• 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!

Yahweh is an abomination?

Spiderman

Veteran Member
The love of the father is different from the love of the mother. To condemn God and desire mercy the way you guys are in this thread is truth. God wants you to desire mercy and he wants mercy, but he is not going to relent in that feminine way that you guys are hoping for. He demands that we come into being.

You have heard that the human individual is meant to be the mediator between God and the world, right? The one within the human individual who mediates with God is the Son of Man.

Do you know the story of Noah when he makes God promise that he will never again flood the world? That is the story of the Son of Man.

Do you know the story of Moses when he convinces God to not kill his people the Israelites? That is the story of the Son of Man.

The Son of Man comes into being and imposes righteousness on God through relationship. The measure of judgment you use on another will be used on you. Train and prepare yourself like a warrior preparing for battle. Stop wishing for the father to turn into the mother and show feminine mercy - become male and circumcise yourself from that feminine web. Do all of this in the name of mercy and justice. Come into being.
No, a father who watches his children get raped, sodomized, tortured to death, and sits in heaven with his finger up his nose, is lower than a mother grizzly bear, weak, pathetic, worthless coward, lower than animals.

What would you think of a Father who ever day is right there next to his children getting raped, trafficked, molested, tempted , and murdered, and has all the power to be a Father, or do what any good cop would do, and he just chooses apathy.

He is the cause of the world's misery. If he would show a lot of people what to do, how to do his will, show them he is speaking to and guiding them personally, the world would be so much better.

Instead, Dad is such a wimp, prepubescent little girls are stronger than the heavenly Father!
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
So, the Bible says "God is love" and preaches being humble and lowly, but his example of being so proud, a bully, a baby killer, and a narcissist, who puts people that don't believe in Jesus, (like Anne frank) in a crematorium or lake of fire, where they scream bloody murder for all eternity...and calls the Gospel of Jesus "good news"...have you read revelation, how he tortures people until they beg for death, but won't give it to them, when he releases plagues and creatures from the bottomless pit?

You think it's noble to worship such a monster? I'm serious, have you read the Bible? I'm interested in what a loving person has to say about how "God is love" can be reconciled with the worst hate crimes ever recorded?


If God is love, the scriptures would have to be mostly not in the Bible , or inspired by the opposite Devil, as a general rule , correct?

When titanic went down, women and children only on the boats. What would you think of a man who is a big bully trampling women and children to death to get on a boat? Yahweh is worse, cries like a baby over blasphemy, and murders children because he's a jealous bully....or the children of Egypt murdered for not having lambs blood smeared on door posts. God is perfect justice? Could you please explain any basis for that?

Well, what about our great big bully God beating little girls to death and torturing them forever because they like someone other than him? If you want, I can show you his threats to the people he hates for burning incense to the Queen of Heaven, because she was helping them, and yahweh wasn't....his wrath, jealousy that someone could love another besides the big proud hypocrite bully, the author of death who tempted Eve to eat something worse than rat poison, so he could have an excuse to torture and murder everyone, especially women?

What kind of sick Father does that to his daughters, tortures them to death between the legs, and multiplies their labor pains because Eve was female, so it's a crime to be a woman? I seriously would love answers. Why can't we admit that most of the Bible is false, if God is love?

.... is so incredibly the opposite example of the God who loves the humble, the God who is love. Why should a father set the worst example, but expect us to do the opposite?.. So, most of the Bible is an abomination or inspired by a false God or sick demon-possessed prophet (s), correct?
Jesus was an example of what the true God is like and he didn’t act anything like the monster God of the Israelites concept.

The book of Revelation is an edited mess!
 

Treasure Hunter

Well-Known Member
No, a father who watches his children get raped, sodomized, tortured to death, and sits in heaven with his finger up his nose, is lower than a mother grizzly bear, weak, pathetic, worthless coward, lower than animals.

What would you think of a Father who ever day is right there next to his children getting raped, trafficked, molested, tempted , and murdered, and has all the power to be a Father, or do what any good cop would do, and he just chooses apathy.

He is the cause of the world's misery. If he would show a lot of people what to do, how to do his will, show them he is speaking to and guiding them personally, the world would be so much better.

