- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Today many Christians view God as an omiscient, omnipotent, benificent, being that is beyond human defintion or understanding. In the Old Testament, however, God, is limited, speaks directly to people, has very human emotions, plays favorites with certain ethnic groups, desires sacrifices, and even makes mistakes just like other old mythic gods from Osirus to Odin.
In Genesis-6, “The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. So the LORD said, “I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth—men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air—for I am grieved that I have made them.”
Here we see God feeling pain and regret and saying he is sorry he did something.Also Genesis – 6, ”And Noah built an altar unto the LORD, and took of every clean beast and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.
And the LORD smelled a sweet savor; and the LORD said in His heart, “I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake, for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.”
Here it is indicated God is pleased with burnt offerings.In Genesis 18 we actually have Abraham not only talk to God, but negotiate with him.
In Genesis 32 Jacob actually wrestles with God who apparently appears as a human.
In Exodus God clearly has a particular people (Jews) and goes to great lengths even unto killing the first born of an entire nation (Egypt) to help then.
In Exodus 20 he explicitly states he is a jealous God and will curse future generations of people who revile him.
So here we have a god of a particular group of people (Jews) who speaks directly to men, appears to them, shows regret, pain, jealousy, wrath and vengeance. This very much sounds indeed like our Greco-Roman or Norse myths.
Even the Persian Zarathustran's had, a better description of God, which they claimed was the great unmanifest creator. They viewed The Almighty God as neither dealer, nor a buyer or a seller, and one that does not need to be flattered by his creatures but rather the supposed initiator of justice, kindness, and truthfulness that guides his creatures to the same principles. Perhaps the Essenes or similar Jewish sects came into contact with these beliefs and decided to graft them on and adapt them to their existing traditions and nomenclature.
From The Pagan heritage of Humanity
- Anthropology and Pagan tradition tell us that this way of life continued for thousands and thousands of years, but with the advent of animal and plant domestication, everything began to change. Man began to look to the cycle of the Sun to guide him through his agricultural year and it is from this era that most of our calendars are based, a solar year divided by 13 months (more moon cycles). This seems benign enough but as agriculture began to turn tribal/nomadic societies into extended/settled societies, the priorities in life also began to change. What was the most important thing to insure the success and prosperity of an agricultural society? Land. And how does a society obtain Land? They take it from other Peoples. And how do they do this? War!!! In time the birth of a child and human life itself was no longer embraced as Sacred and Divine. The gentle Gods of Life gave way to the masculine Gods of War and Death. And how did Warriors appease the Gods of War? They killed something, human or animal, and spilled its blood on the altar. The act of killing, in its own right, became holy, a sacrament to the Gods. What a horrific change this must have been for those who still worshipped in the old ways! We should here remember what was the first thing that the God of Abraham promises. Land (Genesis 15). And the greatest test of Abraham’s faith was to spill the blood of his own son upon the altar (Genesis 22). Though God ultimately stays the hand of Abraham, the story enlightens us as to the accepted religious practices of the age. It is into this age that Asho Zarathushtra is born (but let us come back to Zarathushtra a little later).
There is good evidence that many of the ancient Jewish Festivals, which have long been celebrated in commemoration of biblical events, were originally seasonal festivals, Solar or Lunar in nature. Examples of this transformation are: the Feast of the Tabernacles, originally Sukkot, a harvest festival, now associated with the Exodus from Egypt; and Purim, also associated with the Exodus but originally celebrated on the first full moon after the Spring Equinox.
It was probably natural for Primal Man, in his attempt to understand the workings of his natural environment, to explain them in the terms most accessible to him, human terms. It is easy to see why references such as “the Voice of God” or “the Hand of God” became the norm in describing the Creator. Even Zarathushtra, in the midst of his rebellion against Paganism was unable to avoid this practice, referring several times in the Gathas to the “hand” of Ahura Mazda. But as the Old Gods of Pre-Gathic times (Mithra, Anahita, Verethregna etc.) crept back into the Aryan pantheon, this natural anthropomorphism would give way to an understanding of the Gods as completely man-like. This concept of the nature of God would later be inherited by Jews and Christians and become canonized in Holy Scripture, “And God said, ’Let us make Man in our own image and after our own likeness’” (Genesis 1:26).
Quote (Cato @ Mar. 14 2008,05:45) Today many Christians view God as an omiscient, omnipotent, benificent, being that is beyond human defintion or understanding. In the Old Testament, however, God, is limited, speaks directly to people, has very human emotions, plays favorites with certain ethnic groups, desires sacrifices, and even makes mistakes just like other old mythic gods from Osirus to Odin.
Cato,As you progress through the history of the OT, the Jews begin to change their view of God. At first, He was very human-like and tribal. But as they went through and emerged from the exile, God became less personal and more aloof. In fact, there are some books out there that attempt to outline that God was less involved in the Hebrew faith over time. So that view of God is likely one that influenced the character of “God the Father”, a silent partner to Jesus.
I think that in Jesus, people were wanting a return of a personal, human-like God. They accomplished through the person of Jesus. Jesus, in many ways, became the original God of the OT.
Kj,
As you know many religions have their exoteric and esoteric forms. If you view Kabbalah as an esoteric form of jewish thought (and by Kabbalah the older traditional form not the Madonna pop culture cult form) they have quite a different take on God then the OT, he is more of a force then an anthropomorphic superman. Most of the more mystical takes on God place him on the side of being beyond any true human understanding which is why we have more human like intermediaries, for they being limited, can be better comprehended.
Hi cato,
You say
“In Genesis 32 Jacob actually wrestles with God who apparently appears as a human.”On the basis of Jacob's opinion??
Gen32
24And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day.25And when he saw that he prevailed not against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of Jacob's thigh was out of joint, as he wrestled with him.
26And he said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, except thou bless me.
27And he said unto him, What is thy name? And he said, Jacob.
28And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed.
29And Jacob asked him, and said, Tell me, I pray thee, thy name. And he said, Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name? And he blessed him there.
30And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.
31And as he passed over Penuel the sun rose upon him, and he halted upon his thigh.
32Therefore the children of Israel eat not of the sinew which shrank, which is upon the hollow of the thigh, unto this day: because he touched the hollow of Jacob's thigh in the sinew that shrank.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 18 2008,06:35) Hi Stu,
It will be. Jesus does. We follow Him.
Is it possible to see god or not?Stuart
Hi Stu,
I am sure those with Him in heaven can see Him.
But there are no perishable human bodies in heaven.Nick,
God, according to the OT, has many characteristics similar to both pagan gods and humans which I find troubling. A God capable of creating the entire universe would be above the petty emotions and concerns attributed to the Almighty in the OT. For reasons stated, I can not accept the descriptions, for it limits God and makes him less then he obviously is, which is why I view much of the OT as myth and allegory rather then a literal truth.Hi cato,
Men find many strange and varied reasons for removing the foundations from under their house.Actually, those who believe that God is above petty human emotions such as anger and wrath and the desired to be worshiped likely have a stronger foundation than those who accept that He has many of these same selfish human emotions.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 19 2008,05:59) Hi KJ,
Designer gods are very popular.
They fulfill our every expectation.
Since we cannot know anything definite about your god (you cannot demonstrate that the bible really is 'his word' and in any case that book says that you cannot see god, um except for the bits that say you can), the only definite thing that can be said is that people have invented their personal gods. The concept you hold of god is not a pleasant one. Why invent a miserable god? Do personal gods take on the personality (or an alter ego) of each believer?Stuart
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 19 2008,06:33) Hi KJ,
The sacred writings reveal our God.
We cannot tamper with that revelation.
But is was OK for early christians to tamper with historical writing to make their stories seem more credible? It was OK for Saul of Tarsus to reinvent Jesus in the way he unquestionable did?Stuart
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 19 2008,07:08) Hi Stu,
Really?
Then you must be the holder of real truth?
I posted this:But is was OK for early christians to tamper with historical writing to make their stories seem more credible? It was OK for Saul of Tarsus to reinvent Jesus in the way he unquestionable did?
How does your answer above relate to it?
Stuart
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
