[canajan, eh?]

davidk, on Feb 28 2008, 11:39 AM, said:

Whoa!

"It is a choice for you to pick out the passages that talk about favouritism,... " - canajan-eh? (italics added)

I spoke of finding favor and of God having favorites, but never, NEVER, alluded they were at the expense of others, that is - favoritism! I don't mind you getting angry with me, just don't misrepresent me, or God for that matter! I suggest you sharpen up on your methodological principles of interpretation!

Davidk, could it be . . . is it actually possible . . . that you have never asked yourself the meaning and consequences of the Bible's many verses about being favoured? Do you actually think that Old Testament passages about "favour" are not about "favouritism"? Could it be you are using a dictionary of the English language that does not define favourtism as "the unfair favouring of one person or group at the expense of another" (Canadian Oxford Dictionary)? Please do not tell me you think it was okay for Moses and his people to go ahead and take the land of Canaan away from the people who were already living there simply because "God told the Israelites they were favoured." In this case, the favoured people were clearly being given permission by the authors of Exodus to unfairly favour their own group at the expense of another. This is scriptural justification for a land grab on the basis of being favoured.

Davidk, it is your choice to read the "favoured people/chosen people" parts of the Bible, and view them as God's word. You're welcome to do so. But please be honest about your reading of the passages about "favour." Please be honest about the implications of talking about chosen people. You have to decide whether you think the Covenant with Abraham and the Covenant with Moses were and still are God's word, or whether those Covenants are part of an earlier historical and culture context when individuals were struggling with the same moral issues that today inform the Israeli/Palestinian/Middle East conflict.

Davidk, I am well aware that God is the ultimate realist, and that we are called to keep seeking for the truth. Part of the journey of seeking the truth is for us to be fully honest with ourselves about our inner motives.

I believe -- and this is my personal position, a position you are in no way obliged to agree with -- that it is not good enough for those of us who choose the path of Progressive Christianity to leave the "chosen people" parts of the Bible unchallenged. Such parts exist in both the Old Testament and the New Testament. Wherever such ideas exist, they cause great suffering because they give people supposedly-divine-permission to think they're better than somebody else.

Lastly, I would ask you to please reconsider your implication that I am not showing compassion for the Israelis. I have been talking about nothing but our need to feel empathy and compassion for the individuals on all sides of the current conflict. There are no grounds for you to challenge me on the basis of compassion.

Jen

[mystictrek]

Please read "Ilan Pappe on How Israel was Founded on Ethnic Cleansing" and other articles by this important historian. The more I look at the current disaster in Israel-Palestine, the more I realize that history must not be ignored. The fiction of the official Israeli version of history must be challenged and challenged and challenged again until the Israelis and the European and American enablers of Israel come to their senses. Only then can a real just solution be achieved.

love, john + http://www.abundancetrek.com & http://www.abundancetrek.com/blog + "The spirit of liberty is the spirit of not being too sure you are right.” – Judge Learned Hand

This post has been edited by mystictrek: 03 March 2008 - 11:19 AM

[Cynthia]

Wow. Thanks Mystic. Interesting and horrifying.

[davidk]

God favors the obedient over the disobedient, the believers over the idolaters. Is God safe? No, but He is good. His covenant with Abraham was good and just. The disobedient had opportunity to repent, but ignored it. The disposition of the land was neither unfairly nor unjustly in favor of Abraham and his descendants. God is a good moral governor of the universe. The Abrahamic covenant is precursor to the Gospel of Jesus Christ with both Ephesians and Galations underlining its importance to the Gentiles. They state those "strangers" to the Covenant of the promise have been brought near by the blood of Christ (Christians).

Our journey for seeking Truth must begin with God and understanding His purposes to ultimately bring redemption to the world. Your right when you say we should be fully honest with ourselves and our motives. It is to see if we are being obedient to God or do we remain in egotistical rebellion?

The people chosen by God know the great responsibility they have to reveal His truth. Not as being superior to anyone, but like Paul, as unworthy as anyone. It is true humility. It does not take unrighteous advantage of anyone, it is being a servant. Jews and Christians have been bought and brought into the Covenant. With it comes our great responsibility to love God first so we may love man.

