Just another example of God turning into a hippie between the old and New Testament. One day he's all "STONE THE SINNERS", next thing ya know, he says, "let him who has no sin cast the first stone." Not very consistent, if you ask me. So much for being "the same yesterday today, and forever."

Almost all adultery offences were commuted to fines (usually the dowry) with the exception of a wife blatantly engaging in shrine prostitution.

So, what you're saying is that the reason Christ stopped the stoning in that case was because stoning wasn't the proper punishment for adultery? If so, then that's fair enough. I used a bad example.

However, the rest of my post still stands.

We are not under the law anymore. Christ's death changed many things. The question is, how much did it change? And do we imperfect humans, in this age, have the right to take the life of other imperfect humans? Especially when we, in our hearts, are just as sinful as they are? Or is that a right that is now reserved for God alone?

Just another example of God turning into a hippie between the old and New Testament. One day he's all "STONE THE SINNERS", next thing ya know, he says, "let him who has no sin cast the first stone." Not very consistent, if you ask me. So much for being "the same yesterday today, and forever."

Like I said, that was the point of Christ's death. He came to fulfill the Law.

God didn't change -- He designed from the beginning for there to be two ages. One age under the Law, and another age after it where the Law has been fulfilled and God's people are instead under grace. It's not like He changed His mind suddenly in between the two ages. From the very start, He planned both ages to happen. I don't see how that's inconsistent.

~Riella

"Sounds the God of the Old Testament is pretty cool to me. Is that "Stone the sinners" quote from the AMB (Atheist's Make-stuff-up Bible)?"

I'm not an atheist, and even I can attest to the Old Testament being extremely violent at parts. I was brought up learning that "God is Good, kind, and merciful. And he loves all the little children. "

The most recent time that I heard that was when I was speaking with a priest from a local church. I told him I had doubts about the God of the old Testament being good and holy and just- and he laughed and told me, "I understand what you're saying, we've all noticed it. The world is a terrible terrible place, and terrible things happen here. Like wars, or abortion- the killing of an innocent child. But God loves us, and we need only accept his love."

I nearly responded to that with this verse: "The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open." (@suppressedbylewis- it doesn't take a genius to see that I'm not trolling around with an "atheists make-stuff up bible". If you don't believe me, then you can go here and find your bible listed. http://bible.cc/hosea/13-16.htm )

This certainly doesn't seem like a God who loves little children or relents calamity. I've found countless instances in the Old Testament where God spreads death and destruction against civilizations and their inhabitants.

How is it that God cannot contradict Himself (2 Timothy 2:13) and yet even within the Old Testament he is called "a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, a God who relents from sending calamity..." that still sends destruction on cities and sends the Israelites to kill all the inhabitants (including women and children)???

I've had trouble with these verses for a long time now. A clear answer would be nice, if it could be given.

I'm not at all an expert on the Old Testament (most of my study has been mainly centered on the NT), but I thought I might try posting my thoughts, in case they help at all.

I'm not an atheist, and even I can attest to the Old Testament being extremely violent at parts. I was brought up learning that "God is Good, kind, and merciful. And he loves all the little children. "

Yes, there definitely are violent parts of the Old Testament. And I'm afraid even the ones you've posted here aren't the worst ones the OT contains. It can definitely seem very contradictory to the God we've learned about in Sunday school.

One thing to consider is this: while we've been told by parents and friends and neighbors and even most pastors that God loves absolutely everyone, are we sure that this is true? After all, misconceptions about the Bible are very common. A lot of people think the adage "God helps those who help themselves" is in the Bible. (It isn't.) It's surprising how many false things about the Bible become so widely accepted among Christians and are even taught in churches. Is it possible that the "God loves everyone" adage is one of them?

I'd love to believe that God does, indeed, love everyone. But strangely, I've never seen anything in the Bible that indicates that He does so. In fact, I've seen things that say the opposite. Take for example, Romans 9 (which is in The New Testament, what's more). In that chapter, God says that he loved Jacob, but hated Esau. (What's even more interesting is that it wasn't even because one acted holy and the other acted sinful. Both of them were still in the womb at that point, and hadn't committed any actions yet -- good or bad.)

