Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I have never looked this issue up, because as far as I'm concerned, it does not matter. It is a foolish question and I feel it is only being used to mock God, Christianity, and Christians for being in God and Christianity. Am I wrong? And to answer your question, since I have never taken it upon myself to research this rather off the wall topic before, you might want to read the Taryag Mitzvot to learn more about the rituals and regulations of the Jewish Temple and religion. I have no idea, since I have never researched such an odd topic before, let alone even considered researching it, because as I said, it doesn't matter to me personally, especially from the perspective of eternity. All I know is God had His own laws, rules and regulations regarding the Jewish Temple and religion for His own reasons. None of that applies to me, as a Christian, today. The reasons why God disallowed men with crushed testicles into the Temple may be interesting or even intriguing history of the Jewish religion to some, but it isn't to me. I'm not Jewish, by ethnicity or religion, so none of that really matters in regards to my personal faith and belief in God Himself.
I never said that. I said you have been explained several times what this verse was about but you keep repeating it over and over again in the same manner. You keep saying God said this or instructed this. I have said it was an expression of a person who was in anguish. You have also had another explain to you some context but you also choose to ignore this. You are determined to put your own meaning and context to it so there's nothing i can do. I cant keep repeating this so I will have to leave it at that.Now, if you wouldn't mind, please show me where you (or anybody else) have explained to me in the past why Psalms 139 was chosen to be called "scripture."
It is not telling us to sing it in church. It is about someone else in history. God is not saying to sing this in church and it is not a instructional thing. The person writing it is saying that it is hard for them to sing a song about being in captivity. But the captors are making them do so. The expression in verse 9 is about how the writer felt about the people who killed his family and children and destroyed his city. He is angry and wants the same thing to happen to them. They use to kill the children in war as a way of stopping the enemies children growing up to come and make war against them in the future. This is how they were back then. It was different to now. But you are only looking at it in today's context. They also use to have people fight to the death in stadiums fro entertainment. They also use to crucify people to stakes. They also use to have slaves and sacrifice animals. It was a different time and war was a way of life. Revenge was a way of law and people thought this way. You are seeing things in black and white and dictating how you think it should be like either it was this way or this way and there is no other way but the way I say it has to be.Answer me directly, yes or not... would you sing "happy is he who dashes their infants upon the rocks" in church?
No it is not the only purpose of psalms. have you ever research it your self instead of asking someone and then maybe holding perhaps misinformed interpretations to them. If you want to find out something you have to do some research yourself as well. This is the only way you can truly find out for your self. not on behalf of someone else but for yourself. Afterall you would do it with anything else but it seems you dont want to apply this to this subject.That is the purpose of Psalms, and we've even seen other posters suggest I chant such vitriol.
You are the one who is saying they are about this and that. They are not just about praising God. You are trying to restrict them to what you want and what you want to make them for the purpose of making out how bad they are and how bad God is. You have already decided that this is the case so everything you do is going to be for this reason. All you have to do is acknowledge that you dont believe what the bible and God says and leave it at that. I am not going to give you the answer you want because I believe that God is love and that there is more to what is said besides what you are implying. That is just the way it is. We are just going around in circles now.So if there was a Psalm about how the faithful should praise God and keep a sharp sword in their hand so they can execute vengeance... that's just an expression right?
Once again you are the one who is twisting and changing things. If i say that man is weak you then say the bible is weak. If i say that God is perfect you then say what man has said is perfect so what is written is what God said. You want to attribute what a mere man has said to God and not allow any human aspect to the bible. You want to put onto God things that he did not do and say so that you can bring down God. So i cant say anything else as you see it the way you do and i see it the way i do.So the bible isn't weak, Psalms 139 isn't weak, it was just written perfectly by an imperfect person? So when the imperfect person says a person will be happy if they bash an innocent child on rocks, that statement is perfect but the author is not. Am I getting this?
You can believe that if it makes you feel better.
DiligentlySeekingGod said:And we should remember the following scriptural verses which tell us about the unbeliever, of how they are spiritually dead in their sins and trespasses (Ephesians 2:1-3; Colossians 2:13) and cannot truly understand the things of God (Romans 8:7; 1 Corinthians 2:14).
DiligentlySeekingGod said:I have never researched this kind of topic before. I don't know why in the world I would want to in the first place. As far as I'm concerned, it does not matter. It is a foolish question and I feel it is only being asked to mock God, Christianity, and Christians for being in God and Christianity. A red herring, if you will. Am I wrong? And to answer your question, since I have never taken it upon myself to research this off the wall topic before, you might want to read the Taryag Mitzvot to learn more about the rituals and regulations of the Jewish Temple and religion for yourself. Because as I have already told you, it does not matter to me personally, especially from the perspective of eternity. All I know is God had His own laws, rules and regulations regarding the Jewish Temple and religion for His own reasons. None of that applies to me, as a Christian, today. The reasons why God disallowed men with crushed testicles into the Temple may be interesting or even intriguing history of the Jewish religion to some, but it isn't to me. I'm not Jewish, by ethnicity or religion, so none of that really matters in regards to my personal faith and belief in God Himself. So, you don't see any reason for what God did? So what? Neither do I but I am not God.
Are you not an atheist? As an atheist, would you not disagree with me on the things of God? Am I wrong about that?
Please just answer the question: Why would God not allow men with crushed testicles in the temple? You are a true-believer, spiritually alive and able to understand the things of God, are you not?
You can believe that if it makes you feel better.
Thank you for showing us marvelously that you have no insight into the things of God any better than any non-believer. In fact, you may have less insight.
Stevevw said:I never said that. I said you have been explained several times what this verse was about but you keep repeating it over and over again in the same manner.
You keep saying God said this or instructed this.
You have also had another explain to you some context but you also choose to ignore this.
You are determined to put your own meaning and context to it so there's nothing i can do. I cant keep repeating this so I will have to leave it at that.
It is not telling us to sing it in church. It is about someone else in history. God is not saying to sing this in church and it is not a instructional thing.
The person writing it is saying that it is hard for them to sing a song about being in captivity. But the captors are making them do so. The expression in verse 9 is about how the writer felt about the people who killed his family and children and destroyed his city. He is angry and wants the same thing to happen to them. They use to kill the children in war as a way of stopping the enemies children growing up to come and make war against them in the future. This is how they were back then. It was different to now.
But you are only looking at it in today's context. They also use to have people fight to the death in stadiums fro entertainment. They also use to crucify people to stakes. They also use to have slaves and sacrifice animals. It was a different time and war was a way of life. Revenge was a way of law and people thought this way. You are seeing things in black and white and dictating how you think it should be like either it was this way or this way and there is no other way but the way I say it has to be.
No it is not the only purpose of psalms. have you ever research it your self instead of asking someone and then maybe holding perhaps misinformed interpretations to them. If you want to find out something you have to do some research yourself as well. This is the only way you can truly find out for your self. not on behalf of someone else but for yourself. Afterall you would do it with anything else but it seems you dont want to apply this to this subject.
You are the one who is saying they are about this and that. They are not just about praising God. You are trying to restrict them to what you want and what you want to make them for the purpose of making out how bad they are and how bad God is. You have already decided that this is the case so everything you do is going to be for this reason. All you have to do is acknowledge that you dont believe what the bible and God says and leave it at that. I am not going to give you the answer you want because I believe that God is love and that there is more to what is said besides what you are implying. That is just the way it is. We are just going around in circles now.
Once again you are the one who is twisting and changing things. If i say that man is weak you then say the bible is weak.
You want to attribute what a mere man has said to God and not allow any human aspect to the bible. You want to put onto God things that he did not do and say so that you can bring down God. So i cant say anything else as you see it the way you do and i see it the way i do.
Absolutely, atheist towards the Christian God but that wasn't my point.
My point was, she can believe I disagree with her, simply because I am an atheist. We all know I guess, there couldn't be any other reason to disagree with her.
Sojourner1 said:Here is the answer to your question. The following is a small section from a much larger article (chapter of a book actually), the link to which I will post after the quoted material:
DeligintlySeekingGod said:I don't know because I don't care to know. It's that simple. It does not matter to me in the very least.
This issue of God not allowing men with crushed testicles into the Temple has NO bearing whatsoever to my personal faith and belief in God. It has no bearing whatsoever on my salvation either. I DO NOT CARE. If you want to obsess over it, then so be it. If I want to know something about God, such as the assurance of my salvation, then I will know it and I do know it. I know who God is and I know about His attributes.
I know what God did for me on the cross of His Son, Jesus Christ. I know how God created creation in six days (and yes I believe that to be true). I know how God created us in His image. I know about the Bible prophecies and the End Times. I know what it means to be a true and genuine Christian, according to the Scriptures. I know the foundations of the Christian Faith - through the Scriptures.
But I do not care to know, in the very least, why God did not allow men with crushed testicles into the Jewish Temple. So what?! I may have less insight about such a foolish and insignificant issue of why God did not allow men with crushed testicles into the Jewish Temple but as far as the real spiritual issues go, I am not the one who is spiritually blind, especially into thinking that such a matter as the one you are obsessed over actually matters, from the perspective of eternity.
You are very simple minded in your approach.
I have supported many Christians on this board regarding their interpretation of God and or the bible, when they don't cherry pick what they like and throw away what they don't like, or contradict themselves in the process. Do I agree with them? No, but that is separate as to whether they can view their own holy book with some level of objectivity.
Absolutely, atheist towards the Christian God but that wasn't my point.
My point was, she can believe I disagree with her, simply because I am an atheist. We all know I guess, there couldn't be any other reason to disagree with her.
I find this explanation inadequate of a God with at least a middle school level education. If God wanted to excommunicate those who had chopped off or mutilated their genitalia in worship of another deity, why doesn't the text say so? Instead, the man who is injured by a bull bucking its legs is just as excommunicated as the guy who cuts off his penis to worship another god. A god of any intellect would have said "a man whose penis or testicles are cut off or crushed for worship of another god is removed from my presence." The text doesn't say that.
Furthermore I find your reference inadequate in that it gives no real proof of these actions having been taken by followers of these other gods. It is conjecture. In an age before any pain medications, are we to really believe that individuals were voluntarily crushing their testicles to worship other gods? Really??? Really???
For these reasons, I find your reference to be a good attempt at explaining an immoral section of the bible, but ultimately not based on truth or evidence.
Sojourner1 said:You're entitled to your opinion and I'm sure you realize that there are many more verses and passages throughout the Bible that could add context to the answer given, as well as outside sources regarding pagan worship practices, but it would take way to much time and would serve no purpose as you are not going to change your mind.
The purpose of this thread is to discuss why Christianity is philosophically different from other religions. Now this thread appears to be shifting to a general apologetics thread in that Christians are being asked to defend their beliefs.
I see. You demonstrably do not care about parts of the bible.
And one of his attributes is that he does not want men with damaged testicles worshiping him.
How did God create us in his image?
So you think parts of the Old Testament are important (Genesis 1-2), but other parts are foolish (Deuteronomy 23)?
You're entitled to your opinion and I'm sure you realize that there are many more verses and passages throughout the Bible that could add context to the answer given, as well as outside sources regarding pagan worship practices, but it would take way to much time and would serve no purpose as you are not going to change your mind. The purpose of this thread is to discuss why Christianity is philosophically different from other religions. Now this thread appears to be shifting to a general apologetics thread in that Christians are being asked to defend their beliefs.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?