Bible Study Cover to Cover

Transcendancy is pretty important in establishing the power, or magnitude, or scope of God. It would seem odd to think of a God who was not in some manner transcendent.To me it is slightly more interesting that such a personal God would be established in Genesis. If that story was indeed written first, it may be a reflection of a revolution in worship. What was the catalyst for the new 'God'?Why does no one bother to tell us what God is like? Pretty possibly there were other stories at one time, but if you look at Genesis as pure myth, why are there no tales of how God came to be, as there are in many other religions? Why is it so incomplete and mysterious?

but the wonder of god is his intimacy. transcendence doesn't require distance. because it's a mystery religion. well, christianity is. i know that's not the kind of answer you wanted to hear. but do a bit of reading on them. you're not supposed to know all the answers until you reach that level of initiation. that kinda got lost at some point.what we don't know about the jewish god has either been lost, or we don't know cause we're not jewish.but if you want a metaphysical answer about what god is like, you learn about him in the bible a bit. you have to pick stuff out and see what's people and what's god. then you have to get to know him yourself. but that's not really an answer either. and now you see my dilemma.

No, it's not what I wanted to hear. I know about the mystery cults, and they were pretty bogus, at least compared with a religion that HAS a text to base itself on.I was raised Byzantine Catholic. ALL of the churches have a set of doors before the altar which recall a time when only the 'initiated' were admitted to the mysteries of the Eucharist. The part where the celebrant flags the catechumens by closing the doors is written into the liturgy to this day.Christianity itself is not a mystery religion,even if it picked up some of the antics. I am well indoctrinated, and I still do not know why Genesis does not start with 'in the beginning was a man with a long white beard'.I am being stupid, I know, but if you look at other cultures, there are plentiful elaborated stories of how a person achieved god status. I don't see that Genesis didn't WANT us to have all the answers, but it is more likely they got lost or were never remembered at the end of an oral tradition. We aren't, but we can look it up. Jewish people are not interested in knowing God through Jesus, and it is time I knew how THEY picture God. Take something like this, and it appears the same wall has been erected for Jewish people. Since the Bible is silent on the origins of God, do we for want of information conclude that God had no beginning? If we start to look at Scripture as only literature, is there not the temptation to 'write in' the missing parts?Edited by anastasia, : No reason given.

no. i agree. i was discussing what christianity was through various periods. and technically, christianity is a mystery religion. but it's really not important. that's a very good attitude. i'd recommend a reformed synagogue. just because. it's a good place to start and it'll be really different from your orthodox upbringing. go for a few weeks and then look into a serious bible study. i have no idea what you'll find. i've not made that step yet. after that, start reading theses and stuff on your own. but i'd really say it's best to get a good look at how their brains work before diving in with your own ideas.

I don't agree with the 'technically' part. The most you can say is that Catholicism has retained a little of the ceremony of mystery, but all of the doctrine is pretty well continued Judaeism. I just moved, and I was living right down the street from an orthodox synagogue. Call me strange, but I am one of those strict believers in attendence at one's own church, and since I don't do that often now, I highly doubt I will go to a synagogue or a Bible study.I am in a joking mood, my bad, but I am pretty familiar with the Jewish God concept. The problem is that Jewish people are making the same extractions from the same texts as we are, and it doesn't go far in determining the original intent or view of the writers of Genesis.

I'm curious. Why?Jacob, sure. He's the kind of guy, you shake hands with him, you count your fingers when you get them back. He and Laban deserved each other.Joseph... he's more often at the mercy of events, isn't he, than setting them in motion?Even his early status as the fair-haired kid--a setup by Jacob.___

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

well, yeah, jacob's a shit.but joseph is so self-righteous and snotty and.. guh.

I apologize, in advance, if it seems I’m splitting hairs . I actually admire your diligence. God has already told Adam death was an effect in Gen 2:17, granted Eve could not have heard this bit seeing as she wasn’t created ”til Gen 2:22.
“ . but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."Nevertheless, Eve affirms she knew of the consequences before her decision to partake in the forbidden fruit, although we don’t know if God or Adam brought her up to speed . Gen 3:3
“ . but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.' "In their lack of foresight (natural death by means of old age), did they think God was full of it because they were able to see the sun set that evening and rise the next morning? Was God’s grace displayed by allowing them to die later in life as opposed to that literal day? I read this as Adam blaming the woman for giving him from the tree, not blaming God for giving him the woman. He doesn’t say ,”Never mind what tree I ate from. Wudju gimme that woman who gave me from the tree in the first place anyway.” Where does it assert they speak different languages or that they were separated by language. Seems as the nations (Noah’s families) were separated on the Earth geographically after the flood...by distance or water I would think. The Tower of Babel may be an inserted tale, but this verse seems to do nothing to bolster that thought or any contradiction here. I dunno. You can be sorrowful and grieve w/o regret. My family grieved at my grandfathers passing, but didn’t experience any regret. We knew he was on his way out. It was comforting to know he had graduated to the next part of his life. I was grieved, felt sorrow, yet also a sense of comfort and relief. But maybe God was regretful. As well the root and beginning of the greatest blessing. People who are nave cast judgments on Muslims. Nowhere does the Jewish God tell anyone Ishmael and his descendants are infidels and command for them to be terrorized and murdered at any cost. People suck. No, I’m sorry . religion sucks. Epiphany, people trying to practice religion suck (emphasis on trying). Oh wait, that’s no epiphany, Jesus said something along those lines a long time ago (He was a bit more tactful though). God doesn’t express they should be treated differently than anybody else. Granted, he does call him a jackass. Or ”cause he spunked on the ground?It’s been fun.
Gotta go . dinner’s ready.

i have never asserted that god said any of it. but nonetheless, it sounds precisely like those little stories that are later followed with the total annihilation of a given group. and, surprise, this story is followed by immense interstate strife and killing. if that were the case, it would have said that. but it didn't. it said in order not to give offspring to his brother. that means that god punished him because he wouldn't give his brother an heir.you really think he's the only man in the whole old testament who ever jizzed on the floor? you really think that if he'd caught it in a tissue and flushed it god would have spared him? Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.

I'm enjoying the thread and noticed there has been a lot of talk about mythology. I thought that it might be helpful to quote CS Lewis on Christian mythology.

I’d be willing to bet we agree people have been misrepresenting The Word of God since the beginning of mankind. Refer to this topic, for example, here on EVC; Bible Question: What was the First Sin? . There are plenty of examples we could share. God seems to deal with people, to their own measure, who represent the Word falsely. Consider Luke 17:1-2. What I mean is I believe it carries a penalty. Possibly at their followers expense as well sometimes? Kinda like everybody missing recess for the shenanigans of one class clown.
Consider this hands on example, by a historically proclaimed “great man of God” later in Numbers Here we have a sobering example of one of the greatest snares to walking in spiritual power and authority. Moses is pressured greatly by the people complaining of no water. God commands Moses to take his rod, a symbol of authority given to him by the Lord, and simply speak to the rock to bring forth water. Whether he misunderstood the Word God spoke, was on a power trip, or was simply frustrated and disobeyed it, instead of speaking to the rock, Moses struck it with his rod. Even so, by the Grace of God, water came forth in abundance, but it would seem at a grave cost. The Lord’s discipline was most severe: Moses (and Aaron by association) take(s) credit ("must we bring you water...") for this even though God performs the miracle. God didn't call the Israelites names, but Moses calls them rebels...yet Moses is supposed to be bearing the responsibility of representing God. Not a very accurate representation if you ask me. Moses seems condescending towards those people, to me, in his tone and even more so by hitting the rock (not once, but twice) instead of just speaking to it like commanded. Maybe a better representation of God’s Word and Grace could have been relayed to the Israelites by Moses simply saying ,”Rock, in the Name and the Power of the God of our Deliverance and Provision, please release water for those who God loves.” Here, a penalty is accrued for misrepresenting the Word and Heart of God. The Israelites would not have only received the blessing of the provision of water, but Moses would not have been forbidden to enter the promised land. If great men of God misrepresent his character, how much more so are we inclined?
I’m with ya. Probably not. Though, to me, the cause (“he wasted his seed on the ground“) and effect (“in order not to give offspring to his brother.”) presents two offences. Maybe both were “displeasing in the sight of the LORD”. It may be different (I doubt it though) if he was tossin’ off to a stone carving of a naked lady, but he was hittin’ skins. Either way it seems like tossin’ in the sand is being a poor steward of a God given resource for the creation of human life (no matter how its disposed). Onan had to go out of his way, no doubt, to accomplish this offence regardless. I know people who won’t pull out even when faced with the consequence of fatherhood or child support. Just havin' some fun within the context.These are our thoughts in light of the Scriptures. Who am I to judge a thought the Spirit of God has allowed within you . I was just wording my thoughts as to these Scriptures. Your opinions are a pleasant contrast to me. I apologize if I offended you. Keep up the good work.

---

Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

This may not explain the incompletion or mysteriousness but I hope it helps. Consider this analogy. Providing you have a good relationship with your Father, would you rather know where he was from or what he represents in his character. What is in his heart. By leaving out the irrelevant, the importance of the things included are magnified. To me the Scriptures, when compiled, are a sort of love story concerning God and us, the people. A Divine creation. A tale of God’s epic desire to be with us, forever, in Spirit and in Truth. As he realized through the unfolding centuries no man close to him, or otherwise, could or would convey this indiscriminately and without confusion, He sent His Son, that is himself, His Heart, to set the ultimate precedence once and for all. Finally a man, Jesus, got it right. That’s why he has not communicated through another for the purpose of establishing scripture since the times of the Resurrection and Ascension .There is nothing to say, of relevance, that cannot be summed up in within the life of his Son. From Genesis to Revelation, along with man’s inability to comprehend or communicate God’s love for us all, the adventure of life,death,and life again have been revealed.

---

Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

quote:

---

in order not to give offspring to his brother. that means that god punished him because he wouldn't give his brother an heir.

---

If we read the Bible the way we read any other book, the reason for the wasting of the seed would be the reason for God's disappointment.Of course I find the double standards in this story very fascinating. There seems to be no issue with Judah having sex with a temple prostitute (or so he thought) or the fact that even though Tamar was not married to Judah she had no qualms about doing what was necessary to get the child she was due by Hebrew laws. The end seems to justify the means in this case.So God was disappointed because the brother didn't perform his duty, but wasn't disappointed in Judah for not following through with giving her the youngest son or with the temple prostitute issue.The point of the story being to explain the bloodline as opposed to setting down rules.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

generally. i was really just commenting on the "every sperm is sacred" crap.

Can anyone tell me if the bible gives a purpose or reason for suffering? There is so much suffering in the world today I wonder if there can be an end to it?Edited by dameeva, : No reason given.