Where did this idea that God was All-Seeing and All-Knowing come from if He couldn't find Adam and Eve in the garden until they came out of hiding?
The best I can reason is that His power was exaggerated by priests and travelers, but wouldn't the Church clamp down and prevent that sort of thing from the former? I'm aware that for a time sermons were given in Latin and the common man had no idea what it all meant, but wouldn't the Church nevertheless become aware of and stamp out popular beliefs that conflicted with what the Bible says?
There are, of course also remote areas where once Jesus Christ is removed from their version of Christianity it's pretty much the native beliefs from some hundred or thousand years ago before missionaries arrived. Somehow, I doubt that such remote communities would have this massive influence that leaves most people today thinking (wrongly) that God is All-Knowing and All-Powerful.
Originally Yahweh was a Canaanite storm spirit, he had wives and petty squabble with Baal and the rest of the Babylonian Fun Bunch.
Eventually the Greek philosophers started coming up with fun big infinity ideas about Ideal Perfect Forms and Omni-whatevers and the later Christians started saying about their new guy "Yeah mee too, my God is also those things! Haha!"
Parker Morgan
I thought he was the war god and baal was the storm god
Liam Thomas
Yup. That sums it up nicely.
Logan Watson
Because people changed their mind about gods powers, while keeping the old books canon.
It's like 'why doesn't Superman use the power he used in issue 32 to solve this problem?' it's because the writers didn't think of it.
Ian Diaz
>Where did this idea that God was All-Seeing and All-Knowing come from It's in the old testament, like Proverbs 5:21, and the new testament, like Hebrews 4:13
>He couldn't find Adam and Eve Huh?
Ryder Murphy
Yeah, basically.
Camden Gutierrez
It hurts how you guys accurately represent my generation's ignorance on theology, or anything on religion for that matter.
Charles Green
that poster is right though. christianity emerged from a collision between a fringe jewish sect and a predominantly hellenic culture of the mediterranean. many of its features (including the one OP's asking about) are best explained as products of the tension between christianity's preexisting jewish idiosyncrasies and the desire for legitimacy in the eyes of the hellenic intellectual elite.
Oliver Rivera
> Yahweh was a Canaanite storm spirit Source > he had wives Source > petty squabble with Baal and the rest of the Babylonian Fun Bunch. Source
Landon Martin
>Pretending you won't just ignore or dismiss whatever source/evidence anyone presents
This game has been played enought in the other thread Scroll if you feel like it.
David Morgan
Constnatine has a good point, he can control weather because he's the God of everything.
Do you have anything that points to him specifically being a storm god?
Lincoln Reyes
I can't play this game right now, and it doesn't matter. Believe whatever you want.
Justin Wood
>Where did this idea that God was All-Seeing and All-Knowing come from
The Greeks. Towards the end of the Roman Empire, pagan monotheism was the dominant belief system among educated Greeks, and they are the ones who attributed the characteristics we think of as "Christian" to their idea of god, ie,that he is the Greatest Good, that he is Love, that he is all-powerful and all-knowing, etc etc. These ideas are not found in Judaism, at all, until the period of syncreticsm among the Jews of Hellenic Alexandria.
>"if the pagans mean that the gods are immortal, but, at the same time, created by the supreme God and that they are blessed, not by themselves, but through adhering to him who made them, then their meaning is the same as ours, whatever title they use . . . the fact that they give the name 'gods' to creatures who are immortal and blessed in the above sense, there is here no dispute between us" (Saint Augustine, "De Civitate Dei", IX.23).
Luke Cooper
It is an exaggeration they did after to have more power
Cooper Cruz
How about you present evidence that any god, storm or otherwise, has ever existed and then we'll talk. Until then shut the fuck up and keep your delusions to yourself. How many rapefugee feet have you washed today, christcuck?
Andrew Rodriguez
>Do you have anything that points to him specifically being a storm god?
little is known about the origins of yahweh but "north arabian weather deity" is a plausible theory. israelites added more substantial storm imagery to yahweh by conflating him with baal. here's some material:
Various West Semitic descriptions emphasize either Baal’s theophany in the storm (KTU 1.4 V 6-9, 1.6 III 6f., 12f., 1.19 I 42-46) or his role as warrior (KTU 1.2 IV, 1.5 I 1-5, 1.119.26-29, 34-36; RS 16.144.9334). These two dimensions of Baal are explicitly linked in KTU 1.4 VII 29-35, 1.101.1-4, and EA 147.13-15 as well as some iconography.335 F. M. Cross treats different descriptions of Baal as a single Gattung with four elements, which appear in these passages in varying degrees. The four components are: (a) the march of the divine warrior, (b) the convulsing of nature as the divine warrior manifests his power, (c) the return of the divine warrior to his holy mountain to assume divine kingship, and (d) the utterance of the divine warrior’s “voice” (i.e., thunder) from his palace, providing rains that fertilize the earth.336 Biblical material deriding other deities reserves power over the storm for Yahweh (Jer. 10:11-16; 14:22; Amos 4:7; 5:8; 9:6). Biblical descriptions of Yahweh as storm-god (1 Sam. 12:18; Psalm 29; Job 38:25-27, 34-38) and divine warrior (Pss. 50:1-3; 97:1-6; 98:1-2; 104:1-4; Deut. 33:2; Judges 4-5; Job 26:11-13; Isa. 42:10-15, etc.) exhibit this underlying unity and pattern explicitly in Psalm 18 (= 2 Sam. 22):6-19, 68:7-10, and 86:9-19.337 Psalm 29, 1 Kings 19, and 2 Esdras 13:1-4 dramatize the meteorological progression underlying the imagery of Yahweh as warrior.
