Are Christians any different?

[Voyageur]

First, the Scriptures show that He is God. Click here. When He appeared to Hagar, she recognized that she was in the presence of God; she referred to Him as “the-God-Who-Sees“ (Gen. 16:13).

I am sorry, but this does not convince me. You are drawing your own literary conclusions.

Some Biblical scholars believe that the physical manifestation of God is conveyed through an Angel, such as Metatron. Some Christians believe Metatron is the pre-incarnate Jesus--but there is no consensus on this.

Speaking to Abraham on Mount Moriah, the Angel identified Himself as “the Lord †(?Heb.? YHWH , or Jehovah ; Gen. 22:16).

First of all, this Angel could be merely the messenger of God; so again, it could be Metatron, for example. And this verse is from the Old Testament. At issue here is whether this is Jesus; and this cannot be definitively proven.

Angel can mean a being distinct from God. Saying that he is Lord can simply legitimize the Angel's authority when speaking to Abraham.

When blessing Joseph, Israel used the names “God†and “the Angel†interchangeably (Gen. 48:15, 16).

Why have two names or terms for God in the same story? Why not keep things simple and refer to everything as God, and not as 'the Angel' or 'the Angel of God' (in the specific story). My interpretation is that these other beings are the personal representatives of God, and carry with them the authority and awe-inspiring power of God. This is merely an interpretation, though, as alot of things are with regard to the Bible.

At the burning bush, it was the “Angel of the Lord †who appeared (Ex. 3:2), but Moses “hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God†(Ex. 3:6).

Again, why confuse matters with interchangeable names? Wouldn't it be clearer if the story stuck to: it was 'God' who appeared (Ex. 3:2), but Moses 'hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God.' (Ex. 3:6).

This might have something to do with translation issues; that is, the confusion of what and who is appearing before Moses.

The Lord who went before Israel in a pillar of cloud (Ex. 13:21) was none other than 3the Angel of God†(Ex. 14:19).

Exodus Ch.'s 13 & 14 refer to the 'Angel of God' once. All other divine interaction is attributed to God. And it seems to me that the Angel of God is another being, an Angel, acting along with God.

Gideon feared that he would die because, in seeing the Angel of the Lord , he had seen God (Judg. 6:22, 23).

I interpret this as meaning that the Angel of the Lord conveys the power and authority of God; not that they are one.

The Angel of the Lord told Manoah that His name was Wonderful (Judg. 13:18), one of the names of God (Isa. 9:6).

You are referencing two different books here for your proof.

When Jacob struggled with the Angel, he struggled with God (Hos. 12:3, 4).

I had a Biblical Literature professor in college--who was a pastor by the way--who taught that this Angel was in fact an Angel, and not Jesus. This is one Biblical scholar's opinion, though. But, I do not think that he was straying from agreed upon Biblical scholarship.

These are convincing proofs that when the Angel of the Lord is referred to in the OT, the reference is to deity.

With all due respect, jgred, this is proof enough to convince you. This does not mean that your interpretation is the preferred interpretation.

I think what you could do that might be of interest to yourself and the rest of us, is email religious professors and pastors (of all denominations and disciplines) and see what the general consensus seems to be. I could even email some professors and pastors that I know.

It wouldn't ultimately settle anything, but it could shed some light on the subject.


Cheers...

 

[Voyageur]

Despite my last post, jgred, I see the perspective that you are coming from, and I do not relegate it to a lesser position.

 

[jgredline]

Voy
I read your responses and I must say, your grasping at straws.
You were right about 1 thing. I did use two books as resources. My bible and a concordance. I re did my web page just for you. Well, not really, but for anyone who would want to learn. here is my re write. Let me know what you think.



The Angel of the Lord (Jehovah) is the Lord Jesus Christ in a pre incarnat appearance. A study of the passages in which He is mentioned makes it clear that He is God, and that He is the Second Person of the Trinity.

First, the Scriptures show that He is God. Click here.

To save space, I will not add all the actual scriptures here. For the sake of context, I have provided the book, chapter and verses for you to look up. I will be using the NKJV and ESV translations.

There are two terms that are used to describe the pre-incarnate Christ in the Old Testament.. For now I will give some very simple explanations as to what they mean.



Christophany : These are appearances of the Lord Jesus Christ in the flesh. In particularly the OT. Some liberal theologians say there is no suck thing as a Christophany and others will say that it is Christ appearing to people after the resurrection. This is simply not true as will be proved down below. A Christophony is Jesus pre-incarnate in the OT.. For the trinitarian this poses no problems as it affirms the deity of Jesus Christ, God in the flesh.

Theophany: This is the term that is used by liberal theologians who try and explain away the trinity, thus deny Christ his deity and explain the OT appearances as some sort of god angel. I have heard it even said to be Michael the Arc Angel, or Gabriel the messenger.



When He appeared to Hagar, she recognized that she was in the presence of God; she referred to Him as “the-God-Who-Sees“ (Gen. 16:13).

While Hagar was in the desert at Shur, on the way to Egypt, the Angel of the Lord came to her. This was the Lord Jesus in one of His preincarnate appearances, known as a Christophany. He counseled her to return and submit to Sarai, and promised that her son would become head of a great nation. That promise, of course, is fulfilled in the Arab people. The words Return ... and submit have marked great turning points in the lives of many who have had dealings with God. Hagars exclamation in verse 13 might be paraphrased, You are a God who may be seen, for she said, Have I also here seen Him who sees me? She named the well Beer Lahai Roi (literally, well of the One who lives and sees me).

