quote:Originally posted by Aude Sapere:
I never claimed "Christian brotherhood" alone, I claim universal brotherhood for all men and in all places and at all times. That is why I detest the "God ordained" slaughter alleged to have occured at the hands of the Proto-Hebrews by allegedly God's command through Joshua and Moses. This is clearly NOT the God of universal love and kindness as revealed in the New Testament, but a semipagan parody of the concept, desiring the blood of bulls and sheep and goats and doves to take away sin for a short while to allow people to kill their neighbors or gain wealth.
The early books of the Old Testament are repugnant to any standard of civilized behavior, common sense and most traditions other than a desert tribal blood lust taboo culture.
What inspiration might have been in the oral stories have long been lost with chauvinism, duplicity, and idiocy through the biases of the compilers in Babylon 2500 years ago.
The Old Testament only begins to have any systematic theology once contact with the advanced Persian Zoroastarians is made. It is fair to say, bluntly, that the majority of the first books are no more majestic
than a catalogue of Hammurabi's victories and laws set into narrative form: utterly lacking in produndity beyond that of any common myth and often not even to the level of the Indo-Persians at the same time period of original oral composition.
Sorry, I have been a-reading Tom Paine again.
Hi Neal,
Sorry, my Friend, but one cannot pick and choose which part of God's Word he will accept. Either you accept God and His Written Word -- or you reject both.
Are you saying that you reject both?
Keep in mind that the God of the Old Testament -- is the same God of the New Testament. So, if you reject part of Him; you reject all of Him.
Maybe you should lay aside your Book of Traditions and your Prayer Book -- and give God's Book more thought.
Just a thought.
God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,
Bill
