Jump to content

The Word Of The Lord: Loving Curses And Righteous Dung-Smearing


Aggie
 Share

Recommended Posts

I ran across this edifying passage in Malachi last night and I thought I should share.  

 

For some time I wouldn't read the Bible after my deconversion since it was associated with too many negative emotions.  But over the past couple years I have been going through it again.  I am repeatedly amazed at how many times Holy Writ provides evidence of its own imperfection and (in)humanity.  Perfect example:

 

2If you will not listen, if you will not lay it to heart to give glory to my name, says the Lord of hosts, then I will send the curse on you and I will curse your blessings; indeed I have already cursed them, because you do not lay it to heart. 3I will rebuke your offspring, and spread dung on your faces, the dung of your offerings, and I will put you out of my presence.

Malachi 2:2-3

 

Of course, God is Love and Malachi knows this.  He here reminds of the definition of love in 1 Cor 13-- love is patient, kind, keeps no record of wrongs, and occasionally requires some cursing of people and facial dung-smearing.  Likewise, we can create a more complete list of the fruit of the Spirit (cf. Gal 5:22-23)-- love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, self-control, cursing people, and smearing dung on them.  

 

I honestly don't think I could come up with better reasons for rejecting the Bible than the ones it provides...

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What kind of an all powerful being craves glory from created beings?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow: dung smearing on faces?

... Malachi gives explanation for some things that happened in my early boyhood, which I had long forgotten.

 

In other words, this is the work of men, no more and no less.

Dung smearing, in some hardened Christian circles, is a way to reinforce potty training.

... and they made god in their own image: malevolent and frivolous they created him ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, hell, let's all get shit-faced!  :68:

I'm down with that! *pops bottle of scotch*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aggie, you actually reminded me of another passage.

 

“Now, son of man, take a block of clay, put it in front of you and draw the city of Jerusalem on it. 

Then lay siege to it: Erect siege works against it, build a ramp up to it, set up camps against it and put battering rams around it. 

Then take an iron pan, place it as an iron wall between you and the city and turn your face toward it. It will be under siege, and you shall besiege it. This will be a sign to the people of Israel.

---yaweh tells Ezekiel to build a clay Jerusalem and play castle siege!

 

“Then lie on your left side and put the sin of the people of Israel upon yourself.[a] You are to bear their sin for the number of days you lie on your side. 

I have assigned you the same number of days as the years of their sin. So for 390 days you will bear the sin of the people of Israel.

---now he tells Ezekiel to lie on his left side for 390 days.  Almighty yaweh's most potent way to communicate with his people is with 1 man laying down on his left side for more than 1 year... Wendytwitch.gif 

 

“After you have finished this, lie down again, this time on your right side, and bear the sin of the people of Judah. I have assigned you 40 days, a day for each year. 

---Now the right side, but only for slightly more than a month...

 

Turn your face toward the siege of Jerusalem and with bared arm prophesy against her. 

---... yeah...

 

I will tie you up with ropes so that you cannot turn from one side to the other until you have finished the days of your siege.

---yaweh's into bondage now

 

“Take wheat and barley, beans and lentils, millet and spelt; put them in a storage jar and use them to make bread for yourself. You are to eat it during the 390 days you lie on your side. 

10 Weigh out twenty shekels[b] of food to eat each day and eat it at set times. 

11 Also measure out a sixth of a hin[c] of water and drink it at set times. 

---well thanks yaweh, at least he can feed himself

 

12 Eat the food as you would a loaf of barley bread; bake it in the sight of the people, using human excrement for fuel.”

13 TheLord said, “In this way the people of Israel will eat defiled food among the nations where I will drive them.”

---So Ezekiel, what are you going to use for cooking fire to cook your barley bread with?  Your own poop!  

 

14 Then I said, “Not so, Sovereign Lord! I have never defiled myself. From my youth until now I have never eaten anything found dead or torn by wild animals. No impure meat has ever entered my mouth.”

15 “Very well,” he said, “I will let you bake your bread over cow dung instead of human excrement.”

---ok ok ok, use cow poop instead for your cooking fire.  That way it will not be 'impure meat' that you put in your mouth

 

That's omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent bible god for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aggie, you actually reminded me of another passage.

 

“Now, son of man, take a block of clay, put it in front of you and draw the city of Jerusalem on it.

Then lay siege to it: Erect siege works against it, build a ramp up to it, set up camps against it and put battering rams around it.

Then take an iron pan, place it as an iron wall between you and the city and turn your face toward it. It will be under siege, and you shall besiege it. This will be a sign to the people of Israel.

---yaweh tells Ezekiel to build a clay Jerusalem and play castle siege!

 

“Then lie on your left side and put the sin of the people of Israel upon yourself.[a] You are to bear their sin for the number of days you lie on your side.

I have assigned you the same number of days as the years of their sin. So for 390 days you will bear the sin of the people of Israel.

---now he tells Ezekiel to lie on his left side for 390 days.  Almighty yaweh's most potent way to communicate with his people is with 1 man laying down on his left side for more than 1 year... Wendytwitch.gif 

 

“After you have finished this, lie down again, this time on your right side, and bear the sin of the people of Judah. I have assigned you 40 days, a day for each year.

---Now the right side, but only for slightly more than a month...

 

Turn your face toward the siege of Jerusalem and with bared arm prophesy against her.

---... yeah...

 

I will tie you up with ropes so that you cannot turn from one side to the other until you have finished the days of your siege.

---yaweh's into bondage now

 

“Take wheat and barley, beans and lentils, millet and spelt; put them in a storage jar and use them to make bread for yourself. You are to eat it during the 390 days you lie on your side.

10 Weigh out twenty shekels[b] of food to eat each day and eat it at set times.

11 Also measure out a sixth of a hin[c] of water and drink it at set times.

---well thanks yaweh, at least he can feed himself

 

12 Eat the food as you would a loaf of barley bread; bake it in the sight of the people, using human excrement for fuel.”

13 TheLord said, “In this way the people of Israel will eat defiled food among the nations where I will drive them.”

---So Ezekiel, what are you going to use for cooking fire to cook your barley bread with?  Your own poop!  

 

14 Then I said, “Not so, Sovereign Lord! I have never defiled myself. From my youth until now I have never eaten anything found dead or torn by wild animals. No impure meat has ever entered my mouth.”

15 “Very well,” he said, “I will let you bake your bread over cow dung instead of human excrement.”

---ok ok ok, use cow poop instead for your cooking fire.  That way it will not be 'impure meat' that you put in your mouth

 

That's omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent bible god for you.

 

Nice.  (Study Bibles really should have poop passage cross-references.)

 

Going with the "holy crap" theme, here's a part of a story from the Little Flowers of St. Francis, a collection of pious stories about the great saint.  He gives some spiritual advice that I've never personally received.  Somehow, we don't hear this one much...

 

“But when the devil says to you again: ‘You are damned’, you answer him confidently: ‘Open your mouth and I will shit in it’, and let it be a sign to you that he is the devil that when you say those words, he will immediately go away.."

 

http://www.diquipassofrancesco.it/CompagniDiFrancesco/EN/rufinoEN.html 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ran across this edifying passage in Malachi last night and I thought I should share.  

 

For some time I wouldn't read the Bible after my deconversion since it was associated with too many negative emotions.  But over the past couple years I have been going through it again.  I am repeatedly amazed at how many times Holy Writ provides evidence of its own imperfection and (in)humanity.  Perfect example:

 

2If you will not listen, if you will not lay it to heart to give glory to my name, says the Lord of hosts, then I will send the curse on you and I will curse your blessings; indeed I have already cursed them, because you do not lay it to heart. 3I will rebuke your offspring, and spread dung on your faces, the dung of your offerings, and I will put you out of my presence.

Malachi 2:2-3

 

Of course, God is Love and Malachi knows this.  He here reminds of the definition of love in 1 Cor 13-- love is patient, kind, keeps no record of wrongs, and occasionally requires some cursing of people and facial dung-smearing.  Likewise, we can create a more complete list of the fruit of the Spirit (cf. Gal 5:22-23)-- love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, self-control, cursing people, and smearing dung on them.  

 

I honestly don't think I could come up with better reasons for rejecting the Bible than the ones it provides...

Hi Aggie

 

 

First, if the Bible was a source of negative emotions, my initial thought was that someone used the Bible against you, probably picking out certain scripture to make you feel bad. If that was the case then I am sorry that is what you experienced.

 

With regards to the verses you have used, for some reason you have cut out the very first line on your post, which is hugely important as it tells us who it is actually written to.

 

The first line is 'And now you priests, this is a warning for you (and then the rest as you have posted).

 

This is so important because the priests where the religious leaders of the day. Like the priests, bishops, deacons, pastors etc. we have now. It was not aimed at the general populace.

 

In the verses before we even know why God was angry. It was because the priests, those who proclaimed to follow God and lead by example, where giving poor offerings such as blind or maimed cattle and even ones 'gained through violence' (whatever that was).

 

It then goes on to say that these priests where leading people astray with poor teaching and generally bad behaviour.

 

Like when religious leaders do that today, we get angry expect them to have a higher level of responsibly.

 

The reference to smearing dung on their faces is pure sarcasm. Their offering was supposed to be cleaned of faeces, but they were not doing this and giving God the scraps and then keeping the best for themselves. God was saying he was going to rub their faces in it.

 

God gets particularly angry with people in positions of authority who are meant to represent him, and yet are corrupt and burden people with religion or lead them astray.

 

Jesus only got angry with religious leaders calling them a brood of vipers and hypocrites.

That is what this passage is about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What kind of an all powerful being craves glory from created beings?

A very mis-understood perception of God I feel.

 

He does not crave our glory.

 

One way to look at it is if you have children, and you are good parent, you want them to love, honour and respect you as their parents. If they don't, you can’t guide them, you can’t teach them, you can’t help them, and you can’t have relationship,

 

It the same with God and how he feels towards his children.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I ran across this edifying passage in Malachi last night and I thought I should share.  

 

For some time I wouldn't read the Bible after my deconversion since it was associated with too many negative emotions.  But over the past couple years I have been going through it again.  I am repeatedly amazed at how many times Holy Writ provides evidence of its own imperfection and (in)humanity.  Perfect example:

 

2If you will not listen, if you will not lay it to heart to give glory to my name, says the Lord of hosts, then I will send the curse on you and I will curse your blessings; indeed I have already cursed them, because you do not lay it to heart. 3I will rebuke your offspring, and spread dung on your faces, the dung of your offerings, and I will put you out of my presence.

Malachi 2:2-3

 

Of course, God is Love and Malachi knows this.  He here reminds of the definition of love in 1 Cor 13-- love is patient, kind, keeps no record of wrongs, and occasionally requires some cursing of people and facial dung-smearing.  Likewise, we can create a more complete list of the fruit of the Spirit (cf. Gal 5:22-23)-- love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, self-control, cursing people, and smearing dung on them.  

 

I honestly don't think I could come up with better reasons for rejecting the Bible than the ones it provides...

Hi Aggie

 

 

First, if the Bible was a source of negative emotions, my initial thought was that someone used the Bible against you, probably picking out certain scripture to make you feel bad. If that was the case then I am sorry that is what you experienced.

 

With regards to the verses you have used, for some reason you have cut out the very first line on your post, which is hugely important as it tells us who it is actually written to.

 

The first line is 'And now you priests, this is a warning for you (and then the rest as you have posted).

 

This is so important because the priests where the religious leaders of the day. Like the priests, bishops, deacons, pastors etc. we have now. It was not aimed at the general populace.

 

In the verses before we even know why God was angry. It was because the priests, those who proclaimed to follow God and lead by example, where giving poor offerings such as blind or maimed cattle and even ones 'gained through violence' (whatever that was).

 

It then goes on to say that these priests where leading people astray with poor teaching and generally bad behaviour.

 

Like when religious leaders do that today, we get angry expect them to have a higher level of responsibly.

 

The reference to smearing dung on their faces is pure sarcasm. Their offering was supposed to be cleaned of faeces, but they were not doing this and giving God the scraps and then keeping the best for themselves. God was saying he was going to rub their faces in it.

 

God gets particularly angry with people in positions of authority who are meant to represent him, and yet are corrupt and burden people with religion or lead them astray.

 

Jesus only got angry with religious leaders calling them a brood of vipers and hypocrites.

That is what this passage is about.

 

 

 

Sorry but that does not fix any of the problems with this passage.  God is pissed off that mere mortals won't give God glory.  Think about that.  Have you ever seen a human get angry over ants not giving him glory?  This is even more ridiculous.  Some all powerful, all knowing being need glory from the things God created?  And God created these things in such a way that they would not give God the glory God needs?  It's preposterous.

 

Are you pleased when a cat offers you an offering of a dead bird or a dead mouse?  Are you disappointed if the dead bird was imperfect?  The thought of animal sacrifices is preposterous.  There is no reason why God would need people to harm animals in order for God to forgive.

 

As for you telling us when God gets angry . . . no, first you need to prove God exists at all.  Then if you can do that you need to prove that you can communicate with God.  Then you need to prove that God even cares what humans do.  Then finally you can prove what God gets angry about down here on Earth.  You can't even do the first step.

 

All priests lead people astray with poor teachings if there is no God.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

What kind of an all powerful being craves glory from created beings?

A very mis-understood perception of God I feel.

 

He does not crave our glory.

 

One way to look at it is if you have children, and you are good parent, you want them to love, honour and respect you as their parents. If they don't, you can’t guide them, you can’t teach them, you can’t help them, and you can’t have relationship,

 

It the same with God and how he feels towards his children.

 

 

 

So you are one of those Christians who picks which parts of the Bible really means what it says and which parts can be ignored because they are only metaphor?  Mal 2:2 doesn't mean what it says then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gus, how do you know that your way of thinking is right, and ours is wrong.

 

And when you answer, recite what you write to yourself.  If your words were coming from someone of another religion's and wanting you to convert to theirs, would YOU be convinced?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The reference to smearing dung on their faces is pure sarcasm. Their offering was supposed to be cleaned of faeces, but they were not doing this and giving God the scraps and then keeping the best for themselves. God was saying he was going to rub their faces in it.

 

 

Sarcasm.... from the guy who says he's going to burn me in hell for all eternity in hell where the "worm dieth not" and the "fire is not quenched"? yeah right... rolleyes.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I ran across this edifying passage in Malachi last night and I thought I should share.  

 

For some time I wouldn't read the Bible after my deconversion since it was associated with too many negative emotions.  But over the past couple years I have been going through it again.  I am repeatedly amazed at how many times Holy Writ provides evidence of its own imperfection and (in)humanity.  Perfect example:

 

2If you will not listen, if you will not lay it to heart to give glory to my name, says the Lord of hosts, then I will send the curse on you and I will curse your blessings; indeed I have already cursed them, because you do not lay it to heart. 3I will rebuke your offspring, and spread dung on your faces, the dung of your offerings, and I will put you out of my presence.

Malachi 2:2-3

 

Of course, God is Love and Malachi knows this.  He here reminds of the definition of love in 1 Cor 13-- love is patient, kind, keeps no record of wrongs, and occasionally requires some cursing of people and facial dung-smearing.  Likewise, we can create a more complete list of the fruit of the Spirit (cf. Gal 5:22-23)-- love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, self-control, cursing people, and smearing dung on them.  

 

I honestly don't think I could come up with better reasons for rejecting the Bible than the ones it provides...

Hi Aggie

 

 

First, if the Bible was a source of negative emotions, my initial thought was that someone used the Bible against you, probably picking out certain scripture to make you feel bad. If that was the case then I am sorry that is what you experienced.

 

With regards to the verses you have used, for some reason you have cut out the very first line on your post, which is hugely important as it tells us who it is actually written to.

 

The first line is 'And now you priests, this is a warning for you (and then the rest as you have posted).

 

This is so important because the priests where the religious leaders of the day. Like the priests, bishops, deacons, pastors etc. we have now. It was not aimed at the general populace.

 

In the verses before we even know why God was angry. It was because the priests, those who proclaimed to follow God and lead by example, where giving poor offerings such as blind or maimed cattle and even ones 'gained through violence' (whatever that was).

 

It then goes on to say that these priests where leading people astray with poor teaching and generally bad behaviour.

 

Like when religious leaders do that today, we get angry expect them to have a higher level of responsibly.

 

The reference to smearing dung on their faces is pure sarcasm. Their offering was supposed to be cleaned of faeces, but they were not doing this and giving God the scraps and then keeping the best for themselves. God was saying he was going to rub their faces in it.

 

God gets particularly angry with people in positions of authority who are meant to represent him, and yet are corrupt and burden people with religion or lead them astray.

 

Jesus only got angry with religious leaders calling them a brood of vipers and hypocrites.

That is what this passage is about.

 

 

 

Sorry but that does not fix any of the problems with this passage.  God is pissed off that mere mortals won't give God glory.  Think about that.  Have you ever seen a human get angry over ants not giving him glory?  This is even more ridiculous.  Some all powerful, all knowing being need glory from the things God created?  And God created these things in such a way that they would not give God the glory God needs?  It's preposterous.

 

Are you pleased when a cat offers you an offering of a dead bird or a dead mouse?  Are you disappointed if the dead bird was imperfect?  The thought of animal sacrifices is preposterous.  There is no reason why God would need people to harm animals in order for God to forgive.

 

As for you telling us when God gets angry . . . no, first you need to prove God exists at all.  Then if you can do that you need to prove that you can communicate with God.  Then you need to prove that God even cares what humans do.  Then finally you can prove what God gets angry about down here on Earth.  You can't even do the first step.

 

All priests lead people astray with poor teachings if there is no God.

 

The passage does not have anything to do with God being angry about not giving him glory.

I am saying God was angry beacuse the peope who where meant to be representing him where corrupt and burdening people. Their poor offerings where a direct represntaion of their attitude to God, as in they just did not care. But yet they proffessed to be soemthing they where not.

I am sure you get angry when you hear of religous leaders being corrupt?

 

I am not here to proof to you God is real. I am simply showing what the verse is saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

What kind of an all powerful being craves glory from created beings?

A very mis-understood perception of God I feel.

 

He does not crave our glory.

 

One way to look at it is if you have children, and you are good parent, you want them to love, honour and respect you as their parents. If they don't, you can’t guide them, you can’t teach them, you can’t help them, and you can’t have relationship,

 

It the same with God and how he feels towards his children.

 

 

 

So you are one of those Christians who picks which parts of the Bible really means what it says and which parts can be ignored because they are only metaphor?  Mal 2:2 doesn't mean what it says then?

 

Nope, it means means what it says. I thought I had explained what it meant?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

 

What kind of an all powerful being craves glory from created beings?

A very mis-understood perception of God I feel.

 

He does not crave our glory.

 

One way to look at it is if you have children, and you are good parent, you want them to love, honour and respect you as their parents. If they don't, you can’t guide them, you can’t teach them, you can’t help them, and you can’t have relationship,

 

It the same with God and how he feels towards his children.

 

Poor analogy, Gus.  I'm okay with my son favoring his mother over me.  I'm not going to command him, "Thou shalt have no other parents before me." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gus, how do you know that your way of thinking is right, and ours is wrong.

 

And when you answer, recite what you write to yourself.  If your words were coming from someone of another religion's and wanting you to convert to theirs, would YOU be convinced?

I am not saying anyone is wrong

 

I was giving an explanation of a verse which was brought up. I am not trying to convert anyone, I am just saying this is the meaning of the verse in question. It is up to you if you agree or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

What kind of an all powerful being craves glory from created beings?

A very mis-understood perception of God I feel.

 

He does not crave our glory.

 

One way to look at it is if you have children, and you are good parent, you want them to love, honour and respect you as their parents. If they don't, you can’t guide them, you can’t teach them, you can’t help them, and you can’t have relationship,

 

It the same with God and how he feels towards his children.

 

Poor analogy, Gus.  I'm okay with my son favoring his mother over me.  I'm not going to command him, "Thou shalt have no other parents before me." 

 

You may not say it in those words, and anyway his mother is still his parent.

But how would you feel if your son favoured someones elses parents entirely and had no honour for you or his mother?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Gus, how do you know that your way of thinking is right, and ours is wrong.

 

And when you answer, recite what you write to yourself.  If your words were coming from someone of another religion's and wanting you to convert to theirs, would YOU be convinced?

I am not saying anyone is wrong

 

I was giving an explanation of a verse which was brought up. I am not trying to convert anyone, I am just saying this is the meaning of the verse in question. It is up to you if you agree or not.

 

 

You've said to MM

 

"A very mis-understood perception of God I feel."

 

Implying that he is wrong.  Therefore your statement "I'm not saying anyone is wrong" is a lie.

 

However, I'm not firing any hostility at you yet.  That would depend on your next answer.

 

If you were living with Moses or with Samuel, as part of the Israelites, and god ordered you to do something.  Would you do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I ran across this edifying passage in Malachi last night and I thought I should share.  

 

For some time I wouldn't read the Bible after my deconversion since it was associated with too many negative emotions.  But over the past couple years I have been going through it again.  I am repeatedly amazed at how many times Holy Writ provides evidence of its own imperfection and (in)humanity.  Perfect example:

 

2If you will not listen, if you will not lay it to heart to give glory to my name, says the Lord of hosts, then I will send the curse on you and I will curse your blessings; indeed I have already cursed them, because you do not lay it to heart. 3I will rebuke your offspring, and spread dung on your faces, the dung of your offerings, and I will put you out of my presence.

Malachi 2:2-3

 

Of course, God is Love and Malachi knows this.  He here reminds of the definition of love in 1 Cor 13-- love is patient, kind, keeps no record of wrongs, and occasionally requires some cursing of people and facial dung-smearing.  Likewise, we can create a more complete list of the fruit of the Spirit (cf. Gal 5:22-23)-- love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, self-control, cursing people, and smearing dung on them.  