Suffering is brought about by man and his rebellious behavior against God.

If the Arab-Muslims were to stop attacking Israel, the war would stop. In your compassion, convince the Muslims to stop the attacks. Not for Israel to stop defending themselves!

[canajan, eh?]

davidk, on Mar 7 2008, 09:55 PM, said:

The people chosen by God know the great responsibility they have to reveal His truth. Not as being superior to anyone, but like Paul, as unworthy as anyone. It is true humility. It does not take unrighteous advantage of anyone, it is being a servant.

Thank you for stating clearly and unambiguously that you believe you are chosen by God. This explains a lot. It tells me that one of your core beliefs is an irresolveable paradox. On the one hand, you believe that you are chosen by virtue of your being baptized. On the other, your believe that being chosen is not about being superior, but is in fact about showing humility.

Paul created this paradox for the early church, and it still haunts Christians today.

It takes a lot of mental, emotional, and spiritual energy to come up with inventive new ways of maintaining both sides of this paradox so that these two mutually incompatible belief systems can be forcibly squeezed into a "toothpaste tube" together. But "being chosen" and "having humility" are antipodal to each other. If you think you're chosen, it means you think that when push comes to shove, God will favour you or give you goodies not granted to others -- favouritism. There's just no way around this reality, Davidk. If you want to be "chosen", you have to take a measure of responsibility for all the harm that is caused by "chosenness." (Need I remind you that the majority of Germans in the 1930's began to think of themselves as chosen?)

If, on the other hand, you really want to be a humble servant of God, you have to let go completely of the chosenness, and focus instead on being just one child of many equal children in God's loving family. Take your pick, Davidk. You can choose to be chosen. Or you can choose to be a humble servant. It's a clear case of either/or. You have to pick, and then you have to take responsibility for the consequences of your pick.

Go ahead, make my day.

Jen

[davidk]

We agree with God that humility is superior to selfishness, pride, and arrogance.

One cannot do the will of God selfishly.

Jesus said in John 6:44 that, no one can come to Me unless chosen by the Father. In John 14:6 that, No one comes to the Father (who lives in Heaven) except by way of the Son. In John 15:5, we can't do anything good without Him (Jesus).

These verses explain in the simplest terms being chosen and the subsequent humility.

No one can say he has salvation by his own choice of God (arrogance). It is in response to God's choice of him (humility). God offers His salvation, through Jesus Christ, to all of us and we can choose to accept His grace (humility) or reject it (arrogance). We are all in need of justification by faith in Christ as Savior; Rom 3:23. No one who desires this graceful offer of the peace of God is refused. When you accept His offer, you then realize you have been... chosen! A very humbling realization.
----------

Let's say you have two children, one genuinely obedient and one genuinely disobedient. When you reward each with what they deserve for doing and not doing their chores, are you unfairly favoring the obedient child when he gets the keys to the car while the disobedient child has to stay home on telephone restriction? The keys were offered to both.
If, instead, you gave the keys to the disobedient child, you would be playing favoritism.

[McKenna]

davidk, on Mar 8 2008, 01:39 PM, said:

Let's say you have two children, one genuinely obedient and one genuinely disobedient. When you reward each with what they deserve for doing and not doing their chores, are you unfairly favoring the obedient child when he gets the keys to the car while the disobedient child has to stay home on telephone restriction? The keys were offered to both.
If, instead, you gave the keys to the disobedient child, you would be playing favoritism.

This reminds me of the parable of the prodigal son...except with a different outcome?

Plus, there's a discrepancy between your analogy and the real world. While you may see it as a clear-cut choice between obedience and disobedience, it's really not. Generally kids who disobey their parents know they are breaking the rules; but non-Christians don't know they're "breaking the rules" by not being Christian, because otherwise they'd be Christian! At least, most would. (I have met one person who believes everything in the Bible, yet chooses to disobey - I think they were Luciferian?) It doesn't make sense to write off all non-Christians as disobedient to God and therefore deserving of whatever punishment God wishes to throw at them.

