the prince of peace?

[waitasec]

luke 12:49-53
“I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! 50 But I have a baptism to undergo, and what constraint I am under until it is completed! 51 Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. 52 From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. 53 They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.”


genesis 11
1 Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. 2 As people moved eastward,[a] they found a plain in Shinar and settled there.
3 They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 4 Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”

5 But the LORD came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. 6 The LORD said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. 7 Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.”

8 So the LORD scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. 9 That is why it was called Babel[c]—because there the LORD confused the language of the whole world. From there the LORD scattered them over the face of the whole earth.

how do followers of the bible make up and believe in labeling jesus as the prince of peace?

"may the prince of peace fill your heart in this time of sorrow"

why would the epistles contradict what jesus said....and what god has done?

1 corinthians 14:33
God is not a god of disorder but of peace.

 

[Lindsey-Loo]

luke 12:49-53
“I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! 50 But I have a baptism to undergo, and what constraint I am under until it is completed! 51 Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. 52 From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. 53 They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.”

This verse refers to the finality of deciding to follow Christ. You find that it specifically talks about families, and when a person becomes a Christian, they often feel isolated from the people around them. Following Christ often causes earthly divisions among friends, family, and other groups of people. When a person puts Christ first in their life, they indicate that they are willing to give up the peaceful coexistence they once had with worldly nonbelievers in order to pursue a higher state of living.

genesis 11
1 Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. 2 As people moved eastward,[a] they found a plain in Shinar and settled there.
3 They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 4 Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”

5 But the LORD came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. 6 The LORD said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. 7 Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.”

8 So the LORD scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. 9 That is why it was called Babel[c]—because there the LORD confused the language of the whole world. From there the LORD scattered them over the face of the whole earth.

I don't see a problem here. God commanded the world's early people to go forth and multiply. By resolving to all stay in one place, they were disobeying God's commandments and upsetting his plans for the world. They became confused in their language because God had no desire for all the people to live together in one place. They were scattered as they were meant to be.

how do followers of the bible make up and believe in labeling jesus as the prince of peace?

Jesus, to me, is the Prince of Peace for a couple of key reasons. First, he offers spiritual peace for his believers. I have tried to "go it alone" without God several times in my life, but it was always very tumultuous and I realized I was anything but peaceful when not worshiping my God. Secondly, Christ's message was inherently peaceful. During times of extreme violence in many cases, and where many godly people (Zealots, anyone?) were taking up arms to defend their faith, and everyone expected Jesus to become a physical, worldly King, he was a humble man who offered a message of love. He warned his believers that it would not be easy, as in the first verses you presented, but he ultimately made it clear that Christianity was all about love and peace.

John 8:1-11

1 but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.
But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”
11 “No one, sir,” she said.
“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

 

[waitasec]

This verse refers to the finality of deciding to follow Christ. You find that it specifically talks about families, and when a person becomes a Christian, they often feel isolated from the people around them.

right. so the finality of following jesus is division?
sorry but that principle goes against mine....
what do you think the principle of democracy is?
isn't it the "government by the people who are considered to be the primary source of political power? i see no hint of division there, do you?

I don't see a problem here. God commanded the world's early people to go forth and multiply. By resolving to all stay in one place, they were disobeying God's commandments and upsetting his plans for the world. They became confused in their language because God had no desire for all the people to live together in one place. They were scattered as they were meant to be.

but why wasn't that issue addressed...?
in the previous chapter after the flood they did spread themselves around.
however, in this story what freaked god out was that the unity of the people made them invincible "If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them."
nothing about them disobeying that command...which is pure speculation on your part

Jesus, to me, is the Prince of Peace for a couple of key reasons. First, he offers spiritual peace for his believers. [/I]

oh i see he offers you peace because through faith and only through faith you're saved...

 

[Poisonshady313]

It was Jesus who said "Think not that I have come to bring peace. I bring not peace, but a sword."


Prince of Peace my foot.

 

[Skwim]

It was Jesus who said "Think not that I have come to bring peace. I bring not peace, but a sword."

Which is in accord with what god said.

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

 

[Poisonshady313]

Which is in accord with what god said.

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

Nobody claimed that God was the prince of peace.

If you describe a guy in terms of peace, and he states explicitly that he came not to bring peace... then you have to rethink the way you're going to describe the guy.

 

[emptybe]

]luke 12:49-53
“I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! 50 But I have a baptism to undergo, and what constraint I am under until it is completed! 51 Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. 52 From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. 53 They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.”

From the Orthodox Study Bible: There are two kinds of peace. False peace, to which Christ refers to here, is a shallow harmony that results from ignoring issues of truth. Genuine peace is reconciliation to God through faith in Christ and surrender to truth. Genuine peace has division as a byproduct because not everyone wants truth. In the fallen world, divisions are necessary for truth to be manifest.

genesis 11
1 Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. 2 As people moved eastward,[a] they found a plain in Shinar and settled there.
3 They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 4 Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”

5 But the LORD came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. 6 The LORD said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. 7 Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.”

8 So the LORD scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. 9 That is why it was called Babel[c]—because there the LORD confused the language of the whole world. From there the LORD scattered them over the face of the whole earth.

God did this for our sake. For our salvation. They sought to make a name for themselves and not for the name of the Lord by which man is saved.

I'm not Christian right now... Just playing Devil's advocate

 

[Skwim]

Nobody claimed that God was the prince of peace.

I think Christians who equate Jesus (describe as the P of P in Isaiah) with one of the forms god once took---think trinity here---may well claim just that.

If you describe a guy in terms of peace, and he states explicitly that he came not to bring peace... then you have to rethink the way you're going to describe the guy.

Or, as many do, simply ignore the contradiction and go with the one best suiting one's needs.

 

[waitasec]

From the Orthodox Study Bible: There are two kinds of peace. False peace, to which Christ refers to here, is a shallow harmony that results from ignoring issues of truth. Genuine peace is reconciliation to God through faith in Christ and surrender to truth. Genuine peace has division as a byproduct because not everyone wants truth. In the fallen world, divisions are necessary for truth to be manifest.



God did this for our sake. For our salvation. They sought to make a name for themselves and not for the name of the Lord by which man is saved.

I'm not Christian right now... Just playing Devil's advocate

thats cool...
wonder if the orthodox study bible is reconcilable with the tanakh ?

 

[Lindsey-Loo]

right. so the finality of following jesus is division?
sorry but that principle goes against mine....
what do you think the principle of democracy is?
isn't it the "government by the people who are considered to be the primary source of political power? i see no hint of division there, do you?

Obviously one cannot expect everyone to agree with him just by becoming a Christian. If your argument is that Jesus is divisive because Christians set themselves apart from people they view as worldly, then I'll give you that. It's your own interpretation of peace. You take the word very literally, i.e. Jesus cannot be the Prince of Peace if His followers become emotionally separated from their family and friends.

Other people, myself included, would consider Jesus their Prince of Peace because He brings them peace, regardless of whether their family or friends treat them differently or not. It's really a matter of interpretation, like most things in the Bible.

but why wasn't that issue addressed...?
in the previous chapter after the flood they did spread themselves around.
however, in this story what freaked god out was that the unity of the people made them invincible "If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them."
nothing about them disobeying that command...which is pure speculation on your part

Lol, I can assure you that they weren't invincible. God scattered them, so they certainly failed in their attempt to reject God's plans for them. He saw that they were "powerful" in human terms, referring to their unity in their purpose: to make a name for themselves, demonstrating pride, and the more practical reason for all staying together. However, whatever their motivations, God knew that their plan would lead them away from Him. Pride always comes before the fall. To read the Bible effectively, you can't just read it and say anything not written in the words is pure speculation. You need to do your research about the people of the time, human psychology, even down to their building materials, to draw the proper conclusions about this story.

oh i see he offers you peace because through faith and only through faith you're saved...

Oh, there's varying opinions about whether one is saved by faith or not. I have plenty of faith, but if I died right now, I would probably be hell-bound. Varying opinions.

It was Jesus who said "Think not that I have come to bring peace. I bring not peace, but a sword."


Prince of Peace my foot.

Oh, goodness. History indicates that as far as we know, Jesus never wielded a sword against anyone, and also never permitted his disciples to commit violence against others. There is not a single, solitary verse in the New Testament that commands the church to take up swords.

Keeping all that in mind, I would argue that Christ is talking about a metaphorical sword. He knew that if he fulfilled his purpose on Earth, it would end up dividing the Jews and possibly cut families apart in the process. The purpose of a sword is to cut, and I have always viewed these verses as referring to the way a Christian sometimes has to cut ties with people in the world.

Christ was a peaceful man. To argue any other way is preposterous.

 

[waitasec]

Lol, I can assure you that they weren't invincible. God scattered them, so they certainly failed in their attempt to reject God's plans for them.

i'm sorry but this circular logic...
god "said"...
"then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them."
meaning, united they stand divided they fall...

He saw that they were "powerful" in human terms, referring to their unity in their purpose: to make a name for themselves, demonstrating pride, and the more practical reason for all staying together.

oh i see, so the human spirit should be demoralized and undermined...
come to think of it god really doesn't have any faith in his creation, a common thread in the bible.
if you look at our psychology, in order to feel confident we need to be encouraged and we need to feel a sense of inner faith of ones own.
guess the god of the bible doesn't understand how our brain is wired

"unity in purpose"...what's to be afraid of?
you and i both know there was nothing to be found in the "heavens"

However, whatever their motivations, God knew that their plan would lead them away from Him. Pride always comes before the fall.

pure speculation...
seems to me the god of the bible is hostile against humanity and reverts to tyrannical manipulation to maintain a celestial dictatorship

you are right pride does come before a fall, and the ideal of god is going to spiral down into oblivion...at least that's my hope.

To read the Bible effectively, you can't just read it and say anything not written in the words is pure speculation. You need to do your research about the people of the time, human psychology, even down to their building materials, to draw the proper conclusions about this story.

well lets look at the time of these people. they were ignorant times. had we known then what we know now we wouldn't need to make up a superstition to answer the mysteries that have been solved thus far.
we know why we have disease, we know we are made of star dust,
we know why there are earthquakes and severe weather.
and as far as i can tell, the reason religious dogma has been preserved is because of traditional views that oppose change.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Oh, goodness. History indicates that as far as we know, Jesus never wielded a sword against anyone, and also never permitted his disciples to commit violence against others. There is not a single, solitary verse in the New Testament that commands the church to take up swords.

I seem to remember a verse somewhere about Jesus telling his disciples to carry swords, even if they had to sell the clothes from their backs to do so. If you really want me to, I'll go and dig it up.

Keeping all that in mind, I would argue that Christ is talking about a metaphorical sword. He knew that if he fulfilled his purpose on Earth, it would end up dividing the Jews and possibly cut families apart in the process. The purpose of a sword is to cut, and I have always viewed these verses as referring to the way a Christian sometimes has to cut ties with people in the world.

That's a shame. Judaism is all about unity. We're currently in exile, and we pray constantly to be reUNITED in the land of Israel.... for the in gathering of the exiles (Isaiah 11). We're very family oriented. And if you take a look at Ezekiel 18, it's clear that God would prefer that people doing the wrong thing would turn from their ways and do what's right, instead of being cut off.

Christ was a peaceful man. To argue any other way is preposterous.

Isn't that the same guy who cast demons into a herd of pigs and sent them to drown? Who withered a fig tree for no good reason? Who brought a weapon into the Temple and threw over tables and chased away animals, disrupting the Passover preparations for thousands of Jews? Who said "Mine enemies, who would not have me reign over them, bring them here and slay them before me?"