(cont.)
Justin Lee
People like you are the reason the fedora meme exists
Zachary Russell
All three passages presuppose the image of the storm moving eastward from the Mediterranean Sea to the coast. In 1 Kings 19 and 2 Esdras 13:1-4 this force is portrayed with human imagery. The procession of the divine warrior is accompanied by a contingent of lesser divine beings (Deut. 32:34; 33:2; Hab. 3:5; KTU 1.5 V 6-9; cf. Judg. 5:20). The Ugaritic antecedent to Resheph in Yahweh’s entourage in Habakkuk 3:5 may be KTU 1. 82.1-3, which perhaps includes Resheph as a warrior with Baal against tnn, related to biblical tannînîm.338 Though the power of other Near Eastern warrior-gods was manifest in the storm (e.g., Amun, Ningirsu/Ninurta, Marduk, and Addu/Adad),339 the proximity of terminology and imagery between the Ugaritic and biblical evidence points to an indigenous cultural influence on meteorological descriptions of Yahweh. Israelite tradition modified its Canaanite heritage by molding the march of the divine warrior specifically to the element of Yahweh’s southern sanctuary, variously called Sinai (Deut. 33:2; cf. Judg. 5:5; Ps. 68:9), Paran (Deut. 33:2; Hab. 3:3), Edom (Judg. 5:4), and Teiman (Hab. 3:3340 and in the Kuntillet ‘Ajrûd inscriptions; cf. Amos 1:12; Ezek. 25:13). This modification may underlie the difference between Baal’s epithet rkb ‘rpt, “cloud-rider” (e.g., CTA 2.4[KTU 1.2 IV].8), and Yahweh’s title, rokeb bāa‘ărābôt, “rider over the steppes,” in Psalm 68:5 (cf. Deut. 33:26; Ps. 104:3),341 although a shared background for this feature is evident from other descriptions of Baal and Yahweh. The notion of Baal riding on a winged war chariot is implicit in mdl, one element in Baal’s meteorological entourage in KTU 1.5 V 6-11.342
(cont.)
Levi Barnes
Psalm 77:19 refers to the wheels in Yahweh’s storm theophany, which presumes a divine war chariot. Psalm 18 (2 Sam. 22):11 presents Yahweh riding on the wind surrounded by storm clouds. This image forms the basis for the description of the divine chariot in Ezekiel 1 and 10. Psalm 65:12 (E 11) likewise presupposes the storm-chariot image: “You crown your bounteous year, and your tracks drip with fatness.” Similarly, Yahweh’s storm chariot is the image presumed by Habakkuk 3:8 and 15: Was your wrath against the rivers, O Yahweh? Was your anger against the rivers, or your indignation against the sea, when you rode upon your horses, upon your chariot of victory? You trampled the sea with your horses, the surging of the mighty waters.
The description of Yahweh’s horses fits into the larger context of the storm theophany directed against the cosmic enemies, Sea and River. (The horses in this verse are unrelated to the horses dedicated to the sun in 2 Kings 23:11, unless there was a coalescence of the chariot imagery of the storm and the sun.343) The motif of chariot-riding storm-god with his divine entourage extends in Israelite tradition to the divine armies of Yahweh riding on chariots with horses (2 Kings 2:11; 6:17).
source: Mark S. Smith, The Early History of God: Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, Aug 3, 2002
Nolan Garcia
Didn't Yahweh get rekt by chariots of iron once?
Christopher Bennett
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11 IT'S NO TRU BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN THE BAHBEL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111
Jason Rogers
Who are you trying to make look bad? You just come off as a petty and obnoxious.
Chase Gonzalez
Why are you even In here? Go read a fucking book. You can't hang with the big boys because you didn't even pass high school.
Adrian Gomez
Enjoy hell unbeliever! How dare you say that LAWD JEHOVA is a mere Caynaanite storm gawd!
Heez the father of Lwad Geezuz, and the king of kings, and lawd of lawds!
PRAYZE ISRUHLL!!!1
Connor Martinez
See, I honestly can't tell if you are trying to make Christianity look bad, or trying to make those who try to make Christianity look bad look bad, or trying to make those who try to make Christianity look bad look bad look bad.
