What if?

[floo]

deleted

[john]

Don't worry about it Floo,

As the Christians on here will rush to tell you it's just a made up story, with no more relevance to reality than the tales of Hans Christian Anderson (they were gruesome too).

[Dicky Underpants]

As a devout Christian what if you had an experience which persuaded you god was asking you to sacrifice your child, would you obey that request? If not, why not?

Abraham was prepared to put his son through the trauma of sacrificing him all because he believed god was telling him to do so. What sort of father would do that? Surely any decent father would have told god to stick the request where the sun don't shine. In this day and age he would be prosecuted for even contemplating carrying out such a crime, and rightly so. Abraham should be vilified rather than treated as some sort of Biblical hero, imo!

No takers from the Christian camp, I see. The story doesn't ring too well when read through the eyes of a modern liberal consciousness (or in your case, not so liberal, judging from your comments on what you would do with "scum" whom you don't know at all).
However, it does help to be a bit aware of the prevalence of child sacrifice in ancient times - remembering that the upshot was that Isaac was not sacrificed.

And as John points out, it's only an old story, though that's more likely to be the view of atheists and agnostics, rather than evangelical Christians and Orthodox Jews.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sacrifice

[Hope]

Don't worry about it Floo,

As the Christians on here will rush to tell you it's just a made up story, with no more relevance to reality than the tales of Hans Christian Anderson (they were gruesome too).

I doubt that they will, john.  The bit of Genesis that is theological in nature is the first 11 chapters, not later on.  However, I wonder what folk here would think if they were asked by their employer to move to another part of the country at the point that their child(ren) were about to do important exams or some other developmental test - music grade exams, sports trials, etc., etc. ?

[Hope]

No, they will say Abraham knew god wouldn't let him go through with it!

I doubt they will say that either, Floo.  They'd probably say that Abraham had absolutely no idea what the outcome would be.

[SqueakyVoice]

I doubt that they will, john.  The bit of Genesis that is theological in nature is the first 11 chapters, not later on.  However, I wonder what folk here would think if they were asked by their employer to move to another part of the country at the point that their child(ren) were about to do important exams or some other developmental test - music grade exams, sports trials, etc., etc. ?

At what point does the Bible say  "and the Lord said unto Abraham, "You know how your kids have got their GCSEs coming up...?""

I can't imagine any employer telling an employee they had to move just as a test of their loyalty. Perhaps that's because even my most incompetent employers haven't been narcissistic psychopaths.

[Sassy]

Don't worry about it Floo,

As the Christians on here will rush to tell you it's just a made up story, with no more relevance to reality than the tales of Hans Christian Anderson (they were gruesome too).

WHY would they do that?

Truth is all humans whether Christian or not have committed such horrific things.
Look at Pagan worship like the god of Baal. Mainly the practice of worship of things of nature and the bible shows that Abraham and the reality was to show sacrificing your children was not acceptable.

The lessons we take away from Abraham and from the OT is that sacrificing your child or any human being is not right. Because we as humans have no control over life and dead and cannot give life. We see the difference between giving your life to save another and the evil of sacrificing your life to a god/false religion.

Truth is that man will twist it as he pleases but the difference can be seen in the motive and outcome. Just sacrificing your child without purpose to appease a superstition or a false god is pure evil.

[2Corrie]

Floo I wouldn't obey because that would not come from God:

 if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God's curse!

 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.

[Gordon]

I doubt that they will, john.  The bit of Genesis that is theological in nature is the first 11 chapters, not later on.  However, I wonder what folk here would think if they were asked by their employer to move to another part of the country at the point that their child(ren) were about to do important exams or some other developmental test - music grade exams, sports trials, etc., etc. ?

Then at the last minute, when the kids are crying, when the last boxes are being loaded into the removal van and just as you're getting ready to close the door of your much loved home (which you don't want to leave) for the very last time - then your boss turns up and says 'its o.k. - I changed my mind'.

Sounds a bit cruel and unnecessary to me, as does the the Abraham story, so your analogy isn't especially reassuring. If anything you've succeeded in highlighting the insensitive pettiness of your god in this OT story: and even if it is meant to be taken as being 'theological' it still isn't a great advert for your faith in an all-loving god that seemingly likes a bit of cruel taunting.

[trippymonkey]

Abraham was going to do it out of FEAR for all their safety !! That's obvious !

It just shows how fear is used to control people in religions. That creature of the Bible & Quran is far worse than any human can be because it supposedly can do anything it wants - AND HAS, according to scripture. UGH ?!!?!?

Nick

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Then at the last minute, when the kids are crying, when the last boxes are being loaded into the removal van and just as you're getting ready to close the door of your much loved home (which you don't want to leave) for the very last time - then your boss turns up and says 'its o.k. - I changed my mind'.

Surely it would be ''it's OK...come into the office for your P45.''

[john]

Mr Hope

Can you tell us which bits of the Bible are actually true and not just "theological".

You see people have difficulty taking any of the Bible seriously when even avid believers like you dismiss parts as not actually being factual.

Would it not be better to throw away the Bible as it stands now, with all it's flaws which you admit and produce a version which contains only the bits that are demonstrably true. I wonder how big a book that would be?

[trippymonkey]

It would be little more than a pamphlet !?!!?!?!?

[Dicky Underpants]

Mr Hope

Can you tell us which bits of the Bible are actually true and not just "theological".

You see people have difficulty taking any of the Bible seriously when even avid believers like you dismiss parts as not actually being factual.

