Evidence for God from Science

rare96ws6 wrote:No point in continuing? Why? I asked a simple question, although from the comments it seems it is a tough one to rationalize. You are not debating an atheist here who cares nothing for the Bible and understanding it. I would never do such a thing as murder a child or anyone for that matter. You misinterpret what I wrote if you think I want to go against what God's commandments are. I simply stated that sinning once seems the lesser of two evils compared to my child ending up in Hell for eternity. Wouldn't you agree?

If a Christian did such a thing, they could repent and ask for God's forgiveness as the Bible states we should do. It seems more cruel to allow a child to grow up and then end up in hell if they did not come to God, then to murder them before they reach the age of accoutability. This is really troubling to me, not some off the wall comment to poke fun at Christains. I grew up in a Christain home and now as an adult, trying to find the truth, I have such questions.

Sin entered the world and then death.

Your argument, or question, does not deal with this issue. The fallen world in which we live is not God's fault but ours - we make it so. That is but one reason from many why premeditated murder is wrong. Now look at this bible passage...

2 Kings 23:10, "And he defiled Topheth, which is in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, that no man might make his son or his daughter pass through the fire to Molech." NKJV

This passage describes the ancient religious practice of offering up an infant or child in order to gain power from Baal deities. Such would burn a child alive. This practice was forbidden by God. Yet, according to you, this is a noble practice worthy to do...

The problem is with us not God. Think of God and how he freely gave us reason and intelligence - any denial of these to us would prove that God is indeed not all powerful enough to work with and even through our own decisions and choices even when these are wrong. Being able to do so indeed proves great God's great justice, omnipotence, and love true.

We likewise have to work through our own decisions and guide our children towards God leaving to them that decision for our own offspring to decide upon. This is fair. Denying that is not. Due to sin, children die. God's grace has a special place for them but he also holds one to account for denying them the ability to come into their own being. He sees what they could become; we cannot, either for bad or good.

You seem to be more concerned about rationalizing a way of escaping the judgment and justice of God by using children in your argument. If humanity would not have fallen into sin — this would not even be an issue.

God hates the killing of children because it denies them life — something even God will not do as the scriptures clearly teach. Though we all will die a mortal death and our life is like spilt water upon the ground which we cannot gather back up again. God does not take away life. He placed eternity into our hearts. He is a God of the living and not the dead. God will not deny himself.

Due to sin, it banishes us away from God, forever; yet, God provides a way (the cross) in which some of the banished ones can return to him and be restored back into fellowship with His light all through Jesus Christ. The choice is before us all — remain banished because that is what you desire above all else or return back to the Lord to be made pure again on His terms — not ours.

You think the killing of children spares them hell and thus a good thing; yet, you deny them life and that life cries against your own soul in the Day of Judgment. A person sends themselves to Hell by their own choices. The idea you entertain about justifying killing children testify against you and the evil within you as it seeks to kill, rob, and destroy in ways that slanders God in order to bring Him disrespect. I hope I misread your statements but if not — that is a vulgar idea and needs reported to the police.

Malachi 2:15, “Did he not make them one, with a portion of the Spirit in their union? And what was the one God seeking? Godly offspring. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and let none of you be faithless to the wife of your youth.” ESV

A person sends themselves to Hell. God sends warnings and pleadings to people in various ways to return to him. For that you find fault with God? One way God pleads is found in how we raise our children so they will come to know the Lord. It is not cruel to allow a child to grow up to become their own being.

Also not allowing them life in many various ways such as neglect, abuse, crushing the spirit, etc, is just as bad as well. That is contrary to God's ways and original intent. According to what I am hearing you say is this: It would be far better for God to just wipe of humanity altogether into non-existence than have a place called hell. Is this correct?

If so, you need to wake up and realize that such claims seek to tempt God to deny himself, his word, his gifts, his callings… Tragic and as painful is the death of a little one, it is due to human sin and it effects, or even the outcome of natural disasters, or disease — despite all this, it is comforting to know where they'll be.

Question is for us who linger — will we be meeting them again in Heaven or found like a beast? The real cruelty is for human beings to justify the slaughter of our little ones which just proves the real beast of sin one has become. .

Ecclesiastes 3:18, “I said in my heart with regard to the children of man that God is testing them that they may see that they themselves are but beasts.” ESV
-
-
-

rare96ws6 wrote: No point in continuing? Why?.

Well, if this is not too rude an answer, Because you are talking nonsense. No offense brother.

rare96ws6 wrote: I asked a simple question, although from the comments it seems it is a tough one to rationalize. You are not debating an atheist here who cares nothing for the Bible and understanding it. I would never do such a thing as murder a child or anyone for that matter. You misinterpret what I wrote if you think I want to go against what God's commandments are. I simply stated that sinning once seems the lesser of two evils compared to my child ending up in Hell for eternity. Wouldn't you agree? If a Christian did such a thing, they could repent and ask for God's forgiveness as the Bible states we should do. It seems more cruel to allow a child to grow up and then end up in hell if they did not come to God, then to murder them before they reach the age of accoutability. This is really troubling to me, not some off the wall comment to poke fun at Christains. I grew up in a Christain home and now as an adult, trying to find the truth, I have such questions.

