Is God Self-Evident

Thanks for the exchange.
Hope things are well ...This is not to imply that I agree with either one of you in this specific instance, but rather the exact opposite. To put things in context ...

quote:

---

Psalms 137:7

​

Remember, O Lord, what the Edomites did on the day Jerusalem fell. They said, Tear it down, tear it down, right to its very foundation!

​

8 ~ O daughter Babylon, soon to be devastated! How blessed will be the one who repays you for what you dished out to us!

​

9 ~ How blessed will be the one who grabs your babies and smashes them on a rock!

---

In the end, the text does not infer any god as the baby smasher, the speaker of the narrative/poem or even that one may have condoned such nonsense.The baby smashin' refers to Edomite babies and it's being spoken by a pissed off jewish author, bent outta shape because the Edomites were talkin' shit.Apparently, not only were the Edomites not on the side of the captives, they were allegedly rooting for the destruction of Zion.So then, the psalmist is dramatically anticipating and establishing a certain blessing for whoever may carry out the revenge.It seems as though somebody overlooked the power of forgiveness ...In the name of brother Joshua the Anointed One, peace be with you.One LoveEdited by Bailey, : titleEdited by Bailey, : sp.

---

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker.
If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want and desire mercy, not sacrifice'
They surely would not have murdered the innocent; why trust what I say, when you can learn for yourself?
Think for yourself.Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

Thanks for the exchange brutha hyro ...
Hope things are well with you & yours. Ermm - soooo, you have been attempting to convince everyone that 'god' was advocating and encouraging baby smashin' somewhere within Psalms 137.I just thought it good to point out that the text doesn't seem to support your contention, that is, unless you worship bitter Yisraeli nationalist authors. And for that, I applaud you.Now, would you ever, perhaps, condone laying waste to entire Aphgan, Taliban or Iraqi villages with their correlating infants snuggled into the population?Wait, let me guess - that's different. Afaik, I never asserted that any infants were ever rooting 'for the destruction of Zion' and, moreover, you seem to have gotten that one right this time.However, it appears to me that it's the parents of the Edomite infants who are are charged with a recklessness of sorts in the preceding verse ...

quote:

---

Psalms 137:7

​

Remember, O Lord, what the Edomites did on the day Jerusalem fell. They said, Tear it down, tear it down, right to its very foundation!

​

8 ~ O daughter Babylon, soon to be devastated! How blessed will be the one who repays you for what you dished out to us!

---

And so, it seems the dangerously overwhelming bitterness and resentment displayed by the author of this specific Psalm ...

quote:

---

9 ~ How blessed will be the one who grabs your babies and smashes them on a rock!

---

... is the motivating impulse within the last stance of this sick ass poem, and so, not really 'god' at all - as you would have us think.It is rather, the Edomites who assisted in facilitating this ancient 9-11 of sorts within Yerusalem, being charged by an angry nationalist.Perhaps the author felt that no more Edomite babies somehow equivocates to no more 9-11's in Zion. I'd reckon that's some faulty reasoning at its best.Again, my conscience does not provide for me to agree with you or them (or brutha iano, for that matter). If only the author of the Psalm believed that, maybe they wouldn't have written such drivel. Perhaps they too had a difficult time interpreting scripture ... I would quicker agree that it is a sad display of a very poor mentality captured within this author's writing. This sort of thing is common for a nationalist. There is the sense that you have not allowed yourself to perceive the full context of the injustice involved. I had the opportunity to write a lengthy paper on genocide not too long ago and while I find it quite easy to agree with the shortened definition you have provided, to a certain extent, I'd quicker say ...This description is of a bitter nationalist who has been placed into slavery after having his homeland eradicated. He is, at this point, seeking revenge.Sometimes people who are consumed with fury do and say things they, otherwise, would not have said and done.Please refer back to the top of the page where I inquire ...'Would you condone laying waste to entire Aphgan, Taliban or Iraqi villages with their correlating infants snuggled into the population?'. Simple question, right? I was thinking the bitter Yiraeli that penned the Psalm, but I suppose for one who worships such characters, your response is indeed justified.One LoveEdited by Bailey, : sp.Edited by Bailey, : grammarEdited by Bailey, : grammar

---

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker.
If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want and desire mercy, not sacrifice'
They surely would not have murdered the innocent; why trust what I say, when you can learn for yourself?
Think for yourself.Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

