..Why hast thou forsaken me...

[srb7677]

perhaps we should leave it to the Lord to have the last word.

If and when He speaks I am sure we will be all ears.

[T00ts]

It is the easiest thing in the world to deny God. Any reason will do - a human construct is as good as any. Anti religious rhetoric is well practiced over thousands of years and it is compelling. Things that are beyond the understanding of mankind is dismissed as impossible but perhaps we should leave it to the Lord to have the last word.

[srb7677]

For me if you turn it around , that God did not create man in his own image but that man created god in his ,it seems to make more sense 

That is spot on and encapsulates what I think in a very succinct and well put way.

I have long thought that the God of the OT looks suspiciously like a human construct, in fact the encapsulation of how kings and rulers of the day were often percieved. Jealous, cruel at times, vengeful, but sometimes wise and definitely all powerful. It seems the OT God was modelled on the typical absolute rulers of the day. Vengefulness and jealousy certainly seem to me like typically human emotions and not something you would naturally associate with any higher being.

[Streetwalker]

I have always had a moral problem with this. The very notion that God would favour one people over all others seems like a somewhat racist assumption by some of those claiming it. I simply cannot believe that if God exists, He would ever have favoured one people over all others.

This leads me to conclude that in all likelihood the God of the OT is actually in large part a human construct, invented by those who chose to regard themselves as His chosen people. The prophets were supposedly speaking and interpreting the word of God. But how much actually was the word of God, and how much their own flawed human interpretation? And were they above using their positions for political motives as religious leaders throughout the ages have done?

Moral doubts about issues such as this as well as numerous other stuff in the OT have long ago led me into ceasing to believe in it as the undiluted word of God.

No universal and loving God would ever desire or need a chosen people in my opinion. Plus the God of the OT seems at times cruel, and often jealous and vengeful. These do not speak to me as enlightened traits but look suspiciously like human constructs to me.

So my doubts are deep, profound, long standing, and very real.

I would pretty much agree with that post .

I was brought up a Baptist and in the later years of my church attendence questioned what you have . For me if you turn it around , that God did not create man in his own image but that man created god in his ,it seems to make more sense 

[T00ts]

I have fundamental doubts about the bible being the undiluted word of God, and doubt that any God would be as described in much of the OT.

I am not saying this to in any way mock or belittle your faith. They just happen to be honest and fundamental doubts I have long had. And at heart in some ways I spiritually think and feel more like a bhuddist, rejecting organised religion as the true path to enlightenment and believe that ultimate truths must be learned through a personal spiritual journey.

But if your faith works for you I won't knock it.

I find this interesting and wonder why you would think that someone in an organised religion would not have a Spiritual journey in exactly the way you describe for yourself.

I have always had a moral problem with this. The very notion that God would favour one people over all others seems like a somewhat racist assumption by some of those claiming it. I simply cannot believe that if God exists, He would ever have favoured one people over all others.

This leads me to conclude that in all likelihood the God of the OT is actually in large part a human construct, invented by those who chose to regard themselves as His chosen people. The prophets were supposedly speaking and interpreting the word of God. But how much actually was the word of God, and how much their own flawed human interpretation? And were they above using their positions for political motives as religious leaders throughout the ages have done?

Moral doubts about issues such as this as well as numerous other stuff in the OT have long ago led me into ceasing to believe in it as the undiluted word of God.

No universal and loving God would ever desire or need a chosen people in my opinion. Plus the God of the OT seems at times cruel, and often jealous and vengeful. These do not speak to me as enlightened traits but look suspiciously like human constructs to me.

So my doubts are deep, profound, long standing, and very real.

It is always difficult to separate the expectations of the human and the reality of God. We only understand our very limited experience of existence therefore to grasp just how omnipotent God is will be beyond us. As far as the chosen, this will possibly upset you too but bear with me. If as the Bible says mankind started with Adam and Eve then as they 'multiplied' and came increasingly under the sway of the adversary many drifted away. God redressed the balance with Noah to try and get everyone back on board no pun intended, but once again they drifted. The tribes were scattered, but throughout the OT there was usually one or so tribes who kept true to the teachings and God blessed them above all others, for their obedience. So it's not racist in any way simply a realisation of how it was. God has all His reasons and far from being a cop out it charges all of us to trust and have faith until all is revealed to us either here or in the afterlife.

[srb7677]

Fair enough, my misinterpretation of your post.

However God does what he likes. His ways are not our ways and we can't judge God.
He made an everlasting covenant with Abraham to bless him and all his offspring. Everlasting means for ever. So it still exists. His offspring are the 12 tribes of Israel.
It is in Genesis 17, but your argument is that scripture seems to be just men's ramblings so you may not believe it.

I have fundamental doubts about the bible being the undiluted word of God, and doubt that any God would be as described in much of the OT.

I am not saying this to in any way mock or belittle your faith. They just happen to be honest and fundamental doubts I have long had. And at heart in some ways I spiritually think and feel more like a bhuddist, rejecting organised religion as the true path to enlightenment and believe that ultimate truths must be learned through a personal spiritual journey.

But if your faith works for you I won't knock it.

[Barry]

One point I would wish to clarify. I was not calling God a racist. I do not believe that any such God ever would be. I was suggesting that the notion of a chosen people was a possibly racist interpretation of the word of God by flawed human beings.

Fair enough, my misinterpretation of your post.

However God does what he likes. His ways are not our ways and we can't judge God.
He made an everlasting covenant with Abraham to bless him and all his offspring. Everlasting means for ever. So it still exists. His offspring are the 12 tribes of Israel.
It is in Genesis 17, but your argument is that scripture seems to be just men's ramblings so you may not believe it.

[srb7677]

As you have kindly explained before, you are not entirely opposed to the idea of a god or some form of spirituality. In fact, you have your own beliefs which involve something, a part of us, living on after death. You believe that will arrive in some other being in the future. If that is going to be a human being, remember that the dead outnumber the living by a considerable margin!

Christians believe that part that remains when the body dies is a soul. Different Christians diverge slightly as to exactly what happens when the body dies.

However, your racist God of the Old Testament sent his Son to die so that our souls would be saved, that we will have everlasting life. All that is required is faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God, dying for our sins and rising again from the dead after 3 days.

The gospel was preached "first to the Jew, then to the Gentile". The outcome has been that more gentiles than Jews believed and Jews still deny the deity of Jesus Christ, calling him illegitimate.

Salvation, therefore, is for all, it is a gift of Grace, not racist in any way.

Regarding the OP, Psalm 22 is a prophecy which has been fulfilled. Many many prophecies have already been fulfilled and eventually, they will all be fulfilled as the Word of God is totally reliable.

One point I would wish to clarify. I was not calling God a racist. I do not believe that any such God ever would be. I was suggesting that the notion of a chosen people was a possibly racist interpretation of the word of God by flawed human beings.

[cromwell]

I have always had a moral problem with this. The very notion that God would favour one people over all others seems like a somewhat racist assumption by some of those claiming it. I simply cannot believe that if God exists, He would ever have favoured one people over all others.

This leads me to conclude that in all likelihood the God of the OT is actually in large part a human construct, invented by those who chose to regard themselves as His chosen people. The prophets were supposedly speaking and interpreting the word of God. But how much actually was the word of God, and how much their own flawed human interpretation? And were they above using their positions for political motives as religious leaders throughout the ages have done?

Moral doubts about issues such as this as well as numerous other stuff in the OT have long ago led me into ceasing to believe in it as the undiluted word of God.

No universal and loving God would ever desire or need a chosen people in my opinion. Plus the God of the OT seems at times cruel, and often jealous and vengeful. These do not speak to me as enlightened traits but look suspiciously like human constructs to me.

So my doubts are deep, profound, long standing, and very real.

Well the belt worn on german soildiers uniforms said "Gott mit uns" before and during ww1 and 2.

This though is not unique to them,if there was a god why would he favour one section of humanity if god is any good why would he be with us or anyone exclusively.

This is where you get the madness of people stabbing people like Rushdie,if you are secure in the knowledge that your version of god and belief system is the only true one why would you be so insecure in that as to resorting to kill or maim those you disagree with?

[Barry]

I have always had a moral problem with this. The very notion that God would favour one people over all others seems like a somewhat racist assumption by some of those claiming it. I simply cannot believe that if God exists, He would ever have favoured one people over all others.

This leads me to conclude that in all likelihood the God of the OT is actually in large part a human construct, invented by those who chose to regard themselves as His chosen people. The prophets were supposedly speaking and interpreting the word of God. But how much actually was the word of God, and how much their own flawed human interpretation? And were they above using their positions for political motives as religious leaders throughout the ages have done?

Moral doubts about issues such as this as well as numerous other stuff in the OT have long ago led me into ceasing to believe in it as the undiluted word of God.

No universal and loving God would ever desire or need a chosen people in my opinion. Plus the God of the OT seems at times cruel, and often jealous and vengeful. These do not speak to me as enlightened traits but look suspiciously like human constructs to me.

So my doubts are deep, profound, long standing, and very real.

As you have kindly explained before, you are not entirely opposed to the idea of a god or some form of spirituality. In fact, you have your own beliefs which involve something, a part of us, living on after death. You believe that will arrive in some other being in the future. If that is going to be a human being, remember that the dead outnumber the living by a considerable margin!

Christians believe that part that remains when the body dies is a soul. Different Christians diverge slightly as to exactly what happens when the body dies.

However, your racist God of the Old Testament sent his Son to die so that our souls would be saved, that we will have everlasting life. All that is required is faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God, dying for our sins and rising again from the dead after 3 days.

The gospel was preached "first to the Jew, then to the Gentile". The outcome has been that more gentiles than Jews believed and Jews still deny the deity of Jesus Christ, calling him illegitimate.

Salvation, therefore, is for all, it is a gift of Grace, not racist in any way.

Regarding the OP, Psalm 22 is a prophecy which has been fulfilled. Many many prophecies have already been fulfilled and eventually, they will all be fulfilled as the Word of God is totally reliable.

[srb7677]

God had his chosen people

I have always had a moral problem with this. The very notion that God would favour one people over all others seems like a somewhat racist assumption by some of those claiming it. I simply cannot believe that if God exists, He would ever have favoured one people over all others. 

This leads me to conclude that in all likelihood the God of the OT is actually in large part a human construct, invented by those who chose to regard themselves as His chosen people. The prophets were supposedly speaking and interpreting the word of God. But how much actually was the word of God, and how much their own flawed human interpretation? And were they above using their positions for political motives as religious leaders throughout the ages have done?

Moral doubts about issues such as this as well as numerous other stuff in the OT have long ago led me into ceasing to believe in it as the undiluted word of God.

No universal and loving God would ever desire or need a chosen people in my opinion. Plus the God of the OT seems at times cruel, and often jealous and vengeful. These do not speak to me as enlightened traits but look suspiciously like human constructs to me.

So my doubts are deep, profound, long standing, and very real.

[T00ts]

The Bible OT is the ancient record of mankind handed down through the ages through the Jewish tribes. While today there is doubt that God would speak to us directly or that there might be Prophets as accepted in ancient times there was no question in their minds. As we read the stories, the admonitions and promises and understand that God had his chosen people who had complete and utter faith in Him and obedience to him while those who drifted away or actively defied Him were given the consequences for their behaviour we have to understand how totally in charge of everything He really is. I understand that for many modern man this is simply a step too far, but as I have repeated many times it is the actions of the father of all lies that has succeeded with many to persuade them that it doesn't matter what you do, there is no future, there is no reason to be here, that happiness is riches, and who cares anyway.

I'm off to Church.

[Streetwalker]

This is part of Psalm 22 and attributed to David - who killed Goliath - although there is now some doubt if it was him. ...... For me of course it continues to affirm my beliefs but is also very very interesting. 

The stories of the OT were written to do exactly that ,affirm beliefs and encourage recruits . The David v the giant story was one of good verses evil ,that little David didn't need Sauls armour as he had  Gods protection . It was a story of having faith . 

[srb7677]

I realise there are some who can be interested so yesterday as I continued my in depth study of the OT I am now onto Psalms. Apparently Psalms is a bit like a song book and where we would be able to hear the beginning of a song and tootle along with the next line from memory Jesus on the cross said My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me? A learned Jew would have known fully well what he was referring to.

This is part of Psalm 22 and attributed to David - who killed Goliath - although there is now some doubt if it was him. However study of this particular psalm sees it as a clear revelation of what happened to Jesus on the cross. Taking just one section from say 7- 17 it completely describes what happened from the dislocation of joints, the sword into his side releasing blood and water. It describes how he felt, thirst etc and even that they shared his clothes. I have always found the book of Psalms a bit boring not realising how so much of it is actually revelatory. For me of course it continues to affirm my beliefs but is also very very interesting. When I started the year I didn't think it would be as gripping as it has turned out.

It has been a long time now since I last read the bible but I do recall the fact that I found many things in the OT rather questionable.

Jewish land thefts and the smiting of enemies whose lands they were all appear to have been sanctioned by God supposedly, not to mention  the mass slaughter that supposedly occurred at God's will.

And some of the punishments for misdemeanours or moral crimes in the OT were barbarically draconian. Just for breaking the Sabbath for example was supposed to justify being beaten with rods, whilst if a prostitute happened to be the daughter of a priest, the punishment laid down for her crime was for her to be thrown alive into a furnace.

I can no longer recall the exact verses or books but can distinctly remember reading that.

[T00ts]

I realise there are some who can be interested so yesterday as I continued my in depth study of the OT I am now onto Psalms. Apparently Psalms is a bit like a song book and where we would be able to hear the beginning of a song and tootle along with the next line from memory Jesus on the cross said My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me? A learned Jew would have known fully well what he was referring to.

This is part of Psalm 22 and attributed to David - who killed Goliath - although there is now some doubt if it was him. However study of this particular psalm sees it as a clear revelation of what happened to Jesus on the cross. Taking just one section from say 7- 17 it completely describes what happened from the dislocation of joints, the sword into his side releasing blood and water. It describes how he felt, thirst etc and even that they shared his clothes. I have always found the book of Psalms a bit boring not realising how so much of it is actually revelatory. For me of course it continues to affirm my beliefs but is also very very interesting. When I started the year I didn't think it would be as gripping as it has turned out.