Do you think the God described in the bible is a sore loser? (Jesus, Moses)

[GodLovesUs]

Well first of all, I believe in God but not necessarily the bible. Here is my argument after reading a few books on the bible and here is my first logical assumption:

It looks like the God at least in the OT is a vengeceful God and someone who hates losing. here is a quote from Leviticus

20:1 Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,

20:2 "Moreover, you shall tell the children of Israel, 'Anyone of the children of Israel, or of the strangers who live as foreigners in Israel, who gives any of his seed to Molech; he shall surely be put to death. The people of the land shall stone him with stones.

20:3 I also will set my face against that person, and will cut him off from among his people because he has given of his seed to Molech, to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name.

20:4 If the people of the land all hide their eyes from that person, when he gives of his seed to Molech, and don't put him to death;

20:5 then I will set my face against that man, and against his family, and will cut him off, and all who play the prostitute after him, to play the prostitute with Molech, from among their people.




My question is why would God order other people to murder anyone of Molech. Later on the NT Jesus says who ever thinks he has not sinned cast the first stone. If Jesus is part of the Holy trinity there seems to be an incosistent depiction. Anyone who can explain please do so.


We all remeber the story of Noah of which since the bible God says everything is evil that he will have a clean slate of the world. I hope who have access to the real artifacts, maybe they can enlighten me why I should not thing the OT bible God hates to lose.

As usual my apologies to God if the bible are his words but still it doesn't make sense to me.

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

Well buddy,

I must admit, I am stumped by this as well. Trying to make logical sense of the Bible started me on to a path that led me to Agnosticism/Athiesm/Skepticism, so if you value your faith, my personal advice is not to think about this stuff too much, and whatever you do, don't attempt to apply logic to it.

B.

[GodLovesUs]

Originally Posted by MdmSzdWhtGuy

Well buddy,

I must admit, I am stumped by this as well. Trying to make logical sense of the Bible started me on to a path that led me to Agnosticism/Athiesm/Skepticism, so if you value your faith, my personal advice is not to think about this stuff too much, and whatever you do, don't attempt to apply logic to it.

B.

Appreciate the comment, its just so hard to see that thousands of years people followed a confusing book as the path to God. I wish I had a time machine.

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

Originally Posted by GodLovesUs

Appreciate the comment, its just so hard to see that thousands of years people followed a confusing book as the path to God. I wish I had a time machine.

I have a term to apply to it. Social Inertia.

B.

[greatcalgarian]

Originally Posted by GodLovesUs

Appreciate the comment, its just so hard to see that thousands of years people followed a confusing book as the path to God. I wish I had a time machine.

Blind faith, blind faith, blind faith, and blind faith is the answer to your question. No need to find a time machine.

[Victor]

Originally Posted by GodLovesUs

Appreciate the comment, its just so hard to see that thousands of years people followed a confusing book as the path to God. I wish I had a time machine.

Certainly it would be difficult if done so on your own faculties. That book was never intended to have one person wrestle over it by himself. It's a collection of writings of the family of God. So it's to be expected that somethings would not be properly understood. Perspicuity was intended to be accomplished through the family. Trying to do it any other way will result in a recipe for chaos.

[jewscout]

Originally Posted by GodLovesUs

Well first of all, I believe in God but not necessarily the bible. Here is my argument after reading a few books on the bible and here is my first logical assumption:

It looks like the God at least in the OT is a vengeceful God and someone who hates losing. here is a quote from Leviticus

20:1 Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,

20:2 "Moreover, you shall tell the children of Israel, 'Anyone of the children of Israel, or of the strangers who live as foreigners in Israel, who gives any of his seed to Molech; he shall surely be put to death. The people of the land shall stone him with stones.

20:3 I also will set my face against that person, and will cut him off from among his people because he has given of his seed to Molech, to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name.

20:4 If the people of the land all hide their eyes from that person, when he gives of his seed to Molech, and don't put him to death;

20:5 then I will set my face against that man, and against his family, and will cut him off, and all who play the prostitute after him, to play the prostitute with Molech, from among their people.




My question is why would God order other people to murder anyone of Molech. Later on the NT Jesus says who ever thinks he has not sinned cast the first stone. If Jesus is part of the Holy trinity there seems to be an incosistent depiction. Anyone who can explain please do so.


We all remeber the story of Noah of which since the bible God says everything is evil that he will have a clean slate of the world. I hope who have access to the real artifacts, maybe they can enlighten me why I should not thing the OT bible God hates to lose.

As usual my apologies to God if the bible are his words but still it doesn't make sense to me.

something i will address w/ tanach in hand after shabbat. I won't have time today.

[dawny0826]

My question is why would God order other people to murder anyone of Molech. Later on the NT Jesus says who ever thinks he has not sinned cast the first stone. If Jesus is part of the Holy trinity there seems to be an incosistent depiction. Anyone who can explain please do so.

Remember what's contained within the OT and the NT of the Bible.

God's covenant with man through Jesus Christ is established within the NT of the Bible, not the OT.

In the book of Leviticus...God is establishing his covenant with His children...he is setting the laws and guidelines in which he expects his Children to follow. But to understand Leviticus...you should probably FIRST read the entire book of Genesis and Exodus...so that you understand HOW God delivered his people and fulfilled His promises to His people.

It's not hard to read several verses out of context and to form a negative impression of what you're reading when you're picking and choosing several verses without looking at the context of the text SURROUNDING those verses.

It's like picking up any story book...reading several pages in the middle and then throwing up your hands and declaring..."This just doens't make sense." Well, no...it's not going to make any sense...you don't know how the characters got to where they are at that present time because you didn't read the text prior to that section and you don't know what's going to happen in the pages to follow because you're stuck on that one section.

We all remeber the story of Noah of which since the bible God says everything is evil that he will have a clean slate of the world. I hope who have access to the real artifacts, maybe they can enlighten me why I should not thing the OT bible God hates to lose.

Do you remember God's promise to his people after the flood? He promised that he would NEVER do such a thing to us again...and HAS he? No. God has fullfilled his promise to us. Instead of wiping us all off the face of the earth because our wicked ways...which He very well could have done...He sent Jesus Christ to be the ultimate atonement for our sins...so that we COULD be saved from sin. Why? Because he LOVES us.

"For God so LOVED the world, he sent his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him, shall not perish but have everlasting life." John 3:16

He doesn't cease to keep His word but man does a fine job of discounting it.

As usual my apologies to God if the bible are his words but still it doesn't make sense to me.

And it probably won't unless you fully open your heart to His Word.

[Searcher of Light]

Originally Posted by GodLovesUs

Well first of all, I believe in God but not necessarily the bible. Here is my argument after reading a few books on the bible and here is my first logical assumption:

It looks like the God at least in the OT is a vengeceful God and someone who hates losing. here is a quote from Leviticus

20:1 Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,

20:2 "Moreover, you shall tell the children of Israel, 'Anyone of the children of Israel, or of the strangers who live as foreigners in Israel, who gives any of his seed to Molech; he shall surely be put to death. The people of the land shall stone him with stones.

20:3 I also will set my face against that person, and will cut him off from among his people because he has given of his seed to Molech, to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name.

20:4 If the people of the land all hide their eyes from that person, when he gives of his seed to Molech, and don't put him to death;

20:5 then I will set my face against that man, and against his family, and will cut him off, and all who play the prostitute after him, to play the prostitute with Molech, from among their people.

A quick net search of "molech" pin points this set of verses. Molech is a fire deity who was worshiped by sacrificing one's children to it. The word "seed" refers to children or offspring. In the verses, God's punishment of such child sacrifices is because of two reasons: it is murder, and it is idolatry. Both of which God does not tolerate as both the OT and the NT illustrate.

Originally Posted by GodLovesUs

My question is why would God order other people to murder anyone of Molech. Later on the NT Jesus says who ever thinks he has not sinned cast the first stone. If Jesus is part of the Holy trinity there seems to be an incosistent depiction. Anyone who can explain please do so.


We all remeber the story of Noah of which since the bible God says everything is evil that he will have a clean slate of the world. I hope who have access to the real artifacts, maybe they can enlighten me why I should not thing the OT bible God hates to lose.

As usual my apologies to God if the bible are his words but still it doesn't make sense to me.

The verses containing the idea of the non-sinner casting the first stone:

John 8:
3And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
4They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

5Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

6This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

7So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

8And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

9And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

10When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

11She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

The key is the note whom Jesus was directing the statement. He was directing the statement specifically to the scribes and Pharisees. Apparently, some of these men had commited sins similar to the adultress by the tone of verse 9. Note too they were trying to "trip up" Jesus by bringing the women to Him in the first place.

Another key element needs to be understood. During this time only Roman government officials had the power to condemn a person to death. If Jesus would have said simply "she should be stoned" He would have fallen into their trap and be accused of usurping a right only Rome had.

Now the principle this teaches us is this: we must examine ourselves before we can consider condemning another for sin.

[Searcher of Light]

Originally Posted by GodLovesUs

Well first of all, I believe in God but not necessarily the bible. Here is my argument after reading a few books on the bible and here is my first logical assumption:

It looks like the God at least in the OT is a vengeceful God and someone who hates losing. here is a quote from Leviticus

20:1 Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,

20:2 "Moreover, you shall tell the children of Israel, 'Anyone of the children of Israel, or of the strangers who live as foreigners in Israel, who gives any of his seed to Molech; he shall surely be put to death. The people of the land shall stone him with stones.

20:3 I also will set my face against that person, and will cut him off from among his people because he has given of his seed to Molech, to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name.

20:4 If the people of the land all hide their eyes from that person, when he gives of his seed to Molech, and don't put him to death;

20:5 then I will set my face against that man, and against his family, and will cut him off, and all who play the prostitute after him, to play the prostitute with Molech, from among their people.

A quick net search of "molech" pin points this set of verses. Molech is a fire deity who was worshiped by sacrificing one's children to it. The word "seed" refers to children or offspring. In the verses, God's punishment of such child sacrifices is because of two reasons: it is murder, and it is idolatry. Both of which God does not tolerate as both the OT and the NT illustrate.

Originally Posted by GodLovesUs

My question is why would God order other people to murder anyone of Molech. Later on the NT Jesus says who ever thinks he has not sinned cast the first stone. If Jesus is part of the Holy trinity there seems to be an incosistent depiction. Anyone who can explain please do so.


We all remeber the story of Noah of which since the bible God says everything is evil that he will have a clean slate of the world. I hope who have access to the real artifacts, maybe they can enlighten me why I should not thing the OT bible God hates to lose.

As usual my apologies to God if the bible are his words but still it doesn't make sense to me.

The verses containing the idea of the non-sinner casting the first stone:

John 8:
3And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
4They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

5Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

6This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

7So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

8And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

9And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

10When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

11She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

The key is to note whom Jesus was directing the statement. He was directing the statement specifically to the scribes and Pharisees. Apparently, some of these men had commited sins similar to the adultress by the tone of verse 9. Note too they were trying to "trip up" Jesus by bringing the women to Him in the first place.

Another key element needs to be understood. During this time only Roman government officials had the power to condemn a person to death. If Jesus would have said simply "she should be stoned" He would have fallen into their trap and be accused of usurping a right only Rome had.

Now the principle this teaches us is this: we must examine ourselves before we can consider condemning another for sin.