Instead, Dad is such a wimp, prepubescent little girls are stronger than the heavenly Father!
Yes… and … it is still the truth that there is no justice without the Father through the Son. All of what you hate will continue into the future as long as the mother is lord of this world and the father is cast out into the abyss.
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Do you think reality changes based on which god you choose?
I'm probably not the person to ask, but asked to guess, I'd say acculturation into a religion may give your instinctive take on reality a particular cast, and it may be that it would be unusual to lose that completely, in favor of the views of another religion, even though the forms of religious observance and utterance would change.

Since adolescence materialism has always made sense to me, but my understanding of materialism as a worldview has come a long long way since then. In hindsight I see it was made easier because of the general lack of resistance from my family and my peers.
 

Treasure Hunter

Well-Known Member
I'm probably not the person to ask, but asked to guess, I'd say acculturation into a religion may give your instinctive take on reality a particular cast, and it may be that it would be unusual to lose that completely, in favor of the views of another religion, even though the forms of religious observance and utterance would change.

Since adolescence materialism has always made sense to me, but my understanding of materialism as a worldview has come a long long way since then. In hindsight I see it was made easier because of the general lack of resistance from my family and my peers.
Materialism is the worldview of the privileged. Those who despair in darkness and alienation don’t have the luxury of atheism. Anyone who serves the least among us, identifies with them and believes as they do.
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Materialism is the worldview of the privileged.
I'm not referring to the love of private jets and designer clothes.

I'm referring to materialism as the philosophical view that the universe is entirely as described by the physical sciences from time to time and that humans, brains and all, (and biology generally) are aspects of that universe.
 

Treasure Hunter

Well-Known Member
I'm not referring to the love of private jets and designer clothes.

I'm referring to materialism as the philosophical view that the universe is entirely as described by the physical sciences from time to time and that humans, brains and all, (and biology generally) are aspects of that universe.
I understand. Materialism is the philosophy of the comfortable. I exchanged comfort and privilege for mercy and justice a long time ago.

Materialism the philosophy is correlated with rich societies.
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I understand. Materialism is the philosophy of the comfortable. I exchanged comfort and privilege for mercy and justice a long time ago.
A strange accusation. Since in fact you have no information about my relationship to mercy and justice, I mention that my own morality is, do no harm, and treat others with decency, respect, inclusion and common sense.
Materialism the philosophy is correlated with rich societies.
So is a fair amount of religion these days ─ many churches growing fat on preaching that wealth is evidence of God's favor.

Materialism arises from human curiosity about nature, and it's built into science and scientific method, which brings you your cars, planes, medicines and medical tools, your Mars rovers and James Webb telescope, your improved crops that make large populations possible, and your only hope of beating global warming (to mention just a few). What distinguishes it from prayer is its success rate in actually improving the human lot.
 

1213

Well-Known Member
Well, whichever way you look at God's management of [his] creation in the Garden, it was astonishingly inept. If you don't want people to eat the fruit of trees A and B, you put trees A and B where the people can't get at them. Funny that didn't occur to God.
So, you think humans can't act reasonably? I think God wanted to give people a choice for easy and hard way. They had chance to ask anything directly from God, if they really wanted to know something, but they instead chose this hard way.
And although it's only a story, I've never seen anything wrong with humans knowing good from evil, right from wrong. We ought to celebrate Eve as a heroine of humanity, a legendary great benefactor.
Knowledge doesn't depend on the tree. I don't think Eve brought anything good with her choice.
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
So, you think humans can't act reasonably? I think God wanted to give people a choice for easy and hard way. They had chance to ask anything directly from God, if they really wanted to know something, but they instead chose this hard way.
But how could they? God had denied them knowledge of what was good and what was bad, what was right, what was wrong. You can't blame Adam or Eve or the snake for that.
Knowledge doesn't depend on the tree. I don't think Eve brought anything good with her choice.
In the story the knowledge of good and evil depends entirely on the tree. Before the fruit, no knowledge of good and evil. After the fruit, knowledge of good and evil. So as far as knowledge of good and evil goes, in the story you're simply wrong.

And please explain to me how we'd be better off if we couldn't tell right from wrong.
 

Clizby Wampuscat

Well-Known Member
Jesus was an example of what the true God is like and he didn’t act anything like the monster God of the Israelites concept.

The book of Revelation is an edited mess!
Jesus confirmed the OT scriptures were true. He said "I and the father are one". Jesus does not get a pass from the evil God the father did in the OT, he was right there with him according to scripture.
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
Jesus confirmed the OT scriptures were true. He said "I and the father are one". Jesus does not get a pass from the evil God the father did in the OT, he was right there with him according to scripture.
Jesus didn't confirm all of the OT scriptures, only a few reference's to a coming deliverer. The "Father" reveled by Jesus was more clear than the dim view of God in the OT scriptures which was a God fashioned in the shadow of the men who wrote the OT.
 