I have a friend who was raised an atheist. How can she be disobedient to a God she doesn't even believe exists? She can't - or not intentionally, anyway. And if disobedience is unintentional, how can it be punished? That's like the parent saying to the kid, "You broke a rule. You're grounded!" and the kid saying, "What rule? You never told me that!" You could say that God has told them the rules - through the mouths of Christians - but unless God speaks to them Himself, I see no reason why they should obey the rules, since the rules are coming from the mouth of another human. I don't feel I have to believe everything another human says, at least, and especially not what they say about God! "You broke a rule!" "What rule?" "The rule I told your brother to tell you!" "I thought he was lying, I didn't think you'd have a rule like that! Why didn't you tell me yourself??" If the parent tells the brother the rule, but not the other child, and then expects both to follow the rule, isn't the parent favoring the child they tell the rule to, since that child knows for a fact where the rule came from?

I understand your analogy and I would certainly ground the disobedient child if I were the parent. But I just don't see how it applies to real life.

[canajan, eh?]

McKenna, on Mar 8 2008, 04:20 PM, said:

This reminds me of the parable of the prodigal son...except with a different outcome?

Plus, there's a discrepancy between your analogy and the real world. While you may see it as a clear-cut choice between obedience and disobedience, it's really not. Generally kids who disobey their parents know they are breaking the rules; but non-Christians don't know they're "breaking the rules" by not being Christian

Thanks, McKenna. Good comments.

Another good example of the great harm caused by Davidk's paradigm of obedience versus disobedience is the situation with young children. A young child, whose biological brain has not developed to the point of understanding abstract thought, is also incapable of making the choice that Davidk presents. Ditto for those who are mentally challenged. Also for those who have a disabling mental illness (eg. Alzheimer's, schizophrenia, stroke, various genetic disorders, and so on).

The test for the truth of a message about God's love is the applicability of that message to all beings. Davidk's message excludes millions of people who are surely loved by God! In Davidk's Pharisaic system, there is no place for all the sick and disabled people who were specifically included by Jesus in his ministry as being fully worthy of his love, fully worthy of his healing, fully worthy of his time, and fully worthy to sit at the table with him. Davidk's "lepers" are breaking the rules as Davidk sees the rules, and he is convinced that God will simply not be able to favour them (since to favour a young child or a person with dementia would be like giving the car keys to the disobedient child who didn't accept the "offer.")

In Davidk's version of the Prodigal Son, it is the elder son (the one who is angry and judgmental, though very obedient to the Law) who gets the fatted calf. The younger son -- who was foolish and took risks, but humbly acknowledges his mistakes and asks for forgiveness, and finally understands what his father means to him -- not only doesn't get the fatted calf, but his telephone privileges are restricted.

Somehow I don't think Davidk's version is what Jesus had in mind.

I know, Davidk, that you will never back down on what you're saying. You don't seem to have a capacity to deal with ambiguity in your religious experience. You need the Law to be the Law. That is a choice you have made. But don't you find it exhausting to be so judgmental?

Jen

[October's Autumn]

to quote If Grace is True "Why would God punish someone for a lifetime (70 years or so) of sin for eternity?" That would be like punishing your disobedient child by grounding them until they are dead!


This was a discussion we were having at church how non-sensical this idea is. Human's can't possibly comprehend eternity so even if they knew that if they did thus-and-so and hell would happen forever their concept of "forever" is not possible. There is no way for us to make such a choice -- it is beyond our comprehension.

I always wonder what kind of a person worships a god who would send most people to punishment forever... in my experience it says more about the person than it does about God. We do, after all, create God in our own image.

[davidk]

Jen-
Hello? Do you have the capacity not to rabbit trail. It takes a great deal of effort to communicate with someone that takes such great effort to disagree. You have distorted the topic to the point of its being unrecognizable, untruthful, judgemental, and insulting. If you cannot see to calm yourself and be somewhat rational, I'm afraid I will have to relieve myself of you.


McKenna-
Almost did the same thing but came through in the nick of time.
"I understand your analogy and I would certainly ground the disobedient child if I were the parent." It applies to real life because: even having the disobedient child as a favorite would not be a problem, because you offered the keys to both and you must favor the obedient one for his obedience. Had you given the keys to the disobedient boy you would have shown him favoritism because he did not deserve the keys and the damage would be to the obedient child.
The disobedient child's choice to be disobedient was a detriment he chose for himself.

We should go back through March posts and pick up on the topic of Israel vs Arab-Muslims. The obedient to God vs the disobedient to God and who should be favored.

[McKenna]

davidk, on Mar 9 2008, 07:58 PM, said:

McKenna-
Almost did the same thing but came through in the nick of time.
"I understand your analogy and I would certainly ground the disobedient child if I were the parent." It applies to real life because: even having the disobedient child as a favorite would not be a problem, because you offered the keys to both and you must favor the obedient one for his obedience. Had you given the keys to the disobedient boy you would have shown him favoritism because he did not deserve the keys and the damage would be to the obedient child.
The disobedient child's choice to be disobedient was a detriment he chose for himself.

I must admit I'm entirely confused. I got your point the first time. In that actual situation, of course I would ground the disobedient child. But I'm not talking in terms of analogy. I just meant in that real-life situation, I'd ground the disobedient kid.

I don't see how that relates to what I was trying to say, which is that your analogy doesn't actually apply to the whole Christian/non-Christian thing?

[canajan, eh?]

davidk, on Mar 9 2008, 06:58 PM, said:

Jen-
If you cannot see to calm yourself and be somewhat rational, I'm afraid I will have to relieve myself of you.

Gosh, Davidk, I would be so sad if I had to get up each morning, and not read your new posts that tell me and others on this site that we're not really Christians, and that God therefore does not favour us the way he favours you. Davidk, you are upset by the way I respond to your posts. I take your posts, reflect on them, and apply "the logic of consequences" to them. I point out what the practical results of your thinking are. I can't help it if you find the reasonable and probable consequences of your fundamentalist thinking to be unrecognizable, untruthful, judgemental, and insulting. That's something you'll have to deal with. You don't seem to see any connection whatsoever between your belief systems and the systemic injustice of the world. You seem to live in a bubble of religious bliss, where you think can say anything you want about God, Jesus, and everybody else's souls, and where you will not have to experience the practical consequences that flow from these religious thoughts you cherish. But you're living in the world where God has placed you, and you're expected by God (as are we all) to challenge traditions that cause overt suffering and harm. You're then expected to do something about those traditions -- to work within a community of like-hearted people to effect change. You live in the state of Georgia. Georgia has had to deal with a massive amount of fallout from the issue of slavery. Historically speaking, those who chose to own other human beings used the Bible as their justification. Yet these individuals who hid behind scripture could not have been further from God's truth. Davidk, will you come out in public, and denounce the hypocrisy of those historical figures who said they fully honoured God's word, yet did not listen to their own conscience and did not listen to either God or Jesus on the matter of slavery? Will you do that? Will you walk in the path of Jesus in daring to criticize the ancestors of some of the people you live and work with?

If you do not feel comfortable doing so in public, will you do so in your heart -- just between you and God?

Just a thought, Davidk, just a thought.

Jen

[davidk]

McKenna, on Mar 9 2008, 09:48 PM, said:

... what I was trying to say,... is that your your analogy doesn't actually apply to the whole Christian/non-Christian thing?

The characters are metaphorical. In this case, the obedient are the Semites and other Godly people. The disobedient are the anti-Semetic and other un-Godly people. You, the parent, are God. The keys are to Heaven. Telephone restriction is Hell (just ask any teenage girl). The "children" made their choices based on their knowledge, love, respect, and obedience of you. They knew what the results were going to be, they made their choice. Each got what was promised.

Quote

October's Autumn
to quote If Grace is True "Why would God punish someone for a lifetime (70 years or so) of sin for eternity?" That would be like punishing your disobedient child by grounding them until they are dead!

