Question: How can you justify taking the bible literally when it says all of the thin
- Thread starter Shakes
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Well, the Law is not in reference to just the Law of Moses alone every time it is mentioned in the New Testament; However, it was also mentioned sometimes as being in reference to the Law and the prophets (i.e. prophecy). In other words, sometimes the word "Law" mentioned in the New Testament was in reference to the entire Old Testament.
Law and the Prophets | Learn The Bible
So when Jesus said he came to fulfill and not to destroy that is exactly what he meant. Jesus fulfilled the Law of Moses, but yet he came not to destroy or do away with all portions of the Law obviously because we still cannot murder, steal, covet, etc. and there are prophecies in the Law and the prophets within the Old Testament that have yet to come to pass or be fulfilled.
Think of it in terms of an apple seed and a tree with the apple seed being the Old Testament and the tree being the New Testament. Jesus did not come to destroy the apple seed. He did not take a hammer and completely destroy everything that has come before by smashing that apple seed with a hammer. Everything in the Old was leading up to everything in the New. For in order for an apple seed to fulfill it's potential it must be planted in the ground whereby it can become an apple tree. It is now different than what it was before. The apple tree is no longer an apple seed in and of itself anymore. It is changed. However, this does not negate the apple seed with it being planted in the ground for it to grow and fulfill it's intended purpose, though.
Law and the Prophets | Learn The Bible
So when Jesus said he came to fulfill and not to destroy that is exactly what he meant. Jesus fulfilled the Law of Moses, but yet he came not to destroy or do away with all portions of the Law obviously because we still cannot murder, steal, covet, etc. and there are prophecies in the Law and the prophets within the Old Testament that have yet to come to pass or be fulfilled.
Think of it in terms of an apple seed and a tree with the apple seed being the Old Testament and the tree being the New Testament. Jesus did not come to destroy the apple seed. He did not take a hammer and completely destroy everything that has come before by smashing that apple seed with a hammer. Everything in the Old was leading up to everything in the New. For in order for an apple seed to fulfill it's potential it must be planted in the ground whereby it can become an apple tree. It is now different than what it was before. The apple tree is no longer an apple seed in and of itself anymore. It is changed. However, this does not negate the apple seed with it being planted in the ground for it to grow and fulfill it's intended purpose, though.
Re: Question: How can you justify taking the bible literally when it says all of the
The Bible also says that if our right eyes and/or right hands cause us to sin, we should gouge our eyes out and cut our hands off. But last time I checked, I haven't seen many believers with right eyes or right hands missing.
Now, let me grab some popcorn..........
The Bible also says that if our right eyes and/or right hands cause us to sin, we should gouge our eyes out and cut our hands off. But last time I checked, I haven't seen many believers with right eyes or right hands missing.
Now, let me grab some popcorn..........
Fine I'll take the bait. 3/4 of the verses you mentioned were from the Old Testament. Nobody was covered by the blood of Jesus in the Old Testament and so they didn't get the God's Grace. The only people who had God's favor (but still not His Grace) were the Jews because they chose to attempt to follow His laws of perfection (which they couldn't, because they needed Jesus' perfection).
1timothy 2:12 woman can not hold authority or be in charge of men.
God isn't American. America's laws are not God's laws and its ways are not God's ways. However, this passage is not a green light for men to be tyrants to women.
Mathew 9:22 you only get sick because you don't have faith. Apparently germs aren't real.
Has nothing to do with this passage. The woman had faith in Jesus and Jesus healed her because of it. Plus it wasn't a "germ" disease that she had. She had a period that hadn't stopped bleeding for years. I do believe you copy/pasted because this passage is next to impossible to miss. I'm not attacking you in any way, but, just be honest man
Luke 12:51-53 Jesus didn't come to bring peace he came to pit family members against each other.
Jesus was preparing people for the consequences of their belief in Him. Many Christians have been martyred and None-believing family members have grown to hate Christian family members many times.
1timothy 2:12 woman can not hold authority or be in charge of men.
God isn't American. America's laws are not God's laws and its ways are not God's ways. However, this passage is not a green light for men to be tyrants to women.
Mathew 9:22 you only get sick because you don't have faith. Apparently germs aren't real.
Has nothing to do with this passage. The woman had faith in Jesus and Jesus healed her because of it. Plus it wasn't a "germ" disease that she had. She had a period that hadn't stopped bleeding for years. I do believe you copy/pasted because this passage is next to impossible to miss. I'm not attacking you in any way, but, just be honest man
Luke 12:51-53 Jesus didn't come to bring peace he came to pit family members against each other.
Jesus was preparing people for the consequences of their belief in Him. Many Christians have been martyred and None-believing family members have grown to hate Christian family members many times.