Yeah, I know that last one was part of a parable... but every bible commentary on that verse that I've seen indicates that it's a reference to the fate of those who would not believe in Jesus.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I seem to remember a verse somewhere about Jesus telling his disciples to carry swords, even if they had to sell the clothes from their backs to do so. If you really want me to, I'll go and dig it up.

If Luke 22vs35-38 is what you had in mind. The reason for the swords was so Jesus could demonstrate that his way was peaceful to return the sword.
Matthew 26v52; Rev 13v10

 

[Herman Tripleton]

These texts cannot be read literally. To do so makes a mockery of their message. It is impossible to select a few passages from here and there and formulate any sort of logical argument.
No one who has ever read, in entirety, any single book in the bible with care and consideration would ever make such an attempt. So there must be an ulterior motive to this thread other than serious religious exegesis.

I suspect you have issue with the corruption of the church rather than the sincerity of the faith.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Isn't that the same guy who cast demons into a herd of pigs and sent them to drown? Who withered a fig tree for no good reason? Who brought a weapon into the Temple and threw over tables and chased away animals, disrupting the Passover preparations for thousands of Jews? Who said "Mine enemies, who would not have me reign over them, bring them here and slay them before me?"
Yeah, I know that last one was part of a parable... but every bible commentary on that verse that I've seen indicates that it's a reference to the fate of those who would not believe in Jesus.

Why do you say withered a fig tree for no good reason?

Jesus answered them at Matt 21v21; Mark 11vs19-33 showing an object lesson for them to have faith in God which they would especially need at the time of Jesus death.
Since the fig tree is connected to their quality of faith needed then the corrupt nation at that time like the fig tree had a false or deceptive appearance.
Just outwardly observing God's regulations. Inward barren of good fruitage due to a lack of faith in Jesus.

What is the fate, so to speak, of the goat-like ones of Matthew 25vs31,32?
So yes, the goat-like ones are part of those slain of Rev 19vs11,14,15;
Isaiah 11v4.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

These texts cannot be read literally. To do so makes a mockery of their message. It is impossible to select a few passages from here and there and formulate any sort of logical argument.
No one who has ever read, in entirety, any single book in the bible with care and consideration would ever make such an attempt. So there must be an ulterior motive to this thread other than serious religious exegesis.
I suspect you have issue with the corruption of the church rather than the sincerity of the faith.

The people of Acts 17vs11,27 checked or searched the Scriptures daily to see if things learned were really so.

Since the Bible is not written ABC like a dictionary one needs to compare corresponding passages or verses by subject or topic arrangement.
That shows the internal harmony among its writers.
Jesus often prefaced his statements with the words, "it is written'
Written where but in the Hebrew OT Scriptures.
So Jesus used logic and reasoning on Scripture as the basis for his belief.

In Matthew chapter 23 did Jesus have an issue with the corruption of the religious leaders as he pronounced 'woes' and his reasons for them?

 

[Lindsey-Loo]

i'm sorry but this circular logic...
god "said"...
"then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them."
meaning, united they stand divided they fall...

Circular logic? As far as I can tell, my statement never relied on its own proposition, but perhaps I'm missing something.

I think that we should narrow your idea down even further to something more like: united, their plan will be achieved; divided, their plan will not be achieved. They were not a threat to God, but a threat to humanity, His creation. A Christian believes that nothing threatens God. He scattered them because he cared for them.

oh i see, so the human spirit should be demoralized and undermined...
come to think of it god really doesn't have any faith in his creation, a common thread in the bible.
if you look at our psychology, in order to feel confident we need to be encouraged and we need to feel a sense of inner faith of ones own.
guess the god of the bible doesn't understand how our brain is wired

"unity in purpose"...what's to be afraid of?

you and i both know there was nothing to be found in the "heavens"

Debating 101: Never place words in your opponent's mouth. He or she will always call you on it. Why should the human spirit be demoralized and undermined? I never said that, so I'm assuming you have some explanation for why you believe that. Hopefully, we can agree that pride is generally a negative emotion. The people were essentially building this great tower to make themselves look good when they were supposed to be giving God the glory. The lesson still applies to the "towers" in our own life. How many Christians try to build themselves up when they should be building God up?

