Which "Christian" God Do You Believe In?

[zeez 0]

GOD is the same , unchangeable , in old and new testament , he had the same mercy from the beginning, that's becuase if you read the two books you'll get a better understanding of his plan for the human life.all i have to say is that your question was bombed, god is the same and was the same yesterday today and forever more.read before you start mumbling, and dont give us bs just because someone told you something and you wanted to sound smart

[beatgammit 0]

There's only one God. Hebrews 13:8 "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today, and forever". Jesus Christ, understood by many to be the God of this Earth, remains the same. If he changed, he would cease to be God, because God is a perfect being, and perfection is not changeable. I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormon or LDS for those of you who don't know our full name), and I believe that God the Father is a God of Justice, and that Jesus Christ is a God of Mercy, to satisfy Justice he performed the Atonement and died on the Cross.

 

All in all, I believe that there is only one God (the father), but three distinct beings (God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost).

[Mafamba Team 0]

I don't believe in Christianity, Jesus and the Virgin Mary and so on, I am kind of agnostic, but if I did have to believe in one of the God's it would of most certainly of been the 2nd God.

[mtnbluet 0]

i know the bible gives god two names... but actually there were more than just 2 names.. but they all respresent the same god.... anyways it's all brainwashing stuff that moses created in 1523bc anyways :)learn history some more

I remember being in a Science and Dynamic Change geology class at the University of Wisconsin. One day the professor brought up the Bible as he discussed dynamic change. He used the Old Testament as an example of how you know the accuracy of a history account by phrases they use. In the crossing of the Red Sea some details of the climate and /or vegetation could only be given by a person very well acquainted with the area and the particular time in history, according to my professor. Furthermore, an outsider would have given a different account. Hence, this professor concluded that the Bible was historically accurate and possibly accurate in other things as well. I believe that he simply chose not to be a believer, because you see, my professor was an atheist! I found that amazing. He never said what Jesus said was untrue; he just simply chose not to believe.

[mitchellmckain 0]

I remember being in a Science and Dynamic Change geology class at the University of Wisconsin. One day the professor brought up the Bible as he discussed dynamic change. He used the Old Testament as an example of how you know the accuracy of a history account by phrases they use. In the crossing of the Red Sea some details of the climate and /or vegetation could only be given by a person very well acquainted with the area and the particular time in history, according to my professor. Furthermore, an outsider would have given a different account. Hence, this professor concluded that the Bible was historically accurate and possibly accurate in other things as well. I believe that he simply chose not to be a believer, because you see, my professor was an atheist! I found that amazing. He never said what Jesus said was untrue; he just simply chose not to believe.

This is often the difference between academic honesty and religion. Religion and pseudo-scientific efforts like "Creation science" grab at any excuse, reason or evidence that they can twist into a support for the truth of their beliefs, but scientists and academics in general have trained themselves to judge things honestly according what the evidence tells them. Peer review keeps them them both honest and objective in their finding. It doen't mean that they are always right, but it does mean that unlike religion, when new evidence arises that contradicts their previous claims they are ready to change their theories accordingly, instead of stubbornly and stupidly insisting that they are right regardless.
Edited January 18, 2007 by mitchellmckain (see edit history)

[mtnbluet 0]

For the followers of the Christian faith, it must be difficult to know which God is the right one. The Old testament God is cruel, vindictive and bloodthirsty, the New testament God is loving and caring.
So, which one do you follow?

And, how do you reconcile the two Gods? After all, he/she/it cannot change, as it goes against the whole concept of a Godhead, or is/was there really two gods?

What we really have here is a transition.

Through disobedience Adam & Eve were separated from God. (Remember how before that God would go walking in the garden of eden with Adam. That doesn't sound to me like a harsh God.)

But now God could no longer stand to look at man. All He would see was the sin.

Through the sacrifices of animals, the sin was covered, but never taken away.
Hence, the old testament people had a nature that strayed from God and wandered after sin, like always
finding false idols to spend time on by worshiping them.

However, God was always searching for a man to follow Him and obey Him, but He found precious few.
Finally, He found Abram who He renamed Abraham. Through him He was able to find a young maiden that permitted His seed to be born of the Holy Spirit.

This began the New Testament. For as soon as Jesus died on the cross He was the perfect sacrifice who no longer covered sin but through sinlessness was able to wash our sins away. Hence, from then on when God saw anyone who had accepted Jesus as their Savior, He no longer saw the sin. Now He only saw Jesus in that person and a love relationship could begin to form and develop. Also, the Bible talks of turning a man's heart of stone to a heart of flesh. Now, men became compassionate about serving God and loving their fellow man. If you notice that the New Testament believers met together alot and broke bread from house to house.

So all that to say that man was really the cause for God to react the way He did to them in the New and Old Testaments and not the other way around.

HTH

[mitchellmckain 0]

So all that to say that man was really the cause for God to react the way He did to them in the New and Old Testaments and not the other way around.

I agree with your summation but not with the details of your explanation.

But now God could no longer stand to look at man. All He would see was the sin.

That may make sense to you but not to me. Such a God is too small and petty for me to belieive in. I believe in an infinite God whose very nature is to love and give of Himself unconditionally. I don't think the change was in how God felt about human beings but in what Adam and Eve felt about God and themselves so that the presence of God was no longer conducive to their well being. This was utterly tragic because only in a relationship with God was their any possibility for them to realize their greater potentialities. But as long as Adam and Eve refused responsibility for what they had done and instead insisted on blaming everything on each other and upon "the serpent", the presence of a God who they could depend on for everything was not what was best for them. But without the personal guidance of God, Adam and Eve and all of their decendents were doomed to fall into the self-destructive habits of sin. We were simply not meant to go it alone.

Through the sacrifices of animals, the sin was covered, but never taken away.

This is a traditional way parents have for teaching their children responsibility. If they cannot handle the full consequences of what they have done, the parent give the child something to do as a substitiute (often called punishment) while the parent takes care of the real consequences Himself.

However, God was always searching for a man to follow Him and obey Him, but He found precious few.Finally, He found Abram who He renamed Abraham. Through him He was able to find a young maiden that permitted His seed to be born of the Holy Spirit.

Yes in the first chapter of Isaiha, God gets pretty sick of the sacrifices which are nothing but a cover (or "indulgence") for evil deeds. The situation is much like that of the manipulative nature of children who take their substitutionary punishments for granted and pursue wrongdoing regardless of it. At such a time it becomes necessary for the parent to change the punishments to something more like the real consequences of their deeds. So it was through the Babylonian captivity that the Jews began to realize that God's punishments for sins were more severe than any other people because God's expectation for them was greater than for other peoples of the world.

This began the New Testament. For as soon as Jesus died on the cross He was the perfect sacrifice who no longer covered sin but through sinlessness was able to wash our sins away. Hence, from then on when God saw anyone who had accepted Jesus as their Savior, He no longer saw the sin. Now He only saw Jesus in that person and a love relationship could begin to form and develop. Also, the Bible talks of turning a man's heart of stone to a heart of flesh. Now, men became compassionate about serving God and loving their fellow man. If you notice that the New Testament believers met together alot and broke bread from house to house.

Yes by what He did He not only showed us what our sins do to the innocent that try to help mankind but by doing this Himself He showed us that He was such an innocent only trying to help, but willing to suffer the consequences of our sins. Through this event God could bring reconcilliation between God and man for it demands our recognition that our sins put Him on the cross to be ridiculed and tortured to death. The point is thus that through this event, God can restore the natural relationship He had with Adam and Eve without the detrimental result of having us think that our actions have no consequences.

[CaptainRon 0]

uh... God just seems to be a slightly superior "caring" human being by the discussion of you guys...

[mtnbluet 0]

uh... God just seems to be a slightly superior "caring" human being by the discussion of you guys...

Don't forget that God created us in His image. The exciting part is that when we get to heaven we get to see God face to face with that relationship continuing and deepening, because...we are already created in his image.

[mtnbluet 0]

I agree with your summation but not with the details of your explanation.That may make sense to you but not to me. Such a God is too small and petty for me to belieive in. I believe in an infinite God whose very nature is to love and give of Himself unconditionally.

I agree that God is vast and very loving. One example of this is when the Amalekites raided the Philistine village that David lived in and stole all the families and things and David with his small band of men got them all back. Another example is when Gideon was chosen to free the people, the Philistines, I believe, were the oppressors and they ended up being afraid of Gideon before they evn saw him, and became so confused that they killed themselves. Finally, a 3rd example of the love of God is that Queen Esther was accepted twice by the King-he touched the royal scepter- so she could request that her people be saved from annihilation by Haman.

