|
Why
Jul 11, 2023 20:22:29 GMT -5
Post by Dan on Jul 11, 2023 20:22:29 GMT -5
It's my understanding that Adam and Eve were created adult beings, not toddlers. They were clearly told what they could do and what they must not do. It's fairly simple. They were completely innocent like a baby. They were created in an adult body, but god did not give them the knowledge of good and evil and he didn't want them to even have the knowledge of good and evil. You cannot blame a being of doing something wrong when they have no concept of that and that concept has been withheld from them. 'Eat of that tree and you'll begin to die' isn't a concept that requires the knowledge of good & evil to grasp. Its like telling someone that if they ram their head into a brick wall they'll get a headache. A&E had knowledge, they just hadn't discovered evil until they were disobedient. They hid themselves afterwards, so they knew exactly what they had done wrong. Sin is disobedience to God and evil is the result. The only way you couldn't blame Eve is if she didn't know right from wrong, but from what she told the serpent, she clearly understood God's instructions and was fully cognizant of the repercussions for touching that tree.
|
|
|
Post by chuck on Jul 11, 2023 22:25:30 GMT -5
Imo that's as far off the mark as Christianity has become. Relevant questions for the religion Christianity yes but doesn't make a whole lot of sense when the context of original intent and culture is considered.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 12, 2023 0:12:46 GMT -5
Imo that's as far off the mark as Christianity has become. Revelevant questions for the religion Christianity yes but doesn't make a whole lot of sense when the context of original intent and culture is considered. It's sad that many Atheists quote the erroneous dogma of bible literalist/fundamentalists. It seems that the warped theology of bible literalist/fundamentalists is really good at creating Atheists.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 12, 2023 0:24:05 GMT -5
They were completely innocent like a baby. They were created in an adult body, but god did not give them the knowledge of good and evil and he didn't want them to even have the knowledge of good and evil. You cannot blame a being of doing something wrong when they have no concept of that and that concept has been withheld from them. 'Eat of that tree and you'll begin to die' isn't a concept that requires the knowledge of good & evil to grasp. Its like telling someone that if they ram their head into a brick wall they'll get a headache. A&E had knowledge, they just hadn't discovered evil until they were disobedient. They hid themselves afterwards, so they knew exactly what they had done wrong. Sin is disobedience to God and evil is the result. The only way you couldn't blame Eve is if she didn't know right from wrong, but from what she told the serpent, she clearly understood God's instructions and was fully cognizant of the repercussions for touching that tree.
The tree of the knowledge of good and evil is religious theory IMO, like bible literalism/fundamentalism. I think that's what Jesus was trying to convey to the religious people of his day... Matthew 12:43 “When the unclean spirit has gone out of a person, it wanders through waterless regions looking for a resting place, but it finds none. 44 Then it says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ When it returns, it finds it empty, swept, and put in order. 45 Then it goes and brings along seven other spirits more evil than itself, and they enter and live there, and the last state of that person is worse than the first. So will it be also with this evil generation.” John 5:39 “You search the scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life, and it is they that testify on my behalf. 40 Yet you refuse to come to me to have life. 41 I do not accept glory from humans. 42 But I know that you do not have the love of God in you. Sam Jones referred to life, not theory... I’m glad He ever found me And came to dwell within, The stronger than the strong man, Who saves me now from sin; ’ Twas life I got, not theory, His voice I did obey, And entered in by Jesus— God’s only way.
|
|
|
Post by getreal on Jul 12, 2023 0:36:06 GMT -5
My lord this is tortured. It is a parable. The Bible is largely parables. A story teaching a simple truth. The inevitability of sin. Our mind knows what we should not do, and we do it anyway. My mind tells my hand to write neatly, but my hand fails. My mind tells my hand to draw a perfect circle, and my hand fails. Adam and Eve were always going to fail. Why would anyone need redemption otherwise. Sometimes we work these passages to death. If it was that hard, how would anyone or everyone get it. The Bible is just a tool for those who can read. The basic truths of life are available to everyone including those who can’t read or reason. Do you think all your labor is going to wrest some truth unavailable to anyone else who doesn’t labor like you. Take a step back. Reason less. Just be taught people.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Why
Jul 12, 2023 2:54:44 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2023 2:54:44 GMT -5
Imo that's as far off the mark as Christianity has become. Revelevant questions for the religion Christianity yes but doesn't make a whole lot of sense when the context of original intent and culture is considered. It's sad that many Atheists quote the erroneous dogma of bible literalist/fundamentalists. It seems that the warped theology of bible literalist/fundamentalists is really good at creating Atheists. Everyone is responsible for their own soul, quit trying to blame others for whatever someone might do or react too...
|
|
|
Post by chuck on Jul 12, 2023 2:56:37 GMT -5
Imo that's as far off the mark as Christianity has become. Revelevant questions for the religion Christianity yes but doesn't make a whole lot of sense when the context of original intent and culture is considered. It's sad that many Atheists quote the erroneous dogma of bible literalist/fundamentalists. It seems that the warped theology of bible literalist/fundamentalists is really good at creating Atheists. Its been a couple thousands years in the making. I really have no problem with Atheists, I think they are the same as Christians ect ect, they bleed red. The annoying bit is with the information we have available today the Atheist is just as likely as ignorant as the Christian on the history and culture of the scriptures. I mean the very first image portrayed in that video about standing before God. Western minds conceptualise that as a actual person standing before an actual God whom by the way is also conceptualised by our creative imagination to be the biggest most powerful thing it can imagine existing. Hence the man upstairs in the clouds...... And then the atheist rightly refutes that image but stops there and never considers that may not actually be what it was talking about to begin with so they are stuck on the same spectrum but just at the other end of it arguing back and forward. The idea standing before God could mean a host of other things but for some reason the literal physical aspect of it is by default the only one considered in general by both parties. Maybe the Hebrew people did actually believe they were going to stand before God who knows, but from all the evidence God was never a existent thing you physically stood before in his presence to begin with, heck even calling God a "he" is off the mark as it instantly inserts a image of the only thing we can conceptualise which is a person standing before a bigger person or thing of great power. The Hebrew people likened to the word G O D as a influence, not a existent thing that we physically stand before..... The words in scripture are like art, they tell a story, your story and my story, people for some reason cant get past the form of the picture..... The moral of the story is in simple terms is make the gracious compassionate slow to anger and abounding in love and forgiveness character(LORD) your G O D(number 1 influence) and that will give you the best chance to navigate life successfully. The story of fundamentalist in simple terms is, there literally is a big guy in the sky watching you and he just so happened to commit child sacrifice and the blood from that sacrifice somehow washes away all your badness so long as you do the rituals and if you don't do the rituals your the devil incarnate and he will burn your sorry a$$ and because he hates you I can hate you as well cos he's my God........ I get why the atheist reject it I really do.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Why
Jul 12, 2023 2:58:01 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2023 2:58:01 GMT -5
It's sad that many Atheists quote the erroneous dogma of bible literalist/fundamentalists. It seems that the warped theology of bible literalist/fundamentalists is really good at creating Atheists. Its been a couple thousands years in the making. Start your own "I've fixed it all" church and take your sycophants like Fixit with you...
|
|
|
Post by chuck on Jul 12, 2023 3:41:00 GMT -5
Its been a couple thousands years in the making. Start your own "I've fixed it all" church and take your sycophants like Fixit with you... Why would I do that, in 100yrs it will look like yours............
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Why
Jul 12, 2023 6:04:14 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2023 6:04:14 GMT -5
Start your own "I've fixed it all" church and take your sycophants like Fixit with you... Why would I do that, in 100yrs it will look like yours............ Chuckism was established within days of your coming on TMB, why stop now?
|
|
|
Why
Jul 12, 2023 13:22:44 GMT -5
Post by snow on Jul 12, 2023 13:22:44 GMT -5
They were completely innocent like a baby. They were created in an adult body, but god did not give them the knowledge of good and evil and he didn't want them to even have the knowledge of good and evil. You cannot blame a being of doing something wrong when they have no concept of that and that concept has been withheld from them. 'Eat of that tree and you'll begin to die' isn't a concept that requires the knowledge of good & evil to grasp. Its like telling someone that if they ram their head into a brick wall they'll get a headache. A&E had knowledge, they just hadn't discovered evil until they were disobedient. They hid themselves afterwards, so they knew exactly what they had done wrong. Sin is disobedience to God and evil is the result. The only way you couldn't blame Eve is if she didn't know right from wrong, but from what she told the serpent, she clearly understood God's instructions and was fully cognizant of the repercussions for touching that tree.
