The bible contradicting itself -- God's jealousy

[Joe]

Metal brought this up to me a few days ago and I've kinda been wondering about it. I can't remember where in the bible the verses were, but it was these:

[...] for the Lord thy God is a jealous god.

God is love.

Love is not jealous.

I think it's another OT vs NT thing, but I'm not sure. Anyone know exactly how this works?

EDIT -
Short memory span + Gaim logging = fake long memory span

"For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God." - Exodus 20:5
"Love is not jealous." - 1 Corinthians 13:4
"He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love." - John 4:8

[Eric]

I brought this up in a Biblical discussion on stealthbot.net.

[iago]

Exodus = old testament and John = new testament, right? 

From what I understand, in the old testament God was an asshole and in the new one he's a pussy.  Something about his son dying made him lose all meanness..

(Despite my humorous wording, I'm serious -- God changed characteristics in the new testament.)

[Joe]

I think his actions against humanity changed, not his personality. In the Old Testament we were sinful scumbags, but then Christ came and took our sin, and then God didn't treat us like sinful scumbags anymore.

And yes, you're right about the books.

[Joe]

@Lord: The link that brought me there seems to be out of date or broken.

EDIT -

LK 1:26-38 The angel who appears to Mary to foretell the birth of Jesus says that Jesus will be given the throne of David, that he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and that his kingdom will never end. (None of this took place nor can it now be fulfilled.)

Did that guy even read the Bible at all? Does he have a CLUE what it teacher or who Jesus was?

EZ 20:25 God says that he intentionally gave out bad laws. (This means that God-given laws or commandments are sometimes suspect.)

Read the verse before it (here). God let them go back to their laws, he didn't give the laws to them.

MT 16:28, MK 9:1, LK 9:27 Jesus says that some of his listeners will not taste death before he comes again in his kingdom. This was said almost 2000 years ago. (Note: This and many other passages indicate that Jesus was to come again in a relatively short period of time and not just "quickly" as present day Biblicists assert. All of his listeners are now dead, yet Jesus has not come again in his kingdom. All of the alleged words of Jesus recorded in the Bible are therefore suspect.)

My first response also covers this one, I believe.

MK 16:17-18 A believer can handle snakes or drink poison and not experience any harm. (Note: Many unfortunate believers have died as a result of handling snakes and drinking poison. This kind of assertion negates the Bible as a useful guidebook for life.)

This one's a bit tougher to swallow than the other three, but dying isn't necessarily bad. I'm going to return to my point about that guy clearly not knowing about the afterlife aspect.

EDIT -

GE 2:17 Adam was to die the very day that he ate the forbidden fruit.
GE 5:5 Adam lived 930 years.

I haven't read the entire book of Genesis, but as far as I know it doesn't include a day-for-day record of Adam's life. I bet he ate the apple when he was 930 year old.

[iago]

I think his actions against humanity changed, not his personality. In the Old Testament we were sinful scumbags, but then Christ came and took our sin, and then God didn't treat us like sinful scumbags anymore.

For what it's worth, one of my old philosophy professors told me that in the Jewish version of The Bible they used different names for God, sometimes "merciful" and sometimes "vengeful" among other things.  Apparently, the words for those were translated into a single "God" when it was translated to English.  Dunno if it's true, though. 

[Eric]

GE 2:17 Adam was to die the very day that he ate the forbidden fruit.
GE 5:5 Adam lived 930 years.

I haven't read the entire book of Genesis, but as far as I know it doesn't include a day-for-day record of Adam's life. I bet he ate the apple when he was 930 year old.

Adam had his first son after his banishment from Eden; he was 130 years old at the time.  The mere fact that Adam and Eve were capable of pursuing a life outside of Eden...

LK 1:26-38 The angel who appears to Mary to foretell the birth of Jesus says that Jesus will be given the throne of David, that he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and that his kingdom will never end. (None of this took place nor can it now be fulfilled.)

MT 16:28, MK 9:1, LK 9:27 Jesus says that some of his listeners will not taste death before he comes again in his kingdom. This was said almost 2000 years ago. (Note: This and many other passages indicate that Jesus was to come again in a relatively short period of time and not just "quickly" as present day Biblicists assert. All of his listeners are now dead, yet Jesus has not come again in his kingdom. All of the alleged words of Jesus recorded in the Bible are therefore suspect.)

Did that guy even read the Bible at all? Does he have a CLUE what it teacher or who Jesus was?

I'm sure that he has read the Bible and understands what it teachers.  Jesus has never been given the "throne of David" and has yet to proclaim his rule over the "kingdom."

EZ 20:25 God says that he intentionally gave out bad laws. (This means that God-given laws or commandments are sometimes suspect.)

Read the verse before it (here). God let them go back to their laws, he didn't give the laws to them.

Wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live;

I gave them?

[Joe]

He gave the statutes back to them so that they could follow them, yes. I seriously doubt that paragraph says "I commanded bad statutes to them", but more of "I gave them the right to follow bad statutes". Damned English.

[Eric]

He gave the statutes back to them so that they could follow them, yes. I seriously doubt that paragraph says "I commanded bad statutes to them", but more of "I gave them the right to follow bad statutes". Damned English.

I believe that the statement implies that, since they had chosen not to follow the commandments, he had therefore given them bad commandments to follow.  I can see how your interpretation would apply as well, however.

[Joe]

As for the throne of David, I'm not well-versed enough in the Old Testament to understand that (but David was a great king, and IIRC his bloodline had something to do with the founding of Judaism), but I think it means that he was the King of the Jews. On his cross it said "This is Yeshua, King of the Jews", so he was given the throne of David (if that's what it means, but don't take my word for it), and he told Pilate that his kingdom was not of this world, which means he did claim to have a kingdom (which is obviously Heaven).

[Eric]

As for the throne of David, I'm not well-versed enough in the Old Testament to understand that (but David was a great king, and IIRC his bloodline had something to do with the founding of Judaism), but I think it means that he was the King of the Jews. On his cross it said "This is Yeshua, King of the Jews", so he was given the throne of David (if that's what it means, but don't take my word for it), and he told Pilate that his kingdom was not of this world, which means he did claim to have a kingdom (which is obviously Heaven).

http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/dispen/davidthr.htm

[rabbit]

God has other contradictions.  Such as "You have free will to choose to believe in what you want, but if you don't believe in me and my son you go to hell and get tortured for all eternity".  That's one of my favorite ones.

[dark_drake]

God has other contradictions.  Such as "You have free will to choose to believe in what you want, but if you don't believe in me and my son you go to hell and get tortured for all eternity".  That's one of my favorite ones.

We have the choice to obey the law or not.  If we break the law, we get punished.  If we don't listen to God, we get punished.

[Sidoh]

God has other contradictions.  Such as "You have free will to choose to believe in what you want, but if you don't believe in me and my son you go to hell and get tortured for all eternity".  That's one of my favorite ones.

That isn't a contradiction.  It's elementary cause and effect.

[rabbit]

Not really.  "Free will to choose as you see fit" means that there are no repercussions, IE: they can choose what they want to, without any mitigating factors.  It's like saying "you can have anything you want to for breakfast, but if you don't eat waffles with syrup and a glass of milk I'm going to tie you to a mattress and connect electrodes to your balls and nipples and torture you for a very long time."