Please send her away

The Lord was about His Father’s business, ever and always. He was the master of meeting needs, on time and never late. His knowledge of things and His willingness to wait, brought much ado from the people closest to him, as they thought He was being aloof when their comfort was challenged.

When the boat almost capsized: ‘You don’t care do you Lord?’ No, He doesn’t care if you perish now does He………….. but there is something greater to be learned than a temporary overturned vessel: Trust Him at all costs and at all times.

If they would have paid more attention to His words, they would have seen that His understanding is infinite. When he silenced his antagonizers with the marvellous question: How is it possible than King David called His son His Lord? they would have understood the only implication that ‘before Abraham was, I am.’  Trust His word at all costs and at all times.

He came to His own and his own received Him not. Proof? Yep, ‘away with him, crucify Him.’  Kinda settles that. The ones who received the covenants, the glory, the adoption, the promises, and the giving of the law, said as a nation, ‘We have no king but Caesar.’  This man as our Lord? Forget it.

So in the midst of the Lord’s daily dealings with His own novice disciples , his dealings with the religious hierarchy who found his  ‘doctrine of grace’ unsavory, His assaults by Satan, His meeting the needs of sinners galore, some by divine intervention such as sight, hearing, or speech, others by simple daily bread, His dealings with unbelief at every corner, in the midst of this a woman comes to Him.

She was a Canaanite, an alien from the commonwealth of Israel, without God and without hope. She sees Him: ‘Have mercy on me, O Lord thou son of David, my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil,‘ and what follows next is illuminating, oft overlooked, and rarely understood, for the Lord answered her not a word. He was silent. Not speaking. Not answering. Silent.

Why?

The disciples told the Lord to send her away, being somewhat annoyed. Hmmm. Now in the Lord’s own words: ‘I was not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.’  She came to Him, worshiped him and begged for His help,   — P l e a s e  help me — her voice probably ascending in volume,  now the Lord says to her: ‘It is not meet to take the children’s bread and cast it to dogs.’ Really? He said THIS after breaking His silence?

The Lord was simply speaking in the language she was familiar with, that the Gentiles, any non-Jew was goyim, or dogs, and that woman owned that truth and said: ‘That’s right, but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from the masters table.’

 Truly, this is one of the most remarkable insights into the person of the Lord in the entire New Testament.  Just a drop of your glory is fine by me.

The Lord recognized her great faith, and from that very moment, her daughter was made whole. She trusted Him at all costs.

Why was the Lord silent at the first pleading of hers? To confirm scripture that he was sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, and as such, a Canaanite woman had no claim on David’s greater son, but faith sure did. The man Christ Jesus saw in her that which He did not find in the privileged nation, and once more the foolishness of God is wiser than men.

The Canaanite was a common sinner who heard and knew of the son of David and the pedigree of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob’s God, and His promises. She was vocal in a crowd of strangers, she was fine with being embarrassed, she was okay to be identified with a man who many thought was mad, but she sought him and begged, not for herself, but for her daughter. (It’s never a bad thing to ask the Lord’s mercies for others)

While the apostles in their lack of understanding wanted to send her away, the Lord knew a long time ago she would be there waiting, and he was moved with compassion as only He could have, and as only He could give.

Yep, I’m okay with scraps too.  In return, God has given the riches of his grace, the riches of His mercy, the riches of his word, and the riches of seeing His glory.   Then there is something about the poor being rich in faith.

Send her away, to whom and where would she go? Once more the apostles learn more of ‘Who is this man?‘ Favor was freely bestowed, God’s promises were confirmed, hope was given, a girl was made right, and a devil was ousted.

Indeed the Lord merely spoke the word, and His word transcended time and space. ‘O woman great is thy faith, be it unto thee even as thou wilt.’ A mother’s plea was heard and answered. New life! His favor never diminishes, and He always answers to faith, even though the answer may be silence or a brief delay.

Advertisements

About ColorStorm

Blending the colorful issues of life with the unapologetic truth of scripture.
Gallery | This entry was posted in Characters of scripture and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

128 Responses to Please send her away

  1. Wally Fry says:

    Thank you. And that’s all I have to say about that. Any more would be useless. But thank you.

    Like

  2. Planting Potatoes says:

    good word!

    Like

  3. archaeopteryx1 says:

    Yeah, yeah, written by guys who never met him, 50 years after his death – I shouldn’t have to repeat myself.

    Like

  4. archaeopteryx1 says:

    Share your infinite wisdom with me, O Wise One – what was Moses’ father-in-law’s name?

    Like

    • ColorStorm says:

      A sarcastic compliment and a snare all wrapped up in one terse comment. Nice.

      Since the obvious answer: ‘Now Jethro, the priest of Midian and father-in-law of Moses, heard of everything God had done for Moses and for his people Israel, and how the Lord had brought Israel out of Egypt,’ will no doubt be mocked,

      Surely you know Jethro had OTHER names….(Raguel, Reuel) but not Hobab!

      but you already visited wiki, where you may also find the sneaky suggestion that Jethro was the prophet of Is-lam.

      Nice try.

      (But once more the better question for you: Why would you want any help from a person who according to your own words is “delusional, idiotic, and worthy of a post natal abortion?”)

      Liked by 1 person

  5. archaeopteryx1 says:

    His father-in-law is ‘Reuel’ (Exodus 2.18) or ‘Jethro’ (Exodus 3.1, 4.18) or ‘Hobab’ (Judges 4.11) – take your pick. If Moses actually wrote Exodus, you’d think he’d know his own father-in-law’s name.

    Like

    • ColorStorm says:

      As observed earlier, your snare has been poorly set.

      ‘He then finishes by informing you there are mistakes in what he calls the book of myths, and pleads with you to answer his endless charges. Hmm, seems I read that somewhere.’

      Saul of Tarsus? aka Paul the apostle?
      Simon- aka Peter?

      Shadrach -Hananaiah?
      Meshech- Mishael?
      Abednego- Azariah?

      Right, arch- it was impossible to have another name known by others. Kind of proves the inspiration and preservation of the text,

      (by the way, as noted earlier, Hobab was invited to take the journey…..its rather clear)

      Liked by 1 person

      • archaeopteryx1 says:

        The individuals you reference, at least in scripture, were clearly established as having more than one name – not so Moses’ father-in-law – his three names were the direct result of three different sources, writing about the same individual, and going with their best guess as to what his name might have been.

        Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Sooooooo, Moses and his last name is related to this post how? This is relevant to the Lord’s compassion on a poor woman how?

          This is related to the disciples prejudice how?

          This is related to David’s greater son how? This is related to the glory of the Lord how?

          All I know arch, is there is One patient God in heaven.

          Like

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          It relates to biblical validity, upon which all of your posts depend.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Ok, assume its valid for a moment: now what do think of the post?

          Like

      • David says:

        “Right, arch- it was impossible to have another name known by others. ”

        I have no idea how many names Moses’s father-in-law may or may not have had.

        However, it should be noted that most of the examples that you gave of multiple names involved relatively minor difference in spelling among the alternative names. This does not appear to be the case with Reuel, Jethro and Hobab. So, I’m not sure that your examples are particularly relevant to the issue. Don’t expect this changes anything, just something that I noticed.

        Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Please David, do not add to the attempt of derailing this post.

          Hobab was not Jethro for the third time. The narrative clearly explains it.

          (Shadrach- Hananiah?)
          Thomas -Didymus? Close? In the words of John McInroe ‘You are not serious?

          Now David, what do YOU think of this post you are commenting on? Don’t fall into the trap of travelling nowhere.

          Like

        • David says:

          I wasn’t trying to derail anything, and I’m only slightly serious here. I just thought is interesting that most of your examples involved multiple names with similar spellings.

          Yes, Shadrach- Hananiah are the most different names, but most of the other pairs are similar in spelling. The Thomas -Didymus pair involves the same name in two different language, so of course they are quite different. I believe that this holds for Simon-Peter as well. However, examples based on two different languages are not useful to you in the case of Moses’s father-in-law, because presumably, all of the names in Exodus are in Hebrew.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          David you don”t get it-

          Between you and arch, not one relevant remark has been made regarding the post. This latest one is further proof.

          All the answers are in the book. Its not an index where the sloppy of mind and careless of heart may get their curiosity satisfied.

          There are REASONS why the names are different regarding the same person.

          Like

        • David says:

          “This latest one is further proof.”

          Well, I was really just responding to your comments. I assumed that this was ok to do.

          “There are REASONS why the names are different regarding the same person.”

          Yes, I believe that Arch suggested as much.

          However, if you would questions that address the thread…

          Was Jesus telling the truth when he said “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”?

          Why did Jesus call the woman a dog or compare the woman to a dog?

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Did the Lord Jesus Christ tell the truth? He IS the truth.

          ‘He came unto His own ……and His own received Him not…………BUT as many as received Him……..to them gave he power to become children of God.”

          ‘Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister to the circumcision to confirm the promises made to the fathers.’

          (promises clearly cited in this post)

          The dog comment? Also explained in the post. Sheep- privileged-
          dogs- no privilege — People who think He demeaned her are missing the boat. Nobody elevates humanity like the Lord.

          But what about you? Would you place your entire faith and trust in Him as the Canaanite woman did?

          Liked by 1 person

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          Would you place your entire faith and trust in Him as the Canaanite woman did?” – Surely you mean, “as the Canaanite woman was said to have done by an anonymous man who wasn’t there?

          Like

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          Why did Jesus call the woman a dog or compare the woman to a dog?” – Certainly sounds like bigotry.

          Liked by 1 person

        • ColorStorm says:

          I think the Lord is fond of little doggies. After all, they usually know their master.

          And a dog is far better than ravenous wolves or vipers.

          Liked by 1 person

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          And a dog is far better than ravenous wolves or vipers.” – And FAR better than male lions who lie dozing in the shade of a mimosa while their women go out and hunt their dinner!

          Like

        • David says:

          “Did the Lord Jesus Christ tell the truth? He IS the truth.”

          You didn’t answer the question I raised, but then I didn’t really expect you to do so.

          “The dog comment? Also explained in the post.”

          Not really. Why is she a “dog?” Why wasn’t she a “sheep?”

          “People who think He demeaned her are missing the boat. Nobody elevates humanity like the Lord.”

          By referring to people as “dogs?” Really elevating.

          “I think the Lord is fond of little doggies.”

          Nice attempt at deflection, but you are well aware of the significance of calling someone a dog at this time and place.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Really David?

          I will not dignify your question as to the credentials of the person of Christ, God manifest in the flesh.

          But I do suggest you read the account alone, perhaps ask God to help you understand.

          You missed the point of the conversation between the Lord; if it needs explained to you further, then it is pointless.

          AND OH BY THE WAY, TAKE NOTE OF THAT REMARKABLE SILENCE BY THE LORD, AND ENJOY THE FACT THAT THIS SCENE IS ONE OF THE RICHEST IN SCRIPTURE

          Like

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          …you are well aware of the significance of calling someone a dog at this time and place.

          Clearly there was no “elevation of humanity” evidenced here – the woman obviously knew what the insult implied by his insinuation, otherwise there would have been no need for the comment regarding scraps from the table.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Hay arch

          Forget about the woman for now. What about you?

          Would you not like to be made whole and in your right mind?

          I can show you a hundred or more of your own comments that prove God’s grace is sufficient, and His mercy can cover everything hidden.

          Liked by 1 person

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          Oh, I’m just fine – I was merely marveling at how little you really know about the Bible. But thanks for asking.

          Like

        • David says:

          Ok, so I’m not going to get an answer or explanation. Your choice.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Did the thought ever cross your mind to consider the MASTERS TABLE? Of course not.

          Your filter of unbelief will not allow it. This account is about light, and all you see is darkness; its sad really.

          If you were interested in truth, you would fall down at the Lord’s feet at this humbling account.

          Like

  6. That was beautiful colorstorm. God responds to faith, always. The woman who grabbed His garment, your faith has healed you. The blind man, your faith has healed you. Over and over again He says it’s our faith.

    I’m okay with God’s scraps too. 😉

    As to the discussion above and people having multiple names, I actually have 3 myself, so that’s somewhat amusing. It is only in the modern world that people get suspicious of that. Today we have social security numbers, birth dates, identifying markers, but in biblical times people were nicknamed after their families, their place of origin, their accomplishments, their deeds.

    Liked by 1 person

    • ColorStorm says:

      I appreciate your post here; I wrote this at great risk knowing the possible danger of being misunderstood, which if you read a few comments, there is a bit of that.

      But its God’s word! and there should never be a fear of sharing ALL his counsel. People arrogantly and insultingly think the Lord walked around calling people dogs; but that thinking comes from a dark place.

      The ‘silence’ is a great indicator of something huge; remember the elders with the stones and the silence there……the Lord never punishes a sinner in truth, so the conversation was unique. She surely appreciated it, and oh heck, I’m guessing the Lord knew all about the personal damage that was done unto her; and the disciples didn’t help (send her away…)

      Yea too, the names, I have 4, then you have web names, etc. In Exodus, within the span of one chapter, two different names were used. Gee, the Spirit of God took great risk at being labeled foolish,…………..or simply guided what was true 😉

      But thank you really ib22 for your well received good words.

      Liked by 1 person

    • David says:

      “People arrogantly and insultingly think the Lord walked around calling people dogs.”

      Gosh, I wonder where people get this idea?

      He (Jesus) replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.

      You know, old boy, you like to make pronouncements that I’m supposed to ponder. Well, here’s something for you to ponder.

      You have to count the misses as well as the hits.

      Like

      • It is sad to see someone so petty and wrapped in negativity that they cannot even conceive of the possibility of a loving God. It is also quite irrational to deny the existence of God while also trying to portray Him in a negative light.

        You David, are nothing but the misses, over and over again.

        Liked by 1 person

        • David says:

          “It is sad to see someone so petty and wrapped in negativity that they cannot even conceive of the possibility of a loving God.”

          It’s sad to see someone so blind that they cannot conceive of the possibility that they might be wrong.

          Of course I have “misses”. I’m a flawed human being. So are you. So were the writers of the Bible. This is easy to see if you just consider the possibility that you might be wrong.

          Where did I deny the existence of God? Again and again, you misunderstand me. You call me petty and wrapped and negativity, but you clearly don’t understand me or what I’m saying in these comments. Now, that’s what’s sad here.

          Like

        • I do understand what you are saying. It is you who does not even understand yourself.

          Like

        • David says:

          “I do understand what you are saying. It is you who does not even understand yourself.”

          A statement of extreme arrogance. Well, I guess that this is what religious indoctrination will do to the human mind.

          Now, if I recall correctly, you believe that the Bible says that the Earth was covered by a global flood about 4500 to 5000 years ago? Is this correct?

          Like

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          It is also quite irrational to deny the existence of God while also trying to portray Him in a negative light.” – I don’t believe David is trying, IB, to portray your supernatural magic man in a negative light, but rather the superstitious, scientifically-ignorant Bronze Age men who concocted him.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          EDITORS NOTE- I AM ALLOWING THIS TO STAND (ALBEIT MOMENTARILY BEFORE IT REACHES THE TRASH) SO ALL CAN SEE THE HEIGHTS OF ABSURDITY AND THE DEPTHS OF DEPRAVITY TRAVELLED TO COMMENT ON A POST HAVING ABSOLUTELY NO RELEVANCE OR WORTH.

          THIS IS PERFECT PROOF WHY SOME COMMENTERS NEED SCREENED.

          IB, this post of archs is directed at you; i was going to send it aflame, but thought you may want to see it first.

          Liked by 1 person

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          Your boundless wisdom, CS, is eclipsed only by by your limitless kindness – however, in all fairness, and I can’t envision you as anything other than the epitome of fairness – I don’t quite see how my comment was “HAVING ABSOLUTELY NO RELEVANCE,” as it was simply a response to Insanitybytes’ comment, thus if mine had no relevance to the topic, neither did hers, yet I notice that she was never chastened in such a harsh and demeaning manner —

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Your enigmatism and sarcasm arch is never ending. Why just yesterday I was worthy of a post natal abortion, but follow the bread crumbs of logic………………your comment is not even close to valid.

          Your own words tighten your own rope arch. Read the post and thread, see who is off track, and be fair if you can.

          Like

        • “I don’t believe David is trying, IB, to portray your supernatural magic man in a negative light, but rather the superstitious, scientifically-ignorant…”

          Do you think me so foolish that I would be deceived by such silly words and later bedazzled by your attempts to display your vast intelligence?

          Your argument reminds me of a really poor pick up line in a cheap bar somewhere. It’s so pathetic and flawed I must remember not to be needlessly cruel and break out in laughter.

          Liked by 2 people

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          Do you think me so foolish that I would be deceived by such silly words and later bedazzled by your attempts to display your vast intelligence?” – Considering the belief system, IB, to which you profess to subscribe, the most intelligent answer to which I can honestly come, would have to be, “Yes.”

          Liked by 1 person

        • So, in your morally superior form of atheistic reasoning, do you consider it moral to attempt to prey on the so called delusional and ignorant?

          Or is it that your own sense of self worth is so poor, the only chance you have of ever wining an argument is among the irrational and foolish?

          Liked by 1 person

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          …do you consider it moral to attempt to prey on the so called delusional and ignorant” – Prey? Do you consider it preying when a teacher instructs her students? What kind of school did YOU attend?

          Liked by 1 person

        • God’s school. It was magical and full of treasure hunts and critical thinking skills.

          I am not your student and the very fact that you believe you are qualified to instruct me, puts you in the category of a predator attempting indoctrination.

          Liked by 1 person

        • ColorStorm says:

          Nice.

          In THAT school there is no duct tape, and peanut tossing is allowed and encouraged 😉 😉

          Liked by 1 person

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          Both water and knowledge run downhill – the very fact that I know more than you about how the Bible came to be, qualifies me.

          Liked by 1 person

        • ColorStorm says:

          How it came to be? Hmmmm. You mean this so called ‘book of myths,’ that you spend every waking minute trying to ignore?

          You mean the information gleaned from the internet by God mockers, Christ deniers, Word of God haters, imposters, spiritually depraved thieves, ravenous wolves who present false Gods and who promote doctrines of devils?

          Yea you are qualified while you do not believe one word of it. Ok.

          Like

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          Actually, nocome from biblical scholars who began as devout Christians, raised in Christian atmospheres, and became biblical scholars and biblical archeologists expressly to prove the Bible true, but slowly turned to atheism as the evidence they uncovered proved the authors of the Bible not to have a leg to stand on.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          A biblical scholar and an atheist at the same time?

          Forget the high sighs, gimme a laugh button. Aw heck, I’ll just think of Goldie Hawn for a minute.

          An atheist bible scholar. Too funny. May I remind you that this site promotes ‘the truth of scripture,’ so save your rusty links, or post them at your own place, or anywhere garbage is collected.

          Liked by 1 person

        • David says:

          “It was magical and full of treasure hunts and critical thinking skills.”

          I’m not so sure about the critical thinking skills part.

          Like

        • And yet I had you pegged in only three comments, David, while you continue to underestimate me.

          Also scripture is so simple a child could understand and yet you seem to have failed to grasp one sentence involving dogs. If you were thinking critically you would be asking yourself why you have such a powerful need to deny what is right in front of you.

          Liked by 1 person

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          That story was written by an anonymous author who never met Yeqshua, yet you believe it – what’s worse, you you clearly deny that fact while accusing David of denying what is right in front of him.

          Like

        • David says:

          Predator? That’s a bit over the top, don’t you think? Unless, of course, Arch is somehow making you feel vulnerable.

          Like

        • David says:

          “Also scripture is so simple a child could understand and yet you seem to have failed to grasp one sentence involving dogs.”

          Enlighten me.

          Why did Jesus refer to the woman using the word “dog?” At this time and place, what would be the implication of using such a word to describe a human being? Who would have typically been referred to using the word “dog?”

          Was Jesus telling the truth when he said “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs?”

          Was Jesus telling the truth when he said “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel?”

          “If you were thinking critically you would be asking yourself why you have such a powerful need to deny what is right in front of you.”

          Speaking of denying what’s right in front of you, ylease use your critical thinking skills and the knowledge provided by the geological sciences to demonstrate that the Earth was covered by a global flood.

          Like

        • David says:

          Here’s another way to assess your critical thinking skills.

          If you are wrong about The Truth of Scripture, how could you tell? How could detect the error?

          Like

        • If I were wrong about something in scripture, God would point it out to me. Since you do not believe in the God of scripture, God cannot tell you anything. If you misunderstand something, you have walled yourself off to the only source of correction possible.

          So, no. No critical thinking skills apply when attempting to criticize a book you do not understand, provided by a God you do not believe in.

          Liked by 1 person

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          If I were wrong about something in scripture, God would point it out to me.” – How does anyone discuss anything intelligently with one who believes in magic?

          Like

        • David says:

          “Yea you are qualified while you do not believe one word of it.”

          You seem to be linking qualification to belief. Are you suggesting that one must believe a particular text before one is qualified to assess or evaluate it?

          Like

        • David says:

          “And yet I had you pegged in only three comments, David, while you continue to underestimate me.”

          Ah, more arrogance.

          Like

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          Ah, more arrogance.” – Didn’t Yeshua caution against that –?

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Arrogance?

          Apparently you didn’t get the memo, for a fool says ‘in his heart,’ there is no God.

          You can’t get more proud than not believing in a Creator. Once more, you are indicted by your own words.

          Like

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          …for a fool says in his heart, there is no God” – Written by a man, whose word, by your own admission, can’t be trusted.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          By my admission eh? They like to twist, they like to mock, they like to pervert, they try to find a non existent crack in the armor of God, soooooo,

          These words are spoken to you in the shadows, you in the bleachers who are following from afar, for as you can see, there are deaf ears in these parts.

