PDA

View Full Version : This is WAR



ISRAEL
Oct 23rd 2013, 01:50 AM
This is WAR
Should a Christian go to war?

Should a Christian go to war where he might kill other people when the Bible says Thou shall not kill
Is it right to do war against others or does the Bible forbid it?

It is difficult to determine when war would be a righteous endeavor given that leaders of nations are not Christian and could easily have ungodly reasons for going to war. Nevertheless, war is an unfortunate reality in this world and it causes great destruction, misery, and loss of life. It should be avoided if possible and undertaken only as a last resort.

HOWEVER IF YOU ARE CALLED TO FIGHT IN A WAR WILL YOU GO ? THAT IS THE BURNING QUESTION

keck553
Oct 23rd 2013, 02:16 AM
This is WAR
Should a Christian go to war?

Should a Christian go to war where he might kill other people when the Bible says Thou shall not kill
Is it right to do war against others or does the Bible forbid it?

It is difficult to determine when war would be a righteous endeavor given that leaders of nations are not Christian and could easily have ungodly reasons for going to war. Nevertheless, war is an unfortunate reality in this world and it causes great destruction, misery, and loss of life. It should be avoided if possible and undertaken only as a last resort.

HOWEVER IF YOU ARE CALLED TO FIGHT IN A WAR WILL YOU GO ? THAT IS THE BURNING QUESTION



Go to your Strongs, look up the Hebrew word, etymology and meaning for the english translation "kill" that is used in some Bibles so we can be all on the same page.

Slug1
Oct 23rd 2013, 02:26 AM
This is WAR
Should a Christian go to war?

Should a Christian go to war where he might kill other people when the Bible says Thou shall not kill
Is it right to do war against others or does the Bible forbid it?

It is difficult to determine when war would be a righteous endeavor given that leaders of nations are not Christian and could easily have ungodly reasons for going to war. Nevertheless, war is an unfortunate reality in this world and it causes great destruction, misery, and loss of life. It should be avoided if possible and undertaken only as a last resort.

HOWEVER IF YOU ARE CALLED TO FIGHT IN A WAR WILL YOU GO ? THAT IS THE BURNING QUESTION
The Bible proves that "killing" in NOT a sin. Go study the terms used, the original Hebrew's term in that commandment was about "murder", Thou shalt not MURDER.

Big difference.

Ceegen
Oct 23rd 2013, 02:33 AM
This is WAR
Should a Christian go to war?

Should a Christian go to war where he might kill other people when the Bible says Thou shall not kill
Is it right to do war against others or does the Bible forbid it?

It is difficult to determine when war would be a righteous endeavor given that leaders of nations are not Christian and could easily have ungodly reasons for going to war. Nevertheless, war is an unfortunate reality in this world and it causes great destruction, misery, and loss of life. It should be avoided if possible and undertaken only as a last resort.

HOWEVER IF YOU ARE CALLED TO FIGHT IN A WAR WILL YOU GO ? THAT IS THE BURNING QUESTION


No, I will not kill for God. God doesn't need me to kill anyone. Wars are man-made problems with only man-made solutions in mind.

2nd Corinthians 10:
3 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
4 For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;

Tearing down the strongholds of Satan is not done with violence and death.

keck553
Oct 23rd 2013, 02:41 AM
No, I will not kill for God. God doesn't need me to kill anyone. Wars are man-made problems with only man-made solutions in mind.

2nd Corinthians 10:
3 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
4 For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;

Tearing down the strongholds of Satan is not done with violence and death.

The OP had a question about one of the Ten Commandments, and the question was centered around a misconception of an English word used in some translations. Let's address the translation before we start offering our personal worldviews.

Slug1
Oct 23rd 2013, 02:43 AM
violence and death.God uses man to bring His wrath to the evil doers of the world and kill the evil doers. Is the position that God calls... A Minister of God, reserved for only those who have no faith in Him?

Since God condones and even ORDERS violence and death to see His will done, you might want to view violence and death the same way that God does.

Ceegen
Oct 23rd 2013, 03:10 AM
The OP had a question about one of the Ten Commandments, and the question was centered around a misconception of an English word used in some translations. Let's address the translation before we start offering our personal worldviews.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H7523&t=KJV - The command isn't simply talking about just murder OR killing, it is talking about murder AND killing. It's all-inclusive. Killing is murder and murder is killing. Going to war implies breaking things and killing people.

We can't erase evil from the world by killing people. No matter how many people die, evil still exists.

jayne
Oct 23rd 2013, 03:36 AM
War is not always murder. A just war cannot be. King Solomon, moved by the Holy Spirit, wrote in Eccl. 3 that there is a "time for war and a time for peace....a time to kill and a time to heal.....a time to break down and a time to build up" Certainly an unjust war would be immoral and murderous.

Do you feel that God is a pacifist? He sent His people to war many times - sometimes killing not only men, but women, children, and animals. And when Christ returns - well, it isn't going to be pleasant for those opposing Him. In fact, the Bible describes it as pretty gross.

Balabusha
Oct 23rd 2013, 04:29 AM
War is not always murder. A just war cannot be. King Solomon, moved by the Holy Spirit, wrote in Eccl. 3 that there is a "time for war and a time for peace....a time to kill and a time to heal.....a time to break down and a time to build up" Certainly an unjust war would be immoral and murderous.

Do you feel that God is a pacifist? He sent His people to war many times - sometimes killing not only men, but women, children, and animals. And when Christ returns - well, it isn't going to be pleasant for those opposing Him. In fact, the Bible describes it as pretty gross.

When Jesus Christ comes it is going to be gross? What type of a statement is that?
Probably just another end times paradigm..oh well. I have another angle-thou shall not be killed-so I would run from war, it is scary. I was in front(not. Directly) of a .303 when it went off-this would be the quietest thing on a battle field.

Ceegen
Oct 23rd 2013, 05:42 AM
War is not always murder. A just war cannot be. King Solomon, moved by the Holy Spirit, wrote in Eccl. 3 that there is a "time for war and a time for peace....a time to kill and a time to heal.....a time to break down and a time to build up" Certainly an unjust war would be immoral and murderous.

Do you feel that God is a pacifist? He sent His people to war many times - sometimes killing not only men, but women, children, and animals. And when Christ returns - well, it isn't going to be pleasant for those opposing Him. In fact, the Bible describes it as pretty gross.

Yeah but that's just it, the bible describes Jesus' return as pretty impressive, and the wicked get taken out of the world. I agree, it ain't pretty. But it's God that does it, not us.

I often wondered about Revelation, and how it describes the woman (Israel) being taken into the wilderness on the wings of an eagle? (Revelation 12:14). What does that mean? Could it mean that the entire nation of Israel is evacuated to the United States? Do we try to save them, or fight with them over real estate that has blood on its hands? Because it was land promised to Israel?

The temple was destroyed in 70 AD, and in the Talmud it speaks of drawing the dreaded black stone for forty years after Jesus died. Not a single white stone in 40 years.

What if large populations of Jews, who are surrounded by enemies, seek refuge from being overrun? Where will they go, into the sea? They are cut off on every side. I pray every day that the lost sheep of Israel rejoin, and bring with them their religion. Maybe we could be better Christians, by learning how to be better Jews?

I like that version better than the whole WWIII thing. I don't think we could survive another world war, but we could sure use a revival somewhere in the world. And maybe, who knows, maybe some brave soul steps up and calls Islam out for their violent nature? Okay they have the Holy Land, now what? They conquer by the sword, to fulfill their own prophecies? Would the atheistic Communist nations intervene if the Muslims killed a bunch of Christians and Jews? I don't see China lifting a finger, not even to point out the human rights abuses of other nations, simply because it would be admitting they have a problem, too.

And if there are people among us in this nation, who want to get rid of religion (and especially that intolerant Christian religion, right!?), have they ever hinted at the threat of violence? I believe they have, and it really is starting to gain traction among people. But the same type of antisemitism that invited the slaughter of millions of Jews, is along the same lines happening here in America with regards to Christianity.

Should this happen, and a massive influx of Jews and Christians from around the world come to the United States, we'd instantly have a majority, and could launch a proper investigation into certain practices of our leaders, and possibly stop something horrible from happening all over again.

But I have doubts, because Revelation says that the beast overcomes the saints. (Revelation 11:7). So if God spoke it, we have no chance really. Or do we? Can we be like Nineveh, and avert disaster? Or do we go the way of all the nations before us that were broken of their power, because of divisions and corruption? I'm not some liberal hippy. I think the "peace" sign is an abomination, because of for what it really stands for.

Be as wise as a serpent, but as harmless as a dove. Walk on water and calm the tempest? We have such little faith if we don't believe in miracles. I want a miracle to happen. I don't want a single one of us to be persecuted or martyred. But I don't think we're just all going to fly away before the tribulation happens.

The reason I take the nonviolent view of things, is because God destroyed the Egyptian army in the Red Sea, and killed every first-born of the Egyptians, all on His own. I don't have to do anything. I don't know how he's going to get this poor sinful soul to get anyone to change their minds about violence. I can't convince anyone of anything, it would seem.

Balabusha
Oct 23rd 2013, 05:51 AM
I often wondered about Revelation, and how it describes the woman (Israel) being taken into the wilderness on the wings of an eagle? (Revelation 12:14). What does that mean? Could it mean that the entire nation of Israel is evacuated to the United States? Do we try to save them, or fight with them over real estate that has blood on its hands? Because it was land promised to Israel?
-if you want to find out what revelation 12 means try reading Exodus and the song of Moses, to insert an end times view on this kills a very powerful Messianic prophesy.

shepherdsword
Oct 23rd 2013, 08:43 AM
The temple was destroyed in 70 AD, and in the Talmud it speaks of drawing the dreaded black stone for forty years after Jesus died. Not a single white stone in 40 years.


Can you elaborate a bit on this brother? I have never heard this. I was able to find a source for this in Dankenbring's article.
Is this what you are talking about,the black stone for the "Azazel goat"?

ISRAEL
Oct 23rd 2013, 12:42 PM
lawful Killing a thief in the night
.Exodus 22:2 If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him

ISRAEL
Oct 23rd 2013, 12:44 PM
http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H7523&t=KJV - The command isn't simply talking about just murder OR killing, it is talking about murder AND killing. It's all-inclusive. Killing is murder and murder is killing. Going to war implies breaking things and killing people.

We can't erase evil from the world by killing people. No matter how many people die, evil still exists.


lawful Killing a thief in the night
.Exodus 22:2 If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him

Slug1
Oct 23rd 2013, 12:57 PM
When Jesus Christ comes it is going to be gross? What type of a statement is that?
Probably just another end times paradigm..oh well. I have another angle-thou shall not be killed-so I would run from war, it is scary. I was in front(not. Directly) of a .303 when it went off-this would be the quietest thing on a battle field.Jayne is mentioning about the fact that Jesus will be doing all the killing Himself once He returns. No more need for the Ministers of God to do the killing in the execution of His wrath upon wrong doers. Jesus will be doing the killing.

Also... I totally agree with you about how quiet a rifle shot can be on the battlefield... I've led men in combat since I was Army Infantry until I retired after 21 years as an Infantryman. After 4 times in combat... sounds are experienced in a very different way. Specially when I can say the loudest sound on the battlefield is when you can't hear anything and the bullets are still flying.

jayne
Oct 23rd 2013, 01:19 PM
When Jesus Christ comes it is going to be gross? What type of a statement is that?
Probably just another end times paradigm..oh well. I have another angle-thou shall not be killed-so I would run from war, it is scary. I was in front(not. Directly) of a .303 when it went off-this would be the quietest thing on a battle field.

I am referencing Revelation 19:11-19. The armies of the world gather together presumably to destroy Israel. Jesus comes back on a white horse with all of us with Him. He speaks and it's all over.

The armies of the world led by the beast are all dead - according to the scriptures by the "sword" of His mouth - and an angel calls out for the birds to come and eat their flesh (gross).

I didn't mean to make light of what people endure in a wartime situation.

keck553
Oct 23rd 2013, 03:52 PM
http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H7523&t=KJV - The command isn't simply talking about just murder OR killing, it is talking about murder AND killing. It's all-inclusive. Killing is murder and murder is killing. Going to war implies breaking things and killing people.

We can't erase evil from the world by killing people. No matter how many people die, evil still exists.

The commandment relates to murder, period. Do not stray out of context.

Balabusha
Oct 23rd 2013, 04:48 PM
Can you elaborate a bit on this brother? I have never heard this. I was able to find a source for this in Dankenbring's article.
Is this what you are talking about,the black stone for the "Azazel goat"?
In the Talmud it. States that the glory of the Lord left the temple during the 40 years leading up to the destruction of the temple.

Balabusha
Oct 23rd 2013, 04:56 PM
Jayne is mentioning about the fact that Jesus will be doing all the killing Himself once He returns. No more need for the Ministers of God to do the killing in the execution of His wrath upon wrong doers. Jesus will be doing the killing.

Also... I totally agree with you about how quiet a rifle shot can be on the battlefield... I've led men in combat since I was Army Infantry until I retired after 21 years as an Infantryman. After 4 times in combat... sounds are experienced in a very different way. Specially when I can say the loudest sound on the battlefield is when you can't hear anything and the bullets are still flying.

I disagree with this killing stuff,this has more in common with Islamic end times scenarios, Jesus comes againt to judge, no jesus wars, this needs to be read in the right genre-apocalyptic judgement genre, but I don't want to derail this thread-maybe post this in end times with Jesus slautering people-i will be happy to address this.
-war sounds scary Slug, I am glad my Father took us to a peaceful country to live, you are a brave man.

Slug1
Oct 23rd 2013, 06:11 PM
I disagree with this killing stuff,this has more in common with Islamic end times scenarios, Jesus comes againt to judge, no jesus wars, this needs to be read in the right genre-apocalyptic judgement genre, but I don't want to derail this thread-maybe post this in end times with Jesus slautering people-i will be happy to address this.
-war sounds scary Slug, I am glad my Father took us to a peaceful country to live, you are a brave man.Hooah for your father :hug: Give him a hug for me as well.

The only point I make concerning scripture... killing is not a sin (murder is) and though killing is violent/scary, it has purpose. Otherwise, God would never order man to kill and do violence, but... He did, and based on the scriptures in the NT concerning His wrath being brought to the evil doers by the Ministers of God, He is STILL ordering the killing of evil doers.

Another point I make, why is this honor of being a Minister of God, limted to those with NO FAITH, in God? One of the most misunderstood scriptures in the Bible concerning all this is when John the Baptist informed those soldiers to remain content with their wages...

Luke 3:14Likewise the soldiers asked him, saying, “And what shall we do?”
So he said to them, “Do not intimidate anyone or accuse falsely, and be content with your wages.”

John is prophesied about by Isaiah (Luke 4:3) in that John will be a person who prepares a straight path for people to follow to God. Well... if it is wrong to be a soldier, then why did John tell those soldiers to be content with their wages? He also told them not to intimidate anyone or accuse falsely. Well... this is severely misunderstood too. Intimidation is all about what Islamic terrorism is all about. They don't kill off those who do evil, they DO evil in the intimidation like tactics. John does not want soldiers doing this should then also seek after God... a soldiers job is to destroy evil doers. Also, don't accuse fasely... if a person is not an evil doer, then do not treat them as such.

Ya ever see the movie Courageous? How many Christains avoided that movie because it's about "cops"... or better known in the Bible as... A Minister of God? I sure haven't heard any Christian say negative remarks about those Christians who ARE Ministers of God and will bring God's wrath to evil doers and even KILL them if needed. Not a peep from Christians... yet what do we read in threads like this?

It just seems many misconceptions are fueling the direction people live or follow instead of reading the Bible in CONTEXT and understanding that even Jesus will kill when He returns.

Jade99
Oct 23rd 2013, 07:34 PM
This is WAR
Should a Christian go to war?

Should a Christian go to war where he might kill other people when the Bible says Thou shall not kill
Is it right to do war against others or does the Bible forbid it?

It is difficult to determine when war would be a righteous endeavor given that leaders of nations are not Christian and could easily have ungodly reasons for going to war. Nevertheless, war is an unfortunate reality in this world and it causes great destruction, misery, and loss of life. It should be avoided if possible and undertaken only as a last resort.

HOWEVER IF YOU ARE CALLED TO FIGHT IN A WAR WILL YOU GO ? THAT IS THE BURNING QUESTION


Well, if you really think about it. We as Christians go to war every minute of our lives spiritually against the principalities of the dark. (ah that sound deep) But I'm not kidding.

As far as killing goes, I'm too much of a punk to actually be in the armed forces and apparently because of my asthma and weight, I don't qualify. But I'm guilty and I'm planning to launch an attack on the rat (I named Lupe) before it bring it's tribe or worse a snake in my kitchen. Apparently my cat is not interested in the rat. So plan 2 is to kill it. Oh and I just killed a few gnats about a month ago using red vingar at my desk.

In all honesty, I can't allow myself to say I'm never going to commit murder or kill someone, because we don't know how the future is going to plan out, but also not all killing is premediating. Such as, protecting your kid, cat, yourself. I don't want to appear as a member of the id channel as a suspect or as a victim.

Anyhoo, what's your concern about War and Christians, sugar plum?

Jade99
Oct 23rd 2013, 07:41 PM
Hooah for your father :hug: Give him a hug for me as well.

The only point I make concerning scripture... killing is not a sin (murder is) and though killing is violent/scary, it has purpose. Otherwise, God would never order man to kill and do violence, but... He did, and based on the scriptures in the NT concerning His wrath being brought to the evil doers by the Ministers of God, He is STILL ordering the killing of evil doers.

Another point I make, why is this honor of being a Minister of God, limted to those with NO FAITH, in God? One of the most misunderstood scriptures in the Bible concerning all this is when John the Baptist informed those soldiers to remain content with their wages...

Luke 3:14Likewise the soldiers asked him, saying, “And what shall we do?”
So he said to them, “Do not intimidate anyone or accuse falsely, and be content with your wages.”

John is prophesied about by Isaiah (Luke 4:3) in that John will be a person who prepares a straight path for people to follow to God. Well... if it is wrong to be a soldier, then why did John tell those soldiers to be content with their wages? He also told them not to intimidate anyone or accuse falsely. Well... this is severely misunderstood too. Intimidation is all about what Islamic terrorism is all about. They don't kill off those who do evil, they DO evil in the intimidation like tactics. John does not want soldiers doing this should then also seek after God... a soldiers job is to destroy evil doers. Also, don't accuse fasely... if a person is not an evil doer, then do not treat them as such.

Ya ever see the movie Courageous? How many Christains avoided that movie because it's about "cops"... or better known in the Bible as... A Minister of God? I sure haven't heard any Christian say negative remarks about those Christians who ARE Ministers of God and will bring God's wrath to evil doers and even KILL them if needed. Not a peep from Christians... yet what do we read in threads like this?

It just seems many misconceptions are fueling the direction people live or follow instead of reading the Bible in CONTEXT and understanding that even Jesus will kill when He returns.

I think I've heard of that movie, but I'm picky about what movies I watch, unless it has Christian Bale in it - all bets are off. lol

But I dig what you're saying and it's correct. I get so much flak because I still watch Charmed (sometimes it's watching me, since I'm usually getting ready during the time it's on) and even soap operas. Sometimes, people's opinion about what they feel Christians should do, watch, and listen to, it's based on their own convictions.

Ceegen
Oct 23rd 2013, 09:01 PM
The commandment relates to murder, period. Do not stray out of context.

But who are we to interpret the law? :P

keck553
Oct 23rd 2013, 09:04 PM
But who are we to interpret the law? :P

The ten commandments need no interpretation. They are pretty straightforward, wouldn't you agree?

Sojourner
Oct 23rd 2013, 09:43 PM
The Bible proves that "killing" in NOT a sin. Go study the terms used, the original Hebrew's term in that commandment was about "murder", Thou shalt not MURDER.

Big difference.

Exactly. If "killing" was a sin, the sacrificing of bulls, lambs and goats under the law would have amounted to sin atoning for sin.

Francis Drake
Oct 23rd 2013, 10:52 PM
http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H7523&t=KJV - The command isn't simply talking about just murder OR killing, it is talking about murder AND killing. It's all-inclusive. Killing is murder and murder is killing. Going to war implies breaking things and killing people.

We can't erase evil from the world by killing people. No matter how many people die, evil still exists.


Hey Joshua, we got a slight problem with the troops! They're on a sit down strike again, smack in front of Jericho, and I can't get them moving, and I don't blame them!
In fact some of them right now are turning their swords into some sort of agricultural thingy.

Yes I know you said we gotta march around the walls seven times, they're fine with that. Its all that killing afterwards, that's not what we signed up for. Nobody said about violence.

Joshua, you know as well as the rest of us what Moses said. He wrote it in plain English, "Thou shalt not kill", and these guys are not prepared to compromise even if you are!
In fact they're convinced you've got the battle plan completely wrong. If you had an ounce of faith we could just pray about it and God will move them somewhere else. God can do that you know?

I know you said that you've met this "Captain of the host of the Lord" guy, but just who does he think he is, completely contradicting God like that. Moses made it quite quite clear about all this bloodshed stuff, so you know God will never approve of us just wading into a city and killing everyone.

So I'm sorry Joshua, its no deal.


No, I will not kill for God. God doesn't need me to kill anyone. Wars are man-made problems with only man-made solutions in mind.

2nd Corinthians 10:
3 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
4 For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;

Tearing down the strongholds of Satan is not done with violence and death.

If "Thou shalt not kill" included all murder and killing of any sort, then this is not just a problem for Christian debate today. It is a problem they needed to answer in the Old Testament, and they did so with crystal clarity and no hesitation.
No matter how brilliant anyone here is at translating Hebrew words and meanings, the historic record of war is a simpler and more certain answer. Scriptural record trumps the lot of you.
Ever after the giving of that law, Joshua and his band of brothers slaughtered left right and centre, as had the Moses before him. Anyone still want to argue?

Ceegen
Oct 23rd 2013, 10:56 PM
The ten commandments need no interpretation. They are pretty straightforward, wouldn't you agree?

I agree. So when it says "kill" instead of "murder", my first impression is to believe that is true. I'm a fan of the KJV, so my view might be biased.

Ceegen
Oct 23rd 2013, 11:32 PM
Hey Joshua, we got a slight problem with the troops! They're on a sit down strike again, smack in front of Jericho, and I can't get them moving, and I don't blame them!

...

So I'm sorry Joshua, its no deal.

God didn't require Israel to kill the Egyptians in the Red Sea, or the firstborn male of all their children. That was before the Law was given to Moses on the mountain. Then after the Law was given, they were required to go in and destroy everyone and everything, but they wouldn't have succeeded if God wasn't with them. (Oh yeah and don't forget when they went up against Ai the first time, they lost because someone in their midst had idols as war loot, which God commanded them not to do).

But now we live in a new covenant, under the blood of Him who said "It was once said 'Eye for an eye', but I say unto you...".

Slug1
Oct 23rd 2013, 11:34 PM
I agree. So when it says "kill" instead of "murder", my first impression is to believe that is true. I'm a fan of the KJV, so my view might be biased.Well, I will tell you that your view is not biased if you based your understanding on the KJV, your view is wrong because the translation is wrong. The word used is "murder"... believe me, I grew up KJV only and I struggled because this Bible I trusted said, "kill" for that verse. So I prayed to God to help me. The help began when He led me to other translations and to pursue the original language and told me to leave the KJV in my past where my problems remain. I stopped tripping over struggles that lay behind me when I followed what God told me to do and understanding of His truth was revealed through proper translations and study of the original terms in Hebrew (for OT) study of scriptures.

Bandit
Oct 23rd 2013, 11:37 PM
This is WAR[COLOR=#333333][INDENT]Should a Christian go to war?

Should a Christian go to war where he might kill other people when the Bible says Thou shall not kill
Is it right to do war against others or does the Bible forbid it?

...

Every time you pay your taxes you are paying to have babies killed. So you have been in a war for some time now.

Ceegen
Oct 23rd 2013, 11:39 PM
Well, I will tell you that your view is not biased if you based your understanding on the KJV, your view is wrong because the translation is wrong.

Am I using the wrong translation? Is there a bible version that translates "kill" to "murder" in the commandments?

Slug1
Oct 23rd 2013, 11:40 PM
Am I using the wrong translation? Is there a bible version that translates "kill" to "murder" in the commandments?If I said yes, would it matter? :lol:

No... there are NO translations that change kill to murder... the original term was ALWAYS murder and the KJV got it wrong when the term was translated to kill in the KJV Bible.

keck553
Oct 23rd 2013, 11:57 PM
Am I using the wrong translation? Is there a bible version that translates "kill" to "murder" in the commandments?

Okay...
Hebrew scholars (and Jewish sages in various extra-Biblical writings) note that the word “ratsakh” (translated in KJV as "kill" in the commandment) applies only to illegal killing (e.g., premeditated murder or manslaughter) — and is never used in the administration of justice or for killing in war. The KJV translation as “thou shalt not kill” is too broad.

But, since I used extra-biblical sources, I will add these extra-biblical sources as a counter because I have come to honor your intentions and your freedom to make your own choices -

In the Mishnah it is written, “Why was only one man (i.e., Adam) created by God? — to teach that whoever takes a single life destroys thereby a whole world.”

Murder can be figurative as well as literal. The Talmud notes that shaming another publicly is like murder, since the shame causes the blood to leave the face. Moreover, gossip or slander are considered murderous to the dignity of man. The Pirkei Avot states, “The evil tongue slays three persons: the utterer of the evil, the listener, and the one spoken about…” Jesus also linked the ideas of our words and attitudes with murder.

This is the best answer I know how to give....

Ceegen
Oct 24th 2013, 12:21 AM
If I said yes, would it matter? :lol:

No... there are NO translations that change kill to murder... the original term was ALWAYS murder and the KJV got it wrong when the term was translated to kill in the KJV Bible.

I wonder how and why there can be different versions. If we say God can't preserve the bible, then why read any of them? There has to be one bible that is correct, right?

I was told that the finds at Qumran in cave 4 for the OT and in cave 7 for the NT, are best reflected in the KJV since only the spelling of names were changed. Is that true?

keck553
Oct 24th 2013, 12:45 AM
I wonder how and why there can be different versions. If we say God can't preserve the bible, then why read any of them? There has to be one bible that is correct, right?

I was told that the finds at Qumran in cave 4 for the OT and in cave 7 for the NT, are best reflected in the KJV since only the spelling of names were changed. Is that true?

Hebrew is an ancient and precise language. English is neither. But we can infer the context of the commandment even with "sloppy" english, because God institutes the death penalty in His Law (Torah), and assuming we believe God does not contradict his own Word, we should be prompted to examine His Word in an effort to correct the contradiction we have set up by our own reasoning. In fact, that is why so many people who love the Word of God study Greek and Hebrew.

God's Word does not cancel itself with contradictions. When we come to that knowledge and belief, then we begin the journey of reconciling the things that don't fit into our worldview.

Slug1
Oct 24th 2013, 01:45 AM
I wonder how and why there can be different versions. If we say God can't preserve the bible, then why read any of them? There has to be one bible that is correct, right?
Lets reason this out first... God says "Thou shalt no kill" and then... Moses, go kill them, Joshua, go kill them, Judges, go kill them, King Saul, go kill them, King David, go kill them... etc, etc, etc.

Either God didn't say, "Thou shalt not kill" or He never told people to go kill the enemy.

Let's exercise the gift of common sense and see what can be discerned of the Commandment, "Thou shalt not kill" and determine if "kill" was the original term/meaning.

Also, as I raised earlier... killing IS violent and condoned by and ordered by God... so we need to look at violence as God does, not are you do.

dan
Oct 24th 2013, 03:15 AM
If I said yes, would it matter? :lol:

No... there are NO translations that change kill to murder... the original term was ALWAYS murder and the KJV got it wrong when the term was translated to kill in the KJV Bible.

Let me disagree with you on that one thing. The Jewish Publication Society's OT does say 'murder', and it's available on this site. Praise God.

Also the World English Bible, but that one gets so much else wrong, IMO.

EX 20:13 Thou shalt not murder. (Jewish Publication Society 1917 OT)

EX 20:13 "You shall not murder. (World English Bible)


By the way Ceegan who told you to buy a sword? Jesus did:

LK 22:36 Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take [it], and likewise [his] scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

Jesus also said to oppose the intruder:

MT 24:43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.

And, my favorite, Jesus' only mention of making peace:

LK 11:21 When a strong man armed keepeth his court, those things are in peace which he possesseth.

Francis Drake
Oct 24th 2013, 08:38 AM
Am I using the wrong translation? Is there a bible version that translates "kill" to "murder" in the commandments?

Ceegen, you are wriggling around with the meaning of words, trying to make them fit your own current NT ethos.
No matter what various theologians, you, me, slug1, keck, the Pope, Billy Graham, the Archbishop of Canterbury, or anyone else decides about the true meaning of that Hebrew word, biblical history tell us what the Israelites of the time thought the word meant.
Surely that should satisfy any argument.

God demonstrated the parameters of meaning when, after commanding "Thou shalt not kill", he subsequently commanded them to kill the inhabitants of the land.

By obeying the order to kill the inhabitants of the land, the people demonstrated that the two orders were not contradictory.

Israelite history proves unquestionably that "Thou shalt not kill" referred only to premeditated type murder.
Israelite history proves "Thou shalt not kill," cannot possibly refer to killing in the cause of war.

Whatever scriptures you might use to support pacifism for Christians today, you cannot draw on "thou shalt not kill" as a valid support.

Slug1
Oct 24th 2013, 12:12 PM
Let me disagree with you on that one thing. The Jewish Publication Society's OT does say 'murder', and it's available on this site. Praise God.

Also the World English Bible, but that one gets so much else wrong, IMO.

EX 20:13 Thou shalt not murder. (Jewish Publication Society 1917 OT)

EX 20:13 "You shall not murder. (World English Bible)My response was in relation to Ceegans question if any translation changed the word "kill" into the word, "murder". I was simply pointing out the term was always murder.

Basically, it is the errored translations that inserted the word "kill" so that the meaning of the scripture (Commandment) is changed to a false meaning.

Ceegen
Oct 24th 2013, 08:23 PM
Okay but didn't Jesus make a new covenant, which seems to explicitly exclude violence? (Matthew 11:12 speaks of violence negatively, and in Luke 3:14 Jesus tells a Roman soldier to do violence to no one). Why keep referring back to the OT laws and covenants if that is the case?

keck553
Oct 24th 2013, 08:41 PM
Okay but didn't Jesus make a new covenant, which seems to explicitly exclude violence? (Matthew 11:12 speaks of violence negatively, and in Luke 3:14 Jesus tells a Roman soldier to do violence to no one). Why keep referring back to the OT laws and covenants if that is the case?

So does the "Old Testament" in that context.

God's standards are not willy-nilly and change with various cultural influences.

Francis Drake
Oct 24th 2013, 09:06 PM
Okay but didn't Jesus make a new covenant, which seems to explicitly exclude violence? (Matthew 11:12 speaks of violence negatively, and in Luke 3:14 Jesus tells a Roman soldier to do violence to no one). Why keep referring back to the OT laws and covenants if that is the case?

Matt11v12 Jesus isn't speaking negatively of physical violence. He is simply pointing out that faithful people are violently taking hold of the Kingdom of heaven and thus doing spiritual damage to Satan's domain. They are possessing the land! Hallelujah!

Do you recall Jesus elsewhere accusing the scribes and Pharisees of shutting heaven, yes, they had shut heaven!
If high minded men, with their deceit and tradition etc. can shut heaven, then lowly men of God can surely open heaven! That has to be our sure purpose as the son's of God, to take back control from Satan.

What was the primary mission statement of Jesus as he went forth preaching? "The kingdom of heaven is nigh unto you." ie, open for business here and now, as opposed to what was taught.

The kingdom of heaven is not something for after we die, it is a here and now issue. Sadly the focus of the church is still on heaven when we are dead, which effectively contradicts what Jesus said. Abraham understood this, so did Moses, Joshua, David, etc.

So, starting with John the Baptist, those who received the truth instead of tradition were able to do massive spiritual violence to Satan's domain.

Yes, you can see that this Matt11v12 speaks of war in the heavens rather than a bloody shooting war. I was just setting boblical facts right here, but it still doesn't make your pacifism correct.

Ceegen
Oct 24th 2013, 10:01 PM
Matt11v12 Jesus isn't speaking negatively of physical violence. He is simply pointing out that faithful people are violently taking hold of the Kingdom of heaven and thus doing spiritual damage to Satan's domain. They are possessing the land! Hallelujah!

Do you recall Jesus elsewhere accusing the scribes and Pharisees of shutting heaven, yes, they had shut heaven!
If high minded men, with their deceit and tradition etc. can shut heaven, then lowly men of God can surely open heaven! That has to be our sure purpose as the son's of God, to take back control from Satan.

What was the primary mission statement of Jesus as he went forth preaching? "The kingdom of heaven is nigh unto you." ie, open for business here and now, as opposed to what was taught.

The kingdom of heaven is not something for after we die, it is a here and now issue. Sadly the focus of the church is still on heaven when we are dead, which effectively contradicts what Jesus said. Abraham understood this, so did Moses, Joshua, David, etc.

So, starting with John the Baptist, those who received the truth instead of tradition were able to do massive spiritual violence to Satan's domain.

Yes, you can see that this Matt11v12 speaks of war in the heavens rather than a bloody shooting war. I was just setting boblical facts right here, but it still doesn't make your pacifism correct.

"Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence." - John 18:36.

If this ain't Jesus' kingdom, we have no reason to fight.

Aviyah
Oct 24th 2013, 11:03 PM
For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. (Mt. 5:18)

So I think the original meaning of "no murder" rather than "no killing" still stands even in the New Cov.

sooninzion
Oct 25th 2013, 05:26 AM
"Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence." - John 18:36.

If this ain't Jesus' kingdom, we have no reason to fight.


I was waiting until someone raised this quotation.

I am totally in agreement with the above statement "we have no reason to fight" far from reasons to kill and murder.

Love your enemies...

Our battle is not against the flesh....

One who draws the sword will also go by the sword...

One who follows me must deny himself.... (weapons first!)

There is no greater love than dying for someone whom you love.... (not killing, no hatred)

One who hates his brother will be guilty of murder...

How many quotations do you need from scripture? Under mosaic Law the Lord allowed war and helped in their battles because their hearts were hard. They wanted to live and fight like gentile nations, have a human king over their heads who would always lead them in battles (ref Saul's Rise) and for reasons such as these.

Berean11
Oct 25th 2013, 07:53 AM
I was waiting until someone raised this quotation.

I am totally in agreement with the above statement "we have no reason to fight" far from reasons to kill and murder.

Love your enemies...

Our battle is not against the flesh....

One who draws the sword will also go by the sword...

One who follows me must deny himself.... (weapons first!)

There is no greater love than dying for someone whom you love.... (not killing, no hatred)

One who hates his brother will be guilty of murder...

How many quotations do you need from scripture? Under mosaic Law the Lord allowed war and helped in their battles because their hearts were hard. They wanted to live and fight like gentile nations, have a human king over their heads who would always lead them in battles (ref Saul's Rise) and for reasons such as these.

Jesus of the NT is the God of the OT. And God/Jesus does not contradict Himself.

Read Joshua 23. I would post it but it will make the post too long. It is not because of their hard hearts. It is because He promised them that land. And....He commanded the destruction of whole people groups to prevent defilement of His people. Of course we know that they disobeyed God and did not always destroy everything and everyone that the Lord commanded them to. And those peoples became a snare to Israel. And they were, indeed, defiled. Evil entered in. Idolatry being one of the chief sins/defilement. As it is so now.

Jesus did not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it. The God who commanded who Israel to destroy whole people groups is the same God Jesus who said to His disciples to sell a garment to buy a sword.

War is one of those circumstances that mitigates the furtherance of evil. ALL earthly, governing authorities are appointed or permitted by God. Some abuse that God-given authority and use war and abusive governance to further their own agenda's. We are to protect, defend, and liberate all that we are able. We are not to fight for God's kingdom but to act honorably, justly and mercifully in the behalf of earthly humans. God would have us bring peace if possible but if not He has sanctioned justified killing of evil men. Not as a deterrence (although that may result) but to remove evil.

Jesus said He did not come to bring peace....but to bring a sword.

All who hate God love death (meaning murder).

Pro 8:35 For whoever finds me finds life and obtains favor from the LORD,
Pro 8:36 but he who fails to find me injures himself; all who hate me love death."

They are the seekers after their own flesh. No justice, no mercy, no honor.

God's kingdom is here and now. His kingdom is not of this world. But He did task us with the stewardship of this world. Only now, the world has become so populated that the only way to finally remove the evil is His return. And by the sword of His mouth He will destroy all evildoers. Until then we will continue to do as He commanded until holding back the tide of evil is no longer possible. When evil has finally overrun the earth.


Rev 19:14 And the armies of heaven, arrayed in fine linen, white and pure, were following him on white horses.
Rev 19:15 From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron. He will tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty.
Rev 19:16 On his robe and on his thigh he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords.
Rev 19:17 Then I saw an angel standing in the sun, and with a loud voice he called to all the birds that fly directly overhead, "Come, gather for the great supper of God,
Rev 19:18 to eat the flesh of kings, the flesh of captains, the flesh of mighty men, the flesh of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all men, both free and slave, both small and great."


I know what He said concerning turning the other cheek. If you are being persecuted for His name, imprisoned, enslaved, tortured and put to death for His name then yes, you must not fight. But....until He returns we still are the arm of justice whether they are believers or not. The results are left to God. Some may in fact find Him because we went to war. That is His to judge and to execute who will find Him and when. And by what means.

I see these things from the whole picture of the bible, not just the gospels. And it ALL points to Jesus. And His final solution.

Berean11

dan
Oct 25th 2013, 11:03 AM
My response was in relation to Ceegans question if any translation changed the word "kill" into the word, "murder". I was simply pointing out the term was always murder.

Basically, it is the errored translations that inserted the word "kill" so that the meaning of the scripture (Commandment) is changed to a false meaning.

Oh, OK. I know that the farther back in time you go, the fewer excuses were available for getting it wrong.

Of course, you know about my affinity for the KJV, even with it's faults.

So, I will encourage Ceegan to continue to use it. Learn it's faults, so you won't be fooled, but realize that it has the best, or one of the best views of prophecy of all the different versions, IMO.

dan
Oct 25th 2013, 12:48 PM
I was waiting until someone raised this quotation.

I am totally in agreement with the above statement "we have no reason to fight" far from reasons to kill and murder.

I disagree. When Jesus said His Kingdom was not of this earth, He said NOW, but that was THEN:

JN 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but NOW is my kingdom not from hence.

In this day and age, now, a part of His Kingdom IS of this world. The largest religious contingent on the earth is Christian, estimated to be 2.2 billion people. It is time to fight for some things:

MT 24:43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.

1JN 3:16 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.

1TIM 5:8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.

REV 13:9 If any man have an ear, let him hear:
REV 13:10 He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.

REV 18:6 Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled fill to her double.


Love your enemies...

I believe the mistake here is that, just because one shoots them, one must hate. Not so.


Our battle is not against the flesh....

Except when defending the home, the brethren, the young, and old.


One who draws the sword will also go by the sword...

No, that one was meant for that very moment in history only. None of the other Gospels agree with that interpretation. Besides that, it's not a true statement when taken in that context.


One who follows me must deny himself.... (weapons first!)

Sorry, Jesus Himself told you to buy the sword, even if you have to sell your coat:

LK 22:35 And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing.
LK 22:36 Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take [it], and likewise [his] scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
LK 22:37 For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end.
LK 22:38 And they said, Lord, behold, here [are] two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.

Or, will any choose not to keep His Sayings?

Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: (Matt 7:24)


There is no greater love than dying for someone whom you love.... (not killing, no hatred)

If one just goes first one hasn't died in place of anyone, they've just changed the order of death. But, another meaning is "to wager" your life. In my version, it's something like, "I'll bet I can shoot the bad guy before he can kill my child". No hatred, maybe some killing.


One who hates his brother will be guilty of murder...

Our brothers are other Christians. Everyone else is your neighbor.


How many quotations do you need from scripture? Under mosaic Law the Lord allowed war and helped in their battles because their hearts were hard. They wanted to live and fight like gentile nations, have a human king over their heads who would always lead them in battles (ref Saul's Rise) and for reasons such as these.

Why buy a sword? Why any of the violent talk in the NT?

LK 11:21 When a strong man armed keepeth his court, those things are in peace which he possesseth.

ROM 14:16 Let not then your good be evil spoken of:
ROM 14:17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.
ROM 14:18 For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men.
ROM 14:19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.

How many quotes from scripture, indeed?

Bandit
Oct 25th 2013, 07:49 PM
No, I will not kill for God. God doesn't need me to kill anyone. Wars are man-made problems with only man-made solutions in mind.

2nd Corinthians 10:
3 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
4 For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;

Tearing down the strongholds of Satan is not done with violence and death.

Hello Ceegen,

I can appreciate your perspective, but there have been many in history who have held the same view, but in times of serious distress, abandoned that view. Take Dietrich Bonhoeffer for example. (Probably the most famous Christian martyr of the past century.) He was a German Christian pacifist who eventually participated in at least one attempt to kill Hitler. Though it was a difficult decision, he decided that if Hitler could be killed, countless millions would be saved. There is a point where the killing of an evil person is not only justifiable, but inescapable.

Bandit
Oct 25th 2013, 07:55 PM
When Jesus Christ comes it is going to be gross? [A comment to jayne] What type of a statement is that?
Probably just another end times paradigm..oh well. ...

Karaite, have you not read the whole bible? It seems to me that you have not. Read the last few chapters of Isaiah; jayne is not making this stuff up, nor is it "just another end times paradigm". You need to read the whole bible thoughtfully before you decide what is not in it.

Berean11
Oct 25th 2013, 10:55 PM
I think a good many of us are so insulated from the hideous reality of what dead bodies look and smell like when left laying in streets and buildings from the ravages of war are just not aware. The scene I posted from revelations is every bit gross. 10's of thousands left dead for the carrion birds to feast on is indeed gross.

A creature that is described (it might be a literal description and we won't know for certain till we see it)-

Rev 9:3 Then from the smoke came locusts on the earth, and they were given power like the power of scorpions of the earth.
Rev 9:4 They were told not to harm the grass of the earth or any green plant or any tree, but only those people who do not have the seal of God on their foreheads.
Rev 9:5 They were allowed to torment them for five months, but not to kill them, and their torment was like the torment of a scorpion when it stings someone.
Rev 9:6 And in those days people will seek death and will not find it. They will long to die, but death will flee from them.
Rev 9:7 In appearance the locusts were like horses prepared for battle: on their heads were what looked like crowns of gold; their faces were like human faces,
Rev 9:8 their hair like women's hair, and their teeth like lions' teeth;
Rev 9:9 they had breastplates like breastplates of iron, and the noise of their wings was like the noise of many chariots with horses rushing into battle.
Rev 9:10 They have tails and stings like scorpions, and their power to hurt people for five months is in their tails.
Rev 9:11 They have as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit. His name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in Greek he is called Apollyon.


As hideous as war may be in earthly terms, what confronts us in the final woes and the fury and power of our Lord will be terrifying beyond the worst visage of carnage man can conjure up.

Is it a sin for a Christian to enlist in the military and participate in battle? No. Until the day comes when we can no longer legally participate in the military/battle any who wish to enlist may. I do not believe for one moment that in itself is a sin or wrong. And anyone who would lay on them the charge of murder for doing so perhaps ought to think that all the way through. Same for civilian law enforcement. If you believe it to be a sin, that even in the line of duty when someone is killed justifiably consider that the imminent threat to innocent lives has been removed (including your own). If you do not wish to be protected in a manner that may require the taking of another life then you would have to find an extremely remote plot of land as far away from any human habitation you can find. Somewhere that no one will look for you to collect your taxes or submit to their governing authority.

I suspect that indirectly most humans have blood on their hands. Do I disobey the government and not pay taxes that fund the military and abortions? And the huge difference there is that....generally the military does not engage in indiscriminate murder nor set out to conquer other peoples or nations (although civilian casualties are sometimes unavoidable). But abortion on the other hand is state sanctioned murder. It is a violation of God's will. But my tax dollars go to fund that as well. But God has told me to obey my governing authorities and to pay to Caesar what is Caesars and to God what is Gods. Am I responsible for what happens to those dollars after it leaves my paycheck?

And the execution of a convicted criminal is not meant to be a deterrent. Nor is justifiable war meant to be a deterrent (although it can be). It is at it's very basic level meant to remove evil and evil doers. To stem the tide of evil and evil doers until Jesus returns. It was and is meant to keep God's people from the defilement of all those who hate Him and thus His followers. It is not, however, to fight for God's kingdom. God preserves His kingdom. We do not need to do that for Him. But He HAS instituted laws and governing authorities to maintain order. To prevent utter anarchy and chaos on earth for ALL mankind.

One more thing.....is human life valuable because they are human, created in the image of God and God says they are valuable? Or are they valuable because of human productivity? How many times have you heard that a person should be killed or let die because they are no longer able to lead a productive life? We hear this all the time in the medical world. And not just from the healthcare professionals and professional staff. But from the families too. The productive value is from the evolutionist worldview. The intrinsic value (humans are valuable because they are human and made in His image) is from a Godly worldview.

Our military worldview used to be more about intrinsic value-humans being just humans had some kind of right to liberty, fair and just treatment, some kind of peace and happiness. I have to say though, given all that I have read and seen in recent news that does seem to be changing. There may very well come a time when Christian men and women will no longer enlist because the governing/military worldview/justification for war will not be for these things but for oppression, power, wealth, and fame.

Thank you to all of you on this board who have served in the military and law enforcement wherever you serve or have served. I can only imagine the burdens you carry from that service. I am sorry that at times you have been treated in sometimes the worst of manners. I also believe you have served not because you hate what is in front of you but because you love what is behind you. Your family, friends, and your country.

The LORD bless you and keep you;
the LORD make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
the LORD lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace.

Berean11

Ceegen
Oct 25th 2013, 11:07 PM
Of course, you know about my affinity for the KJV, even with it's faults.

So, I will encourage Ceegan to continue to use it. Learn it's faults, so you won't be fooled, but realize that it has the best, or one of the best views of prophecy of all the different versions, IMO.

That is where I disagree. I don't think it, the KJV, has faults... But that's just me.

Jade99
Oct 25th 2013, 11:20 PM
When Jesus Christ comes it is going to be gross? What type of a statement is that?
Probably just another end times paradigm..oh well. I have another angle-thou shall not be killed-so I would run from war, it is scary. I was in front(not. Directly) of a .303 when it went off-this would be the quietest thing on a battle field.

Well, it's true. It is going to be gross. Ok, lets make it pretty. It's going to be not good for unbelievers, they are going to pay the piper for their rejection. Is that a better way of putting it? It is going to be harsh, but when they decided to reject God, they pretty much sealed their fate. It's sad, because some of my friends and family are going to be in that group.

Slug1
Oct 26th 2013, 02:51 AM
That is where I disagree. I don't think it, the KJV, has faults... But that's just me.We've showed you that the KJV translation of that specific Commandment... is wrong.

God wrote... "Thou shalt not murder" in that stone... not, "kill" as the KJV translates and thus, teaching and learning this Commandment from the KJV Bible has messed up people for generations to the point people are in bondage under it and fruit of this bondage is that they REFUSE to accept the proper translation(s).

fewarechosen
Oct 26th 2013, 01:44 PM
i have a ton of indepth word breakdown info on word ratsach but we can save it for later if we need go there, it doesnt just mean murder, so anyone wanting to say the translation is wrong and want to peg it as simply murder is wrong, no one in this thread put forth any of the usages of it in scripture and used it to compare it against other words used for kill in murder in ot which will show it simply doesnt just mean murder it also means kill/slay. I will skip that for now to go to a quicker and much more trusted way to tell which word is used.

so the OT command was though shall not ratsach/kill

then comes along Christ and the apostles and what do you know they spoke of that same commandment yet they also spoke it in greek.

lets see what Christ siad, surely He can help us understand if its murder or killing. hmmm i wonder what word He used.

Luk 18:20
Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.

the word kill above is phoneuō, in greek it means to kill, which murder is included in because murder is of course killing but the word itself does not mean to murder there is a different greek word for that.

now lets look at the greek word he chose not to use which in scripture means murder

Mar 15:7
And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection.

the word murder above is phonos, which only means murder, that is not the word Christ used when He could of if He wanted to mark it as murder. clearly Christ chose the word kill and not word for murder in greek when referencing thou shalt not kill, now anyone who is saying that thou shalt not kill is wrong and it should be thou shalt not murder goes directly against Christ, He said it was kill and not simply just murder.


phoneuō g5407
I.to kill, slay, murder
II.to commit murder

phonos g5408
I.murder, slaughter

Mat_5:21 Ye have heardG191 thatG3754 it was saidG4483 by them of old time,G744 Thou shalt notG3756 kill;G5407 andG1161 whosoeverG3739 G302 shall killG5407 shall beG2071 in dangerG1777 of theG3588 judgment:G2920

Mar_10:19 Thou knowestG1492 theG3588 commandments,G1785 Do notG3361 commit adultery,G3431 Do notG3361 kill,G5407 Do notG3361 steal,G2813 Do notG3361 bear false witness,G5576 DefraudG650 not,G3361 HonourG5091 thyG4675 fatherG3962 andG2532 mother.G3384

Luk_18:20 Thou knowestG1492 theG3588 commandments,G1785 Do notG3361 commit adultery,G3431 Do notG3361 kill,G5407 Do notG3361 steal,G2813 Do notG3361 bear false witness,G5576 HonourG5091 thyG4675 fatherG3962 andG2532 thyG4675 mother.G3384

the above is Christ speaking and He always uses Kill, as compared to the greek word for murder which is in below scriptures and not used at all when speaking about the commandment that thou shalt not kill

Mar_15:7 AndG1161 there wasG2258 one namedG3004 Barabbas,G912 which lay boundG1210 withG3326 them that had made insurrection with him,G4955 whoG3748 had committedG4160 murderG5408 inG1722 theG3588 insurrection.G4714

Luk_23:19 (WhoG3748 forG1223 a certainG5100 seditionG4714 madeG1096 inG1722 theG3588 city,G4172 andG2532 for murder,G5408 wasG2258 castG906 intoG1519 prison.)G5438

Luk_23:25 AndG1161 he releasedG630 unto themG846 him that forG1223 seditionG4714 andG2532 murderG5408 was castG906 intoG1519 prison,G5438 whomG3739 they had desired;G154 butG1161 he deliveredG3860 JesusG2424 to theirG846 will.G2307

Rom_1:29 Being filledG4137 with allG3956 unrighteousness,G93 fornication,G4202 wickedness,G4189 covetousness,G4124 maliciousness;G2549 fullG3324 of envy,G5355 murder,G5408 debate,G2054 deceit,G1388 malignity;G2550 whisperers,G5588


so if Christ wanted to mark it as murder the word for murder would have been used (phonos) but he did not he used (phoneuo) kill

now the other thing you can do is look up all the usage of the two words in scripture and then you can also look up the word in other ancient greek scholars around same time and those same words are used by them so you can find the usage of them outside of scripture translation, and if you do you will find that it agrees with scripture phonos is to murder and phoneou is to kill/slay and the two words are very different and Christ chose kill.

so if you say the OT translation is wrong and its murder not kill then you are saying Christ is wrong, good luck with that

keck553
Oct 26th 2013, 02:17 PM
fewarechosen - the hebrew word ratsach is never used in the Bible for anything but murder. The word is not used in the context of war or execution. Do a word check in your Bible. The context will come clear.

And Jesus was a Hebrew, not a Greek.

fewarechosen
Oct 26th 2013, 02:44 PM
fewarechosen - the hebrew word ratsach is never used in the Bible for anything but murder. The word is not used in the context of war or execution. Do a word check in your Bible. The context will come clear.

And Jesus was a Hebrew, not a Greek.


well you are wrong on the first part and of course he was hebrew not greek you think i didnt know that and lol at your petty remark do a word search like i havent, where did i say he was greek ?some things will never change.


to prove to you that i did a word search and you are wrong about it never being used for anything but murder i will give you ot, since in my post i clearly said i had done so which you wanted to ignore to make a snied remark about doing a word search. since you clearly did not read my post perhaps you were in a hurry to make snied remarks and i will post it below so it becomes clear to you that i have.

"i have a ton of indepth word breakdown info on word ratsach but we can save it for later if we need go there, it doesnt just mean murder"

one thing to point out also is you ignore Christ word of kill instead of murder - are you saying those words are wrong and scripture cant be trusted ? i very much want to hear your answer for that question




Num 35:30 (http://bibleforums.org/Bible.cfm?b=Num&c=35&v=30&t=KJV#s=152030)

Whoso killeth any person, the murderer H7523 (http://bibleforums.org/lang/Lexicon/Lexicon.cfm?strongs=H7523&t=KJV) shall be put to death H7523 (http://bibleforums.org/lang/Lexicon/Lexicon.cfm?strongs=H7523&t=KJV) by the mouth of witnesses: but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die.




the above says the ratsach shall be put to ratsach, you do not put a murderer to murder, he is not murdered by the mouth of witnesses he is put to death by mouth of witnesses justly, yet the word ratsach so in that context its not used for murder at all

same with this one below



Jos 20:3 (http://bibleforums.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jos&c=20&v=3&t=KJV#s=207003)

That the slayer H7523 (http://bibleforums.org/lang/Lexicon/Lexicon.cfm?strongs=H7523&t=KJV) that killeth any person unawares and unwittingly may flee thither: and they shall be your refuge from the avenger of blood.





in the above it says the ratsach that kill anyone unaware or unwittingly, you dont go and murder someone unaware and unwittingly thats not murder, if you are driving legally and a kid jumps in front of your car and you unaware and unwittingly hit and kill them you are not guilty of murder, so again in the scripture above its not speaking of murder.

now i could give you every instance of that word as used in scripture since i looked every single one of them up long ago, but no need, scripture already shows you are wrong and ratsach is used for other things besides just murder.

so perhaps try a word check before you go and tell someone to do a word check, hope it becomes clear for you as scripture shows that ratsach is not only used for murder.

oh and "jesus was a hebrew and not a greek" was such a juvenile statement, but shows where your heart is

keck553
Oct 26th 2013, 02:47 PM
your second verse presented is an unjust killing, thus "murder." these days its called "homocide"

the one and only other verse you cited, I'll study and get back to you, but I suspect it is a Hebraic grammatical instrument. Unlike english, often times context defines the meaning of Hebrew words. I suspect that is the case here on your one and only citation.

and it is not a petty comment. By the way, a few other translations agree.

New King James Version: You shall not murder.
Revised English Bible: Do not commit murder.
New International Version: You shall not murder.
New American Standard Bible: You shall not murder.
New Revised Standard Version: You shall not murder.
Amplified Bible: You shall not commit murder.
New English Bible: You shall not commit murder.
Tanakh (Jewish Publication Society): You shall not murder.

fewarechosen
Oct 26th 2013, 03:20 PM
your second verse presented is an unjust killing, thus "murder." these days its called "homocide"

the one and only other verse you cited, I'll study and get back to you, but I suspect it is a Hebraic grammatical instrument. Unlike english, often times context defines the meaning of Hebrew words. I suspect that is the case here on your one and only citation.

and it is not a petty comment. By the way, a few other translations agree.

New King James Version: You shall not murder.
Revised English Bible: Do not commit murder.
New International Version: You shall not murder.
New American Standard Bible: You shall not murder.
New Revised Standard Version: You shall not murder.
Amplified Bible: You shall not commit murder.
New English Bible: You shall not commit murder.
Tanakh (Jewish Publication Society): You shall not murder.

it only takes one to prove its not always used for murder, since you made the claim its on you

the second one is not an unjust killing, its saying if they killed them unwittingly or unaware, thats far from murder. and goes on to denote difference - no hate before

now for the full scripture

Jos 20:3 That the slayer that killeth any person unawares and unwittingly may flee thither: and they shall be your refuge from the avenger of blood.
Jos 20:4 And when he that doth flee unto one of those cities shall stand at the entering of the gate of the city, and shall declare his cause in the ears of the elders of that city, they shall take him into the city unto them, and give him a place, that he may dwell among them.
Jos 20:5 And if the avenger of blood pursue after him, then they shall not deliver the slayer up into his hand; because he smote his neighbour unwittingly, and hated him not beforetime.

now not trying to convince you but for others who read this the example given above is of ratsach, in the above example its not murder its slayer/killer hence why they translated it slayer.

to give an example of the context of that ot scripture, if vedor was selling bread and a thief came and tried to steal it and the vendor slammed the door on him and the thief fell hit his head and died the vendor is not guilty of murder, but it is still fact that he slew the man and did kill him , thats an example of ratsach not meaning murder, scripture even goes out of its way to point out unwittingly and unawares to show the difference between murder and this example of ratsach, even more clear is the man is allowed to live in another city and is not put to death as the ot law demands on murder.

so there is an example of ratsach not being a murder and not being put to death as ot demands of murderer, you are wrong on calling it an unjust murder because murder denotes intent, thats why it was used as slayer in this context, every example of ratsach is not murder as you claimed, but every example of ratsach is killing like scripture shows.

you cannot commit murder unwittingly and unaware

also still waiting for this answer

"one thing to point out also is you ignore Christ word of kill instead of murder - are you saying those words are wrong and scripture cant be trusted ? i very much want to hear your answer for that question"

fewarechosen
Oct 26th 2013, 03:41 PM
since i feel like going even further

here is the scripture saying a murderer must be put to death

Num 35:16
And if he smite him with an instrument of iron, so that he die, he is a murderer: H7523 the murderer H7523 shall surely be put to death.

the above is denoting intent as was missing in the previous post i wrote, someone who is a ratsach with intent it says he surely must be put to death

as compared to the person who did it unaware and unwittingly he is not called on to be put to death same in below

Deu 19:4
And this is the case of the slayer, H7523 which shall flee thither, that he may live: Whoso killeth his neighbour ignorantly, whom he hated not in time past;

Deu 19:6
Lest the avenger of the blood pursue the slayer, H7523 while his heart is hot, and overtake him, because the way is long, and slay him; whereas he was not worthy of death, inasmuch as he hated him not in time past.


the above notes he is not worthy of death again contrasted with

Num 35:17
And if he smite him with throwing a stone, wherewith he may die, and he die, he is a murderer: H7523 the murderer H7523 shall surely be put to death.

Num 35:18
Or if he smite him with an hand weapon of wood, wherewith he may die, and he die, he is a murderer: H7523 the murderer H7523 shall surely be put to death.

Num 35:19
The revenger of blood himself shall slay the murderer: H7523 when he meeteth him, he shall slay him.

so there are examples of ratsach being unaware and unwittingly killing (not murder) not worthy of death and a ratsach that is guilty of murder and being worthy of death

not all ratsach is murder

and again thats why the word phoneuō is used in NT and not phono, Christ said not kill instead of not murder for a reason and it wasnt because he didnt understand the difference

Francis Drake
Oct 26th 2013, 05:29 PM
i have a ton of indepth word breakdown info on word ratsach but we can save it for later if we need go there, it doesnt just mean murder, so anyone wanting to say the translation is wrong and want to peg it as simply murder is wrong, no one in this thread put forth any of the usages of it in scripture and used it to compare it against other words used for kill in murder in ot which will show it simply doesnt just mean murder it also means kill/slay. I will skip that for now to go to a quicker and much more trusted way to tell which word is used.

so the OT command was though shall not ratsach/kill

then comes along Christ and the apostles and what do you know they spoke of that same commandment yet they also spoke it in greek.

lets see what Christ siad, surely He can help us understand if its murder or killing. hmmm i wonder what word He used.

Luk 18:20
Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.

the word kill above is phoneuō, in greek it means to kill, which murder is included in because murder is of course killing but the word itself does not mean to murder there is a different greek word for that.

now lets look at the greek word he chose not to use which in scripture means murder

Mar 15:7
And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection.

the word murder above is phonos, which only means murder, that is not the word Christ used when He could of if He wanted to mark it as murder. clearly Christ chose the word kill and not word for murder in greek when referencing thou shalt not kill, now anyone who is saying that thou shalt not kill is wrong and it should be thou shalt not murder goes directly against Christ, He said it was kill and not simply just murder.


phoneuō g5407
I.to kill, slay, murder
II.to commit murder

phonos g5408
I.murder, slaughter

Mat_5:21 Ye have heardG191 thatG3754 it was saidG4483 by them of old time,G744 Thou shalt notG3756 kill;G5407 andG1161 whosoeverG3739 G302 shall killG5407 shall beG2071 in dangerG1777 of theG3588 judgment:G2920

Mar_10:19 Thou knowestG1492 theG3588 commandments,G1785 Do notG3361 commit adultery,G3431 Do notG3361 kill,G5407 Do notG3361 steal,G2813 Do notG3361 bear false witness,G5576 DefraudG650 not,G3361 HonourG5091 thyG4675 fatherG3962 andG2532 mother.G3384

Luk_18:20 Thou knowestG1492 theG3588 commandments,G1785 Do notG3361 commit adultery,G3431 Do notG3361 kill,G5407 Do notG3361 steal,G2813 Do notG3361 bear false witness,G5576 HonourG5091 thyG4675 fatherG3962 andG2532 thyG4675 mother.G3384

the above is Christ speaking and He always uses Kill, as compared to the greek word for murder which is in below scriptures and not used at all when speaking about the commandment that thou shalt not kill

Mar_15:7 AndG1161 there wasG2258 one namedG3004 Barabbas,G912 which lay boundG1210 withG3326 them that had made insurrection with him,G4955 whoG3748 had committedG4160 murderG5408 inG1722 theG3588 insurrection.G4714

Luk_23:19 (WhoG3748 forG1223 a certainG5100 seditionG4714 madeG1096 inG1722 theG3588 city,G4172 andG2532 for murder,G5408 wasG2258 castG906 intoG1519 prison.)G5438

Luk_23:25 AndG1161 he releasedG630 unto themG846 him that forG1223 seditionG4714 andG2532 murderG5408 was castG906 intoG1519 prison,G5438 whomG3739 they had desired;G154 butG1161 he deliveredG3860 JesusG2424 to theirG846 will.G2307

Rom_1:29 Being filledG4137 with allG3956 unrighteousness,G93 fornication,G4202 wickedness,G4189 covetousness,G4124 maliciousness;G2549 fullG3324 of envy,G5355 murder,G5408 debate,G2054 deceit,G1388 malignity;G2550 whisperers,G5588


so if Christ wanted to mark it as murder the word for murder would have been used (phonos) but he did not he used (phoneuo) kill

now the other thing you can do is look up all the usage of the two words in scripture and then you can also look up the word in other ancient greek scholars around same time and those same words are used by them so you can find the usage of them outside of scripture translation, and if you do you will find that it agrees with scripture phonos is to murder and phoneou is to kill/slay and the two words are very different and Christ chose kill.

so if you say the OT translation is wrong and its murder not kill then you are saying Christ is wrong, good luck with that

Despite your wonderfully detailed analysis of the words, you also have completely failed to answer why, if the commandment in the OT referred to all killing, they subsequently set out to kill all the inhabitants of the land.

I would much rather simply read how Moses and the Israelites understood the commandment, than listen to all your academic prowess.
Your linguistic skills are outvoted by millions of ancient Israelites whose actions are far louder than mere words.

If you can explain the discrepancy between Moses' demonstrated understanding of that commandment, and your proclaimed meaning of it, I might start listening to what you say. In the meantime I shall just ignore it.

fewarechosen
Oct 26th 2013, 06:27 PM
Despite your wonderfully detailed analysis of the words, you also have completely failed to answer why, if the commandment in the OT referred to all killing, they subsequently set out to kill all the inhabitants of the land.

I would much rather simply read how Moses and the Israelites understood the commandment, than listen to all your academic prowess.
Your linguistic skills are outvoted by millions of ancient Israelites whose actions are far louder than mere words.

If you can explain the discrepancy between Moses' demonstrated understanding of that commandment, and your proclaimed meaning of it, I might start listening to what you say. In the meantime I shall just ignore it.

those posts were for those who were trying to say scripture was in error and that the words were wrong, i was simply addressing the words and usage themselves and translations.

as far as discrepancy did the jews decide on their own to go kill all the inhabitants of the land or did God order them too ? there in is the difference

(and not sure if you are trying to tie in moses smiting egyptian and if you are trying to say that was just)

God told man not to kill, He never said He himself does not kill or that He should not kill or any such thing. so the commandment is to us.

there is a big difference between God deciding you should kill/war with someone and us simply deciding who to kill or war with, i assume that makes sense ?

God who is all knowing and from that information decides ok i want you jews to go kill these people, done deal, and just, ordered by God who is all knowing and able to dictate who should die.

i hope one sees the difference between a direct order from God to someone to Go kill/war and us deciding who we should kill/war without order from God.

so i guess i must first ask do you see a difference between God telling a man to go kill someone compared to that man deciding on his own who to kill ? there in is the whole of it

my dad used to tell me dont start fires, then would i would go camping with him he would tell me to start the fire, that didnt conflict or anything, he was the informed adult he made the decision which i was not to make on my own, thats a crude analogy but its the jist of it, Big Big Big Big Big difference between God ordering someone to kill or wage war with and man going and doing it himself.

so yea, the commandment is - thou shalt not kill

as far as "mere words" everyone can play word games and say its not or it is but we all have to account for our words when we see him because as He says

Mat_12:37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.

as a side note in terms of modern words the closest you could prolly get in english to ratsach is slay/slayer if you wanted to try and pigeonhole it into one word which english doesnt cover in one word

Slug1
Oct 26th 2013, 06:55 PM
so if you say the OT translation is wrong and its murder not kill then you are saying Christ is wrong, good luck with thatHebrew...

ratsach: to murder, slay
Original Word: רָצַח
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: ratsach
Phonetic Spelling: (raw-tsakh')
Short Definition: manslayer

The term has meant murder.

The topic is that specific COMMANDMENT and it's not prevention from killing, it's prevention of murder. Are you gonna say that God COMMANDS man not to kill and then says, Moses, go kill those enemy, Joshua- go kill those enemy, Judges- go kill those enemy (one of which is supernaturally empowered TO KILL), King Saul- go kill, King David- go kill... etc, etc. etc.

Francis Drake
Oct 26th 2013, 06:55 PM
those posts were for those who were trying to say scripture was in error and that the words were wrong, i was simply addressing the words and usage themselves and translations.

as far as discrepancy did the jews decide on their own to go kill all the inhabitants of the land or did God order them too ? there in is the difference

(and not sure if you are trying to tie in moses smiting egyptian and if you are trying to say that was just)

God told man not to kill, He never said He himself does not kill or that He should not kill or any such thing. so the commandment is to us.

there is a big difference between God deciding you should kill/war with someone and us simply deciding who to kill or war with, i assume that makes sense ?

God who is all knowing and from that information decides ok i want you jews to go kill these people, done deal, and just, ordered by God who is all knowing and able to dictate who should die.

i hope one sees the difference between a direct order from God to someone to Go kill/war and us deciding who we should kill/war without order from God.

so i guess i must first ask do you see a difference between God telling a man to go kill someone compared to that man deciding on his own who to kill ? there in is the whole of it

my dad used to tell me dont start fires, then would i would go camping with him he would tell me to start the fire, that didnt conflict or anything, he was the informed adult he made the decision which i was not to make on my own, thats a crude analogy but its the jist of it, Big Big Big Big Big difference between God ordering someone to kill or wage war with and man going and doing it himself.

so yea, the commandment is - thou shalt not kill

as far as "mere words" everyone can play word games and say its not or it is but we all have to account for our words when we see him because as He says

Mat_12:37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.

as a side note in terms of modern words the closest you could prolly get in english to ratsach is slay/slayer if you wanted to try and pigeonhole it into one word which english doesnt cover in one word

If the commandment "Do not kill" was given with the intention that it included all killing and murder, God would never then countermand it.

dan
Oct 26th 2013, 11:36 PM
That is where I disagree. I don't think it, the KJV, has faults... But that's just me.

I know how you feel, but, if you look at the "expert's version" of the OT, which is the English version of the Jewish Publication Society, you will see "murder" in the place where "kill" is in the KJV's Third Commandment.

Due to the disparity in the definitions, I will call that a big mistake.

ISRAEL
Oct 27th 2013, 12:49 AM
Ecclesiastes 3
King James Version (KJV)
3 To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:

2 A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;

3 A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;

4 A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;

5 A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;

6 A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away;

7 A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;

8 A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.

Ceegen
Oct 27th 2013, 04:50 AM
We've showed you that the KJV translation of that specific Commandment... is wrong.

God wrote... "Thou shalt not murder" in that stone... not, "kill" as the KJV translates and thus, teaching and learning this Commandment from the KJV Bible has messed up people for generations to the point people are in bondage under it and fruit of this bondage is that they REFUSE to accept the proper translation(s).

I'll take that into consideration with a grain of salt, but it still amazes me that no one can agree on a single translation or bible version.

Have you ever read about or watched a video on what the differences are in the bibles? Just curious.

Slug1
Oct 27th 2013, 12:29 PM
I'll take that into consideration with a grain of salt, but it still amazes me that no one can agree on a single translation or bible version.This is why I went to study of original words. When I read the Bible and God commands that man CANNOT kill... then orders man to go kill, this doesn't add up. As I child I was taught from the KJV, told all other Bibles were "evil" because they were wrong. Yet... here is God commanding one thing and ordering man to break that command?????

I want to serve a God who is ALL that He says He is throughout the Bible. So this means I needed to understand His Word so that I will be aligned with HIM. I encourage you to do the same.


Have you ever read about or watched a video on what the differences are in the bibles? Just curious.No interest... we have the resources of knowledge today (as even prophesied in the Bible) to KNOW more and in utilizing this availability of knowledge, man can choose to remain bound under errored learning and teaching and continue IN that error, or they can learn the truth with the availability to knowledge. Plus... we have the Holy Spirit and when scripture don't line up with what God is saying in other scriptures, then pursuing what the Holy Spirit points out, should be followed.

Ceegen
Oct 28th 2013, 04:53 AM
This is why I went to study of original words. When I read the Bible and God commands that man CANNOT kill... then orders man to go kill, this doesn't add up. As I child I was taught from the KJV, told all other Bibles were "evil" because they were wrong. Yet... here is God commanding one thing and ordering man to break that command?????

I want to serve a God who is ALL that He says He is throughout the Bible. So this means I needed to understand His Word so that I will be aligned with HIM. I encourage you to do the same.

When I first started to seriously study the bible, I bought a "James Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible" in 2000 or 2001. I clearly remember looking up that particular commandment, and the word at that time for some reason, only had one translation: Kill. Not murder, not manslaughter, just "kill". Thou shalt not Kill. When and where this changed, or whatever the case may be, I don't know. I don't know Hebrew or Greek, and even if I did it isn't the Hebrew and Greek of the bible.

I'm not ready to put my trust in a translation that no one can seem to agree on, but I will put my trust in God. So far as I have understood scripture through the example of Jesus Christ, I have no reason to be violent and kill anyone for any reason. I don't want another blood covenant, I already have one by the blood of Jesus.

The new covenant is of water, which is why we baptize. We have no need to shed blood when the blood of an innocent man is enough.


No interest... we have the resources of knowledge today (as even prophesied in the Bible) to KNOW more and in utilizing this availability of knowledge, man can choose to remain bound under errored learning and teaching and continue IN that error, or they can learn the truth with the availability to knowledge. Plus... we have the Holy Spirit and when scripture don't line up with what God is saying in other scriptures, then pursuing what the Holy Spirit points out, should be followed.

No interest in learning about the differences in all the bible translations?

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:" - 2nd Timothy ch3 v16.

If the scripture is profitable for doctrine, and my bible says something different than your bible, how does that effect the doctrines based on those verses which are different or even missing from the text? Can you quote for me Acts ch8 v37 from the NIV?

Francis Drake
Oct 28th 2013, 10:13 AM
When I first started to seriously study the bible, I bought a "James Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible" in 2000 or 2001. I clearly remember looking up that particular commandment, and the word at that time for some reason, only had one translation: Kill. Not murder, not manslaughter, just "kill". Thou shalt not Kill. When and where this changed, or whatever the case may be, I don't know. I don't know Hebrew or Greek, and even if I did it isn't the Hebrew and Greek of the bible.

I'm not ready to put my trust in a translation that no one can seem to agree on, but I will put my trust in God. So far as I have understood scripture through the example of Jesus Christ, I have no reason to be violent and kill anyone for any reason. I don't want another blood covenant, I already have one by the blood of Jesus.


Like you, Ceegen, I use a Strongs concordance although I tend to use an online version like http://biblehub.com/. However the best interpreter of scripture has to be scripture itself.

With that in mind, whatever the accuracy of translation of the commandment not to kill/murder, you cannot touch the full testimony of the whole of scripture.
With the fullness of all the ignorance that I possess, I can safely reject all the best theologians and linguists, if they continue to deny what scripture shows plainly to my face.

And the fact is, that the whole testimony of scripture refuses the possibility of that commandment referring to warfare!

Ceegen, you need to walk away from the argument about translation accuracy, its a sideshow, its a deflection from the vividly clear evidence before your eyes.
If your translation is right, go back and read scripture, then tell me why, after Moses gave the law, did he command them to constantly break it!

Lets all pretend that we don't know Hebrew or Greek. Lets pretend we have never read a concordance. Lets look to bible history and work the meaning from that.
It is totally sufficient.

Then let us remember that God has never changed!

So Ceegen I repeat my request to you.-
If your translation is right, go back and read scripture, then tell me why, after Moses gave the law, did he command them to constantly break it!

Can you possibly answer this simple question?

Slug1
Oct 28th 2013, 10:40 AM
When I first started to seriously study the bible, I bought a "James Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible" in 2000 or 2001. I clearly remember looking up that particular commandment, and the word at that time for some reason, only had one translation: Kill. Not murder, not manslaughter, just "kill". Thou shalt not Kill. When and where this changed, or whatever the case may be, I don't know. I don't know Hebrew or Greek, and even if I did it isn't the Hebrew and Greek of the bible.

I'm not ready to put my trust in a translation that no one can seem to agree on, but I will put my trust in God. So far as I have understood scripture through the example of Jesus Christ, I have no reason to be violent and kill anyone for any reason. I don't want another blood covenant, I already have one by the blood of Jesus.

The new covenant is of water, which is why we baptize. We have no need to shed blood when the blood of an innocent man is enough.



No interest in learning about the differences in all the bible translations?

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:" - 2nd Timothy ch3 v16.

If the scripture is profitable for doctrine, and my bible says something different than your bible, how does that effect the doctrines based on those verses which are different or even missing from the text? Can you quote for me Acts ch8 v37 from the NIV?Putting all translations aside... does it make sense to you that God would COMMAND man that killing is a sin, and then... order man to kill?

Does that make sense?

Ceegen
Oct 28th 2013, 04:59 PM
Putting all translations aside... does it make sense to you that God would COMMAND man that killing is a sin, and then... order man to kill?

Does that make sense?

I don't know but it makes more sense that God said "Thou shalt not kill", and then when He was here and walked among us killed no one, nor even commanded that anyone should die.

Slug1
Oct 28th 2013, 06:10 PM
I don't know but it makes more sense that God said "Thou shalt not kill", and then when He was here and walked among us killed no one, nor even commanded that anyone should die.I see you only choose to accept portions of the Bible, while ignoring the context of others. You do realize that when Jesus returns, He will do all the killing Himself of all evil doers? Since He's back, there will be no more need for the Ministers of God to do the killing anymore, He'll do all by Himself.

Does it make sense that God would COMMAND that killing is a sin, and then order man to kill? Honestly answering this question will help you overcome your ignoring of scripture.

Ceegen
Oct 28th 2013, 07:52 PM
I see you only choose to accept portions of the Bible, while ignoring the context of others. You do realize that when Jesus returns, He will do all the killing Himself of all evil doers? Since He's back, there will be no more need for the Ministers of God to do the killing anymore, He'll do all by Himself.

Does it make sense that God would COMMAND that killing is a sin, and then order man to kill? Honestly answering this question will help you overcome your ignoring of scripture.

I'm not ignoring scripture, just wondering why we find reasons to kill a person based on the Law? Why did God let Cain, who was a murderer, live? And yet Jesus was put to death under the crime of blasphemy by the Law, because Jesus went around claiming to be God?

How do we explain these things?

Slug1
Oct 28th 2013, 08:08 PM
I'm not ignoring scripture, just wondering why we find reasons to kill a person based on the Law? Why did God let Cain, who was a murderer, live? And yet Jesus was put to death under the crime of blasphemy by the Law, because Jesus went around claiming to be God?

How do we explain these things?God didn't have man kill man based on the law... He told them to go into cities and slaughter man/women/child/livestock... HOW can God do this AFTER writing a Commandment that states: Thou shalt not kill...??

Thus the reason why many have helped in understanding scripture in that the term was "murder" and that there is NOTHING sinful in the act of killing another human, WHEN killing is needed. Sure, the Law stipulates some reasons to kill man, but the fact is... killing has NEVER been a sin.

Unless you are a KJVOist and I can understand your bondage and lack of will to see the TRUTH and would rather just accept what a "translation" of scripture teaches and not learn from the actual scriptures and understand that WAS written by God on those stones.

You are doing all you can to avoid honesty.... does it make sense for God to Command man that killing is a sin, and then order man to kill?

A simple yes or a no will help you face the truth of the scriptures as you set aside a "translation" of scripture that is called the KJV.

As for Cain... read the scriptures... God didn't kill him because He cursed him instead.

Aviyah
Oct 28th 2013, 08:13 PM
Why did God let Cain, who was a murderer, live?

I believe God was giving Cain a chance to repent. And I have a feeling he might have, because several of his children's names had the name of God in them.

Or maybe he didn't change, I'm not sure. But I'm pretty confident that God didn't kill Cain immediately for the same reason He didn't kill Adam and Eve immediately.

Ceegen
Oct 28th 2013, 08:34 PM
God didn't have man kill man based on the law... He told them to go into cities and slaughter man/women/child/livestock... HOW can God do this AFTER writing a Commandment that states: Thou shalt not kill...??

Wasn't the conquests of Joshua to rid the lands of the Nephilim? They did exist after the flood...


Thus the reason why many have helped in understanding scripture in that the term was "murder" and that there is NOTHING sinful in the act of killing another human, WHEN killing is needed. Sure, the Law stipulates some reasons to kill man, but the fact is... killing has NEVER been a sin.

Not for God, at least. Only a righteous and just God can kill.


Unless you are a KJVOist and I can understand your bondage and lack of will to see the TRUTH and would rather just accept what a "translation" of scripture teaches and not learn from the actual scriptures and understand that WAS written by God on those stones.

I don't know Hebrew or Greek! Isn't God capable of getting at least one translation to the major language of the time? English is used ALL over the world!


You are doing all you can to avoid honesty.... does it make sense for God to Command man that killing is a sin, and then order man to kill?

Does it make sense for God to create a tree which bears fruit that will kill Adam and Eve if they eat it, and then quietly walk away and leave them alone for a serpent to tempt them?


A simple yes or a no will help you face the truth of the scriptures as you set aside a "translation" of scripture that is called the KJV.

Or maybe God made sure that there was at least one translation for this time period? Hebrew, then Greek, then Latin, then English.

keck553
Oct 28th 2013, 10:31 PM
Wasn't the conquests of Joshua to rid the lands of the Nephilim? They did exist after the flood...
.

Rahab was one of the nephilim at Jericho?

Slug1
Oct 28th 2013, 10:39 PM
Wasn't the conquests of Joshua to rid the lands of the Nephilim? They did exist after the flood...Did they? Let's begin here... what scripture do you use to support this?

Also... you are not gonna be allowed to use this nephilim distraction take away from the question. Joshua killed all the men, all the women, all the children and all the livestock in Jericho. Unless you are gonna say, they are ALL nephelim... then I'm just gonna bow out. So, lets not be distracted and FACE the scriptures for what they are teaching us.

Does it make sense that God will command man in that killing is a sin, and then ORDER man to kill?

Francis Drake
Oct 28th 2013, 10:46 PM
I'm not ignoring scripture, just wondering why we find reasons to kill a person based on the Law? Why did God let Cain, who was a murderer, live? And yet Jesus was put to death under the crime of blasphemy by the Law, because Jesus went around claiming to be God?

How do we explain these things?




As for Cain... read the scriptures... God didn't kill him because He cursed him instead.

I know this is slightly off topic, and I don't want to interrupt the flow, but just address this single question.

God didn't curse Cain as an alternative to killing him.

God had given, via Adam and Eve, specific directions about redemption through the blood sacrifice. God had accepted Abel's sacrifice because it was blood, but rejected Cain's sacrifice of vegetables because it was bloodless. Cain was angry and responded with, "OK God, you want blood, I'll give you blood."
With that, Cain slew his brother!
God was bound by his own law to accept Abel's blood on Cain's behalf. Obviously God knew what was going to happen beforehand.

If you think this is nonsense, read Hebrews 12v22But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, 23to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, 24and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel.…

The death of Abel was not mere murder, it was a sacrifice, that is why it draws a comparison with the sprinkled blood of Jesus.

Following a dream years ago, the Lord has been taking me on a journey of revelation about the blood of redemption. Following on from the garden of Eden, as I read about what Abel had done, I always knew in my spirit that it was a legal, but nevertheless rebellious sacrifice. However I had no scripture to back it up. I then did what I always do and started to pray for it to be revealed, and that is what the Lord showed me. Hebrews 12v24.

Ceegen
Oct 29th 2013, 02:31 AM
I know this is slightly off topic, and I don't want to interrupt the flow, but just address this single question.

God didn't curse Cain as an alternative to killing him.

God had given, via Adam and Eve, specific directions about redemption through the blood sacrifice. God had accepted Abel's sacrifice because it was blood, but rejected Cain's sacrifice of vegetables because it was bloodless. Cain was angry and responded with, "OK God, you want blood, I'll give you blood."
With that, Cain slew his brother!
God was bound by his own law to accept Abel's blood on Cain's behalf. Obviously God knew what was going to happen beforehand.

If you think this is nonsense, read Hebrews 12v22But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, 23to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, 24and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel.…

The death of Abel was not mere murder, it was a sacrifice, that is why it draws a comparison with the sprinkled blood of Jesus.

Following a dream years ago, the Lord has been taking me on a journey of revelation about the blood of redemption. Following on from the garden of Eden, as I read about what Abel had done, I always knew in my spirit that it was a legal, but nevertheless rebellious sacrifice. However I had no scripture to back it up. I then did what I always do and started to pray for it to be revealed, and that is what the Lord showed me. Hebrews 12v24.

See! This is what I'm talking about. Why would Cain ever believe that a blood sacrifice like that is ever what God wanted? Perhaps he was deceived, but back in those days I don't think it was too hard for Satan to go "to and fro" in the earth to sow his seeds of doubt. It's not like he had far to go, everyone that every lived at that time, was *right there*. Ya know?

Nothing we can do will fix the problem, I don't know why we keep trying so hard to bring the kingdom of God to earth before it is time! God said that following Him would be hard to do, and even that people would want to kill us just because of the very mention of the name Jesus. History has proven that to be correct, just as punishment happens to the other nations that don't believe. We're no better than they. What makes us above being judged?

If this is a Christian nation, then it is time we started acting like it. We can't hide our sins with the blood of other men. There is only one blood that can cleanse sins, so don't let that blood be on your hands. We have no excuses, but the world has all kinds of excuses to war and fight with each other, but don't be like the world.

Let your conscious convict you, not me. The world is watching us closely, and what do they see coming out of the United States? Violent movies with occult ideas, video games that glorify it all, and we are the leading producer of pornography! And it doesn't matter that we disagree with it, we live here too, and so by virtue in the guilty by association clause, they hate us too? They're being deceived.

Does it really matter who we vote for, when they all just do what they want anyway? Where's the real change of heart in this nation of ours? These clowns wouldn't get elected to office if the people's morals weren't in such bad shape. Speaking as a nation means the people we elect represent us, and so if they're morally bankrupt, then so is the majority that elected them.

Francis Drake
Oct 29th 2013, 08:51 AM
Nephilim still exist after the flood

Did they? Let's begin here... what scripture do you use to support this?

Also... you are not gonna be allowed to use this nephilim distraction take away from the question. Joshua killed all the men, all the women, all the children and all the livestock in Jericho. Unless you are gonna say, they are ALL nephelim... then I'm just gonna bow out. So, lets not be distracted and FACE the scriptures for what they are teaching us.

Does it make sense that God will command man in that killing is a sin, and then ORDER man to kill?

Just responding to the question of Nephilim before and after the flood.
Genesis 6v3Then the LORD said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years." 4The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown. 5Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Numbers 13v32So they gave out to the sons of Israel a bad report of the land which they had spied out, saying, "The land through which we have gone, in spying it out, is a land that devours its inhabitants; and all the people whom we saw in it are men of great size. 33"There also we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak are part of the Nephilim); and we became like grasshoppers in our own sight, and so we were in their sight."

mikebr
Oct 29th 2013, 07:02 PM
If we worship a violent God who kicks butt and takes names, it makes sense that His followers should do the same. Doesn't it? Think about how violent our god is. He takes His vengeance out on His own son and then everyone who doesn't accept Him is susceptible to eternal conscious torment in a raging fire. Its no wonder that we are violent people.

Slug1
Oct 29th 2013, 08:26 PM
If we worship a violent God who kicks butt and takes names, it makes sense that His followers should do the same. Doesn't it? Think about how violent our god is. He takes His vengeance out on His own son and then everyone who doesn't accept Him is susceptible to eternal conscious torment in a raging fire. Its no wonder that we are violent people.I've asked this of Ceegan... define "violent" in the way God views it compared to the way man views violent action.

If man viewed violence as God did, there would be very controlled need for it's use.... but the world is understanding the use of violence based on the murderous usage that satan inspires. Killing is violent, but since killing is not a sin, the violence matters not. It is needed, justified and those who are used by God to bring God's wrath to evil doers do it with a clear conscious.

Those who kill as in the act of murder, then the enemy pounds them in guilt of their sin and they suffer for the sin they did both spiritually and physically.

The soldiers and law enforcement of the world who DO what God has them do... how many of these people do you hear suffering for what God called them to do?

None on this end... plenty of people without faith in God serving as soldiers and/or law enforcement and they suffer for killing they do. They suffer because they do not have what faithful Christians have who serve in such positions.

Ceegen
Nov 1st 2013, 02:52 PM
I've asked this of Ceegan... define "violent" in the way God views it compared to the way man views violent action.

If man viewed violence as God did, there would be very controlled need for it's use.... but the world is understanding the use of violence based on the murderous usage that satan inspires. Killing is violent, but since killing is not a sin, the violence matters not. It is needed, justified and those who are used by God to bring God's wrath to evil doers do it with a clear conscious.

Those who kill as in the act of murder, then the enemy pounds them in guilt of their sin and they suffer for the sin they did both spiritually and physically.

The soldiers and law enforcement of the world who DO what God has them do... how many of these people do you hear suffering for what God called them to do?

None on this end... plenty of people without faith in God serving as soldiers and/or law enforcement and they suffer for killing they do. They suffer because they do not have what faithful Christians have who serve in such positions.

"They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service." - John 16:2.

People have been thinking they're doing God a service by killing others for thousands of years now, what makes today any different?

Slug1
Nov 1st 2013, 03:01 PM
"They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service." - John 16:2.

People have been thinking they're doing God a service by killing others for thousands of years now, what makes today any different?Well, persecution against Christians is more about the enemy's move in people to murder.

Again, you must understand how God views killing... not a sin and how He views murder... a sin. God not only allows killing of "evil doers", He also does it Himself through the Ministers of God right now. When He returns, He'll do all the killing of evil doers Himself.

So that scripture is about murdering (perscuting) righteous people... all in the name of God due to being DECEIVED. Has nothing to do with bringing God's wrath to evil doers.

So, in all you are saying... is it wrong for the Ministers of God to be used by God to bring His wrath to the evil doers of the world and kill them?

CBrosneck
Nov 2nd 2013, 02:47 AM
What kind of war are we talking about here? War in the defense of your own nation? War to stop the aggression of another nation? War to defend another nation? The answer depends on what type of war you're talking about.

There is simply no logical support to say that war is always wrong. Throw all the cherry-picked verses you want, you cannot escape it. God has killed many millions of people, at one point killing almost ALL of them, in fact. War if used properly is a form of righteous anger. Jesus exemplified this for us at the temple.

Ceegen
Nov 2nd 2013, 05:29 AM
I think this redefining of words is a plague upon us. Having a concordance doesn't seem like a reason to doubt the KJV translators, if they were in fact divinely inspired, which I believe that they were. I haven't studied Greek or whatever, but I have studied English quite a bit. The KJV makes more sense to me than any other bible version I've seen, and more sense than any interpretation of the KJV which we have because of these concordances.

Why do we feel the need to improve what's already there? Maybe we're wrong about something? If I'm wrong, who is right? How would we know?

It just brings more questions than answers, and I find that to be the most interesting aspect of all.

Slug1
Nov 2nd 2013, 11:51 AM
I think this redefining of words is a plague upon us. Having a concordance doesn't seem like a reason to doubt the KJV translators, if they were in fact divinely inspired, which I believe that they were. I haven't studied Greek or whatever, but I have studied English quite a bit. The KJV makes more sense to me than any other bible version I've seen, and more sense than any interpretation of the KJV which we have because of these concordances.

Why do we feel the need to improve what's already there? Maybe we're wrong about something? If I'm wrong, who is right? How would we know?

It just brings more questions than answers, and I find that to be the most interesting aspect of all.So then... how can God say killing is a sin, and then order man to go sin?

Ceegen
Nov 2nd 2013, 01:59 PM
So then... how can God say killing is a sin, and then order man to go sin?

Why did God make the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, knowing that Adam and Eve would be tempted by Satan to eat from it, and that they would die because of it?

Slug1
Nov 2nd 2013, 03:57 PM
Why did God make the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, knowing that Adam and Eve would be tempted by Satan to eat from it, and that they would die because of it?Ceegan... be honest, if your not gonna answer the question, cool. So far, your avoidance is the fruit you bear. Or, if you CAN'T answer the question, are you willing to learn from answers to help you understand?

Ceegen
Nov 3rd 2013, 05:53 PM
Ceegan... be honest, if your not gonna answer the question, cool. So far, your avoidance is the fruit you bear. Or, if you CAN'T answer the question, are you willing to learn from answers to help you understand?

Matthew 21:
23 And when he was come into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came unto him as he was teaching, and said, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority?
24 And Jesus answered and said unto them, I also will ask you one thing, which if ye tell me, I in like wise will tell you by what authority I do these things.
25 The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him?
26 But if we shall say, Of men; we fear the people; for all hold John as a prophet.
27 And they answered Jesus, and said, We cannot tell. And he said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.

If you can't answer my question, then I am not obliged to answer your question, and yes that is totally cool with me. If you can't answer my question, are you willing to learn from answers that I have to help you understand?

Slug1
Nov 3rd 2013, 09:51 PM
Matthew 21:
23 And when he was come into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came unto him as he was teaching, and said, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority?
24 And Jesus answered and said unto them, I also will ask you one thing, which if ye tell me, I in like wise will tell you by what authority I do these things.
25 The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him?
26 But if we shall say, Of men; we fear the people; for all hold John as a prophet.
27 And they answered Jesus, and said, We cannot tell. And he said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.

If you can't answer my question, then I am not obliged to answer your question, and yes that is totally cool with me. If you can't answer my question, are you willing to learn from answers that I have to help you understand?I was a soldier when I began to search God's heart as revealed through the scriptures. When He led me to Acts 10 and the verses about Cornelius and how this soldier was righteous before Him... I understood that I also stood righteous before God as a soldier. There are others but the lesson the Holy Spirit led me through began with Acts 10.

Your understanding is that God has made killing a sin and yet, in the Bible, even after making killing a sin, He orders man to sin by killing.

How do you justify this?

Do you understand that in the original text, God stated that murder was a sin, not killing.

Francis Drake
Nov 3rd 2013, 09:56 PM
If you can't answer my question, then I am not obliged to answer your question, and yes that is totally cool with me. If you can't answer my question, are you willing to learn from answers that I have to help you understand?


Originally Posted by Ceegen
Why did God make the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, knowing that Adam and Eve would be tempted by Satan to eat from it, and that they would die because of it?


Ceegen, I suspect that Slug didn't bother answering because it was taking the discussion away from the core point which you keep evading. However I shall answer it for you, then you will have no hiding place from both mine and Slugs repeated question.

God gave Adam freewill. Freewill is probably the most sacrosanct aspect of the creation of man. God could not possibly relate to man at such a high level if man had no freewill. Man could not possibly choose to love God, if he wasn't also free to reject God.

Therefore without the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, mankind could not possibly love God!

I suspect that this statement is quite an outrageous shock for many who read it!

That freedom of choice happened to be pinned onto one specific tree. I suspect it didn't have to be a tree, because the issue is about decision making not trees. However being tied to a tree then enables it to understood better when juxtaposed against the Tree of Life.

God created Adam with the freedom to choose. God gave Adam dominion over the planet. God walked with Adam, and Adam clearly knew that God was both his creator and loving father, especially after Eve turned up! Therefore Adam had every reason to look to God as his single and most powerful source of wisdom, learning, and truth etc.

Now look at the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.
Genesis3v4
The serpent said to the woman, "You surely will not die! 5"For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." 6When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate.


To say to Adam, "you will be like God", is a straight forward invitation to pride and independence from God. If you become like God, then you can act like God. You can be God as far as this planet is concerned. You can function without God. You become the source instead of God.

You, Adam, can be the source of what is Good and Evil.
You, Adam, will decide what is right and wrong.
You, Adam, will decide what's good and bad
You are the final and sole arbiter from now on.
You don't need God to do this job properly.

God didn't kill Adam as some sort of punishment for his disobedience. Adam died because he unplugged himself from God and declared independence.
Adam walked away from life and straight into death.
Adam walked out of light and straight into darkness.

I believe that ever since Adam was created, God had been building Adam's Tree of Knowledge. God had been Adam's teacher as they walked in the Garden, so all that knowledge was becoming a tree in Adam's life and there was absolutely nothing wrong with that. After all, knowledge is just knowledge. Its only information storage in the brain.

However once we elevate that knowledge as superior to our spiritual relationship with God, then we are dead. We all repeatedly eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Adam was no different to us. We all would have done the same. The question is would we have come back for mercy or remained separated.

Now Ceegen, how about answering Slug?

Ceegen
Nov 4th 2013, 01:44 AM
Now Ceegen, how about answering Slug?

Your answer only proves my point: You, Adam, can punish or forgive sin! Because if you take the law into your own hands by punishing sin, you make yourself a god!

Only in the Old Testament do you find that blood is required at the hands of those who adhere to the law, but in the New Testament you find no such law or commandment by Jesus or any of the apostles. Find me one in the New Testament only, that validates the use of violence for any reason. Just one. And when you do, I'll be ready to disprove why that isn't a justification of violence, as I have done in other threads with other people.

You can't get me to kill anyone. I just won't do it, and I don't think you're right. I disagree entirely that anyone here is a better Christian or morally superior because they can find reasons to kill other people. It doesn't make sense, no matter how you justify it. If God didn't kill them for their crimes, why should I?

If we trust God, we don't have to fight back at all. God will save us, right?

Ceegen
Nov 4th 2013, 01:45 AM
How do you justify this?

"Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."

That's how I justify it.

Slug1
Nov 4th 2013, 02:28 AM
"Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."

That's how I justify it.Hmmm, seems you will avoid the question because this does not address it.

Do you still feel that the KJV is right and God said that killing is a sin?