THE HARSH GOD??

[CaptWalker]

This question is taken from Luke-19 and Matthew-25, the parable of the pounds/talents. In both versions the "Master" is basically referred to in the same way by the lazy servant who did not gain anything from what he had been given because he hid it. He is called "hard" and "austere", but i am focusing more on the Luke version and the meaning of the word Austere which is translated as "harsh,rough,rigid". Now I know the "Master" in the story is at least a type of GOD, but my question of late is does that make him 100% in nature and character? Actually in every teaching i've ever heard on this the focus has always been on the lesson to be learned rather than if the Master and GOD are actually one in the same? But no where in the chapter does it indicate whether they are or not, but only that Christ taught it as if they both were. Even if there seems to be a contradiction between the Master simply dishing out retribution and punishment, whereas God is being fair and just even if the final judgement/sentence is exactly the same?  Anyway i have just been a little bothered and confused by this lately and about the attitude God seems to have towards someone who may actually deserve to be chastised but at the same time may have just been too ignorant or overly cautious and afraid to take some action or make a big life decision for instance? But maybe someone else has another perspective on this and i do appreciate any feedback or input... 

[Tzephanyahu]

On 12/31/2019 at 4:44 PM, CaptWalker said:

But maybe someone else has another perspective on this and i do appreciate any feedback or input... 

Shalom CaptWalker,

Great question.  Perhaps I can help you on this matter.

Whilst a surface read can give you the impression that the master was hard and tough, a careful reading seems to reveal more on the matter.

The last servant accuses the Master of certain character traits and assumes the Master's actions and decisions - effectively judges him.  Let's take a closer look at this...

In Luke 19:21 the servant says "For I feared you, because you are an austere man.  You collect what you did not deposit and reap what you did not sow".  But wait, is that correct?  The master DID deposit and and sow with the servant but the servant is implying he is coming to collect what he DIDN'T sow.  Not only this, but he accuses him of being an austere man - but who said that he was?  We are never given this information in the parable, neither do the other servants.

Now, how I read it, the Master judges the servant according to his perception of him and by his standards.  In Luke 19:22 the Master replies "And he said to him 'Out of your own mouth I will judge you, you wicked servant.  You "knew" that I was an austere man, collecting what I did not deposit and reaping what I did not sow.  Why then did you not put my money in the bank, that at my coming I might have collected it with interest?" (Emphasis and inverted commas mine).

Therefore, I see it as this:  The last servant has made a grave error. He  judges and accuses the Master at his coming.  So, the Master retorts by saying "Okay, I will become to you exactly as you have judged me to be, and I will judge your works by your own standards" .

I don't think that is the main point of the parable but it is a key point, as this servant effectively represents a group of Christians on Judgment Day.  Again, not unbelievers, but Christians.

That's my understanding of it anyway.

Love & Shalom

[Jostler]

35 minutes ago, Tzephanyahu said:

...Therefore, I see it as this:  The last servant has made a grave error. He  judges and accuses the Master at his coming.  So, the Master retorts by saying "Okay, I will become to you exactly as you have judged me to be, and I will judge your works by your own standards" .

I don't think that is the main point of the parable but it is a key point, as this servant effectively represents a group of Christians on Judgment Day.  Again, not unbelievers, but Christians.

That's my understanding of it anyway.

Love & Shalom

 

 

We've both come to the exact same conclusion independently.  My understanding is also  that the Master is not taking ownership of the accusations, but instead is exposing the servant's hypocrisy by judging him according to what he said.

Quote

Mat 12:36-37

“But I say to you that for every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment.

“For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”

 

[CaptWalker]

Yeah i can also see that now, but for whatever reason have never heard it taught this way? Almost seems like a lot of preachers will just try to overlook why the Master is like that and maybe even thinking well if that's how God is at times then so be it, we just have to accept it?? Well actually seems they are at least partly right if God does indeed become whatever we "judge" Him to be, and then treats us accordingly. But as far as convincing any unbelievers or Atheists that this parable is not an example of God's TRUE nature, well good luck with that! But i think they really prefer the O.T. God who ordered Israel to wipe out entire peoples, women and children. But as much as God had wished there were another way, it obviously had to be done that way, or else these people would have eventually attacked Israel and done the same thing to them. But why the women and children i have always asked?? All i can think of is those little innocent boys growing up to be haters of Israel and then one day eventually becoming a nation again and Israel's mortal enemy, which obviously they already have more than enough of TODAY! And they can't even defend themselves anymore in an all-out war such as the one in 1967 without being demanded to give back territory that they rightfully took over when those nations attacked them, not the other way around. But am starting to digress and get away from the subject  so will leave it at that...

[Tzephanyahu]

18 minutes ago, CaptWalker said:

Yeah i can also see that now, but for whatever reason have never heard it taught this way?

Yes, you won't hear a lot of stuff taught in Churches today.  A lot of teachings are watered-down and simplified for the sake of no offending others, compromising with the times, or simply poorly educated on the Word.  It was prophesied to be this way in our times though.

20 minutes ago, CaptWalker said:

God who ordered Israel to wipe out entire peoples, women and children. But as much as God had wished there were another way, it obviously had to be done that way, or else these people would have eventually attacked Israel and done the same thing to them. But why the women and children i have always asked??

A popular question.  

It's a big subject which I shall try and compress for you for the sake of time.

Yahweh did not always ask Israel to do this - women and children were typically spared.  But this was for a very particular group of people at a certain time. - Those populating Canaan.

There was effectively a genetic issue with the Canaanites and others populating the Holy Land.  It goes all the way back to Genesis 6, when the fallen angels mated with human women and created hybrid humans.   These hybrids, of Nephilim, were the principle cause of the Flood and are detailed a lot more in the apocryphal books (that were found in the Dead Sea Scrolls) such as the Book of Enoch and the Book of Jubilees. 

Now, after the Flood, these hybrids of fallen angel and man survived (probably through the wives of Noah's sons) and mainly through Ham's lineage.  These descendants populated the land of Israel (or Canaan back then) deliberately and was probably by the direction of Satan.  Effectively, whilst Israel was in slavery in Egypt, Satan was aware that he had about 400 years to setup a minefield for the Israelites as these hybrids were all concentrated in the Promised Land. 

Therefore, when the time came for Israel to claim the land, they were instructed to destroy that people entirely, whose genetics were corrupted and had the potential to corrupt others with their offspring.  They had something severely unnatural about them and they certainly weren't just peaceful human villagers.

I realise that's quite a lot to take on as it's a big subject.  But hopefully that gives you a little insight into why Yahweh may have instructed for all of them to be wiped out.  Because it certainly wasn't the standard.

Love & Shalom

[Tzephanyahu]

6 minutes ago, Abby-Joy said:

I'm glad someone pointed out the Genesis 6 explanation for the "harshness of God" in those specific situations. 

Thank you Abby-joy. I was actually kinda dreading it as its a big subject and you can sound like a madman when you try to explain it briefly! Hehe. 

But it must be shared, even in short.  As many doubt our Father over this matter. 

Love & Shalom 

[Justin Adams]

14 minutes ago, Abby-Joy said:

I'm glad someone pointed out the Genesis 6 explanation for the "harshness of God" in those specific situations. 

Yes, when the apostle says 'the law was given for transgressions', he was referring to Gen 6. (plural)

Now that WILL upset some seminarians...

[CaptWalker]

Well i agree with almost everything you(Josheb) said here, but i don't really know where or why you came up with the idea that Jesus was "sodomized"?? I have never heard that even implied by ANYONE, so if you wanted to be the first to do so(as far as i know) then congratulations! Otherwise, i am at a loss as to what would make you say that?!

Edited July 11, 2020 by CaptWalker

[Willa]

On 1/3/2020 at 8:23 AM, Tzephanyahu said:

Yes, you won't hear a lot of stuff taught in Churches today.  A lot of teachings are watered-down and simplified for the sake of no offending others, compromising with the times, or simply poorly educated on the Word.  It was prophesied to be this way in our times though.

A popular question.  

It's a big subject which I shall try and compress for you for the sake of time.

Yahweh did not always ask Israel to do this - women and children were typically spared.  But this was for a very particular group of people at a certain time. - Those populating Canaan.

There was effectively a genetic issue with the Canaanites and others populating the Holy Land.  It goes all the way back to Genesis 6, when the fallen angels mated with human women and created hybrid humans.   These hybrids, of Nephilim, were the principle cause of the Flood and are detailed a lot more in the apocryphal books (that were found in the Dead Sea Scrolls) such as the Book of Enoch and the Book of Jubilees. 

Now, after the Flood, these hybrids of fallen angel and man survived (probably through the wives of Noah's sons) and mainly through Ham's lineage.  These descendants populated the land of Israel (or Canaan back then) deliberately and was probably by the direction of Satan.  Effectively, whilst Israel was in slavery in Egypt, Satan was aware that he had about 400 years to setup a minefield for the Israelites as these hybrids were all concentrated in the Promised Land. 

Therefore, when the time came for Israel to claim the land, they were instructed to destroy that people entirely, whose genetics were corrupted and had the potential to corrupt others with their offspring.  They had something severely unnatural about them and they certainly weren't just peaceful human villagers.

I realise that's quite a lot to take on as it's a big subject.  But hopefully that gives you a little insight into why Yahweh may have instructed for all of them to be wiped out.  Because it certainly wasn't the standard.

Love & Shalom

These people were completely destroyed in Noah's flood.  However, the people of Canaan had become wicked--their sin had become full--so that God chose that Israel completely destroy them all and their animals as well.  Israel sinned and didn't obey completely.  Saul disobeyed and didn't destroy them all.  They were tricked into making a treaty with some.  So some wicked people remained in the land.  Their sin spread to the Israelites so that even their kings became idolators. 

[enoob57]

On 12/31/2019 at 10:44 AM, CaptWalker said:

This question is taken from Luke-19 and Matthew-25, the parable of the pounds/talents. In both versions the "Master" is basically referred to in the same way by the lazy servant who did not gain anything from what he had been given because he hid it. He is called "hard" and "austere", but i am focusing more on the Luke version and the meaning of the word Austere which is translated as "harsh,rough,rigid". Now I know the "Master" in the story is at least a type of GOD, but my question of late is does that make him 100% in nature and character? Actually in every teaching i've ever heard on this the focus has always been on the lesson to be learned rather than if the Master and GOD are actually one in the same? But no where in the chapter does it indicate whether they are or not, but only that Christ taught it as if they both were. Even if there seems to be a contradiction between the Master simply dishing out retribution and punishment, whereas God is being fair and just even if the final judgement/sentence is exactly the same?  Anyway i have just been a little bothered and confused by this lately and about the attitude God seems to have towards someone who may actually deserve to be chastised but at the same time may have just been too ignorant or overly cautious and afraid to take some action or make a big life decision for instance? But maybe someone else has another perspective on this and i do appreciate any feedback or input... 

The pavement for thought toward this is remembering we the created rely totally upon The One Who 'IS' not created....by all things we are in debt for being!