          God gave His word to Moses first, written ‘with the finger of God.’

          God’s Word!

          When Matthew wrote ‘the book of the generation of Jesus Christ the son of David, son of Abraham……….’ men wrote as they were directed by the Spirit of God.

          God’s word, Old and New, same Author. Same unity.

          In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth…….

          In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God.

          But tkx arch and David (same person maybe?) at least you have allowed us to testify to others.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          No, I believe that would be called confidence in God, discernment, and a clear understanding of the wiles of man.

          May i repeat, you have nothing on ib.

          Like

        • David says:

          “No critical thinking skills apply when attempting to criticize a book you do not understand, provided by a God you do not believe in.”

          So, the principle expressed here is that no one is able to assess, evaluate or criticize the sacred texts of any faiths other than their own.

          If you’ll pardon the cliche… Critical thinking. You keep using that phrase. I do not think that phrase means what you think it means.

          “If I were wrong about something in scripture, God would point it out to me. Since you do not believe in the God of scripture, God cannot tell you anything. If you misunderstand something, you have walled yourself off to the only source of correction possible.”

          Oy, vey. Honestly, seriously, I don’t even know what to say here. I’m speechless. God would point it out to you?! REALLY?!

          Like

        • David says:

          “No, I believe that would be called confidence in God, discernment, and a clear understanding of the wiles of man.”

          Yes. That’s what I said. Arrogance.

          Like

        • David says:

          “You can’t get more proud than not believing in a Creator.”

          Which creator are we talking about here?

          By the way, I sure you’re familiar with the phrase tu quoque.

          Like

        • David says:

          “An atheist bible scholar. Too funny. ”

          Again, you seem to be linking qualification to belief. Are you suggesting that one must believe that a particular sacred text must have a particular supernatural origin before one is qualified or permitted to assess, criticize or evaluate it? Can a text only be examined by those who adhere to the faith expressed by the text? Does one always have to start with the belief that a text offers absolute truth before examining the text to see if it contains absolute truth?

          Like

        • David says:

          “But tkx arch and David (same person maybe?) at least you have allowed us to testify to others.”

          Not the same person, two different people. And we haven’t allowed you to testify to others. It’s your blog. You were going to testify without us.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          It was a figure of speech, like the word spoke to the woman about a little animal.

          What you refused, others will enjoy 😉

          Like

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          All either of us has done, has been to offer your handful of readers another point of view.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          The envelope please:

          And the winner of the John McInroe ‘Are you serious award?’ goes to:

          aw nevermind.

          Liked by 1 person

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          Speaking of commendations, I just thought you might like to know that I have nominated your comment for the coveted “Snappy Retort of the Year” Award, and though the year is yet young, I have to say it’s looking good. You’re already FAR ahead of “So’s your old man!“, “Your mother wears army boots!” and PeeWee Herman’s ever-popular, “I know you are, but what am I?” Personally, I think you’re a shoo-in, but we’ll keep our fingers crossed —

          Like

        • David says:

          “God gave His word to Moses first, written ‘with the finger of God.”

          Well, the finger made a mistake.

          Like

        • David says:

          “And the winner of the John McInroe ‘Are you serious award?’ goes to:”

          That’s odd. I often have the same reaction when I read YOUR comments.

          Like

        • Wally Fry says:

          Hey David
          I have a question for you. And nobody seems willing to answer this…so maybe you will.
          First though..regarding your comment that “the finger made a mistake,” wow is all I can say about that. If(and you are) you are wrong about who the finger is…you are in a pickle.

          Any way back to my question. What, exactly is your agenda here? You come to ColorStorms blog and have even come to mine. Obviously you are tracking down Christians to argue with. Your need to prove the Bible wrong seems to border on desperation.

          Do your questions come from your own reading of the Bible? Or do you google Bible issues to hammer Christians with? Some our your questions seem odd..like the whole name thing..its a non issue.

          So..what is it yous seek? You say answers, I say you are not. The Bible has them all…but you are obviously looking for the problems with it. Here is my guess about you David, and It’s a good guess because I have looked in the mirror and seen this person. You KNOW the answer…but you hate it. You KNOW God is real and you KNOW judgment is coming. But, in some crazy twist of logic you seem to think if you can prove God’s Word untrue, then are are except from it.

          Guess what David? Your disbelief and your accusations and your so called “mistake” will never change the truth of what the Bible says. I’ll be honest, it just breaks my heart to see you taking this path. Your anger and desperation show me you know, in your heart, the reality of what you are looking at…give it up David…now…even now God will restore you to Him.

          Liked by 2 people

        • ColorStorm says:

          Nicely stated-

          Good words here W.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Wally Fry says:

          Ty…sure wish it would not fall on dear ears though Bro

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Not all baby’s are born on Saturdays………

          ya never know what tri-mester the folks in the bleachers are in, but hey, all we can do is plant and water.

          Liked by 2 people

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          all we can do is plant and water.” – Oh, and don’t forget the fertilizer – there seems to be an ABUNDANCE of that!

          Like

        • Wally Fry says:

          Arch…rather than retype a whole comment…just take David’s name off mine and insert yours…that shoe fits.

          Liked by 1 person

        • David says:

          “First though..regarding your comment that “the finger made a mistake,” wow is all I can say about that. If(and you are) you are wrong about who the finger is…you are in a pickle.”

          The “finger” wrote that there was global flood. It is extremely unlikely that the “finger” was correct about this. Therefore, the finger was almost certainly mistaken. Hence, my comment.

