Which Commandments?

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
You have no objective evidence of the claim of morality. Therefore, it's totally an assumption.
Sir, your claim that no unbeliever is ever moral has been proven false. I have observed unbelievers with my own eyes that are moral. All it takes is one such person to prove your claim false. I have found many. Your claim is false.


No. You're eisegetically assuming "full of contradictions."
No, contradictions can be proven.

For instance, Exodus 20 says "Thou shalt not steal".

But in Exodus 3:22 God commands the Israelites to steal. So is stealing wrong or isn't it?
I don't agree at all.
You say, this in response to, "Do you agree with me that it was immoral to kill Amalekite babies?"

Do you understand I Samuel 15? There it says God commanded the Israelites to kill all the Amalekites, including the babies, for what their ancestors did centuries earlier. Surely it is wrong to kill people because their ancestors did something wrong. And most definitely it is wrong to kill babies because their ancestors did something wrong.

If you had been living in that day, and you had the command to kill Amalekite babies, would you have chased a two year old down the street, ignored her pleas, and thrust your spear through her heart? Would you willingly and gladly slay a two year old girl?
Total war is like that.
No, sir, total war is not like that. Check out the Geneva Convention Rules. Any civilized country realizes that such acts are wrong.
Also, God can declare judgment on humanity by any means He chooses.
That does not change the fact that slaughtering babies is immoral. If your God commands people to slaughter babies, then he is commanding something immoral.


It's not murder because it's an act of judgement on Total Depravity.
Do you consider this child to be totally depraved? I do not.

beautiful-baby-1024x819.jpg


If you were living in King Saul's day, and this baby was an Amalekite, would you have willingly and gladly taken your sword and cut off this baby's head?
 
Upvote 0

JohnClay

Married Mouth-Breather
Supporter
Oct 27, 2006
1,129
186
Australia
Visit site
✟443,319.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
For instance, Exodus 20 says "Thou shalt not steal".

But in Exodus 3:22 God commands the Israelites to steal. So is stealing wrong or isn't it?
Also Exodus 20 says "You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor" but in Joshua 2 Rahab lied to protect some spies and was rewarded. That is similar to people lying to protect Jews they're hiding in WW2....
 
  • Agree
Reactions: doubtingmerle
Upvote 0

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
The ancient Greek compares it to the sport of archery, as their word for sin was a word in their competition meaning "to miss the mark." <-- It's their analogies that count. Not yours.
If the target is the size of a gnat and 10 miles away, I will miss the mark.

It is possible to make a target that is impossibly hard to hit. That does not prove we are all bad shots. It just proves the target is unreasonable.

Again, back to my claim: I have observed with my own eyes that nonbelievers can be as moral as believers. Your silly philosophical argument claiming one can make a target so difficult that nonbelievers will all miss it proves nothing. Believers will miss it too. So the fact that I miss an impossible target does not prove you are more moral than me.

I never said "metaphor." The link to chabad.org didn't say "metaphor."
You may not have used the word "metaphor" but you interpreted the verse metaphorically. The verse condemned mixing wool and linen. You interpret that metaphorically to mean don't mix good and bad. That is not what the verse says. It says not to mix wool and linen.

Gratitude is not earned.
I am not talking about doing something to earn salvation. I repeat: I am not talking about doing something to earn salvation. I have told you that dozens of times.

If you win the lottery and are given a check for a hundred million dollars, you did not earn that money. But you still need to physically accept the check to get that money.

Question: If you win the lottery, what do you need to do to earn that money? Answer: nothing. It is a gift. You don't need to earn it.

Question: If you win the lottery, what do you need to do to have that money? Answer: Accept the check and deposit it.

The question of what you need to do to earn the money, and what you need to do to have the money are two different questions. Understand?

I am not asking what you need to do to earn eternal life. I am asking what you need to do to have eternal life.

All of your many arguments about not being able to earn eternal life are totally off subject. I am not asking about earning eternal life.


You're not obligated to make yourself bear fruit to earn the status of "tree-ness," or to earn getting planted in the orchard.
I did not ask what you need to do to earn eternal life. I asked you what you need to do to have it.

As a natural habit of living. Again, "fruit." Nowhere ^ here does it say that obedience is the way to "earn" or "merit" heaven. You're reading a contradiction into it from an assumed outside bias on your part.
Again, I am not asking the question of what you need to do to earn eternal life. I am asking what you need to do to have eternal life.
The paragraphs you quoted talk about what one needs to do to have eternal life. Again they say:

Faith must involve a personal commitment to Christ (2 Corinthians 5:15). It is more than being convinced of the truth of the gospel; it is a forsaking of this world and a following of the Master...

Those with genuine faith—those who are submitted to the lordship of Christ—follow Jesus (John 10:27), love their brothers (1 John 3:14), obey God’s commandments (1 John 2:3; John 15:14), do the will of God (Matthew 12:50), abide in God’s Word (John 8:31), keep God’s Word (John 17:6), do good works (Ephesians 2:10), and continue in the faith (Colossians 1:21–23; Hebrews 3:14). Salvation is not adding Jesus to the pantheon of one’s idols; it is a wholesale destruction of the idols with Jesus reigning supreme...

Scripture teaches that Jesus is Lord of all. Christ demands unconditional surrender to His will (Romans 6:17–18; 10:9–10). Those who live in rebellion to God’s will do not have eternal life..​

They discuss what one needs to do to have eternal life. You evade the issue, and say they don't discuss what we need to do to earn salvation. Of course not! That is not the question.

Get with the program, please.

it is the SIGN of true salvation, i.e. "fruit of righteousness."
The problem for you is that both nonbelievers and believers do righteous things. If doing good is a sign of true salvation, then I know a lot of atheists that have a sign of true salvation.


That is the same thing as saying you need to obey these commands to have eternal life.
Correct. The link you sent says that if you don't do this you won't have eternal life. You are correct in stating that this is the same thing as saying you need to obey these commands to have eternal life.

One of the two Paulomycins on this account--the one that says you need to follow all of the commandments to get to heaven-- will agree with what you just wrote.

The other Paulomycin brother on this account--the one that says you need not follow any of the commandments--will disagree.


That verse doesn't say heaven is earned either. Jesus is simply stating a brute fact.​
Again, we are not talking about what you need to do to earn eternal life. We are talking about what you need to do to have it. Jesus said you need to do the will of his Father to have eternal life. He did not say this act earns salvation.


You were raised under a merit-based (works) soteriology. You were taught that the one work of choosing faith saved you, as opposed to others who didn't choose.
No, sir, in no sense was John R Rice teaching works salvation. He said salvation was provided by God, and all one needed to do was believe it. He was clear that there was nothing one could do to earn it.

Rice bases his tract on Acts 16:31: "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved". Are you telling me that this verse also teaches works salvation?

Rice taught easy-believism. I find it amusing that you want to call his easy-believism "works salvation" while you yourself accept lordship salvation.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Did you forget that I am a Calvinist? There's no contractual obligation. You're either a sheep or a goat.
Then why did you post a link saying that there was a contractual obligation, with a whole list of things that disqualifies a person from heaven if they fail to follow them? Again you link says:

Scripture teaches that Jesus is Lord of all. Christ demands unconditional surrender to His will (Romans 6:17–18; 10:9–10). Those who live in rebellion to God’s will do not have eternal life..

 
Upvote 0

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Y
You mean, "if an orthodox Jew does that, is he immoral?" I'm a Gentile convert. Don't bother considering this or anything. Just knee-jerk reject it as-if you never read the Bible before. You either completely forgot or never read Acts 15.
So now there is one set of laws I need to keep if I am a Jew, and a different set if I am a Gentile? Why would God have different requirements?

One Paulomycin using your account says we need to keep all the commandments to get to heaven. Another says you don't need to keep any of them. Now we have a third Paulomycin, and this Paulomycin says there is one set of laws for Jews to get to heaven, and a different set for Gentiles? How many people are using your account?

I hear that many generations back one of my ancestors was Jewish. If that is so, do I need to follow the Jewish set or the Gentile set? Whatever, please give me the set of commands Jews need to follow to get to heaven, and the set that Gentiles need to follow to get to heaven.


Not if you're a Gentile, who are held to a lower standard.
You say this in response to, "And if I eat meat from a cow that was strangled, have I sinned?"

That is a very odd response, since you were referring to Acts 15. Acts 15:20 refers to the Gentiles and says, "But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood."

So the verse is saying Gentiles need to refrain from things strangled. And yet you say the commandment to abstain from things strangled does not apply to Gentiles. So who should I believe, you who say the command does not apply to Gentiles, or James who says it does?

You bring up Acts 15 in the context of what commands one needs to follow to get to heaven. I'm not sure how this even applies, since Acts 15 isn't even talking about how to get to heaven. Nevertheless, you somehow think this chapter is relevant to our discussion.

For the record, the list in Acts 15:20 is very odd:

1) abstain from pollution of idols.
2) abstain from fornication.
3) abstain from things strangled,
4) abstain from blood.
I'm sorta surprised that "abstain from murder" and "abstain from stealing" didn't make the list. I would have thought they were important.

Anyway, are you saying that this is the list of commands Gentiles need to follow to get to heaven?
 
Upvote 0

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
When did I say you "bought" anything?
It was an analogy.

And you are missing the point. The point is that Lordship Salvation is like buying a car on credit with no money down and saying you got it free. A car is not free if there is a payment plan after you leave the dealer. Likewise salvation is not free of requirements if there is a long list of requirements afterwards. According to Lordship Salvation as described in the link you provided, there is a long, long list of requirements after the original commitment.

So Lordship Salvation does not mean going to heaven with no strings attached. There is a long list of commands attached. It would be nice to know up front what is on that list.
 
Upvote 0

dcalling

Senior Member
Jan 31, 2014
3,184
323
✟107,345.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
And you get all this from the presence of the obscure Hebrew word hamad in the last commandment?

Perhaps Moses could have been more clear and said, "Thou shalt not harm other people when trying to get what you want." That doesn't seem to be what he said.

It is chamad, not hamad (starts with CHETH). The Jewish people clearly understand it as desire, the usages elsewhere and from commentaries.

Jesus is answering the man's questions, as the man want to go to heaven, and Jesus told him what to do but he can't do it even when under direct command from God. The Rabies think we can obey this commandment, but as God showed us we can't keep any of the commandments (to hate your brother is murder). Our only hope is to take redemption from God.
 
Upvote 0

dcalling

Senior Member
Jan 31, 2014
3,184
323
✟107,345.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
It was an analogy.

And you are missing the point. The point is that Lordship Salvation is like buying a car on credit with no money down and saying you got it free. A car is not free if there is a payment plan after you leave the dealer. Likewise salvation is not free of requirements if there is a long list of requirements afterwards. According to Lordship Salvation as described in the link you provided, there is a long, long list of requirements after the original commitment.

So Lordship Salvation does not mean going to heaven with no strings attached. There is a long list of commands attached. It would be nice to know up front what is on that list.

It is not credit. It is more like someone paid your debits for you.

A more accurate analogy is someone build houses for homeless, it is totally free to homeless but they have to promise to turn their life around, i.e no more drug/gambling and the house is yours. Some accepts and some rejects.
 
Upvote 0

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
A more accurate analogy is someone build houses for homeless, it is totally free to homeless but they have to promise to turn their life around, i.e no more drug/gambling and the house is yours. Some accepts and some rejects.
Do they need to turn their lives around? If they need to turn their lives around in order to stay in the house, then there is a requirement: Follow these rules and you can stay here.

But if all they need to do is say they are going to turn their lives around (while snickering) and then do nothing about it, why even bother to make them say it?

Does your analogy describe the requirements to get to heaven? If so, does one need to live up to the commitment, or can one simply make a commitment and forget about it?
 
Upvote 0

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Jesus is answering the man's questions, as the man want to go to heaven, and Jesus told him what to do
Not really. According to your post, there are two ways to get to heaven. A) Follow a certain list of rules, or B) take redemption from God. Jesus only told him about plan A. Why did Jesus leave out plan B?
but he can't do it even when under direct command from God. The Rabies think we can obey this commandment, but as God showed us we can't keep any of the commandments (to hate your brother is murder).
OK, so plan A is impossible. So why even bother with plan A?

Suppose I work at a museum ticket counter where children are allowed in free. A mother asks what it cost for her child, and I tell her $1 million dollars. Have I told her the truth? No. Suppose I tell her, "It is either a) $1 million to get in, or b) it is free." Did I tell the truth? Well technically yes, but it is a really weird way to say it.

