20
   

Moses thought the world was at one time perfect. What happened?

 
 
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Jun, 2015 09:10 pm
@neologist,
Well. for starters, I was born.....
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Jun, 2015 09:17 pm
@neologist,
neologist wrote:

Assuming there were a God


and assuming that God is intelligent

Quote:
To which type of people would he direct his message?



the message would definitely go to someone with the ability to influence others
0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Jun, 2015 09:20 pm
@neologist,
neologist wrote:

Not very classy to post a jpeg you've posted before But it's an interesting take.


I'm not shooting for classy, though. And I don't mind reposting an image, seeing as how I doubt that everyone saw it the first time.

Quote:
But. I wonder:
Assuming there were a God
Assuming he would consider leaving us a message explaining why things are
To which type of people would he direct his message?
A nomadic goat herder in words simple enough for anyone to understand?
Or, a scientist with multiple Phds who can then use his lofty status to control the less sophisticated?


When you start with "assuming," everything after that becomes so much 'angels dancing on the heads of pins' kind of stuff, but if you like. I imagine a god would deliver his message to someone with widespread, verifiable credibility so as to have it universally propagated. Furthermore, I would expect a god that actually wanted to get his message/story out would just put it out there for all to see, not just a select few. Write in the sky or something.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Jun, 2015 09:27 pm
@FBM,
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Jun, 2015 10:51 pm
@neologist,
That's a fair point. Actually, I bet that's a lab tech separating blue colored water from green.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Jun, 2015 11:21 pm
@FBM,
The nomadic goat herder was 4000 years closer to whatever caused life to come from where-ever/whatever it came from than the guy with all the PHDs.....
0 Replies
 
thack45
 
  2  
Reply Sat 13 Jun, 2015 11:41 pm
Moses was in enough hot water with the big guy; arguing with him at the burning bush, not speaking to a rock, his little Gilgamesh side project...
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Jun, 2015 12:33 am
@FBM,
FBM wrote:
. . . . I imagine a god would deliver his message to someone with widespread, verifiable credibility so as to have it universally propagated.
Perhaps if the message is considered unpopular, the credibility of the messenger would be challenged. Sort of like "Kill thy physician and the fee bestow upon thy foul disease" King Lear Act 1 Scene 1
FBM wrote:
. Furthermore, I would expect a god that actually wanted to get his message/story out would just put it out there for all to see, not just a select few. Write in the sky or something.
Perhaps a website as widely translated as Wikipedia, currently with 288 languages in translation? That would be more than 97% 0f the world's population. Would that be widespread enough?
Of course, people would have to be willing to look.
FBM
 
  2  
Reply Sun 14 Jun, 2015 12:43 am
@neologist,
Well, I suppose a guy from ethnic group/race A telling people of other races that ethnic group/race A has been chosen by a god that nobody can see and that everyone else should follow what they teach is going to be an unpopular message. Wink

Why not put prophets in every society, rather than just one? Why not spell it out in the stars or make miracles a global, daily event? Why not just appear to everyone, for that matter? I don't think that would be difficult for a being that created the entire universe.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Jun, 2015 02:32 am
@neologist,
Whoever wrote the first five books of the Bible was dealing with a god he/she/they thought would kill everyone in the world on a whim...so it would make sense to be a major league ass kisser.

When Saddam Hussein ruled in Iraq...in public, every Iraqi thought he was doing a perfect job; when Mao ruled in China...in public, every citizens of China thought he was doing a perfect job; when Stalin ruled in the Soviet Union...in public, every citizen of the Soviet Union thought he was doing a perfect job; when Hitler ruled...well...you get the idea, I'm sure.

Yeah...they wrote that it was perfect.

Nothing difficult to understand about that.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  3  
Reply Sun 14 Jun, 2015 04:53 am
@neologist,
Any God that wanted to leave a message would leave one that everyone could understand, and would have no challenge doing so.

You're trying to make sense of the senseless. It's an act of desperate irrationality.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Jun, 2015 07:58 am
@neologist,
neologist wrote:
Perhaps if the message is considered unpopular


and there's your answer to why whoever wrote about Moses ignored the crap and kept up with the coach's happy glorious days message




(did you forget your original question?)
thack45
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Jun, 2015 09:26 am
Some time after Joseph (son of Jacob) was sold as a slave by his jealous brothers to the Egyptians, he meets them again and says something to the effect of, "while you meant it for evil, god meant it for good". AFAIK, this is basically the christian message about good and bad in the world. So even though there appears to be an obvious chain of events that pins the rap on the chief, the idea is that he has a plan that transcends our trivial emotions in the moment. Or something like that.
tsarstepan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Jun, 2015 11:41 am
@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:

neologist wrote:
Perhaps if the message is considered unpopular


and there's your answer to why whoever wrote about Moses ignored the crap and kept up with the coach's happy glorious days message




(did you forget your original question?)

I already forgot the original question myself. Was it "Who wrote the book of love?"
coluber2001
 
  3  
Reply Sun 14 Jun, 2015 12:44 pm
Well, there are two ways, basically, to take mythology, which is the language of religion. First is mosaically, which is the literal interpretation that most individuals and religions insist on using. The second is hermetically, after the legendary Hermes Trismegistus. This way is a metaphorical interpretation, which to me is the only sensible way to interpret mythology, just like poetry. You don't reject poetry because it sounds ridiculous if taken literally--my heart soars like an eagle. Better get it back in your chest where it belongs.

A person who can only takes things literally is a pretty dour, unfeeling person.
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Jun, 2015 01:39 pm
@tsarstepan,
tsarstepan wrote:
I already forgot the original question myself. Was it "Who wrote the book of love?"
Actually, that was on another thread answered here: http://able2know.org/topic/281123-2#post-5971885
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Reply Sun 14 Jun, 2015 01:51 pm
@coluber2001,
The problem, though, is that many theists claim that the Bible is the inerrant testimony of a CREATOR GOD.

The people who actually wrote the Bible...assuming it was humans rather than gods...could be writing metaphorically. But that, of course, would mean we would have to consider the conditions and knowledge working at the time of the attempt.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  0  
Reply Sun 14 Jun, 2015 02:02 pm
I am profoundly impressed by the general reluctance of folks to consider, if only for the sake of argument, the assertion that a sentient writer composed the Pentateuch with a consistent theme. Frank, at least comes close, asserting that Moses was a toady who would write anything to kiss up. But that pretty much would verify Moses' recognition of a God with power. I had hoped to elicit discussion on whether Moses offered any text that would explain how he could continue to assert that God's work was perfect.

Awaiting that, I will try to get to individual objections as time permits.
neologist
 
  0  
Reply Sun 14 Jun, 2015 02:16 pm
@thack45,
thack45 wrote:
Some time after Joseph (son of Jacob) was sold as a slave by his jealous brothers to the Egyptians, he meets them again and says something to the effect of, "while you meant it for evil, god meant it for good". AFAIK, this is basically the christian message about good and bad in the world. So even though there appears to be an obvious chain of events that pins the rap on the chief, the idea is that he has a plan that transcends our trivial emotions in the moment. Or something like that.
Those who consider the "obvious chain of events", as you put it, do you suppose they believe the mutiny of Genesis chapter 3, might have altered the "plan", while the purpose remained intact? That might be so God's purpose would remain perfect and his power would assure its fulfillment.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Sun 14 Jun, 2015 02:29 pm
@neologist,
I think (blindly guess) that Moses was operating in about the same mode as you, Neo...absolutely convinced that a particular GOD exists...and that the GOD has somehow revealed itself to us...and has made known what pleases it and what offends it.

You regularly and continually assert that this GOD created (or was responsible for) an existence that was perfect...until screwed up by two humans.

The thought itself seems to me to be self-contradictory...and I cannot understand how you hold to it...EXCEPT that you do.

So it apparently was with Moses.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 01/20/2022 at 04:15:02