| Some Absurdity Of The Christian God |
Of Course The Christian God Loves Us All ~ It Says So In The Bible |
| Ezekiel 32:5-6 NSV I will strew your flesh upon the mountains, and fill the valleys with your carcass. I will drench the land even to the mountains with your flowing blood; and the watercourses will be full of you. |
How can Christians possibly reconcile the fact that the biblical picture of their God goes totally against what they profess to believe: that God is love?
"God's Holy Spirit is moving upon the earth in a supernatural way giving us insight and revelations about how much He really loves us, and what real love means. God is Love. To know God is to know love." ~ Taken from a typical Christian site.
It would be difficult to find a more absurd, immoral and downright unpleasant being than the Old Testament God with His endorsement of lying, stealing, subversion, torture, slavery, murder, rape, incest, oppression, anti-learning and bias against women.
Most Christians don't seem to have a problem believing in two contradictory concepts: God is love and if you follow His will and obey His rules He will reward you by allowing you to spend eternity basking in His Glory and singing His praises. They also seem able to believe that if you use your "God given" free-will, logic and reason to not accept Him this loving Father will make you spend eternity in a burning lake of fire, weeping and wailing, complete with wall-to-wall teeth knashing.
A reply from a Christian to an atheist on a Christian/Atheist message board
"this is good. another soul for me. to feast upon. will you be dining together. in hell. or do you prefer. solitary confinement. deb and pat. I shall enjoy. devouring you. yea when I walk through the valley of the shadow of death I WILL bring fear and all that is evil let the burning and knashing of teeth begin. wicked"(sic)
From Preachers Corner
Hell is a place of literal fire where bodies are tormented forever and ever, yet the bodies are never consumed. Heaven is an eternal place and so is the lake of fire (Rev.20:10). There will be a conscious existence in the regions of the damned. People will face the miserable consequences of rejecting Jesus Christ while the ceaseless ages roll, worlds without end.
who don't have a problem with the fact that as a loving Father He's mangled, tortured, drowned defiled, scourged and murdered His creations and remained unmoved by their screams, pleas or prayers.
As with the Stockholm Syndrome or the abused child syndrome, they still love the abuser and seem to have a pathological need to defend their God.
However, the god of the Christian bible comes across as a mixture of power-mad satrap, unable to bear the thought of any rivals, and a spoilt toddler, prone to temper trantrums and ever ready to stomp his toys.
The god of the Old Testament, omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient though he may be portraited by Christians, exhibits the arrogant, manipulative behaviour of a psychopath, displying an utter lack of guilt, shame, remorse or empathy over what impact His actions will have: an egotistical maniac of a god who wishes to flaunt His power.
And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle. Exodus 12:29
This God of the Old Testament, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient though He may be, is little different from other psychopaths.
Three Examples of the christian gods' absurdities
Original Sin ~ What A Crock - God Evicts His Own Children
God arranges the Fall of Man by not giving Adam and Eve a sense of right and wrong, but He expects them to know that it's wrong to disobey Him. Poor Eve gets the blame and the pain of all future women is increased. He created them and He knew full well their instincts and desires, being "all knowing" God was well aware of what they would do, but Adam and Eve had not yet eaten of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, so they did not know that what they were doing was wrong.
The bible says they had no sin in their nature and were created perfect in God's image and if they were truly innocent before they consumed the fruit, how could they be held accountable for disobedience? They had no knowledge of what disobedience meant. Even though God told them that if they ate the fruit, they would surely die, how could they know what death really is since they had not witnessed it or had any knowledge of death. The concept of their deaths would have been a meaningless term.
Genesis 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
God also spitefully subjugates women to men, ensuring that countless generations of women are treated as chattels or second-class members of society.
God decides that as the parents of mankind have spoiled His plan and corrupted their nature, that it is just and mercyful that all their decendants are equally guilty and should suffer as well. Instead of punishing the two 'offenders', he decreed that all of Humanity should bear the burden of guilt.
"All their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation, being now conceived in sin, and by nature children of wrath, the servants of sin, the subjects of death, and all other miseries, spiritual, temporal, and eternal."
Sounds more like child abuse rather than the actions of a loving Father because in response to a solitary error, God invents and supplies pain, conflict, hostility, and frustration to those He "made in His image" as well as mortality itself. All these things are not the result of that single perceived 'sin' but God's response to it ~ God introduced sin into the world, not Adam and Eve.
