Jeremiah 32-34

[wolfpurplemoon]

Jeremiah proves he is a true prophet by saying that the king's cousin will come and offer his field to him because he is entitled to buy it. Which the cousin then does, but if the king is the one who is entitled to the field then it was bound to happen? Because the fact that the Babylonians were besieging the city wasn't enough proof.

There is nothing too difficult for God (insert question about whether God can make a rock too heavy for him to lift)

God has made a covenant that the day and night will come at their proper times, wouldn't want the sun to go on strike and refuse to rise would we.

God promises to make the people of Israel as numerous as the stars, I guess they broke the covenant a lot then...

OK, Jeremiah's prophecies are not so great, he tells King Zedekiah that God says he'll die a peaceful death, the footnote tells me that he is captured by Babylonians, has his eyes cut out and the dies in prison, yeah sounds peaceful to me.

Oh well, Zedekiah gets in trouble for not getting everyone to release their slaves, guess that's why he doesn't get the peaceful death in the end.

Comments

[zen-says.livejournal.com]

was reading a book : "God Hates You, Hate Him Back : Making sense of the Bible" by CJ Werleman. An interesting read to go hand in hand with your journal.

Cheers

[wolfpurplemoon]

Thanks for that recommendation, it's the first one someone has posted on my bible posts that I've actually been interested in getting hold of!

[zteccc.livejournal.com]

When Israel was first set up, after the exodus from Israel, each family was given an amount of land. The land was supposed to be kept within the family and passed thorugh generations. Nobody, not even the king, could legally take that land. The owners could, however sell the land although the nearest relative would have the first option to buy the land (to keep it in the family). Jeremiah's cousin, Hanamel, wanted to sell his land, and Jeremiah was the closest relative so he had the right (and responsibility) to buy it (assuming he could afford it and wanted it). God uses this transaction and sets up a "time capsule" so that people could see the receipt when the people of Judah returned and see that once again they could buy and sell land in their home country. Note that this would have been supporting evidence of Jeremiah's prophecies 50 years later.

God can do anything. The argument of God creating a rock that he cannot lift is flawed. One counter argument: God is infinite, having infinite power to do whatever God so desires. A rock that God cannot lift is an undefined construct. How much does it weigh? If we put a number to this question, in other words if we define it, then the answer must be greater than infinity because otherwise, God could apply a portion of God's infinite power to the task of lifting the rock and therefore lift it. Thus such a rock is undefined (because a number greater than infinity is undefined). The question assumes a definition that doesn't apply. Similarly, the question could assume a finite rock of immense mass, but therefore imposes a limit on God's power. Such imposition of a limit is contradicted by the definition of an all-powerful God. In short, the question, as asked, presupposes either a limit on God's power, or an undefined object that an infinite power cannot affect. The question is thus assuming what it is trying to prove which is not valid in logical proofs.

-- Jeff

[wolfpurplemoon]

I was being a little facetious with the rock comment, but anyway, that question may assume what it is trying to prove, but your counter argument assumes God exists doesn't it? Surely that problem needs be resolved before we worry about how heavy a rock can be before God can't lift it.

[zteccc.livejournal.com]

The suggestion of God being unable to create a rock that God cannot lift presupposes God and then tries to disprove God by showing a contradiction.

My argument showing the fallacy in the logic doesn't presuppose God, it simply shows that this is not a valid logical argument to disprove the existence of God. My argument would fail if my attempt were to prove the existence of God, but I'm not trying to do so, I was simply trying to show that the rock contradiction is invalid.

In practice, I do not believe it is possible to prove the existence of God. I can make a good case from several directions, but proof is beyond the ability of any natural, logical methods. The only proof would be supernatural and since we are natural beings, our proofs cannot reach that area. As such, all we have is faith. Either we have faith that God exists or faith that God doesn't exist, but we don't have proof in either direction.

-- Jeff