Right, first of all you are (unintentionally, perhaps) taking God for a schmuck. Imagine a rapist, who does as he pleases, raping and violating women, safe in the knowledge that, come the end, he can "repent" and have eternity because God says so...Do you think God cannot see through this? Indeed...So, if God can see through this, then it makes the "do wicked - repent = eternity" ad infinitum complete and utter nonsense; what the bible won't tell you is that God is not a schmuck, and forgiveness has to come with salvation, and salvation has to come from within. Your point, while superficially plausible on the surface, becomes completely absurd in the light of a loving God. No, it is not cruel to let your child grow up and find his/her way on his/her own. As a parent and a Christian you are duty bound to give Christ to your child. If your child grows to reject Christ and is on a path to oblivion then you are no less duty bound to urge your child to reconsider, using the many wonderful tools that a Christian has at his disposal. What you do not do, and what is in no way rational - hence the difficulty in rationalising - is sacrifice your child *just in case* he/she turns out rejecting God. This is just defeatest, anti-christian irrationality in the extreme.

"This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live and that you may love the Lord your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him. For the Lord is your life, and he will give you many years in the land he swore to give to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob." Deuteronomy 30:19-20

Choose life - choose God = have eternity. We can only do our best for our children, the rest is in God's hands...

Peace brother

B. W. wrote:

rare96ws6 wrote:No point in continuing? Why? I asked a simple question, although from the comments it seems it is a tough one to rationalize. You are not debating an atheist here who cares nothing for the Bible and understanding it. I would never do such a thing as murder a child or anyone for that matter. You misinterpret what I wrote if you think I want to go against what God's commandments are. I simply stated that sinning once seems the lesser of two evils compared to my child ending up in Hell for eternity. Wouldn't you agree?

If a Christian did such a thing, they could repent and ask for God's forgiveness as the Bible states we should do. It seems more cruel to allow a child to grow up and then end up in hell if they did not come to God, then to murder them before they reach the age of accoutability. This is really troubling to me, not some off the wall comment to poke fun at Christains. I grew up in a Christain home and now as an adult, trying to find the truth, I have such questions.

Sin entered the world and then death.

Your argument, or question, does not deal with this issue. The fallen world in which we live is not God's fault but ours - we make it so. That is but one reason from many why premeditated murder is wrong. Now look at this bible passage...

2 Kings 23:10, "And he defiled Topheth, which is in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, that no man might make his son or his daughter pass through the fire to Molech." NKJV

This passage describes the ancient religious practice of offering up an infant or child in order to gain power from Baal deities. Such would burn a child alive. This practice was forbidden by God. Yet, according to you, this is a noble practice worthy to do...

The problem is with us not God. Think of God and how he freely gave us reason and intelligence - any denial of these to us would prove that God is indeed not all powerful enough to work with and even through our own decisions and choices even when these are wrong. Being able to do so indeed proves great God's great justice, omnipotence, and love true.

We likewise have to work through our own decisions and guide our children towards God leaving to them that decision for our own offspring to decide upon. This is fair. Denying that is not. Due to sin, children die. God's grace has a special place for them but he also holds one to account for denying them the ability to come into their own being. He sees what they could become; we cannot, either for bad or good.

You seem to be more concerned about rationalizing a way of escaping the judgment and justice of God by using children in your argument. If humanity would not have fallen into sin — this would not even be an issue.

God hates the killing of children because it denies them life — something even God will not do as the scriptures clearly teach. Though we all will die a mortal death and our life is like spilt water upon the ground which we cannot gather back up again. God does not take away life. He placed eternity into our hearts. He is a God of the living and not the dead. God will not deny himself.

Due to sin, it banishes us away from God, forever; yet, God provides a way (the cross) in which some of the banished ones can return to him and be restored back into fellowship with His light all through Jesus Christ. The choice is before us all — remain banished because that is what you desire above all else or return back to the Lord to be made pure again on His terms — not ours.

You think the killing of children spares them hell and thus a good thing; yet, you deny them life and that life cries against your own soul in the Day of Judgment. A person sends themselves to Hell by their own choices. The idea you entertain about justifying killing children testify against you and the evil within you as it seeks to kill, rob, and destroy in ways that slanders God in order to bring Him disrespect. I hope I misread your statements but if not — that is a vulgar idea and needs reported to the police.

Malachi 2:15, “Did he not make them one, with a portion of the Spirit in their union? And what was the one God seeking? Godly offspring. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and let none of you be faithless to the wife of your youth.” ESV

A person sends themselves to Hell. God sends warnings and pleadings to people in various ways to return to him. For that you find fault with God? One way God pleads is found in how we raise our children so they will come to know the Lord. It is not cruel to allow a child to grow up to become their own being.

Also not allowing them life in many various ways such as neglect, abuse, crushing the spirit, etc, is just as bad as well. That is contrary to God's ways and original intent. According to what I am hearing you say is this: It would be far better for God to just wipe of humanity altogether into non-existence than have a place called hell. Is this correct?

