You said — “Being a former Christian, I’m long familiar with most of the scriptural/theological analysis you presented, but I ultimately turned away from a similar position when I realized that it was, in actuality, an incredibly tortured and twisted rationalization of an obvious truth — that the Bible is a product of ancient man, in all his backwardsness and barbarism, not of any God. You’ve come to the opposite conclusion, and I respect that. Now, back to the original point.”
—
Well, that’s very interesting, describing yourself as a former Christian. I can’t help but wonder why, but I suppose that’s not the big question here on this thread.
But before I move on, to what you’ve said next, I will say that people should believe God and what He says — based upon — whether He “is” (i.e., He exists), that He is the Creator God (you know, the one spoken about in the Declaration of Independence), and that He has spoken to us — through the Word of God (as given to us by Him guiding those who wrote it) and through the living word, Jesus Christ.
And one should not take it to be “I’ll believe it, so that makes it true for me!” That’s definitely no way to go. It’s either true in an outside and objective sense, apart from anything anyone says or believes — or it simply is not true.
And with the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, that we are told about in the Bible and testified to us by Jesus Christ — He is true in that objective sense. That’s the only reason and basis we have for believing it (not just because of some wishful thinking on our part).
So, that’s where my answers are “coming from.”
.
And then you say — “So, as I understand your position, the critical point is that God is ordering the stoning, and so that is what makes it a righteous and just act. When man decides to do it on his own, it is evil. Therefore, logically, if God were to tell us tomorrow that he is ordering that 1 million unborn children be aborted towards some grand plan of his, that would make abortion for that particular reason acceptable, correct? Or, how about the public beheading of 1 million 5-year olds? Basically, there is no act so evil that would not become righteous if you believed God wanted you to do it, would you agree?”
—
Well, let’s look at that question carefully and see what you’re saying.
Today when I talk to you and you tell me (for sake of discussion, you’re a guy...) that you would never have sex with a 10 year old, either a boy or a girl, and that it’s simply abhorrent and a terrible idea.
And I ask you, “But why? Do you mean that you’re accepting other people’s opinions about it, or you just realize that it’s illegal and you won’t do it because you’ll get in trouble, or you, perhaps just can’t stand the thought of it, or what?”
You might tell me that, *you* personally think it’s abhorrent and that *you* personally think that anyone who does that should be put away for life.
Then I say, “Okay, I see that this is definitely your strongly held and personal belief and that’s *who you are*. You are such a person that this is what you think.
Okay, I now understand who you are and what type of person you are. BUT — let me ask something. What if you “change your mind” later on and you start to think that it’s okay to do that. What would you do then? I mean, you think this way now — but later, you just might think, “Well, it’s not really a bad idea after all and I think I just might do it.”
I might stand back out of the way, before I asked the questioned, because you might get so mad at me, and say, “I would never change my mind about that!!” But, then again, I might ask you once more — “BUT, what if you did? Would you do it then, if you changed your mind?”
You see, you would be trying to tell me that it’s *not in your character* to be that way and you would never change your mind and that it’s abhorrent. But, I might be saying, “However, *theoretically* it’s possible you could change your mind and thus, if I ask the question, would you do it then, if you thought differently?”
You would simply *reject that question* out of hand, as *not realistic* and *not representing your character* — and thus is a ridiculous question.
AND LIKEWISE, to ask the “What if God were to do something unrighteous, would that make it righteous?” — is like asking if God would change His character and change His righeousness to something unrighteous.
But, you could say, “Well, if God says this is righteous now, He could change His mind and say it’s not later.” But, once again, it comes down to the basic character (either of the person or of God). In God’s case, He actually says that He’s “not like a man” in that He *will not* change His mind or His character. He is perfectly righteous in ways (He explains to us...) that are *beyond* even our comprehension. That’s what He says, about Himself.
So, to have a question posed — “What if God says to do this unrighteous thing — would you do it and would that make it righteous?” — that is asking a question that would never be and would never happen, because God doesn’t change His mind (like mankind does) and God’s righteousness is the same from the beginning to the present and through to the infinity of the future.
The *real understanding* of this is that there is no unrighteous act or command that God would give, because all that He does is full of righteousness.
Therefore, to ask, “What if He did this unrighteous thing?” is not understanding who God is. He wouldn’t, because He doesn’t violate His character and who He is and He never changes in who He is.
The Christian God has ordered the killing of children and innocent people before, according to the Old Testament. So, it would not be out of character for him to do it again, and that is why my question is a fair one.
He didn't come to destroy the law or Prophets (age whatever you want to call it inclusive), it is good until Heaven and Earth pass away (age whatsoever inclusive), whoever (that does not say Jew only does it) breaks the least (all 600 as you claim) and teaches men that is ok to break them (as you are) will be called least in heaven.
Jesus after His resurrection, Jesus said:
* "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations... teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you." Mat. 28:19-20 And years later, "James and all the elders" said to Paul:
* "You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law." Acts 21:20
Paul Used The Law
Paul teaches that the unrepentant world is still under the law, and that the law is designed to show guilt and to bring people to Christ:
* But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless... and for sinners... for murderers... for sodomites, for kidnappers, for perjurers... 1 Tim. 1:8-10
All the world is under the law:
* Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God... Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law. Rom. 3:19, 31
* Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. Gal. 3:24-25
Christians who are untutored in the evangelistic role of the law oppose the foundation of the criminal code upon God's law.