Speaking to Abraham on Mount Moriah, the Angel identified Himself as “the Lord †(?Heb.? YHWH , or Jehovah ; Gen. 22:13-19).

To offer Isaac was surely the supreme test of Abrahams faith. God had promised to give Abraham a numberless posterity through his son. Isaac could have been as much as twenty-five at this time, and he was unmarried. If Abraham slew him, how could the promise be fulfilled? According to Hebrews 11:19, Abraham believed that even if he slew his son, God would raise him from the dead. This faith was remarkable because there was no recorded case of resurrection up to this time in the worlds history. When Isaac asked, Where is the lamb?, his father replied, God will provide for Himself the lamb. This promise was not ultimately fulfilled by the ram of verse 13 but by the Lamb of God (John 1:29).

There are two outstanding symbols of Christ in this chapter. Isaac is the first: an only son, loved by his father, willing to do his fathers will, received back from the dead in a figure. The ram is the second: an innocent victim died as a substitute for another, its blood was shed, and it was a burnt offering wholly consumed for God. Someone has said that, in providing the ram as a substitute for Isaac, God spared Abrahams heart a pang He would not spare His own. The Angel of the Lord in verses 11 and 15, as in all the Old Testament, is the Lord Jesus Christ. Abraham named the place The-Lord-Will-Provide (Jehovah-jireh) (v. 14). This is one of the seven compound names for God in the OT . The others are:

To read the rest click on the link.
http://www.pro4machineworks.com/The_Ang ... _LORD.html

 

[vinc]

When it comes to Christians joining the military. The main motive is to provide defensive services to one's own country. They provide protection to their countrymen from wicked people at the risk of their own lives.

Does this include the killing of innocent civilians through bombs? Or soldiers killing civilians by way of gun?

No. It does not include all that. As i said earlier that the main motive is to provide defensive services and not to encourage violence or terror towards innocent civilians. But, the problem with wars is that there is always the danger of innocent civilians being injured or killed because of the hatred-levels escalating among those groups who are at war with each other. This is the reason why i had mentioned in my last paragraph that "God would like peace and harmony to prevail among the different nations of the world so that there wouldn't be the need for the Military Department in each country".

[quote:29e58]John 15:13 - Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

This is not limited to war. It could apply to any number of situations.

Yes, i agree that one could apply to any number of situations but we can apply it to war-situations also. This is the reaon why i have quoted the above Bible verse.

Christians in Defense forces of the Government do so as their duty for their fellow-country-men. One can be a good witness for the Lord even being in the Defense Forces.

But, taking part in war crimes or not trying to stop your fellow soldiers is equally wicked, and surely not condoned by God.

As i said earlier again that although it is not condoned by God, it may not be practically possible. It is always good to follow after peace rather than war. We do not become a wicked person if we are not trying to stop our fellow soldiers from going to war. Each person is entitled to take his own decisions, we can only express our opinions and not force our opinions on anyone. The soldiers are also Government-workers like us who do what their Higher Command tells them to do as a duty. There is a saying that, "Man sees the action but God sees the intention". According to this God can judge a righteous judgement on an individual basis.

So, God can understand Acts of Self-Defense and Acts of Protection for others and justifies such Christians.

Self-defense is subjective, as we have seen with Iraq, for example. Some people think invading Iraq was a matter of self-defense. But, Iraq posed no imminent threat to the United States, nor did they invade the United States--which is how the United States legally justifies a declaration of war. The same was the case with Vietnam and Korea.

Each country's leaders ought to take their own wise decisions in this regard. Only God knows who can be justified and who is guilty of judgement.

While God would like peace and harmony to prevail among the different nations of the world so that there wouldn't be the need for the Military Department in each country, it is not practically possible due to the diverse beliefs of people in the world and more so due to the hatred existing in some of them.

Indeed. Fundamentalists of every religion are the source of this hatred and violence against one another.

Yes, i agree and we can only hope for better understanding and a sense of peace to prevail within them. :

It is also due to the wicked, evil and violent people in the world who love to make war and violence rather than go for peaceful negotiations and see that the world is made a better place to live in.

Touche. But, wicked, evil and violent are relative terms. A virtuous man to some, can be a violent tyrant to others. This is the perception of Bush in the Middle East and elsewhere in the world. I am not indicting Bush, but this is how many people in the world see him. So, it proves that definitions of what constitutes evil, wicked and violent or virtuous, diplomatic, etc., are relative--a matter of perception.

Yes, it is a matter of perception. Bush was or is considered as a tyrant by people in the middle east just like Saddam was or is considered as a tyrant in the west. There are also Americans who do not like Bush and some of his decisions and there are Iraqis who do not like Saddam and some of his decisions. But, as a person how Bush or Saddam is only those who are closely associated with them for years can say. The saying, "Dictators were not born but were made" is somewhat truthful imo.

It is more individualistic in nature. One cannot judge someone is wicked or evil unless one has been with and interacted with for some years. It also involves the Office and the Responsibility a person has on his shoulders for his country-men and for the greater good of the whole world. Therefore, imho God takes an entirely broad-minded view of this entire scenario.
[/quote:29e58]

Responses are within the main quote.

Lord bless you.

 

[CrimsonCross]

do we believe, or do we really believe.

 

[CrimsonCross]

do we believe, or do we really believe.