Not only that, but Rebekah’s children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac. Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! For he says to Moses,

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

So, if we ignore the things our Sunday school told us, and look at the Bible alone, it appears that God loves some and hates others, even before that person's birth. The people He hates still have a purpose here, which is why he had them be born... but I don't think he necessarily loves them. At least, I haven't seen anything in scripture that indicates he does.

The most recent time that I heard that was when I was speaking with a priest from a local church. I told him I had doubts about the God of the old Testament being good and holy and just- and he laughed and told me, "I understand what you're saying, we've all noticed it. The world is a terrible terrible place, and terrible things happen here. Like wars, or abortion- the killing of an innocent child. But God loves us, and we need only accept his love."

Strange that he would say that. What that priest doesn't seem to understand is that you were referring to things that the Bible says God Himself caused or willed. Whereas the priest seemed to referring to things that happened by other means against God's will. What's more, what the priest said doesn't seem to be in line with what the Bible said.

And if "God loves us, and we need only accept His love", I wonder how that would apply to Esau, who God hated even back when he was still in the womb... Something to think about.

I nearly responded to that with this verse: "The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open." ...
This certainly doesn't seem like a God who loves little children or relents calamity. I've found countless instances in the Old Testament where God spreads death and destruction against civilizations and their inhabitants.

How is it that God cannot contradict Himself (2 Timothy 2:13) and yet even within the Old Testament he is called "a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, a God who relents from sending calamity..." that still sends destruction on cities and sends the Israelites to kill all the inhabitants (including women and children)???

God is slow to anger. It's hard to see that, though, without seeing all the evil in the world that He sees.

Keep in mind that God is Holy -- and being Holy is a huge level of goodness. I don't think it's something humans can even fathom. So, in His eyes, even the tiniest thing we do (like swearing or teasing a sibling) is a very great evil. It may not seem that bad to us, but that's only because: 1. we are evil ourselves, and 2. we're used to seeing these things happen, and so it feels normal. But the Bible says that the punishment of sin is death. We deserve death for even the tiny little bad things we do. When looking at it that way, it actually shows that God is having great mercy on us all the time. We mess up a hundred times just in one day. But God isn't exactly throwing lightning bolts at us. Yet, that really is what we deserve.

However, just because God is slow to anger, that doesn't mean He never gets angry. God is a merciful God, but he is also a God of justice. If I remember right, the cities He sent His wrath on were cities of great evil. Cities that had been given chance after chance to reform their ways, cities that had received warnings from prophets, cities that did not intend to change and never would change. It was an act of mercy in itself just giving them so many chances. But enough was enough. There comes a time when punishment is the good and holy thing to do, even though it seems tragic from our perspective.

~Riella

Just another example of God turning into a hippie between the old and New Testament. One day he's all "STONE THE SINNERS", next thing ya know, he says, "let him who has no sin cast the first stone." Not very consistent, if you ask me. So much for being "the same yesterday today, and forever."

On the contrary, I find this more of a label that man has put on the Bible and less of a truth every time I open the book. (Forgive me if I mentioned this before- I forgot when the last time I posted here was.)

God is a god of love. Meaning he is a god of both mercy and discipline. Though the Old Testament has its violent parts, it has its times of peace as well. Likewise, the New Testament, though explaining God's mercy on the Earth explains his discipline as well.

To many this makes God seem contradictory, but in reality both his mercy and his discipline stem from his love for the world. He wants the world to become a good and just place again, but in order for that to happen it must be cleansed of it's evil. Those who repent and turn away from sin can be forgiven, but those who do not will continue to do evil and must be destroyed. (Bear with me, this makes sense in my head, but I'm horrid at explaining things properly.) What I'm trying to say is that his discipline and mercy both stem from the same love- therefore he isn't contradicting himself, he's doing what he has to to save life. Furthermore if one actually reads the Bible, one will find he shows both sides very equally in both parts of the Bible (at least I have).

I was actually thinking a lot about this subject while reading Ezekiel 18. It describes God's justice in how he will judge each person solely for there own actions, and not the actions of his forefathers. And it very clearly states that while even just one sin is enough to send someone to death, but if a person repents and turns away from sin he is forgiven.

If a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits sin, he will die for it; because of the sin he has committed he will die. But if a wicked man turns away from the wickedness he has committed and does what is just and right, he will save his life. Because he considers all the offenses he has committed and turns away from them, he will surely live; he will not die.

The Old Testament very clearly states that God would rather forgive those who repent than punish those who do not.