Genesis 3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.
Being "all knowing" God knew the course that the knowledgeless couple would take and deliberately chose to tempt them by drawing their attention to the wonderous tree that He had created. Instead of gently correcting the offenders and explaining why their actions were wrong, as any loving parent would do, He decreed that all creation should suffer. Showing no sense of justice or mercy ~ suppossedly also His traits ~ He condemns all of humanities future.
Instead of creating evil an omnipotent God would have the power to create the universe in such a manner that all available choices were good and aligned mankind's morality, ethics and desires matched His.
Christians try to rationalise their god's creation of evil by using the free-will arguement but free-will is only a factor if you are able to weight-up the consequences of your decision.
One point to be bourn in mind is that the existence of evil is not necessary for the existence of freewill so, instead of presenting us with, for example, two possible courses of action, one resulting in what God considers evil and one resulting in that which God considers good, He could simply present us with the two possible good courses, and allow us to choose our own path to goodness. Limiting or expanding the number of possible options does not negate free choice.
Most Christians don't seem to recognize that God lied when He said in Genesis 2:17
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Adam supposedly lived for 900 years yet here we have God saying for in the day that thou eatest ~ and not keeping His word about killing someone. And the serpents punishment for telling the truth in Genesis 3:4? "And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:"
"...upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life."
Interestingly, there is not one type of serpent or snake that eats dirt.
Another interesting fact is that there is no mention in Genesis of God giving free-will to Adam and Eve. What is very evident about the book of Genesis is that it contains two accounts of the creation of the Earth and Mankind. One would think that, as these two accounts reflect different authors, different time periods, different orders of creation and the narratives contradict each other on several important points, they are not the "words of God" or even inspired by God.
One might even come to the conclusion that Genesis is a written account of the various tribal myths and legends and the reason for the differences is that they were first preserved orally, with differences creeping in as they were passed down over the generations. As each was espoused by a different sect, and it was impossible to merge them, the initial redacter simply wrote both of them back to back. The redacter considered both to be of equal importance so both were included.
What is annoying, irritating and absurd is when someone tries to pretend that there are not two different accounts, from two different sources, with two different stories.
For a fuller breakdown of the 'Original Sin' and 'Curse' myth, hava look here.
Let's assume that you've read the Bible and know that the Christian religion is based on the intervention of two men: Adam, who ruined us with the Curse and the Fall of Man, and Jesus, who came to redeem us from his dad's Curse.
"For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive", according to Paul, so obviously Jesus Christ and the Christian religion are inextricably bound to the historicity of the Garden of Eden, of Adam and Eve, the talking snake, the Curse and the Fall.
Also depending on these events is the divine mission of Jesus Christ, Son of God (or God Himself depending on which of the 34,000 Christian sects you belong to), sent by Him to redeem the world from the sin of Adam because it was the "original sin" of Adam which caused God to curse His creations and which, supposedly, clings to every since-born human soul, until and unless "redeemed" by Jesus.
Forget for a moment that the historicity of the Garden of Eden, of Adam and Eve, a talking snake, etc. has no basis in reality and was lifted from the Babylonian Epic of Creation.
Forget for a moment that the historicity of Jesus depends on a few forged documents and the conflicting and contradictory accounts in the Gospels.
Forget also that we have none of the actual teachings of Christ, just those that have been reported allegorically or anecdotally in the New Testament.
Open your bible and reread about the curse in Genesis chapter 3 and you'll see that the curse is principally against the ground itself, not the man and woman and there is not one word in the whole account regarding sin, death or damnation as a penalty against Adam himself, much less against his offspring and all humanity. Why do you think that is?
In fact, except for having to work for an honest living, the "curse" is against the ground itself, not the man.
There's a breakdown of it verse by verse and curse by curse here if you want, but I've found that it's much more satisfying to do your own research and to reach your own conclusions rather than taking things on faith.
If you look through the Old Testament you won't find any reference to "original sin" or the "curse and Fall," or of eternal damnation on account of that or anything else. Why do you think that is?
Even Moses, Gods' arch-terrorist and the supposed writer of Genesis, never includes the "curse of Adam" in the catalogue of curses and threats he was so found of huring. Nor does any other OT priest or prophet even hint at Adam's curse, the Fall, or eternal damnation in hell fire. Why do you think that is?
Hell and its fire are totally non-existent in the entire Hebrew listings of penalties and punishments. Why do you think that is?
Do you not think it very strange that neither JC, or any of the four writers of the so-called gospels, utters a word about Adam, the talking snake scene in the Garden of Eden, the curse, the Fall, or of "redemption" by Jesus Christ for any sin of Adam, who, incidentally, is only once - "Adam, which was the son of God" in Luke - remotely referred to throughout their gospels?
Open your bible again and you'll find it was Paul, who never met or knew Jesus and who admitted "lying to the glory of God", who took this childish fable of a talking snake and a muddled "curse", personal and temporal in it's original form, and warped and twisted Christianity into the priestly doctrine of eternal damnation in hell fire for all humanity.
It's been a good, long gig for the priests and promoters of Christianity, seeing how the doctrine contains the disease and the cure, the carrot and the stick: "Your loving Father has cursed you and only through us can you be saved!" "Follow us and get to heaven or you're going to burn!" and all the rest of the dogmatic, self-contradictory and muddled propositions.
Some apologists claim that without the "original sin," mankind would have lived forever without death but this is also distinctly denied by the 'inspired' record. The statement about his death and return to dust was no part of the "curse" at all because man was never designed to live on the earth forever:
"And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken." 3-22/23
So, they were driven away from the Tree of Life, another magic tree with property of making earthly life everlasting, with the express purpose of preventing them from acquiring immunity from death.
There is no need for Christ, or his cobbled together teachings, because Christianity is based on a ridiculous fable. From that comes the monstrous cardinal tenet of the Christian Church and faith: a great and glorious God has damned all the countless billions as yet unborn to eternal hell fire because one man and woman ate fruit at the instigation of a fabled talking snake. For punishment he must work for his living thereafter, and that "in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shall surely die" which he promptly did just 930 years later.
God Kills Everything
Noah Gets His Feet Wet
All life on earth destroyed because of the actions of God's imperfectly designed humans. Why couldn't He have just wiped away humankind? Why not just remove the evil ones? Surely God knew who they were; after all, He made them the same as He made evil and introduced sin into His creation:
Isaiah 45:6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.
45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
If God is omnipotent, why not just kill those He wanted killed directly? Were the plants and animals so full of sin that they had to die as well? Other life-forms, though not as complex as humans, have sensory systems that are capable of experiencing pain, stress and fear but do not have the capacity to learn from punishment, nor are they capable of making moral judgments ~ logically only a self-aware entity has the capacity to make informed moral decisions ~ yet all life had to suffer and die. Why were these billions of other non-sentient creatures denied the goodness and benevolence of what the Christians like to tout as a morally perfect being?
If the whole idea was to rid the world of wicked people, did His plan work? Is the world now free of sin and wickedness?
Genesis: 6:5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6:6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
"The story of the Flood as told in the Bible closely approximates both of the earlier Mesopotamian versions. Though the Hebrews spent perhaps more time in Egypt, their is little doubt in my mind that they adapted their story of Noah’s flood from that of the Sumerians and Akkadians. The same may be perhaps true for the Greek flood myth. The Egyptian flood myth appears to be independent, and while it is also an aetiological myth, linked perhaps to the observation of natural events, that turned the Nile to blood: the Nilotic red tide produced by the combined red algal bloom, and the annual deposition of Nilotic mud.
It is also quite possible, that in a Jungian sense, all cultures find it necessary to incorporate an apocalyptic vision into their explanation of existence.
Finally, an actual hydro-meteorological event or series of events, occurring in Mesopotamia itself, namely a catastrophic flood or series of floods on the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers is the most likely source for the story’s origin." Anthony Orr Clarke.
For an extremely detailed breakdown showing why the Genesis global flood has no basis in reality, have a look through the files of Graham Kendall.
As with many other of the myths and legends in the bible Noah's global flood story is an adaptation of older stories: in this case the Sumerian Gilgamesh epic and the Babylonian myth of Atrahasis, and regardless of the "proof" presented by psysdoscience site like Creation Science or Answers In Genesisthere is a total lack of compelling evidence to substaniate a literal interpretation.
| COMPARING THE GENESIS AND GILGAMESH MYTHS | ||
| FLOOD DETAILS | GENESIS | GILGAMESH |
| Date Written | Circa 1000 BCE | Circa 2000 BCE |
| Any Historical Evidence? | No | No |
| Any Geological Evidence? | No | No |
| Sent By | Yehwah | Assembly of Gods |
| Extent of flood | Worldwide | Worldwide |
| Caused By | Mankind's Sins | Mankind's Sins |
| Name of hero | Noah | Upnapishtim |
| Announced Via | Direct from God | In a dream |
| Flood caused by? | Heavy rain | Heavy rain |
| Height of the ark | Three stories | Six stories |
| Ark landed at | Mount Ararat | Mount Nisir |
| Intended for whom? | All humanity | All Humanity |
| Human taken onboard | Family members | Family members and a few others |
| Other life taken onboard | Two,or seven, of every species | All species of animals |
| How many compartments? | At least one | Many |
| Shape of doors and windows? | Rectangular | Square |
| Outside coated with? | Pitch | Pitch |
| Character of Hero | Righteous | Righteous |
| Complaints from Hero? | Many | Many |
| Duration of deluge | Forty days | Six days |
| Instructed to build boat? | Yes | Yes |
| Hero blessed after flood? | Yes | Yes |
| Sacrifice given after landing? | Yes, by Noah | Yes, by Upnapishtim |
| Test to find land | Release of raven and dove | Release of raven, dove and swallow |
"The Bible is not a textbook on science. The bible is not a textbook on history"
This is commonly quoted by Christians and seems to have originated with Augustine. It's a tactic used to explain away the many conflicts between the Bible, science and real historical events.
So, when trying to reconcile such things as evolution with Genesis, the fact that the Bible teaches that the earth is flat or the earth was created about 6000 years ago that particular Christian cliche is invoked as an excuse as to why the bible need not be "taken literally" on that particular scientific or historical point. However, II Timothy 3:16 tells us that the Bible is authoritative in all that it touches upon, science included.
3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
Did the Nephilim survive the Flood
In Genesis God kills everything except Noah's family and a few million breeding pairs who are all packed into a small boat for a year.
7:21 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:
7:22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.
so according to the bible no Nephilim survived, but in Numbers, written after the worldwide flood, the Nephilim are mentioned:
13:33 And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak,(the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim) which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight. The Bible says that ONLY Noah and his family survived the deluge so how did the Nephilim survive the Flood? Or were these different "sons of God" having sexual relations with "daughters of men".
God Hardens Pharaoh's Heart
Then Punishes Egypt Because Pharaoh Has A Hard Heart
Mass slaughter and destruction in Egypt caused by God sending ten plagues because Pharaoh Ramasees II won't release the Children of Israel. For some reason He deliberately hardens Pharaoh's heart thus ensuring that the ruler will refuse to release the Isralites, thus making these plagues necessary in the first place. God admits that this is so he can perform 'His wonders'.
Exodus 11:9 And the LORD said unto Moses, Pharaoh shall not hearken unto you; that my wonders may be multiplied in the land of Egypt.
Exodus 7:3 And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt.
7:4 But Pharaoh shall not hearken unto you, that I may lay my hand upon Egypt, and bring forth mine armies, and my people the children of Israel, out of the land of Egypt by great judgments.
7:13 And he hardened Pharaoh's heart, that he hearkened not unto them; as the LORD had said.
7:14 And the LORD said unto Moses, Pharaoh's heart is hardened, he refuseth to let the people go.
10:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, Go in unto Pharaoh: for I have hardened his heart, and the heart of his servants, that I might shew these my signs before him:
10:20 But the LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart, so that he would not let the children of Israel go.
Whoever wrote the Exodus story of the plagues seemed to have more intent than just a demonstration of God's power because each one was also a propaganda victory over the worship of an Egyptian deity ~ remember: God's name is Jealous ~ "no other gods before me" and all that.
Does it not seem the height of absurdity that the God of the Christians, who they say created everything:
"the universe, matter, energy, space and time, the heavens and the earth and all life therein", to whom they endow with omni-everything powers and the capacity to move through time and space at will
would act in such an illogical fashion?
The first plague was blood ~ dahm ~ and was an attack on Hapi, the father of the gods and god of the Nile, the bring of life through the water of the Nile. All of the fish of the river died, causing a terrible stench
The Egyptians venerated the river, but when the waters turned to blood they would have been covered with the shame and confusion of their great god Hapi being "dethroned. The influence of other deities connected with the Nile, such as Amon and Khnum would also have been reduced.