Back to our man with the question. He asks what it takes to get into heaven. Jesus responds with a list of rules. Did he tell the truth? If there is a plan B, then no, one does not need to follow that list of rules. Had Jesus said you can either obey these rules or you can take redemption, would he be telling the truth? I suppose you would say that would be the truth, but it would be a weird way to say it. Why not just give him plan B, since that is the only plan that is possible?

Our only hope is to take redemption from God.
What does "take redemption from God" mean? How does one go about doing that?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

dcalling

Senior Member
Jan 31, 2014
3,184
323
✟107,345.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Do they need to turn their lives around? If they need to turn their lives around in order to stay in the house, then there is a requirement: Follow these rules and you can stay here.

But if all they need to do is say they are going to turn their lives around (while snickering) and then do nothing about it, why even bother to make them say it?

Does your analogy describe the requirements to get to heaven? If so, does one need to live up to the commitment, or can one simply make a commitment and forget about it?

Nope, my analogy is only a analogy. It is better than the credit one :)

We as humans can't change ourselves, only God can, and God will change us inside out, and God will help us full fill the commitment.
 
Upvote 0

klutedavid

Well-Known Member
Dec 7, 2013
9,346
4,381
Sydney, Australia.
✟244,844.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Which commandments must I follow to get into heaven? If I read this correctly, Jesus' first answer is that there are 6 necessary commandments. Five of those are in The Ten, and another one he threw in there from elsewhere.
No one gets into heaven by obeying the ten commandments.

I will repeat that.

No one gets into heaven by obeying the ten commandments.

Here are the commandments that we have been given.

1 John 3:11-12
For this is the message which you have heard from the beginning, that we should love one another; not as Cain, who was of the evil one and slew his brother.

1 John 3:23-24
This is His commandment, that we believe in the name of His Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, just as He commanded us. The one who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. We know by this that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us.


1 John 4:7-8
Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love.

1 John 4:12
No one has seen God at any time; if we love one another, God abides in us, and His love is perfected in us.

1 John 4:21
And this commandment we have from Him, that the one who loves God should love his brother also.

The commandments we were given are just two commandments.

Matthew 11:30
For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.
 
Upvote 0

dcalling

Senior Member
Jan 31, 2014
3,184
323
✟107,345.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Not really. According to your post, there are two ways to get to heaven. A) Follow a certain list of rules, or B) take redemption from God. Jesus only told him about plan A. Why did Jesus leave out plan B?

OK, so plan A is impossible. So why even bother with plan A?

Suppose I work at a museum ticket counter where children are allowed in free. A mother asks what it cost for her child, and I tell her $1 million dollars. Have I told her the truth? No. Suppose I tell her, "It is either a) $1 million to get in, or b) it is free." Did I tell the truth? Well technically yes, but it is a really weird way to say it.

Back to our man with the question. He asks what it takes to get into heaven. Jesus responds with a list of rules. Did he tell the truth? If there is a plan B, then no, one does not need to follow that list of rules. Had Jesus said you can either obey these rules or you can take redemption, would he be telling the truth? I suppose you would say that would be the truth, but it would be a weird way to say it. Why not just give him plan B, since that is the only plan that is possible?


What does "take redemption from God" mean? How does one go about doing that?

Plan A is a mirror, show us how holy God is. Jesus is telling him what the requirement is (God's standard), and the man said he already followed but knows he didn't, and he kept on asking, and don't want to follow through (i.e. Love your God with ALL).

Take redemption from God means you trust what God told us to do, i.e. in our case accept Jesus as our savior, accept his redemption (that we have sinned, but God used the only one who did not sin, Jesus as a sin offering). We have to accept that we can't save ourselves, we can only follow God and accept God's word and grace, that is what I mean redemption.
 
Upvote 0

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
No one gets into heaven by obeying the ten commandments.

I will repeat that.

No one gets into heaven by obeying the ten commandments.
OK, so it is not the ten.

How about following the seven commandments? When Jesus was asked which commandments, he listed seven: Five from the Big Ten, one from elsewhere in the Old Testament, and one he made up from scratch (sell all that you have and give it to the poor). Was he mistaken when he told the man these are the seven he needed to follow to enter into eternal life?

Here are the commandments that we have been given.

1 John 3:11-12
For this is the message which you have heard from the beginning, that we should love one another; not as Cain, who was of the evil one and slew his brother.

1 John 3:23-24
This is His commandment, that we believe in the name of His Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, just as He commanded us. The one who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. We know by this that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us.