Of course He doesn't have any faith in us. We suck at everything He tells us to do. xD The Bible explains in countless places that no one can do anything to actually be worthy of God. Why should he have faith in a creation that has been screwing up from the beginning?

Confidence in oneself is prideful. We are supposed to have confidence in God, not confidence in ourselves. In everything that I do, I try to give God the glory. I don't always. I am insanely arrogant about most things actually. Surprise. But the lesson applies to those types of things. The consequences of putting faith in yourself instead of faith in the Lord.

As far as your point about their being nothing for the people to find in the heavens, that's my precise point. God realized exactly what we realize; that the people's venture to build a tower to Heaven was totally fruitless. He did them a favor by stopping that one in it's tracks. Going to your psychological point about confidence, how confident would the group have felt if they built a tower to the heavens, realized it was for naught, and all had disgusting inbred children as a result of not spreading out across the world? :no: They would have felt very silly indeed.

pure speculation...
seems to me the god of the bible is hostile against humanity and reverts to tyrannical manipulation to maintain a celestial dictatorship

you are right pride does come before a fall, and the ideal of god is going to spiral down into oblivion...at least that's my hope.

Tehe, you accuse me of speculating and yet you provide no evidence for God being hostile and tyrannical and dictatorlike. The way I see it, God does what He knows is in our best interests. You have yet to disprove that. As for your metaphor for pride and God spiraling into oblivion, I really have no idea what you're talking about. Feel free to elaborate.

well lets look at the time of these people. they were ignorant times. had we known then what we know now we wouldn't need to make up a superstition to answer the mysteries that have been solved thus far.
we know why we have disease, we know we are made of star dust,
we know why there are earthquakes and severe weather.
and as far as i can tell, the reason religious dogma has been preserved is because of traditional views that oppose change.

Let's explore this, shall we? Though the dates for the building of the Tower of Babel range from 2200 BC to 950 BC, a date I find favorable after reading numerous articles on this subject is around 2241 BC. What were the people like at the time? Anything but ignorant. At this time in history, humans were traveling from place to place to herd animals, trade wares, and make new homes. Horses had been tamed and were widely used for transports. Great palaces were being completed all over the world, most notable in Crete. All kinds of jewelry was created from precious metals and worn, especially earrings, which were highly popular at this time. Written languages had been in existence for decades, and glass had just been created. And the very people you dismiss as "ignorant" were busy building complex ziggurats. In fact, most archaeologists agree that the Tower of Babel was actually a ziggurat.

They were superstitious, sure. So are people today. You're a cynic, I get that, but not everyone is. Just because they were, as you put it, "superstitious" does not mean they were ignorant. Only different and the product of their times.

It was into this atmosphere of new and exciting creations and accomplishments that the people of Babel decided to build a great tribute to themselves. And it was that idea that God rejected.

I seem to remember a verse somewhere about Jesus telling his disciples to carry swords, even if they had to sell the clothes from their backs to do so. If you really want me to, I'll go and dig it up.

No need. Uravip2me cited the verse, and here it is in its entirety:
35 Then Jesus asked them, “When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?”
“Nothing,” they answered.
36 He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. 37 It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’[a]; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.”
38 The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.”
“That’s enough!” he replied.



Again, I see a metaphorical sword. What use would the disciples have for a real one? They have no history of violence, either. A sword was, and still is, a sign of bravery and valor. The disciples took the Word of God as their sword, and bravely faced a world that truly did not want to accept it. They wielded the Word, so to speak. Christ often spoke in extended metaphors. His parables are prime examples of this. It often seemed easier for his disciples to understand than if he just straight up said "Take my words and go teach people." I mean, that doesn't even sound poetic either. Not nearly as good.


The fact is, everytime Jesus actually had the opportunity to commit violence, or encourage his disciples to commit violence, he always did the very opposite. When he was arrested, he healed the man his disciple actually attacked with a sword. When he was beaten and cursed at, he did nothing. He was the ultimate man of peace.