If so, you need to wake up and realize that such claims seek to tempt God to deny himself, his word, his gifts, his callings… Tragic and as painful is the death of a little one, it is due to human sin and it effects, or even the outcome of natural disasters, or disease — despite all this, it is comforting to know where they'll be.

Question is for us who linger — will we be meeting them again in Heaven or found like a beast? The real cruelty is for human beings to justify the slaughter of our little ones which just proves the real beast of sin one has become. .

Ecclesiastes 3:18, “I said in my heart with regard to the children of man that God is testing them that they may see that they themselves are but beasts.” ESV
-
-
-

I was not writing about sin entering the world, but because of sin though, people who die without Jesus spend eternity in Hell. I simply question why Christains do not kill their children to ensure Heaven for them. I do not mean this is some crazy way, just in the way that God did so in Numbers 31. I assume God kills these children to bring them to him, although if not he did not, then he must create some people with the intent to send them to hell. What do you believe about this?
So it is more important to let a child grow up than to ensure it gets to heaven? This is how your post looks to me. "Do as I say not as I do" is what I gather God says according to you. I mean that, not sarcastically, but by reading the Numbers 31 verses.
Killing children is what our Heavenly father allows/did, but is not what we should do. You mentioned this is not God's way, but he did this. The Bible states he did.
You are right, I am trying to rationalize, but not God's judgement. I am trying to rationalize why it is so important for a child to grow up and live life on this earth, when eternity should mean so much more. Maybe I am coming across wrong. I am not trying to antagonize or provoke. I am simply trying to get a legitimate answer to my question. There must be something much more important by letting a child grow up than to ensure them Heaven for them, but I have not found it. It is further complicated by the fact that God himself killed children according to the Bible.
This also makes he think of the abortion debate. I have alway believed it to be wrong. I do wonder though, if God will come back before we over populate the world. If not, I can see governements mandating abortion as population control. Is it still sin then?

DannyM wrote:

rare96ws6 wrote: No point in continuing? Why?.

Well, if this is not too rude an answer, Because you are talking nonsense. No offense brother.

rare96ws6 wrote: I asked a simple question, although from the comments it seems it is a tough one to rationalize. You are not debating an atheist here who cares nothing for the Bible and understanding it. I would never do such a thing as murder a child or anyone for that matter. You misinterpret what I wrote if you think I want to go against what God's commandments are. I simply stated that sinning once seems the lesser of two evils compared to my child ending up in Hell for eternity. Wouldn't you agree? If a Christian did such a thing, they could repent and ask for God's forgiveness as the Bible states we should do. It seems more cruel to allow a child to grow up and then end up in hell if they did not come to God, then to murder them before they reach the age of accoutability. This is really troubling to me, not some off the wall comment to poke fun at Christains. I grew up in a Christain home and now as an adult, trying to find the truth, I have such questions.

Right, first of all you are (unintentionally, perhaps) taking God for a schmuck. Imagine a rapist, who does as he pleases, raping and violating women, safe in the knowledge that, come the end, he can "repent" and have eternity because God says so...Do you think God cannot see through this? Indeed...So, if God can see through this, then it makes the "do wicked - repent = eternity" ad infinitum complete and utter nonsense; what the bible won't tell you is that God is not a schmuck, and forgiveness has to come with salvation, and salvation has to come from within. Your point, while superficially plausible on the surface, becomes completely absurd in the light of a loving God. No, it is not cruel to let your child grow up and find his/her way on his/her own. As a parent and a Christian you are duty bound to give Christ to your child. If your child grows to reject Christ and is on a path to oblivion then you are no less duty bound to urge your child to reconsider, using the many wonderful tools that a Christian has at his disposal. What you do not do, and what is in no way rational - hence the difficulty in rationalising - is sacrifice your child *just in case* he/she turns out rejecting God. This is just defeatest, anti-christian irrationality in the extreme.

"This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live and that you may love the Lord your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him. For the Lord is your life, and he will give you many years in the land he swore to give to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob." Deuteronomy 30:19-20

Choose life - choose God = have eternity. We can only do our best for our children, the rest is in God's hands...

Peace brother

I am sorry you feel it is nonsense, but to me it is serious. I take eternity very seriously. I do not have children and do not want them, so this issue really does not concern me firsthand. If I did have children, I would not kill them. I see God killing children in the Bible and wonder why Christians don't kill their own so that they never have to worry about them going to Hell.
To me, facing the consequences of one sin is easier to endure than knowing my child will spend the rest of eternity in Hell. I think it is crazy to thing somehow anything else is more important than where you spend eternity.
If you believe that children go to Heaven when they die, then there is atleast one other way inwhich a person can get into Heaven other than knowing Jesus. if this is true, then a person killing their child is just excersizing one option for how the child will get into Heaven.
Do you think there is something more important in this life for the child other than a ticket to heaven? I just don't see it. Numbers 31 does not show me this.

rare96ws6 wrote:....I was not writing about sin entering the world, but because of sin though, people who die without Jesus spend eternity in Hell. I simply question why Christains do not kill their children to ensure Heaven for them. I do not mean this is some crazy way, just in the way that God did so in Numbers 31.

I assume God kills these children to bring them to him, although if not he did not, then he must create some people with the intent to send them to hell. What do you believe about this? So it is more important to let a child grow up than to ensure it gets to heaven? This is how your post looks to me. "Do as I say not as I do" is what I gather God says according to you. I mean that, not sarcastically, but by reading the Numbers 31 verses.

Killing children is what our Heavenly father allows/did, but is not what we should do. You mentioned this is not God's way, but he did this. The Bible states he did.

You are right, I am trying to rationalize, but not God's judgement. I am trying to rationalize why it is so important for a child to grow up and live life on this earth, when eternity should mean so much more. Maybe I am coming across wrong. I am not trying to antagonize or provoke. I am simply trying to get a legitimate answer to my question. There must be something much more important by letting a child grow up than to ensure them Heaven for them, but I have not found it. It is further complicated by the fact that God himself killed children according to the Bible.

This also makes he think of the abortion debate. I have alway believed it to be wrong. I do wonder though, if God will come back before we over populate the world. If not, I can see governements mandating abortion as population control. Is it still sin then?

As long as you can assure me that you are not looking to justify killing kids then I might try to answer you. I am not sure who you are...

Numbers 31 happened long ago, in another time, an entire different culture, and era. The Midianites were an ancient people whose religious system was barbaric and even disease spreading called Baal Peor worship. Children - males were used for sexual religious rites as well.

Please do your own research on this matter and for a start read…

http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/sbs777/sno ... e1112.html

...as it might help

Christians do not use children for this purpose nor do we burn our babies in fire…

Malachi 2:15 - “Did he not make them one, with a portion of the Spirit in their union? And what was the one God seeking? Godly offspring. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and let none of you be faithless to the wife of your youth…” ESV

What you seem to be doing is trying to make what applied in ancient times to nowadays. You cannot. To understand Numbers 31 — you must understand the historical context and learn from it.

As far as I know, the perverted rites of Baal are no longer practiced…from this you can answer your own questions...
-
-
-

So what was long ago, no longer applies? How do we know what part of the Bible still applied and what part we should follow?
Jesus does not state what parts of the Old testament still apply today.
I have read about the people you are refering to below, but it still does not justify why God killed those childen. The thought of killing a child is horrifying to me, but the Bible shows this was common place in the old and new testaments. It looks like it was and may still be acceptable to God. When did it not become acceptable to him?

Exodus 21:15: And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.
Exodus 21:17: And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.
Leviticus 20:9 states the same thing.

In the new testament God allows Herod to kill many young boys while he is trying to find Jesus. It is wonderful that Jesus
was born, but what of all those other little boys?
In the Old testament verses above, God allows the killing of children when they disobey. It is OK to kill them if they disobey, but not OK to kill them to send them to Heaven? This seems contradictory to me.

rare96ws6 wrote:So what was long ago, no longer applies? How do we know what part of the Bible still applied and what part we should follow?
Jesus does not state what parts of the Old testament still apply today.

I have read about the people you are refering to below, but it still does not justify why God killed those childen. The thought of killing a child is horrifying to me, but the Bible shows this was common place in the old and new testaments. It looks like it was and may still be acceptable to God. When did it not become acceptable to him?

Exodus 21:15: And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.
Exodus 21:17: And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.
Leviticus 20:9 states the same thing.

In the new testament God allows Herod to kill many young boys while he is trying to find Jesus. It is wonderful that Jesus was born, but what of all those other little boys?

In the Old testament verses above, God allows the killing of children when they disobey. It is OK to kill them if they disobey, but not OK to kill them to send them to Heaven? This seems contradictory to me.

So we should still be taking vengeance on the Midianites for perpetuity??

I think not — you do not understand the bible. You think you can entrap us with a pleaful ploy as you suggest? Thank you for exposing your hand and who you are as well as your true intent!

Again, it is up to you to look into the historical sources of Baal Worship and the sexual rites of the ancients and how genetically some diseases are spread through the male gene onward. From this, you may find your answer and it would be up to you to defend these pagan rites as noble and pure then your argument may have merit.

Trying to correlate killing of children due to Herod's madness to Numbers 31 as the same moral equivalency is not wise. What it does show is this: Satan's work exposed… Do you even really believe in such things as Morals?

Number's 31 the devil's ploy is again exposed — he corrupts a people like the Midianites so badly that it forces the hand of God to react in hopes of getting an ignorant person like your self to curse God and lead others to do the same. Evil always attacks the Good and tries to manipulate it for its own ends.

Didn't you know that - Sin entered the world and through that comes death? Sin affects all. Are you so pure and so noble without any flaws? Evil forces that hand of good to do things in order to accuse good of being the true evil, while the true evil laughs in the back ground in an attempt to convict good as being evil and true evil as good!

Romans 5:12, “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned…” NKJV

Next — you no nothing of the bible or what the passage below means…

2 Timothy 2:15, 16, 17, "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth. 16 But avoid worldly and empty chatter, for it will lead to further ungodliness..." NASB

Now read…

Jeremiah 31:31, 32, "Behold, days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them," declares the LORD.” NASB

Ezekiel 37:26. "I will make a covenant of peace with them; it will be an everlasting covenant with them. And I will place them and multiply them, and will set My sanctuary in their midst forever.” NASB

Hebrews 8:13, “When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear…” NASB

Was Moses under the Old Covenant?

What of the New?

Do you know anything about this and the difference between the two and why the reason for the change???

Next — regarding your last comment — how dare you try to entrap God and us by coming on this forum and spout such trash! You ignorance of the bible is telling.

Until you can answer the differences between the two Covenants and why the need for the New — no answer will be given you.
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:

rare96ws6 wrote:So what was long ago, no longer applies? How do we know what part of the Bible still applied and what part we should follow?
Jesus does not state what parts of the Old testament still apply today.

I have read about the people you are refering to below, but it still does not justify why God killed those childen. The thought of killing a child is horrifying to me, but the Bible shows this was common place in the old and new testaments. It looks like it was and may still be acceptable to God. When did it not become acceptable to him?

Exodus 21:15: And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.
Exodus 21:17: And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.
Leviticus 20:9 states the same thing.

In the new testament God allows Herod to kill many young boys while he is trying to find Jesus. It is wonderful that Jesus was born, but what of all those other little boys?

In the Old testament verses above, God allows the killing of children when they disobey. It is OK to kill them if they disobey, but not OK to kill them to send them to Heaven? This seems contradictory to me.

So we should still be taking vengeance on the Midianites for perpetuity??

I think not — you do not understand the bible. You think you can entrap us with a pleaful ploy as you suggest? Thank you for exposing your hand and who you are as well as your true intent!

Again, it is up to you to look into the historical sources of Baal Worship and the sexual rites of the ancients and how genetically some diseases are spread through the male gene onward. From this, you may find your answer and it would be up to you to defend these pagan rites as noble and pure then your argument may have merit.

Trying to correlate killing of children due to Herod's madness to Numbers 31 as the same moral equivalency is not wise. What it does show is this: Satan's work exposed… Do you even really believe in such things as Morals?

Number's 31 the devil's ploy is again exposed — he corrupts a people like the Midianites so badly that it forces the hand of God to react in hopes of getting an ignorant person like your self to curse God and lead others to do the same. Evil always attacks the Good and tries to manipulate it for its own ends.

Didn't you know that - Sin entered the world and through that comes death? Sin affects all. Are you so pure and so noble without any flaws? Evil forces that hand of good to do things in order to accuse good of being the true evil, while the true evil laughs in the back ground in an attempt to convict good as being evil and true evil as good!

Romans 5:12, “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned…” NKJV

Next — you no nothing of the bible or what the passage below means…

2 Timothy 2:15, 16, 17, "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth. 16 But avoid worldly and empty chatter, for it will lead to further ungodliness..." NASB

Now read…

Jeremiah 31:31, 32, "Behold, days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them," declares the LORD.” NASB

Ezekiel 37:26. "I will make a covenant of peace with them; it will be an everlasting covenant with them. And I will place them and multiply them, and will set My sanctuary in their midst forever.” NASB

Hebrews 8:13, “When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear…” NASB

Was Moses under the Old Covenant?

What of the New?

Do you know anything about this and the difference between the two and why the reason for the change???

Next — regarding your last comment — how dare you try to entrap God and us by coming on this forum and spout such trash! You ignorance of the bible is telling.

Until you can answer the differences between the two Covenants and why the need for the New — no answer will be given you.
-
-
-

No I do not think we should attack the Midionites! I think it is horrible that such things took place. You sure seem offended by my questions. Maybe I should have just posted my comments to an atheist forum! At least some of them will try to find a solution without badgering a person.
I am not defending pagan rituals or rites. I am simpluy stating that God allowed all of these children to die, and he did not have to. An all powerful God could have selected the children with diseases to be killed and the ones that were disease free to live, but he did not.
Moses was under the first covanent that God made with man. Under this covanent, it was acceptable to stone your children to death for misbehaving. This is what the verses I listed in my last post show. If if says anything to the contrary, please give me your interpretation. I am trying to see the rationale behind it.
I do not appreciate the personal attack against my intelligence. I am ignorant because I am searching for the truth?
Covenants? Of course I know of the two. God made a new convanent with us so that all had a chance at redemption through Jesus Christ. I accepted Jesus as my personal savior when I was 14 years old. I do not claim to understand the Bible fully, which shoould be obvious by my questions. If I understood it all, I would not post such things....and I do not ever curse God!
Personally, I can't rationalize the killings of the children in Numbers or by Herod. Maybe you can and others can, but not everyone interprets the Bible the same way. Judaism does not even believe that Jesus fulfills this second convanent. One thing that I am unsure of as to the old covanent though if that everything about it is invalid now. Is it?
I am searchign for understanding. You mentioned that there is no correlation between the killings in Numbers and that of Herod. Can you explain this please?

rare96ws6 wrote:An all powerful God could have selected the children with diseases to be killed and the ones that were disease free to live, but he did not.

OR....an All Powerful God could have just healed all, made everyone sinless and we wouldn't be here.
.
.

rare96ws6 wrote:
No I do not think we should attack the Midionites! I think it is horrible that such things took place. You sure seem offended by my questions. Maybe I should have just posted my comments to an atheist forum! At least some of them will try to find a solution without badgering a person.
I am not defending pagan rituals or rites. I am simpluy stating that God allowed all of these children to die, and he did not have to. An all powerful God could have selected the children with diseases to be killed and the ones that were disease free to live, but he did not.
Moses was under the first covanent that God made with man. Under this covanent, it was acceptable to stone your children to death for misbehaving. This is what the verses I listed in my last post show. If if says anything to the contrary, please give me your interpretation. I am trying to see the rationale behind it.
I do not appreciate the personal attack against my intelligence. I am ignorant because I am searching for the truth?
Covenants? Of course I know of the two. God made a new convanent with us so that all had a chance at redemption through Jesus Christ. I accepted Jesus as my personal savior when I was 14 years old. I do not claim to understand the Bible fully, which shoould be obvious by my questions. If I understood it all, I would not post such things....and I do not ever curse God!
Personally, I can't rationalize the killings of the children in Numbers or by Herod. Maybe you can and others can, but not everyone interprets the Bible the same way. Judaism does not even believe that Jesus fulfills this second convanent. One thing that I am unsure of as to the old covanent though if that everything about it is invalid now. Is it?
I am searchign for understanding. You mentioned that there is no correlation between the killings in Numbers and that of Herod. Can you explain this please?

Hi rare96ws6,

To me, you seem to be rationalizing children's demise and that is why I am a bit harsh until you can prove me otherwise. You seem to me to be rationalizing children's demise in any form just to spare them from Hell as justification for getting rid of children and using Numbers 31 for this purpose.

Question: What of the person who seeks the demise of children and does the act? (Luke 17:1, 2 -)

In Numbers 31 God charged Moses for a task for taking vengeance - the latitude for that vengeance was up to Moses to enact. Often times, Evil will corrupt a society and culture so much that Good is forced to react to ensure the survival of Goodness.

Such violence meted from Good is necessary and that was the case in Numbers 31 as well as even in World War 2. Evil always seeks to overthrow Goodness by attempts to subvert it first by redefining Goodness as the true Evil and thus makes true evil appear to be good.

Yes, children go to heaven but using that as an excuse to rid the world of them to avoid hell or met out punishment is a greater evil. Again, what of the person who seeks the demise of children and does the act? No excuse will spare them and such are certainly ensured a place in Hell.

From the Time of Christ and beyond this current date, we are under the New Covenant and as Christian's are charged to instruct our children well and with love — not use the Old Covenant system to justify cruel and unusual punishment toward them nowadays as you seem to be suggesting or attempting to justify.

As for Herod and Moses — again you have Herod representing Evil slaying innocents in order to maintain power and thus mocks God's goodness. For Moses — you have Goodness forced to react to evil that corrupted a whole society done in order to preserve the people of Israel from being likewise corrupted: Two totally different acts in two manifestedly different time periods, involving two totally different things.

Many people have amply answered you but you persist — so why? If you still cannot see the differences then you need to do more research on your own until you do.

You seem know that there is a difference between the Old and New Covenant, and even seem to understand why Moses did what he did. You even say murder of children is wrong, yet, you persist in trying to justify it through use of bible quotes. If you cannot listen to your own conscious on this matter — then what are you listening too?
-
-
-

rare96ws6 wrote:I am sorry you feel it is nonsense, but to me it is serious. I take eternity very seriously. I do not have children and do not want them, so this issue really does not concern me firsthand. If I did have children, I would not kill them. I see God killing children in the Bible and wonder why Christians don't kill their own so that they never have to worry about them going to Hell.
To me, facing the consequences of one sin is easier to endure than knowing my child will spend the rest of eternity in Hell. I think it is crazy to thing somehow anything else is more important than where you spend eternity.
If you believe that children go to Heaven when they die, then there is atleast one other way inwhich a person can get into Heaven other than knowing Jesus. if this is true, then a person killing their child is just excersizing one option for how the child will get into Heaven.
Do you think there is something more important in this life for the child other than a ticket to heaven? I just don't see it. Numbers 31 does not show me this.

Like I said, on the surface you make a valid point. But it is all very superficial (in terms of it being valid). In Numbers, God makes the dicision, calls the shots- God knows what kind of life these children will lead. Now, unless ou have some god-like power which gives you insight into how your children will end up then there is no rational basis for your argument. (I know you have no children; just making the point.) What age would you advocate killing the child? At birth? In which case, how would you know your child? When he/she turns teenager? At the sight of one teenage tantrum? If he/she starts listening to satanic-metal? Did you know that many people who rebel against faith end up back in their faith?

DannyM wrote:

rare96ws6 wrote:I am sorry you feel it is nonsense, but to me it is serious. I take eternity very seriously. I do not have children and do not want them, so this issue really does not concern me firsthand. If I did have children, I would not kill them. I see God killing children in the Bible and wonder why Christians don't kill their own so that they never have to worry about them going to Hell.
To me, facing the consequences of one sin is easier to endure than knowing my child will spend the rest of eternity in Hell. I think it is crazy to thing somehow anything else is more important than where you spend eternity.
If you believe that children go to Heaven when they die, then there is atleast one other way inwhich a person can get into Heaven other than knowing Jesus. if this is true, then a person killing their child is just excersizing one option for how the child will get into Heaven.
Do you think there is something more important in this life for the child other than a ticket to heaven? I just don't see it. Numbers 31 does not show me this.

Like I said, on the surface you make a valid point. But it is all very superficial (in terms of it being valid). In Numbers, God makes the dicision, calls the shots- God knows what kind of life these children will lead. Now, unless ou have some god-like power which gives you insight into how your children will end up then there is no rational basis for your argument. (I know you have no children; just making the point.) What age would you advocate killing the child? At birth? In which case, how would you know your child? When he/she turns teenager? At the sight of one teenage tantrum? If he/she starts listening to satanic-metal? Did you know that many people who rebel against faith end up back in their faith?

You say that since God know what kind of life these children would lead, he kills them? Why does he not just kill us all then, since he knows what lives all of us will lead? Please clarify what you mean here.

B. W. wrote:

rare96ws6 wrote:
No I do not think we should attack the Midionites! I think it is horrible that such things took place. You sure seem offended by my questions. Maybe I should have just posted my comments to an atheist forum! At least some of them will try to find a solution without badgering a person.
I am not defending pagan rituals or rites. I am simpluy stating that God allowed all of these children to die, and he did not have to. An all powerful God could have selected the children with diseases to be killed and the ones that were disease free to live, but he did not.
Moses was under the first covanent that God made with man. Under this covanent, it was acceptable to stone your children to death for misbehaving. This is what the verses I listed in my last post show. If if says anything to the contrary, please give me your interpretation. I am trying to see the rationale behind it.
I do not appreciate the personal attack against my intelligence. I am ignorant because I am searching for the truth?
Covenants? Of course I know of the two. God made a new convanent with us so that all had a chance at redemption through Jesus Christ. I accepted Jesus as my personal savior when I was 14 years old. I do not claim to understand the Bible fully, which shoould be obvious by my questions. If I understood it all, I would not post such things....and I do not ever curse God!
Personally, I can't rationalize the killings of the children in Numbers or by Herod. Maybe you can and others can, but not everyone interprets the Bible the same way. Judaism does not even believe that Jesus fulfills this second convanent. One thing that I am unsure of as to the old covanent though if that everything about it is invalid now. Is it?
I am searchign for understanding. You mentioned that there is no correlation between the killings in Numbers and that of Herod. Can you explain this please?

Hi rare96ws6,

To me, you seem to be rationalizing children's demise and that is why I am a bit harsh until you can prove me otherwise. You seem to me to be rationalizing children's demise in any form just to spare them from Hell as justification for getting rid of children and using Numbers 31 for this purpose.

Question: What of the person who seeks the demise of children and does the act? (Luke 17:1, 2 -)

In Numbers 31 God charged Moses for a task for taking vengeance - the latitude for that vengeance was up to Moses to enact. Often times, Evil will corrupt a society and culture so much that Good is forced to react to ensure the survival of Goodness.

Such violence meted from Good is necessary and that was the case in Numbers 31 as well as even in World War 2. Evil always seeks to overthrow Goodness by attempts to subvert it first by redefining Goodness as the true Evil and thus makes true evil appear to be good.

Yes, children go to heaven but using that as an excuse to rid the world of them to avoid hell or met out punishment is a greater evil. Again, what of the person who seeks the demise of children and does the act? No excuse will spare them and such are certainly ensured a place in Hell.

From the Time of Christ and beyond this current date, we are under the New Covenant and as Christian's are charged to instruct our children well and with love — not use the Old Covenant system to justify cruel and unusual punishment toward them nowadays as you seem to be suggesting or attempting to justify.

As for Herod and Moses — again you have Herod representing Evil slaying innocents in order to maintain power and thus mocks God's goodness. For Moses — you have Goodness forced to react to evil that corrupted a whole society done in order to preserve the people of Israel from being likewise corrupted: Two totally different acts in two manifestedly different time periods, involving two totally different things.

Many people have amply answered you but you persist — so why? If you still cannot see the differences then you need to do more research on your own until you do.

You seem know that there is a difference between the Old and New Covenant, and even seem to understand why Moses did what he did. You even say murder of children is wrong, yet, you persist in trying to justify it through use of bible quotes. If you cannot listen to your own conscious on this matter — then what are you listening too?
-
-
-

It is research that brought me here to this forum. I have reasearched and read with an open mind, many different interpretations and commentaries on the subjects to which we write now. Without reading anyone else's interpretation
of what Herod did or what happened in Numbers 31 I am stunned that God would allows such things to happen.
In the old testament, Moses was following the law; God's law. Killing others who did not follow the one true God was acceptable back then. This is disturing to me. Why kill them? Ignore them and the short life they are given to live.
What Herod did to those children in the new testament is every bit as bad as what happened in the old testament. I realize why it happened, but God could have allowed Jesus to come into this world without the deaths of many other children. He is stronger and more powerful than the devil. He could have found a way. This is his creation.
I am not trying to rationalize us killing our children, but I can not rationalize why God sometimes does the killing.

rare96ws6 wrote: It is research that brought me here to this forum. I have reasearched and read with an open mind, many different interpretations and commentaries on the subjects to which we write now. Without reading anyone else's interpretationof what Herod did or what happened in Numbers 31 I am stunned that God would allows such things to happen.

In the old testament, Moses was following the law; God's law. Killing others who did not follow the one true God was acceptable back then. This is disturing to me. Why kill them? Ignore them and the short life they are given to live.

What Herod did to those children in the new testament is every bit as bad as what happened in the old testament. I realize why it happened, but God could have allowed Jesus to come into this world without the deaths of many other children. He is stronger and more powerful than the devil. He could have found a way. This is his creation.

I am not trying to rationalize us killing our children, but I can not rationalize why God sometimes does the killing.

Your answers are found within these statements and you'll have to seek out the answers on your own:

John 14:30, "I will no longer talk much with you, for the ruler of this world is coming, and he has nothing in Me."NKJV

John 12:31, "Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be cast out." NKJV

Conviction beyond all reasonable doubt - such is the mystery the justice of God...

We live a world of sin. It was extremely dark and perverse way before and during Moses' time. After Moses, it was just as brutal. When Acts 2:1 occurred this brutal darkness began to be pushed back...in each successive generation.

Ephesians 2:1 -2” And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins, 2 in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience…” NKJV

John 16:11, "...of judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged..." NKJV

For you who live during this pushing and continued pushing back of darkness - you cannot fathom why God is so slow to anger and why such things happen...

Ecclesiastes 8:11-13, "Because the sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil. 12 Though a sinner does evil a hundred times, and his days are prolonged, yet I surely know that it will be well with those who fear God, who fear before Him. 13 But it will not be well with the wicked; nor will he prolong his days, which are as a shadow, because he does not fear before God." NKJV

Nahum 1:3, "The LORD is slow to anger and great in power, And will not at all acquit the wicked. The LORD has His way In the whirlwind and in the storm, And the clouds are the dust of His feet." NKJV

Question: Are you using your current bewilderment as an excuse to continue to deny God? Again the ruler of this world system is being judged in this…his acts made manifest…

2 Co 4:4. “…whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them.” NKJV

You are stunned that God allows bad things to happen?

He will stop all of it but according to his timing and according to his ways — not yours or mine. Because first comes conviction for each successive generation in a manner of far greater awesome equity and justice that what we can adequately conceive of for both the unjust, and those made just.

To require the stopping of evil according to your terms of requirement for God to stop it would involve the extermination of humanity way back in Genesis 6… and all of us would not be here now.

Herein is a great mystery: how would that be fair, just, right to those that would come in future generations whom were foreknown by God to become his own by his own right hand?

How can you prove yourself in fairness, justice, rightness even to the wicked without acting contrary even to them?

The ways of the Lord are far above what mortal minds can fully fathom…
-
-
-

rare96ws6 wrote:You say that since God know what kind of life these children would lead, he kills them? Why does he not just kill us all then, since he knows what lives all of us will lead? Please clarify what you mean here.

Well, I don't mean to over-simplify this, Rare, but I don't know. God was clearly involved and played an intimate role back then and intervened in certain matters. Why doesn't He do this anymore? I imagine He needed to intercede to establish the foundation he wished to establish. I can understand how He was required to step in in the persuit of establishing this foundation. Was He to keep stepping in, like a puppet master, righting every wrong? Why didn't He kill the 9/11 bombers as children? Well, we are a long way from those ancient times when God was stepping in to nurture certain events. God no doubt came to realise that man can be inherently wicked, long before 9/11, and He eventually entered space and time to give us new hope. He came as Christ to shoulder our sins. The wicked *will* be punished; the good victim *will* his family again in the new life. It is what it is; there is evil in this world. But this world is a mere blot on the eternal landscape. It sounds absurd to me the idea that God would keep bailing us out. He's effectively said, "Right, I've had enough of this. You lot really know how to ruin a good thing! I'm now gonna take on your sins, and give you new hope."

So we cannot object to His procedures regarding a creation He wasn't obliged to create. He has no duties to you and I because He might not have bothered creating us in the first place. How can you be shocked? You and I are here. God has no duties to a creation He might not have created. Yet He does give us hope.