• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Where in the Bible is the Christian God Cruel and/or Incompetent...

halbhh

The wonder and awe of "all things".
Dead people at no point conform to any meaningful definition of 'sleep'.
In a way, this is the most key thing we see differently, and much else flows from it.

God existing as in the common bible would mean that death of this mortal body is a kind of illusion (it seems final, but is not).

Consider--
Simply assuming
death of this body is a final (real) death into an irreversible extinction is simply a version of disbelieving in the God of the bible.

2 propositions that are not independent. Each is just a form of the same assumption/premise.
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
In a way, this is the most key thing we see differently, and much else flows from it.

God existing as in the common bible would mean that death of this mortal body is a kind of illusion (it seems final, but is not).

Consider--
Simply assuming
death of this body is a final (real) death into an irreversible extinction is simply a version of disbelieving in the God of the bible.

2 propositions that are not independent. Each is just a form of the same assumption/premise.
You're welcome to believe about these things as seems best to you.

What we're discussing is the text of the bible touching on human sacrifice.
 

joelr

Well-Known Member
lol...

Also a wonderful thing, in my opinion, ala Joseph Campbell.

To listen and hear and begin to understand -- Campbell was a master at that, and at teaching it.

Campbell shows us what is possible in understanding subtle things about myths and other subtle stories --

To listen in a truly sympathetic way, to hear what is actually there.

Instead of bringing our simplistic ideologies to a story, to instead hear it as it is, with the subtle things about it.


I agree, Campbell understood Christianity very well.

"Joseph Campbell understood Christianity as comprised of mythical themes similar to those in other myths, religious and secular. Admitting that certain portions of the biblical record are historical, he taught the theological and miraculous aspects as symbolic, stories in which the reader can find life-lessons for today. Campbell believed that these life-lessons are the heart of Christianity and that taking the theological or miraculous elements literally not only undermines Christianity's credibility, but results in sectarianism and a misunderstanding of the universal themes held in common by all humanity."

"Joseph Campbell understood critical doctrines of Christianity as myth and maintained that understanding myth was a key to making sense of key doctrines of Christianity in any society, including a highly-technological one."
Campbell writes,

The problem, as we have noted many
times, is that these metaphors, which concern that which cannot in any other way be told, are misread prosaically as referring to tangible facts and historical occurrences. And in another place he
remarks Jesus dies, is resurrected, and goes to Heaven. This metaphor
expresses something religiously mysterious. Jesus could not literally have gone to
Heaven because there is no geographical place to go.

Belief in an age of technology: C. S. Lewis and Joseph Campbell on myth and its application to the Christian faith in a technological society
 

joelr

Well-Known Member
The main thing I've seen over and over here are non believers trying to paint it (incompatible with the text of various scripture like the common bible) that people dying in this mortal body are dying final or irreversible death.

If that were so, it would of course then make any 'god' able to prevent such death out to be merely a murderer.

But that painting or assumption there is no afterlife contradicts the text of the common bible, and many other religious texts.

So, they begin with a contradictory premise, and then assert the obvious implication of the false premise, over and over.

Analogy:
It's like someone saying about a skilled surgeon with a reported, written track record of having saved a lot of patients in many feats of skilled work --
"Why did that evil doctor let so many die?"
-- it's about that level of distortion.

When many of the OT stories about killing 70,000 in a plague and destroying entire cities, women and children were written there was no afterlife yet.

"The Torah, the most important Jewish text, has no clear reference to afterlife at all. It would seem that the dead go down to Sheol, a kind of Hades, where they live an ethereal, shadowy existence (Num. 16:33; Ps. 6:6; Isa. 38:18)."
Afterlife in Judaism

Concepts of an immortal soul that belongs in heaven and the concept of heaven itself came to Judaism during the Persian and Greek invasion and are known to have likely been taken from those cultures. So when the myths were written death was not how religious view it now with a revisionist history. The myths about souls and heaven came later.
So you are complaining about "non-believers" making assumptions about no afterlife yet when the text about killing other societies was written the high priests also did not assume their was any sort of afterlife?
The borrowed myths were taken while being occupied by the original cultures? Could this be more obvious myth?




"During the period of the Second Temple (c. 515 BC – 70 AD), the Hebrew people lived under the rule of first the Persian Achaemenid Empire, then the Greek kingdoms of the Diadochi, and finally the Roman Empire. Their culture was profoundly influenced by those of the peoples who ruled them.Consequently, their views on existence after death were profoundly shaped by the ideas of the Persians, Greeks, and Romans. The idea of the immortality of the soul is derived from Greek philosophy and the idea of the resurrection of the dead is derived from Persian cosmology. By the early first century AD, these two seemingly incompatible ideas were often conflated by Hebrew thinkers. The Hebrews also inherited from the Persians, Greeks, and Romans the idea that the human soul originates in the divine realm and seeks to return there.The idea that a human soul belongs in Heaven and that Earth is merely a temporary abode in which the soul is tested to prove its worthiness became increasingly popular during the Hellenistic period (323 – 31 BC). Gradually, some Hebrews began to adopt the idea of Heaven as the eternal home of the righteous dead."


Heaven - Wikipedia
 

halbhh

The wonder and awe of "all things".
You're welcome to believe about these things as seems best to you.

What we're discussing is the text of the bible touching on human sacrifice.

As already explained, the common bible, both the Hebrew Bible part and also the NT, make quite clear that:

Those following God rightfully and under the Spirit can turn that same day (or same hour it would seem, if not minutes!) and then do evil/wrongs. This is easily visible in both the Tanakh and NT.

Peter and Moses stand out as very strong examples, for instance -- they are powerful counterexamples to the mistaken theory that anyone guided by God will only do right things.

And of course only 1 counterexample even would be enough to invalidate a mere theory (for an objective person).

Next, it's also clear in the texts that God didn't find fully acceptable any human sacrifice except that of Christ.

And that God prohibited such sacrifice (many times) in such as Deuteronomy and other books in the Tanakh.

But God did indeed allow people to do wrongs, over and over and over, and even often without response or saying anything until later in time.
 
Last edited:

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Next, it's also clear in the texts that God didn't find fully acceptable any human sacrifice except that of Christ.
No, the exact contrary is what is clearly stated at the places I've referred you to.

In each case the story is explicit that God was involved in setting up the human sacrifice, and in either causing it to happen, or calling it off.

And having made this clear to you endlessly, I accept that you're unable to hear it, so I'll leave the conversation at this point.

Go well.
 

halbhh

The wonder and awe of "all things".
No, the exact contrary is what is clearly stated at the places I've referred you to.

In each case the story is explicit that God was involved in setting up the human sacrifice, and in either causing it to happen, or calling it off.

And having made this clear to you endlessly, I accept that you're unable to hear it, so I'll leave the conversation at this point.

Go well.

Can't agree God accepted any other sacrifice of a person and here's why:

There's no way for me to un-read, or forget, what I've read, and it's not from only a few passages, but from the entire whole of all the Tanakh, as a whole, and all the NT also, as a whole. It's so clear.

But you would have to read in a more listening, neutral way, without an agenda to see this or that, and get the bigger, deeper messages that come across over time, and repeatedly, in the books.
 
Top