Comparing God with Abraham dishonors God

by Ireneus 7 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Ireneus

    Abraham was tested by God (Genesis 22:1) to know whether he would abandon his attachment towards his son.

    Attachment is a sign of ego, the fountain head of all vices. When you ignore all the factors and forces (known and unknown) that are at work behind every happening, you tend to say “I did this and that”thus taking credit for which your part is too negligible. It is like a farmer taking credit for the agricultural products. That means ego arises in ignorance. In ego, you place “the I”in the middle of your garden, your life. Ego tends to think in terms of “good”and “bad”and you want to accumulate what you think as good and hate what you think to be bad. Thus in ego, you have many desires. If desire is not fulfilled, anger (vice) arises. If desire is fulfilled, you develop attachment (vice) toward what is gained and crave for more of it, greed (vice) both of which further reinforce your ego. This causes a vicious circle.

    Thus attachment is clearly a product of ego. Abraham’s attachment to his son was put to test. He was asked to sacrifice what is closest to his heart and dearest to him. Abraham showed his love of God is more important than his love toward his son. Thus behind the details, story has a good message—Love the Gift-giver more than the gifts.

    However, this story makes sense only in connection with those who have ego problem. In all cultures sacrifice of ego (the brute within) was symbolized by sacrifice of some animal. Many call God as ‘greater Abraham’and say Abraham’s test foreshadowed what God would do in the future sending his son to die for the sins of the world. When the Bible writers say ‘God so loved the world that He was even willing to forego His attachment with His only begotten son and sent him to die for us’they indirectly mean God has attachment, which is one of the manifestation of having ego, the source of all evils.

  • Half banana
    Half banana

    Yes Ireaeus God suffers from all of the worst of human traits including egoism as you point out. God just can't seem to manage without the attachment of puny humans to assist him!

    It was the story of Abraham and Isaac seen through the eyes of Kierkegaard (a theist) which made the penny drop for me and I became atheist. This tale is obviously an early moral tale from polytheistic times when heroes spoke and usually argued personally with their deity. The ugly human sacrifice account promoted an appalling morality which like the Watchtower's is not above ending your children's lives for the sake of fidelity to the cult.

    God is the ego-maniac par excellence, his genocidal lust, homophobia, obsessive patriarchy, nationalism, war-mongering-- "dash all the unbelievers to death including infants" etc, is done with an evil vindictiveness and worse still, he wants perpetual worship for this!

    Could it be that the powerless Judean peasants living under the political domination of a foreign empire, were projecting these traits onto an imaginary divinity who they hoped might save them from their oppressor? Could it?

  • Ireneus

    Bible writers simply projected their own view of God. Here is an example of human thinking on how to impress a would be father-in-law: "David took his men with him and went out and killed two hundred Philistines and brought back their foreskins. They counted out the full number to the king so that David might become the king's son-in-law. Then Saul gave him his daughter Michal in marriage." (1Samuel 18:27)

    Imagine when such writers paint a picture of God, how distorted it would be!

  • Half banana
    Half banana

    (Sorry Ireneus, I spelled your name wrongly)

    The account of David and the Phillistines is grotesque but of course divinely inspired! However it is unlikely to be true, just a tale to say how the hero David went to ridiculous lengths in affirming the tribal Jewish customs to gain the king's approval to get the princess as his wife. Forget the toll of 200 needless killings amongst the neighbours who are worthy of death because they have a different god. If they worship a different god they must be treated as sub-human and its no loss to murder them in Jehovah's eyes. Such are the sacred Bible values. Anyway how can this be useful guidance for anybody in the 21st century?

  • Ireneus

    Hi Half banana,

    There is guidance, but to know other unreasonable comparisons such as this: Jesus is called “son of David”, “Greater David” …etc.

    David was ignorant about the greatest quality of God (impartiality, God never discriminates between His children), according to Moses (Deut 10:17) and Jesus (Mathew 5:44-48; 25:31-46); yet David did (1 Sam 18:27)

    When he already had many wives and concubines, he still murdered his faithful friend and robbed his wife (greed, robbery, adultery …) which are all against what Jesus stood for.

    Seeing resemblance in Jesus and David, Bible writers highlight how distorted their own vision is, thus proving Jesus own statement: “Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.” (Mathew 15:14)

  • MightyV8
  • venus

    There are cases of Bible writers forgetting/overlooking writings of fellow Bible writers. For example, if a liar is caught, he should be treated as impurity in the society, and should be cut off from the society so that it may serve as a lesson for others: If a malicious witness takes the stand to accuse someone of a crime, the two people involved in the dispute must stand in the presence of the Lord before the priests and the judges who are in office at the time. The judges must make a thorough investigation, and if the witness proves to be a liar, giving false testimony against a fellow Israelite, then do to the false witness as that witness intended to do to the other party. You must purge the evil from among you. The rest of the people will hear of this and be afraid, and never again will such an evil thing be done among you. Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.(Deuteronomy 19:16-21)

    According to this Law, it is Satan (not Jesus Christ) that should have been crucified. But it seems Paul went against this Law, and theorized that killing an innocent man would remove the sins of the world.

  • EverApostate

    Comparing one imagination with another can never dishonour either of the imaginations.

    Believing in either/both of these, dishonors our common sense.

Share this