A bloodthirsty god?

[Autodidact]

Originally Posted by Rolling_Stone

For some reason, I find it rather pathetic that those who criticize religions for being dogmatic dogmatically cling to notions that religions have largely abandoned.

Just from reading RF, there are many posters here who believe all of these "notions" to be the truth.

[Autodidact]

Originally Posted by Rolling_Stone

For some reason, I find it rather pathetic that those who criticize religions for being dogmatic dogmatically cling to notions that religions have largely abandoned.

For example, they say they believe in evolution, but when they meet the evolution of religion, like theologically expanding concepts of infinity and eternity and supreme values, they decry the change rather than celebrate its advancement. Religion, they think, must conform to their biased preconceptions or be discredited.

God is in man and man in God, but while God is, man is becoming.

You're using too broad a term. The thread is not about religion. It's about the God described in the Old Testament. Some may worship some other, less violent God, but that God is clearly murderous, vengeful and arbitrary.

[Riverwolf]

Originally Posted by Autodidact

You're using too broad a term. The thread is not about religion. It's about the God described in the Old Testament. Some may worship some other, less violent God, but that God is clearly murderous, vengeful and arbitrary.

You know, until a few days ago, I did believe the same thing. But I was actually reading the Holy Scriptures, a translation of the Old Testament by Jews with Jewish ideology in mind without Christian bias, and I discovered something. Remember the part where God is talking to Abraham, and he's asking if he'd spare the city if there were only ten righteous men in it, and God said he would? That made me realize that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was the only possible action to be taken, because the cities were so sinful and so corrupt that there were only two possibilities if the cities were spared: that their influence would spread to the rest of the world and God would be forced to flood the world again, which he said he wouldn't do again, or the cities would simply destroy themselves over time, slowly and painfully. Sometimes being cold is the only thing to do, when there are no innocents in a city. As for the rest of the rules in the Torah, they were set down so there would be order, and many more lives would be spared among the Israelites and other nations, regardless of whether or not that actually happened.

As for the deeds carried out in Joshua onwards, those are stories. They aren't meant to be taken literally, nor is the God portrayed in those stories necessarily God himself. The writers were simply recording what the Israelites were doing, and the only way to make it acceptable for the people was to say "God told us to."

It turns out that YHWH of the Old Testament is hardly all-seeing and all-powerful. Creating a world is easy-peasy. But throughout Genesis, it is made clear that YHWH cannot do everything that he would want to do, and that he is as much distressed about what he has to do as everybody else. But there is no other way.

Just because you can create a world doesn't mean you can run it.

[gnostic]

Originally Posted by riverwolf

As for the deeds carried out in Joshua onwards, those are stories. They aren't meant to be taken literally, nor is the God portrayed in those stories necessarily God himself. The writers were simply recording what the Israelites were doing, and the only way to make it acceptable for the people was to say "God told us to."

If so much of the biblical events are stories then it stand to reason that God is nothing more than story character. Hence, God/Yahweh/Allah is nothing than a mythological being; no more real than Enki, Zeus and Odin.

How can you possibly believe in something is that isn't real? Very easily, considering that countless numbers of Christians and Muslims believing in a non-existent deity in what you call "story-books" and what they call "scriptures".

[Riverwolf]

Originally Posted by gnostic

If so much of the biblical events are stories then it stand to reason that God is nothing more than story character. Hence, God/Yahweh/Allah is nothing than a mythological being; no more real than Enki, Zeus and Odin.

How can you possibly believe in something is that isn't real? Very easily, considering that countless numbers of Christians and Muslims believing in a non-existent deity in what you call "story-books" and what they call "scriptures".

So if you use an entity that you believe exists in a fictional story, that automatically causes the entity to not exist? The Torah is to be taken as literally as possible. The other stories are to be taken no more literally than the parables of Christ. They are stories written to provide a moral or message. After all, to the imaginative mind, a fictional story is better for getting a life-lesson across than a boring non-fiction essay.

"Artists use lies to tell the truth."
-V for Vendetta

BTW, I believe in the existence of ALL the gods that have ever been worshiped. However, I worship none of them.

[gnostic]

What's a cengnostic?

[Autodidact]

Originally Posted by Riverwolf

You know, until a few days ago, I did believe the same thing. But I was actually reading the Holy Scriptures, a translation of the Old Testament by Jews with Jewish ideology in mind without Christian bias, and I discovered something. Remember the part where God is talking to Abraham, and he's asking if he'd spare the city if there were only ten righteous men in it, and God said he would? That made me realize that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was the only possible action to be taken, because the cities were so sinful and so corrupt that there were only two possibilities if the cities were spared: that their influence would spread to the rest of the world and God would be forced to flood the world again, which he said he wouldn't do again, or the cities would simply destroy themselves over time, slowly and painfully. Sometimes being cold is the only thing to do, when there are no innocents in a city. As for the rest of the rules in the Torah, they were set down so there would be order, and many more lives would be spared among the Israelites and other nations, regardless of whether or not that actually happened.

As for the deeds carried out in Joshua onwards, those are stories. They aren't meant to be taken literally, nor is the God portrayed in those stories necessarily God himself. The writers were simply recording what the Israelites were doing, and the only way to make it acceptable for the people was to say "God told us to."

It turns out that YHWH of the Old Testament is hardly all-seeing and all-powerful. Creating a world is easy-peasy. But throughout Genesis, it is made clear that YHWH cannot do everything that he would want to do, and that he is as much distressed about what he has to do as everybody else. But there is no other way.

Just because you can create a world doesn't mean you can run it.

Well of course you can just choose not to believe what's writtin there; that's what I do myself. My point is that the fictional character as portrayed there does display these characteristics.

[Riverwolf]

Originally Posted by Autodidact

Well of course you can just choose not to believe what's writtin there; that's what I do myself. My point is that the fictional character as portrayed there does display these characteristics.

As a fictional character in the stories, yes, YHWH does display bloodthirsty and genocidal traits. But, when you go deep into the human subconscious, we all feel that way sometimes. Gods as works of fiction in my opinion represent the human psyche, regardless of whether or not they actually exist. I don't think you'd have much luck explaining to a common person the scientific aspects of the human psyche and tendencies, but if you tell them that the gods have our faults and problems, then portray them doing very human things, they'll understand it. The only problem with that is it promotes pointing fingers at things, which I don't approve of.

[Riverwolf]

Originally Posted by gnostic

What's a cengnostic?

I made up that word. It combines cent, which is a hundred, and gnostic, which is knowledge. Basically, my religion takes knowledge from hundreds of sources, always evolving with new knowledge obtained.