Clizby Wampuscat

Well-Known Member
Jesus didn't confirm all of the OT scriptures, only a few reference's to a coming deliverer. The "Father" reveled by Jesus was more clear than the dim view of God in the OT scriptures which was a God fashioned in the shadow of the men who wrote the OT.
I disagree, Jesus said:

You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me. ~ Jn 5:39 NASB

He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.” Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. He told them, “This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day. ~ Luke 24:44-46 NIV


Jesus cited 14 OT books as truth. He believed 9 OT figures actually existed as he quotes them as such.

Jesus believed the flood was real and so he was involved with killing almost the entire population of the earth.

Jesus submitted to the authority of the OT scriptures:

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. ~ MT 5:17-19 NIV
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
I disagree, Jesus said:

You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me. ~ Jn 5:39 NASB

He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.” Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. He told them, “This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day. ~ Luke 24:44-46 NIV


Jesus cited 14 OT books as truth. He believed 9 OT figures actually existed as he quotes them as such.

Jesus believed the flood was real and so he was involved with killing almost the entire population of the earth.

Jesus submitted to the authority of the OT scriptures:

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. ~ MT 5:17-19 NIV
I disagree, the flood is a myth and Jesus certainly didn't believe in it. Some words were put into Jesus' mouth after he left by Jewish followers who were still trying to bring their fellow Jews to the Jesus movement.
 

Clizby Wampuscat

Well-Known Member
I disagree, the flood is a myth and Jesus certainly didn't believe in it. Some words were put into Jesus' mouth after he left by Jewish followers who were still trying to bring their fellow Jews to the Jesus movement.
Most believers pick and choose what they want to believe is true. The bible records Jesus referring to an actual flood, this is all I was saying.
 

Starlight

Spiritual but not religious, new age and omnist
We know that God is all good and all loving. In fact, “God is love” (1 John 4:8). And yet, in the Old Testament, we find various scenes in which God’s people are called to “destroy” other nations.

These do not sound like the words of a God who “is love.” Troublesome passages like this remind us why it is so important to understand how to interpret Scripture “in accordance with the Spirit who inspired it” (see Catechism of the Catholic Church 111-114).

Based on this text alone, without proper context, it’s easy to see why someone might think that God commands evil. If we are to understand what is happening here, then we need to keep in mind the following criteria for biblical interpretation:

  1. Pay attention to the “content and unity of the whole of Scripture” (CCC 112). In other words, the rest of Scripture should help to make sense of this passage. So we can turn to similar passages of the Bible to help shed light on this question.

  2. Read the Bible in light of the “living Tradition” of the Church (CCC 113). We have to take into account what God has revealed to us not only in the written words of Scripture, but also in Sacred Tradition. The Church’s teaching on the command, “Thou shalt not kill,” is that “no one can under any circumstance claim for himself the right directly to destroy an innocent human being” (CCC 2258).

  3. We need to remember that there is a “coherence of truths of the faith” (CCC 113). This means that our faith is not self-contradicting. We cannot say it was morally acceptable for the Israelites to kill innocent people then, but that it is no longer acceptable in our day.
So if God is good, and it’s never morally acceptable to intentionally destroy an innocent person, how are we to understand this? Consider what St. Augustine said about difficult passages of Scripture:

“… if in the Scriptures I meet anything which seems contrary to truth, I shall not hesitate to conclude either that the text is faulty, or that the translator has not expressed the meaning of the passage, or that I myself do not understand” (St. Augustine, Ep. 82, i. et crebrius alibi).
We know it’s never morally acceptable to intentionally kill innocent persons. We also know that God is all good. So what was God asking Israel to do in this passage? Was he calling them to act in an evil way by killing innocent persons? Two other stories in Scripture should help to answer this question.

Abraham, God, and Sodom (Genesis 18-19)

In this story, Abraham is like a defense attorney pleading for clemency on behalf of Sodom (a city with some serious problems, as we learn in Genesis 19). Abraham asks God,

“Will you really sweep away the righteous with the wicked? … Far be it from you to do such a thing, to kill the righteous with the wickedShould not the judge of all the world do what is just?” (Genesis 18:23-25)
Abraham affirms that God is just, and it’s unjust to kill righteous persons. So Abraham asks God if he would spare Sodom if there were fifty, forty, thirty, or ten righteous people in Sodom. In each instance God says that he “will spare the whole place for their sake.”

