It's an illogical convuluted inexplicable movement.

First was the jews. That Spirituality is pretty strict. Pray 3X a day, religious festivals at set times for set reasons and set periods.
Punishments set down in a book called "Deuteronomy."
This book and that way of living within it became known as "The Law."

After a period of time, "religion" crept under what God had intended with his "Law".
"The Law" that was intended to reconcile people back to God when they sinned now became a wall.
It seperated God from humans.

Which was the opposite of what The Law was meant to do.
It was meant to give humans a way BACK to God.
Instead, it really showed how far humans (men in particular) were from God.
Our sins kept us from God. Not the existance of The Law".

The sins always existed, The Law only defined them.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Nov 13^th, 2008 at 11:30pm:

It's an illogical convuluted inexplicable movement. First was the jews. That Spirituality is pretty strict. Pray 3X a day, religious festivals at set times for set reasons and set periods. Punishments set down in a book called "Deuteronomy." This book and that way of living within it became known as "The Law." After a period of time, "religion" crept under what God had intended with his "Law". "The Law" that was intended to reconcile people back to God when they sinned now became a wall. It seperated God from humans. Which was the opposite of what The Law was meant to do. It was meant to give humans a way BACK to God. Instead, it really showed how far humans (men in particular) were from God. Our sins kept us from God. Not the existance of The Law". The sins always existed, The Law only defined them.

what law are you talking about?

The only illogical and convulted idea I see bing propounded here is the one that God got it wrong. He gave it his best shot, but failed. And had to try again with a whole new religion based on completely different ideas.

What you're effectively saying is God didn't know what he was doing, messed up and had to try again.

Whereas the Islamic concept is that the exact same religion of pure monotheism is sent time and time again and man continually falls away from it. There's no progression from judaism to christianity to Islam in our teaching, we believe the same religion sent every single time was pure monotheism (or Islam), judaism is not mentioned one single time in the OT, and even in the NT, it's just mentioned to refer to the religion the Jews happen to practise, the religion is not actually called Judaism.

phillip - there are many laws in deuteronomy. About medical, legal, social laws.
Things like what to do if someone is sick, gives details of the rash and how to get rid of it etc, if someone kills a neighbours oxen, rape, unlawful killing.
Details the sacrifices to be made, how to judge people or the recompense to be given to the victim .


Abu - yes, that was a way I thought of it for a while too. That God had got it wrong, so came out with plan "B".
After reading the whole story though, the entirety of it makes sense.
The "Laws" were correct. That people sinned and this removed them from God, does not prove the laws wrong.
It means the people are wrong.
eg, suppose I chronically speed in my car and repeatedly get caught and finally thrown in jail.
It was my speeding that caused that, not the laws on speed limits.

You are right, the word judaism is not mentioned in the bible (from my memory.)  The religion in the OT is given for jews, or those who want to join and was known as the law.
I guess later on the word Judaism was coined. It always existed, that's what the OT was about.

The main evidence of God's failure is existence of the Devil and his/her absolute evilness while maintaining God's omnipotence at the same time. This duality runs into logical contradiction.

Tallow - good thought.
You are saying, if God existed, he would have got rid of the devil ?

A hindu told me a while ago something interesting.
We are not meant to be here. We are meant to be in Eden.
We got here cause Adam and Eve ate that apple, and let sin (the devil ?) into the world .
Perhaps in Eden, there was no devil ?
We effectively left eden by our actions.

Or maybe having the devil around gives a natural balance.
Good and bad, man and woman ...
Just only ever having good would be boring and unreal.

If God "forced" us to be "good". ie got rid of the devil, our relationship with God would be false.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 9:25am:

Tallow - good thought. You are saying, if God existed, he would have got rid of the devil ?

Not quiet. God exists but is not omnipotent therefore there is continuous battle between Good and Evil or rather as taoists put it eternal balancing dance between yin and yang.

BTW, there is also a concept of Free Will, which makes Humans third great power and great acrobats.

Good discussion tallow - thanks.

maybe God opts to NOT do away with the devil ??

Sprintcyclist wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 10:57am:

... maybe God opts to NOT do away with the devil ??

It can be too. There are analogies of that  like Catch-and-Release type of sport fishing or democratic governance system of Government vs Opposition.

tallowood,


Quote:

The main evidence of God's failure is existence of the Devil and his/her absolute evilness while maintaining God's omnipotence at the same time. This duality runs into logical contradiction.

Your point doesn't hold against Islam, although perhaps it does against the Christian perception.

In Islam, the devil is not like a "God for the other team". The devil is merely a rebellious creature, like any rebellious creature (even some humans) and is not 'absolute' evil, nor does he pose any challenge to God's omnipotence. There is no duality like this in Islam. The devil is more like a whisperer who merely incites humans to commit evil, rather than being pure evil himself.

abu_rashid wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 11:54am:

tallowood, Quote: The main evidence of God's failure is existence of the Devil and his/her absolute evilness while maintaining God's omnipotence at the same time. This duality runs into logical contradiction. Your point doesn't hold against Islam, although perhaps it does against the Christian perception. In Islam, the devil is not like a "God for the other team". The devil is merely a rebellious creature, like any rebellious creature (even some humans) and is not 'absolute' evil, nor does he pose any challenge to God's omnipotence. There is no duality like this in Islam. The devil is more like a whisperer who merely incites humans to commit evil, rather than being pure evil himself.

Then why Islamic God can not get rid of Devil for good if it is omnipotent and see Devil as a threat to purity of Moslem thought and behaviour?

abu_rashid wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 6:33am:

The only illogical and convulted idea I see bing propounded here is the one that God got it wrong. He gave it his best shot, but failed. And had to try again with a whole new religion based on completely different ideas. What you're effectively saying is God didn't know what he was doing, messed up and had to try again. Whereas the Islamic concept is that the exact same religion of pure monotheism is sent time and time again and man continually falls away from it. There's no progression from judaism to christianity to Islam in our teaching, we believe the same religion sent every single time was pure monotheism (or Islam), judaism is not mentioned one single time in the OT, and even in the NT, it's just mentioned to refer to the religion the Jews happen to practise, the religion is not actually called Judaism.

Could you get any more arrogant? I mean, really, do you see it and don't care, or are you completely unaware of it?

Most likely explanation, for all this nonsense, is that man has imagined these "messages", imagined "god"....why? Because humans need to believe in something. They always have, from the Australian aboriginals Dreamtime, to Hindus, Buddhists...everywhere you look in every part of the world humans have invented some sort of god/s some sort of spirituality that explains the unexplainable. They can't all be right, so the logical conclusion is they are a human invention.

Abu - thanks for your input.
Yes, one of God's answers to me was "because of the deceiver."

Which is about all he does, deceive.
he's just a shifty powerless liar with bad dress sense !!!!!

Sprintcyclist wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 9:25am:

If God "forced" us to be "good". ie got rid of the devil, our relationship with God would be false.

That is correct.

And perhaps we would be God's slaves.

Without freewill, perhaps we would all be muslims?


:-/

Sprintcyclist wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 12:36pm:

... Which is about all he does, deceive. he's just a shifty powerless liar with bad dress sense !!!!!

a politician

Sprintcyclist wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 12:36pm:

Abu - thanks for your input. Yes, one of God's answers to me was "because of the deceiver." Which is about all he does, deceive. he's just a shifty powerless liar with bad dress sense !!!!!

I've got bad dress sense, and I'm actually wearing a bright red tee-shirt today. Does the job pay well? ;)

A bright red tshirt !!!!!!

Does it go with your tail muso ?? :)

jordan484 wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 12:29pm:

abu_rashid wrote on Nov 14th, 2008 at 6:33am: The only illogical and convulted idea I see bing propounded here is the one that God got it wrong. He gave it his best shot, but failed. And had to try again with a whole new religion based on completely different ideas. What you're effectively saying is God didn't know what he was doing, messed up and had to try again. Whereas the Islamic concept is that the exact same religion of pure monotheism is sent time and time again and man continually falls away from it. There's no progression from judaism to christianity to Islam in our teaching, we believe the same religion sent every single time was pure monotheism (or Islam), judaism is not mentioned one single time in the OT, and even in the NT, it's just mentioned to refer to the religion the Jews happen to practise, the religion is not actually called Judaism. Could you get any more arrogant? I mean, really, do you see it and don't care, or are you completely unaware of it? Most likely explanation, for all this nonsense, is that man has imagined these "messages", imagined "god"....why? Because humans need to believe in something. They always have, from the Australian aboriginals Dreamtime, to Hindus, Buddhists...everywhere you look in every part of the world humans have invented some sort of god/s some sort of spirituality that explains the unexplainable. They can't all be right, so the logical conclusion is they are a human invention.

try again, Islamically god sent hundreds of thousands of prophets to a lot of different people. And as for it being a human invention, well thats another thread in that.

So, I guess we have about finished the chapter on jews ??
time to move onto the christian story.


The law had shown how far people had moved away from God.
According to the law, for sins a price had to be paid.
Generally a flawless animal was sacrificed to bring people back to God after people had sinned.
(Yes, not so good if you were an innocent animal !!)