...Why will you die, O house of Israel? For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign Lord. Repent and live!

Is that not exactly the same message that is preached throughout the New Testament? That those who repent will be forgiven because Christ died on the Cross, and that those who do not will be sent to death when God rids the world of evil and casts out the Devil during the final battle. And is that not the basic point?

It can definitely seem very contradictory to the God we've learned about in Sunday school.

This brings up a question I've been thinking about for a while: how should children be told about God?

Should we hold nothing back and include all the verses of people drowning in their own vomit, babies being dashed to pieces on rocks, the Great Flood etc.? It would seem like this isn't a good idea. Just as you shouldn't bombard children with the depravity of the world, I don't think they should know this stuff yet. They're not ready. I know that it would repulse me as a child.

At the same time should we give children the idea that God is a Cosmic Push-over? If Sunday school teaches the lamb side of God, while ignoring the lion, won't they get a faith-shattering shock when they realize that God devours sinners?

The important thing to remember is that children don't see the world as that bad of a place. When I was a kid, I thought I could be perfectly content living on Earth forever. Now, that I'm older, I long renewal. I also understand my own depravity much better. When I was a kid I though that because I followed God I was one of the Good Guys.

How did it work out for me? Well, C. S. Lewis was an invaluable help. His picture of Aslan, the beautiful and terrible lion, as well as his other books when I got older, helped me tremendously. But not every child has this dear old professor to teach them.

This brings up a question I've been thinking about for a while: how should children be told about God?

Should we hold nothing back and include all the verses of people drowning in their own vomit, babies being dashed to pieces on rocks, the Great Flood etc.? It would seem like this isn't a good idea. Just as you shouldn't bombard children with the depravity of the world, I don't think they should know this stuff yet. They're not ready. I know that it would repulse me as a child.

At the same time should we give children the idea that God is a Cosmic Push-over? If Sunday school teaches the lamb side of God, while ignoring the lion, won't they get a faith-shattering shock when they realize that God devours sinners?

The important thing to remember is that children don't see the world as that bad of a place. When I was a kid, I thought I could be perfectly content living on Earth forever. Now, that I'm older, I long renewal. I also understand my own depravity much better. When I was a kid I though that because I followed God I was one of the Good Guys.

How did it work out for me? Well, C. S. Lewis was an invaluable help. His picture of Aslan, the beautiful and terrible lion, as well as his other books when I got older, helped me tremendously. But not every child has this dear old professor to teach them.

I don't believe we should teach God is a cosmic pushover, nor do I believe we should contain every gory detail of the Bible when we first tell it to them as children. Balance is key, as always. The Bible is written for adults, and therefore contains some adult content that requires the child to grow a little older before it is shown to them.

We should tell children exactly who God is: a loving God who is merciful, but also a God who believes in justice and will punish the wicked. You don't have to give great detail about blood and guts, etc. to say that there is punishment.

And it's alright for children to be told there is evil in the world. I don't mean we should take them out to some dangerous place where lots of wickedness is going on, just to say, "Look! This is what the world is really like!" That, of course, is a bad idea. Children are very impressionable. Even witnessing a tiny bit of evil will seem like a huge, bad thing to them. Even getting pushed out of the way by a mean kid at the playground will show them that the world is unfair, and that there are "bad guys". And just disobeying their parents and needing to be punished will show them that they themselves have wickedness inside of them (providing that the punishment is handled well, and that things are explained to them properly by the parent).

~Riella

I recently posted a little blog sort of thing on facebook about we should teach children (or anyone, really) about morality, speciically Christian morality, and my explanation was inextricable tied to God, so I think it is relevent to this discussion. I argued that my generation (the focus of the post) does not have a problem saying "no," as so many believe (saying no to alcohol, sex, drugs, laziness, etc.), but nobody has given us something better to say "yes" to. Why do I keep myself from those things? Because I know God's presence, with a clear mind to percieve Him, and the woman He has chosen for me to someday marry, are all going to be much better, and I have faith in that. I believe that children should be taught that life is not about saying no to the "big" sins, as it seems so many are, but it is about saying yes to the best life that only God can provide. Of course many other things are important to learn as we grow, like the grace of Christ and other theological support for this, but I think at the root, young people today lack direction to see that city on a hill that cannot be hidden. Keep in mind I'm only 18 years old myself, barely an adult and very young in my faith, so perhaps my opinon is not the best to go by, but I wish I'd learned these things when I was younger, rather than being told NOT to do certain things. Nothing turns my eyes from lust like thinking about my wife, nothing makes substance abuse disgusting to me like experiencing God with a sober mind, nothing turns me from unrighteousness like the vision of a righteous man.

Excellent post, Andrew. I'm really encouraged by your blossoming faith.
You have it in one - we are the Yes! and Now! generation. Self-discipline and self-sacrifice are becoming rarer and rarer. We want something, we get it. There's no self-control, no discernment, just a desire for instant gratification. We should endeavor to say No! and run from temptation when it becomes too much but we should also first run to the One who made us and paid the price to redeem creation to Him. I also believe there need to be healthy alternatives to giving into temptation. God made us sexual beings, so it's only natural that we crave such things. But you can't just remove the bad practice and expect good things. You need to replace the 'hole' that remains with something good and Godly, otherwise the bad practices will only come back stronger than before and do far more damage. (It's in the Bible).

Very good point, Warrior. I have been learning that it is very important to remember our total inability, as humans, to excape from sin on our own. We definitely need God's help. I tried to resist lust on my own a couple of months ago, and the results were embarrasing, hurtful to others and nearly made a large part of my life fall apart. My intentions were not sinful, but I made the mistake of trying to be righteous on my own power. Now I know, when temptation strikes, pray immediately. Of course, I still mess up all the time and try to handle things on my own, but I can see the result of God's hand, things I would have given into before that I am now able to resis with His help. I agree that we do need to say no to temptation, I hope I didn't come across as if I was ignoring that. I just mean that the point is not to run from sin, but to run toward God (which is also away from sin, but with better intentions, I think, for us and for our relationships with God).

I am glad you are encouraged by my faith, that encourages me. These have been the best months of my life, God blows my mind all the time.

No worries, mate. I didn't think you were ignoring the belief that it was wise to run from sin and say No! when temptation comes your way. I was just adding to the content of your post. I love your idea of praying when temptations come your way. A very wise and godly approach. It's such a simple idea but not one of the first that comes to my mind. Thanks again, my friend!

Keep in mind that God is Holy -- and being Holy is a huge level of goodness.

How can God, being all holy and with a huge level of goodness, stoop to such evils, then? It makes even less sense when it comes to the verse about the mothers carrying unborn children being killed; it's not right that the baby would never get a chance to choose for itself the life it would live (whether it be good or evil). I know that my definition of fair is probably different from most people's here, but I cannot fathom (as you stated, ithy) that God himself would order the deaths of so many of his creations. There are hundreds of verses in the bible of how God loves us; many of which are in the new testament. Jesus tells us to turn the other cheek to those who have hurt us. Why, then, does God not follow his own rule? God even wrote on the Ten Commandments that we shouldn't kill.

So, in His eyes, even the tiniest thing we do (like swearing or teasing a sibling) is a very great evil. It may not seem that bad to us, but that's only because: 1. we are evil ourselves, and 2. we're used to seeing these things happen, and so it feels normal. But the Bible says that the punishment of sin is death.

but the Bible also tells us that God is just and merciful ( http://www.jollynotes.com/inspirational ... cy-verses/ These are a very small portion of the kind of verses I'm talking about).

We mess up a hundred times just in one day.

This is entirely true, I hate to admit.

But God isn't exactly throwing lightning bolts at us. Yet, that really is what we deserve.

Maybe not now, but he did... Soddom and Gomorrah (sp?) were destroyed by fire and brimstone, if I remember correctly. And would we really deserve such death for the very little bad things we do? That depletes any chance of redemption from those; and there are entirely worse things than swearing or teasing a sibling (I get that was just an example, but I find it rather pitiful that death would be deserved from such a petty sin). I mean, God sent the Israelites to destroy cities and kill women and children. How, then, can God do such a thing then expect that over a little sin that we commit that we're so much worse?

How can God, being all holy and with a huge level of goodness, stoop to such evils, then? It makes even less sense when it comes to the verse about the mothers carrying unborn children being killed; it's not right that the baby would never get a chance to choose for itself the life it would live (whether it be good or evil).

Also keep in mind that, because God is omniscient, he also knows what that baby would have become had he been born.