          Now, if this truly was the finger of God, then I can understand your “wow” response. However, it is extremely unlikely that the finger was the finger of God. The finger was almost certainly a human one, and human fingers make mistakes. No big deal. No wow.

          (It’s also very unlikely that the first five books of the Bible were written by “Moses”, and this is a conclusion that I share with many Christians. )

          As to the “pickle,” as previously noted, I’m familiar with Pascal’s wager. In the end, Christianity is a religion of fear, terror and torture, isn’t it?

          “Any way back to my question. What, exactly is your agenda here?”

          I think I’ve answered this question before, and I don’t know why you won’t accept my answers. Some people visit blogs to argue about sports, some people like to argue about politics or economics or history. Are these folks “desperate”, too? I like to argue about religion. Everyone needs a hobby. Look, if ColorStorm doesn’t want me to post here anymore, he can say so, and I’m gone. No problem, no desperation.

          “Do your questions come from your own reading of the Bible? Or do you google Bible issues to hammer Christians with? Some our your questions seem odd..like the whole name thing..its a non issue.”

          My questions comes from many, many sources, from many, many years of thinking about things and from personal experiences. This includes reading the Bible. I usually only google except to confirm that I’m remembering something correctly. It’s not necessary to google in order to find things to hammer Christians with. I just read a given post and and to the comments that follow, and if something tickles my brain a bit, I post a comment. Something the “tickle” is about something big, and sometimes it’s about minor things, like the spellings of names.

          “You KNOW the answer…but you hate it. ”

          Why would I hate the answer if the answer to which you refer is accurate. Who doesn’t want eternal bliss? I’d love to see and talk to my dad again, but I’m afraid that it’s just not going to happen.

          Why would I fear judgement? Christianity offers it ridiculously easy to escape from judgement. Hitler himself could be experiencing eternal bliss right now. Say your sorry, go to heaven. Very simple. You don’t even have to cut off your foreskin.

          Like

        • Wally Fry says:

          “extremely unlikely”
          But possible even in your world. Definite in mine, possible in yours. Willing to gamble eternity on unlikely, David?

          “Christianity is a religion of fear, terror and torture, isn’t it?”,
          No. I certainly feared judgment, as I should have. But it would only remain fear based if I had to actually DO something to escape. Glory to God I don’t. Just agree with Him that I have failed Him and accept the payment He made. Very cool, that.

          ” Christianity offers it ridiculously easy to escape from judgement. Hitler himself could be experiencing eternal bliss right now”
          Okay, let me make sure I got that. God is an unreasonable Jerk who damns people to hell. But, He has also made it ridiculously easy to escape. Why, exactly is that a problem? Looks like the hallmark of a loving God to me. And..Hitler..yep coulda. Moments before he put that gun to his head and pulled the trigger…repentance and faith would have saved him. Wow..and this is the man who killed 6 million of God’s chosen ones. That’s love for sure.

          I eagerly await your next feeble excuse for non belief David. There are none..GIVE….IT….UP.

          Like

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          Willing to gamble eternity on unlikely, David?” – Pascal? Is it really you?

          Liked by 1 person

        • Wally Fry says:

          No..it’s LIvingston you ninny.

          What was the point there, Arch?

          Like

        • David says:

          I should retype a section from the previous comment…

          I just read a given post and the comments that follow, and if something tickles my brain a bit, I post a comment. Sometimes the “tickle” is about something big, and sometimes it’s about minor things, like the spellings of names.

          Like

        • David says:

          And more typos to correct…

          Christianity makes it ridiculously easy to escape judgement. Hitler himself could be experiencing eternal bliss right now. Say you’re sorry, go to heaven.

          Like

        • David says:

          “Willing to gamble eternity on unlikely, David?”

          I repeat, I’m familiar with Pascal’s wager. In the case, I will suggest that you do the googling as there are many response to this wager available to you on the internet.

          “But it would only remain fear based if I had to actually DO something to escape. Glory to God I don’t. Just agree with Him that I have failed Him and accept the payment He made. Very cool, that.”

          You’ve contradicted yourself. First you said that you don’t have to do anything to escape. Then you said that you had to “agree with Him” to escape torture. So which is it? Do you have to do something to escape torture or not?

          “Okay, let me make sure I got that. God is an unreasonable Jerk who damns people to ‘hell. But, He has also made it ridiculously easy to escape. Why, exactly is that a problem?

          Two problems, minimum. One, it doesn’t make much sense in the context of basic concepts of justice. Two, and more much significantly, the escape hatch is not available to all humans. It’s very clear that millions of humans have lived and died with no knowledge of Jesus. This is certainly not a very “loving” thing to do, and the inconsistencies here suggest that this is a human-created theology.

          You see, if you are correct, then yes, it’s easy for ME to escape. This is why I disagree when you say…”You KNOW the answer…but you hate it.” It’s nice that it’s easy for me, but that still leaves a set of unresolved problems. What about everyone else? How can heaven be bliss if I know that those I love are being tortured for all eternity. All of this leads to me seriously doubt that what you are saying is correct to begin with.

          So, it all sounds good at first glance, and there’s no reason why I should hesitate to jump in the escape pod. But if you think about it, you have to conclude that the pod doesn’t actually exist.

          “Wow..and this is the man who killed 6 million of God’s chosen ones. That’s love for sure.

          No. That would be a massive injustice.

          “GIVE….IT….UP.”

          Ok, now you’re creeping me out. You sound like a cult leader demanding that I drink the Kool-Aid.

          Like

        • Wally Fry says:

          David
          You have already drunk the cool aid, so to speak. Jesus Christ offers the antidote.

          What about those you love? I have some of those. They hear the truth and may reject it. That’s not my choice, it’s theirs. All those other people in the world? Well, David, we aren’t talking about them..we are talking about you. To use them as an excuse for your own choice is not logical. God will reach whoever wants to be reached. You are being reached..as we speak. So, again, why not give it up?

          By grace you are saved, through faith..not of works. Faith and belief is not a work David. Surely even you can see the difference. If you can’t see it, then it is because you don’t want to see it.

          Liked by 1 person

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          Is this the part where we all softly hum a chorus of “Just as I am“?

          Liked by 1 person

        • Wally Fry says:

          Maybe don’t hum it..maybe actually ponder those wonderful words…Just as I am..without one plea..but that thy blood was shed for me…wowww..that’s good stuff, my friend.

          Like

        • David says:

          “What about those you love? I have some of those. They hear the truth and may reject it. That’s not my choice, it’s theirs. ”

          Sounds good, and it’s to say, but I suspect that these words would not serve to comfort you if you had to watch one of your children being tortured for all eternity. Words aren’t going to do the trick here.

          “To use them as an excuse for your own choice is not logical.”

          It’s not an excuse. It’s an reason and explanation for why I’ve concluded that your theology is human construct,

          “God will reach whoever wants to be reached.”

          So, one does not have to know and worship Jesus Christ, the Son of God, in order to be saved?

          “If you can’t see it, then it is because you don’t want to see it.”

          I could say the same of you.

          Like

        • Wally Fry says:

          David
          “So, one does not have to know and worship Jesus Christ, the Son of God, in order to be saved?”

          Really? Let me go back and check out this thread and see if I said that…um..nope never did. Nor would I. Jesus said..I am the way, the truth, and the life..no man comes unto the Father except by me.

          David I have dealt with you in a reasonable manner, out of love for you and your lost condition. But what you just did is wrong and reprehensible. And don’t go claiming you misunderstood. You are obviously not stupid. In fact if word volume indicates intelligence, you may in fact the the smartest man who ever lived. And yes, that was sarcasm. But, seriously you are not stupid and have not misunderstood.

          What you just did is take my simple sentence and bend it into a pretzel to either…1. Meet your own agenda..or 2. Completely and intentionally misrepresent mine..or 3. Tell an outright and bald faced lie. I truly suspect the answer lies in a combination of all three.

          You wonder why people disengage with you? Don’t bother asking why..as you answer you own question quite adequately.

          Have a good day sir..I’m out on this thread.

          Like

        • David says:

          “David I have dealt with you in a reasonable manner, out of love for you and your lost condition. But what you just did is wrong and reprehensible. And don’t go claiming you misunderstood.”

          Sorry, but I’m afraid that you really, clearly did not understand my point.

          Recall that I was responding to my point about millions of people living and dying with zero chance salvation.

          You said in response…

          “God will reach whoever wants to be reached.”

          I assume that you said this so that I wouldn’t worry or fuss about these millions of people with zero knowledge of Jesus Christ. Well, the only reason not to worry about these people would be if some of these people with zero knowledge of Jesus had been saved, even though they had zero knowledge of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

          So, based on this, I concluded that one does not have to know and worship Jesus Christ, the Son of God, in order to be saved.

          I think if you read carefully, you will see that I did not say that YOU said one does not have to know and worship Jesus Christ, the Son of God, in order to be saved. I did NOT sayt that this is what YOU said. This was simply the conclusion that I drew myself from the available data.

          Now, if you do not believe that that ANY of the millions who lived and died with zero knowledge of Jesus were saved, then I misunderstood you, and I apologize. However, my conclusion was not intended to be an intentional misrepresentation of what you said.

          It’s just not accurate to say that I bent what you said into a pretzel for the reasons that you listed. It’s certainly possible that I misunderstood you, but before accusing of me “telling lies” and other atrocities, maybe you should check with me to see what I was thinking when I wrote my comment.

          It’s the internet. Misunderstandings happen.

          Like

      • David says:

        “Or is it that your own sense of self worth is so poor, the only chance you have of ever wining an argument is among the irrational and foolish?”

        You seem to have an irresistible urge to make all of this personal.

        Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Really david?

          You began by following the lead of your kin, by speaking of the names of Moses, then you took a detour into the flood,

          Nice tactic.

          But as to personal, maybe you should try that approach when looking at the post here. See your self as the unworthy one. Think you can do that?

          But you have nothing on ib.

          Like

        • David says:

          “Nice tactic.”

          I don’t believe that you understood what I meant when I used the word “personal.” How is referencing the flood making it “personal?”

          Like

      • David says:

        And more typos to correct…

        Christianity makes it ridiculously easy to escape judgement. Hitler himself could be experiencing eternal bliss right now. Say you’re sorry, go to heaven.

        Like

  7. ColorStorm says:

    Try to stay on point there David. Your side trips (flood) are like the perpetual fly at a picnic.

    Ahem, the woman, the Lord and the the Masters Table?

    (sorry for jumpin ib 😉

    Like

    • David says:

      Try to stay on point?

      Am I the one describing others as “petty?” Am I the one making arrogant statements like “I do understand what you are saying. It is you who does not even understand yourself?” When are you going to tell those who are agree with you to “stay on point”, too?

      Now, as to the master’s table, what is it that you wish to discuss? By the way, if the Bible says that there was a global flood, then the master’s table is moot, the flood is “on point” whether you realize it or not?

