation? k Well, I could concede that the concept was there, because God wants us to do that, ultimately, but the command came from Jesus Christ. It was excluded from morality, as only loving those who loved you back was the norm. Jesus added to the commandments in order to enforce what God originally wanted, which Israel had watered down or misinterpreted over the centuries. When Jesus made these now commands, people were flabbergasted...so it was unheard of, which is why I believe that it was a new concept with Jesus Christ. PS: Why do you suggest that I go off on tangents? We can only do so much in here! Because you don't address what is brought up. But you certainly did this time- While other great minds were saying that love your enemy is a good idea, the Hebrews were killing theirs because God told them to. God did not love His enemies at the time. Not only the soldiers, but the women and children and the unborn. Yet, in Asia, there were concepts that would have made Jesus proud. Of course, these were the very people that would contribute to the Hebrew's concepts of an even greater enemy in Lucifer- the Devil. The God of the ancient Hebrews didn't seem to know about this evil person yet, and all of His killing was done against human enemies. Can anyone here explain that? k Your trying to mix two dispensations here. Without a clear understanding of the dispensations and why they exist, you cannot correlate or reconcile them, hence your lack of understanding. Floatingaxe is doing a good job of sketching them out, however. . . Which two? k

Huh? Like a gold ring in a pig's snout is a beautiful face on an empty head Proverbs 11:22 k

Yes, it doesn't come naturally--that is why it is a command from Jesus Himself, the one with all authority---and it is a behaviour we can only do by the power of the Holy Spirit. Before the Holy Spirit came, we had the Son: same person! Those who heard the command from Jesus' own lips would certainly have been surprised by it, as it was not in the commandments given to Moses, but they would have been spurred on to obedience by the Son Himself! I know, I sure would have, if I was sitting at His feet and He told me that! When are you going to answer the post that's presented without going off on a tangent that has nothing to do with what I said? I said that 'Love your enemy' is an ancient concept that pre-dates Christ. You, in your incredibly ignorant response, say that Jesus said it, I believe it, and that settles it. How does that even begin to address my question? The concept PRE-DATES Christ's words. Might that not mean that "Love your enemy' might come naturally by observation? k Well, I could concede that the concept was there, because God wants us to do that, ultimately, but the command came from Jesus Christ. It was excluded from morality, as only loving those who loved you back was the norm. Jesus added to the commandments in order to enforce what God originally wanted, which Israel had watered down or misinterpreted over the centuries. When Jesus made these now commands, people were flabbergasted...so it was unheard of, which is why I believe that it was a new concept with Jesus Christ. PS: Why do you suggest that I go off on tangents? We can only do so much in here! Because you don't address what is brought up. But you certainly did this time- While other great minds were saying that love your enemy is a good idea, the Hebrews were killing theirs because God told them to. God did not love His enemies at the time. Not only the soldiers, but the women and children and the unborn. Yet, in Asia, there were concepts that would have made Jesus proud. Of course, these were the very people that would contribute to the Hebrew's concepts of an even greater enemy in Lucifer- the Devil. The God of the ancient Hebrews didn't seem to know about this evil person yet, and all of His killing was done against human enemies. Can anyone here explain that? k You are wrong about the knowledge of Lucifer. About God--He chose to work with His people, setting them apart to be called His own. He called them out from among the pagan people. They were pagan through and through, and God was NOT proud of them. They had nothing that God would be pleased with, which included some notion of loving their enemies---they wouldn't know how! God hates sin, and that is your answer---He punished sin with wrath and precision. Nowadays, of course, he holds back His wrath because of Jesus, but He is still the same God of wrath and those who deny Him will suffer at His hand. I agree with you about so much. The ancient Hebrews were indeed polytheists in Abraham's day. What you have said makes sense. Except for the fact that they knew about Lucifer. That's where we differ. But I'm glad that we can find common ground. I don't believe that the Christian God would hate me. I don't believe in Him, and that could cause a rift that is insurmountable, and I know that eternal hell is your version of my eventual future as a result, but I suppose I have problems believing in such an exclusive God. He created everyone, and only those of the western world seem to have the benefit of salvation in an easy package. I don't want to be your enemy, nor do I want to be anyone's enemy, but if there is a God who created everyone, it seems to me that He wouldn't be so elusive as to have created evidence against what lots of Christians believe is all. It takes a lot of information to understand this evidence, but it is there. I can't help that. But consider this- it is God's own choice whether or not to grant me sufficient faith to accept Him, or harden my heart against Him. I am open. If I'm doing it wrong, then people like you are the only ones that can tell me about it. k

You know not of what you speak. We are responsible to be seedsowers. I sow seed and when I come across stony ground, I don't waste my time--nothing grows there. We are called to make disciples, and I must be about doing that. We can't spend inordinate amounts of time with those who are stony-hearted. We need to be about bringing people to Christ who WILL come. I want to stand before the Father with my spiritual children, and not have to say to Him.."Well, God, I spent all my time with those who will not hear, and so I have no one." Somewhere along the line we need to make judgments and decisions about when we move on. So--regarding the pearls: I won't cast my pearls before swine--those who do not value the Truth. I will keep them and offer them to those who would accept them. Do not make evil judgments about me concerning my faith. I am a child of the King! My faith is solidly on the Saviour, Jesus Christ, who lives in me and lives forever! He is awesome, and wondrous in every way! All praise to Jesus! Your harsh words ring in my ears as Joy! Thank you! I thought they might. k By the way- I LOVE your quote! k

You know not of what you speak. We are responsible to be seedsowers. I sow seed and when I come across stony ground, I don't waste my time--nothing grows there. We are called to make disciples, and I must be about doing that. We can't spend inordinate amounts of time with those who are stony-hearted. We need to be about bringing people to Christ who WILL come. I want to stand before the Father with my spiritual children, and not have to say to Him.."Well, God, I spent all my time with those who will not hear, and so I have no one." Somewhere along the line we need to make judgments and decisions about when we move on. So--regarding the pearls: I won't cast my pearls before swine--those who do not value the Truth. I will keep them and offer them to those who would accept them. Do not make evil judgments about me concerning my faith. I am a child of the King! My faith is solidly on the Saviour, Jesus Christ, who lives in me and lives forever! He is awesome, and wondrous in every way! All praise to Jesus! Your harsh words ring in my ears as Joy! Thank you! I thought they might. k

This is getting incredibly boring now! Atheists are atheists because they refuse to see the evidence before them, and when presented with it, they choose to deny it. Game over. I'd like you to point to this evidence. k Floatingaxe points to all nature--the universe. Excellent! Evidence of God in the universe~! It hasn't been proven by scientific means, but shows promise by personal interpretation. Are humans fallible? k