QUESTION #1: Where in Genesis, prior to Noahs's story, does it say getting drunk on wine is a sin?
Question #2: Where in Genesis, prior to Noah's story, does it say getting naked "IN YOUR OWN TENT!!!" is a sin?
****
Tamara Rasheed - Hmmm... it's possible that THE FLOOD said that it was a sin lmao ! Everything prior to that is irrelevant?
Muhammad Rasheed - ???
Explain, please.
Tamara Rasheed - I'm really just joking saying that, but the flood wiped everyone out because of their iniquities. Whatever the Children of Adam were doing seemed to be 1) pretty distracting from belief, and 2) really sinful.
Tamara Rasheed - I would ask this question: What did those who believe refrain from doing that the people who didn't believe did do? I think that is where I would move to answer those questions. Did the prophets and believers who followed them prior to Noah partake in getting drunk on wine and getting naked in their tents? What were the circumstances under which they did that, if they did do those things?
Muhammad Rasheed - Worshiping 'gods' other than the One God was the iniquity. My question is toward the modern stance of slandering Noah over that infamous incident that probably didn't happen anyway, but if it did... why is it being interpreted as if he was wrong when there was no precedent that being nude and drunk on wine in the privacy of your own domicile was a sin?
Tamara Rasheed - Does that even matter since he was chosen by God? God says He chooses who He will. Whatever kind of person Noah was before he was chosen became irrelevant.
Muhammad Rasheed - It very much matters. God said that Noah was a righteous man who walked with Him. THAT'S the kind of man he was. So if this righteous man got nude and drunk in the privacy of his own tent, why are we saying he was other than what God said Noah was?
Since when... pre- or post-Great Flood... has being nude/drunk in the privacy of your own home a sin in the OT? Where is the verse that says it is so?
Tamara Rasheed - I think someone who chooses to look at Noah's turn toward belief as being a sign for them that God is oft-forgiving and Most Merciful to those who mend their ways and believe is much better off than someone who chooses to slander a prophet and find something ill in him. They're obviously unable to take anything good away from such a profound instance of mercy and have much deeper problems, IMHO.
Tamara Rasheed - That's my very point though, Muhammad. God chose Noah for the same reasons He chose every prophet. When I say "Does it matter?" it's my way of saying that God's choice supercedes anything that we as mankind would feel is relevant in that situation. He even showed Moses that what makes sense to him wasn't on the same level as what commandments he gave his other messengers (like when Moses asked one of God's messengers if he could follow him to see what he was doing, etc.) Some things are beyond our knowledge, but we can't be satisfied by that. Just like being satisfied by God's choice is beyond us.
Muhammad Rasheed - One of the problems I find with that is that God said Noah was a righteous man who walked with Him BEFORE the wine incident.
Muhammad Rasheed - So the stance you are taking is irrelevant here. btw I take the traditional Islamic stance in this regard: That God chose the people to be His messengers because they were already obedient to Him. He didn't chose "sinners" in the Christian sense to be the messenger/prophets. He chose people who were proof that you could believe in God, reject temptation and work righteous deeds as the men who would instruction us in wisdom and scripture.
Tamara Rasheed - But the Holy Qur'an says that God forgives anything except giving Him partners. That doesn't mean that no one ever did anything sinful after they believed. It just meant that they were willing to take on the punishment from doing things they shouldn't have been doing. I think that is very much relevant here.
Gerald Welch - The operative phrase is "Old Testament" under which we are no longer bound (see Acts 15)
Tamara Rasheed - God didn't choose infallible people to be prophets - that's an oxymoron. Righteous and infallible aren't the same.
Muhammad Rasheed - Evidence Against Vilifying/Slandering Noah
Exhibit A: You're SUPPOSED to be naked in your private residence. That's what having your own home is FOR.
Exhibit B: Noah's growing a vineyard, making wine, and getting drunk is the very first mention of alcohol in the bible. There is no scriptural precedent stating that getting drunk was a sin.
Muhammad Rasheed - Honestly, Tee, I see no evidence that Noah did anything that needed to be repented of at that point.
Tamara Rasheed - And I'm saying that regardless if there was anything to be repented for or not, it's not up to us to say that because Noah was a prophet.
Tamara Rasheed - And I think that makes the whole debate irrelevant.
Muhammad Rasheed - I'm saying that it is up to scripture to say whether he was or not, therefore someone please show me where Noah was wrong at based on the scriptural evidence.
Muhammad Rasheed - @ Gerald - I specified "OT" in that part because God does give a light-weight command in the Holy Qur'an telling the believers to leave intoxicants alone.
Michael Daniels - There was no admonition against getting drunk prior to Noah's time. For all we know Noah could've invented alcohol. The sin was Canaan's for laughing at and disrespecting his grandfather. That doesn't mean Noah was sinless the entire 950 years of his life because he wasn't. "For all have sinned and fall shourt of the glory of God" Romans 3:23. Your sister is right, Mo. Calling someone righteous does not mean he or she was sinless.
Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "There was no admonition against getting drunk prior to Noah's time. For all we know Noah could've invented alcohol. The sin was Canaan's for laughing at and disrespecting his grandfather."
He disrespected him by laughing at his humorous, drunken condition? I don't understand. What was the nature of the disrespect? If a close relative makes a silly spectacle of themselves and you laugh, do you really consider that disrespect? I realize before you respond that families will differ from household to household on what they would consider inappropriate or not, but that still seems a bit over the top.
Michael Daniels wrote: "That doesn't mean Noah was sinless the entire 950 years of his life because he wasn't. "For all have sinned and fall shourt of the glory of God" Romans 3:23. Your sister is right, Mo. Calling someone righteous does not mean he or she was sinless."
Repentance purifies you of sin, and that gift was bestowed on to Adam. I'm confident that the messenger of God died both righteous and sinless, Deac.
Michael Daniels - "He disrespected him by laughing at his humorous, drunken condition? I don't understand. What was the nature of the disrespect? If a close relative makes a silly spectacle of themselves and you laugh, do you really consider that disrespect? I realize before you respond that families will differ from household to household on what they would consider inappropriate or not, but that still seems a bit over the top"
Honor your father and mother is a fundamental element of God's message. Canaan, and possibly Ham as well, did the opposite of that.Now clearly it's Noah and not God, Himself that assigns the curse to that portion of his family but it seems he was speaking as a prophet rather than just a pissed off old guy. And the Holy Spirit chose to include this portion in Scripture for a reason.
"Repentance purifies you of sin, and that gift was bestowed to Adam. I'm confident that the messenger of God died both righteous and sinless, Deac."
The blood of Jesus purifies sin. If repentance was all that was necessary why would God require the sacrifice of life from Adam to Cain and Abel to Noah to Moses all the way until the final sacrifice, His own Son. Furthermore, if Noah was sinless there was no reason for him to die as "the wages of sin is death."
Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "Honor your father and mother is a fundamental element of God's message."
I'm still having problems seeing how involuntary laughter at something silly you think is genuinely funny is a sign of disrespect. When i was a kid I would bust out laughing whenever my dad farted, it didn't mean I lacked respect for him. How was this supposed to be a sin?
Michael Daniels wrote: "Canaan, and possibly Ham as well, did the opposite of that."
I don't see it.
Michael Daniels wrote: "Now clearly it's Noah and not God, Himself that assigns the curse to that portion of his family but it seems he was speaking as a prophet rather than just a pissed off old guy. And the Holy Spirit chose to include this portion in Scripture for a reason."
There was no curse. That concept was only Jewish folklore that was allowed to be added to the canon.
Michael Daniels wrote: " The blood of Jesus purifies sin. If repentance was all that was necessary why would God require the sacrifice of life from Adam to Cain and Abel to Noah to Moses all the way until the final sacrifice, His own Son."
I'm not sure why the sacrifices are needed. If that is what they are for, as part of the repentance ritual, then again, I'm confident that the messenger of God was aware of this fact, and died both righteous and sinless.
Michael Daniels wrote: "Furthermore, if Noah was sinless there was no reason for him to die as "'the wages of sin is death.'"
We all live in a finite terrestrial state as human beings on earth. Being born is how we arrive, and death is how we leave. The death of our physical body is not a punishment, it's only the natural order of things; the normal end of our life span, already recorded in heaven before we were born. The law of our existence on earth.
No comments:
Post a Comment