The multitude of people sinning, and the ways of humans had turned was was supposed ot be spiritual into what was then a business.
A religion.
The keepers of the religion were greedy and cold no more help people to God than the blind could give directions from a map.

But still, Gods heart wanted his people with him.

abu_rashid wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 6:33am:

The only illogical and convulted idea I see bing propounded here is the one that God got it wrong. He gave it his best shot, but failed. And had to try again with a whole new religion based on completely different ideas. What you're effectively saying is God didn't know what he was doing, messed up and had to try again. Whereas the Islamic concept is that the exact same religion of pure monotheism is sent time and time again and man continually falls away from it. There's no progression from judaism to christianity to Islam in our teaching, we believe the same religion sent every single time was pure monotheism (or Islam), judaism is not mentioned one single time in the OT, and even in the NT, it's just mentioned to refer to the religion the Jews happen to practise, the religion is not actually called Judaism.

you are misunderstanding christianity.

Judaism is the covenant the jews made with god because that is the type of relationship they wanted with god, one of law.

christianity was the second covenant, just a different and more personal way to relate to the same god.

christianity teaches that all jews still have the old covenant with god, neither covenant is wrong, just that the jews were stubbern and wanted a relationship based on law so god because he loved them gave them what they wanted.

no one said god got it wrong.

Quote:

Judaism is the covenant the jews made with god because that is the type of relationship they wanted with god, one of law.

The covenant was made with Abraham (pbuh) before Judaism as we know it even existed. There were very few laws mentioned in the original covenant, they came later. Besides, if you have no laws, you really have no religion. The law vs faith idea is a misunderstanding of modern Christians. The NT says you're not justified by the law, doesn't say to throw it out.


Quote:

christianity was the second covenant, just a different and more personal way to relate to the same god.

So why not just make it like that from the start, if it's the correct way? Why make all those people go through all that stuff in the OT, and then bring a whole different religion?

Also, I was never able to accept that the God described in the OT, is the same as the Christian God as defined in the Nicene creed, or even in the NT.


Quote:

christianity teaches that all jews still have the old covenant with god, neither covenant is wrong, just that the jews were stubbern and wanted a relationship based on law so god because he loved them gave them what they wanted.

How about Arabs/Muslims? You do realise your own Bible says the covenant was made with Abraham (pbuh) and his son Ishmael (pbuh) right? although it later revoked this, and claimed the covenant was with Isaac (pbuh) only, most likely as the Israelites began to fight more with their  Ishmaelite cousins. They had a habit of slandering and denouncing their tribal enemies in their book.


Quote:

no one said god got it wrong.

Actually sprint did.

"The Law" that was intended to reconcile people back to God when they sinned now became a wall.. ..Which was the opposite of what The Law was meant to do.

the covenant was with Isaac only, Ishmaelites worshipped many other own tribal gods for many centuries after not that I hold it against them as after all The God of Israelites is their tribal god too.

Quote:

try again, Islamically god sent hundreds of thousands of prophets to a lot of different people. And as for it being a human invention, well thats another thread in that.

No, I won't, I'm happy with my conclusion.

Lets try not to be sidetracked by minor differences of opinion.
this thread is just to give  a broad outline and progression.

I'ld prefer for others to start specific threads on "sacrifices", "the Law", "sins" etc.


So, the people through their sins were kept from God.
In the law, a sacrifice is to be paid for major sins, in order to give spiritual compensation.
It can be seen as a fine, to put things right.


The pharisees (priests of the day) were not really behaving how God wanted them too.
Pride blew them up, they became unforgiving and stiffnecked.
ie, their privileged, respected and well paid position had turned some of them to a superior attitude.
They lacked compassion.
In such a state, they could not help others to lead a spiritual life.

God was unsatisfied with this, and decided to pay for everyones sins for all time by himself.

Pretty sweet deal really for us sinners.

Enter the time of Jesus Christ on the planet.

Jesus on this planet is in complete agreeance with The Law.

The Law says a price must be paid for a sin.
The highest price was an unblemished sacrifice.

Jesus was without sin (unblemished).
He effectively sacrificed himself to pay for our sins.

If you have never sinned, you do not need Jesus.
you are a MUCH better person than I am.

There is no requirement to pray X times a day.
There is no need to attend festivals.
There is no need to find a path to God through a cleric/pastor/priest.
There is no need to offer further sacrifices.

To get redemption if one has sinned, there is a need for Jesus.
He has already paid the price.
Every sinner that comes to Jesus makes his sacrifice more valuable.

There are many predictions in the OT about Jesus.
Where he would be born, when he would be born, his lineage, his death, things that would happen during his life.

