Posted on 01/23/2013 7:24:58 PM PST by Morgana
Yes, if you're satan.
5.56mm
I think we let the Bible speak for itself, although we must remember that the history of the conquest was written after the fact. What happened was war, and war as it was conducted in those times is no different from the way war is conducted in ours, except for the weapons used.
It is that, and SO much more.
Not only, but those who have never read the Bible as a book should be read, so we learn what it actually says or something close to what it says. Liberal Christianity is a false and sentimental faith, which refuses to see that the Bible describes people whose way of life was radically different from our own, but whose trials and tribulations are like our own, and whose need for love and hope are just the same as ours.
But is history and only people who read no history can fail to see that it is the history of man as he was and is and shall be, but also what he ought to be.
Let me guess . . . the part of the Bible that shouldn't be taken literally is Genesis 1-11 . . . am I right?
I wonder if you consider the virgin birth or the resurrection a "parable."
Thank G-d I am no longer in that blasphemous church.
You have no comment to make about your co-religionist saying most of the Bible is "parable?" I suppose you agree with her then.
So . . . you're saying that G-d never ordered the extermination of the Canaanites but that the stone age savages who wrote the Bible put the words in G-d's mouth to justify what they did. Is this St. Robert Bellarmine's position or has the Church "grown" since then?
What do you have to say about the Torah (written before the Conquest) ordering the extermination of the Canaanites beforehand? Oh wait a minute . . . you don't believe the Torah was written before the Conquest, do you? Perhaps you believe it was written at King Solomon's court?
One of the verses he was referring to, I don't know where it is but it says something about “taking up the serpent”.
I guess you have not heard of the “Snake handlers” that exist in parts of West Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee. Once in a while here on Free Republic a story comes on about them. Usually because they died of rattlesnake bite.
“Let me guess . . . the part of the Bible that shouldn't be taken literally is Genesis 1-11 . . . am I right? “
One of the verses he was referring to, I don't know where it is but it says something about “taking up the serpent”.
I guess you have not heard of the “Snake handlers” that exist in parts of West Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee. Once in a while here on Free Republic a story comes on about them. Usually because they died of rattlesnake bite.
Now come on . . . you know you believe Genesis 1-11 is Babylonian/Canaanite mythology!
Tomorrow's morning reading includes the splitting of the Red Sea. I suppose Pharaoh's chariot just got stuck in the mud . . . right???
I think that the Bible is history, but sacred history. God reveals himself to men and puts truth in their mouths and in their pens. Which is to say that the acts attributed to Joshua were in God’s eyes justified, which may seem harsh or unjust to some readers, unless they consider that they were much the same as the actions we took during WWII to crush the hideous regime of Hitler. I believe that he has endowed men with a kind of “ordered liberty.” He has set not only physical bounds to that liberty but moral ones, and that we must accept the consequences of acting outside those bounds. We can see that our science unaided, gives us god-like powers. And if we but do the will of God we could re-create the earthly paradise. But from the beginning we have chosen not to do his will because we have the crippling perversity of will that can be traced to the first man. Therefore like children we must be trained and constrained.
Genesis is if anything a deconstruction of Babylonian mythology. All one has to do is to read that mythology closely to see how radically different the stories are.
My Family including a 9 year old 12 year old and 15 year old daughter read the entire bible last year cover to cover.
An old testament passage and a new testament passage along with a psalm and proverb.
There were somethings that made us wonder as we read them with our girls but at the same time we were able to discuss how God see’s some of those things and why they would be wrong... even the passage in Ezekiel brought a good discussion with my girls.
God’s word will not return void!
What is embarrassing are people like me and my/our lack of knowledge and my/our behavior that reveals our ignorance or defiance.
As my understanding of the world and of human nature and world history grows, so does my appreciation for the Bible.
It's all there, in the Bible, nothing new under the sun or in the hearts of humans that's not written about.
Alot of you “I’m not embarrassed by anything in the Bible” have no idea of what you are talking about. Not one of you could find the verse that was being referred to in the article. I read the bible every day.
However, concerning the below if ever there was an embarrassing passage this would be in contention with a couple of them I know of.
Try reading this verse or chapter and studying it in a bible class. This is red cheek embarassing material to read out loud in front of a group, assembly or what not. No matter the version or translation.
NIV
Ezekiel 23:19-20
http://bible.cc/ezekiel/23-19.htm
various other bible versions listed alongside.
Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt.
There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.
It would be helpful to use the KJV, as it renders far more understanding.
Here is the part that you left out that explains it all:
.
[1] The word of the LORD came again unto me, saying,
[2] Son of man, there were two women, the daughters of one mother:
[3] And they committed whoredoms in Egypt; they committed whoredoms in their youth: there were their breasts pressed, and there they bruised the teats of their virginity.
[4] And the names of them were Aholah the elder, and Aholibah her sister: and they were mine, and they bare sons and daughters. Thus were their names; Samaria is Aholah, and Jerusalem Aholibah.
Yes, he was talking about the city-states of Samaria and Jerusalem, not women at all.
duh
And “Egypt,” or “Babylon” refer to the outside world in general, not necessarily the nations of Egypt or Babylon.
Rules are a little different on the religion forum, RBStealth. Maybe you didn’t realize it. Don’t get your feelings hurt when this reply gets deleted.
You, and the headline of the article you are protecting, both generalize way too much. I said there could be some contextual discomfort, meaning you could construct an embarrassing situation if you set out to do so. Thinking people can also avoid such situations. And thinking headline writers would have done a better job on the headline, which itself was embarassing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.