Plane Crash

[kensington]

Yep, the children of Ammon killed him.

You are as blind as a bat.  If you read II Samuel 12:9 any other way besides Nathan accusing David of murder... you are the one who is having private interpretation... among other things.  Yikes!

Seriously, kensington!  If God believed David was innocent, and the children of Ammon were guilty, He would have said, "they", and not "thou".

love,

The bolded part in Kensington's post was a quote from Mystery Man I believe.

True dat...  

[sopranette]

And we keep posting the same verses at him, kensington.  I'm flabbergasted by this whole thread, personally.

love,

sopranette

[sopranette]

And now prove to us how Paul was not a murderer before his conversion, MM.  I love magic tricks.

love,

sopranette

[Jimbob]

If you purposefully push a man off the curb in front of a coming bus, you murdered him, not the driver of the bus.

Same idea with David and Uriah.  David plotted his death and gave orders that carried it to fruition.  The children of Ammon were merely the tools in the real murderer's plot, and that murderer was David.

Really, it's not complicated unless you're trying to eisegete.

[Mystery Man]

Show me where "God" called King David and murder !

[Bonnie]

If you purposefully push a man off the curb in front of a coming bus, you murdered him, not the driver of the bus.

Same idea with David and Uriah.  David plotted his death and gave orders that carried it to fruition.  The children of Ammon were merely the tools in the real murderer's plot, and that murderer was David.

Really, it's not complicated unless you're trying to eisegete.

[Nevertheless]

Show me where "God" called King David and murder !

They already have, but you won't listen.  Now, how about Paul?

[Mere Nick]

Dear BigDog, I reckon you're shot down here even though you presented an honest opinion of things to come upon men, but because of the consensus of popular belief of some here that there is no consequence for sin, and no reward for faith,

How you can read anything here and say something like that is beyond me.

[Mere Nick]

Quoting Mere Nick - It's the "eternity of pain and suffering" bit. Only in Christ is there eternal life.

Response - I have no argument with you, but according to the scripture below Satan is tormented day and night for ever and ever; is he in Christ? No, I would say not, so is there the possibility there is eternal conscience existence in the second death or lake of fire?

Revelation 20:10  And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. 
God bless you in Jesus' name - larry2

Keep in mind that Satan is not human.  A little later John tells of the lost being tossed and it is the second death.  Jesus told us to fear him who can destroy both body and soul.

Do not take anything I say (and I'm saying that you are) as if I'm saying croaking outside the grace of Christ is not a terrible tragedy.  It is.  However, it appears the scripture do teach an eternal punishment but not an eternal punishing.  Either way, hell is to be avoided.

[larry2]

Previous quote by larry2 - Dear BigDog, I reckon you're shot down here even though you presented an honest opinion of things to come upon men, but because of the consensus of popular belief of some here that there is no consequence for sin, and no reward for faith.

Quoting Mere Nick - How you can read anything here and say something like that is beyond me.

Response - Maybe I don't understand your reply to what I have said. I was addressing the negative comments to his thread, and not restricting what I said strictly to what was said in replies here. I believe his thread was a good post.

In Jesus' name - larry2

[Mere Nick]

Previous quote by larry2 - Dear BigDog, I reckon you're shot down here even though you presented an honest opinion of things to come upon men, but because of the consensus of popular belief of some here that there is no consequence for sin, and no reward for faith.

Quoting Mere Nick - How you can read anything here and say something like that is beyond me.

Response - Maybe I don't understand your reply to what I have said. I was addressing the negative comments to his thread, and not restricting what I said strictly to what was said in replies here. I believe his thread was a good post.

In Jesus' name - larry2

It was a good post about a terrible accident.  OneLung had an observation and I showed him evidence that others look to the scriptures and wonder about the same thing he does.  If you disagree with me about something, for example, I don't call that being negative but offering your observations of the available data.  If you disagree with me by calling me a blithering idiot or something, then you would be getting a bit negative.

[kensington]

Show me where "God" called King David and murder !

I"VE GOT IT...  Thinking along the same lines as you... URIAH killed himself.  He committed suicide!  Afterall, He joined the ARMY to serve King David,  and he is the one who did not sleep with Bathsheba while home on leave, thus getting himself shipped right to the front of the line, a certain death.

Yes, if the crow flies upside down, and we follow your line of reasoning.... Uriah committed suicide. 

How is that for "Personal interpretation"? 

[larry2]

Quoting Mere Nick - Jesus told us to fear him who can destroy both body and soul.

Response - I see what you objected to now about Satan - First of all I do not believe he is human either, but I was trying to make a point; possibly a bad one - I give completely up and will delete that post. There is also a spirit of man

In Jesus' name _ larry2

[Mystery Man]

David was most certainly a murderer, and the bible says so.  Read 2 Samuel 12:9-12.

love,

sopranette

David sent Uriah to war.  David didn't slay Uriah with the sword literally.  So the statement in II Samuel 12:9 is a figurative statement.