Would it not be better to throw away the Bible as it stands now, with all it's flaws which you admit and produce a version which contains only the bits that are demonstrably true. I wonder how big a book that would be?

Speaking as an unbeliever, that's strikes me as incredibly silly. The Song of Solomon is obviously a poem. In what sense is a poem 'true'? What do you mean by 'true'? Do you mean the bits of the Bible that purport to be literal, historical truth? You obviously haven't read very much of the Bible, since a lot of it hits you in the eye as not ever having been meant to be history. Ecclesiastes is not history. The Book of Proverbs is not history. The incredibly boring Book of Leviticus is not history.

Now there will always be debate about the meaning of all the above, but I doubt whether you'd ever be able to demonstrate conclusively whether the Song of Solomon is unequivocally 'true' or not.

We don't have to pay much attention to the rednecks in the American Bible belt who want to assert that the opening chapters of Genesis are literally true as history and 'science' - any person with two brain cells can see that they are not literally true.

But I get a feeling of unease when people like yourself start talking about ditching large bits of world literature. I get the feeling that if you had your way, we'd be burning Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, because they also talk about 'gods' and are therefore obviously not 'true'. And that applies to any number of other well-known works of world literature. Vergil's Aeneid - talks of gods - burn it. Plato's philosophy - talks of a spiritual realm of 'Ideas' and his Timaeus talks of a creator-demiurge - burn them. The Popol Vuh - the classic text of Mayan mythology - burn it. And so on.

[Sebastian Toe]

We don't have to pay much attention to the rednecks in the American Bible belt who want to assert that the opening chapters of Genesis are literally true as history and 'science' - any person with two brain cells can see that they are not literally true.

You do realise that you have just described our very own ~TW~ as a one brain cell redneck, don't you?

Now carry on and keep up the good work.

[Dicky Underpants]

You do realise that you have just described our very own ~TW~ as a one brain cell redneck, don't you?

Now carry on and keep up the good work.

I'd hesitate to grant him even one brain cell - but so long as he confines his rants to a few visits here and street corners, he's quite harmless. Unlike the US variety - especially now the Trump suggests he's born again.

[Brownie]

Speaking as an unbeliever, that's strikes me as incredibly silly. The Song of Solomon is obviously a poem. In what sense is a poem 'true'? What do you mean by 'true'? Do you mean the bits of the Bible that purport to be literal, historical truth? You obviously haven't read very much of the Bible, since a lot of it hits you in the eye as not ever having been meant to be history. Ecclesiastes is not history. The Book of Proverbs is not history. The incredibly boring Book of Leviticus is not history.

Now there will always be debate about the meaning of all the above, but I doubt whether you'd ever be able to demonstrate conclusively whether the Song of Solomon is unequivocally 'true' or not.

We don't have to pay much attention to the rednecks in the American Bible belt who want to assert that the opening chapters of Genesis are literally true as history and 'science' - any person with two brain cells can see that they are not literally true.

But I get a feeling of unease when people like yourself start talking about ditching large bits of world literature. I get the feeling that if you had your way, we'd be burning Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, because they also talk about 'gods' and are therefore obviously not 'true'. And that applies to any number of other well-known works of world literature. Vergil's Aeneid - talks of gods - burn it. Plato's philosophy - talks of a spiritual realm of 'Ideas' and his Timaeus talks of a creator-demiurge - burn them. The Popol Vuh - the classic text of Mayan mythology - burn it. And so on.

Excellent post, homage to the Dick!

[Hope]

Mr Hope

Can you tell us which bits of the Bible are actually true and not just "theological".

You see people have difficulty taking any of the Bible seriously when even avid believers like you dismiss parts as not actually being factual.

There are some very easy ways to tell, john.  For instance, is it poetry?  Is it 'wisdom literature'?  Is it historical in the sense of having been written contemporaneously with the events; within a generation of the events; centuries after the events; ...?  Then there are specific linguistic techniques that are very obvious in the original languages - for instance, hyperbole was a favourite such technique with Jewish writers.

Would it not be better to throw away the Bible as it stands now, with all it's flaws which you admit and produce a version which contains only the bits that are demonstrably true. I wonder how big a book that would be?

But how do you show that something is 'demonstrably true', john?  For instance, are the many snippets of wisdom that occur in the Book of Proverbs 'demonstrably true'?  Is the poetry that fills Psalms 'demonstrably true'?

Part of the importance of the written word is that it covers far more than just the mere truth.

[Sebastian Toe]

There are some very easy ways to tell, john. 

Unfortunately Hope, our friend ~TW~ would say that you are unable to tell (oh and you are probably going to hell for good measure ) 

[Spud]

An idea which may be wrong, but I'll put it down anyway, is that God was testing Abraham to see if he would 'mind' (for want of a better word) if his later offspring, Jesus, died for everybody's sin.

[ad_orientem]

No, they will say Abraham knew god wouldn't let him go through with it!

Wrong. Abraham didn't know but he believed in God when he promised Abraham "Sara thy wife shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name Isaac, and I will establish my covenant with him for a perpetual covenant, and with his seed after him".

[john]

Dickie

You are of course right and the point is well made.

But you take me too literally like some do the book itself.

My comments were of course aimed at those who claim the Bible as an infallible and undeniable guide to the way to live life. And insist that some bits are literally true whilst admitting that other bits are; poetry, allegorical, etc. They cannot have it both ways methinks.