The second plague was frogs ~ tz’fahr’day-a ~ was an attack on Heka (Heqt) the toad goddess, wife of Knepfh (Khnum) and goddess of the land. Frogs miraculously multiplied in number, so many that the land was infested with them. Also, Heka was the goddess of the resurrection and procreative power. Frogs were consecrated to the Osiris and were the symbol of inspiration. Frogs and toads were very sacred to the Egyptians.
The third plague was gnats ~ kinnim. Vast swarms of gnats tormented people and animals. This was an attack on Geb, “the great cackler,” who was god of the earth and vegetation. He was the father of Osiris and husband of Nut.
The fourth plague of flies ~ arov ~ was an attack on Khepfi, scarab, who was the god of insects. Vast swarms of flies through the land, spreading disease. The plague of beetle, a scarab, was an emblem of Re (Ra), the sun god.
The fifth plague was livestock ~ dever ~ This was an attack on Apis, who was the bull god. Disease on the livestock - horses, donkeys, camels, cattle, sheep and goats - but those of the Israelites were unharmed. The Egyptians held many beasts in veneration. The lion, wolf, dog, cat, ape, and goat were sacred to them; but especially the ox, heifer, and ram (Khnum). The soul of their god Osiris was believed to reside in the body of the bull, Apis. Mnevis, the bull god, was symbol of fertility.
The sixth plague was boils ~ sh’chir ~ Festering boils on people and animals through the land. This was an attack on Thoth (Imhotep), the god of medicine, intelligence and wisdom. The Egyptians had several medical deities, to whom, on special occasions, they made sacrifices.
The seventh plague was hail ~ barad ~ This was an attack on Nut, the sky goddess, for this was harvest time, the time of plenty. Powerful hail storms destroyed the standing crops. The hail stones were so big that any people or animals caught outside in the storm were killed. Nut was the mother of Osiris. Also, this was an attack on Isis, goddess of life, and Seth, protector of crops.
The eighth plague was locust ~ arbeh ~ Locusts in such great numbers that the ground was covered with them. They devoured everything that survived the hail storm. This was an attack on Anubis, the god of the fields. This plague finishes up the work that was done by the hail. They devoured every herb of the land and fruit of the trees. Also, this plague was an attack on Isis, protector of against locust, and Seth, protector of crops.
The ninth plague was darkness ~ choshekh ~ Darkness over the entire land for three days - but the Israelites had light in Goshen. This was an attack on Ra or Amon-Re, the sun god. Darkness was considered a creation of Seth, evil principle destroyer of Osiris. It seemed Re (Ra), the sun god, was dead; and Seth had killed him.
The tenth plague was death of the first-born ~ makkat b’khorot ~ Death of the firstborn. This was an attack on Pharaoh, who was the god-king. Pharaoh was considered a god. In fact, first-born people and animals were often worshipped. Pharaoh was considered an incarnation of Ra, the sun god, and Osiris, the giver of life. Because Pharaoh’s son was consider a god, a god of Egypt actually died.
Just think of all the death and destruction that was caused by Yahweh deciding to harden Pharoah's heart. It could all been avoided had He left Pharoah's heart alone or even softened it but, as it says in Exodus 34:14
"For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God"
so it seems He was unable to pass up on the chance of hurting some of the other gods.
He could also have stopped all the hosts of Pharaoh, including the captains of 600 chariots, who drown in the Red Sea while pursuing the Israelites.
"... and the Lord overthrew the Egyptians in the midst of the sea." Exodus 14:27-28
However, with the God invented by Christians, death and destruction usually are His prefered methods and generally win out over love and compassion.
Here's an interesting article about the work carried out by John S Marr and Curtis Malloy and gives a naturalistic explaination for the plagues: no divine intercedance required.
God loves You! |
| And he created everyone on earth. And his love for you is more higher than anything in this world. Of-course God loves you. And the care he has for you is more than the amount of sand on the beach. |
| God will never forake your life. His love and care for you will never end. And whenever you need love and care from God you never have to wait. His love is thier already. And they never love anyone in this world less than anyone else. Thier love for everyone in this world is the same. They treat everyone fair. Thier is none more powerful than God. |
| From another typical Christian website. The writer makes bold assertions but it seems doubtful that she has read the bible fully. The vast majority of Christians have never read the "Good Book" and are 'bible illiterates'. They only hear the 'approved' palatable verses from the pulpit and blindly accept that God is the font of goodness. |