this God is very local
Published on August 18, 2008 By greywar In Religion

     The Bible has some wonderful stuff in it but if you are looking for moral or ethical help I would suggest avoiding Genesis like the plague.

 

      The first recorded instance of setting someone up for ethical failure:

 

 15 The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

 

     Also note the first instance of a deity telling an outright lie to man up there when he tells them that they will die from eating the fruit. Imagine their surprise when they ate it and didn’t die but rather figured out that they were naked (the horror!) :

 

she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

 

     Followed closely by over-the-top cruelty to Eve (keep in mind that God already lied about the penalty for eating the fruit and apparently has now decided that knowledge of good and evil is just not painful enough) :

 

16 To the woman he said,
       "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing;
       with pain you will give birth to children.
       Your desire will be for your husband,
       and he will rule over you."

 

    Why was God so pissed (and why did he lie about the tree) ? Well obviously it was because he didn’t want them to start eating from the trees that God and his peers (apparently he has peers in the garden) wanted to keep for their own:

 

     And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." (a good point to keep in mind is that this passage with it’s attendant implications is the progenitor of many aspects of modern would-be “hermeticists” - GW)

 


 

 

       God follows up his ethical misdirection here by randomly promoting sibling rivalry when Adam’s sons bring him part of the food they have worked so hard to make. Apparently God is a meatetarian:

 

3 In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the LORD. 4 But Abel brought fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The LORD looked with favor on Abel and his offering, 5 but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor.

 

     At this point it is important to note that the God of Genesis is not an omniscient God in any manner and that there are apparently other men in Nod that God did not create:

 

Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me."

 

     Who will kill him then? God’s creations at this point number Adam, Eve, Cain, and the now dead Abel. The Noddites were apparently already there from some other God (perhaps one of God’s buddies who hang out with him in the Garden eating fruits of knowledge and life while knocking back some brewskies?).

 

     This brings us to one of the bigger conflicts in the “early” bible… Who is the Lamech’s family? Note that I don’t just mean there are two people ambiguously named Lamech here but rather that there are two lineages for the exact same Lamech. Was he of the house of Cain (the cursed) or of Adam. We are about 3 pages into the bible and it is a train wreck of consistency:

 

Cain lay with his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Cain was then building a city, and he named it after his son Enoch. 18 To Enoch was born Irad, and Irad was the father of Mehujael, and Mehujael was the father of Methushael, and Methushael was the father of Lamech.

 

     So Cain was the head of Lamech’s family? Wait for it:

(ok I am abbreviating here):

 

Adam’s line:

 

Adam – Seth- Enosh- Kenan – Mahalalel – Jared – Enoch – Methuselah – Lamech – Noah

 

    Since the narrative runs that Noah was a nice guy we can assume that Cain’s Lamech didn’t father him since that Lamech is a vengeful ass (then again God in this version is also a vengeful ass so maybe that just makes Lamech ibn Cain “godly”):

 

23 Lamech said to his wives,
       "Adah and Zillah, listen to me;
       wives of Lamech, hear my words.
       I have killed
[y] a man for wounding me,
       a young man for injuring me.

 

    I wonder if he ever killed a man for snoring?

 

    Keep in mind that at this point we are only up to Genesis 5! God needs a new proofreader. If I make it through these classes without an aneurism that really will be a miracle.

 

 

 

Site Meter


Comments (Page 2)
on Oct 20, 2008

My problem Oleteach, is that people try to say that the Bible is all factual, not a sort of "guidebook how to be nice with some examples" but that it is all raw and factual, and in that way, Genesis falls short.

on Oct 21, 2008

Iceciro,

Yes, there are literalist who think that every word is dictated by God even though many observant people can see that such a view is foolish. My method is: look for a message that will help me keep to my goals of life: Keep my eyes on Christ, stay in step with His way, and not look down my nose at people who have a different view of life than mine. We are all looking for meaning to our lives.  

on Oct 21, 2008

 

The Bible has some wonderful stuff in it

Greywar,

You've got it exactly right up to this point.

I wonder though....when are you going to mock Allah and bash the Qur'an by way of equal time, as it were?  

on Oct 23, 2008

Heh, you don't know greywar! That's sad, too, because he used to be a regular contributor here.

Thank you LW for your heads-up on greywar. You know before I posted my comment, I did try to check his other writings, but I didn't come up with much...that might be becasue of the new JU format, don't know (or my inability to navigate around JU!)!

 

Greywar is an equal opportunity spreader of sarcastic wisdom, and no topic, person, political party, or religion is immune from his sting.

Ha, I have no reason to doubt you LW.

Having said that.....even so....I find quite a bit of sarcasm, but little wisdom....do you get my drift?

 

on Oct 23, 2008

You only believe that because you don't understand that many of the translations missed the mark. In the original text, the flood destroyed 'eh-rets' (for lack of a hebrew font) and 'eh-rets' more accurately translated means 'that place', not the entire earth.

Well, whether or not Noah's Flood was local or worldwide is certainly debatable. Based upon a great number of other Scriptural passages, we have good indication that the Great Flood was a global event.

A few of them are:

Genesis 7:4, "For yet awhile and after seven days, I will rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights and I destroy every substance that I have made, from the face of the earth.

V6, "and he was 600 years old when the waters of the flood overflowed the earth."

v. 18, "For they overflowed exceedingly, and filled all on the face of the earth."

v. 19 "And the waters prevailed beyond measure upon the earth: and all the high mountains under the whole heaven were covered."

v22, "and all things wherein there is the breath of life on the earth, died."

Additionally, the fossil record itself supports a world-wide Flood.  There have been of all kinds of creatures that would not ordinarily be found on top of mountains all over the world.

 

 

on Oct 24, 2008

the end result is a text which doesn't hang together internally for even 3 pages.

i was going to point what you said to you. then i read your above comment. isnt that a contardiction on your part?!!!!

if you know that the text is not authentic enough... why blame God for it? .... people with souls and people without ... mud people and blood people!!!!

just asking.

on Oct 24, 2008

why test them at all? Was he like...double checking his work?

even you LW? get sucked up in this false premise!!! i am surprised!!!!

everyone says "they were tested" .... there were no tests, no trials and errors .... no proof-reading ... He created them, told them the rules and the choices and the dangers then He let them live as they wish ... they chose ... and here we are ... simple isnt it?????

again people ... "that was not a test"  ..... that is the real "humans" living their lives.

LW, you know what Qura'n says about this whole thing ... i am not going to repeat it for you ... dont supress information  

it is really not that confusing or complicated ....

btw,there was no such thing as a second tree (i.e of life) ... that is part of the misinformation introduced by many texts and many authers of the current document ... it was just one forbidden tree ... not two ...

on Oct 24, 2008

And neither Eve nor Adam would have ever thought to eat of that tree without the serpent.


God doesn't lie, but he doesn't necessarily give the whole truth either.

how do know that?.... humans sometimes do things Satan himself can never think of... dont underestimate how evil WE can be.... or how divine WE can be ... and that is a miracle by itself.

and God didnt hide anything either .... He told them what Satan is to them .... "your enemy" he told the two of them ... and warned them not to listen to him ... but they did ....

when the true story is told in its complete form ... there are no surprises... no contradictions... it is simple free-will action with its consequences born by the actors ... which was made very clear to them at the outset ...

stop blaming the author for the mistakes of the publisher !!!!!

 

 

on Oct 24, 2008

I wonder though....when are you going to mock Allah and bash the Qur'an by way of equal time, as it were?

  i think that will create a problem for you. If he does what you asked him to do he will get the story without any confusion or contradiction ....

and why ask him to do it ... why not you? there is nothing there to bash Lula ...

on Oct 24, 2008

GREYWAR POSTS #11

When these texts were being copied and amended there were competeing scholars who each had their own versions of the Torah scrolls and had based their careers on their version being correct. When compromises had to be made for political reasons you sort of ended up with wierd bits and chunks from one being included while parts of another were exised etc... the end result is a text which doesn't hang together internally for even 3 pages.

Greywar,

This is partly correct...unfortunately there are many mistranslations of the Holy Bible out and around.....however, even so, you've come to the wrong conclusion.....AND having said that, let's take a step by step look the translation of the Holy Bible.

