Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: kosta50; Quix; MarkBsnr; Kolokotronis; stfassisi; HarleyD; Dr. Eckleburg; blue-duncan; wmfights
The Old Testament God was no "Daddy," FK. His way of dealing with misbehaved children was rather extreme.

Well, I suppose one could make a case with David, but I am guessing that you are talking about the accounts of God killing whole towns and villages, etc. They were NOT His children. But there are tons of examples of God acting as a personal beloved Father in the OT. Three are God providing a ram to Abraham at the key moment, God leading the Jews out of Egypt in response to their prayers, and God testing the mettle of His son Job, and then MORE than fully restoring him.

FK: I truly believe that God wants to have this type of [personal] relationship with us rather than one where we are a drone reporting through ten layers of hierarchy to get to Him.

I respect your belief, and I believe it is genuine, but where do you find that in the Bible?

Thank you. I would say that I find this type of relationship EVERYWHERE in the Bible. In the OT, God communicated directly to His prophets. He didn't lead them as we might lead a pet. He talked to them, personally. Not only that, but He interacted with them, as opposed to issuing commands and then leaving. He suffered their idiocies and played them along. Even though it was presumably a waste of His time, He still "worked" with them.

And then, of course, we have Jesus. For Jesus, being 100% God, to have personal relationships with His followers was nothing new. It was just in a new form, and even more personal. He cared about His disciples in ways that we fully recognize. He ate with them, sang with them, cried with them, and laughed with them. Except for taking a wife, it just doesn't get any more personal. Jesus COULD have been a very impersonal King, but He WANTED to have personal relationships with them then, and with us now.

4,538 posted on 03/28/2008 7:19:12 PM PDT by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4237 | View Replies ]


To: Forest Keeper; MarkBsnr; Kolokotronis; stfassisi; HarleyD; Dr. Eckleburg; blue-duncan; wmfights
Well, I suppose one could make a case with David, but I am guessing that you are talking about the accounts of God killing whole towns and villages, etc. They were NOT His children.

In all fairness, to put it in the context of the Reformed theology, they were not His children because God ordained them before they were even born not to be His children. They couldn't be His children even if they wanted to! And, because they were  not His children, they were human cattle for slaughter.

Once dehumanized, the destruction of God's refuse in the Old Testament genocides become God's "justice." 

Three are God providing a ram to Abraham at the key moment

Another way of looking at that is that what the OT God did to Abraham was cruel and sadistic. God would have known  Abraham's faith and that Abraham's love for God was stronger than for his son. God did not have to test Abraham to know that.

God leading the Jews out of Egypt in response to their prayers

From the Reformed point of view, that is an oxymoron. The Reformed can't say that payers change what God predestined. If the prayers were predestined, then the Jews prayed not because they wanted to but because they had to. And God did not "respond" to their prayers, but simply did what His "plan" envisions would happen, since obviously even God is helped captive by His own "plan."

God testing the mettle of His son Job, and then MORE than fully restoring him

God had no reason to test Job.  God would know what's in Job's heart. God was making a bet with Satan, who said he could make Job curse God.

What I see in all this is Zeus, not Christ, not even a foreshadow of Christ. What I see is a deity that acts like a man would, a God made in man's image.

For Jesus, being 100% God, to have personal relationships with His followers was nothing new

Christ had a very select group of followers, a dozen of men and a few women, that you could say had any personal interaction with Him, none of which was a friendship of any kind, but a strict relationship. He told them what, when and where to do, where not to do, where to go, where not to go, how to pray, etc., etc. That was a very relationship. I never thought of my relationship with my teachers and professors as "personal," although I spent a good part of my days and years with them. 

God is not out chum. St. Thomas' words "You are my Lord and my God" does not have the possessive meaning Protestants and Baptists assign to it. He is our God, but He is not ours. Rather we would be His.

4,540 posted on 03/28/2008 8:22:41 PM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4538 | View Replies ]

To: Forest Keeper

INDEED.

Well put.

Thanks.

May Daddy bless you and yours in every way.


4,547 posted on 03/28/2008 9:59:29 PM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4538 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson