All are better than YHWH.
Ba’al, Molech, Chemosh - you name it. All other Elohim in the Bible are better than YHWH from what the Bible tells us about them.
Oh and every human being ever too - every one of us better than YHWH.
no, I'm just going through the source material which is the basis of your belief and pointing out to you some things that may cause you to question whether such a deity is worthy of your worship.
I contend that your acceptance of YHWH - a hostile tribal God of a hostile and megalomaniacal people - is poisoning your spirit and causing you to put bitter (the deliberate murder of children and torment of an innocent man) for sweet (its a blessing for children to die / YHWH was setting Job right in his thinking)
do you agree that YHWHs actions are indistiguishable from any actions the devil might take?
Such as hardening pharoahs heart in order to keep providing himself a justification for sending plagues, culminating in mass child murder - of people and livestock.
Would you say that was more of a godly thing to do, or more of a devilish thing to do?
Please just answer straightforwardly. Take your cue from Jesus here and:
Mat 5:37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.
continuation of dead-ended thread:
YHWH permitted his altar-ego Satan to do that to Job. For a bet/to prove a point. And they both kept holding sitreps on the matter.
Jobs children were killed. Why? Why would an allegedly loving god permit the killing of Jobs children?
And does he really think that giving Job more money is adequate compensation? Why?
And why does he shout at Job after agreeing to all the torment?
On your answer to the devil question, that may be. But give me some examples of things that the devil might do where you could spot it and go aha! That's the work of the devil!
I suspect you know the point I'm getting at - that the tendencies and actions of your god YHWH are indistinguishable from anything the devil himself would ordain or carry out.
psst (whisper it) it's because your god is the evil god. Satan himself masquerading as an angel of light - although his disguise is as the emperors new clothes for some of us... perhaps you might also arise from your stupour and see YHWH's little inch of evil flopping about in all its shame..
YHWH MADE them sacrifice their firstborn (there he goes again with his bloodlust for infants) and then upbraided them for it.
Tell me, what kind of deeds might the devil get up to that you would be able to spot and say 'that's the devil at work'?
And what about Job?
you mean be with YHWH or against him. If the choice were so binary as that, then I would very much choose to be against him.
You say YHWH is not malevolent. I think he clearly is and I have given countless examples throughout our conversation of his malevolence. In fact, even YHWH himself says he is the cause of evil:
Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
His torment of Job, for why again? What about this:
Eze 20:25 I gave them laws that bring punishment instead of life, Eze 20:26 and I let them offer me unacceptable sacrifices, including their first-born sons. I did this to horrify them and to let them know that I, the LORD, was punishing them.
Face it man! You worship the devil!
yeah, I think it's probably best not to conflate these terms.
Gnostic refers to a specific group in and around early Christianity, correct? And this sect (if that's the right term) have their own gospels which are generally considered to post date the synoptics.
The Gospel of Thomas predating or being contemporaneous with the early Christian texts is a fascinating idea and I'm not saying it isn't the case. It could well be. But it still doesn't undo all the other Christian texts which are abundantly evil and deceptive and anti-gentile and which only serve to underpin the OT anyway.
It doesn't move the needle on any of that. Unless, you DO agree that the NT should be thrown out entirely for the sake of the Gnostic gospels.
Can both the canonical NT and the Gnostic texts coexist and complement each other? Or are they irreconcilably opposed in fundamental ways?
YHWH had already selected Jacob though and presumably colluded with him to enact treachery upon his brother. And yet you are blaming Esau
Gen 25:23 And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.
This was before they were born and apparently ordained by YHWH himself.
Why would YHWH look favourably upon Jacob for so treacherously exploiting his brother in such a manner? Perhaps YHWH the clearly evil psychotic deity takes great delight in the treachery and deceit of his offspring and had it all planned from the beginning.
But Esau's to blame, right? Just like the Pharoah is to blame for not letting the Israelites go in the face of all those plagues - even though YHWH deliberately hardened his heart to prevent him from doing so - culminating in YHWH getting to enact one of his favourite judgments: child murder! Kill all the firstborn! Even of the livestock!
His detestation of the firstborn, including Esau, is curious to say the least.
Also, WHY do you have a collective noun for everyone else?
you have a collective noun for those who do not worship the god of Israel, YHWH.
All diverse peoples and religions - no matter how unconnected and disparate they are - are lumped together as though they were one amorphous blob. From the Greek and Roman pantheons through to Buddhists, Hindu's and Zoroastrians through to Yoruba, Aztecs and Mayans to Druids, Norse, Daoism and everything in between.
You have just come to accept the Israelite god as YOUR one true god - despite the fact that he has no place for you unless you are a Jew. And that is fine and totally your prerogative. It comes with the territory of allying yourself to YHWH and his people.
Why did Esau sell his birthright? I believe the story goes that Jacob took advantage of his brothers hunger and only agreed to feed him on the condition he gave up his birthright.
