padraig (u.s.)
a monkey that will go ape
I do love the way KJV bible reads on the page tho
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?
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.
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).
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.
Luka will hate this but the new Neal Stephenson makes an OK stab a plausible simulation theory via biblical creationism and uploaded minds. Made me think about genesis slightly differently.
hehe. Hod.
platonic god =! jewish god
platonic
The majority of commentators, both ancient and modern, have felt that Ham's seeing his father naked was not a sufficiently serious crime to explain the punishment that follows.[14] Nevertheless, Genesis 9:23, in which Shem and Japheth cover Noah with a cloak while averting their eyes, suggests that the words are to be taken literally,[15] and it has recently been pointed out that, in first millennium Babylonia, looking at another person's genitals was indeed regarded as a serious matter.[14]
Other ancient commentators suggested that Ham was guilty of more than what the Bible says. The Targum Onqelos has Ham gossiping about his father's drunken disgrace "in the street" (a reading which has a basis in the original Hebrew), so that being held up to public mockery was what had angered Noah; as the Cave of Treasures (fourth century) puts it, "Ham laughed at his father's shame and did not cover it, but laughed about it and mocked."[16]
Ancient commentaries have also debated whether "seeing" someone's nakedness meant to have sex with that person (e.g., Leviticus 20:17).[15] The same idea was raised by third-century rabbis, in the Babylonian Talmud (c. 500 AD), who argue that Ham either castrated his father, or sodomised him.[17] The same explanations are found in three Greek translations of the Bible, which replace the word "see" in verse 22 with another word denoting homosexual relations.[16] The castration theory has its modern counterpart in suggested parallels found in the castration of Uranus by Cronus[18] in Greek mythology and a Hittite myth of the supreme god Anu whose genitals were "bitten off by his rebel son and cup-bearer Kumarbi, who afterwards rejoiced and laughed ... until Anu cursed him".[19]
Not necessarily. Tell us more.
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.