However, please explain why these people died. Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, one day offered strange fire before the Lord (i.e. they made a mixture of incense that was not what God had ordered) and fire came out from the altar and devoured them. Secondly, when King David moved the Ark back to Jersalem, he hadn't read that only the priests were supposed to move it and in a special way. King David moved the Ark via a cart pulled by oxen and when Uzza touched the ark to steady it, he died right there on the spot. Lastly, when the Jews in the desert with Moses grumbled, plagues would go out and kill thousands as well God led them in the desert for 40 years because of disobedience. These examples sure look like a conditional God to me.

[demolaynyc 0]

To me, the "two" Gods you mention are one. Just like what it says in Deutoronomy, "The Lord is good, the Lord is ONE". There is only ONE God. There are no two Gods.I agree with the statement that in the Old, he's a Scary God but in the new he is Loving God.First of all, God loves his children don't forget that.God damns sinners. But in fact, all humans are sinners! But through God's love and mercy he sent Jesus Christ to save us! The good news is that if we accept Jesus as our Lord and Saviour and you let him in your heart, then all the sins you've commited and sins yet to be commited will be cleansed and you will become Holy and Pure in the eyes of God and therefore you go to Heaven.What I'm trying to say here is that even though we commit sins but we have Jesus we are still pure and holy in the eyes of God because of his Great Mercy.

[demolaynyc 0]

To me, the "two" Gods you mention are one. Just like what it says in Deutoronomy, "The Lord is good, the Lord is ONE". There is only ONE God. There are no two Gods.I agree with the statement that in the Old, he's a Scary God but in the new he is Loving God.First of all, God loves his children don't forget that.God damns sinners. But in fact, all humans are sinners! But through God's love and mercy he sent Jesus Christ to save us! The good news is that if we accept Jesus as our Lord and Saviour and you let him in your heart, then all the sins you've commited and sins yet to be commited will be cleansed and you will become Holy and Pure in the eyes of God and therefore you go to Heaven.What I'm trying to say here is that even though we commit sins but we have Jesus we are still pure and holy in the eyes of God because of his Great Mercy.

[ginginca 0]

Love the sinner ... hate the sin.

[yuhuu 0]

Yessss,,God is God. God is love and just..He decided that anyone that sins deserves dead...but,,,since a lot of humans are going to hell. Gods love gives us a chance to life forever if we accept JesusChrist as our Owner and savior....God punishes the son he loves...Because He cares of His sons....And we see this God in the Old and New Testament...God remains the same through both testaments...What happens a lot of times is that a lot of people just read certain pasagges of the bible...and then they say: "I have read the bible" jajajajaja...But they really meant : "I have read some verses of the bible, and it appears that God is bloodthirsty" Before comming to conclusions of Gods character...I would recommend everyone to read the bible completely...Without that condition fulfilled is senseless to have a discussion. You have to agree on that..is senseless...is like comming to say that the u2 song "beautiful day" is just tones without lyrics...and comming to that conclussion because all what you heard was the first 10 seconds of the soundtrack...

[mitchellmckain 0]

However, please explain why these people died. Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, one day offered strange fire before the Lord (i.e. they made a mixture of incense that was not what God had ordered) and fire came out from the altar and devoured them. Secondly, when King David moved the Ark back to Jersalem, he hadn't read that only the priests were supposed to move it and in a special way. King David moved the Ark via a cart pulled by oxen and when Uzza touched the ark to steady it, he died right there on the spot. Lastly, when the Jews in the desert with Moses grumbled, plagues would go out and kill thousands as well God led them in the desert for 40 years because of disobedience. These examples sure look like a conditional God to me.

I was not there and I am not God. So I cannot explain them. The question is do you believe in such a God? If you do, then you must be very proud of yourself. But if you do not, then why are you talking about things you do not believe in? Why do you make such an effort to mock the beliefs of others? Do you really need to prop up a feeling of your own superiority so desperately, and why is that?

How should a parent love a child? Should he cease to love the child when the child makes a mess? The parent will quite often say BAD or some other sort of negative reaction or punishment. The child cries forlorn thinking himself unloved, but is this true? Is the love of the parent conditional simply because the parent tries teach the child things? I do not think so. The parents expression of love must be on the parents terms for it is the parent who knows what is best for the child. Likewise we cannot demand that God love us in the manner that we would choose to be loved because we are just as ignorant of the requirements of our own well being as an infant.