The point about Esau from the post you are responding to though was to show you YHWHs undying hatred for anyone other than Jacob ie Israel. This was in response to you stating that YHWH 'loves me'.
Patently, YHWH detests the guts of anyone who is not Israel or who does not serve Israel and therefore so, presumably, must you.
I strongly disagree with your categorising the world into two groups of people.
‘Pagan’ is a purely Christian term used to lump together everyone who is not Jew/Christian. Similar to goyim and kuffar. It’s a distinctly Abrahamic (ie Jewish) out-group naming convention and not one I subscribe to at all.
I would also challenge your proposition that the alleged creator, YHWH, loves anyone besides Israel. In fact, he declares his undying hatred.
Mal 1:2 “I have loved you,” says the LORD. But you say, “How have you loved us?” “Is not Esau Jacob's brother?” declares the LORD. “Yet I have loved Jacob Mal 1:3 but Esau I have hated. I have laid waste his hill country and left his heritage to jackals of the desert.” Mal 1:4 If Edom says, “We are shattered but we will rebuild the ruins,” the LORD of hosts says, “They may build, but I will tear down, and they will be called ‘the wicked country,’ and ‘the people with whom the LORD is angry forever.’” Mal 1:5 Your own eyes shall see this, and you shall say, “Great is the LORD beyond the border of Israel!”
Your take is the take that is ‘exactly backwards’
The Jews, with the benefit of having the OT scriptures in front of them, created a midrashic messiah to fulfill their prophecies. A literary device. The creation of a myth and a new missionary sect of Judaism for the purpose of conquering and Judaising Rome and the gentiles.
so, I was thinking of apocryphal still in the sense of being 'excluded from canon' but nonetheless acknowledged as contemporaneous with the other books of the hebrew scriptures or the new testament, contrasted with the gnostic texts which appeared much later than any canonical books.
Just to clarify then, you initially said that there was good reason to believe that the Gnostic texts predate the synoptics and referenced the Dead Sea Scrolls (provably amongst the oldest extant manuscripts) as supporting evidence. The gnostic element contained within the DSS however is purely the Book of Enoch which is not Gnostic per se but is perhaps an early precursor of gnostic thought.
I think I'm back where I began in this case - that in order to accept the Gnostic rebranding of Jesus, I would have to toss out all of the NT which came before.
Jesus does say that repeatedly, but he is paraphrasing the many times YHWH said these things through the prophets, as in:
Deut 29:4 Isaiah 6:9-10 Ezekiel 12:2 Jeremiah 5:21
This (amongst many many other sayings) just corroborates Jesus being the subject/disciple/son of / influenced or inspired by YHWH.
I would just ask you to double check your claim that Gnostic formed part of the Dead Sea Scrolls. References I have checked state that they don't. In fact, http://www.gnosis.org/library/dss/dss.htm would even seem to pit the Qumran and Nag Hammadi finds as competitors on some level. I'm not seeing such a claim on the wikipedia article you linked either..
thanks for the offer but I'd much rather discuss the primary source material - the bible itself. I'm sure C.S Lewis might have some insightful things to say, and probably some not so insightful but I wouldn't substitute it in for the thing itself.
Yeah, I could see how there could possibly be a valid spiritual reality underneath, but it just feels off to me.
However I'm not that au fait with gnosticism. I would have a hard time accepting that Jesus works to undo YHWH's evil plans because the canonical new testament and Jesus own alleged words say totally otherwise.
In order to entertain such a thing I would have to disregard the New Testament in its entirety and give regard only to the gnostic texts - which I believe are much later than the canonical ones. And I don't think that's something I could possibly do.
Do you think you might be attributing to Jesus something that was already within you? Like using Jesus as a kind of proxy?
My mum died of cancer back in October. She was a fan of Jesus but she was barely literate. I used to go read her the Bible and stuff.
Anyway, towards the end I remember locking t phone off and taking mushrooms so I could come to terms with what was about to happen. I blindfolded my eyes, put sacred music on through my headphones and took mushrooms. I had an incredibly powerful, ancestral experience. Something I’d never felt before and after it was done I felt transported back to primitive times where communication was done through grunts and gestures. Very strange but very profound. There were lots of tears and a coming to terms.
My mum was questioning God (well the Bible god anyway) towards the end and her questions were all valid and undone the notion of god in their own right. I was pleased that she was dispelling the myth in some way but disappointed that it was only dawning on her as her death drew nearer and disappointed that she was going to face the end no longer fully comforted by a steadfast belief in his benevolence.
I read Ecclesiastes at her funeral. A time for everything.
But my experience with mushrooms that time showed me that the “pagan” way is more natural and chimed a lot more with my gentile spirit.
Well they were interesting reads.
I read nothing in there that shows YHWH to be in any way superior though. In fact, it just underlined YHWH to be a parochial war god of a specific people, just as the Bible claims him to be.
What did you take from it?