"Raising and lowering them into the fire'

[merkavah12]

Possibly none of the madness of persecution would ever have happened if only God had said that his name was, ' LOVE '.

...which according to the passage you put up, it is. Hebrew. Learn it.

[James Hannam]

Rtaylor,

I'm not the only one getting fed up with you. Please could you find somewhere else to post your messages?

If you persist in your inane postings, you will be the first person ever to be banned from this board.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Best wishes

James

[rtaylor]

Is this just being a little intolerent of you?
The fires of the Inquisition where started because of religeous intolerence. Difference of opinion. I do look for 'LOVE' in the bible. but it is hard to find. My bible is in english and that is the only language that I understand. The passage I qoute is about a God who describes Himself as being Jealous. He says that his name is also 'Jealous'. It is because of this passage that most of the madness of history has happened. God, in his Jealous Rage, kicked Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden. That passage allows the believer in this God to dis-posses the non- believer of his home and comforts. We have seen many examples of this thru-out history. And it still continues to this day, in the form of Islamic Fundamentalism, which is really no different to Christian Fundamentalism. When any of these 'faiths' are in positions of power there is persecution. History tells us this.
If you wish to ban me go ahead. I seek to know Truth. Perhaps its not to be found here.
I read somewhere that ' Scepticism is the beginning of Wisdom '.

Best wishes, Robert Taylor.

[merkavah12]

I seek to know Truth.

You couldn't have typed that with a straight face.

I read somewhere that ' Scepticism is the beginning of Wisdom '.

...and I read somewhere that "Wisdom is the child of humility and openness". You may want to consider that, dumpling.

My bible is in english and that is the only language that I understand.

I rest my case. If you understood Hebrew, you would know that the word "Jealous" in that passage translates more closely to "Zealous (in love)" or "Passionate (in love)". Both words being used in the context of love. To understand a work, ANY work is to understand it's context and the language it was written in. Get a translation guide, a book of Biblical commentaries, and get to work.

[rtaylor]

You remind me of one of those Islamists who says if you do not understand Arabic you cannot understand the Holy Koran. If a religeon is a universal religeon, available to all , then it should be understood easily by all. A true God of Love does not differentiate, does not choose one nation over another, or one language over another.

[jamierobertson]

Oct 25, 2010 10:49:01 GMT rtaylor said:

You remind me of one of those Islamists who says if you do not understand Arabic you cannot understand the Holy Koran. If a religeon is a universal religeon, available to all , then it should be understood easily by all. A true God of Love does not differentiate, does not choose one nation over another, or one language over another.

Translation: "I'm lazy, and can't be bothered putting in the work that lets me get the most out of the Bible. The God of the universe isn't making accomodations for my lazy ass, therefore he DOESN'T EXIST!!! BLLEEEEEERGGHHH!!!!!!!"

[rtaylor]

Thanks for the silly childish comments.
The fact is I really do not have time to learn Arabic or Hebrew, or for that matter ancient Greek, which is what my bible tells me that the NT has been translated from. Perhaps all this religeous stuff is only for those who think of themselves as academics. Just as in the old days of the early Christians, when only the Pope and the clergy had access to the Holy Scriptures. In the dark ages, when people had to rely on other peoples interpretation, without question.
I was under the immpresion that we live in more enlightened times and could discuss without insults.
If any religeon is a universal religeon it should be easy to understand for everyone.

The subject under discussion in this thread I thought, was about some of the atrocities carried out in the name of the Saviour of the world, Jesus Christ, as taught in some schools.
Christianity appears to me to just about as intolerent as any other intolerent religeon.

The language of ancient Rome was, I think, Latin. Do I need to go and have an understanding of that too?
So much to read, so little time!

[blessedkarl]

Do fully understand the way people think you do have to understand the language. Granted you can get a reasonable understanding of certain periods from historians whom have written reputable books. Nonetheless, no one is telling you to read the whole Bible in the language it was written. You made a comment on certain semantical matters and your comment was shown to be incorrect. You seriously sound like an ideologue.

[rtaylor]

No one is telling me to read the bible in the language in which it was written.
Thats good, because there does seem to have been a few involved. Ancient Greek. Latin, Hebrew, Aramaic, probably even anceint Eygptian too. (Alexandria.)
Each man or woman must come to their own understanding about God, in their own language.
To imply that one language can better describe God than another does not make sense to me.
To imply that the word Jealous, when applied to God, means something other than Jealous as I know it to mean does not make sense.
If Jealous has 2 meanings when applied to God then you are dividing God.
When God is divided he is not ONE.
He is not immutable. He becomes a changing God, just like all those Pagan Gods.
Even to the point of having as Son.

Of all the human attributes, Jealousy is the worst of all.
We all know that those who love with zealousy are demanding , selfish people.
Inconsiderate, controling, even tryrannical.

True Love gives,abides forever, asks nothing in return and does not impose.

[noons]

What I'm getting here is that you seem to be trying to justify limiting your understanding. When historians and scholars analyze historical documents, they understand that as language changes, it is imperative to know how the words they translate were understood by the people who wrote them, and by the society for which it was written. And you, as someone who does not believe in God, and therefore does not believe scripture was written for you or anyone in our time, would presumably be open to what modern scholarship has to say. But instead you're saying that these modern English translations should be more than sufficient to make judgment calls on, which is a very silly position, especially for someone who claims to be a rational skeptic.

[rtaylor]

You seem to be making a claim that only certain people can come to a sensible understanding about the bible. Those who are educated in history and ancient languages. I am not educated but have read a few books.
I do recognize that the bible should be interpreted with relevance to the time of writing and the possible mindset, or way of thinking, of the writer. If God has a plan, and its an on-going event, the bible is the worst possible guide book for that event. Belief in the God of the bible has been disastrous for mankind, judging by its history and ongoing religous voilence.
What was the mindset of a people that describe God as being Jealous?
How could they come to such a conclusion?