That's a shame. Judaism is all about unity. We're currently in exile, and we pray constantly to be reUNITED in the land of Israel.... for the in gathering of the exiles (Isaiah 11). We're very family oriented. And if you take a look at Ezekiel 18, it's clear that God would prefer that people doing the wrong thing would turn from their ways and do what's right, instead of being cut off.

Indeed, but that might not be true for someone who converted to Judaism. Someone from a Muslim family who decided to convert would still find himself separated, cut off from, and divided from his family. The same could go for a former Christian. Yet I would never argue that indicates Judaism is not an inherently peaceful religion. Using that logic, almost any belief system would be considered divisive. Sure, Jesus caused controversy and uproar among the Jews of the time. Some converted, and some did not. But that does not mean Jesus wasn't peaceful. Especially compared to several of the radical groups at the time, Christ's methods were incredibly peaceful.

 

[Lindsey-Loo]

...continued...

Isn't that the same guy who cast demons into a herd of pigs and sent them to drown? Who withered a fig tree for no good reason? Who brought a weapon into the Temple and threw over tables and chased away animals, disrupting the Passover preparations for thousands of Jews? Who said "Mine enemies, who would not have me reign over them, bring them here and slay them before me?"

Yeah, I know that last one was part of a parable... but every bible commentary on that verse that I've seen indicates that it's a reference to the fate of those who would not believe in Jesus.

My family is American Indian, a group that is widely stereotyped as being "people of peace." You know, like the whole nature child thing? My dad is a hunter, and if you want to try to tell me he is not peaceful because he kills animals, that would be just as preposterous as saying Christ wasn't a peaceful man. Especially considering that during his time, animal rights didn't exist. And that's not even mentioning the fact that he drove the demons into the swine to save a PERSON'S life. Seems like a pretty weak argument to me. No one is saying Abraham was violent because he sacrificed animals all the time. Using your logic, I would have to say that the Judaism of the time was much more violent that Christianity because of the plethora of animal sacrifices.



Christ withered a fig tree. Someone go arrest him. The fig tree's feelings must have really been hurt. I pulled about two hundred tomatoes out of my grandmother's garden last summer. I must be a straight up serial killer.



The temple thing is the best argument I've ever heard for Christ being violent. Let's take a look at this case.



First, Christ acted in his anger. Outbursts happen to everyone, and the Bible teaches that anger is a sin only if one dwells upon it. Second, he didn't physically harm anyone. Third, he was totally justified. The people were being blatantly disrespectful to the Lord by making his dwelling place like a marketplace. It was absolutely disgusting, and in the Old Testament people were struck down for much less.


Of course the parable you mention is not about the present. It refers to the time of Christ's return, like many of his parables. And of course, being a parable, we know that Christ does not mean all His enemies should be physically slain. You're right that it references the spiritual fate of those who do not accept God into their lives. It's a difficult concept, but I can't expect God to let evil slide. Christ gives us not a threat, but a warning. It is up to us to decide where we will ultimately end up.

 

[waitasec]

These texts cannot be read literally. To do so makes a mockery of their message. It is impossible to select a few passages from here and there and formulate any sort of logical argument.
No one who has ever read, in entirety, any single book in the bible with care and consideration would ever make such an attempt. So there must be an ulterior motive to this thread other than serious religious exegesis.

I suspect you have issue with the corruption of the church rather than the sincerity of the faith.

i have an issue with religious faith...

 

[waitasec]

Circular logic? As far as I can tell, my statement never relied on its own proposition, but perhaps I'm missing something.

I think that we should narrow your idea down even further to something more like: united, their plan will be achieved; divided, their plan will not be achieved. They were not a threat to God, but a threat to humanity, His creation. A Christian believes that nothing threatens God. He scattered them because he cared for them.

