The religion of the Jews at the time of Abraham was very much pagan.
Jesus spoke many times of Abraham, and never in mythic terms: Matt 8:11
Abraham was one of the OT righteous. Just another example that God can reveal Himself to pagans as well.
Jesus said here that it was lawful to do good on the Sabbath (Matt. 12:12)
Any work? For any reason? No He said ti was good to do work to save man's life on a Sabbath. The intent is what changes the rules.
God is multifaceted AND consistent. This is what the whole of scripture reveals. It is God's revelation
Yet the Church teaches that God is simple and indivisible. Just another exmaple that we don't share the same Christian faith.
For one to say that God is only love in the human sense is to deny that He is also just and that He has wrath, for example.
God is just because He offers forgiveness of our sins and salvation to all through Christ crucified; God's "wrath" is His love experienced by those who hate Him. It's still love! :)
Abraham was one of the OT righteous. Just another example that God can reveal Himself to pagans as well.
That's well and fine, but I don't see how it addresses my point. Do you believe that Abraham ever lived and that the stories written about him really happened? I would doubt it, so even if you say he ever lived, why would you call him righteous? IOW, why would you accept that one claim and reject all that supports it?
FK: Jesus said here that it was lawful to do good on the Sabbath (Matt. 12:12)
Any work? For any reason?
Yes, any Godly work for any Godly reason. The verse says:
Matt 12:12 : How much more valuable is a man than a sheep! Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath."
Seems plain enough.
No He said it was good to do work to save man's life on a Sabbath.
Where does that come from??? The context was a man with a shriveled hand and its healing. The KJV translation also has nothing like you suggest.
FK: "God is multifaceted AND consistent. This is what the whole of scripture reveals. It is God's revelation."
Yet the Church teaches that God is simple and indivisible. Just another example that we don't share the same Christian faith.
Yes, I would agree that our respective faiths are much farther apart than I originally imagined possible when I first started posting here on FR. And, it would make perfect sense if the Church taught that God is simple as a Being, if the Church only accepts perhaps the Book of John and selected red letter selections from the other Gospels as the only true revelation. I don't think the Church actually does that but I HAVE seen Latin support for the idea that all scripture must be interpreted through the Gospels, MEANING that any perceived inconsistencies must result in the offending passages being for all intents and purposes declared LIES. In Apostolic theology I see no concept of the totality of scripture at all. I see only the concept of hierarchy of scripture determined by a hierarchy of men.