group discussion


54 views

topic: A Question About Genesis





Comments (showing 1-23)    post a comment »
dateUp_arrow    newest »

message 23: by Nathan (new)

42379 There was a whole section on why it says "us" when God speaks.

Yes, and the answer is: Most ancient religions were polytheistic.


message 22: by Abby (new)

2289756 I read a devotional a little while ago called "God and His Ways" by Bryan Smith and Coart Ramey. There was a whole section on why it says "us" when God speaks.


message 21: by rgb (new)

538288 Jill wrote: "Ana wrote: "this is not a spelling bee."

It's not even English."


To be charitable Ana Diaz may not be a native English speaker, and I probably wouldn't sound much better in Spanish. But spelling and grammar aside, the content of your statements, Ana, is still incorrect. This isn't a game. There are no witches. There are no demons. There is no Devil. I'm open minded about God, but whether or not there is a God, the Bible is contradicted by many matters of fact and is certainly not divinely inspired truth from cover to cover, which makes it rather likely that the whole thing is a mix of stories, legends, a bit of history, and a whole lot of myth. Not something to be taken seriously, nor something that should be taken to be a source of moral truths or perfections.

rgb


message 20: by Nathan (new)

42379 this is not a spelling bee

Ana,

It may not be, but I certainly wouldn't trust someone who would get kicked out of one on the first word to help me answer the all important questions of the world. It always cracks me up the way some people think that all that matters is the "truth" they can find in the Bible. They think, "It doesn't matter if I am dumb and ignorant of the way the world works as long as I believe in Jesus and the Bible."

Well, Jesus isn't real and the Bible is a pile of bullshit stories. It does matter if you are dumb or not, so try your best not to be.


message 19: by Jill (last edited Jun 06, 2009 08:01PM) (new)

1345249 Ana wrote: "this is not a spelling bee."

It's not even English.


message 18: by Ana (new)

2011360 this is not a spelling bee.


message 17: by Ana (new)

2011360 u kno something.u re right my GOD is all powerful for defend himself.So i i dont hav do it 4 him.BuT JUSt be careful.like God exist Devil too.incluse magic,withches nd demon.nd if u not re carefull.u dont in wat re u getting into.u even evr kno wat re talking about.read the bible dont made u cristian,just made u somebody who read it.nd u even can understand wat re talking about.so just be careful.cause if u dont kno how 2 paly this game.dont played


message 16: by Dan (last edited Jun 06, 2009 05:03AM) (new)

40101 hey let me tell u something guys.u dont have any idea wat re u talking about.So just be careful in things tat u dont understand liked this one.So if u do me a favor can un please shut up!!!we re talking here about mu God(Dios)nd he is almighth enough 4 defensed himself.
so just be quiet.If u doesn't kno wat re u talking about
thank u


Translation:


Hey, let me tell you something, guys. You don't have any idea what you're talking about. So just be careful discussing things you don't understand, like this topic. Could you do me a favor and please shut up? We're talking about my God (Dios), and he is mighty enough to defend himself. So, just be quiet if you don't know what you're talking about.

Thank you.


Your logic is horrible. God is powerful enough to take care of himself, and can deal with literally anything, and so, you have to take care of him by telling us to stop talking about him, because apparently he can't deal with that himself. God is all powerful, but is simultaneously caused grave injury by discussions on an Internet forum. No, you're right, that makes perfect sense.


message 15: by Nathan (new)

42379 hey let me tell u something guys.u dont have any idea wat re u talking about.So just be careful in things tat u dont understand liked this one.

First of all, you can't even spell, so don't begin to lecture the intelligent in the room about intelligence.


message 14: by rgb (new)

538288 Ana wrote: "He must really miss it. I'm gonna make God happy. Now where can I find an unblemished lamb on a Tuesday night...
u unrespectful.if u dont belived tat doesn't mean tat u hav the right 2 judged it.u..."


Actually, yes it does. Precisely the way you would (and I have no doubt do) judge satanic rites involving killing goats and dancing naked around a fire before falling to in an orgy. We would both consider this somewhat silly and hard on goats, not to mention uncivilized and superstitious.

The difference is that you consider your superstitious beliefs not to be superstitious, only other people's. And as far as I know, not even orthodox Jews still kill doves and sprinkle their blood all over the altar, slaughter whole cattle and burn their parts in a specified order on the altar, cut the throats of unblemished lambs, slice open their chest cavities, and remove their ribcages so that can wave fresh bloody ribs at the sky to please God. All of which is described as being pleasing to God -- he loves it, especially the savory smoke of burning animal flesh. That's why Cain slew Abel, after all. Abel was an animal farmer, and God liked burning meat. Cain only raised grain crops. God didn't like offerings of burned wheat, so he favored Abel, making Cain so jealous that he slew Abel.

It all makes perfect sense, right? As much sense as slaughtering random people because they burn incense (also detailed in the Old Testament) -- God hates the smell of incense. Only burning meat, not burning wheat.

Surely you want me to follow the directions given in the Old Testament for making God happy? Jesus commanded that his followers obey the Old Testament Law, which clearly includes these burned and wave sacrifices. I trust that you regularly perform these rituals?

Also note that if in fact your God is almighty enough to defend himself and he actually exists and he cares about people mocking the obvious barbarity of burning animals to make him happy, the obvious stupidity of waving pieces of meat at him (in a ritual way) to make him happy, then he can always:

* Appear in person (as Jesus) or in any other form he wishes and tell me himself. He's All Powerful! Surely this is easy for him. If he says shut up in person, I assure you, I'll shut up.

* Zap me with lightning. Very traditional. Look, it's raining outside. I'll even go outside in a bit and make it easy for him. Not easier -- one can't make anything easier for an infinitely powerful being -- and well, I suppose everything is easy so it's just as easy for him to smite me with lightning as I sit here.

* Any of an infinite number of other things. As you say, he can defend himself, although I can't imagine an infinite being considering anything I do to be an attack, any more than a primitive microbe on Mars can bother me.

Of course, you and I both know perfectly well that nothing at all is going to happen to me. Jesus didn't show up. No burning bushes or angels appeared. And no lightning. I'm not being disrespectful when I point all this out, I'm just pointing out facts that you know as well as I. You aren't "respectful" of Greek or Roman mythology (at least not as a religion). You treat it as a mythology. Superstition. Belief in gods and goddesses that don't exist, people performing rituals such as human sacrifice to the winds that were wicked acts no matter how religiously motivated they were. What, exactly, is the difference between these mythologies and yours?

rgb


message 13: by Ana (new)

2011360 He must really miss it. I'm gonna make God happy. Now where can I find an unblemished lamb on a Tuesday night...
u unrespectful.if u dont belived tat doesn't mean tat u hav the right 2 judged it.unrspectful


message 12: by Ana (new)

2011360 hey let me tell u something guys.u dont have any idea wat re u talking about.So just be careful in things tat u dont understand liked this one.So if u do me a favor can un please shut up!!!we re talking here about mu God(Dios)nd he is almighth enough 4 defensed himself.
so just be quiet.If u doesn't kno wat re u talking about
thank u



message 11: by Nathan (new)

42379 Now where can I find an unblemished lamb on a Tuesday night...

Not in Alabama. They are all "blemished" there I bet.


message 10: by rgb (new)

538288 And don't forget, there were a number of murderous sprees recorded where they slaughtered members of their own tribe for worshipping the wrong God, or worshipping the right God the wrong way.

I seem to recall that Jehovah had a real dislike for incense, and would do things like set you on fire if you used any. But he really liked those burnt offerings and those wave offerings. Cut out the liver, wave it just right. God loved that.

He must really miss it. I'm gonna make God happy. Now where can I find an unblemished lamb on a Tuesday night...

rgb


message 9: by Nathan (new)

42379 Kill them all, steal all of their possessions and their virgin women for use as sex slaves

And all because they worshipped the wrong god.


message 8: by rgb (new)

538288 Nathan wrote: "I hate to tell you guys but it says "us" because the myth of Genesis is likely adapted (poorly) from a previous polytheistic religion. The concept of the Trinity doesn't even come close to enterin..."

Yeah, sort of like later on where Genesis talks about all the sons of God that are running around the landscape, and where God talks about the Jews not having any other Gods. There were lots of Gods at the time. Wars between peoples were always wars between the Gods of those peoples. The entire Old Testament carries on to no end about that, with God targeting a whole list of tribes by name for genocidal elimination a la Numbers 31 -- genocide, infanticide, rape and murder. And theft, of course. Kill them all, steal all of their possessions and their virgin women for use as sex slaves.

rgb




message 7: by Nathan (last edited May 19, 2009 05:39PM) (new)

42379 I hate to tell you guys but it says "us" because the myth of Genesis is likely adapted (poorly) from a previous polytheistic religion. The concept of the Trinity doesn't even come close to entering into the Bible until a lot later and is invented by different authors.


message 6: by Henric (last edited Feb 02, 2009 10:29PM) (new)

1983742 Courtney wrote: "Didn't want to distract the Debate topic too far from it's goal, so I decided to make a new topic for my question.

Anyways, Genesis 1:26 says "Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after..."


Actually, Rabbi Harold Kushner suggests exactly that - that G-d is speaking to the animals, and that would, from a theistic perspective explain that Human has both a spiritual and physical component. G-d simply asked the animals to pitch in their physical and instinctual traits, while He provided the spiritual traits.

It is highly improbable that the text is using "Elohim" to designate some sort of trinity or polytheistic idea. Rather the "Eloh-im" is used in the singular plural used in Hebrew to indicate infinity, vastness, beyond human scope, as in hashamayim (Heaven) and mayim (Water/Sea


message 5: by Eric▲ (new)

1530271 they refers to God Jesus The Holy Spirit


message 4: by fini (last edited Feb 01, 2009 02:49PM) (new)

Nophoto-u-25x33 The Hebrew name Elohim is plural. Literally; "In the beginning Gods, He created the heavens and the earth." One God with three persons in what is called, God.


message 3: by deleted member (new)

Yes. The Trinity: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit...


message 2: by Ashleigh (new)

1560899 "They" refers to Jesus and the Holy Spirit.


message 1: by Courtney (new)

1234855 Didn't want to distract the Debate topic too far from it's goal, so I decided to make a new topic for my question.

Anyways, Genesis 1:26 says "Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth."" according to the version I am looking at, and my question is, who is this "us"? Surely, he is not talking to the animals? So then, someone/thing else? When were THEY created?

I found this unusual, and was wondering if anyone had an explanation to offer.


back to top

unread topics | mark unread