First, no other book in the history of the world has wielded as much influence on civilization as the Holy Bible. Why? Becasue All the Books of the Old and New Covenants (Testaments) are sacred not becasue they've been composed by human industry, and not becasue they contain Divine revelation without error, but becasue they've been written under Divine guidance through the inspiriation of the Holy Spirit, they have the one true God as their Author. The Holy Spirit inspired the human authors to write down in the manner and style of the day, what He wanted them to write, The working together of God and man in the writing of the Holy Bible iis called inspiration and it covers not only matters of faith and morals, but extends to facts of history as related to the whole Bible.

Second, the OLd Testament of which the first five Books (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy were considered books central to Hebraic Judaism) are called Torah in Hebrew. Torah means instruction, not just a lesson, but the kind of instruction a parent gives to a child when he wants him to obey.  

Third, while none of the original manuscripts are known to exist, some very ancient transcriptions have survived the years. The Dead Sea scrolls are an example of this and these support that later translations are correct.

The most important early translation of the Old Testament (including the first five Books known as the Torah) came to us from 72 Jewish rabbis about 250 BC. and completed about 100 BC. The translation was made for the Jews of Egypt so that they could read their sacred books in Greek, the only language that most of them understood at the time.  The Septuagint was widely used in Palestine and distributed throughoout the Mediterranean world through the first centuries of the Christian era. In 405, St.Jerome, a linguistic genius, faithfully and accurately translated the Hebrew into Latin. His translation was univerally accepted and is considered an august, sacred translation in its own right free from doctrinal error.  From St.Jerome's Latin text to the printing presses of Gutenberg, the Church through the works of dedicated monks and nuns, who tediously copied by hand had faithfully translations of Sacred Scripture. Directly from St.Jerome's Latin text, we have the English translation in the Douay Rheims Bible which is a substantially true copy of the original Hebrew.

So, no sir, with all due respect, the problem isn't a matter of erroneous translations of the original Hebrew...rather it is one of private interpretation.

The problem is that people read Sacred Scripture and misunderstand or mis-interpret (whether knowingly or unknowingly or even for purposes of sarcasm, mocking or bashing) what it means...just as you have done here...

The Chruch teaches that the private reading of the Holy Bible with reliance solely upon one's own powers of comprehension is no sure way to arrive at the Truth. Experience and blogs like this one bears out her teaching for the wildest absurdities have resulted from the theory of private interpretation of Sacred Scripture. It stands to reason that if one reads a sense into Scripture which God did not intend at all, you no longer have God's Word.

Pure and simple, much of what is written here like God doesn't know His own mind and deliberately leads men into contradictiory notions is blasphemy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

on Oct 24, 2008

everyone says "they were tested" .... there were no tests, no trials and errors .... no proof-reading ... He created them, told them the rules and the choices and the dangers then He let them live as they wish ... they chose ... and here we are ... simple isnt it?????

again people ... "that was not a test" ..... that is the real "humans" living their lives.

ThinkAloud,

 Adam and Eve were not so much 'tested" by God rather, given free will  just as the angels, were on probabation. Our eternal happiness  is not yet final or complete becasue it can be lost. The angels had been happy from the beginning, but was lost by Lucifer and other bad angels. The angels who remained steadfast and obedient to God received the supernatural and eternal happiness of Heaven which they could never lose again.

Same premise for us humans. Mankind, like the angels, are gifted with free will and like them must undergo a human life of probation. God gave us His commands and we can freely choose ...Deuteronomy 30:19, "I call heaven and earth to witness this day, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing. Choose therefore life that both thou and thy seed may live."

We get to freely choose either to side with God or against Him. Adam being the representative and father of the human race, chose aganst life, and there rested on his decision not only his own fate, but the fate of all of his posterity. We can apply this same lesson in the case of the father who gambles away his fortune and makes his children losers as well as himself.   

 

 

on Oct 24, 2008

LULA POSTS:

I wonder though....when are you going to mock Allah and bash the Qur'an by way of equal time, as it were?

tHINKaLOUD POSTS: i think that will create a problem for you. If he does what you asked him to do he will get the story without any confusion or contradiction ....

and why ask him to do it ... why not you? there is nothing there to bash Lula ...

Thinking back upon what I wrote, I should have been more inclusive by way of equal time bashing....

We all know that no one cries foul when Christianity is bashed in the print and news media, hollywood, on TV, in public schools, etc. ad nauseum.  I saw "The View" recently and these women started bashing Catholicism (actually showing monumental ignorance of it), yet other religions like Judaism, Islam, and African American and other forms of Protestantism are exempt from their criticism.

Hollwood will stage anti-Catholic plays and make fun of Christian dogma all day long, but we never see an anti-Jewish or anti-Muslim one. Why? For the last one, they might fear a bomb in their mailbox.  

Of Muslims, there is nothing to bash ThinkALoud? Really? How about talking truth...Muslims behead their enemies, terrorize non-combatants, fly airplanes into buildings, shoot nuns in the back, and are presently kidnapping bishops and killing them, burning Catholic Chruches to the ground, and legally murder those who wish to convert from their religion.

These I would not bash for I do not bash period....but I do condemn them...100%.

 

 

 

 

 

on Oct 24, 2008

why not you? there is nothing there to bash Lula ...

ThinkAloud,

It is the Qur'an from which these Muslims get their direction to commit these awful crimes is it not?  

on Oct 24, 2008

Lula posts:

It is the Qur'an from which these Muslims get their direction to commit these awful crimes is it not?

LW posts:
Oh please, lula. Was it not the BIBLE that those who burned 'witches' at the stake and tortured innocents during the inquisition that got THEIR direction?

Let those without sin....

First of all there is no comparison between the Holy Bible and the Qur'an. This isn't tit for tat....The Qur'an doesn't get exonerated by casting aspersions against the Holy Bible. 

And second, of these examples, nope.... we can't blame the Holy Bible for directing the misdeeds of sinful man....sorry about that!

I'm doing my level best to tell the truth, not cast stones. All I'm saying is if we take seriously the words of the Qur'an itself and how they are used by jihadists, then it is clearly their inspiration and guidebook; the motivating force of the jihad movement. Don't get me wrong though....are there peaceful Muslims? ...Of course...but neither they nor we can ignore the jihadist's many clear statements or trapess around on tippy-toes watching our every word (or cartoon) just becasue we might offend sensibilities.

We do not do genuine Muslim reformers any good by being fearful of criticizing Islam or by denying they have much work to do with the Qur'an and Islamic traditions by pretending that the source of the problem is other than what it is.  

 

 

 

on Oct 24, 2008

We all know that no one cries foul when Christianity is bashed in the print and news media, hollywood, on TV, in public schools, etc. ad nauseum.

No one except Muslims .... they cry a lot when ANY of God's words or Messengrs get insulted, bashed or not respected in anyway ... any YOU are one of the people who bash Muslims for doing that. in most Muslim countries ... no moviemaker, article auther or artist is allowed to publish anything even remotely touching in a bad way God's words or messengers ... even the mere representation in a movie for any messenger is not allowed. The world call this sensorship ... and it is ... but it is a needed one ... we prohibit publishing childeren's porn, dont we? ... God,His word and Messengers are less important? ... i dont think so ...

despite the fact that Muslims believe that the current documents (i.e Bible and Torah) are not the authentic ones ... but because they contain many truths of the original ... they are treated as Sacred Books. no one is allowed to bash them in any way even slightly .... only here and europe that bashing is allowed ... but if you listen to what Muslim say about that in their Mosques ... here in the US you will know that there are still people who object strongly to bashing any thing related to God.

the problem is you dont allow yourself to know ... what a shame.

 

Of Muslims, there is nothing to bash ThinkALoud? Really? How about talking truth...Muslims behead their enemies, terrorize non-combatants, fly airplanes into buildings, shoot nuns in the back, and are presently kidnapping bishops and killing them, burning Catholic Chruches to the ground, and legally murder those who wish to convert from their religion.
These I would not bash for I do not bash period....but I do condemn them...100%.

It is the Qur'an from which these Muslims get their direction to commit these awful crimes is it not?

that is what i meant when i said .. why not do it yourself. If you did you would realize that all what you said and all what those terroists do IS AGAINST WHAT QURA'N says !!!!!

really it is Lula.... qura'n says .. even in war .. you are not allowed to attack women, children and unarmed men AND you are not allowed to destroy property ... even trees ....

does the Geneve convention says that? I doubt it lula.

and if you believe, as you seem to be, that Qura'n instructs muslims to do the things you mentioned ... then why not bash it? it would be deserving of bashing ... mine included.

Meta
Views
» 1043
Comments
» 53
Category
Sponsored Links