What if God isn't what we say He is.

[Mr. Peterman]

I know that a lot of people seem to hate God because they hate what is written in the Bible among other things. The Bible can be shown to have contradictory elements and a lot of the time can be shown to just be political propaganda. There are many places in the Bible where a man has attempted to use God's authority to push their own agenda. So if God probably didn't say those things (and you can probably come up with a good reason why some man did), why be mad at God. And certainly, if God doesn't exist, nobody should try to be mad at some imaginary god, the way some of you seem to be, but maybe it only seems that way. Anyway, I've just been studying the Bible and I'm trying to find things in the Bible, actually the Torah, that either add to or subtract from the credibility of the document. I just started this thread so that people could post what they find to be ridiculous or credible in the Torah, and maybe the New Testament as well, and maybe read between the lines and tell everyone specifically how they think the writer would benefit from his writings by using the name of God. In short, tell me what you really think was going on, when they wrote what they did. I'm going to start with Leviticus. Does anyone know how they would benefit from so many sacrifices. Why did they only want them done at the tabernacle? And why did they want a Sabbath?

[Chacmool]

I know that a lot of people seem to hate God because they hate what is written in the Bible among other things.

Nope. I don't hate what is written in the Bible, just like I don't hate what is written in Grimm's Fairy Tales. Talking pigs and sleeping princesses don't offend me in the least.

[Eclogite]

1. I know very few people who claim to hate God.

2. Those who do, do so because of his perceived inaction, not because of what is written in the Bible.

3. You are arguing from a false premise. You assume there are only two options: the Bible is the word of God; people pretended it was the word of God for their benefit. You have ignored the possibility that they were targeting the benefit of their community. Any ritual, including sacrifice, will tend to draw people closer together and help create, or strengthen a sense of identity.

[Zythryn]

Another possible option is that it is a collection of stories that attempt to explain the world and life.

People often will try to explain what they don't understand.

As for hating God, I know of no one that hates God.

[modest]

Nope. I don't hate what is written in the Bible, just like I don't hate what is written in Grimm's Fairy Tales. Talking pigs and sleeping princesses don't offend me in the least.

 

Yeah. I think most people would agree. Like the bumper sticker says, I don't have a problem with God. It's his fan club I can't stand.

 

Also, Mr. Peterman, you should probably recognize,

 

And certainly, if God doesn't exist, nobody should try to be mad at some imaginary god, the way some of you seem to be, but maybe it only seems that way.

 

it makes no more sense to love an imaginary God as to hate him.

 

Anyway, I've just been studying the Bible and I'm trying to find things in the Bible, actually the Torah, that either add to or subtract from the credibility of the document.

 

"much study is a weariness of the flesh" ~Ecc 12:12 :evil: :hihi:

 

In short, tell me what you really think was going on... Does anyone know how they would benefit from so many sacrifices.

 

Because animal sacrifice is so prolific in the ancient world—spanning nearly all cultural and geographic lines—it would be a very good bet that the practice in Judea started well before the Jewish religion. In other words, when Judaism was developing, it needed to explain something that people would already have been doing. The same, I would guess, would be true of the Sabbath,

 

...And why did they want a Sabbath?

 

Working every day of the week sucks. It's not hard to imagine a tradition of a 'day off' developing. When the law was written it naturally needed to explain that. Actually, I get a really strong sense of that kind of thing all through the Torah. The books, especially Genesis, read like an answer to questions that would naturally have presented themselves.

 

For example, where did the Hebrew word adam (which meant 'man') come from? Well, naturally, that's what god named the first man. The stories are like explanations. Why were the Israelites called 'Israelites'. Naturally, there was a guy named "Israel" who had 12 sons who is literally the father of the nation of Israel. When Genesis was first written there certainly were 12 tribes of Israel each of his sons being the father of that tribe.

 

The book is like a series of prosaic explanations of why the world was the way it was. Why do people not work one day of the week: because God didn't work one day of the week. Why are there ruins of a city over here: because God destroyed a city there. Why so many languages: God didn't want people understanding each other so he made the different languages. Why do people have knowledge of good and evil: because people ate from a tree of 'knowledge of good and evil'. It's very prosaic, almost like a parent giving up when a kid asks 'why is the sky blue?'... 'because god made it that way' :)

 

Why did they only want them done at the tabernacle?

 

I believe most of the ancient religions of Mesopotamia were temple-oriented. The tabernacle, I would guess (but have never heard or read this) is a nomadic adaption of a ziggurat. Ziggurats have many things in common with the tabernacle including both being the place that animals are sacrificed.

 

In fact, if you want to know from where and how the traditions that are realized in the pentateuch evolved, reading about the Ubaid period of prehistoric Mesopotamia should be really, really insightful.

 

~modest

[Moontanman]

I see no more reason to hate a non existent God than to love a non existent god. I simply do not believe there is or was one. People hate those who refuse to conform to their standards, hate people who are different. I have always thought this hatred gives them reason to love themselves or at least those who are as miserable as they are. The pagans come closest to a non hatred religion, they do not hate anyone.

[Buffy]

The interesting psycho-sociological issue is that what Mr. Peterman is exposing here--so well brought out by the previous posts--is the strong desire by believers to believe that those who do not agree with their beliefs do so out of a hate for the believer's God.

 

This serves a couple of purposes:

• It increases the cohesion of the group because all of it's members have the notion reinforced that others who do not believe do so out of hate not just for their God but their members as well. "To attack my God is to attack me."
  
• It reaffirms their own faith since the opposite of hate is love, thus the disagreement about the existence or incarnation of God becomes a way to justify their faith in spite of any objections posed by apostates or unbelievers.

 

In that light, what does Mr Peterman's question say about belief?

 

Don't hate me because I'm beautiful, :confused:

Buffy