Posted on 01/03/2002 11:19:13 AM PST by ArGee
A very rich man decided that he wanted to show kindness to the people of the fair city where he lived. Since he was very rich indeed, he decided to throw a banquet for the entire city. He rented the largest sports arena in the city and began his plans. He planned for huge amounts of the best food possible, making allowances for every religious and medical diet. He advertised the banquet in every possible manner - television, radio, billboard, door-to-door canvassing. Considering that there might be some who could not travel, he arranged for free bus transportation to and from the event, and some special-needs vehicles for all who could not ride busses. He even scheduled the banquet to run for 24 hours a day for several days so that everyone could be sure of being served.
He planned long and hard and finally the big day came. The rich man ate quickly and then went about wishing all his guests well and personally making sure that all had every need met. After a while he went outside to tour the grounds and talk with those who had not yet gone in, and those who had already left. Everyone was happy. Many were profusely thankful. It was a glorious occasion.
At one point the rich man noticed a group of people sitting outside a locked door with most unpleasant looks on their faces. Sensing they were not happy, he went over to them. He did not introduce himself but simply asked them if he could be of service.
"We want to go in through this door," one of them replied.
The rich man explained to them that the hall was arranged to feed a large number of people as quickly and effortlessly as possible. This required order inside, and the entrances and exits had been carefully planned to be as efficient as possible. He then offered to go call one of the golf carts that were avaialbe to help people who could not walk far to take them to the entrance. But the man replied, "We do not want to go in the entrance. We want to go in this door. We don't understand why we can't go in any door we wish. We think the man who set this banquet up is mean and hateful for insisting we go in through the entrance. He has tried to bill himself as a very kind man by offering this banquet, but he is not kind at all if he will not indulge us and let us go through this door.
The rich man was distressed at these words, but still attempted to please these people. He tried once more to explain to them what was behind this particular door, and how if they went in this door they would disrupt the meal service being offered inside. He offered to drive them himself, not only to the door, but inside the hall to their tables if they would only go through the entrance to enjoy the meal. Again the man said, "No, but only a hateful man would keep us from going through the door of our choosing. And we will sit here and tell anyone who will listen to us what an awful man he is until he lets us in."
At that the rich man was enraged and he shouted, "Enough." Then he called a police officer to have them thrown off of the property and ordered that they not be allowed to return until the banquet was over and all the scraps had been hauled away. Then, mourning for their loss, he turned to visit with other guests.
Then why do you fear him, if he doesn't want you to?
It doesn't make any sense to me.
I thought you were supposed to love him.
Can you love out of fear?
I'll watch for it.
Just wondering what gives one the notion that something is horrific or brutal. Why might that person suggest, say.. raping a child is wrong. Is it just wrong because society says its wrong, is it wrong because an individual thinks its wrong, or is there a moral absolute. If rape is indeed absolutely wrong, who says? Who wrote the moral law shall we say?
Can you love out of fear?
I don't know about God but when I was a little kid I kind of felt that way about my Dad. Not terror but a respect that was a bit of fear.
There is an atomic powered radio station that broadcasts the glory of God every day! We call it the sun!
best, AMPU
The kind that can raise people from the dead.
From Hebrews chapter 11:
17: By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,
18: Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called:
19: Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure.
Actually, I find Christians are better informed about other faiths than any single group that I have been exposed to (including atheists, agnostics, Catholics, New Agers, etc). Because of Christianity's evangelistic focus, knowing how to advocate for your faith often means understanding the faith of those you evangelize.
When you look at an ant, do you expect it to know why you're about to step on him? Why then wouldn't you apply that same painfully blatant logic to the creator (from whence our unalienable derive) of the entire universe?
I could go pious on you and argue your points with scripture, but I'm not gonna go there. As Rumsfeld said; "I'm plucky but not stupid".
If God created me... he presumably did so complete with the ability to reason. Why would he give me such a precious gift, if he did not expect me to use it.
And so I apply this faculty of reason to what I read in the Old Testament, and I ask myself certain questions. I ask myself how a loving God could stomp the life out of every living soul in a town, because he didn't approve of the majority's behavior. Or how a loving God could flood the entire world, and drown countless children like rats, because he didn't like the way their parents behaved. Or how a loving God could demand that Abraham be willing to slit the throat of his own son, in a demonstration of faith. What kind of a loving God could demand that people he created in his image, grovel at his feet like chattel? What kind of a loving God stomps children to death because their parents didn't bend a proper knee?
Are these the actions of a loving God?
I think not. So I must draw one of two conclusions from these observations.
Either the God of Abraham does not exist....
Or
Those who describe him have attributed things to him, which could not possibly be so of a loving God.
"Non-believers", on the other hand, are either going in by other doors that the believers either don't believe exist, or which they believe lead to hell, or non-believers are not going in by any door, either because they have never heard of this banquet, or do not believe it exists, or have better things to do - maybe they were invited to a better banquet on the other side of town, with a more interesting mix of guests.
Analogies...they seldom mean entirely and only what you intend them to mean.
I don't claim to be an expert on the bible but if I remember correctly there was this "tree of knowledge" whose fruits were not intended for human consumption.
Setting aside the deep theological arguments about what the OT describes, not meant for just a cursory reading, I'm curious about what gives one the notion that killing a child is wrong.
I think a Biblically thoughtful Christian understands non-Christians a lot better than you realize. I think that such a thoughtful Christian will recognize that the lost sinner's fallen nature makes conversion impossibly difficult, so to speak.
The Bible teaches that justification is by faith, not by works. It follows from this that there is no carnal effort involved. But this does not mean that conversion is easy.
Today's most popular evangelists represent conversion as being as easy as walking down an aisle and confessing Christ. But they forget that Jesus never represented conversion that way.
There is a reason for that. And it definitely does explain why most people are not Christians.
It would appear that some people are unable to discern that killing a child (or anyone else without just cause for that matter) is wrong, unless they are told so by someone claiming to represent an unseeable God.
As for me, I'd suggest that my moral code (derived by reason) suffices just fine.
Of course that's what the book says.... but the denial and subjugation of knowledge wouldn't seem to be an attribute of a loving God.
It seems more in keeping with the attributes of a tyranical shaman intent on keeping control.
Regards my friend.
I respect that answer. My only concern is when another's reason, such as Hitler, says it is for the betterment of humanity that we kill certain people. How can an outsider determine who has more accurate reason? Just interesting thoughts to ponder.
He does expect you to use it, which you do well. Just not as well as you could in certain possible situations.
Using your sodom example, can you think of any other reason why God would do such a thing besides that he doesn't exist or he couldn't possibly be a loving God. I know you can think of many other possibilities. Put your thinking cap on and come up with reasons (for arguments sake) why such an action would be beneficial to long-haul humanity.
BTW, the Sodomites would all be long dead now anyway. The United States for example, is still here as "One Nation Under God".
Disclaimer: I'm just an ant with a few silly examples to provoke thought. I admit could be way off base.
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.