From this we learn that God is indeed just, and he will not kill the innocent.
As the Catechism says, “God is infinitely good and all his works are good” (CCC 385). “God is in no way, directly or indirectly, the cause of moral evil” (CCC 311). The interesting thing is that God does end up destroying Sodom in Genesis 19. Does that mean there wasn’t a single righteous person among them? Were there no innocent children? Or is there something more to this scene? Let’s look at our next story and see how it can help explain what might be happening.

The Battle of Jericho (Joshua 6)

Jericho was a city within the Promised Land spoken of in Deuteronomy 7; part of a nation that was to be “utterly destroyed.” In the book of Joshua we see Israel besiege and attack Jericho “putting to the sword all living creatures in the city: men and women, young and old, as well as oxen, sheep and donkeys” (Joshua 6:21).

What is happening here? A literalistic interpretation of this passage brings us back to where we started: It would seem God was commanding the death of the innocent, including the young. But is this the only possible way to interpret this text? When we read Scripture, it’s important to distinguish between a literal and a literalistic interpretation of a text. The literalist interprets every word of Scripture as literal, historical truth; and does not distinguish among the various types of writing found in Scripture—including poetry and metaphor.

A literal understanding of Scripture recognizes that “truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing” (CCC 110). Is the author of Joshua really intending to say that every single living creature in Jericho was utterly destroyed, including innocent children?

The problem with this view is that the story itself has an exception to Jericho’s utter destruction. Rahab and her family are spared (see Joshua 6:25). Is it possible that in these examples the sense of utter destruction was not meant to be understood literally, but was used as an expression? Could this refer to a great—but not total—devastation? We use similar expressions frequently. For example, if I described a comedy I really enjoyed and said “I was dying of laughter,” you wouldn’t begin thinking that I was literally dying. You know that’s just an expression for how funny something was. So too, the idea that “every living creature” in Jericho was killed is quite possibly just an expression.

What’s Deuteronomy Calling Israel to Do?

We know from Abraham’s conversation with God that God does not punish the innocent. So it’s not likely Deuteronomy intended to say that God was commanding the death of everyone. In fact, Deuteronomy goes on to say, “You shall not make marriages with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons” (Deuteronomy 7:3). Why would Deuteronomy need to forbid intermarriage with these nations if they were to be utterly destroyed? There would be no one left to marry among them. It’s more likely that the phrase “utterly destroy” was used as an expression.

Perhaps it was intended to describe a complete victory for Israel; a victory that meant separating themselves from anything that might get in the way of their relationship with God. Actually, that’s the reason Deuteronomy gives for this command, “For [the nations] would turn your sons from following me to serving other gods, and then the anger of the LORD would flare up against you and he would quickly destroy you” (Deuteronomy 7:4). This interpretation would mean that God did not command evil. Rather he commanded Israel to avoid evil by removing those temptations that might lead them astray. Christ uses a similar expression in the New Testament to describe avoiding sin:

“If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away … And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one of your members than to have your whole body go into Gehenna” (Matthew 5:29-30).
Christ is not speaking literally. He’s using an expression to illustrate the severity of what he is saying. So the lesson here is, don’t literally cut off your hand, pluck out your eye, or lay waste to a nation. Instead, remove those things in your life that draw you away from the Lord. It’s better to separate yourself from those things than to find yourself separated from God.

 

Colt

Well-Known Member
Most believers pick and choose what they want to believe is true. The bible records Jesus referring to an actual flood, this is all I was saying.
Its not a matter of picking and choosing, its a matter of common sense. The same kind of proud religious men who put the Son of God through an unjust, trumped up trail and turned him over to the Romans to be killed, were perfectly capable of exaggerating their history! The flood was about trying to establish an authoritative line of descent back to the Adam of Mesopotamian lore.
 

Clizby Wampuscat

Well-Known Member
Its not a matter of picking and choosing, its a matter of common sense. The same kind of proud religious men who put the Son of God through an unjust, trumped up trail and turned him over to the Romans to be killed, were perfectly capable of exaggerating their history! The flood was about trying to establish an authoritative line of descent back to the Adam of Mesopotamian lore.
Believe what you want, I have no dog in the hunt.
 
Top