Tuesday, August 9, 2011

Dennis Says: "I think we need a new kind of God"


Biblegod Sounds All Too Human.


Dennis Diehl - EzineArticles Expert AuthorFor the last 4000 years, our Western concept of God has been based on the God that evolved out of the Old Testament theocracy of ancient Israel. That God came into His own as an evolution from earlier gods, all of whose individual traits, the True God Most High was given. It is this God that we have come to "love" in some way, though it seems mostly a one way street in practical human experience. It is this one true God of the OT that we read is a jealous God, never thinking that in that context, He was jealous because there were still other gods a lingering and it was not that He was the only one, but just needed to be the top one. Therefore, "you shall have no other gods, BEFORE ME." The others are lesser types and don't forget it. "I am a jealous God."   In short, the text should read, "You shall not bring any other gods into my presence because I would be jealous of them."  Even as a kid, I wondered why the only God was jealous of no other gods that existed, until I learned that when the Decalogue was given, they did exist. I guess they have since moved elsewhere.




The Bible God is everything from a consuming fire (hmm, the Sun?), to the Bright and Morning Star, to a loving Father. He created humans, then didn't realize how nasty they could be, so he wiped them out drowning them all, save 8, like rats and left humanity the unending quest for the original ark and a way to explain badly the origins of everything from dinosaurs to the Grand Canyon. That one story has slowed the progress of human critical thinking probably as much as any. A few weeks ago headlines asked "Has Noah's Ark Been Found," (again) but it turned out to be a pile of rocks.


This one true Bible God scattered humanity so they couldn't talk too much to each other in one language and advance the cause of science too quickly. They built a tall mud building which scared the Bible God into thinking man thought he could ascend to heaven. No scientific understanding that mud bricks could only take so much pressure and go so high. They obviously haven't seen the Sears Tower from the air. Hard to spot down there on the approach to O'Hare.


The Bible God lived in an obscure land, in obscure mountains and choose to wander around in the desert with an obscure people for a time in an effort to get them to worship him and Him only. He got the group out of Egypt by an Exodus of hundreds of thousands, which neither history nor archaeology can find, but non-the-less, it happened. If you have ever seen the start of the Boston Marathon, you would get an idea of what that might have been like with those in the back jogging in place for days until the mass of humans moved. In exchange for this, and at the exclusion of everyone else on the planet, He would make them the greatest and their kind as the sand of the sea and the stars of heaven. Oi...if this is the greatest humans can be, we need another plan. So for a couple thousand years, this Bible God threatened, punished, exiled, warned, spanked, abused and gave up a couple times, save for that one guy that was worth saving. Seems the Bible God had flawed plans.


Along the way, this Bible God, the same God who is the loving Father now of Jesus and the Christian Faith, but of whom there is precious little known since Jesus has taken all the attention away from Him for the last 2000 years, slew the masses for the benefit of His people. Any nation that ended in "ite", like Amalekites, Hittites, Jebusites...got slaughtered if they got in the way of the people of the Bible God. I guess if you wore "tites" you were history back then. Ok, the Stone Tablets said "Thou Shalt Not Kill" but that only meant "Each Other." It was not binding on the "ites" that got in the way, including the born and unborn children of women who just happened to be not born of the true Bible God people. Those poor souls got their heads smashed, bellies ripped , burned and generally routed in various and hideous ways.


All tolled, the OT portrays Bible God as slewing 1, 238,000 plus while Satan only gets direct credit for 10, Jobs kids.


The Bible God loved meat during this time and millions of animals ended up on the alters and in the pots of a Priesthood working the Temple shifts day and night for a thousand years. That's a hell of a lot of precious wildlife going up in smoke to appease the Bible God. Between Roman arenas and the BG's love of animal flesh, it's no wonder there are few impressive animals left in the Middle East. The Turtle Doves went to Rumania just to recover their numbers since the Romans, at least, didn't send Turtle Doves into the arena.


The BG loved blood as well as the smell of burning flesh. The more blood the better and even the Christians figured out that "without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins." Always blood...blood, blood, blood. The life might be in the blood as the Bible God tells us, but getting it from the body onto the ground seemed to be more of the goal. From redemption by blood sacrifices we went to redemption by execution of the Lamb and the shedding of human blood once and for all. Whew..at least that stopped all the slaughter...well ok , it didn't, but we can say it did in Church and feel better. Actually, history has shown us that after Jesus shed his blood once and for all, a whole lot of human blood was going to be spilled over the next couple thousand years by those that love Jesus and want everyone to see and experience the love of Jesus as they do, and come under his once and for all blood sacrifice. Go figure.


So up to this point, we have a Bible God that is pretty scary, vengeful, jealous, bloodthirsty, clannish, has no wife or consort, surrounds himself with male angels by the millions and seems to think and teach that women are just one rung above animals and other household possessions. Ever ask why ALL Bible Angels are MALE and ALL gift shop angels are FEMALE? Oh well, nuther story. This BG has tons of laws about human sexuality and the consequences of not abiding by the rules, but seems to Himself only be a God from the waist up, even though we are told he has hands and feet.


So in time, the BG gives up on a people of his own with those methods and sends His Son, for about a year of human history, to tell us everything we need to be and do or not do. After the Romans, yes it was the Romans and not the Jews, sent him back to heaven, it's been pretty much a big mess of confusing and conflicting beliefs and "isms" that have brought us to near extinction. Even as a kid I wondered in Sunday school why The BG giving His Son was such a big thing for him to do. He knew he would get him back in three short days, so it's not like Jesus would never come home. I have buried lots of kids that never got to go home and see mom and dad again. I got to try to encourage parents who had lost them, but had no immediate hope of return. I also wondered why it was such a big sacrifice of Jesus for me, when he also knew his death was just more or less an inconvenience to him personally. He didn't have be afraid because he knew he'd be resurrected. He also only spent, according to the account, about six hours on the cross designed to kill one slowly over days as tens of thousands before him and after found out. So it was pretty quick compared to what others had happen to them who had no hope of a quick turn around time. Maybe I think too much. I know it's not encouraged in church or some would not say, "You don't pray in my school, and I won't think in your church." I like that one!


At any rate, I think we need a new kind of God. I know that god's evolve slowly over time, but we don't have much time at the rate we are going. I'd like to make a few suggestions as to the kind we evolve to next with the hope it really does make us spiritual over religious and more universally tolerant instead of tribal and cultic.



1. We need a God that teaches all of us are one and same save for a bit more or less melanin and spot on the planet of origin. This way we might not be so freaky about borders, incursions and "the enemy." I say genetically test all people in the Middle East to prove it's a family feud and they all the same people. Then test in the Far East and West, put the darn genome thingy on TV and point out what a real human is and how they relate.


2. We need to evolve a God that is non-judgmental so humans can't get a hold of all His laws and wring the life out of humanity with them to their personal gain. This would stop the proliferation of thousands of sects, denominations, organizations, cults, "isms" and One True Churches that suck the soul out of people by separating them from the world of real people. We gotta stop majoring in the minors...


3. We need to evolve a God that endorses equality across the board for humans. There are no better humans on the planet than others. No better colors, types, sizes, looks or ways of being. We are what we are and since humans seem to divide up into 16 basic temperaments, we need to recognize that as part of our spirituality and worth. Humans have 16 basic ways of being wired and it's not a spiritual problem to not be wired like someone else! The wealthy just have more and a responsibility to share and teach while the poor have less for reasons that usually relate directly to their government, opportunities and whether they live in sand or soil.


4. We need to evolve a God that appreciates sensual and sexuality. Whoa...la la la la la, I'm not hearing this. Bible sex usually get's you killed for it. Couples rammed thru together with a spear. Women stoned to death. Or mostly just not spoken of. Whoever sneaked the Song of Solomon in must have gotten himself put outside the camp. The Church took the obvious intent and turned it into an earthly story with a heavenly meaning about Jesus...but whew. I think not. BG has no sexuality. Jesus may have, but we don't speak of it and deny it or burn those that suggest it. The disciples were just a group of disconnected men with no women allowed. Original "He Man, Woman Haters Club" I guess. They had the "power to lead around a wife" but that is not very romantic or intimate.


"Power" and "Lead" are not words most women respond to these days in the world of the open hearted and enlightened...few as they relatively be. The Apostles were womanless save for getting their feet washed and supper cooked for them by women. Some women gave them money, so it's not a bad set up. But no sex. Uh uh....no no no. And of Paul..well forget it. He thought all should be like him, which was virginal. I think this hides the fact that he was a troll of some kind, or just not the kind of guy any woman would want to live with romantically. One could suspect other orientation for Paul, which is what he wrestled with in that Hellenistic/Hebraic world, but who knows. I just know a man that "beats himself and keeps himself in subjection" sounds like a troubled guy. We need a God that would help him relax and not be so difficult on this topic. For better or worse, Paul's ideas have made millions think they were the same as God's ideas. They weren't. Jesus said to marry and Paul said, better not to. Someone is wrong.



5. We need to evolve a God that doesn't need to be adored, worshipped, tithed to, sacrificed for and feared. We've had enough of that and all it does is grow abusive organizations and churches that use that to fear, shame and guilt the gullible into submission. We need a God that doesn't need money to build temples and houses to Himself. Like the denomination I came from. They taught that "God liveth not in houses made of stone...." and then set out to make, and dedicate one to Him, made of marble from some godawful expensive place, where He could live if He wanted to, which He didn't. They later evicted Him and sold the House for God to another Church that invited Him back, but He'd already left town by then.


6. We need to evolve a God that we now lies in each one of us and expresses Itself/Himself/Herself, the real Holy Trinity, in the individual who is appreciated for that... different but equal and ok. We don't have all be little yellow pencils for God, Jesus or The Trinity Broadcasting Network. We need a God where truly there is neither male or female, bond or free, black or white, from Yale or the Tech College down the street. Each human is who they are, where they are, being what they are and it's ok. He certainly doesn't require the one true folks to slay the untrue or non-compliant ones.


7. We need to evolve a God that respects the truth of Science and inquiry. No more repressing scientific reality by some church, organization or mind set that is bogus and based on myth and deceit. You keep your God out of my stem cells and I'll keep my God out of your face...we might say. We need a God and spirituality that allows for humans to appreciate their long journey from Africa to Consciousness and understanding the nature of reality is not what we might think it is based on our limited five senses.


In short, we need to grow up and become these things ourselves and a new God will emerge in our souls and we can do better than what we see going on today with the misery one people brings upon another, day in and day out...world without end.


Dennis C. Diehl



24 comments:

Allen C. Dexter said...

I knew you couldn't keep quiet. You think too much and care too much.

I enjoyed it tremendously. Keep thinking. Keep writing. What you write needs writing.

Norm said...

Dennis,

That's an excellent article on the anthropomorphized concept of God.

Perhaps you'd consider doing one on Satan, as well.
I think it's interesting that in the OT, "ha-Satan" is simply an aspect or agent of God, but has been changed by both Christianity and Islam into something more personal.

I wouldn't expect TV preachers to give up these concepts anytime soon, though, since there's lots of mileage and money to be derived from their usage.

Your Pain Buddy,
Norm

DennisCDiehl said...

Hi Norm,
Thanks and you are right. Ha-Satan was originally on the Council of the Gods in Genesis and Job. He was part of the "Let US make Man in OUR image..." He did God's bidding and was not the bad guy Christianity has made him into. Of course, the Serpent in the Garden, the original wise counselor to the goddess which was also going down with EVE (the goddess)was also not any Satan. That story evolved later.

Thanks Allen, I'll know when I'm done I suppose.


Nice hearing from you!

Allen C. Dexter said...

"That story evolved later."

I find it ironic that the evolution haters are caught up in religions which evolved over time, but they will never see or admit to that.

Byker Bob said...

One person's evolution is another's dispensationalism. And, I actually believe that God uses evolution as one of the dynamic processes of the universe. Why? In the physical realm, stasis is impossible. That which ceases to grow dies.

Basically, in our modern era, philosphy, religion, and government all attempt to treat the same problem: A dominant species with free will is controlled by emotion.

The Church of Satan either fails to acknowledge this, or perversely applies an opposite treatment, since their one commandment is "Doest as thou wilt." Existentialism would appear to apply acceptance and passivity as a solution. However, most other God-ordained belief systems (did I hear an atheist chuckle?), and man made ones as well do not attempt to sidestep the problem.

Scientology uses an auditing process to "clear" members from their reactive minds, allegedly restoring sanity.

WCG used extreme legalism in an attempt to legislate the problem away.

Buddhism and TM's mind devices attempt to create states of dispassionate existence.

Christianity is somewhat unique in that it presents a very basic behavioral code, forgiveness, healing, and divine guidance through a personal relationship with the deity as solutions to the problem. Oh, and ultimately, salvation. What is so bad about that? The only problem is that we've all been victimized, not by the real deal, but by a gross perversion of it.

BB

Anonymous said...

Maybe we should have a god who expects us to understand that we no longer have to view him with an ancient cosmology -and that myths and legends could serve a useful but temporary purpose.

DennisCDiehl said...

"Christianity is somewhat unique in that it presents a very basic behavioral code, forgiveness, healing, and divine guidance through a personal relationship with the deity as solutions to the problem. Oh, and ultimately, salvation. What is so bad about that? The only problem is that we've all been victimized, not by the real deal, but by a gross perversion of it."

Forgiveness: not unique to Christianity by any means.

Healing. Really? where does this occur???

Divine guidance. Really??? How does one determine their guidance is divine? Weinland, Pack, Meredith etc all use this one to promote their unique rightness.

Personal relationship with Deity.
Really??? How does this show up? How do we see this working? I have a personal relationship with my Shih Tzu Chewie because she is present, here, touchable, wiggly, funny, real. These however are not any characteristics of Deity. One just seems to have to believe in the magical belief and suppose it is real IMHO

Ultimately salvation. And you know this??? Or do we just believe this is so and hope it is? None of these things are provable in reality. They are assumed based on old texts that say so. We have no personal experience with this concept to validate it in any way.

The Bible seems a written opinion about how things may be or could be, or we hope are. But no one can prove that "And the Lord said," was really said by anyone but the author in his imagination.

Anonymous said...

Do you mean evolution of the concept of God in contrast to a survivial of the fittest mentality where others may need to be eliminated to insure the fittest have adequate resources for the contiuation of the tribe or clan, but remain present as blood-letting and sacrifical rites, long after the initial curcumstances have disappeared and their function is no longer needed, as sort of collective meme in the community.

Anonymous said...

So, Dennis, you're looking for an impersonal divinty to guarantee the continuation of you person, the object of your consciousness. Or, are you looking to continue your conscience without your person? I now people who like the latter, not sure what that is.

Norm said...

BB,

When you wrote that "Christianity is somewhat unique in that it presents ...", you wisely used the word, "somewhat", since Islam also "presents a very basic behavioral code, forgiveness, healing, divine guidance through a personal relationship with the deity, and salvation."

I'm not sure, though, whether Allah or Jesus delivers better auto parts.
Perhaps Jesus has the "midas-touch" and specializes in transmissions, while Allah's better with water pumps and timing chains.

And of course, ha-Satan will be there to test us, as we try to read through dirt-smudges on the Chiltons manuals and skin our knuckles installing them.(Not to mention trying to find that 17mm deep socket that the neighbor never returned.)

Norm

DennisCDiehl said...

"So, Dennis, you're looking for an impersonal divinty to guarantee the continuation of you person, the object of your consciousness. Or, are you looking to continue your conscience without your person? I now people who like the latter, not sure what that is."

It was just an article meant to point out what, to me, is the less than desirable God of the OT that we still talk about as if it really were the "loving Father" of Jesus etc. This is the father Jesus calls "Father" and yet they must argue a lot over how things ought to be done on earth. Do we forgive or do we annihilate?

I don't pretend to know if or what a real Deity is. I can't prove it exists or knows I am in the Multiverse or cares.

Of course I would like meaning. I would love to think that somehow quantum physics, energy, vibrational fields, consciousness goes on as "me" or whatever. I can't prove it and I won't tithe for it ha. I do hope,however, that nothing is for nothing.

caseywollberg said...

"One person's evolution is another's dispensationalism"

Except that evolution can be demonstrated as a fact, while dispensationalism is just question begging and wishful thinking, an ad hoc rationalization for "The Truth" that wasn't. You're just arguing in circles, Bob. All religion came from earth, from the mud, through the apes. If you want to argue for a different origin, you'll have to provide some evidence.

humble commentator said...

The most advanced evolutionists believe that an alien came to this planet and began life here.

Evolution is just replacing one god with another.

Either way, you're all worm food.

Anonymous said...

Dennis Says: "I think we need a new kind of God"

What's wrong with the one you created?

He said, "Biblegod Sounds All Too Human."

Perhaps because you're made in his image.

He said, "For the last 4000 years, our Western concept of God has been based on the God that evolved out of the Old Testament theocracy of ancient Israel."

Strange, I thought the Western concept of God for the last 2000 years was of the long-haired blue-eyed Jesus Christ?

He said, "It is this God that we have come to "love" in some way...."

Really? That's hard to see judging from this website.

He said, "this one true God of the OT ...was jealous because there were still other gods ...He ... needed to be the top one."

Its obvious from the text that he was the top 'Elohim' [mighty one].

He said, "'In short, the text should read, 'You shall not bring any other gods into my presence because I would be jealous of them.'"

Yeah, maybe if a man's wife starting running around with other men, he would tell her, 'YOU SHALL HAVE NO OTHER HUSBANDS BEFORE ME!" Or maybe that's just me. Israel wasn't exactly faithful. In fact, none of us is ever very faithful are we?

He said, "Even as a kid, I wondered why the only God was jealous of no other gods that existed, until I learned that when the Decalogue was given, they did exist."

Most kids don't know that 'other gods' mean the idols, false gods, Ba'als, i.e., the fallen 'elohim,' which were worshiped instead of the Creator.

He said, "He created humans, then didn't realize how nasty they could be, so he wiped them out drowning them all, save 8, like rats...."

He knew how nasty they could be, the very great difference between carnality and the ruach ha kodesh.

He said, "This one true Bible God scattered humanity so they couldn't talk too much to each other in one language and advance the cause of science too quickly. They built a tall mud building which scared the Bible God into thinking man thought he could ascend to heaven."

It wasn't science, it was human vanity, arrogance, and pride.... just EXACTLY like today's leaders.

It wasn't fear, it was love, just like the love of a knowing father who has to make decisions for his 'ignorant' and sometimes hateful children for their best sometimes.

He said, "The Bible God lived in an obscure land, in obscure mountains and choose to wander around in the desert with an obscure people for a time in an effort....."

Honestly, if this is atheism, it is really boring. WCG was never boring, it was quite a ride!

Sorry, I need to go checkout rotten.com for a while.....just needed a warm up. OK, one more....

He said, "In short, we need to grow up and become these things ourselves and a new God will emerge in our souls and we can do better than what we see going on today with the misery one people brings upon another, day in and day out...world without end."

Growing up would be my advise also. Take heart, a new God has emerged in your souls, and I'm sure he will lead you into a 'brave new world [order]' real soon now.

Now that you know about the other 'elohim,' how does it feel to be one?

Good luck on that self-resurrection thing, brother worm food.

Regards.

caseywollberg said...

"The most advanced evolutionists believe that an alien came to this planet and began life here."

Advanced evolutionists? You must be an advanced propagandist to parrot this canard so glibly (and without attribution or citing a source, too, I note--good move).

caseywollberg said...

Regarding this latest "anonymous": Why do idiots always use so many words to say so little?

Allen C. Dexter said...

"ultimately, salvation. What is so bad about that?"

What's so bad about it is the whole concept of needing salvation. It's based on a stupid myth and is a stupid idea to begin with. It's whole purpose in ancient and in modern times is to keep a fearful populace under the thumbs of the reigning religion.

Anonymous said...

From: Anon2and3. I posted the 2nd and 3rd anonymous responses.

Wasn't it Fred Hoyle who pitched the notion that that life was seeded on this planet from outer space? I remember reading a book of his where he suggested it; but it's been twenty years.

Allen C. Dexter said...

The premise that life was seeded here from outer space strikes me as another myth akin to there being a god or gods that did it.

Both teachings are wanting in that they don't explain how the "seeders" came into existence.

Anonymous said...

From: Anon2and3:

Allen, I didn't mean seeded in the manner Johnny Appleseed seeded apple trees, and it was Hoyles hypotheis, not mine. And, Hoyle was an atheist to boot anyway.

Your infinite regress argument implies an infinite number of entities, objects, durations etc. that can never be observed, as they are infinite in number; so, you're criteria for an origen is one that never can be met from the outset.

caseywollberg said...

The exogenesis and panspermia hypotheses you're talking about were put forward not to dismiss abiogenesis, but to account for the supposedly short window of time allowed for local abiogenesis to have occurred. It was never conceived as problematic with regard to infinite regress issues, since the biological material in question could theoretically have come from anywhere, thus eliminating the original problem of a too-short window for local abiogenesis. That was the whole point of the hypothesis.

However, the notion of there not being enough time for life to have evolved terrestrially is not taken very seriously these days: there are far too many hypotheses available that (together or separately) can readily account for relatively rapid abiogenesis under early earth conditions.

Allen C. Dexter said...

My feeling on the subject is that life is an integral part of the evolution of matter. It's inevitable that life will arrise.

If it can arrise, it can spread from one place to another, and that includes spreading by interstellar transport via mereors, comets, etc.

By the same token, I think that super-intelligent, self-aware life such as we humans is extremely rare throughout the universe. It took millions of years and alot of serendipitous happenings for us to be who and what we are. All kinds of happenstances could have thrown the old "monkey wrench" into the gears along the way.

I'm certain life is ubiquitous throughout the universe. Something akin to us is an entirely different matter.

humble commentator said...

caseywollberg,

Thanks for noticing that I'm 'advanced,' and get your own sources, what am I your research assistant?

Anonymous from Planet 9 said...

caseywollberg said...

"The exogenesis and panspermia hypotheses you're talking about were put forward not to dismiss abiogenesis, but to account for the supposedly short window of time allowed for local abiogenesis to have occurred. It was never conceived as problematic with regard to infinite regress issues, since the biological material in question could theoretically have come from anywhere, thus eliminating the original problem of a too-short window for local abiogenesis. That was the whole point of the hypothesis."

Translation: "The most advanced evolutionists believe that an alien came to this planet and began life here."

Comment: "Why do idiots always use so many words to say so little?"