Blood and the God of life

a reply to: DISRAELI

The plan of moving from A to B to C, and the character that lies behind that plan, has not changed.

Are you sure?

religions associated with A, B and C, seem to be conflicted....

IF blood is life... Isn't life material?

a reply to: Akragon
a) They are not in conflict if they are acting to prepare the way for each other. Like childhood and adulthood.
I think I'm just repeating what I've already said, so we will be probably going round in circles from this moment onwards.

b) Blood is not life. Blood is a symbol of life, used for teaching purposes. That was intended to be the point of the OP.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: Matrixsurvivor
The Biblical God has very clearly given permission to eat; "Every living thing that lives shall be food for you" (Genesis ch9 v3). Either you take seriously what he says, or you don't. There is no point in seizing on one part of it and ignoring another.

I take seriously what the true God has shown me... and it doesn't come from only the Bible. Your conscience is seared to that animals plight... because a BOOK written by men and stamped with "Holy, infallible, and inerrant" has convinced you that turning AWAY from the mercy that should be inside you, and instead justifying killing and eating another sentient being..is a-ok.
TRUE mercy and compassion wouldn't do such a thing. But, since YHWH said to do it (from a book that has more holes in it than Swiss cheese), you do it.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: Akragon
a) They are not in conflict if they are acting to prepare the way for each other. Like childhood and adulthood.
I think I'm just repeating what I've already said, so we will be probably going round in circles from this moment onwards.

b) Blood is not life. Blood is a symbol of life, used for teaching purposes. That was intended to be the point of the OP.

Yea, the biblical god is bloodthirsty. Not a god I want anything to do with. Besides, as "god", don't you think he could have come up with a less barbaric way to teach??

a reply to: Matrixsurvivor

From the Index thread of my "God's Law" series;

Your patient teacher

I am the son of two schoolteachers and the grandson of a third.
I may have mentioned this before.
This provides me with a very accessible analogy for the way God approaches the question of giving laws to the people of Israel.
He behaves like a teacher.

A good teacher is always conscious of the capabilities and limitations of his pupils, and he tries to give them teaching at the appropriate level.
He talks to them in terms which they will be able to understand, and sets out to improve their understanding in gradual ways.
If their reading abilities have taken them to the end of the first of the “Janet and John” books, then he offers them the second book.
If their mathematical skills have taken them as far as adding up and “taking away”, then he might begin showing them how to multiply and divide.
What he’s not going to do is start scribbling Einstein’s equations on the blackboard.
Teaching is not about “zapping” people with instantaneous advanced knowledge (except in science fiction stories).
It is the slow and patient work of gradual training.

We find a similar patience in the way the God of Israel deals with his people.
Thus his intention for marriage was that “a man leaves his father and mother and cleaves to his wife and they become one flesh” (Genesis ch2 v23).
Yet in the Old Testament laws he accepts, for the time being, the practice of divorce, which Jesus blames on “the hardness of their hearts” (Matthew ch19 v8).
And why does God allow them to fall short of the intended standard?
Because their minds are not yet ready for the intended standard.
They are still in training.

He finds this people living in a very patriarchal society, like all the other societies of the time.
Whatever he thinks about this, he does not try to change it at a stroke.
He modifies their behaviour gradually, beginning with some mild restraints on the husband’s power.
He finds them owning slaves, like all the other societies of the time.
Whatever he thinks about this, he does not try to abolish the custom at a stroke.
He modifies their behaviour gradually, providing slaves with some legal protection, and trying to discourage them from enslaving their own people.
He finds them loving their brothers and other kinsmen and encourages them to treat the rest of the nation in the same way.
However, they are not yet ready to extend the concept of “brothers” to the world at large, so that part of the training is postponed for a later stage.
He finds them offering animal sacrifices, like all the other societies of the time.
Whatever he thinks about this, he does not try to abolish the practice at a stroke.
Instead, he gradually changes the meaning of the word “sacrifice”, giving it a more and more metaphorical interpretation, and waiting until the more literal sacrifices can be brought to an end by the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem.
And he finds them engaging in war, just like all the other societies around them.
But in this case, too, it takes time to wean them out of it.

In short, what we see in the laws of the Old Testament, and in the overall history of the Old Testament, is the slow and patient work of gradual training.
God does not “zap”. He teaches.

When modern critics are assailing the laws and the culture of the Old Testament, this is precisely what they are complaining about.
They don’t think God should have been giving his people this patient teaching.
They think he should have “zapped” them , instantly, to a state of spiritual maturity comparable to their own.
If they had been in God’s place (and they would certainly have done the job better) they would have “zapped”.

The God of the Old Testament is much more patient than they are.
He finds his people at the “cuh-ah-tuh-CAT” level of spiritual education, and he lifts them gradually.
A lot of work will be required before they can reach the kind of spiritual heights from which these critics can look down haughtily at the junior versions of themselves.
The fact that God is willing to undertake this slow and patient work is very revealing.
It shows us that God is a teacher.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: DISRAELI

He finds them offering animal sacrifices, like all the other societies of the time. Whatever he thinks about this, he does not try to abolish the practice at a stroke.
Instead, he gradually changes the meaning of the word “sacrifice”, giving it a more and more metaphorical interpretation, and waiting until the more literal sacrifices can be brought to an end by the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem.
And he finds them engaging in war, just like all the other societies around them.
But in this case, too, it takes time to wean them out of it.

Uh, no, he didn't. He actually demanded sacrifices. If one did not bring the necessary sacrifice, they were in deep ca-ca.

In short, what we see in the laws of the Old Testament, and in the overall history of the Old Testament, is the slow and patient work of gradual training.

Alright, then why did YHWH kill the kids who were making fun of Elijah's bald head? There wasn't much patience in that.

When modern critics are assailing the laws and the culture of the Old Testament, this is precisely what they are complaining about. They don’t think God should have been giving his people this patient teaching.
They think he should have “zapped” them , instantly, to a state of spiritual maturity comparable to their own.
If they had been in God’s place (and they would certainly have done the job better) they would have “zapped”.

Well...seems it's not rocket science (if you ARE god) , to say, "DO NOT DO THIS". Are you kidding me? You actually think that "said god" needs to take that much time to get his point across? Then, what the heck were the 10 commandments for? Seriously dude, you are trying to sound scholarly and have only ended up sounding "fundamentally" inept.

The God of the Old Testament is much more patient than they are.

No, he's not. Do you even read the OT?? He didn't have more patience than a nat. BUT....he was sure good at keeping the established "staus quo"...AND adding more on that "his people" needed to adhere to.

edit on 12-1-2017 by Matrixsurvivor because: (no reason given)