Last edited:
Hi Shakes, welcome to cc! Your questions are interesting, although many people before you have had similar questions. In regard to your specific post quoted above, even several verses either side of a given passage may not give adequate context to "justify" the stated behaviour. Context is MUCH more than the verses either side. Consider this: To whom was the Law given? In what historical period? What was the nature of the people Israel was to kill? What kind of people were the Israelites? What were God's long-term plans, and how do these commands fit into those plans?
No Bible-believing Christian would rightly interpret that passage as justification to go and kill anyone today. It was written to Israel several millennia in the past. We continue to read it because it is part of the whole story of God's redemption of mankind. Unfortunately, you are unlikely to get the gist of the Bible by pulling out specific verses and dogging on them. Better to try for a broad understanding and, when you have the big picture in mind, look closer at the details; they will make more sense. Start with John 3:16.
You find these passages offensive; fair enough, but I'd also suggest that your concept of right and wrong is without any foundation other than God. Right/wrong = moral law, which requires a giver of moral law. If the giver is man, there is no objective right and wrong, as one man's murder is another man's hunting for meat. If the Giver is God, then the definition of right and wrong comes from Him, not from us. God is good (Matthew 19:17 and others) and what He does, or commands to be done, is ultimately good, even if we do not see how.
Keep asking these hard questions, and keep your heart open to seek the truth.
Blessings,
Dino
No Bible-believing Christian would rightly interpret that passage as justification to go and kill anyone today. It was written to Israel several millennia in the past. We continue to read it because it is part of the whole story of God's redemption of mankind. Unfortunately, you are unlikely to get the gist of the Bible by pulling out specific verses and dogging on them. Better to try for a broad understanding and, when you have the big picture in mind, look closer at the details; they will make more sense. Start with John 3:16.
You find these passages offensive; fair enough, but I'd also suggest that your concept of right and wrong is without any foundation other than God. Right/wrong = moral law, which requires a giver of moral law. If the giver is man, there is no objective right and wrong, as one man's murder is another man's hunting for meat. If the Giver is God, then the definition of right and wrong comes from Him, not from us. God is good (Matthew 19:17 and others) and what He does, or commands to be done, is ultimately good, even if we do not see how.
Keep asking these hard questions, and keep your heart open to seek the truth.
Blessings,
Dino
Re: Question: How can you justify taking the bible literally when it says all of the
Hmmm..... I want to say that we can know what is good and right according to God. Morality is not a mystery. Unless a man's conscience has been seared with a hot iron (i.e. their moral compass is shut off because of sin). For God's good ways in doing what is right is based on love. For God is love.
Hmmm..... I want to say that we can know what is good and right according to God. Morality is not a mystery. Unless a man's conscience has been seared with a hot iron (i.e. their moral compass is shut off because of sin). For God's good ways in doing what is right is based on love. For God is love.
Re: Question: How can you justify taking the bible literally when it says all of the
In other words, when I hear people essentially say that they can sin and still be saved, I know that is wrong and immoral. If I hear people make excuses to sin in the future by saying that they will never be able to stop sinning, then I know that such a thiing is immoral. When I hear people say that God's version of morality is hard to understand, I don't believe that to be true at all. God is good. God is not evil. We can know God's righteous and good ways. God did not tell Hosea to marry a prostitute and God did not tell Abraham to murder his own son. Nor did Rahab lie. Many folks just do not dig deep enough into the Scriptures to get the context (And they just read the Bible with their moral compass shut off). But this is understable, though. The Bible says we are living in the last days.
In other words, when I hear people essentially say that they can sin and still be saved, I know that is wrong and immoral. If I hear people make excuses to sin in the future by saying that they will never be able to stop sinning, then I know that such a thiing is immoral. When I hear people say that God's version of morality is hard to understand, I don't believe that to be true at all. God is good. God is not evil. We can know God's righteous and good ways. God did not tell Hosea to marry a prostitute and God did not tell Abraham to murder his own son. Nor did Rahab lie. Many folks just do not dig deep enough into the Scriptures to get the context (And they just read the Bible with their moral compass shut off). But this is understable, though. The Bible says we are living in the last days.
Again all of those verses are in the Old Testament. Those people deserved to die for the sins they committed. WE deserve the same treatment. The difference is that we have the blood covering of Jesus and they didn't. So we have God's Grace. Even though these people were killed in the Old Testament, they were still given the chance to live forever. After Jesus was crucified, He went to Hell (Sheol) for 3 days and preached to the spirits of the people from the Old Testament.
Also, think about this. Why do you think it's "wrong" for God to command the killing of these people when the only thing that makes "right and wrong" a legitimate thing is a God that defines right and wrong?
Also, think about this. Why do you think it's "wrong" for God to command the killing of these people when the only thing that makes "right and wrong" a legitimate thing is a God that defines right and wrong?