      Like

      • David says:

        typos corrected….

        By the way, if the Bible says that there was a global flood, then the master’s table is moot. The flood is “on point” whether you realize it or not.

        Like

      • ColorStorm says:

        If there was 5 sigh button, you would get it.

        How much time did you spend on the ‘flood’ post? And you came away with nothing but further unbelief.

        The ‘point’ here, is as you may know, about the Lord, and a Canaanite woman who found favor. Maybe you should read it again, and see if your ‘flood’ interest is germane.

        I already apologized to ib for jumping in, but your endless diversions are weary.

        Liked by 1 person

  8. David says:

    “I already apologized to ib for jumping in, but your endless diversions are weary.”

    The diversions are made necessary by the arrogance of those who fail to understand that they may “miss”, too.

    “The ‘point’ here, is as you may know, about the Lord, and a Canaanite woman who found favor.”

    Ah, yes. The dog who found favor. The point is, you have to consider all of the words in the passage, and this is something that you don’t want to do.

    So, let’s see. Master’s table. Scraps. This is what you want to discuss? You want to discuss how Jesus describes this greatest gift of grace as….scraps? Scraps discarded by the humans and fit only for dogs? Grace = SCRAPS?! This is what you wish to discuss?

    Like

    • ColorStorm says:

      I make no apologies for refusing to debate the merits of scripture.

      But you however, press an issue which is mind boggling, for you believe none of it, and want answers from all of it, as you ‘try to prove’ the defects in God and his word, while you deny the defects of your own heart. -cs

      Liked by 1 person

      • David says:

        “I make no apologies for refusing to debate the merits of scripture.”

        Again, your choice.

        Like

      • archaeopteryx1 says:

        I make no apologies for refusing to debate the merits of scripture.” – I agree, CS, that no one should feel the need to apologize for something they’re simply unable to do, but they should at least be willing to admit their inability.

        Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          -from the Higher Education post:

          You have seen the arguments: “What about this verse?’ ‘What about this new find?’ What about this scholar?’ ‘What about this link?’ ‘What about this video?’ Utter foolishness as if there is a weakness in the text.

          Who dares to bring a charge against scripture? May I remind you the devil had nothing…

          The insincerity by Pilate in asking the Lord ‘what is truth?’ is proof enough that some interrogators deserve absolute silence as the correct and only answer.

          Every time you open your mouth arch, the embarrassment becomes wider and more obvious. Do you never tire of your own insolence?

          Liked by 1 person

        • David says:

          “Utter foolishness as if there is a weakness in the text.”

          “Utter foolishness” is when you begin with the unchallengeable, dogmatic and absolute assumption that there is no weakness in the text.

          Like

  9. David says:

    By the way, I see that you’re quick to apologize to those you agree with, but not so quick to suggest that they stay “on point”, too.

    Like

  10. I am sorry colorstorm, to be nipping at your trolls. Feel free to delete anything that bother you. I wrote a post this morning about God and name calling and calling God names because it’s a common theme around the blogosphere. 😉

    Liked by 1 person

    • ColorStorm says:

      No, I just didn’t want you to feel that you had to waste your time.

      Your answers are far better than mine anyway 😉 Have at it if you please, no apologies.

      Liked by 1 person

    • archaeopteryx1 says:

      IB, I’ve called you NO names, and neither has David, yet you’ve called us trolls – who’s really doing the name-calling here?

      Like

      • You are trolling because your purpose is not to address this post, but to try and promote your own agenda and to create rabbit holes and diversionary tactics. Also, the name calling you engage is directed towards a God most of us love and respect, so that is impolite to say the least.

        Liked by 2 people

  11. Arkenaten says:

    The point of faith is well illustrated with this example, even though the language might seem harsh.

    Liked by 1 person

    • ColorStorm says:

      It wasn’t harsh to her, she knew it as a figure of speech., and the Lord would never demean a sinner begging for His help in truth.

      Like

      • Arkenaten says:

        Yes, I suppose so. The vagaries of culture/language and all that.
        She didn’t seem upset.

        Like

      • archaeopteryx1 says:

        It wasn’t harsh to her, she knew it as a figure of speech.” – You haven’t the faintest notion what she knew or didn’t know! Why do you say such things?

        Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Why do I say such things?

          Uh arch, the fact that she said: ‘HAVE MERCY ON ME O LORD, SON OF DAVID,’ might be a good indicator.

          Apparently she knew something that you do not. The narrative kinda spells it out if you take off the glasses of fog, unbelief, and bias..

          Like

        • archaeopteryx1 says:

          Apparently she knew something that you do not.” – OR, here’s another possibility, and a far more likely one – since the gospel was written anonymously by an author who wasn’t there and didn’t know either of the participants in the conversation, that author simply put words into the woman’s mouth.

          EDITORS NOTE: How low must a person sink to malign a woman seeking mercy, a Lord who freely answered her need, and the word of God which gives hope to whosoever will.

          Then there is the perpetual harassment of the scripture writers, who were simply led by the Holy Spirit of God.

          Like

  12. Eliza says:

    Great rich encouragement from God’s glorious word. I see your heart and it is filled with devotion to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and love for His saints. Thank you for sharing this, it greatly blessed my heart. Thank you Lord Jesus Christ that you love us and give us more than we could ever hope to deserve. May I have patience as I wait on You in prayer. God bless you:)

    Liked by 1 person

  13. ColorStorm says:

    Yes, there is a depth to God’s word that we simply find in awe, that leads us to appreciate the glories of the Lord.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Thank you for the post and your follow. Blessings, A.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s