 

I honestly don't think I could come up with better reasons for rejecting the Bible than the ones it provides...

Hi Aggie

 

 

First, if the Bible was a source of negative emotions, my initial thought was that someone used the Bible against you, probably picking out certain scripture to make you feel bad. If that was the case then I am sorry that is what you experienced.

 

With regards to the verses you have used, for some reason you have cut out the very first line on your post, which is hugely important as it tells us who it is actually written to.

 

The first line is 'And now you priests, this is a warning for you (and then the rest as you have posted).

 

This is so important because the priests where the religious leaders of the day. Like the priests, bishops, deacons, pastors etc. we have now. It was not aimed at the general populace.

 

In the verses before we even know why God was angry. It was because the priests, those who proclaimed to follow God and lead by example, where giving poor offerings such as blind or maimed cattle and even ones 'gained through violence' (whatever that was).

 

It then goes on to say that these priests where leading people astray with poor teaching and generally bad behaviour.

 

Like when religious leaders do that today, we get angry expect them to have a higher level of responsibly.

 

The reference to smearing dung on their faces is pure sarcasm. Their offering was supposed to be cleaned of faeces, but they were not doing this and giving God the scraps and then keeping the best for themselves. God was saying he was going to rub their faces in it.

 

God gets particularly angry with people in positions of authority who are meant to represent him, and yet are corrupt and burden people with religion or lead them astray.

 

Jesus only got angry with religious leaders calling them a brood of vipers and hypocrites.

That is what this passage is about.

 

 

Gus,

 

I don't think your exposition helps.  I think you missed my point actually.

 

I think that it's a fair reading that we have metaphorical dung-wiping being talked about here.  However, the crassness of the imagery shows God's degree of contempt.  What he is planning to is comparable to such disrespectful and insulting behavior.  

 

I left out the prior verse because I think it doesn't make a difference-- God is threatening to curse and otherwise condemn people he thinks are showing insufficient glory to his name.  This is petty, jealous, in violation of the golden rule, in violation of Jesus' command not to curse people, unkind, unloving, and generally in poor taste.

 

As I'm sure you know, God curses, condemns, torments, and smites vast multitudes of non-priests in the Bible. He supposedly cursed the entire human race because of Adam's horrific crime of fruit-eating, flooded the entire earth, and cursed the entire nation of Israel (and numerous other nations of well) acting on the extremely unjust principle of corporate guilt.  He sent plagues, famines, wars, etc., etc.  If true, this would represent the torment of millions of children-- as well as millions of non-priestly people who wouldn't have been behaving in ways that God didn't like if He hadn't cursed them all for Adam's sin in the first place.  Of course, he also keeps an eternal Inquisition going in hell apparently.

 

In short, God would have had a better claim to being "Love" if he had been literally wiping dung.  

 

The good news is not that Jesus died for our sins, but that there is no such God who goes around smiting, cursing, killing and torturing people in the first place.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The passage does not have anything to do with God being angry about not giving him glory.

 

 

 

" . . . if you will not lay it to heart to give glory to my name, says the Lord of hosts . . . 

 

 

 

I am saying God was angry beacuse the peope who where meant to be representing him where corrupt and burdening people. Their poor offerings where a direct represntaion of their attitude to God, as in they just did not care. But yet they proffessed to be soemthing they where not.

 

When a real person is being misrepresented they directly address the problem.  An all powerful God would not need to give a vision to a prophet.  God could talk directly to all the people who were deceived and thus fix the problem.  Isn't it amazing how a modern twitter user is more powerful at communicating that Old Testament God?  That is a rhetorical question.  Of course it is expected that modern technology far out performs the wildest imagination of the humans who wrote the bible.

 

 

 

I am sure you get angry when you hear of religous leaders being corrupt?

 

The crime is the only part of Christianity that I take seriously.  God must be very busy to never lift a finger despite all the evil done in his name by God's very own representatives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gus,

 

BTW, I did not deconvert because Christians are bad people.  The people that I love most in the world are largely Christians.  

 

I reject traditional Christianities because we have every reason to believe they are false.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Nope, it means means what it says. I thought I had explained what it meant?

 

 

If the passage means what it says then there is no need to explain what it means.  Anybody who can read will know what it means.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wow, this place doesn't let up ha-ha

 

Much as I would like to reply to each response I just can't. Don't take that as offence or dodging but there is one of me and seemingly hundreds of you guys biggrin.png

 

Ill try and respond to questions that may cover some of the others

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.