1 John 4:7-8
Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love.

1 John 4:12
No one has seen God at any time; if we love one another, God abides in us, and His love is perfected in us.

1 John 4:21
And this commandment we have from Him, that the one who loves God should love his brother also.

The commandments we were given are just two commandments.
As, so when Jesus told the man seven commandments he needed to follow to have eternal life, he was mistaken? It is actually just two commandments that we need to follow to get to heaven?

One would think that a book about how to get to heaven would have made this clear.
 
Upvote 0

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
We as humans can't change ourselves, only God can, and God will change us inside out, and God will help us full fill the commitment.
I was not asking what kind of assistance was available to help us fulfill a commitment.

I was asking what commandments we need to commit to following. Apparently we need to commit to following something, and we need to follow through on that commitment. But you are a little vague on what we must commit to do.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Plan A is a mirror, show us how holy God is. Jesus is telling him what the requirement is (God's standard), and the man said he already followed but knows he didn't, and he kept on asking, and don't want to follow through (i.e. Love your God with ALL).
You call the commandments in plan A "requirements" but we can skip them by choosing plan B. In that case, they really aren't requirements.

So it seems odd to me that Jesus told this man only plan A (keep commandments) when he knew plan A was impossibly hard for humans, and a much easier plan B was available. Why didn't Jesus tell him plan B?

Take redemption from God means you trust what God told us to do, i.e. in our case accept Jesus as our savior, accept his redemption (that we have sinned, but God used the only one who did not sin, Jesus as a sin offering).

You seem to be saying that all Jesus had to say was, "You can't be good enough, but no worries, it does not matter what you do. Here. Have eternal life. It's a gift. Accept it. No strings attached, except also you must surrender to Christ as Lord, follow God, and follow through on a specific commitment to turn your life around. Details to be described later."
We have to accept that we can't save ourselves, we can only follow God and accept God's word and grace, that is what I mean redemption.
OK, it comes back to "following God" and "fulfilling a commitment". And that is on top of the acceptance part? So there is some fine print we need to discuss before we sign on?

Must one "follow God" and "fulfill a commitment" to get to heaven? If one must follow God and fulfill a commitment to get to heaven, exactly what does that entail?
 
Upvote 0

klutedavid

Well-Known Member
Dec 7, 2013
9,346
4,381
Sydney, Australia.
✟244,844.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
OK, so it is not the ten.

How about following the seven commandments? When Jesus was asked which commandments, he listed seven: Five from the Big Ten, one from elsewhere in the Old Testament, and one he made up from scratch (sell all that you have and give it to the poor). Was he mistaken when he told the man these are the seven he needed to follow to enter into eternal life?
If you could obey them perfectly, then of course you enter heaven. I don't think that anyone has ever loved their neighbor, as they love themselves. I don't even think that is possible to do. Though, Jesus fulfilled the demands of the entire law. Maybe that's why the law exists, to show us we are sinners and enable us to identify the messiah
As, so when Jesus told the man seven commandments he needed to follow to have eternal life, he was mistaken? It is actually just two commandments that we need to follow to get to heaven?
Believing in the death and resurrection of Jesus is the primary doctrine that initiates salvation. That is not in the seven. Loving others is the eternal command.
One would think that a book about how to get to heaven would have made this clear.
I think it is clear in the text but it takes a lot of attention to see it. Here read the following.

The rich young ruler.

Matthew 19:19-21
"Honor your father and mother; and You shall love your neighbor as yourself". The young man said to Him, “All these things I have kept; what am I still lacking?” Jesus said to him, “If you wish to be complete, go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”

So the gospel was proclaimed. It is in the text but not easy to notice.

Matthew 19:23-26
And Jesus said to His disciples, “Truly I say to you, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” When the disciples heard this, they were very astonished and said, “Then who can be saved?” 26 And looking at them Jesus said to them, “With people this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

Salvation is only granted by Jesus Christ.

Thus the ten commandments are there to show you that you need Jesus.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danthemailman
Upvote 0

klutedavid

Well-Known Member
Dec 7, 2013
9,346
4,381
Sydney, Australia.
✟244,844.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Sir, your claim that no unbeliever is ever moral has been proven false. I have observed unbelievers with my own eyes that are moral. All it takes is one such person to prove your claim false. I have found many. Your claim is false.



No, contradictions can be proven.