The guidelines Jesus gave were quite unlike The law of the OT.
Yet they went bejond the old laws.
As Jesus had fulfilled the old laws, they needed no longer apply.

Jesus commandments/guidelines are spiritual and nonreligious.
They are guides that apply to any society.

Things like "Do to others as you would have done unto yourself", "forgive", "turn the other cheek", "obey the laws of the land."
Laws like this are simple, yet complete and personal.
They easily replace many tombs of legalise.


Some people say the romans killed Jesus, some say The jews.
Some say religion, some say The Law, some say the pharisees.

His death gave us a release from the grip of sin, death and doctrines.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Nov 19^th, 2008 at 8:58am:

As Jesus had fulfilled the old laws, they needed no longer apply.

So killing, stealing, having carnal knowledge of your neighbour's goat etc became acceptable.  ;) - as long as you repented.

muso - i like your posts :-)


I prob experessed myself poorly there.

no, crimes are still not acceptable.  "do unto others ....."

repentence means a bit more than saying 'sorry"

take care

tallowood wrote on Nov 16^th, 2008 at 12:08am:

the covenant was with Isaac only, Ishmaelites worshipped many other own tribal gods for many centuries after not that I hold it against them as after all The God of Israelites is their tribal god too.

Actually it was with Abrahams 'only' son (at the time). Given that Ishmael by all biblical reports was 7 years older then Isaac, it is impossible that the 'only son' spoken of was Isaac.

lestat and others - I have copied and pasted your comments on covenant onto a new thread.

Good luck with it.

abu_rashid wrote on Nov 15^th, 2008 at 11:55pm:

Quote: Judaism is the covenant the jews made with god because that is the type of relationship they wanted with god, one of law. The covenant was made with Abraham (pbuh) before Judaism as we know it even existed. There were very few laws mentioned in the original covenant, they came later. Besides, if you have no laws, you really have no religion. The law vs faith idea is a misunderstanding of modern Christians. The NT says you're not justified by the law, doesn't say to throw it out. [quote]christianity was the second covenant, just a different and more personal way to relate to the same god.

So why not just make it like that from the start, if it's the correct way? Why make all those people go through all that stuff in the OT, and then bring a whole different religion?

Also, I was never able to accept that the God described in the OT, is the same as the Christian God as defined in the Nicene creed, or even in the NT.


Quote:

christianity teaches that all jews still have the old covenant with god, neither covenant is wrong, just that the jews were stubbern and wanted a relationship based on law so god because he loved them gave them what they wanted.

How about Arabs/Muslims? You do realise your own Bible says the covenant was made with Abraham (pbuh) and his son Ishmael (pbuh) right? although it later revoked this, and claimed the covenant was with Isaac (pbuh) only, most likely as the Israelites began to fight more with their  Ishmaelite cousins. They had a habit of slandering and denouncing their tribal enemies in their book.


Quote:

no one said god got it wrong.

Actually sprint did.

"The Law" that was intended to reconcile people back to God when they sinned now became a wall.. ..Which was the opposite of what The Law was meant to do.

[/quote]

God made th covenant with Abraham the way he did because that was what abraham with his cultural understanding could comprehend.

in AD 2000 after the roman and greek empires humans had developed into an entirely different culture which could understand different things. People can only relate to what they can comprehend.

It has never been gods way to heavily influence the understanding of people he has always given that job to parents. God works to our limited understanding.

I cant speak for sprint who is a protestant, but i can for over a billion catholics world wide in saying that god had the best relationship the jews in their antiquated understanding could have with him.

it was only when people changed their own philosophy on life that god designed a new system that was easier for them.

In the end God simply wants the love and obedience of a father, he is not concerned whether we are jewish or christian, or muslim

ok guys and gals, i have started a number of threads from off topic comments from here.

they are circumcision, covenant and sacrifice.

please use those  

So, the OT laws still stand as valid.
If one wishes to be chained to a set of laws one is invariably going to trespass.

Or one can accept Jesus, who has paid the trespasses.


Then, some 600 yearts later, mohammad arrives.
He has not been prophesised about in the OT (much) or the NT (at all).
His goes back to the old laws, only makes them MUCH more stringent.
Much more severe.
The punishments are extreme, there is death for many trespasses.
There is no forgiveness for thouse out of his self made religion.
Those within the belief have preferential treatment by other followers.
Mohammads life is one of warring, domination and bloodshed. he approves of assassainations.
He weds a child and has many sex slaves as well as wives.

Under his creed, his followers are to love him first, then family members later, then other followers.






"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.'
But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven.
He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.
If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that?
And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?
Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect."


Matthew 5:43 - 48