[Csihar]

Originally Posted by Daywolf [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That was from the deceiving spirit, not God directly. I see no problem with it. umm... I'll put it this way in context of the thread. The man got raped, the victim turned in the perpetrator in which he went to prison. You know what happens in prisons? Robbery, rape, murder etc. and the perpetrator became subject of that by being sent to it. Oh and then deported.

Now did the victim directly send the perpetrator there himself and by his own power? No, someone else, like a judge or magistrate, they sent him there on behalf of the victim who sent the judge to deal with him. Does that mean the perpetrator is now the victim and the victim the perpetrator since all the unspeakable things are or may be happening to him in prison? That would be nuts, the victim is still only the victim and whatever happens to the perpetrator, it's of no fault of the victim. The victim didn't pass sentence, didn't judge him, only testified.

This is no different. This was a judgement carried out, and the spirit used deception to do it, no different than in a modern court of law with lawyers and such. Do we throw judges into prison dependent on what lawyers, juries, witnesses, bystanders do? If we don't like the way the layers handle things to make a case do we throw them out and let the defendant fend for himself? No, the lawyers do what they do, however they may do it by their own choices, their own discretion. Even the prison warden is not micro-managed by the judge, has their own task and their own choices in which to deal with things.

See if we follow the other logic, we close all prisons, no more judges, no more lawyers. Then everyone becomes a victim and a perpetrator, just as much as the victim in this case feels as a perpetrator over the rapist being deported. I could probably write this better, more understandable, but I'll roll with it.

Remember that I was replying to Blitzers. In the passage God sanctions the deceit, which I find to be of equal footing with the quote from the Quran. I made no judgement about God's action itself, it was all just pointing out the error in Blitzers' post.

I don't really see how that led you to the rest of your post.

Regardless, I don't think any analogy comparing human beings with God ever works. God is not a human being and the circumstances are never, ever the same.

Originally Posted by Daywolf [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

To quantify the bible in a simplistic way, from a point of it meaning what it says in a literal fashion (that what it says is what it means), the flow of the OT is looking forward to the future fulfillment of Christ on the cross, the work of redemption, while the NT is looking back to the fulfillment of Christ on the cross.

The OT not only looks forward to this work, but also provides a filter, in that no common man is able to fulfill, that man always falls short of perfection and in no way could fulfill the work of God's son on the cross. The law, especially, was put there not to save in any way, but is death to man, as no man can pass through such a filter, but only look forward to one that can and will do so.

Now looking back as the NT does, the law was fulfilled, it served it's purpose, and is credited so by Christ who fulfilled the law, applied to him. It's not gone, it's just fulfilled, and a reminder that only the Christ had the ability to fulfill the requirements of the law, and even still today no other who attempts to fullil that law is able to, even though they can try if they wish as it hasn't been taken away or destroyed.

So in other words, the law is still there if you want to try to prove that you are the real christ spoken of in the bible (and needs to be perfect from birth to grave). But for everyone else, it was already fulfilled and now it is replaced with grace thru the one that fulfilled it.

Remember that the OT is only the OT for Christians. Your interpretation would not be agreed with by any Jewish person. Considering the Old Testament/Tanakh and even the New Testament are very much Jewish books I tend to side with the Jewish interpretation.
The Christian version (and I think 'version' is the right word here) is marred by its translation, politics and non-Jewish interpretation.

To be a bit less general, I'm not seeing why 'the law' is being interpreted as the messianic prophecy? Why does 'the Law' not refer to the Torah? The numerous laws have been summarized into 1 or 2 sentences (can't remember which) even before Christ.