Thanks for the exchange hyro.
Hope things are well with you. lol - no it doesn't. I'll wind up saying this redundantly I guess - the Psalms are songs, not commandments. They are sung to God, but not by God.Also, the text never mentions God speaking to the author or as the author, and more over, the author is singing to their God. It's a song hyro. [some emphasis mine]Please stop regurgitating poisonous nationalist ideologies, it's bad for your health - lol Obviously, anyone who doesn't worship angry Yisraeli's or poems as a 'god' can do that. Your argument seems to be failing this time around ol' boy. There is no need to cherry pick anything in this instance. The idea that you present - that Psalms are commandments from 'god', is your unique idea.Even if I wanted to cherry pick 'em, which isn't the case here, there's no need in this instance. Again, it's a religious chant to the author's god.Btw, I'm not a proponent of the christian/catholic sola scriptura, otherwise known as the doctrine of the 'infallible Word of God'.Again, I feel this can't be stressed enough - they are poems hyro, not commandments. Good deal. I'm really glad to hear that. No. Were trying to get you to realize that a Psalm is not a commandment and that 'god' didn't author them. They are sung to God, not by God. God's role in the Tehillim is as a listener. Again, they are an offering to God, not from God. Are you unable or unwilling to concede to that notion?If so that's fine, I guess, as there are always going to be people who disagree with you regardless of your personal stance regarding scripture.Some may even try to kill you over it, but others will likely take solace in your shadow. It is as relevant as it may possibly get if someone is contending the song's were written to God, by God. That contention has very little support. No offense meant to you or Peg in this instance, as I'm about as bright as a stump, with only the faith of a mustard seed - yet, nonetheless ...While I would guess that Peg has more faith than you, I would have wagered you as the brighter one. Perhaps I wasn't spot on with that assessment.Please show me - specifically, where God commanded and delighted in this so called massacre. All I see is a threat of sorts on behalf of a harp player. You read it again bud - I've been reading the Tehillim for 17 yrs. It is not 'god' speaking, but rather 'god' being chanted or sung to.If you'd rather live in your fantasy world, that's fine too. Every one is entitled, agnostics, atheists, deists and theists alike. I doubt that by you continuing to repeat yourself with that allegation, that it's, somehow, going to make it any more true. Again, the one singin' the song to God is dreamin' of baby smashin' and as far as I can reason, God tuned 'em as soon as they started bein' a jackass. Consider, in context, God is the one who allegedly facilitated the Yisraeli captivity, as well as, the destruction of Zion - due to idolatrous behavior.The author of the poem is then, basically, putting out a hit of sorts, as you reasoned before. They are fuckin' pissed bro. Apparently this specific author learned nothing by captivity and defeat, except how to be more idolatrous and miserable. Perhaps this crew was unwilling to catch on to reality ...A bitter heart only returns bitterness. Again ...If you worship bitter nationalists, then, perhaps, I can understand your perspective. However, I do not worship bitter nationalists. After reading the bible a few times, as far as I can tell, God wrote on a couple of tablets which he gave to Moses, the Prophets spoke out on God's behalf regarding social injustice and then Joshua the Anointed One spoke on the Father's behalf. So then, bitter priests just made attempts to stuff the rest of this shit in God's mouth.If you want to convince me, show me where a Prophet condoned these behaviors.Otherwise save your energies for someone more worthy. Sure doesn't seem that way. From where I stand, it seems like ...* you've been persuaded to worship bitter nationalists and wicked priests as some sort of 'god'* you've been persuaded to worship wicked priests and bitter nationalists as some sort of 'god'or* you've been persuaded to worship bitter nationalists and wicked priests as some sort of 'god'If you are trying to persuade me to worship that 'god', again, I'd suggest you save your energy - lolThe traditions of the Nevi'im became locked within my heart and mind awhile ago. That's not an issue for most of the people I know who pass the time with Psalms.It is well known that they are a form of song, designed as an offering of sorts to God. They are not a form of song, designed by God to mankind. That's sounds like your story.I'm interested to hear who agrees. I'd be surprised if even the proponent's of sola scriptura at EvC - or elsewhere, would concede to that though.Again, there's no actual commandment's found in the Tehillim. They're employed, more simply, throughout the traditional facets of Jewish worship such as funerals or morning services, and such. According to the Talmud, they were originally recited by the Levites within the confines of the Yerusalem Temple.Their reading is viewed as a vehicle of sorts for gaining God's favor, and so, it wouldn't be uncommon to hear their recitation, in part or in whole, during times of trouble, such as disease, famine or at a time of imminent danger, perhaps, to promote an added security of sorts towards modern Yisrael.I'm not sure how interested you are with the subject of Yisraeli tradition on the whole, but this is a pretty good read entitled 'Israel: the sword and the harp: the mystique of violence and the mystique of redemption'. I recommend chapter 8, 'Religionality' - the Nationalization of Religious Culture, even if you only browse. Ah, different question altogether. Everyone has their own view, but I'd quicker agree that the roman bible provides an infallible Witness of God.Perhaps two separate testimonies, as in a plaintiff and a defendant. Well, since my conscience does not provide for that option, I'll maintain a certain consistency in my veiw that sola scriptura is a priestly scam of sorts.At least, according to the criteria that you've provided. Perhaps that's only if you can be convinced that the prophet's were friendly with the priestly traditions. Judging by their condemnation, I'd say they weren't.So then, you may have a few choices, as far as I can reason ...* priests and prophets are in accord with one another and the scriptures are a sham.* priests and prophets are in accord with one another and the scriptures are are authoritative.* priests and prophets are not in accord with one another and the priestly writings are authoritative.* priests and prophets are not in accord with one another and the prophetic writings are authoritative.Since, after many hours of study, the priests and prophets do not seem to align well within my conscience, I must ultimately adhere to the last option. Consider - what do the priests speak about; what do the Prophet's speak about? Ask yourself, do they align with one another honestly?If it is true, as is written, that a double minded man is unstable in all his ways, reasonably the same must hold true to God who is above our ways. Perhaps one may need to take a definitive stance regarding how they feel the heart of God can be defined and what they feel characterizes the heart of mankind.At that point, as one becomes better able to distinguish the two, then perhaps one is in a better position to begin making informed decisions.It will, no doubt, be challenging to not get caught up in the distractions of others. Actually, yea - I suppose I can perceive how that may become a dilemma for someone. It's been quite a long time since I considered that dynamic. As far as the Psalms go though, there's not likely to be a dilemma for the one who understands they're just simple songs to God, albeit poorly written at times. I agree. I just can't agree with someone who present's a false dichotomy of sorts or doctrine, as is often done.Once I submitted my conscience and intellect to God, it took a certain precedence over the word of ambiguity.Peace to you bud.One Love