Jaxon Mitchell
...
Charles Cruz
oh no someone posted something substantial and i went all crosseyed
better redirect the thread back to retard mudwresting
Camden Rogers
>He couldn't find Adam and Eve in the garden until they came out of hiding
He knew exactly where they were but being a good father, he wanted to give Adam an opportunity to come out of hiding on his own accord.
It's similar to how a human father might ask his child whom he knows has been misbehaving "is there anything you want to tell me?"
Jack Young
It's extremely difficult for a Christian to accept that his religion is just like all the others, ie, made up, because they've been lied to their whole lives that /their/ religion is a religion, while al the others are just mythology. You can't expect them to accept it just like that, recovering from religion is a process that takes years.
Chase Morris
Yeah, except a /good/ father would have stopped Adam from eating the apple, just like a good father stops his son from putting his hand on a hot stove. Yahweh is a sadistic father, he watches people sin (knowing ahead of time that they will, because of how he made them) and then uses this to "justify" punishing them, forever. Who exactly he's justifying himself to is anyone's guess, of course, but this is apparently the way the all-powerful creator of the Universe operates, according to Christians.
A good father allows his children to make mistakes and doesn't override their free agency. God warned Adam what would happen if he ate the fruit but Adam chose to disobey and suffered the consequences.
>BUT IF GAWD REALLY CARED HE WOULD HAVE SAVED HIM!!!11!1!
He did. That's why Jesus came to die for us. Regardless, I'm sure had the Genesis story shown God preventing Adam from eating the fruit there would be people like you complaining how tyrannical God was for preventing Adam from doing what he wanted to do. People will always find a way to be contrarian especially when spirituality is involved.
Mason Hall
>A good father allows his children to make mistakes and doesn't override their free agency
Here's why this analogy doesn't work. If my child puts it's hand towards a stove, I might, if I were a sadist, simply watch and let the child learn a painful lesson. Then, in the future, my child would be much less likely to burn himself again, so my not intervening could be said to have a positive effect.However, in letting humans sin, God isn't teaching us anything. He simply punishes us for it, with no possibility of redemption, and so no possibility of learning from our mistakes. This is analogous to a parent watching his child jump out of a skyscraper window, citing "respect for the child's agency" as his excuse.
Brody Brooks
it has to do with Platonic philosophy
Oliver Ross
The whole book of Genesis is about instructing humanity about our origins. We do learn from Adam's sin because it teaches us that disobedience leads to death and it explains why the world is so broken. Also redemption is possible for those who believe in Jesus and remember that the crucifixion and atonement were all planned before the creation of the world.
Some Christians even subscribe to what is known as the "fortunate fall" theory which is the belief that the fall from Eden was ultimately a good thing because God's love is demonstrated more gloriously through healing that which was broken and conquering evil as opposed to never allowing bad things to happen at all.
Aiden Hill
Except no, because the Bible is wholly unremarkable and there is no way to "realise" that it is God's word, as opposed to just being yet another collection of myths. So again, this is not evidence of a loving father, this is like writing a warning in Greek and then blaming your non-Greek-speaking child for ignoring your warnings when he violates one of your arbitrary rules. Again, this is the behaviour of a sadist, NOT a good father.
Michael Campbell
>wholly unremarkable >most influential text in the history of humanity
Have fun trolling!
Goodbye and God bless.
Jack Garcia
I now you're incapable of thought, but for those of us are, the Bible in no way stands out when compared with other mythological texts, such as the Hindu scriptures or the Koran. If you were raised in the religion then it may seem otherwise, but I wasn't and have found nothing at all even close to compelling in my readings of the Bible. If this really is god's word, and if doubting this really is a sin for which god will punish me, then such a god is simply unjust and wicked. I have no interest in kow-towing to a celestial tyrant, and no reason to think doing so will make any difference at all.
Ian Cox
Read "Patterns in Comparative Religion" by Mircea Eliade, it'll clear up a lot of this confusion.
Seriously, go read it. This post is the least amount of trolling that has ever occured on this board.
Jose Roberts
Can I get tl;dr summary?
Nolan Allen
it's also extremely difficult for a freshly-minted atheist to accept that religion is just a mundane social structure and not a vast conspiracy against them personally. i find that actual history of religion and historical criticism of religious material offends militant atheists more than it offends the genuinely religious. for example, there is an almost unanimous consensus in academia that jesus of nazareth was a genuine historical figure, but militant atheists will reject this violently, because they consider themselves victims of religion and have an emotional need to see christianity as intentionally malicious and utterly false. they will therefore find recourse in moronic and irrational conspiracy theories (romans inventing jesus to control jews, constantine writing the bible, cesare borgia being the face of jesus etc). you cannot seriously discuss history of religion without one of these babies shitting everything up.
Isaac Myers
Yes this is also true, and one of the generally unpleasant facts about humans in general. We spend our whole lives trying to get over our upbringing, and most of us never manage.