They were commanded to not eat from the 'tree of the knowledge of good and evil and are exiled from Eden'. That is how the tree is described. That they would not have the knowledge of good and evil, right or wrong until after they had done the deed.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 12, 2023 13:26:33 GMT -5
Imo that's as far off the mark as Christianity has become. Revelevant questions for the religion Christianity yes but doesn't make a whole lot of sense when the context of original intent and culture is considered. It's sad that many Atheists quote the erroneous dogma of bible literalist/fundamentalists. It seems that the warped theology of bible literalist/fundamentalists is really good at creating Atheists. If you read the bible as it actually reads and don't do any interpreting to make it something that sounds better, then who could not become an atheist? What I don't understand is why people have decided that the bible didn't mean how it actually reads? Actually I do understand. Everyone would be an atheist if they did that. The difference is that atheists read it as it stands and realizes just how unlikely that the god of the bible actually exists and how it is more the beliefs of an ancient tribe that didn't know better.
|
|
|
Why
Jul 12, 2023 13:33:24 GMT -5
Post by snow on Jul 12, 2023 13:33:24 GMT -5
My lord this is tortured. It is a parable. The Bible is largely parables. A story teaching a simple truth. The inevitability of sin. Our mind knows what we should not do, and we do it anyway. My mind tells my hand to write neatly, but my hand fails. My mind tells my hand to draw a perfect circle, and my hand fails. Adam and Eve were always going to fail. Why would anyone need redemption otherwise. Sometimes we work these passages to death. If it was that hard, how would anyone or everyone get it. The Bible is just a tool for those who can read. The basic truths of life are available to everyone including those who can’t read or reason. Do you think all your labor is going to wrest some truth unavailable to anyone else who doesn’t labor like you. Take a step back. Reason less. Just be taught people. If the christian god actually exists he definitely set up his creation to fail. How else could he require forgiveness from sins if no one ever sinned. He literally had to torture his son on the cross to redeem his failed creation. I agree if we take god out of the equation that it's just a story about how humans mess up and sometimes they mess up so bad that there are permanent consequences. That humans suffer for the mistakes they make. To interpret it as a god that needed a failed humanity in order to be able to redeem them, just makes that god into a manipulative monster imo. Thankfully I think that it's highly unlikely any gods actually exist.
|
|
|
Why
Jul 12, 2023 13:37:45 GMT -5
Post by snow on Jul 12, 2023 13:37:45 GMT -5
It's sad that many Atheists quote the erroneous dogma of bible literalist/fundamentalists. It seems that the warped theology of bible literalist/fundamentalists is really good at creating Atheists. Its been a couple thousands years in the making. I really have no problem with Atheists, I think they are the same as Christians ect ect, they bleed red. The annoying bit is with the information we have available today the Atheist is just as likely as ignorant as the Christian on the history and culture of the scriptures. I mean the very first image portrayed in that video about standing before God. Western minds conceptualise that as a actual person standing before an actual God whom by the way is also conceptualised by our creative imagination to be the biggest most powerful thing it can imagine existing. Hence the man upstairs in the clouds...... And then the atheist rightly refutes that image but stops there and never considers that may not actually be what it was talking about to begin with so they are stuck on the same spectrum but just at the other end of it arguing back and forward. The idea standing before God could mean a host of other things but for some reason the literal physical aspect of it is by default the only one considered in general by both parties. Maybe the Hebrew people did actually believe they were going to stand before God who knows, but from all the evidence God was never a existent thing you physically stood before in his presence to begin with, heck even calling God a "he" is off the mark as it instantly inserts a image of the only thing we can conceptualise which is a person standing before a bigger person or thing of great power. The Hebrew people likened to the word G O D as a influence, not a existent thing that we physically stand before..... The words in scripture are like art, they tell a story, your story and my story, people for some reason cant get past the form of the picture..... The moral of the story is in simple terms is make the gracious compassionate slow to anger and abounding in love and forgiveness character(LORD) your G O D(number 1 influence) and that will give you the best chance to navigate life successfully. The story of fundamentalist in simple terms is, there literally is a big guy in the sky watching you and he just so happened to commit child sacrifice and the blood from that sacrifice somehow washes away all your badness so long as you do the rituals and if you don't do the rituals your the devil incarnate and he will burn your sorry a$$ and because he hates you I can hate you as well cos he's my God........ I get why the atheist reject it I really do. I reject all gods as being manmade. Curious, do you believe in the Christian/Jewish/Muslim god? And if you do, how do you picture that entity or sentience if you wish to define it as such?
