NEW explanation for why God killed babies in the OT (Heresy?)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Harry123
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mate you are the only one getting concerned if Balaam’s donkey didn’t talk.
Please quote me where I said a donkey cannot talk?
Click to expand...
Nor does my faith fall if Jonah didnt die inside a whale and was raised by God.

Nor if Elijah didn’t go to heaven body and soul…which in fact is theologically silly from a Christian perspective anyways.

Yet you seem to hold these truths as essential to Catholic faith.
 
Last edited:
BlackFriar said:
Mate you are the only one getting concerned if Balaam’s donkey didn’t talk.
Please quote me where I said a donkey cannot talk?
Click to expand...
Nope, I just don’t think needless boreholes in the mortar of the walls or excavations under the foundations are ever a wise idea. A little fissure here and there may not be a big thing in itself, but maintaining the integrity of the structure is kinda critical in the overall scheme of things.

Apparently you disagree. 🤔
Click to expand...
 
Jesus Himself referenced Jonah and said that the men of Nineveh would condemn “this generation” so that would have to count for something.
 
So you also believe that Jonah died inside the whale and 3 days later God brought him back to life…and if that is not true Christianity fails?
Good luck with that.
 
I said, “It’s gotta count for something when Jesus said it happened.”
 
James817 said:
You can’t understand Scripture if you don’t understand the literal sense. If we didn’t get the fact that God told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, we miss the fact that God was testing Abraham, and we miss the extent of Abraham’s faith and how he received Isaac back as a symbol.
Click to expand...
My understanding agreeing some what that God was calling out Abraham and testing Abraham, who lived in and who was called out from a pagan Nation, where their beliefs were to sacrifice their children to their pagan gods etc
God is testing Abraham first? Preparing him maybe to serve him and to know him? Sends an angel to teach Abraham, and to stop Abraham>>do not do that,>>>> Abraham obeys, accept the belief and faith in The One God, does not take the innocent life of his son. To stop such inhumane practices?
Thus God blesses Abraham, makes a Covenant with Abraham will be the Father of Many nations. Preparing Abraham for his mission, task at hand?
In Genius, it states, All Life is Sacred in the Blood. Is it not repeated through out the whole bible?
Flows also with Ten commandments Thou shall not?
Does not ask for human sacrifice? The One True God does not come to destroy His Creation but to Save?
Does it not further mention>> I think in the book of Isaiah, where God states?>>> I did not ask for your animal sacrifices, stand to be corrected.
Difference of those who believed in many gods, their rituals, practices, belief and the difference of those who believe in The One True God>>makes it very clear>>>>>>>All Life is Sacred in the Blood.
Flows also with Jesus teaching which was all about the>>> little children and those who harm them, better for them, who harms a child>>to tie a large rope around their necks >>>then for them to face judgment day? Something like that. Peace 🙂
 
If you are too embarrassed to answer the question and unpack your contribution its hard to understand why you raised it.
 
No you did. And while we’re at it, let me ask you this question:

Was Jesus lying when He said, “The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and now something greater than Jonah is here?”
 
I have no idea what you just said.
But you did opine that if Balaam’s ass did not speak then Christianity fails.
Good luck with that.
 
BlackFriar said:
40.png
James817:
Was Jesus lying when He said, “The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and now something greater than Jonah is here?”
Click to expand...
Lying about what exactly?
Click to expand...
Will “the men of Nineveh stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it,” or won’t they?

Was Jesus just fictionalizing or speaking metaphorically? There is, then, in your view, a hidden qualifier to the effect that “If the men of Nineveh actually existed, then they would stand up in judgement, but since they didn’t, no worries, just shape up and be good!”

That is possible, I suppose, with Jesus having a bit of fun with what were commonly known Jewish stories.

Kind of like, “If Red Riding Hood were here, she would never have been duped by that wolf in your grandmother’s dress.”

The problem with this way of seeing things is that Jesus used the “sign of Jonah” as the only sign to point forward to his Resurrection, and if the story of Jonah and the accompanying ‘sign’ that goes with it were merely folklore, then that would be good reason for thinking that Jesus viewed his own resurrection in similar light – i.e., as symbolic of something rather than as a real possibility and actual historic event.

The fact that he was really raised from the dead, seems to point back at the story of Jonah as a real occurrence, at least as far as Jesus, AKA God the Son, was concerned.

So, do you suppose the resurrection of Jesus from the dead actually happened, or is that also to be treated as folklore? Just to be clear where you are coming from, I mean.
 
Last edited:
When you can form a complete, relevant and coherent question I will try and answer it.
 
Someone whose Christian faith falls if God did not speak through Balaam’s donkey will be impervious to anything further on this theme no matter how reasonable sorry.

Nor was it your question.
 
BlackFriar said:
Someone whose Christian faith falls if God did not speak through Balaam’s donkey will be impervious to anything further on this theme no matter how reasonable sorry.

Nor was it your question.
Click to expand...
You keep trying to saddle me with this idea that my faith stands or falls on Balaam’s donkey when what I said was the story is in Scripture and doesn’t contradict what God could do, so there isn’t a reason merely to fictionalize it unless you have a penchant to dismiss anything that isn’t scientifically replicable. In which case you would need to dismiss the resurrection, Jesus raising Lazarus and others from the dead and healing diseases, Jesus casting out demons, tongues of fire at Pentecost and a whole host of other supernatural “wonders,” including God becoming bread and wine in the Eucharist.

You still need to explain why some of these non-natural occurrences are admissible while some are not? Where is the line drawn, for you? What is the criteria by which you filter the fictional from the true?

At that point we can clearly determine the criteria where someone’s (at least your) faith stands or falls.

Regarding Balaam’s donkey, it does show God has a sense of humour and I see no reason why it couldn’t have happened. Does my faith fall if it turns out to be merely a fable? Nope. Does my faith fall if the Resurrection turns out to be merely a fable? Yup. But it won’t turn out that way.

Could God raise someone from the dead? Yes. Could he make a donkey talk? No reason to think he couldn’t.
 
Last edited:
A marian point being available, I will take it. Of course then Enoch implies something quite different and The Holy Spirit does the work needed to be sure the other book of Enoch is not canonical. Who could have predicted such congruence?
Is not the Mother of God the nativity of the parted Jordan of Elijah as type? But the OT priest parts the waters to transport himself. Mary transports Christ for all of mankind. Thus baptism recreates us into a new person, a child of God.
Where is this theological silliness? Let the donkey speak.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top