---

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker.
If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want and desire mercy, not sacrifice'
They surely would not have murdered the innocent; why trust what I say, when you can learn for yourself?
Think for yourself.Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

Thank you for the exchange hyro.
I hope things are good wiith ya. The author of the verse in question never commands anything. Please, demonstrate otherwise. Perhaps you know that God would condone baby smashin'. I have yet to reach that conclusion.What I will consider is that God will allow one to succumb to their own aggression. Again, whether or not sola scriptura, as defined by those within levtical christians and catholic traditions, has a valid basis in reality is a separate topic. No need to put words in my mouth friend.Again, what I will consider is that God will allow one to succumb to their own aggression. The first three are taken on a prophetic stance. The would be victims are all Yisraelis who have misrepresented the heart and will of God.That 'God's chosen people' are the ones being laid to waste seems to suggest God doesn't play favorites as some would have us believe.They show, once more, that God will allow one to succumb to their own aggression.The Nevi'im seem, to me, much more consistent than the priestly traditions. I have no excuses hyro. What I have is an educated understanding of how the prophets anticipated God's unwillingness to sit back and watch injustice.Perhaps I also feel that I have a certain understanding - as do you, but mine concerns the style that was often employed throughout prophetic utterance.The character of Yisraeli governance was often condemned and called into question by the Prophets of ancient Yisrael as a hypocritical charade intended to divert the people into sterile activities and the hollowness of religion and its dogmas, and so subvert the pursuit of true justice in the land.Notice how Isaiah asserts that 'no amount of silver or gold will buy {the Medes} off'? This infers an earlier time when bribery and extortion ruled Yisrael. According to the prophet, God was not happy about it and was willing to allow the Yisraelites to succumb to their own aggression and social misjustice.Even the last example you provide, found in the law books which are replete with documented edit and forgery, is a warning against Yisrael.Would you like to place these passages within their original context, together? Start a thread and I'll try to spend some time in it with you. What I feel is tragic is when a nation or a people go out of their way to misrepresent the heart and will of God, thinking they will somehow benefit. That God is unwilling to cater towards social misjustice. Perhaps you have. I'll let the audience, made up of critical thinkers and dogmatics alike, be the judge.Yet, later in this very post, you'll hand this victory to me and I will share with you the spoils of our work. I've suggested the roman bible as an infallible witness of sorts. Making a stride towards understanding who speaks what to who - and why, is critical. In any case, one may gain a better understanding by taking some sort of definitive stance concerning the heart and will of the character in question.That being, as far as my understanding goes, that God is unwilling to cater to social misjustice, and will not let forgeries go undocumented ...Regardless of the persistent attempts carried out through the malignant aggression on behalf of dogmatics who certainly wish they would have. Ok - you got me.It is obvious that because I will not succumb to your sola scriptura that I'm some sort of terrorist. I get that from dogmatics constantly.It doesn't change the fact that the roman bible has been edited multiple times to serve a variety of agendas or that the book contains that witness.And that many people nullify those portions of the text, will not change the fact either. It is sad that people decide to take an all or nothing stance.I understand that it's a fear based mentality massaged and promoted by the church and those who believe them, over the more critical evidence. Not to imply that I agree with you on the whole, but ... ... now we're gettin' to some level playing field - lol Duly noted. I appreciate it, I guess. If you will, divide and enjoy these spoils with me.Honestly, this isn't about winning to me, as much as it is about allowing a spirit of truth to flourish