I’m not asking what if the Bible were true; I’m asking what if the God described in the Bible’s original source were true. The Bible suffers from “pearl in the dung” syndrome.
Even though Biblical scribes may have been very dedicated to copying the holy texts, they were only human. They could’ve made mistakes. And who says the first person to receive God’s Word could read and write? Almost certainly it was passed down through the generations orally. If you’ve ever played “telephone”, you know how radically different the final message can be from the original.
At best, we have a warped caricature of what God wants from us, but I think we’re just picking out patterns in static.
What original source do you have in mind, then? God, I guess, would be the original source, but he’s not taking questions.
By original source, I mean that which was made known to whomever was special enough to have communicated with God.
The very philosophy of the Bible is self-contradicting. A benevolent, loving God who knowingly, intentionally and willingly created natural disasters, cancer, AIDS, and George W. Bush, is self-contradicting.
juan2003: You might also consider that several groups of humans decided for all time which books were the inspired and inerrant Word of God out of hundreds of possibilities. The Catholic canon was not decided until 1563; it was 1647 for Protestants.
Of particular interest is the book of Revelation, upon which the whole of Christian end-times prophecy and the ‘Left Behind’ series depends. There were many apocalpyses available to early Christians, and one cannot help but wonder how one of them ended up being the canonical end-of-the-world scenario.
The OP question is clearly unanswerable. If one wishes to take a stab at what the deity wants, perhaps it would be best to look at what is common among most scripture.
The closest I can come is what Christians call the golden rule. The Christians say “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” The somewhat more constrained Jewish formulation is “what is hateful to you, do not do to others.” If there is anything that the deity has in mind for humanity, that’s got to be it. As Hillel said, “all the rest is commentary.”
When debates such as these arise (ie. is Yahweh real or not?), why isn’t the position ever considered whether it would be ethical or immoral to believe in such a deity in the first place? In other words, is there any amount of evil one person can commit in their lifetime that justifies the concept of eternal damnation? Why would anyone believe in or support a God that would treat his creations in such a way? And please, no “the Lord works in mysterious ways” horse swill.
When debates such as these arise (ie. is Yahweh real or not?), why isn’t the position ever considered whether it would be ethical or immoral to believe in such a deity in the first place? In other words, is there any amount of evil one person can commit in their lifetime that justifies the concept of eternal damnation? Why would anyone believe in or support a God that would treat his creations in such a way? And please, no “the Lord works in mysterious ways” horse swill.
As it stands, religon is a crapshoot. Of all the worlds religions, is
yours the only door to God? It’s like Let’s Make a deal, is God
behind door #1, #2, #3, #4 ? And if you pick the wrong door,
you just blew eternaty! All that praying,and good deeds nothing.
Are you sure your faith is the only way? How much serious study
of the other world religions have you done? Could it be that they
are all praying to the same God, and don’t know it.
FrankoEven if there was absolute proof for the existence of God & the identity of said God, that would not negate the need for faith. Knowing that someone exists does not necessitate trusting that person.