Debating 101: Never place words in your opponent's mouth. He or she will always call you on it. Why should the human spirit be demoralized and undermined? I never said that, so I'm assuming you have some explanation for why you believe that. Hopefully, we can agree that pride is generally a negative emotion. The people were essentially building this great tower to make themselves look good when they were supposed to be giving God the glory. The lesson still applies to the "towers" in our own life. How many Christians try to build themselves up when they should be building God up?

Of course He doesn't have any faith in us. We suck at everything He tells us to do. xD The Bible explains in countless places that no one can do anything to actually be worthy of God. Why should he have faith in a creation that has been screwing up from the beginning?

Confidence in oneself is prideful. We are supposed to have confidence in God, not confidence in ourselves. In everything that I do, I try to give God the glory. I don't always. I am insanely arrogant about most things actually. Surprise. But the lesson applies to those types of things. The consequences of putting faith in yourself instead of faith in the Lord.

As far as your point about their being nothing for the people to find in the heavens, that's my precise point. God realized exactly what we realize; that the people's venture to build a tower to Heaven was totally fruitless. He did them a favor by stopping that one in it's tracks. Going to your psychological point about confidence, how confident would the group have felt if they built a tower to the heavens, realized it was for naught, and all had disgusting inbred children as a result of not spreading out across the world? :no: They would have felt very silly indeed.



Tehe, you accuse me of speculating and yet you provide no evidence for God being hostile and tyrannical and dictatorlike. The way I see it, God does what He knows is in our best interests. You have yet to disprove that. As for your metaphor for pride and God spiraling into oblivion, I really have no idea what you're talking about. Feel free to elaborate.

Let's explore this, shall we? Though the dates for the building of the Tower of Babel range from 2200 BC to 950 BC, a date I find favorable after reading numerous articles on this subject is around 2241 BC. What were the people like at the time? Anything but ignorant. At this time in history, humans were traveling from place to place to herd animals, trade wares, and make new homes. Horses had been tamed and were widely used for transports. Great palaces were being completed all over the world, most notable in Crete. All kinds of jewelry was created from precious metals and worn, especially earrings, which were highly popular at this time. Written languages had been in existence for decades, and glass had just been created. And the very people you dismiss as "ignorant" were busy building complex ziggurats. In fact, most archaeologists agree that the Tower of Babel was actually a ziggurat.

They were superstitious, sure. So are people today. You're a cynic, I get that, but not everyone is. Just because they were, as you put it, "superstitious" does not mean they were ignorant. Only different and the product of their times.

It was into this atmosphere of new and exciting creations and accomplishments that the people of Babel decided to build a great tribute to themselves. And it was that idea that God rejected.

if god wanted to protect his creation from them selves then why did he allow the creation of the atom bomb and then allowed us to use it?
why are we capable of destroying this planet 100 times over?
what is more dangerous, a tower or nuclear warfare?
you can't have it both ways, if you take this preposterous fable literally. that is the circular logic i am speaking of...

did these people know what viruses and bacteria were? did they know what causes earthquakes? could they predict the weather?
ignorance isn't stupidity, btw. i did not imply stupidity. i said they were ignorant, lacking in education or knowledge...you do realize we are more educated and knowledgeable about the world and the cosmos than they were...

we suck at everything he tells us to do

lets take a good look at that statement, shall we?

from this statement we can see that confidence is lacking because we are unable to live up to the tyrannical dictators standards...

why is this a tyrannical dictator? because we were born sick and ordered to be healed.
because free will is what threatens this IDEAL of a celestial being living in our minds while being subjected to mind control. and that's what it's about control...the roman catholic church created a system that turned mans conscience into a commodity for total control over the people.
from the silly story of the fall of man to the scapegoat we depend on to feel better about ourselves...humanity is to be diminished to increase the power of the few

it is a false statement that every inclination of the human heart is evil from childhood. genesis 8:21
children are good and forgiving and do not discriminate, biases are taught...do you have children? you should know this if you do.

prince of peace? how can you be at peace when you are told
no matter how hard you try you will never be good enough unless god lives through you vicariously. pride is good, and i'm not talking about being stubborn. i'm talking about a sense of integrity and self dignity.