Oh my--what am I doing--biting? God help me (and I mean that
)
Hi Y'all
---
Ummm, well, first of all (in case anyone is interested) I am thinking that it might be rather difficult for many folks to understand what the argument is actually about.
But to me, it is a good conversation to have--after all (in case anyone is interested) it boils down to whether blood or good intentions mean more to God.
I would just like to interject that I am all for good intentions--and I don't think God has anything against them either, from what I read. However, I also glean from those same readings that man has a hard time having truly good intentions on his own.
I do not think that Cain had good intentions--after all, when he did not win the prize, he got awfully angry, and then he became the first human recorded in the Bible to commit murder. And like someone has pointed out here or elsewhere or in my heart--God was merciful enough to sentence him not to death, but to life, albeit it not a very comfortable one from what I understand.
I believe that sometimes the passages in the Bible foreshadow other passages. After all, if God is the creator of all, than surely he created the elements of great literature (note here that I said literature, not fantasy--even though we could not even have the latter without His design). God's Word is unique, even in its form--people can argue about flood stories, and creatures rising from the ashes and yada-yada-yada, but still, when it comes right down to it, this collection is truly different. ( I mean the Christian collection. Now I am sure someone will want to argue over the denominational interpretations--I will get back to you on that after I have read the Apocrypha. Working on it. If for no other reason than to hopefully shut up all the opposing voices in my head so I can decide for myself--and I think I know that I am going to find that what I have believed is what I believe.)
Anyway, is it possible that God is capable of foreshadowing the blood sacrifice of His Son? Oh, wait, silly me--YES. Shall I begin naming Scripture passages? Just because Moses had not come down from Mount Sinai with the ten commandments yet is not a defense for Cain. Even the New Testament tells the account by Stephen (who, of course, was immediately stoned to death) that the Patriarchs of old had acted first in faith, and were spared to some extent the blood sacrifice. But then the blood is always there, and it is the blood of the Lamb. And His blood means both--the intentions of the heart and the sacrifice.
You both have valid points. The blood will always cry out. It will cry out about the heart.
The God that I believe in would have no interest in the shedding of blood if He was not willing and expecting to shed His own for the sake of His own. There is the intent, and there is the blood. There together.
InPeace,
InLove