Brewtus;1206823; said:
That's a major problem with the Bible that many Christians seem to gloss over. If one is to use the Bible as a book of moral teachings and as a guideline to live one's life by, then you need to cherry-pick the good parts and ignore a significant part of it. And if parts of the Bible need to be ignored, why does that make it such a revered holy book? Seems to me that the Bible is actually a poor source of moral enlightenment.
I guess I don't put much weight into books outside of the Torah, NT, and passages concerning prophecy. To me, the rest is just man being man and writing what will benefit him.
Cherry-picking? I guess if you want to call it that.. I guess I consider my selections based on who is doing the teaching.. and would use that in any sort of reading of moral teachings.
Buckeyeskickbuttocks;1205633; said:
This daily prayer, declares more than simple monotheism. It's not as easy as saying, there is but One true G-d. Instead, it says that that G-d is One... to talk about G-d's parts, even to the extent that we might think we're glorifying him - say calling him All Knowing - actually is an insult to G-d in as much as it denies his being ONE.
I think the matter of "insulting G-d" lies within ones intention. My personal theory is that the soul, the ultimate judge, is really ones conscious.
Basically, if you don't think you are doing anything wrong - how can you be wrong? Infact, as Christians we are taught not to judge, but to forigve. I think that teaching falls into line with the theory that the only fair and true judge is ones own conscious.
G-d admits no plurality. In other words, to identify some part of G-d, even an infinite one, states that G-d is composed of parts making a whole. Maimonides would prefer to say, not what G-d is, but what G-d is not.
"G-d is not without power" instead of "G-d is omnipotent" In "negative theology" we do not say what may be the individual parts of G-d and thereby suggest something other than Oneness.
I like this, and I like the concept.. however, again, it lies within ones intentions. This thinking requires a lot of thought, energy, and study.
I think for common man (The Bible, IMO - in regaurds to stories in the OT, is very symbolic and is a dumbed down version of what we as humans need to know. ie. Garden of Eden) this thought process is too deep. I think if one calls God omnipotent - with the intention of worship and not disrespect - that person is not insulting G-d in the least.
One might ask, "But isn't saying "G-d is not without power" really just a way of saying G-d has power? And in doing so, aren't we once again piecing together a G-d of parts and not ONE?" Well.. yes... that's true.
But Maimonides would not intend his negative theology to imply that.
EXACTLY. "Maimonides would not intend his negative theology to imply that." .. Intention of the worship.
Actually, Maimonides would go further and say the best way to think about G-d is absolute silence, but appreciates that doing so is not for everyone.
I like this piece of your post too, and would agree. I would be willing to bet, most people 1.) can't quiet their mind and 2.) if/when the attempt to do so, their mind wanders away from the focus of worship and silence.
OK.. the Bible also tells us in the Second Commandment that it is a sin to practice Idolatry. "Thou shalt not make unto thee graven image, nor any manner of likeness, or any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: thou shalt not bow down unto them, nor serve them."
But, can't we say that - considering Maimonides' outline about what G-d is (not) - that it's true that whatever G-d might be doing, he's not walking with Moses. He's not sitting on a throne... he's not talking to Noah. To say that G-d is doing these things... talking, sitting, walking.. as a man might... Judaism - and later, Christianity - become nothing more than single deity paganism, right?
Again, I think a lot of scripture is symbolic. "Sitting on a throne" = G-d is LORD of all lords, KING of all kings.
I do disagree with "not talking to Noah" (or any other prophet for that matter)
With respect to thinking such things makes one a pagan... The more I research certain "pagans" I think they were more aware of the world, universe, life force, 'G-d', 'Holy Spirit', etc. than almost all modern day faiths are today.
It's almost as if those teachings have been strained and numbed out.. I would venture a guess it has a lot to do with the current age and point in time we find ourselves in - but thats my crazy side of my mind..
However, I go back to the intentions.. I don't think theres any real diffrence in the G-d anyone worships. I think this can be seen through the core teaching of the earths religions.. It seems ever great teacher.. every great sage.. had a very simple teaching.. LOVE.