I hope I may comment on this sufficiently. I also hope we agree that Grace is a gift from God.
While a gift is obviously given, likewise, a gift is recieved, rejected or ignored. Does anyone have any unopened wedding presents, or a gift you may have just put in a closet somewhere, given away, or just thrown away? The gift of Grace has been treated the same.
God is soveriegn and He has given man free will. He has the authority to offer us this gift of eternal Grace and we have the authority to either accept His gift, or reject it. He gives us the choice, explains it, demonstrates it, promises the results, we decide. It is the consequence of our decision on His gift that will determine our reward (Heaven or Hell).

[McKenna]

davidk, on Mar 10 2008, 10:10 AM, said:

The characters are metaphorical. In this case, the obedient are the Semites and other Godly people. The disobedient are the anti-Semetic and other un-Godly people. You, the parent, are God. The keys are to Heaven. Telephone restriction is Hell (just ask any teenage girl). The "children" made their choices based on their knowledge, love, respect, and obedience of you. They knew what the results were going to be, they made their choice. Each got what was promised.

Oh my Lord. Sorry for my frustration, but I have already clearly stated - twice - that I understood your analogy as you first presented it! My very first post in response to your analogy clearly stated this, and I went on to reject this analogy as not applicable to the real world. If you would like to actually respond to my ideas - rather than restating an idea over and over which I have already said I understand - I would appreciate it.

davidk, on Mar 10 2008, 10:10 AM, said:

He has the authority to offer us this gift of eternal Grace and we have the authority to either accept His gift, or reject it. He gives us the choice, explains it, demonstrates it, promises the results, we decide. It is the consequence of our decision on His gift that will determine our reward (Heaven or Hell).

This is what I was arguing against. If my argument was unclear because it was stated within the confines of the parent-child analogy, let me know and I can restate it.

[TheGreatWhiteBuffalo]

Quote

I hope I may comment on this sufficiently. I also hope we agree that Grace is a gift from God.
While a gift is obviously given, likewise, a gift is recieved, rejected or ignored. Does anyone have any unopened wedding presents, or a gift you may have just put in a closet somewhere, given away, or just thrown away? The gift of Grace has been treated the same.
God is soveriegn and He has given man free will. He has the authority to offer us this gift of eternal Grace and we have the authority to either accept His gift, or reject it. He gives us the choice, explains it, demonstrates it, promises the results, we decide. It is the consequence of our decision on His gift that will determine our reward (Heaven or Hell).

See there it is again, (Heaven or Hell) how about Heaven or nothing? Take another look into the Universe, the Heavens and see if beyond the light is there anything? Could a soul be cast out into nothing? An eternal soul could be lost forever cast into an infinite nothing far away from communion with a pure and holy GOD... How else could it be written that no evil will enter the presence of GOD? Check out Job, I think the book of Job agree's that there will be no evil in Heaven as that is a universal law and truth, then how can you ever justify the presence of evil before a pure and holy GOD? The only way this could be true is that the story is flawed for if GOD is omnipotent then GOD knew and allowed the evil to happen to Job and now you have to agree that GOD has missed the mark... In Proverbs we read that GOD allows the rain to fall on the just and the unjust equally, so that means that the Blessings of GOD are not given only to the Christians as Evil can happen to anyone at anytime. The only way to fix this problem is to expose the evil so that all can see, the light must shine on the dark places for all to know.

The whole problem is created by the hand of man trying to manipulate the masses for the profit of the leaders. The flaw is in all aspects of Government through the Church we need good laws that are enforced with authority and diligence...

[davidk]

McKenna-

Perhaps I misinterpreted when you gave me a response saying how you understood and when you made a real life application by saying, "...in that real-life situation, I'd ground the disobedient kid." You led me to believe we were on the same page, but perhaps my metaphor was unclear, for you said, "...doesn't actually apply to the whole Christian/non-Christian thing?". Ergo, I had to explain it was not about Christians, but Gods favor in regard to the obedient Semites.

TGWB-

So, we are in agreement about the Grace of God being His gift to us.

