F
FuzzyBunny116
Guest
In the OT, for example, adultery is punishable by death. Jesus, though, in the NT forgives the woman who commits it. Why is He so merciful in the New, but seems so harsh in the Old?
- Status
F
Fidelis
Guest
If you only take isolated instances like the ones you cited, a very unbalanced perspective is easy to develop. In fact, however, the Old Testament is primarily the story of how God covenated himself to Israel. Even when Israel repeatedly turned their back on God to chase after idols, time after time God had mercy on them and took them back.
Contrariwise, it is an easily documentable fact that in the New Testament, Jesus spoke far more about hell and judgment, than he ever did about heaven.
As you begin to read both Testaments more widely and in context, you will see it is clear that God never changes.
Contrariwise, it is an easily documentable fact that in the New Testament, Jesus spoke far more about hell and judgment, than he ever did about heaven.
As you begin to read both Testaments more widely and in context, you will see it is clear that God never changes.
S
Steven_Merten
Guest
Hello Fuzzybunny,
Actually King David was guilty of adultery, murder and coveting his neighbor’s wife. God forgave King David.
It is actually the modern Catholic Church leaders whom are out of balance when preaching about Jesus rather than an imballance between Old Testament and New Testament.
Did you know that it is Jesus, not Moses, who really gave us the image of eternal damnation, eternal punishment, casting souls into the fires of Gehenna, throwing people into the fire prepared for the devil and his angels, ect.?
Christians today automatically assume that hell and damnation was a Moses thing and now Jesus taught only of forgiveness and love. Yet it was Moses, not Jesus, that first gave God’s command to love your neighbor as yourself. Moses is the one who first taught people to take no revenge. Instead it was Jesus who first gave us our modern understanding of hell and who He will send there.
Please take a look at the side of Jesus that most homilists do not focus on in their homilies. The parts where Jesus tells us He will not forgive and the parts where Jesus tells us He will cast people into hell.
Please visit WARNING! Jesus Does Not Forgive All
Actually King David was guilty of adultery, murder and coveting his neighbor’s wife. God forgave King David.
It is actually the modern Catholic Church leaders whom are out of balance when preaching about Jesus rather than an imballance between Old Testament and New Testament.
Did you know that it is Jesus, not Moses, who really gave us the image of eternal damnation, eternal punishment, casting souls into the fires of Gehenna, throwing people into the fire prepared for the devil and his angels, ect.?
Christians today automatically assume that hell and damnation was a Moses thing and now Jesus taught only of forgiveness and love. Yet it was Moses, not Jesus, that first gave God’s command to love your neighbor as yourself. Moses is the one who first taught people to take no revenge. Instead it was Jesus who first gave us our modern understanding of hell and who He will send there.
Please take a look at the side of Jesus that most homilists do not focus on in their homilies. The parts where Jesus tells us He will not forgive and the parts where Jesus tells us He will cast people into hell.
Please visit WARNING! Jesus Does Not Forgive All
A
Aaron_I
Guest
Wait, are you seriously suggesting that Catholics are wacky liberals who try to hide the existence of hell. That is an illfounded belief (at least outside of Boston). Frankly I see liberal Protestants as being more problematic.
For the record, I went to Catholic school for 12 years, and yet somehow understood that Jesus preached the existence of hell. Also I somehow missed the part where anyone had thought that Moses stressed the existence of hell. Heck, did they even believe in the afterlife by that point?
For the record, I went to Catholic school for 12 years, and yet somehow understood that Jesus preached the existence of hell. Also I somehow missed the part where anyone had thought that Moses stressed the existence of hell. Heck, did they even believe in the afterlife by that point?
D
dkward2
Guest
I do not think Jesus was a pacifist. One only has to look at his reaction to the money lenders in the temple. He did not go on a hunger strike to get them out, nor did he have a sit in. He went in violently and overturned tables and destroyed stuff.
In Luke 22:36, Jesus talks about buying swords. Later, his disciples tell him they have two swords, and Jesus says that it is enough. While Jesus said turning the other cheek was a virtue, he was not a fanatic. Turning the other cheek, spoken as a metaphor, does not mean you don’t have a right to the defense of your person.
A little off-topic (talking about Hell):
As far as I know of, many Jews to this day do not believe in the hell that you two seem to speaking of: a place of continual torture/fire/etc.
For background info, I was raised a Protestant, and was made aware of a scary hell early on. I do not currently believe that such a place exists. For example, the word Gahenna was not used by Jesus to suggest a place of torture in the afterlife. It was merely a garbage dump where thieves and others not worthy of a grave were tossed after death. They also burned brimstone (sulfur) in this pit to keep things hot and to destroy the trash.
