God and unbelievers
How does God deal with non-believers?
2 Kings 17:25
When they first lived there, they did not worship the LORD; so he sent lions among them and they killed some of the people.
The Bible alleges this god sends lions to kill unbelievers. Why am I somehow not very scared of this god and his lions, which are no more than paper tigers?
2 Kings 17:25
When they first lived there, they did not worship the LORD; so he sent lions among them and they killed some of the people.
The Bible alleges this god sends lions to kill unbelievers. Why am I somehow not very scared of this god and his lions, which are no more than paper tigers?
posted by Steven Carr at 1:13 AM
12 Comments:
Didn't the Lions switch sides later?
Bloody Lions you just can't rely on them!
Now if the Bible had mentioned retro-viruses I would be impressed.
Steven,
What is the point of this post? To say that God is unfair, or to say that it just seems a bit silly? I don't quite get it.
Phil
The Good Book should be left to gather dust on a shelf, or brought down and quoted?
One might ask the same question of your blog.
PS. Your not-quite-articulated criticism of the above verse - which supposedly proves that God sends lions to kill unbelievers - conveniently ignores the context that the unbelievers at that time (not today, thankfully) did some pretty horrible things, as is clear from the whole chapter.
Oh well,if a book says people are evil, they are obviously Untermenschen who must be vernichted.
Love your enemies, unless they do some pretty horrible things, in which case send lions to eat them.
Pcraig still does not explain why unbelievers of today are not scared of his imaginary god. Can't this god rustle up a few paper tigers?
Well, the point that crime deserves justice/punishment stands pretty well-established even today. "Love your enemies" doesn't mean let them sacrifice their children. (I think your attempts at satire still need work.)
As for people not being scared of God, there are all sorts of reasons. Lots of people weren't scared back then, and lots aren't now. So I'm not really sure what your point is.
"...doesn't mean let them sacrifice their children. "
Hmmm... God accepted the sacrifice of Jephthahs daughter for example:
29 Then the Spirit of the LORD came upon Jephthah. He crossed Gilead and Manasseh, passed through Mizpah of Gilead, and from there he advanced against the Ammonites. 30 And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD : "If you give the Ammonites into my hands, 31 whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites will be the LORD's, and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering."
32 Then Jephthah went over to fight the Ammonites, and the LORD gave them into his hands. 33 He devastated twenty towns from Aroer to the vicinity of Minnith, as far as Abel Keramim. Thus Israel subdued Ammon.
34 When Jephthah returned to his home in Mizpah, who should come out to meet him but his daughter, dancing to the sound of tambourines! She was an only child. Except for her he had neither son nor daughter. 35 When he saw her, he tore his clothes and cried, "Oh! My daughter! You have made me miserable and wretched, because I have made a vow to the LORD that I cannot break."
Judges 11:29-35
I think you're reading something into the story that isn't there. Where does it say what God thinks of this? Isn't it a story about Jephthah's stupidity for making such a silly promise?
I am not sure what you think I am reading into the story. God lets Jephthahs sacrifice his daughter, I wouldn't second guess Gods motivations, but he did accept the sacrifice.
Sorry Martin, but there's nothing in the text to suggest that God approves.
Lets review this shall we?
1: "If you give the Ammonites into my hands[...]I will sacrifice[...]"
2: "Jephthah went over to fight the Ammonites, and the LORD gave them into his hands"
You may claim if you wish that God intended to do that anyways, and did not intend the girl's sacrifice, but don't act as if the text doesn't suggest it.
Post a Comment
<< Home