Page 2 of 16 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 239

Thread: GENESIS: The Dissensus Bible Group.

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    26,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by padraig (u.s.) View Post
    One strong reaction I remember

    Old Testament God is a petulant asshole

    Always punishing people for breaking rules they didn't know existed, needlessly cruel, vindictive

    Abraham + Isaac, Moses, Job, Tower of Babel, etc
    Today, 01:46 PM #56 Corpsey's Avatar Corpsey Corpsey is online now
    i corpse therefore i am
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    7,605
    Default
    Two responses to the Bible that are too obvious to be interesting

    1. God's a cunt
    2. In spite of my rational atheism, I can see great aesthetic beauty in the book of X,Y,Z - I'm not a monster!

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to luka For This Useful Post:


  3. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    26,516

    Default

    It is vital we keep corpseys wise words in view throughout the course of this assignment or you will all depress me too much and I will refuse to play with you.

  4. #18
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    CHI
    Posts
    4,531

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Corpsey View Post
    The Greek gods are the same, perhaps worse.
    Sure. Or the Scandinavian gods, or etc

    But the Greek gods are more like humans with superpowers so it makes sense for them to have human passions, habits, foibles.

    OT God, creates everything from nothing, moves in the face of the waters, is all-seeing/knowing etc unfathomable infinite entity

    Then populates creation with people and immediately starts being a completely unreasonable dick to them in a very personal way

  5. #19
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    CHI
    Posts
    4,531

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Corpsey View Post
    Aren't most kings/rulers petty and insecure?
    They're not supposed to be depicted that way by their panegyrists tho

  6. #20
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    CHI
    Posts
    4,531

    Default

    I'm not saying OT God is terrible

    I'm saying I find it an interesting contrast, or inconsistency, in betrayal, very unflattering

  7. #21
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    CHI
    Posts
    4,531

    Default

    I do love the way KJV bible reads on the page tho

  8. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by padraig (u.s.) View Post
    Like OK its allegorical + reflects the culture (tough, warlike, insular desert/hill people) that produced it

    But still

    Its not the harshness, but the pettiness + insecurity OT Hod is depicted with. Like shouldn't this all powerful deity be above most of this, aloof?
    hehe. Hod.
    platonic god =! jewish god
    platonic god =~ christian god (via interpretive traditions)
    jewish god:


    JAH IS the vicissitudes of Nature. the buckling plates underground and the torrents from on high. the leveling blast of the volcano. judaism most likely emerges from the bronze age collapse.
    the other bit here is that things can be elliptical on purpose for breathing room/room to meditate. or accounts can be contradictory or the sequence of things can feel incongruous to call your attention to a third point.
    kamal salibi has an interesting idea ab israel being in the asir of the arabian peninsula and palestine only being colonised later. but ofc it's something of a provocation
    Quote Originally Posted by luka View Post
    It says bless the lads and it means bless the lads.
    Quote Originally Posted by sadmanbarty View Post
    i don't know, probably some marxist cultural theory or something
    Quote Originally Posted by thirdform View Post
    gabber terrorism is fun but not all the time, sometimes you gotta be sophisticated or sulky for the ladies.
    https://manifestacionesoterica.bandcamp.com/

  9. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    9,492

    Default

    Immediately I'm struck by something that should have been more obvious to me - that when God creates the earth, the earth is all there is. It isn't the pendant orb, as in Milton. It is water, in the dark, and nothing else. He creates the sky afterwards. So it's an even stranger vision than I had thought it was.

    Also god naming things. This is a sort of recounting of or imaging of the birth of the world in human consciousness. "And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas...". In a sense we "made" the earth, and the sea, and the stars, by naming them. Edit: but then Adam is given the chance to name all the animals, and names Eve "Woman", because she comes of Adam - and so naming is not an expression of consciousness so much as dominion.
    Last edited by Corpsey; 18-06-2019 at 10:23 PM.
    Αι ψυχαί οσμώνται καθ΄ Άιδην.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Corpsey For This Useful Post:


  11. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    787

    Default

    A reading I like is that the OT narrates a tribe's changing conception of God, and of itself. Their image of Him is initially of a super-powerful tribal warlord, petty and capricious, who sometimes doles out exorbitant rewards and sometimes wreaks exorbitant retribution. They, in relation to Him, are sometimes rebellious and sometimes awed and grateful children. That's the starting point; somehow from there the entire Jewish system of morality develops, along with an increasingly subtle, intimate and sublimely abstract conception of God.

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to poetix For This Useful Post:


  13. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    9,492

    Default

    I need this translated (the bit in bold):

    (God to Cain)

    Why art thou wroth? And why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? And if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.
    Αι ψυχαί οσμώνται καθ΄ Άιδην.

  14. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    9,492

    Default

    It's immediately obvious that this isn't a single narrative written by a single author, or even pretending to be. I think by chapter 5 there's already been at least three, slightly contradictory accounts of God's creation of Adam and Eve.

    The generations of Adam does read a bit like an absurdist joke

    "And X lived Y years and begat Z. And X lived Y years after he begat Z. And all the days of X were Y years. And he died."

    Repeat x 8
    Last edited by Corpsey; 18-06-2019 at 10:46 PM.
    Αι ψυχαί οσμώνται καθ΄ Άιδην.

  15. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    9,492

    Default

    There were giants in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bore children to them; the same became the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown.
    I understand these giants are the subject of some debate, but probably some sort of fallen angel, but isn't the rest of it difficult to understand? "And they bore children to them" - the "they" here is presumably the giants/Nephilim, not "the sons of God" - unless that's the same thing? But this confused me because God then repents for creating men, not giants/Nephilim.
    Αι ψυχαί οσμώνται καθ΄ Άιδην.

  16. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    26,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Corpsey View Post
    I understand these giants are the subject of some debate, but probably some sort of fallen angel, but isn't the rest of it difficult to understand? "And they bore children to them" - the "they" here is presumably the giants/Nephilim, not "the sons of God" - unless that's the same thing? But this confused me because God then repents for creating men, not giants/Nephilim.
    This is where killa priest comes in.

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to luka For This Useful Post:


  18. #29
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    9,492

    Default

    As much as I don't want to be Mr literalist, I am confused at every turn by things such as God's covenant. He drowns all life because flesh is corrupt and man's imagination is evil, but then he lets Noah and the rest live, and decides he won't do it again, and promises not to. And I'm not sure under what proviso. It seems like the rules don't change after the flood - don't kill any other man and be fruitful and multiply. This isn't so much unjust as inexplicable to me.

    From wiki

    The Noahic covenant[Gen 9:8–17] applies to all of humanity and all other living creatures.[9] In this covenant with all living creatures, God promises never again to destroy all life on Earth by flood[9:11] and creates the rainbow as the sign of this "everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth".[9:12–17] Noah and the generations of his posterity were required in their turn never to shed blood, nor to consume it (as the Watchers and giants of Enoch's day had done).
    A. I don't know who the "watchers" are. B. So the rule before was you could kill anyone, just not Caine?
    Last edited by Corpsey; 19-06-2019 at 08:12 AM.
    Αι ψυχαί οσμώνται καθ΄ Άιδην.

  19. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    The Fear - Dublin
    Posts
    8,459

    Default

    Luka will hate this but the new Neal Stephenson makes an OK stab at plausible simulation theory via biblical creationism and uploaded minds. Made me think about genesis slightly differently.
    Last edited by droid; 18-06-2019 at 11:33 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •