Find me a home (now focusing on biblical Israel & the talmud)

[Hooahguy]

Why the "G-D". I know you're not supposed to say His name, but God is not his name, any more than Allah or Elohim (or however it is transcribed.)

"you shall not take G-d's name in vain."
G-d has many, many names, so i just prefer to be safe and not use it when referring to him. but when referring to gods in general, i have no problem.

[Rhyfelwyr]

To ask that question is to fundamentally misunderstand the Medieval Papacy. The Pope is the Senior Bishop in the West, and his Primacy dates back to before Nicaea, where it was confirmed. It is therefore as old as the Creeds, the declaration of the Holy Trinity, the formalisation of the Church hierarchy and virtually every major tenet of Christian belief.

It is therefore older than Biblical Canon, which was not fixed until around 400 AD.

So...

Doesn't matter if it goes back to 90AD, or 500AD. What would matter is if Jesus himself had said anything on the matter, and what he does say is very much open to interpretation. Some people even say that the 'rock' Jesus tells Peter to build his church upon simply means a 'small rock' and so the Pope shouldn't have primacy over any other Bishop.

I hate to tell you this but Episcopal Lutheranism is Catholicism circa 1000 AD, so is Anglicanism. In fact the differances between national Protestant Churches ape the pre-Gregorian National Churches. This is even true of the Scots Episcopalians, who have no Archbishop but are not ruled by York.

The "Reformation" makes the news because unlike previous Reform Movements it resulted in schism and excomunication. This seems to have cause Luthor, Huss and Wyclif nervous breakdowns.

The most interesting thing about Calvin is that he seems to have sought Apostacy from the putset, not reform from within.

Hey I'm glad Catholicism wasn't always so bad, it also got a lot better after the Protestant Reformation. Luther's schism came at a real low point for the Catholic Church, it was in a state back then. Also I don't disagree that there were reformers before the 'Reformation', as with all these historical 'watersheds', you can see the seeds being sown well in advance.

Calvin did not seek to cause trouble or be an apostate for the fun of it. Martin Bucer put a lot of work into reconciling Calvin with Luther, but Luther was quite disrespectful at times (he literally carved verses supporting his views on the eucharist into the discussions table). If Calvin couldn't unite with Luther, he was never going to get anywhere with the Catholic Church.

Not a reasoned arguement, really, is it?

See what I said to Hooah above.

Don't know what you mean, I'm just saying what the Bible says. Man says to God, "sorry I don't need you", so God foresees a world where man gets what he asks for and lives in separation from God. Does this make God the author of sin? Certainly, the Bible says evil can be traced back to God:

"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." (Isiah 45:7)

But this isn't doesn't mean God commited the sin Himself. His foreknowledge made it inevitable, but the actual sin was commited by a person. This is the reality Adam asked for. Thankfully, by providence, by interevening directly in our fallen world, God transforms people to His will and gives us salvation. Praise the Lord!

[Fixiwee]

I wish Bill Hicks could read this thread.

[Tribesman]

well firs tof all, the israelites would have met the 7 nations, b/c they were int he areas the israelites were promised to get. plus the 7 nations were evil immoral people.

How do you know that god promised the land to the people?
How do you know that the other people were evil and immoral?
Is the answer , someone wrote it a long time ago so its true ?
Could it just be the rewritting of history by the victors of a conflict ?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

"you shall not take G-d's name in vain."
G-d has many, many names, so i just prefer to be safe and not use it when referring to him. but when referring to gods in general, i have no problem.

I thought he had no name, when Moses asks his response is merely "I am".

God, The LORD, the Almighty etc. are all merely titles, surely?

Still I suppose there's nothing wrong with playing it safe.

[Hooahguy]

How do you know that god promised the land to the people?
How do you know that the other people were evil and immoral?
Is the answer , someone wrote it a long time ago so its true ?
Could it just be the rewritting of history by the victors of a conflict ?

careful there, tribsey, dont do decide. the torah tells us all that, so its true. its also why its called faith.

I thought he had no name, when Moses asks his response is merely "I am".

God, The LORD, the Almighty etc. are all merely titles, surely?

Still I suppose there's nothing wrong with playing it safe.

he does have a name- i suppose "i am" is one of them.

[Tribesman]

the torah tells us all that, so its true.

prove that it is true

[Hooahguy]

prove that Jesus existed. prove that mohammed existed.
its called FAITH for a reason.

[Incongruous]

prove that Jesus existed. prove that mohammed existed.

Umm... what respectable historian does not accept that Jesus and Mohammed existed?

[Hooahguy]

and what respectable historian does not accept that the bible existed?
im not saying they didnt exist. im saying that its hard to "prove" such things.

[drone]

prove that Jesus existed. prove that mohammed existed.
its called FAITH for a reason.

Fairly certain that both are real historical figures. God, on the other hand, is not. Faith says he exists, and faith alone. Jesus and Mohammed, while they existed, may or may not have had special powers/insight/etc., faith also determines this, and faith alone. What Tribesman is asking is valid. What justifications did the ancient Israelites have for their actions?

[Hooahguy]

what justifications? G-d told them to. that should be enough.

[drone]

what justifications? G-d told them to. that should be enough.

Do you realize what a can of worms that statement opens?

God is not provable, he exists in faith. If I believe God tells me to kill my neighbors, I get a free pass?

[Hooahguy]

in G-ds eyes, yes. there is always a reason for a commandment. G-d does nothing needlessly. the 7 nations were evil, just like the nations destroyed in the flood. why did he kill everyone but Noah and his family? everyone but him was evil.
same case here.

[drone]

So what you are saying is that every religious war or atrocity out there is justified?

[Hooahguy]

for my G-d, yes. in my eyes, they are not atrocities. but in your eyes, they may be.

personally, i think this argument is pointless. its like running into a brick wall over and over.

[drone]

So you don't have any problems with 9/11, the Alhambra Decree, the Crusades, and the Inter Caetera then. Interesting view point.

[Hooahguy]

MY god. not yours or anyone elses. he did not order those things.
shame on you for saying that i have no problem with 9/11 and the like. thats libel.

[drone]

MY god. not yours or anyone elses. he did not order those things.
shame on you for saying that i have no problem with 9/11 and the like. thats libel.

Your god is also the god of the Christians and Muslims.

[Tribesman]

MY god. not yours or anyone elses.

So when people do nasty stuff and say its your gods will its OK , but if other people do nasty stuff and say its their gods will they are just doing nasty stuff .

what justifications? G-d told them to.

prove it .

the 7 nations were evil

prove it

he did not order those things.

prove it

You shoulda let it rest Hooah

thats libel.

Actually no it isn't , going on what you have written the statement cannot be called unjustifiable so it isn't libel .

[Rhyfelwyr]

Your god is also the god of the Christians and Muslims.

Who says? He's the Christian God yes, but quite different from Allah.

[drone]

Who says? He's the Christian God yes, but quite different from Allah.

In interpretation, yes. But all three faiths trace back to Abraham.

[Rhyfelwyr]

In interpretation, yes. But all three faiths trace back to Abraham.

So if you come from the Judeo-Christian tradition, you could say it is acceptable for yourself to act in God's name, but not someone doing it in the name of Allah.

[drone]

So if you come from the Judeo-Christian tradition, you could say it is acceptable for yourself to act in God's name, but not someone doing it in the name of Allah.

And vice versa. And here we hit the crux of the whole argument. God did not personally appear before all the Israelites and tell them that the 7 nations were evil and must be destroyed. These things go through a unreliable, unverifiable, and biased, human filter. Be they priest, pharisee, pope, OBL, divine-right king, prophet, OT8, etc. Just because some ancient book says "God told them to do it", doesn't make it so, this is a very common and convenient way of justifying evil deeds for personal gain.

Hooahguy's whole argument is that some human, claiming to have insight into God's wishes, tells people it's ok to burn/rape/pillage in his name, it's all good. Thus justifying holy war, pogroms, militant Islamic terror, the works.

And he also doesn't like to share.

[Rhyfelwyr]

And vice versa. And here we hit the crux of the whole argument. God did not personally appear before all the Israelites and tell them that the 7 nations were evil and must be destroyed. These things go through a unreliable, unverifiable, and biased, human filter. Be they priest, pharisee, pope, OBL, divine-right king, prophet, OT8, etc. Just because some ancient book says "God told them to do it", doesn't make it so, this is a very common and convenient way of justifying evil deeds for personal gain.

Hooahguy's whole argument is that some human, claiming to have insight into God's wishes, tells people it's ok to burn/rape/pillage in his name, it's all good. Thus justifying holy war, pogroms, militant Islamic terror, the works.

And he also doesn't like to share.

Hooah isn't justifying Muslim extremists, since he doesn't even believe Allah exists. Obviously it will appear like a double-standard from a secular point of view, but remember he believes there's only one God who can justify people's actions.

Also, Hooah isn't basing everything on some human, since I'm sure he will feel he has some relationship with God. Not that I'm suggesting a voice should tell him to smite the Canaanites, but he trusts in the God of the Old Testament.

[drone]

Hooah isn't justifying Muslim extremists, since he doesn't even believe Allah exists. Obviously it will appear like a double-standard from a secular point of view, but remember he believes there's only one God who can justify people's actions.

Allah and the J/C God are one in the same. All 3 religions worship the same God, they just do it in different ways due to, surprise surprise, different human interpretations.

Also, Hooah isn't basing everything on some human, since I'm sure he will feel he has some relationship with God. Not that I'm suggesting a voice should tell him to smite the Canaanites, but he trusts in the God of the Old Testament.

I'm not questioning his faith in God, I'm questioning his blind acceptance of the words (spoken or written) of humans that various bad things are cleared through the Almighty.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Allah and the J/C God are one in the same. All 3 religions worship the same God, they just do it in different ways due to, surprise surprise, different human interpretations.

There are a lot of big, big differences. Allah is not a triune God, Islam is not so much about forgiveness as about weighing up your good deeds against the bad come the end of your life. With Christianity, part of the Godhead came to earth in human form (something Muslims believe Allah can't do) because everyone is a sinner and can only get to heaven with if Christ pays for their sins, not by being good enough on their own merits. Not only are the doctrines different, the whole concept of God is different.

I'm not questioning his faith in God, I'm questioning his blind acceptance of the words (spoken or written) of humans that various bad things are cleared through the Almighty.

But what if part of his faith in God is related to the fact that God did genuinely give visions etc to the prophets? So he doesn't worship God because a prophet says so, but instead he knows that God really said that stuff to the prophets because of his relationship with God? It's part of his trust in Him.

[drone]

There are a lot of big, big differences. Allah is not a triune God, Islam is not so much about forgiveness as about weighing up your good deeds against the bad come the end of your life. With Christianity, part of the Godhead came to earth in human form (something Muslims believe Allah can't do) because everyone is a sinner and can only get to heaven with if Christ pays for their sins, not by being good enough on their own merits. Not only are the doctrines different, the whole concept of God is different.

Like I said, interpretations. All three are monotheistic religions, there is only one god. Islam recognizes Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Solomon, Moses and many other Hebrew figures as chosen by God. The roots are the same, the methodology is different. This is what happens when people enter the equation.

But what if part of his faith in God is related to the fact that God did genuinely give visions etc to the prophets? So he doesn't worship God because a prophet says so, but instead he knows that God really said that stuff to the prophets because of his relationship with God? It's part of his trust in Him.

If that's what he thinks, fine. But that line of thinking, the absolute trust that human texts are infallible, leads to suicide bombers and crusades. You sow, you reap.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Like I said, interpretations. All three are monotheistic religions, there is only one god. Islam recognizes Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Solomon, Moses and many other Hebrew figures as chosen by God. The roots are the same, the methodology is different. This is what happens when people enter the equation.

To say they are the same is just your own interpretation isn't it?

If that's what he thinks, fine. But that line of thinking, the absolute trust that human texts are infallible, leads to suicide bombers and crusades. You sow, you reap.

No, because Allah isn't real.

Of course, I say that because we are discussing people's lines of thought, I'm not saying they are actually correct.

Also, who says the trust in the human texts doesn't come from the relationship with God? Atheists always presume we worship God because of the texts, but for most religious folk the texts and God Himself at least complement each other.

[drone]

To say they are the same is just your own interpretation isn't it?

The Jews living in medieval Muslim lands kept their religion due to this interpretation, so I wouldn't say it's just mine.

Also, who says the trust in the human texts doesn't come from the relationship with God? Atheists always presume we worship God because of the texts, but for most religious folk the texts and God Himself at least complement each other.

The reasons for peoples' spirituality are their own.