Also, just because a book says babies are not given the chance to live, that does not mean the book is false because it seems unfair to us. After all, we know this happens in real life, regardless of whether the OT is true or false. God allows pregnant mothers to be murdered. There are also stillborn babies. God could have stopped those things from happening, but He allows them. The death of babies is something we'll have to accept whether we accept the OT or not.

I cannot fathom (as you stated, ithy) that God himself would order the deaths of so many of his creations.

Technically, he orders the death of everyone some way or another. We all have our appointed times to die. Just different times and different methods for each one of us. God is the one who gives life. He is also the one who takes it away. (That's part of what being "God" means.) His goal is not to make us immortal here and now in this present life.

There are hundreds of verses in the bible of how God loves us; many of which are in the new testament. Jesus tells us to turn the other cheek to those who have hurt us. Why, then, does God not follow his own rule? God even wrote on the Ten Commandments that we shouldn't kill.

That we shouldn't kill/murder, yes. Humans have no right to murder other humans. We did not give human beings their life, therefore we have no right to take it away. We are not master over any human's soul. But God is. We don't have the same rights God has. If we did, it would be like saying a character in a book has the same rights the author of the book has. We were made by Him. He is our Creator. He decides what happens to us. But if we try to decide what happens to other people, we're stepping out of our boundaries.

but the Bible also tells us that God is just and merciful ( http://www.jollynotes.com/inspirational ... cy-verses/ These are a very small portion of the kind of verses I'm talking about).

Like I said, God is merciful and shows mercy to us every day.

But God isn't exactly throwing lightning bolts at us. Yet, that really is what we deserve.

Maybe not now, but he did... Soddom and Gomorrah (sp?) were destroyed by fire and brimstone, if I remember correctly. And would we really deserve such death for the very little bad things we do? That depletes any chance of redemption from those; and there are entirely worse things than swearing or teasing a sibling (I get that was just an example, but I find it rather pitiful that death would be deserved from such a petty sin). I mean, God sent the Israelites to destroy cities and kill women and children. How, then, can God do such a thing then expect that over a little sin that we commit that we're so much worse?

According to the Bible, the wages of all sin is death. Not just the "really bad ones".

Plus, have you heard about the scripture that says if you have broken just one part of the Law, you have broken all of it?

Another thing is, in OT times there were things people could do for atonement. Sacrifices they could make. It's not as if they were lost without a hope. With examples like Soddom and Gomorrah, these were people who would not even do what they could to atone for their sins. They didn't want to. There was no hope for them. God knows when people are redeemable and when they are not. He's omniscient.

~Riella

SBL. I did enjoy your post. And if you do sign in again I must say the last paragraph was spot on.
Many a time an un-believing individual has tried to prove something in the Bible. Usually starting by asking if I believe the Bible. When I answer affermiitivly then a verse is usually quoted out of context.
To any who have faced this please remember this one response. Tell them that they asked if you believed the Bible. That means as a whole, compleate, not select single verses.
But, this is also a reminder to us all. That we must study God's word, so we are ready to give an answer. And if we do not know, to admit that we do not. Then take the time to seek out the answer.

SBL, I don't believe we need to be ashamed of any part of the Bible. However, there are some parts of the Bible that children should not learn until they are a bit older. By "older", I don't mean 18. The more violent parts could be read to, in my opinion, a six-year-old or seven-year-old (although, this depends on the child's nature). But children who are ages like 3 or 4 are still learning what death even is.

Using Grimm's fairy tales as an example did not really drive the point home in my case, because I wouldn't read that to them until they were older either. And it has nothing to do with modern mindsets. It is just that, as a parent, it's best to get to know your child's nature, and make sure they're at an age that you can explain things to them properly, before showing them any content which could be misunderstood.

It also depends a great deal on the child. I have heard of children so sensitive they started crying when just hearing about someone getting slapped across the face. In the case of that child, it would not be in their best interest to tell them about people getting cut open by swords -- at least, not until they got a bit older and are able to handle such things.

Sex is also discussed quite openly in the Bible. Which is fine, of course. But it would be neither appropriate nor profitable to read those parts to a child -- especially since that child has no idea what sex is yet. And I'm not sure cases of adultery would make the best introduction to what sex is. Therefore, I would wait to read those parts to them until Godly sex had been explained to them properly, and they were old enough to understand it.

~Riella