Gahenna is indeed a place of fire and brimstone, but Jesus wasn’t talking about an afterlife of continual pain.
In Luke 22:36, Jesus talks about buying swords. Later, his disciples tell him they have two swords, and Jesus says that it is enough. While Jesus said turning the other cheek was a virtue, he was not a fanatic. Turning the other cheek, spoken as a metaphor, does not mean you don’t have a right to the defense of your person.
A little off-topic (talking about Hell):
As far as I know of, many Jews to this day do not believe in the hell that you two seem to speaking of: a place of continual torture/fire/etc.
For background info, I was raised a Protestant, and was made aware of a scary hell early on. I do not currently believe that such a place exists. For example, the word Gahenna was not used by Jesus to suggest a place of torture in the afterlife. It was merely a garbage dump where thieves and others not worthy of a grave were tossed after death. They also burned brimstone (sulfur) in this pit to keep things hot and to destroy the trash.
Gahenna is indeed a place of fire and brimstone, but Jesus wasn’t talking about an afterlife of continual pain.
D
Della
Guest
I think what you are asking is has the law changed from the OT to the NT, yes? Well, it hasn’t. While the punishment for certain sins was and still is death, Jesus ushered in the age of grace, in which men can have direct access to God through the graces Christ earned for us by his redemptive death on the cross. The people of the OT were looking forward to the time of Christ, the Messiah and we are living in the age of the Messiah, present to the world in his Church, both in the authority he gave to our ordained leaders but also in the sacraments, especially the sacrament of the altar. God was merciful in the OT just as in the NT. Many times he forgave and held back his rightful judgment out of love for his people, and he is still doing that for us today, but now we have the gift of the grace of God initiated in our souls through baptism. I hope that helps you.
L
Libero
Guest
It does seem to me that God is very vengeful, to an unchristian extent in the OT. I am not questioning God, but there is a stark contrast to how God deals with sinners in the OT and the NT.
What about the parting of the Sea. God allows all of these chosen children to escape, but will just kill all the others who were not as nice (and thinking into it, many of those people would not have bad hearts, they would just have been influenced).
What about the parting of the Sea. God allows all of these chosen children to escape, but will just kill all the others who were not as nice (and thinking into it, many of those people would not have bad hearts, they would just have been influenced).
F
Fidelis
Guest
This is a popular minimalist interpretation of Jesus’ use of the word Gehenna, but it does not make sense in the context of Jesus’ overall teaching about the afterlife. Jesus, as he often did, was in this case clearly using an earthly metaphor to emphasize a heavenly reality.
P
Paris_Blues
Guest
Steven Merten:
Therefore, it would be our choice.
True but isn’t it basically because the reason why people are cast into Hell is because for their own choice? I think Jesus would like to forgive ALL but how can He if they choose not to repent and follow HIm?
Therefore, it would be our choice.
D
Della
Guest
In the instance of the parting of the Red Sea, God was not dealing with individuals as separate souls but as groups of people doing a very physical thing–Egyptians chasing the Israelites while the Israelites are running from the Egyptians. The Egyptians weren’t going to stop the Israelites and ask them nicely to return quietly to slavery in Egypt, they were going to put every one of them, men, women, and children to the sword. Do you really think God ought to have spared them and done what? Have them all make a bonfire, sit down together, and sing cum-by-ya holding each other’s hands? Should we have done that with the Nazis or with the terrorists who ran commercial airplanes filled with innocent people into building also filled with innocent people? There is a time for peace and a time for war, a time for mercy and a time for justice, and that will not change until Christ returns.
S
SueKrum
Guest
I think we need to take the bible as a whole. Protestants like to take isolated scriptures. but if you read the Bible cover to cover (which would take a long time) you would see that nothing has changed. It’s gotten better because now the holy spirt dwells in us after baptisim. But Scripture says that “Jesus Christ is the same ysterday, today and forever” (I can’t quote it which one it is, that’s not my gift) God doesn’t change. To imply that He changed would say that He is not perfect! We need a healthy ballance between to love of God and His wrath. God is love, but he is also justice. And thank God for it! I’m glad He is! You should be too!
L
Libero
Guest
Should we have killed all Nazis, no. Many had just been influenced by an evil but very intelligent man. What is so wrong with wanting to help people. Many of those Egyptians chasing Gods chosen children would have done so because they were given orders to. Are people really so bad that they deserve going to hell? Whilst there may be a time for peace and war, we can not just choose to forget our faith during the times of war. We are instructed to show compassion, and love for all, we cannot just abandon those beliefs because others have not learnt that they should be followed. Surely trying to educate people is better than just throwing them out like bad apples.
D
Della
Guest
Whoa there! Who said anything about individual Egyptians or Germans going to hell who fought under orders from their leaders? That’s not how God sees it, you know. The individual guilt or innocence of any particular soul has nothing whatsoever to do with whose side that person was on in a conflict. God judges their hearts and their motives, not us.
And yes, sometimes war is necessary to defend the innocent who would certainly die if the nation or leader who is in the wrong isn’t stopped. Think of the millions of Jews, Catholics, Jehovah Witnesses, Gypsies, etc., etc. that Hitler had murdered in concentrations camps. Shouldn’t we have tried to liberate them and save them from the horrors of the camps and an unjust death? Not to mention all the peoples and nations who had been subjugated against their will to the iron rule of the Nazis.
God is not a pacifist and neither was Jesus. He never told us that we weren’t to defend the innocent nor not go to war. What Jesus talked about was taking insults and persecution for being one of his own and not seek revenge for such things. That is a very different thing from conducting a just war or defending the innocent.
Death isn’t the very worst thing that can happen to anyone. Not being saved is the worst thing that can happen. Everyone dies whether by natural causes, including catastrophes of nature, to illness, to many things out of their control. God judges the whole of the person’s life and what they did with the grace he gave them, not by the things we humans would think. God’s ways are not our ways, you know.
D
dkward2
Guest
What other teachings do you look to to arrive at your conclusion of Jesus’ overall teaching?
M
mlchance
Guest
Why is God so different in the OT?
He isn’t. The very same God who killed the first-born of Egypt also delivered the Sermon on the Mount.
– Mark L. Chance.
He isn’t. The very same God who killed the first-born of Egypt also delivered the Sermon on the Mount.
– Mark L. Chance.
F
Fidelis
Guest
A good place to start is in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
**ARTICLE 12
“I BELIEVE IN LIFE EVERLASTING” **
Sections 1020 - 1065
scborromeo.org/index2.htm
This is a complete explanation of the four last things: death, judgment, heaven and hell. The footnotes are packed with Scripture references clearly showing Jesus’ teaching.
D
dkward2
Guest
Fidelis:
God destroys things that offend him; He does not torture them.
I don’t understand how this can be correct. I mean, the Day of Judgment hasn’t even happened yet. The dead have not risen (1 Thesselonians). Furthermore, the dead know “not any thing” (Ecc 9:5). There are also countless examples of death described as being asleep. If judgment day is when we are all judged, how can people already be in hell? Furthermore, Jesus descended into hell. This makes perfect sense only if hell means the grave. I don’t think it makes sense that Jesus would be sent to a fiery pit to be tortured. Nor do I think there is any number of sins you can commit that would justify torture for eternity. God is a just God. A just God would not do that.
God destroys things that offend him; He does not torture them.
J
javelin
Guest
I think you are equating God’s destruction of the Egyptians (or any others in the OT) with His condemning them to Hell, and I don’t think that’s necessarily true. As another poster stated, God judges each individually. However, He cannot necessarily always bring general judgements selectively. Recall the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (spelling?). God would have spared those cities if even a few could be found who were just. But there were none, and so they were all destroyed. He could have spared only the few just ones, but He would have spared all for their sake. That’s pretty merciful, really.
A concept I’ve read about lately in covenant theology is the idea of “covenant curses”. Those who abide by the precepts of their covenant with God are blessed, but those who enter the covenant and break it are cursed. God’s blessings are many, but His judgement can be severe. It has always been that way, and always will be. God’s promise under the final, perfect covenant forged by Jesus on the cross is that we can be with Him for all eternity if we repent and avail ourselves to the Grace He offers us. For those who choose not to repent and live in the power of sin, they have broken the covenant and will be left to an eternal separation from God – which is where Satan and the demons abide. Sounds like Hell to me.
Peace,
javelin
L
Libero
Guest
Whilst this is an example, and perhaps one that is not the best given the current topic, we could certainly find more examples of God seeking vengence, (perhaps not vengence) but acting more violently in circumstances in the Old Testament, where in The NT he would respond in a far different manner.
My point being, that I believe in the stories of The Egyptians and the Israelites, and then Sodom, God would have spared them, the angels would be there to convince them to change, not there so that they can ensure that destruction goes ahead.
Either way, my point was that we cannot persecute the many due to the philosphies or ideaologies of the few. If we were to kill all Nazis in WW2, we would have taken many innocent who did not believe in Hitlers cause as well.
D
Daniel_Marsh
Guest
Hi Micheal, personaly, I view revelation as being progressive. The further one wades into scripture the deeper one understands the nature and being of God. As such, I do not see a difference between the god of the OT vs the god of the NT. I see God’s love, mercy, holiness and judgement in both testaments. For an example of God’s mercy and love in the OT read Eze 18.
- Status