The word - "Killed" in II Samuel 12:9 is the Hebrew word - "nakah" , which means - "cause".  The cause was, that he sent him to war.

If it had been the Hebrew word - "muth", it would be murder.  But it is not !

David did kill him, or had him killed.  That is murder... and in this day and age you can get the death penalty for it.  He used his position as King to send Uriah to a "CERTAIN" death because he did not sleep with Bathsheba to take the blame for the baby.  God required and eye for an eye and took the life of his child.  David committed murder. 

That was because of his adultery , not murder !

Adultery and murder, both just as terrible as each other.

yes, both are terrible.

But King David only committed adultery, not murder.   He sent Uriah to war, because Uriah was a soldier.  Yes, King David sent Uriah into a heated battle.  Yes, Uriah died.  Yes, King David sent him to war, as King, hoping that in this heated battle that Uriah would die, to cover up his adultery. This is why King David told Uriah to go unto his wife before going to battle.

But not all soldiers die in battle.  In this case King David wanted Uriah to be killed in battle.  But that is not murder !

1. David was King
2. Uriah was a soldier
3. David sent soldiers to battle all of the time
4. Yes, there was adultery
5. Uriah died in Battle by the sword of the children of Ammon
6. God sent Nathan to tell King David that he was responsible for his death to cover up his adultery.
7. God caused King David's son to die because of this adultery, because he gave reason for the enemy of God , which is equal to cause God to look like a liar, and a unrighteous God.  God was the cause for King David's son dying.  Does this make God a murderer ?  Of course not, right ?  "The Lord struck the child"  "and he died"

If you read from II Samuel 12:1 you get a better picture of how God compared the death of Uriah to King David.   God sent Nathan and Nathan said unto David.  "There were two men in one city ; the one rich , and the other poor.  The rich man had exceeding many flocks and herds.  But the poor man had nothing, save one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and nourished up : and it grew up together with him, and with his children ; it did eat of his own meat, and drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was unto him as a daughter.  And there came a traveller unto the rich man, and he spared to take of  his own flock and of his own herd,  to dress  for the wayfaring man that was to come unto him; but took the poor man's lamb, and dressed it for the man that was come to him.  And David's anger was greatly kindled against the man; and he said to Nathan, As the Lord liveth, the man that hath done this thing shall surely die :  And he shall restore the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing, and because he had no pity.  And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man.  Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I anointed thee King over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul;  And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.  Wherefore hast thou despised the commandment of the Lord to do evil in his sight ? thou hast killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword, and hast taken his wife to be thy wife, and hast slain him with the sword of the children of Ammon.

Now therefore the sword shall never depart from thine house <STOP>

This explanation by Nathan whom God sent unto David is a story of "how" God saw all of this unfold.  Uriah was the ewe that was slain, and killed.  God is reminding David that everything he has is because of God .  David had no pity. No shame.  No thought upon how this was wrong.

God took the wives of King David and gave them unto his neighbour and they shall lie with his wives.  The waring of the sword shall remain upon his house.  And the Lord God killed the child born into adultery .

David's punishment was "equal" to his evil. 

If King David is a murderer, then so is the Lord God who killed the child born in adultery !

[Mystery Man]

Show me where "God" called King David and murder !

They already have, but you won't listen.  Now, how about Paul?

You are the one who said that Paul was a murderer.  Prove it !

[kensington]

Show me where "God" called King David and murder !

They already have, but you won't listen.  Now, how about Paul?

You are the one who said that Paul was a murderer.  Prove it !

Oh... this just gets better all the time...   I'll just retire to the peanut section for a while and relax...    

[kensington]

Mysteryman said:  But King David only committed adultery, not murder.   He sent Uriah to war, because Uriah was a soldier.  Yes, King David sent Uriah into a heated battle.  Yes, Uriah died.  Yes, King David sent him to war, as King, hoping that in this heated battle that Uriah would die, to cover up his adultery. This is why King David told Uriah to go unto his wife before going to battle.

But not all soldiers die in battle.  In this case King David wanted Uriah to be killed in battle.  But that is not murder !


If this is your version of David, Uriah and Bathsheba.... that would make the Prophet Nathan a liar.  I just doubt that is the case.  I wonder if you have noticed that NO ONE has been backing up your points on this?  You may want to take a peek around you there where the wind is blowing and see that you are alone in this position... and that is due to the fact that it's just not so. 


Is II Samuel NOT in your Bible?  Or are you just not allowed to read it?   IN order for your scenario to be correct, Nathan (a prophet of God) would have to have been wrong.  That being the case, he would not have been a Prophet...  for one thing we do know, Prophets don't miss.  He said flatly that David "Killed" Uriah.  So... either David did kill Uriah, making him a murderer, or Nathan was not a Prophet.   

And that is just not the way it happened in the REAL Bible... 

[sopranette]

If MM were correct, that would have made Nathan not just a false prophet and a liar, but also a false witness.  To have accused a king of murder when it just wasn't true would have been a grave offence.

Paul admitted himself he was a blasphemer and a murderer of Christians. Acts 26:10.  Certainly Paul was deathly ill with sin, and yet was hand picked by God for conversion.

love,

sopranette

[Mystery Man]

Mysteryman said:  But King David only committed adultery, not murder.   He sent Uriah to war, because Uriah was a soldier.  Yes, King David sent Uriah into a heated battle.  Yes, Uriah died.  Yes, King David sent him to war, as King, hoping that in this heated battle that Uriah would die, to cover up his adultery. This is why King David told Uriah to go unto his wife before going to battle.

But not all soldiers die in battle.  In this case King David wanted Uriah to be killed in battle.  But that is not murder !


If this is your version of David, Uriah and Bathsheba.... that would make the Prophet Nathan a liar.  I just doubt that is the case.  I wonder if you have noticed that NO ONE has been backing up your points on this?  You may want to take a peek around you there where the wind is blowing and see that you are alone in this position... and that is due to the fact that it's just not so. 


Is II Samuel NOT in your Bible?  Or are you just not allowed to read it?   IN order for your scenario to be correct, Nathan (a prophet of God) would have to have been wrong.  That being the case, he would not have been a Prophet...  for one thing we do know, Prophets don't miss.  He said flatly that David "Killed" Uriah.  So... either David did kill Uriah, making him a murderer, or Nathan was not a Prophet.   

And that is just not the way it happened in the REAL Bible... 

You may argue your point all you like.  Sometimes it makes for a good discussion. But as of lately the discussion has soured.

Your making assumptions based upon your carnal thinking.  Reading the Word of God is not suppose to be private interpretation. But you as well as others assume that God won't mind if you go right ahead and give your own private interpretations.  Well, rest assured, he does mind if you do such a thing !  He is watching and collecting data.  

Nathan was a prophet of God, and yes, Nathan did say that David killed Uriah and with the sword, which occured in battle with the children of Ammon.

But the word "Killed" is not a Hebrew word for murder !   And the punishment put upon David is equal to the evil that he did.

The word - "Killed" in this verse (II Samuel 12:9) is the Hebrew word - "nakah" and is never used to indicate murder !

According to the law of God a murderer is to be put to death - Period !  No if's , ands , or buts about it.  Read Numbers 35:17 and Numbers 35:31

In Numbers 35:27 the word "kill" is the Hebrew word - "ratsach" and it means - "Murder"

Deut. 5:17 < One of the ten commandments - "Thou shall not kill" -- is this same Hebrew word "ratsach" - to murder.

If King David was a murderer, God would have had to put King David to death !

[Mystery Man]

If MM were correct, that would have made Nathan not just a false prophet and a liar, but also a false witness.  To have accused a king of murder when it just wasn't true would have been a grave offence.

Paul admitted himself he was a blasphemer and a murderer of Christians. Acts 26:10.  Certainly Paul was deathly ill with sin, and yet was hand picked by God for conversion.

love,

sopranette

The only thing that is false here are you people who make such eroneous comments.

Paul never admitted to murdering anyone.  And especially in Acts 26:10 !

[Bonnie]

Show me where "God" called King David and murder !

They already have, but you won't listen.  Now, how about Paul?

You are the one who said that Paul was a murderer.  Prove it !

Oh... this just gets better all the time...   I'll just retire to the peanut section for a while and relax...    

Amen!

[sopranette]

Acts 26:10
Which thing I also did in Jerusalem: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I gave my voice against them.
And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.

You really have lost any shred of credibility you may have had on this forum, MM.  And your comments on this thread have proven why it's so easy to dismiss anything you have to say on any of the subjects posted here.  It was funny, now it's just sad, really.  A foolish man is counted wise when he does not speak.  You are dismissed.

love,

sopranette

[Nevertheless]

One of the quotes in my signature is very applicable to this thread.  Which one I will leave open to private interpretation . . .

[OneLung]

Acts 26:10
Which thing I also did in Jerusalem: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I gave my voice against them.
And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.

I don't know too much about this stuff, but reading Acts 26:10, I don't think it's content would be allowed in as evidence in a modern day murder trial. The verse states that he "shut them up" and trash talked them after they were put to death, but it doesn't state that he actually killed anyone with his own hand.

Just an observation...

[Mystery Man]

Acts 26:10
Which thing I also did in Jerusalem: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I gave my voice against them.
And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.

You really have lost any shred of credibility you may have had on this forum, MM.  And your comments on this thread have proven why it's so easy to dismiss anything you have to say on any of the subjects posted here.  It was funny, now it's just sad, really.  A foolish man is counted wise when he does not speak.  You are dismissed.

love,

sopranette

Your comments are not sane, nor are they rational.  

Saul put them in Jail.  He consented unto their death.  But the law and chief priests put them to death , not Saul !   Saul persecuted the church, but he Saul didn't kill anyone !

[sopranette]

rational.  

You don't know the meaning of the word.

love,

sopranette

[sopranette]

Acts 26:10
Which thing I also did in Jerusalem: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I gave my voice against them.
And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.

I don't know too much about this stuff, but reading Acts 26:10, I don't think it's content would be allowed in as evidence in a modern day murder trial. The verse states that he "shut them up" and trash talked them after they were put to death, but it doesn't state that he actually killed anyone with his own hand.

Just an observation...

Paul was given a rank that allowed him to not only imprison Christians, but also have them put to death.  When someone falsely accused one of blasphemy, a crime punishable by death at that time, that is murder in God's eyes.

love,

sopranette

[Mystery Man]

rational.  

You don't know the meaning of the word.

love,

sopranette

A rational person reads what written.  Which you constantly fail to do !

In Acts 26  Saul was under the law of the time.  He was acting like one our our policeman.  He brought them to jail.  And that is where it ends, other than his comments.  Saul had no authority to put anyone to death.  But the law did.  The chief priests had the authority to put them to death, which they did.

Saul consented unto their death, and he punished christians often and persecuted them.  But he never, ever killed one of them !

Humility is a hard pill to swallow.  But it is better to swallow it now , rather than later before the judgement seat.

[Mystery Man]

Acts 26:10
Which thing I also did in Jerusalem: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I gave my voice against them.
And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.

I don't know too much about this stuff, but reading Acts 26:10, I don't think it's content would be allowed in as evidence in a modern day murder trial. The verse states that he "shut them up" and trash talked them after they were put to death, but it doesn't state that he actually killed anyone with his own hand.

Just an observation...

Paul was given a rank that allowed him to not only imprison Christians, but also have them put to death.  When someone falsely accused one of blasphemy, a crime punishable by death at that time, that is murder in God's eyes.

love,

sopranette

Wow, you have quit the imagination.  Everything you just said is not true !  And we know you didn't read it from the bible.  You just made it up as you go along in your imagination.  Which btw will get you nowhere. 

Truth then eludes you, because you would rather believe what you dream up , instead of what is written.

[sopranette]

It is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in an argument.

love,

sopranette

[OneLung]

Acts 26:10
Which thing I also did in Jerusalem: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I gave my voice against them.
And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.

I don't know too much about this stuff, but reading Acts 26:10, I don't think it's content would be allowed in as evidence in a modern day murder trial. The verse states that he "shut them up" and trash talked them after they were put to death, but it doesn't state that he actually killed anyone with his own hand.

Just an observation...

Paul was given a rank that allowed him to not only imprison Christians, but also have them put to death.  When someone falsely accused one of blasphemy, a crime punishable by death at that time, that is murder in God's eyes.

love,

sopranette

OK, if he was responsible for the deaths because he falsely accused them of a capitol crime, then that would make him a murderer. I can see that.

[Mystery Man]

It is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in an argument.

love,

sopranette

So that was your goal, to defeat me ?  Sad !

This conversation with "you" has ran its course.   You need to read the word with a rational mind. Not a mind that is out of control, and full of imaginations that are irrational.

[Mystery Man]

Acts 26:10
Which thing I also did in Jerusalem: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I gave my voice against them.
And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.

I don't know too much about this stuff, but reading Acts 26:10, I don't think it's content would be allowed in as evidence in a modern day murder trial. The verse states that he "shut them up" and trash talked them after they were put to death, but it doesn't state that he actually killed anyone with his own hand.

Just an observation...

Paul was given a rank that allowed him to not only imprison Christians, but also have them put to death.  When someone falsely accused one of blasphemy, a crime punishable by death at that time, that is murder in God's eyes.

love,

sopranette

OK, if he was responsible for the deaths because he falsely accused them of a capitol crime, then that would make him a murderer. I can see that.

What capitol crime ?  Where do we read that Saul falsely accused anyone ?  It was Saul who wanted the christians to "blaspheme" their beliefs - Verse 11 -- Not the other way around !

[sopranette]

It is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in an argument.

love,

sopranette

This conversation with "you" has ran its course.   You need to read the word with a rational mind. Not a mind that is out of control, and full of imaginations that are irrational.

When someone uses the phrase, "you need to..." in a debate, it means that person is angry and has run out of options.  It's an attempt to regain control. FYI.

love,

sopranette

[OneLung]

Reading both verses, it kind of sounds like he was attempting to entrap them into committing blashpheme so he could accuse them. Tactic doesn't nullify intent.