Moses was High
- Started
- Last post
- 285 Responses
- ********0
Gramme/Telos.
Stop it, you're making me look like an ass. This is going on your permanent record.
- gramme0
In response to the blog Blue posted that discusses polytheism in Judaism:
First of all, I am not convinced that this guy is saying the Jews were polytheistic; in fact, he says that they had their one God, Yahweh (the same God the Father I've been discussing ad infinitum). Old Testament writers acknowledged that people worshipped other gods. They even acknowledged at times that some of those gods were actual spirits; but they are described as demons, not as gods, and they are always shown to be much lesser in power than Yahweh.
The blog writer (this Daniel guy) mentions several passages that he believes to bear up his points. I will address them one by one.
Genesis 31:30-34.
Laban had caught up to Jacob and demanded of him: "But why did you steal my gods?" Jacob replied "But if you find anyone who has your gods, he shall not live" although he didn't know that Rachel had taken the gods. [Here we have Jacob recognizing Laban's gods]—First of all, Daniel assumes that Laban is a Hebrew. This is not the case. Laban was a pagan, separate from the house of Isaac. He worshipped man-made idols of wood or stone, which Rachel stole form her father's house. This example held up by Daniel is thus a strawman and makes no reference to any Hebrew God but Yahweh.
Exodus 20:3
(The first commandment): You shall have no gods before me. [The gods of other nations are recognized, and the same in the next 2 quotes]—OK...so Moses acknowledged that other nations had other gods. Big deal. They are written, and the original Hebrew bears this up, as lowercase gods. Other gods are discussed throughout the Bible. This is no secret, and this is not swept under the rug in any church I've ever attended. Either those gods were demons, or they were entirely baseless, inanimate, powerless man-made creations of wood or stone or metal.
Exodus 31:14
Do not worship any other god, for the LORD (Yahweh), whose name is Jealous, is a jealous god.—First of all, the passage is actually in Exodus 34, but whatever. So, God (Yahweh) calls himself Jealous. OK, so he gives himself multiple names. He is obviously referring to himself. This is fine and in accord with his triune nature. My other point w/ this passage is the same as above: The mention of other gods is the same as elsewhere. He simply says the Hebrews should not worship any other gods. This is not polytheistic, it is only an acknowledgment that other people outside Judaism followed other gods.
Exodus 23:24-25
Do not bow down before their gods or worship them or follow their practices. You must demolish them and break their sacred stones to pieces. Worship the LORD (Yahweh) your god...—This guy is digging a grave with his own shovel. This verse again reinforces that the Hebrews were monotheistic and were commanded to not only be true to Yahweh alone, but to demolish the idols of other nations.
Deut. 10:17
For the LORD (Yahweh) your god is god of gods and lord of lords, the great God, mighty and awesome, [Yahweh is the chief god, like Zeus]—This verse means that all other gods are subservient to Yahweh. Whenever the Bible refers to other gods in lowercase, the meaning in the original Hebrew is dead gods, entities that are either demons (i.e. fallen angels, who were servants, not gods) or are entirely figments of men's imaginations. This verse, like others, reinforces the real God as supreme over the fake gods.
1 Sam 5:2-3
Then they carried the ark into Dagon's temple and set it beside Dagon. When the people of Ashdod rose early the next day, there was Dagon, fallen on his face on the ground before the ark of the LORD (Yahweh). [Here is one of a number of competitions between Yahweh and the other gods showing that Yahweh is greater, but in so doing recognizing the other gods.]—Dagon is no secret. Scholars have speculated that he was one of a number of entities that Canaanites worshipped, who was a real being – a demon, perhaps even an arch-demon. There is no mention anywhere in the Bible that this Dagon or any other god ever did anything for anyone who worshipped him. He commanded them to sacrifice their children in the temple fires. That was his contribution to the lives of the Canaanites. However, his idols were made of stone, by men. So, the Hebrews carried the holy ark into Dagon's temple. The stole representation of Dagon fell flat on its face. This is in my opinion a funny and slapstick display of God's sovereignty over all other gods.
The name Yahweh is not mistranslated into THE LORD. The name was so sacred, so holy, that the Hebrews did not even speak it out loud – they only wrote it, and even then our modern pronunciation is speculative since written Hebrew lacks vowels (they wrote the name as YHWH). In speech, they called Yahweh The Lord, Elohim, Adonai (true, this is a generic term meaning 'Lord', but when they were referring to Yahweh it is always unmistakable).
Our blogger Daniel says that people saw God, in spite of the apostle John's words "No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known." (by the way, the 'One and Only' here is referring to Jesus, which is obvious if you read the rest of the chapter). Daniel uses a passage from the book of Daniel as his source:
Daniel 7:9
"...the Ancient of Days took his seat. His clothing was as white as snow; the hair of his head was white like wool...",—The ancient of Days is Jesus, this is made plain in the book of revelation. Like Yahweh, Jesus has many names. Think of a powerful and illustrious king, who has many titles that describe his exploits. Jesus, the Ancient of Days, has appeared in the flesh – unlike Yahweh the Father – and Daniel got a foretaste of this in his visions. Our blogger uses Isaiah, Amos and Job as further evidence – but these passages are also referring to Jesus Christ, they are actually just a few of the many Old Testament foreshadowings.
In Genesis and elsewhere, God is referred to as Elohim, a plural name. This plural name is a reference to the Trinity. He also says elsewhere "Let us make man in OUR image". This means that the Trinity was not a New Testament concoction, but that it stretched into eternity – it's even mentioned in the very first passages in the Bible. This is not evidence that there is more than one God, because they are described as being in perfect concert – thus, the three-in-one nature of God.
In closing, there is no forced harmony with church dogmas and Greek polytheism. Greek gods were very human, they displayed flaws, they could be corrupted and killed. God, Yahweh, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, Elohim, The Holy Trinity...whatever name you choose, this God is different from all others. He is sovereign, immutable, indestructable and perfect.
These so-called passages of support for supposed Jewish polytheism are in reality confirmation of the One True God.
- Stop already.********
- what would jesus do in this case?sea_sea
- Stop already.
- gramme0
Jebus:
People post false teachings, misunderstandings, they ask questions – should I let these things lie? If someone asks me a question, if they want my take on things, should I not answer? Sorry my friend. I can't just shut up and put up while people totally misconstrue the core messages of my faith.
I say go ahead and do what you feel compelled to do – but hell if I don't try to clear things up for people who obviously want to get to the bottom of things.
By the way...there are many things I don't understand. Some questions I can't answer. I'm not any smarter than you guys.
On that note, my brain is fried. Have a restful weekend, everyone.
Cheers,
grammep.s.—Blue, I know I owe your email a reply if you're still reading.
- teleos0
Gramme: Well put two posts above. It is hard to sort thru all of the elephant hurling and ad hominem nonsense here, especially with the sophomoric and simple mrdobolina around. But you seem to always be able to do it. Great job of showing how the Bible, from the very start, delivers a strong monotheistic theme. Of course someone like blueOne may shout that it was retroactively manipulated to appear this way, but such an accusation would demonstrate utter ignorance for how the Torah came to be.
blueOne:
You lost all credibility be linking infidels.org. LOL! You should know better. C'mon, man. Talk about a site that consistently spews nonsense that no-one takes seriously. You're going to have to do better than that. Further, your blasting McDowell and Geisler because they are Christians published by Christian publishing houses is nothing more than an ad hominem. And it's silly; who else do you expect to have defend the Bible's scholarship and publish such defenses!?Mimio:
I haven't read Friedman's book. Looks like one I need for my collection. Since you're terribly open-minded and intellectally honest, let me recommend you now read the following:
http://www.amazon.com/Origin-Bib…
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Scri…
http://www.amazon.com/Bible-Tran…By the way, Mimio, you don't get more scholarly than FF. Bruce.
http://scholar.google.com/schola…though Metzger comes close...
http://scholar.google.com/schola…
- teleos0
oooops!...
Isaiah 43:10 -
10 "You are my witnesses," declares the LORD,
"and my servant whom I have chosen,
so that you may know and believe me
and understand that I am he.