through a more critical analysis of these various texts. That is not to imply, by any means, that I indeed know the Truth^TM, but rather that, much like you if I may suppose, I'm not quick to believe the corporation.Again, I have more faith that, as I submit my conscience and intellect to God, I will be assisted by a spirit of truth more honest than the former. It certainly is my friend. Yet, my conscience does not quickly allow me to assign the unspeakable towards the heart of God. Mankind on the other hand ... As you seem to understand - and I would tend to partially agree, these texts are often politically motivated. The 'very Word of God' served Rome well.However, I have no desire to partake in nationalism and have identified that these ancient Jewish texts were formed into a book paid for by Constantine. Perhaps you're justified in veiwing my stance as a reduction of sorts, but it may be - just as quickly, construed as a minimalism of political manipulation.Again, I get that shit all the time for not bowing to the 'sacred' doctrines of Rome and her illegitimate step children. Usually, it's from christian sects though. While I may recognize, what I perceive as, dogmatic tendencies in your debate, I don't identify you as a christian, and so, I tend to become a bit confused.I'm sure my lack of patience with dogmatics and abundance of sarcasm doesn't always serve me - or others, well, but that's something I need to work on. Again, I have taken a definitive stance on the character, the heart and the will of God. That being, God will not cater to those who promote social misjustice.So then, when I encounter a passage - after rendering my conscience and intellect to God, that conflicts with the outcome of my evolved conscience and intellect, in regards to social misjustice, I must begin asking questions. I am, by no means, infallible, but I do trust God more than mankind or myself. An interesting perspective, albeit a bit ambiguous by nature. Personally, I'm thankful to have developed a relationship with God long before I ever found out about that ol' book or made any attempt towards understanding what is actually taking place within it's pages. In the end, reality is my canon hyro - to me, the bible is a chapter in that book. And yes, I know that's considered a cop out by imperialists, nationalists, catholics and christians - and many others, alike.There is a sense within me that suggests sola scriptura is as much of a cop out on their parts as well, perhaps motivated by a fear of reality and justice. Again, that only holds if I believe you - that the bible is, somehow, a greater authority concerning the Truth^TM of our existence than reality itself.Thankfully, I don't subscribe to that doctrine. As I said, God was in my heart long before the pages within the bible made their way into my mind. Yep - perdy shitty.It seems to me, like a cryin' shame, that people trust the political motivations of mankind over the witness of God - that being, the prophets and reality. I have already addressed this, and ... ... this. So, I'll leave them for now. If not for my faith in God's ability to heal one's mind and guide them into a more full understanding of reality, I would have agreed.Again, I'm thankful to not have been indoctrinanted at a young age. As far as I can reason ...Your position, as one who has, perhaps, been proselytized - before seeking the character, the heart and the will of God, into accepting the idea of sola scriptura, as presented in the poli-religious arena, seems unworthy of envy as well. However, I don't believe all people will rot in such putrid beliefs, but rather, I have abundant faith many will pursue the eradication of social misjustice caused by fear based poli-religious doctrines such as 'sola scriptura'.My hope and prayer, then, is that many will not throw out the baby with the bath water, as it were, after becoming completely and totally frustrated by the deceit, ignorance, naivety and nullification of evidence constantly and consistently promoted and promulagated by those weak minded fear mongers.Again, thanks for the exchange hyro, and - peace to you bud.One Love

---

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker.
If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want and desire mercy, not sacrifice'
They surely would not have murdered the innocent; why trust what I say, when you can learn for yourself?
Think for yourself.Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary