|
|
 | | From: | Steve Goltra | | Subject: | Re: Open View Theism | | Date: | Sun, 16 Jan 2005 20:30:52 GMT |
|
|
 | I take it that you did not read my post on the Blood Covenant ritual?
Abraham did not enter into a
"Suezarian-Vassel covenant" with a King. They entered into a berius, a
special type of blood covenant (berius), that is identical to the diatheke
covenant, that is found in the New Testament. In this special covenant, God
does all of the giving and Abrahams seed is the recipient.
Also, just to fair to the Jews, they had been in Egypt for over 400 years
and had taken on the ways of their captors. They actually worshipped cows
and were involved in the ual sin of Egypt, as well as the worshipping of
the many Egyptian Gods.
And finally, due to the Passover, the first Passover, which is a picture of
the final sacrifice made by Christ at the feast of Passover 1500 years
later, and when they left Egypt they all were well , and not sick due to
this experience. They continued being well all the way to their entry into
the promised land. There is more to this, but I don't want to get into it.
I have met Hugh Ross (Huge Loss) before. I actually have gone to hear him
speak twice. The problem I have with Hugh is that his scientific education
has blinded his eyes to God's power. The Jews in the early Church had the
same problem with the Law. They still wanted to keep the Law, eventhough
Christ fulfilled the Law. Going back to Hugh, he cannot set his science
aside and realize that if God created a mature man, an adult, that he could
also create a mature earth, an "older" earth. This whole thread is really
going nowhere and I am finding it quite a waste of time. As long as you and
I both believe that Christ is the Messiah, the Seed of the Woman, that took
away the sin of the world, and we have confessed this with our mouth to
others, we will be in heaven.
God bless,
Steve Goltra
"Muz" wrote in message
news:oTfGd.7767$pZ4.3658@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> >I pointed out to you the inconsistencies of God's statements to Moses,
> about
>>how the Jews were Moses people and that Moses was the one that took
> the Jews
>>out of Egypt, etc. I guess that did not compute with you, or ?
>
> I understood what you were trying to say, but it simply isn't supported
> by the text. Multiple times throughout the OT, God rejects Israel
> because they did not keep the covenant, and were not observing the
> sabbath. Hosea takes a prostitute as a wife, and then sends her away
> as a symbol of God's rejection of Israel for a time. Jeremiah 3 is the
> symbolic story of how Israel left, and God was wooing her back. The
> very theme of Israel's existance in the OT is judgment, rejection, and
> restoraion.
>
> You are correct in that the covenant with the Israelites is
> Suezarian-Vassel, in that the powerful king (God) offers certain
> things, if the Vassels (Israel) are loyal to him, and obey His
> commands. And Israel agreed (Exo 24:7)
>
> However, in Exo 32, we see Israel violating the covenant by worshipping
> another god. At this point, the covenant is broken. The only covenant
> that needs to be kept is the promise to Abraham, which God has stated
> that He will keep through Moses. In fact, there are no inconsistencies
> in God's stated course of action, and, in fact, if there were, God
> would be lying to Moses about His intention. You sure you want to
> adopt a view of a lying god?
> (I noticed that you've dropped Jer 3:7 from the discussion.)
>
> Michael
>
>
|
|
|