Before me no god was formed,
nor will there be one after me.
- ********0
- TheBlueOne0
"who else do you expect to have defend the Bible's scholarship and publish such defenses!?"
Archeologists, Hebrew scholars, Historians. Silly me, I think using a christian apologist to make a christian point that's consistent with a point you "believe" again violates the scierntific and academic concept of Independent Validation. But I expect that now fomr a liar and idealogue like you. Kiss my ass. You just keep believing in your hollow fake god. See you sucker.
- I am more than happy, when I have the time, to compile the long list of archeologists, historians, etc...teleos
- ...who's findings support the Biblical account. Trust me, it is an impressive list.teleos
- I've already provided you with a couple (Josephus being one of the more noteworthy).teleos
- Keep in mind that evidence you find in books like Geisler's, comes from all...teleos
- ...manner of sources from all manner of fields. But you wouldn't know because...teleos
- ********0
the christian belief in this thread sounds like the result of learned intellectual formulations rather than direct revelation--what good is that?
- Rand, I'd say that at least in my case it's both. Head knowledge is useless if it doesn't change the heart.gramme
- mrdobolina0
teleos you are so condescending, how do you expect anyone with or without faith to treat you? This is not what Jesus taught, is it? You just seem so fake to me, you taslk about this religion of love and all you ever do is talk about how stupid everyone else is. Gramme seems very sincere in what he talks about, although I may disagree with him, at least he is sincere and honest in talking about his faith. you on the other hand are a fucking asshole about it. I thought christians were supposed to be kind. Don't bother bringing up my attitude or behavior, I do not subscribe to your belief system and should not be judged by it. But you profess to be a christian and all I ever see from you is condescension and just being an outward dickhead to people. How does this square with your faith? I'd really like to know.
- molo0
"This thread needs more drugs", said Moses. And the slaves rejoiced.
- ********0
Gramme and Telos have the art of copy and paste down pat.
- Khurram0
exactly gramme. This is beyond your so called "sins". Which are quite pathetic and tawdry in the grand scheme of things. This is about YOUR state of mind, as simple as that. You might obsessively think that there was something "special" something particular about your youthful rebellion, but newsflash - there really wasn't.
i've already laid it out, and i'll do it again, the nature of your cult. Even if you had led the most perfect unobjectionable (boring) life - this in the eyes of your cult and it's propogators would not absolve you as a "sinner". Nothing less than full indoctrination into the religion and the adoption of it's absolutism would be enough. So ultimately, you lising all these "sinful" things that you did - is MEANiNGLESS. The only real sin you were guilty of, was not accepting the cult of Christ.
Mate - i COULD NOT GiVE A FUCK about "sin". A meaningless immaterial nothing concept. i know no sin or sinners. No good or bad. No right or wrong. That only things that i hold are my values. My values your values. Values i adopt and values i discard. THESE are my compass - not your "perfect" God.
is that self-centred and self-serving? You bet it is. i wouldn't have it any other way. You could quote me all the biblical rhetoric you like, but nothing will take away from the fact that i know - *i* am the source of all my values and my "morals". That it's the material working of my brain and it's interaction with society and human culture that straddles 100,000 years that makes me who i am, and HOW i FEEL. There is nothing more.
bro i can respect your point of view, but end of the day, that is all it is. if abortion moves you more than global warming, then fair play to you. But that's just YOUR point of view (or at least a point of view you adopt from religious men who tell you how to think and feel). i see chaos in the world, i also see the beauty. i see things for what they are, and you know what? i ain't THAT bad. Sure there's fucked up shit - but it was always thus. And, in fact, in our age where the self is the source of all knowledge and power, we have steered ourselves into a world that is far more just and far more egalitarian than when fortress Christendom imposed its paradigm, and men of religion ruled over us. Christ, i would NEVER wanna go back to a time of Christian acsendency *shudder*.
To paraphrase Nietzchse "the lack of objective standards of truth motivates self created standards and criteria. it's an active form of existence. i possesses a store of creative energy and power which allows me to impose personal meaning on the world while never forgetting that i am the the source and progenitor of that meaning. i am heroic in this sense, facing the world with courage and purpose."
i know that infantile people like you and all other Christians can't deal with this responsibilty. They need a "sacred" moral code handed down from their fathers. Me, i'm not like that. For i am a warrior....
- JesusChrist0
Uh,... Guys?
Let it go, seriously.
Don't make me smite you. I haven't smate anyone in a long ass time.
- ********0
Impostor.
- pango0
i don't know about you guy, but this made me feel a bit better about religion. i used to hate it but now i see we have something in common.
what's next? Jesus was actually a black woman? that will be awesome!
- play0
arguing about religion has never ended up well.
- religion has no place inside the QBN, just like facts have no place within organized religionplay
- amenplay
- gay-menmrdobolina
- So...if religion has no place here, why do these threads regularly go well over 100??gramme
- Seems to me there's a thriving market for the discussion here.gramme
- gramme0
Khurram, you are correct about the only unforgiveable sin, that is rejecting Christ even at the end of one's life.
Why exactly is it that you can't accept the fact that I and many other Christians are actually quite capable of thinking for ourselves, and do so on a daily basis? Because I have a moral compass that is bigger than me does not make me a sheep. It does not make me weak. Rather, it shows that I understand my place in the grand scheme of things. I know that using my own personal moral compass without any other sort of grounding will lead to chaos and death. Show me a person for whom total moral objectivity works, for whom it provides order – show me a world that benefits from such standards (or lack thereof), and I will show you a person, and a world, whose very existence is predicated upon a vast web of lies, self-deceit, and pride. It's where we're all headed if we insist on offering anything of worth to God besides our brokenness. We are so dead-set on making at least some small contribution to our salvation. When you alone steer the ship, you end up lost. I think of Marie Antoinette, whose last words were "Nothing tastes."
Interesting that you quote Nietzsche, the poster child of nihilism. Now that's a real joyful outlook, let me tell you... What a sad ass that guy was. Brilliant, but a misguided man nonetheless.
I heard a great analogy today about salvation. Say you're at someone's birthday party. Everyone is congratulating the birthday boy or girl for being born. "What an excellent job you did, getting conceived and entering the world through your mother's womb!" "I like that thing you did with the whole fetus turning into an adult thing. Brilliant work, you really knew how to get born."
As asinine as this analogy sounds, this is how much we are able to contribute to our own salvation. We are stuck in the mud and cannot pull ourselves out. To say we have anything good enough in us to satisfy God's justice is like saying we make some sort of contribution to being born. Thankfully God, much like the doctor with his forceps, is able deliver us from our own suffocating placenta of death and self-destruction.
- ********0
See - there it is...the only "unforgivable sin is rejecting Christ"..
Why ? So at the end of your life an apparition appears and says "I am Christ - do you accept me ?"....And I answer - well, what do you mean ?, and he says "only I can wash away your sins, so that you can continue your consciousness in a nice place, and things will be groovy"..and I say "Well WHY ? - I mean, thanks for the offer, as generous as it is, but those things I did while alive that I regret - I'll be responsible for those. I did it, I realised then that it was wrong - looking back - I was young, angry, misguided, in a bad mood, I just didnt understand..I tried to correct it where and when I could, I feel badly for some of it, but then again I don't hold any grudges against anyone that had sinned against me - I forgave them, so all in all I really don't think theres a massive karmic debt that I owe the world - I left it better than I found it to the best of my enlightened ability - if there's anyway that I am obliged to correct these mistakes then I will gladly do so, but again - thanks for the offer, but its MY burden to carry...and what with YOU being God incarnate, honestly I owe you SO much for the wonderful life I've had in this fantastic world that it would be rude of ME as your guest to expect you clean up. I'll do that, and I'm happy to do so - what do you say ?"..
According to your view, Gramme - this is NOT possible, and that can ONLY be a deliberate construction of the world...a slewing of the goalposts - if it is deliberately constructed that there is NO WAY I can possibly make good everything I have done, then that's really kinda fucked and mean.
I am perfectly willing to try to correct what I have done wrong, referred to in your posts as 'MY sin', but if Im not even given a chance to do that, and have to dump this onto someone else to clean up, then I am not even being given an opportunity to be fully responsible for myself, and I have NOT been granted the freedom and love to be myself in the world that the apparant 'illusion' of freewill seemed to give me. Theres just no way I could have done it, I was never free, and so I was never loved if all along the game was rigged so that I could NOT be this perfect person (according the moral code). I was on a string the whole time, and a string not of protective oversight (kids get cancer, horrible things happen to innocent people), but of the inability to ever become what I strived for. If I was MADE imperfectly, deliberately, and even upon recognising that I was imperfect, never given the chance to LIVE perfectly, and more importantly be entirely RESPONSIBLE for myself, then frankly I do not want what is offered - my 'redemption'.
Tell you what, I'll forgo that, and take another job - correcting other people's 'sin', I will give up my place in this 'heaven', in order that other people can achieve their everlasting happiness, and I will gladly do this for their sakes - it's a rigged game, it's not their fault - but I cannot be so disingenuous as to play along and dump my responsiblities on you, please - if you love me so much then at least grant me the freedom to be myself, as anyone who has ever had a child grow to adulthood very painfully learns to accept.
- CALLES0
so was he high?
- gramme0
miko—
All our regrets for our mistakes and valiant repairs are absolutely useless. "I was young", "I was misguided", "I was angry"—these are all cop-outs. So, having "accepted responsibility" for your mistakes, how would you intend to shoulder than burden? What do you think the penance would be for all of your mistakes, if you were a relatively good person? Would you really spend an eternity in agony and let someone else take your place in heaven? Would you rather just stubborn yourself to death than accept an unwarranted gift of clemency?
The debt we owe to the world is far eclipsed to the debt we owe to God. Your attitude about sin, and the responsibility your bear, shows me that you really do not understand the severity of sin, the debt we all owe to God that cannot be paid without his grace. Do you really think you can apologize it away? How exactly would you envision justice to be carried out? In order for God to shove aside his requirement for justice, he would need to cease being God. There are only a few things God can't do: he cannot sin, he cannot even be in the presence of sin, and he cannot cease to be God.
Because God does not want to spend eternity without us, he offers grace. What would really be mean would be if he required us to shoulder the burden of our own mistakes. That would mean that no one would be allowed into heaven. You tell me, which scenario is worse?
God did not deliberately make man imperfect. Man, having the ability to choose between good and evil, chose evil in the beginning. While subsequent generations did worship God, they carried the poison of death, the seed of corruption that was sown by the first man. Evil, to paraphrase Augustine, is not a thing as much as a twisting of an existing thing; the fact that it has been introduced into the created order is our fault, not God's fault.
So then, the very logical question you raise at the end of your post above is, if I may summarize: "Why the hell does God allow evil and fallen nature to continue? If he is God, and if God is all-knowing and all-powerful, why did he allow evil to exist in the first place? Why has it been allowed to persist for so long? It seems the game is rigged, we either fall to our knees and repent, or we stay on our feet in hell forever. Some choice!"
I hear your objection, and I understand. Really. This is something I struggled with for a very long time. I am sorry to say that I do not have a clear answer for that one. This is all I know on the subject: Based on what I read in Scripture, what I've heard and seen in the lives of others, and what I know in my own life, God is good. He is the archetype, the original model of love, grace, patience, and power. He knew me before I was made. He knew what path your life would take before he formed you, even though he gave you the ability to make decisions rather than pull you about like a cosmic puppet. He has some plan that will ultimately be the best plan there could ever be for the healing of mankind. Some of that plan has already been revealed. I have come to see it as rather pointless to speculate on the whys and wherefores of suffering in the world. I am simply grateful that there IS actually a way out.
I know this answer will seem feeble to you and others, miko. I do not mean to discredit the profundity of pain in this world. I am sorry that I do not have answers for everything. I truly wish I did.
You mention parenting. Have a look at the story of the prodigal son in Luke 15:11–32. I think it's the most poignant picture of parental love I have ever seen.
- *2nd paragraph: far eclipsed BY the debt we owe God, I meant to say.gramme