For instance, Exodus 20 says "Thou shalt not steal".

But in Exodus 3:22 God commands the Israelites to steal. So is stealing wrong or isn't it?

You say, this in response to, "Do you agree with me that it was immoral to kill Amalekite babies?"

Do you understand I Samuel 15? There it says God commanded the Israelites to kill all the Amalekites, including the babies, for what their ancestors did centuries earlier. Surely it is wrong to kill people because their ancestors did something wrong. And most definitely it is wrong to kill babies because their ancestors did something wrong.

If you had been living in that day, and you had the command to kill Amalekite babies, would you have chased a two year old down the street, ignored her pleas, and thrust your spear through her heart? Would you willingly and gladly slay a two year old girl?

No, sir, total war is not like that. Check out the Geneva Convention Rules. Any civilized country realizes that such acts are wrong.

That does not change the fact that slaughtering babies is immoral. If your God commands people to slaughter babies, then he is commanding something immoral.



Do you consider this child to be totally depraved? I do not.

beautiful-baby-1024x819.jpg


If you were living in King Saul's day, and this baby was an Amalekite, would you have willingly and gladly taken your sword and cut off this baby's head?
In the Second World War we bombed German and Japanese cities. In fact, we nuked two cities in Japan.

Those cities were mainly inhabited by women, children and babies. The men were away fighting in the war. So I think, yes, we have often taken the sword to women and children.
 
Upvote 0

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Those cities were mainly inhabited by women, children and babies. The men were away fighting in the war. So I think, yes, we have often taken the sword to women and children.
True.

But the main target, at least on paper, was the industrial-military might in the Japanese cities we bombed. We did not drop the bombs specifically to kill babies.

And there is endless debate whether the limited military advantage of destroying Japanese war-making might justified the slaughter of innocents. I tend to think it was not justified. But we digress.

In I Samuel, we are not talking about the unintentional side effect of war in which babies also die. We are talking about the deliberate attack on babies. Do you agree that it is wrong to deliberately take your sword and slaughter babies in a war?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,703
2,335
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟467,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
If you could obey them perfectly, then of course you enter heaven. I don't think that anyone has ever loved their neighbor, as they love themselves. I don't even think that is possible to do. Though, Jesus fulfilled the demands of the entire law.
So whether it is two or seven or ten commandments is irrelevant. Why did you stress that it was two?

Your point is that Plan A (following commandments) doesn't work.

I find it odd that Jesus told this man only Plan A, when Plan A never works.
Maybe that's why the law exists, to show us we are sinners and enable us to identify the messiahBelieving in the death and resurrection of Jesus is the primary doctrine that initiates salvation.
I didn't ask what initiates salvation. I asked what we need to do to get to heaven.

If one believes and has salvation initiated, is that the only requirement, or are there other requirements?
That is not in the seven. Loving others is the eternal command.I think it is clear in the text but it takes a lot of attention to see it. Here read the following.

The rich young ruler.

Matthew 19:19-21
"Honor your father and mother; and You shall love your neighbor as yourself". The young man said to Him, “All these things I have kept; what am I still lacking?” Jesus said to him, “If you wish to be complete, go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”

So the gospel was proclaimed. It is in the text but not easy to notice.
I am a little confused what you are getting at. Jesus lists seven things and promises that if you keep those seven you have eternal life. Then, after saying the previous list was sufficient, he adds on the words you underline. Are you saying there are actually eight commandments we need to follow? Or is this last one you underlined the only one that counts? So is it 1 or 2 or 7 or 8 or 10 or hundreds of commandments that we need to follow?


Matthew 19:23-26
And Jesus said to His disciples, “Truly I say to you, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” When the disciples heard this, they were very astonished and said, “Then who can be saved?” 26 And looking at them Jesus said to them, “With people this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”
I have heard three contradicting explanations for why Jesus told this man only Plan A (get to heaven by following commandments) without telling him about Plan B.
1. Plan B was not yet available. The man was up the proverbial creek until Plan B became available.
2. Jesus really meant pick either (the impossible) Plan A or (the free) Plan B, but neglected to mention Plan B.
3. Plan A actually is required and does work once you have God's help. Plan B is just a means of getting assistance to do Plan A.
The words you now underline are used by those who choose explanation 3. Are you now switching to explanation 3?
 
Upvote 0