Bible/Yaweh attrocitie thread

[3 to be 4]

two great minds think alike.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Grogan, I've gone so far here as to say, I am not a biblical literalist. Actually, beyond that, even those who think they are literalists are not; it is all a matter of emphasis and interpretation, in which everyone who reads the bible is engaged. So no, I do not believe the bible is a compendium of literal truths.

I'll also go so far as to say that the Hebrew bible is a collection of different stories and traditions, often -- to my thinking -- relating much more than a simple face-value reading can reflect. I think there are contracting documents in it, such as some of the "specs" for the Temple; stories you would tell to kids; historical chronicles; epics of popular memory (like the Conquest narrative, and the stories of the tribal confederacy); echoes of earlier Bablyonian myths, such as one of the Creation accounts, as well as the story of Noah; and even love poems and stories. We only call it "The bible" because this literature of a whole people was collected and reduced to writing; the Jewish people knew its own moral message and its own law and history, and in exile, needed to reduce all of this to writing, lest the Jews be dispossessed not only of their land, but of their identity. The Canon evolved through about the third century b.c.e., to my recollection, and then was considered set.

My point in this rambling is not that a historical process discounts the value of this book, or makes impossible the notion of divine inspiration.

I am a firm believer rather that, as the distillation of a culture that's existed since the second millenium b.c.e., it would be a hell of a heritage to throw away lock, stock, and barrel. And so I treat that heritage with respect, even as I question it. I suppose I would do the same were I an animist with 3500 years of literature from my culture at my disposal, but that is beside the point. I am not an animist, I am a Jew. The God of the bible is my God, and I count myself as of His people, so naturally the history and stories of that relationship are of great interest to me.

Now, all piety aside, what are the most significant events in the last 100 years, to a Jew? The Holocaust and the establishment of the state of Israel. Think of those events in relationship to the Conquest narrative.

The Conquest of Canaan can not be read by a modern Jew without very unsettling results; it is, as you say, replete with commandments to Genocide (commandments that, according to later railing prophets, we just weren't good enough at.) Still, how can the generations after the Holocaust not ask these questions?

And similarly, the establishment of Israel in the wake of the Holocaust, can only remind us of these same stories. This time, the Jews attempted at every turn to establish a state specifically in cooperation with other inhabitants of the region. The result, of course, was more threats of extermination, more pogroms, more bitter rancor, more war.

I will draw no conclusions; I don't think reading the story of Joshua is a very good idea as a "Road Map to Middle East Peace." I will say, though, that I am happier to have that part of myself available, along with the many many more palateable messages in Judaism, in forming Jewish responses to ongoing Jewish history.

I'll end only with this: Judaism's grown and flourished into a faith in which these questions -- the Conquest narrative, for example -- must be pondered. At one time long ago, I sense this same people viewed the Conquest as akin to the Dolphins' 1972 season. We were 7-0 dude, 8-0 if you include Egypt. Well, now our understanding is more nuanced - and I value having the stories of that time, regardless of the accuracy of the details.

That very growth since that time is something I thank God for, just as long-suffering Pats fans can appreciate the Super Bowl years that much more, for having spent so long wandering in the proverbial wilderness. I can't claim this to be some aspect of Divine Purpose, Grogan. I am just gladder to have the history of my people in my hands, than not to have it, despite the problems regarding literal historical truth, and problems with the central morality, especially during the Conquest.

Keep questioning, Grogan. It's what Job does, if you'll recall. To many, the story of Job is the story of learning humility in the face of God.

What the story tells me is that Job knows he is a righteous man. He wants only his day in court (in fact, the formula "gird up your loins like a warrior," is a legal formula akin to "Oyez oyez, comes the plaintiff..." etc.) Job was a lawyer by trade.

And look at what he thinks of his "Friends," who come to console him by trying to figure out what he did to piss God off.

Finally, look how Job's friends fall away at the end, having falsely defended God, as if God needs defending: that's the part of Job I really appreciate. True, God's answer is "I'm bigger than you," more or less. God tells Job there are limits to his intellect and the sweep of his understanding. But we see clearly that Job's friends, who don't argue with God, are portrayed as asses for attempting to defend Him on false pretenses.

So anyway, I gather you've parted ways with the whole biblical ball of wax; again, my idea of God is more concerned with how people act toward one another, than with some sort of celestial Skinner box. We may disagree, and we may read the bible differently, or you may just ditch it altogether. What matters is the moral core of good men and women, not that their doctrines align.

That, and beating the Bills.

PFnV

 

[3 to be 4]

I say you lost him in the middle of the second paragraph somewhere.

 

[grogan2767]

It's funny, cause essentially you don't believe ****. Please forgive my swearing, I have been resisting for years.

I like your posts. You basically don't believe the Bible,no matter how you wrap it. Most Christians, likely 3 to 4 as well, think you are going to suffer for ALL eternity FOREVER and EVER. It really doesn't matter if I jettison the whole thing, and you think some of it is worth something. We both are ******* doomed according to 3 to 4. The Good News? The Good News is it is Bull ****!

Grogan, I've gone so far here as to say, I am not a biblical literalist. Actually, beyond that, even those who think they are literalists are not; it is all a matter of emphasis and interpretation, in which everyone who reads the bible is engaged. So no, I do not believe the bible is a compendium of literal truths.

I'll also go so far as to say that the Hebrew bible is a collection of different stories and traditions, often -- to my thinking -- relating much more than a simple face-value reading can reflect. I think there are contracting documents in it, such as some of the "specs" for the Temple; stories you would tell to kids; historical chronicles; epics of popular memory (like the Conquest narrative, and the stories of the tribal confederacy); echoes of earlier Bablyonian myths, such as one of the Creation accounts, as well as the story of Noah; and even love poems and stories. We only call it "The bible" because this literature of a whole people was collected and reduced to writing; the Jewish people knew its own moral message and its own law and history, and in exile, needed to reduce all of this to writing, lest the Jews be dispossessed not only of their land, but of their identity. The Canon evolved through about the third century b.c.e., to my recollection, and then was considered set.

My point in this rambling is not that a historical process discounts the value of this book, or makes impossible the notion of divine inspiration.

I am a firm believer rather that, as the distillation of a culture that's existed since the second millenium b.c.e., it would be a hell of a heritage to throw away lock, stock, and barrel. And so I treat that heritage with respect, even as I question it. I suppose I would do the same were I an animist with 3500 years of literature from my culture at my disposal, but that is beside the point. I am not an animist, I am a Jew. The God of the bible is my God, and I count myself as of His people, so naturally the history and stories of that relationship are of great interest to me.

Now, all piety aside, what are the most significant events in the last 100 years, to a Jew? The Holocaust and the establishment of the state of Israel. Think of those events in relationship to the Conquest narrative.

The Conquest of Canaan can not be read by a modern Jew without very unsettling results; it is, as you say, replete with commandments to Genocide (commandments that, according to later railing prophets, we just weren't good enough at.) Still, how can the generations after the Holocaust not ask these questions?

And similarly, the establishment of Israel in the wake of the Holocaust, can only remind us of these same stories. This time, the Jews attempted at every turn to establish a state specifically in cooperation with other inhabitants of the region. The result, of course, was more threats of extermination, more pogroms, more bitter rancor, more war.

I will draw no conclusions; I don't think reading the story of Joshua is a very good idea as a "Road Map to Middle East Peace." I will say, though, that I am happier to have that part of myself available, along with the many many more palateable messages in Judaism, in forming Jewish responses to ongoing Jewish history.

I'll end only with this: Judaism's grown and flourished into a faith in which these questions -- the Conquest narrative, for example -- must be pondered. At one time long ago, I sense this same people viewed the Conquest as akin to the Dolphins' 1972 season. We were 7-0 dude, 8-0 if you include Egypt. Well, now our understanding is more nuanced - and I value having the stories of that time, regardless of the accuracy of the details.

That very growth since that time is something I thank God for, just as long-suffering Pats fans can appreciate the Super Bowl years that much more, for having spent so long wandering in the proverbial wilderness. I can't claim this to be some aspect of Divine Purpose, Grogan. I am just gladder to have the history of my people in my hands, than not to have it, despite the problems regarding literal historical truth, and problems with the central morality, especially during the Conquest.

Keep questioning, Grogan. It's what Job does, if you'll recall. To many, the story of Job is the story of learning humility in the face of God.

What the story tells me is that Job knows he is a righteous man. He wants only his day in court (in fact, the formula "gird up your loins like a warrior," is a legal formula akin to "Oyez oyez, comes the plaintiff..." etc.) Job was a lawyer by trade.

And look at what he thinks of his "Friends," who come to console him by trying to figure out what he did to piss God off.

Finally, look how Job's friends fall away at the end, having falsely defended God, as if God needs defending: that's the part of Job I really appreciate. True, God's answer is "I'm bigger than you," more or less. God tells Job there are limits to his intellect and the sweep of his understanding. But we see clearly that Job's friends, who don't argue with God, are portrayed as asses for attempting to defend Him on false pretenses.

So anyway, I gather you've parted ways with the whole biblical ball of wax; again, my idea of God is more concerned with how people act toward one another, than with some sort of celestial Skinner box. We may disagree, and we may read the bible differently, or you may just ditch it altogether. What matters is the moral core of good men and women, not that their doctrines align.

That, and beating the Bills.

PFnV

 

[grogan2767]

This from the dude who thinks the Bible is the Word of a supreme being. Dumb ****.

I say you lost him in the middle of the second paragraph somewhere.

 

[grogan2767]

>>I'll end only with this: Judaism's grown and flourished into a faith in which these questions -- the Conquest narrative, for example -- must be pondered. At one time long ago, I sense this same people viewed the Conquest as akin to the Dolphins' 1972 season. We were 7-0 dude, 8-0 if you include Egypt. Well, now our understanding is more nuanced - and I value having the stories of that time, regardless of the accuracy of the details.

I like your posts. However, putting a defenseless infant to death by the sword, by the thousands likley, is digusting, disgraceful, and simply no god ordered it. Do you think God ordered it? 3 to 4 HAS to believe it because that is the way Christians are. When I have asked Christians this question, they actually say something like "Hey, He can send them to Hell, he can do whatever He wants". Insane!!!!!!! How could he be Omi-benevolent?

Out of fairness, I was a Bible thumping, Born Again Christian. However, I just was ignornant of much and buried the rest, becasue I didn;t want to let go of my supernatural imaginary friend Jesus.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Grogan, this is a perception you and 3toB seem to share of me, that I don't believe the bible one iota. I think in this, you may be united by Christian upbringing (forgive me for saying so, of course, I'm not just doing it to piss you off.)

The notion that a belief is not grounded in literalism is railed against within the same belief system you have jettisoned.

The belief system of fundamentalist Christianity makes much of an attempt at literalism. Other belief systems acknowledge interpretation. Orthodox Judaism insists on no such literalism, and heterodox forms of Judaism allow even greater latitude (from some points of view, in fact, too much latitude.)

Having been raised around Christians (and vocal ones at that,) I came close to internalizing this literalist point of view, before I (like you) realized it was utter bull****.

The key is realizing that literalism in this regard is a lot like the Lewis "trilemma" 3toB keeps trotting out.

Literalism is an attempt to frame a debate, to the benefit of dogma over truth. If the questions cannot be answered, for the literalist, you have two choices: Accept God and accept that it is your own fault you don't get Him (grovelling more in the process); or, accept that you are at odds with God, and therefore Satan-bait (at which point you must once again grovel about not understanding, PLUS probably subject yourself to some sort of exorcism.) I have seen this really mess with people's heads.

My belief is that I've chosen to accept the notion of God, and I neither have nor require proof. I cannot defend God through a false argument of "intelligent design" or what have you. God just is for me, though God may not be, in the minds of others. I do not claim to have proof, yet I cannot in all honesty say I do not pray in moments of danger, or after the death of a friend. Though perhaps a human "design flaw" (irony intended,) I think a religious urge is inevitable in an organism that knows of its own demise. For me, spirituality is only in question as something I accept or shut away, not as something that does not exist. But again, that is a personal view, and not objectively proveable.

I "don't believe ****," in the sense that I don't have rock solid ideas of something which, by all our admission, we aren't really sufficient to pin down, for example, the personality and desires of God, or the disposition of the souls of the dead. I do believe that choosing to believe has a great deal of value to me. I do believe in the morality core to the Torah, as I personally read and define it. I am happy to be in a tradition that rewards that search rather than tries to square it with the answers given by an authority.

And I think of my spirituality as something I do, and something that's deeply ingrained in me, not as something I need anyone else to accept.

Probably for you, that all distills to me "not believing ****," a response I'm used to around here.

But being a man of great faith in the notion that I believe, I'll reserve the right to differ

PFnV

 

[grogan2767]

As far I'm concerned, you can believe whatever you want, except believing that everyone deserves to be tortured forvever for not beleiving the same thing as you. However it is important to note that the Bible is a man made nightmare.

Grogan, this is a perception you and 3toB seem to share of me, that I don't believe the bible one iota. I think in this, you may be united by Christian upbringing (forgive me for saying so, of course, I'm not just doing it to piss you off.)

The notion that a belief is not grounded in literalism is railed against within the same belief system you have jettisoned.

The belief system of fundamentalist Christianity makes much of an attempt at literalism. Other belief systems acknowledge interpretation. Orthodox Judaism insists on no such literalism, and heterodox forms of Judaism allow even greater latitude (from some points of view, in fact, too much latitude.)

Having been raised around Christians (and vocal ones at that,) I came close to internalizing this literalist point of view, before I (like you) realized it was utter bull****.

The key is realizing that literalism in this regard is a lot like the Lewis "trilemma" 3toB keeps trotting out.

Literalism is an attempt to frame a debate, to the benefit of dogma over truth. If the questions cannot be answered, for the literalist, you have two choices: Accept God and accept that it is your own fault you don't get Him (grovelling more in the process); or, accept that you are at odds with God, and therefore Satan-bait (at which point you must once again grovel about not understanding, PLUS probably subject yourself to some sort of exorcism.) I have seen this really mess with people's heads.

My belief is that I've chosen to accept the notion of God, and I neither have nor require proof. I cannot defend God through a false argument of "intelligent design" or what have you. God just is for me, though God may not be, in the minds of others. I do not claim to have proof, yet I cannot in all honesty say I do not pray in moments of danger, or after the death of a friend. Though perhaps a human "design flaw" (irony intended,) I think a religious urge is inevitable in an organism that knows of its own demise. For me, spirituality is only in question as something I accept or shut away, not as something that does not exist. But again, that is a personal view, and not objectively proveable.

I "don't believe ****," in the sense that I don't have rock solid ideas of something which, by all our admission, we aren't really sufficient to pin down, for example, the personality and desires of God, or the disposition of the souls of the dead. I do believe that choosing to believe has a great deal of value to me. I do believe in the morality core to the Torah, as I personally read and define it. I am happy to be in a tradition that rewards that search rather than tries to square it with the answers given by an authority.

And I think of my spirituality as something I do, and something that's deeply ingrained in me, not as something I need anyone else to accept.

Probably for you, that all distills to me "not believing ****," a response I'm used to around here.

But being a man of great faith in the notion that I believe, I'll reserve the right to differ

PFnV

 

[shmessy]

Anyone else think that this Grogan2767 fella is not exactly on the level?

 

[grogan2767]

How am I not on the level? EVRYTHING I told you is the truth. What do you think I am lying about?

Anyone else think that this Grogan2767 fella is not exactly on the level?

 

[shmessy]

How am I not on the level? EVRYTHING I told you is the truth. What do you think I am lying about?

Given your previous posts, your posts that have been deleted in the past from the fan forum (re: she-males, homosexuals,etc), the truly offensive tone you're taking tonight, it's quite obvious what you are.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

We cross-posted.

I can only understand the bible by taking it as it was written, as the product of its times, many stories written in different styles for a variety of reasons, imbued with a common moral core. The thought does evolve, and the questions inherent in one time are treated in another. At one time, Israelites are killing off Canaanites mercilessly; at another, Jonah is sent to the Assyrians -- the very people who have just scattered the Northern kingdom -- to tell them to stop being wicked. Not to convert them, mind you; not to make them Jews (God's "chosen,") not to punish them for destroying Israel -- simply to tell them to stop being wicked (to each other.)

In this later work, the point of the story is clearly universal behavioral virtue; not behavioral virtue among Jews, but among all humans. Right behavior is necessary for all... and prophecy turns out to be conditional. The Ninevites do mend their ways, and they are not destroyed.

This is far from the point of view during Conquest period, when the local Canaanite populations are being "exterminated." (though it appears that never got achieved.)

The laws of the ancient theocracy were the laws of the ancient theocracy; the story about Elija/42 kids/she-bears could well have been a story to scare kids into respect. You can not square the details of stories from different traditions (Northern/Southern kingdoms, for example,) without jumping through some hoops.

But the point regarding the proponderance of what we'd now just never accept being ordered by God himself bears examination and deserves an answer. My answer would sound to you like a passel of rationalizations; certainly I'd never answer that this is "okay" because of some consideration of eternal reward/punishment.

And it's been tempting for me, too, to abandon the whole kit and kaboodle based on the troubling passages.

I can only say I did not.

I understand where you're coming from here. It's interesting that 3toB was born to Jewish parents, and is now our foremost proponent of the type of Christianity you've been in for decades. And you're our foremost opponent thereof.

Anyway, I don't like to go too deeply into my own beliefs, or the Torah itself, on these boards. It gives people fodder to dishonor the beliefs and the scriptures, which I believe must be read with respect, but also with questioning. Between you and 3toB, we have the makings of a pretty good Jew, it seems. Pity you're not two sides of one mind (unless of course you are... stranger things have happened on line.)

PFnV

 

[3 to be 4]

For the record, kudos to Shmessy for seeing beyond any agenda and calling ugly behavior what it is.
we've had our differences but that showed me some real character and I didnt want it to go unrecognized.

 

[shmessy]

For the record, kudos to Shmessy for seeing beyond any agenda and calling ugly behavior what it is.
we've had our differences but that showed me some real character and I didnt want it to go unrecognized.

Amen, whatever differences we have, there's absolutely no room on a civilized website for wanton abuse.

 

[gomezcat]

Given your previous posts, your posts that have been deleted in the past from the fan forum (re: she-males, homosexuals,etc), the truly offensive tone you're taking tonight, it's quite obvious what you are.

It would be interesting to know if grogan's IP address matches anyone else's..

 

[grogan2767]

Who else do you think I am?

I have never posted on this site with a differnent name.

Everything I say about Christianity and the Bible is true.

It would be interesting to know if grogan's IP address matches anyone else's..

 

[grogan2767]

Hey Gomezcat,

I am not any other name on this board.

Also, what the heck would it matter even if I were? Without a doubt, the most offensive things that I have posted on this site, ARE the horrible scriptures themselves.

3 to 4 actually thinks it's some kind of "truth" beacon when people are offended by the name of Jesus. That is stupid. people are offended because the followers of Jesus erroneously teach that ALL human kind is utterly depraved, and utterly incapable of being anything but children of the Devil. AND that we ALL deserve an eternity of torture in Hell for the sin of being born. (original sin, I.e. Adam and Eve's sin, is enough to send us to Hell. It is so awful and wrong)

I originally came here to talk about the Pats. Couldn't believe the foolish Fundy Christian crap on this site.

-former Fundy Christian who has awoken to reality. (Spent 22 years believing in Jesus, but now can't because it is horrible. Christians are "discipled" to basically fall in love with Jesus well before they know what is in the Bible. They are too in love with "him" when they start to learn how awful the fake God in the Bible is (Angry, Bitter, Destructive, Killing Babies, Burning people alive, ordering the Isrealites to Kill babies, sending female Bears to rip children apart, threatens great wrath to the Israelites IF they show mercy to the Canaanites, and on and on and on)

It would be interesting to know if grogan's IP address matches anyone else's..

 

[3 to be 4]

Im not even convinced you ever were a Born again Christian, Grogan. Discipleship training involves not only having read the Bible, but going beyond that, so I dont know where you are getting this nonsense about being "discipled to fall in love" and then, after say, 22 years, reading the Bible, and finding out how evil God is.

more likely, you're some 18 year old who hates Christians and decided to take the offensive with some imagined personality.

I mean, think about it, if you were a "recovered" Christian, is going around calling people stupid and swearing at them the way Christianity Anonymous goes about its business.

Its been real, but I think, as someone else has alluded to, YOU arent for real.

 

[grogan2767]

You're wrong. I'm 40 years old, AND my deconversion was VERY painful. I have a family and children and it is tough. Any time you want to debate the Bibe that is fine.

I guarantee you I serverd "Jesus" with all of my heart during my walk. I was in Campus Cruscade for Christ, went on missionaries trips, etc.

You are a typucal brainwashed Christian. "There is no such thing as an Ex-Christian, they must have never been one in the first place!" You have no idea how many former born agains there are.

I have not lied once in this board. You can say anything you want, but you are wrong when you make such claims about me.

I already know that I know more about the Bible, theology, discipleship, etc than you. You are a lightweight Christian as far as I'm concerned.

Im not even convinced you ever were a Born again Christian, Grogan. Discipleship training involves not only having read the Bible, but going beyond that, so I dont know where you are getting this nonsense about being "discipled to fall in love" and then, after say, 22 years, reading the Bible, and finding out how evil God is.

more likely, you're some 18 year old who hates Christians and decided to take the offensive with some imagined personality.

I mean, think about it, if you were a "recovered" Christian, is going around calling people stupid and swearing at them the way Christianity Anonymous goes about its business.

Its been real, but I think, as someone else has alluded to, YOU arent for real.

 

[grogan2767]

Also, you protest too much. You know I'm right, that is part of your problem. All Christians are suppressing truth. Your brain actually wants you to question things, but you force it not to. You KNOW in your heart that Hell is rediculous.

You are right about one thing. I never was a "born again" Christian as CHristians think. But you know what, neither were you!! Because it is not real. YOU are not a born again Christian, because there are NONE! At least not in the way you think. All being a Born Again means is that is the paper religion you are choosing to follow. There is no real relationship with CHrist. I have already explained this to you.

I am going to keep you from harming people here. People need to be prevented from going into the cult in the first place.

Im not even convinced you ever were a Born again Christian, Grogan. Discipleship training involves not only having read the Bible, but going beyond that, so I dont know where you are getting this nonsense about being "discipled to fall in love" and then, after say, 22 years, reading the Bible, and finding out how evil God is.

more likely, you're some 18 year old who hates Christians and decided to take the offensive with some imagined personality.

I mean, think about it, if you were a "recovered" Christian, is going around calling people stupid and swearing at them the way Christianity Anonymous goes about its business.

Its been real, but I think, as someone else has alluded to, YOU arent for real.