Autumn-

"I always wonder what kind of a person worships a god who would send most people to punishment forever... in my experience it says more about the person than it does about God. We do, after all, create God in our own image." - Autumn

Where does this fit in?

[October's Autumn]

Quote

Autumn-

Quote

I always wonder what kind of a person worships a god who would send most people to punishment forever... in my experience it says more about the person than it does about God. We do, after all, create God in our own image.

Where does this fit in?

Had I not seen you play dumb already this morning I would think that it was beyond you to do so. I am forever optimistic.

BTW, if you use the "quote" you'll have more easy to read posts.

[McKenna]

davidk, on Mar 11 2008, 01:22 AM, said:

McKenna-

Perhaps I misinterpreted when you gave me a response saying how you understood and when you made a real life application by saying, "...in that real-life situation, I'd ground the disobedient kid." You led me to believe we were on the same page, but perhaps my metaphor was unclear, for you said, "...doesn't actually apply to the whole Christian/non-Christian thing?". Ergo, I had to explain it was not about Christians, but Gods favor in regard to the obedient Semites.

I guess we're just misunderstanding each other all over the place.

Your analogy was first brought up in post #26:

davidk, on Mar 8 2008, 02:39 PM, said:

No one can say he has salvation by his own choice of God (arrogance). It is in response to God's choice of him (humility). God offers His salvation, through Jesus Christ, to all of us and we can choose to accept His grace (humility) or reject it (arrogance). We are all in need of justification by faith in Christ as Savior; Rom 3:23. No one who desires this graceful offer of the peace of God is refused. When you accept His offer, you then realize you have been... chosen! A very humbling realization.
----------

Let's say you have two children, one genuinely obedient and one genuinely disobedient. When you reward each with what they deserve for doing and not doing their chores, are you unfairly favoring the obedient child when he gets the keys to the car while the disobedient child has to stay home on telephone restriction? The keys were offered to both.
If, instead, you gave the keys to the disobedient child, you would be playing favoritism.

Due to the fact that the analogy was located right after you mentioned being "chosen" (in other words, "favored") by accepting Christ as Savior, and by the words "Let's say" you seemed to be implying that the analogy related to the preceding paragraph, I assumed that your analogy had to do with Christians being "favored" by God by getting to go the Heaven ("have the keys") while non-Christians are not favored because they "reject the keys" by being "disobedient" and therefore go to Hell.

Where in there did I misunderstand you?

[davidk]

McKenna, on Mar 11 2008, 04:25 PM, said:

Your analogy was first brought up in post #26:

I can see where you got that. Isreal was the 'main' topic, and the concept of 'chosen' was challenged so I ended up with both topics on the same page trying to address Jen. I put a line in there to try and delineate them from each other. My Bad!

Autumn-
PLAYING dumb?

I do have a question here, when you said;"We do, after all, create God in our own image." I can't tell whether it was facetious or not. I hope it is.

Quote

"...to quote If Grace is True , ..."

Where do we find knowledge of God's Grace? (in Hebrew, and in Grk [although not commonly], 'Grace' is also translated as 'favor'. hmmm?)
We agree that God sending anyone to Hell is not in His nature.
We abandon His Grace by rejecting the gift of faith in Jesus Christ, forever. Even if you don't agree with this, 'forever' is completly understood. It is ludicrous to think 'forever' is not an understandable concept. It means forever, for eternity. To tell anyone you don't understand that it is a very long time that doesn't end, you're lying.

TGWB-
Man does evil within the sight of God everyday. God is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent. He allows us free will. There is judgement.
In Job, the Adversary was allowed to test Job's Faithfulness. Job lived up to the hype. He was restored and blessed by God even more than he was before.

Quote

The whole problem is created by the hand of man...

You hit that nail!

[McKenna]

davidk, on Mar 12 2008, 02:08 AM, said:

I can see where you got that. Isreal was the 'main' topic, and the concept of 'chosen' was challenged so I ended up with both topics on the same page trying to address Jen. I put a line in there to try and delineate them from each other. My Bad!

Ah. Sorry for the misunderstanding!