|
|
|
Why
Jul 12, 2023 17:38:47 GMT -5
chuck likes this
Post by fixit on Jul 12, 2023 17:38:47 GMT -5
It's sad that many Atheists quote the erroneous dogma of bible literalist/fundamentalists. It seems that the warped theology of bible literalist/fundamentalists is really good at creating Atheists. If you read the bible as it actually reads and don't do any interpreting to make it something that sounds better, then who could not become an atheist? What I don't understand is why people have decided that the bible didn't mean how it actually reads? Actually I do understand. Everyone would be an atheist if they did that. The difference is that atheists read it as it stands and realizes just how unlikely that the god of the bible actually exists and how it is more the beliefs of an ancient tribe that didn't know better. With all due respects, you are reading the bible through the lens of bible literalism/fundamentalism. From your posts it seems to me that you do actually believe a lot of what's important in the bible.
|
|
|
Post by matisse on Jul 12, 2023 19:05:14 GMT -5
It's sad that many Atheists quote the erroneous dogma of bible literalist/fundamentalists. It seems that the warped theology of bible literalist/fundamentalists is really good at creating Atheists. Everyone is responsible for their own soul, quite trying to blame others for whatever someone might do or react too... *quit
|
|
|
Post by getreal on Jul 12, 2023 20:57:47 GMT -5
If you read the bible as it actually reads and don't do any interpreting to make it something that sounds better, then who could not become an atheist? What I don't understand is why people have decided that the bible didn't mean how it actually reads? Actually I do understand. Everyone would be an atheist if they did that. The difference is that atheists read it as it stands and realizes just how unlikely that the god of the bible actually exists and how it is more the beliefs of an ancient tribe that didn't know better. With all due respects, you are reading the bible through the lens of bible literalism/fundamentalism. From your posts it seems to me that you do actually believe a lot of what's important in the bible. [br I so agree fixit. I love snow. Ok stop your ears snow as it may go to your head but you have the essence of what the Bible teaches without believing in it which is wonderful. The bible says you can learn the essential truths from nature. An honest wanting to know and be your best self, loving others, will find all arriving at the same place despite looking to different texts perhaps. Those who look to the Bible to defend a religion end up in a wasteland. Feeding on their egos. Hating others. Sad.
|
|
|
Why
Jul 12, 2023 22:04:50 GMT -5
via mobile
musician likes this
Post by chuck on Jul 12, 2023 22:04:50 GMT -5
Its been a couple thousands years in the making. I really have no problem with Atheists, I think they are the same as Christians ect ect, they bleed red. The annoying bit is with the information we have available today the Atheist is just as likely as ignorant as the Christian on the history and culture of the scriptures. I mean the very first image portrayed in that video about standing before God. Western minds conceptualise that as a actual person standing before an actual God whom by the way is also conceptualised by our creative imagination to be the biggest most powerful thing it can imagine existing. Hence the man upstairs in the clouds...... And then the atheist rightly refutes that image but stops there and never considers that may not actually be what it was talking about to begin with so they are stuck on the same spectrum but just at the other end of it arguing back and forward. The idea standing before God could mean a host of other things but for some reason the literal physical aspect of it is by default the only one considered in general by both parties. Maybe the Hebrew people did actually believe they were going to stand before God who knows, but from all the evidence God was never a existent thing you physically stood before in his presence to begin with, heck even calling God a "he" is off the mark as it instantly inserts a image of the only thing we can conceptualise which is a person standing before a bigger person or thing of great power. The Hebrew people likened to the word G O D as a influence, not a existent thing that we physically stand before..... The words in scripture are like art, they tell a story, your story and my story, people for some reason cant get past the form of the picture..... The moral of the story is in simple terms is make the gracious compassionate slow to anger and abounding in love and forgiveness character(LORD) your G O D(number 1 influence) and that will give you the best chance to navigate life successfully. The story of fundamentalist in simple terms is, there literally is a big guy in the sky watching you and he just so happened to commit child sacrifice and the blood from that sacrifice somehow washes away all your badness so long as you do the rituals and if you don't do the rituals your the devil incarnate and he will burn your sorry a$$ and because he hates you I can hate you as well cos he's my God........ I get why the atheist reject it I really do. I reject all gods as being manmade. Curious, do you believe in the Christian/Jewish/Muslim god? And if you do, how do you picture that entity or sentience if you wish to define it as such? The word spelt G O D in the bible is not a description of one particular individual entity or sentience. The question do I believe in God depends on what you think G O D is. I dont think your description of G O D represents what the Hebrew people were talking about. From my understanding G O D is best described as a verb, so to believe in G O D is something you do and I don't want to tell you I am gracious and compassionate ect eft because I know sometimes I am not. Im a fallible human being. I think it's important to understand this.... Exodus 20:2-4 [2]I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. [3]Thou shalt have no other gods before me. [4]Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: In today's understanding the Hebrew writer here is saying.... The gracious compassionate character has brought you out of bondage. You should have no other influences before the gracious compassionate slow to anger and abounding in love and forgiveness character. You should not make that influence into a image(singular) that confines or boxes in this influence. Basically the way you have asked your questions contradicts everything they are saying, this is not me trying to insult you it just what you are saying makes no sense in relation to the intent of the Hebrew writers imo. This is why reading the plain English words with a foundation of western custom and culture leads people to not understand the Hebrew concepts underlying the literature translated into english. An example would be love God before your family, we know what sort of hell has ensued from that but that's what it say's right.... Matthew 10:37 [37]He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. If the Hebrew G O D is the L O R D do you see why you should want to Love that first.....it's not love some entity before your family, it's love those characters traits first before any other character traits of your family that may supress those gracious compassionate character traits. When the Hebrew talked about things like father and son they were not really talking about the form, but rather the character traits, a son was of similar Character to the father, a son was a builder of the family name, and the word "name" means character unlike western culture a name is something a person is know by, two totally different concepts and if you read the plain English words through the lense of your culture you get the existent God in the sky and his existent son on the ground. Form vs function. Hebrews think function, westerners think form. This also is linked to the idea during the time of Jesus about individual responsibility or individual judgement that people commonly mistake for some judgement day in the clouds before a existent God after you die. Back then you were part of a family group, individual responsibility wasn't like we know it today, It was more family oriented which needs to be understood with all the language surrounding family and names in scripture. Couple this together with the gospel writers copying phrases first used by the Romans like "the son of god" in a confrontational in your face kind of way back at the romans. Unless you have some basic grasp of all of these nuanced things a simple reading of the text plants the image western religion has portrayed for far too long into your mind.......
|
|
|
Post by chuck on Jul 12, 2023 22:30:18 GMT -5
If you read the bible as it actually reads and don't do any interpreting to make it something that sounds better, then who could not become an atheist? What I don't understand is why people have decided that the bible didn't mean how it actually reads? Actually I do understand. Everyone would be an atheist if they did that. The difference is that atheists read it as it stands and realizes just how unlikely that the god of the bible actually exists and how it is more the beliefs of an ancient tribe that didn't know better. With all due respects, you are reading the bible through the lens of bible literalism/fundamentalism. From your posts it seems to me that you do actually believe a lot of what's important in the bible. I agree, it's what you do, not the image or form you conceptualise in your head......
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 12, 2023 23:02:57 GMT -5
With all due respects, you are reading the bible through the lens of bible literalism/fundamentalism. From your posts it seems to me that you do actually believe a lot of what's important in the bible. I agree, it's what you do, not the image or form you conceptualise in your head...... You show what you believe by how you live your life. Words are cheap.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 13, 2023 12:32:12 GMT -5
If you read the bible as it actually reads and don't do any interpreting to make it something that sounds better, then who could not become an atheist? What I don't understand is why people have decided that the bible didn't mean how it actually reads? Actually I do understand. Everyone would be an atheist if they did that. The difference is that atheists read it as it stands and realizes just how unlikely that the god of the bible actually exists and how it is more the beliefs of an ancient tribe that didn't know better. With all due respects, you are reading the bible through the lens of bible literalism/fundamentalism. From your posts it seems to me that you do actually believe a lot of what's important in the bible. I only read the bible literally when talking to literalists. I feel it's important to speak to individual groups of believers from where they stand in their belief systems. Personally, I see the bible as a kind of history of the evolution of religious and ethical beliefs. I don't see the bible as literal in any way. I even question that Jesus lived and was more a concept that was a mixture of cultural beliefs that became merged with the Jewish apostles beliefs. Paul imo, brought in the rising dying godman concept to the church and his influence on what direction Christianity went was huge. I believe that without Paul Christianity would have never continued. I'm not even sure that it was Christianity until Paul took it over. The apostles were Jews that still supported the law and circumcision etc. They admonished Paul for teaching a 'wrong' gospel. Anyway, that's a subject that's been beaten to death on here, so that's not relevant to this thread. I do see good in the bible. I don't see it's good parts as unique to the bible. Early religions like Buddhism and even Confucius, the originator of the Golden Rule were good guidelines for how humanity should live, cooperate with each other to enhance the chances of survival with the best outcomes. thehistorianshut.com/2016/11/16/the-golden-rule-is-older-than-you-think/
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 13, 2023 12:37:23 GMT -5
With all due respects, you are reading the bible through the lens of bible literalism/fundamentalism. From your posts it seems to me that you do actually believe a lot of what's important in the bible. [br I so agree fixit. I love snow. Ok stop your ears snow as it may go to your head but you have the essence of what the Bible teaches without believing in it which is wonderful. The bible says you can learn the essential truths from nature. An honest wanting to know and be your best self, loving others, will find all arriving at the same place despite looking to different texts perhaps. Those who look to the Bible to defend a religion end up in a wasteland. Feeding on their egos. Hating others. Sad. I have studied the history of religions and there is good to be found in all of them. There is so much common ground between religions that it's sad that they all view each other with mistrust. Thank you getreal
|
|
|
Why
Jul 13, 2023 12:46:58 GMT -5
Post by snow on Jul 13, 2023 12:46:58 GMT -5
I reject all gods as being manmade. Curious, do you believe in the Christian/Jewish/Muslim god? And if you do, how do you picture that entity or sentience if you wish to define it as such? The word spelt G O D in the bible is not a description of one particular individual entity or sentience. The question do I believe in God depends on what you think G O D is. I dont think your description of G O D represents what the Hebrew people were talking about. From my understanding G O D is best described as a verb, so to believe in G O D is something you do and I don't want to tell you I am gracious and compassionate ect eft because I know sometimes I am not. Im a fallible human being. I think it's important to understand this.... Exodus 20:2-4 [2]I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. [3]Thou shalt have no other gods before me. [4]Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: In today's understanding the Hebrew writer here is saying.... The gracious compassionate character has brought you out of bondage. You should have no other influences before the gracious compassionate slow to anger and abounding in love and forgiveness character. You should not make that influence into a image(singular) that confines or boxes in this influence. Basically the way you have asked your questions contradicts everything they are saying, this is not me trying to insult you it just what you are saying makes no sense in relation to the intent of the Hebrew writers imo. This is why reading the plain English words with a foundation of western custom and culture leads people to not understand the Hebrew concepts underlying the literature translated into english. An example would be love God before your family, we know what sort of hell has ensued from that but that's what it say's right.... Matthew 10:37 [37]He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. If the Hebrew G O D is the L O R D do you see why you should want to Love that first.....it's not love some entity before your family, it's love those characters traits first before any other character traits of your family that may supress those gracious compassionate character traits. When the Hebrew talked about things like father and son they were not really talking about the form, but rather the character traits, a son was of similar Character to the father, a son was a builder of the family name, and the word "name" means character unlike western culture a name is something a person is know by, two totally different concepts and if you read the plain English words through the lense of your culture you get the existent God in the sky and his existent son on the ground. Form vs function. Hebrews think function, westerners think form. This also is linked to the idea during the time of Jesus about individual responsibility or individual judgement that people commonly mistake for some judgement day in the clouds before a existent God after you die. Back then you were part of a family group, individual responsibility wasn't like we know it today, It was more family oriented which needs to be understood with all the language surrounding family and names in scripture. Couple this together with the gospel writers copying phrases first used by the Romans like "the son of god" in a confrontational in your face kind of way back at the romans. Unless you have some basic grasp of all of these nuanced things a simple reading of the text plants the image western religion has portrayed for far too long into your mind....... That is truly interesting. But I have to ask if the current Jews believe what you just wrote or have they also lost the meaning? Where did you learn that interpretation? When the Hebrews became monotheists didn't they make their god of war Yahweh into their 'one true God'? Historically they worshiped as polytheists. So I'm not sure how that fits with what you wrote? I definitely like your interpretation of words because it makes more sense to me as an atheist. That they were talking more about concepts rather than worshiping a God. I just don't know if I buy that they didn't actually worship 'formed' entities and then later one 'formed' entity called Yahweh.
|
|