If in the beginning there is only god...

[MrE2Me]

That argument makes no sense to me.  I'd also like a clarification, please...

[easytrak]

Animals are not in God's image because they are not conscious. They are like computer programmes, working according to certain input commands. But they do tell us about God because they came from Him. As an analogy, a work of art gives us insight into the personality of the artist.

---

God must be conscious, because we are conscious and we came from Him. Logically, God cannot give us something which He doesn't have Himself.

I went one further and said He is consciousness itself. If God were merely conscious like us it would mean consciousness is something bigger than God.

[up2smthn]

First off, being an atheist the question is rather moot. Secondly, one of the reasons i'm sure there's no god is that i seriously doubt that there's just ONE of anything.

[up2smthn]

Man created god in HIS own image.. We didn't come from him, he came from US. Leaves his consciousness somewhat in doubt, eh?

[SteveS]

Man created god in HIS own image.. We didn't come from him, he came from US.

Man, I can't express how completely I agree with this sentiment.  When people criticize the religious god, they often wonder why god appears to possess all these human emotions.  A typical answer is that we are made in god's image, explaining the similarity.  But it rings hollow to me because the reverse theory, god is thought up by people, explains the same thing so equally well, and doesn't involve anything outside of regular work-a-day reality.  Occam's razor sort of slices this one apart, IMHO.

[MrE2Me]

It certainly explains why his behavior and biases reflect those of the same time period in which the Bible was written...  Coincidence?  I think not!

[easytrak]

up2smthn:

What I am trying to get across to you is that all things which exist had to come from something which is existence, is life, is being - in other words, a source.

MrE2Me:

Indeed the behaviour and biases of God in the Old Testament is much the same as the people of the Old Testament. But Christ is much different to the people around Him. So while this argument could work for the Old Testament, it is not the same for the New Testament.

[MrE2Me]

You don't think the New Testament comes across as dated?  Pro-slavery, women as objects, etc etc?  It's all the word of God, supposedly, so...

[Tom62]

up2smthn:
Indeed the behaviour and biases of God in the Old Testament is much the same as the people of the Old Testament. But Christ is much different to the people around Him. So while this argument could work for the Old Testament, it is not the same for the New Testament.

The Jezus concept of a swell, great, nice guy isn't really helpful. In the end you are not dealing with him, but with his "father". He is the one who will judge you, according to your bible, not Jezus. If God is indeed the guy from the OT then I rather stay far away from him. Another point is that even the NT doesn't always portraits Jezus as the kind of ever loving, mr. Nice Guy. Read Matthew for example:

5:17: Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn't the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament.
7:13-14: Jesus says that most people will go to hell
8:21: Jesus tells a man who had just lost his father: "Let the dead bury the dead."
10:5-6: Jesus tells his disciples to keep away from the Gentiles and Samaritans, and go only to the Israelites.
10:34-36: Jesus says that he has come to destroy families by making family members hate each other. He has "come not to send peace, but a sword."
11:20-24: Jesus condemns entire cities to dreadful deaths and to the eternal torment of hell because they didn't care for his preaching.
12:34: Jesus often called people names. One of his favorites was to call his adversaries a "generation of vipers."
13:41-42, 50: Jesus will send his angels to gather up "all that offend" and they "shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth."
15:4-7: Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating. He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: "He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death." (See Ex.21:15, Lev.20:9, Dt.21:18-21) So, does Jesus think that children who curse their parents should be killed? It sure sounds like it.  
15:22-26: Jesus refuses to heal the Canaanite (Mk.7:26 says she was Greek) woman's possessed daughter, saying "it is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to the dogs."

Is that the kind of guy you want us to follow?

[MrE2Me]

In the end you are not dealing with him, but with his "father". He is the one who will judge you, according to your bible, not Jezus. If God is indeed the guy from the OT then I rather stay far away from him.

Exactly!  Great post.

[Simoli]

What I am trying to get across to you is that all things which exist had to come from something which is existence, is life, is being - in other words, a source.

Does that mean something created god?  That kind of puts you in a pickle if you believe god created everything.

[Will]

Man created god a couple thousand years ago because we had no reasonable conclusions based on evidence to explain natural phenomena. We gave the sun a personality because we had no knowledge of nuclear fusion and incandescent gas.

[SteveS]

What I am trying to get across to you is that all things which exist had to come from something which is existence, is life, is being - in other words, a source.

How do you know this to be true?  It seems to make "common sense", but modern science has drilled home the fact that "common sense" and "human intuition" are almost completely useless outside of our regular experience.  We have no "common sense" understanding of the interior of a black hole, or "intuitive knowledge" of a quantum event.

The origin of the Universe is much the same --- we can't explain it, and it's hard to even understand if our questions actually make sense (the most famous example being the question of what came before the Big Bang; if the Big Bang started time, there was no "before the Big Bang", so what does this question mean?).

[easytrak]

MrE2Me:
Yes I do believe the New Testament comes across as dated by today's standards. But for the people of the time it was quite radically different. And a guy like Abraham was probably radically different compared with the people in his time, though by today's standards he would be considered immoral.

Note that Christ did not deliver comprehensive doctrine. Thus there is still room for improvement today.

Tom62:
The Bible is a difficult book to understand.

Let us take one example: God repeatedly states "He will judge."
God rejects no-one. It is man who rejects God. But why does God say He is judge? Because that was an analogy which the people would understand.

Some of your other examples:
Go only to the Israelites: They were too weak to go to the Gentiles. But they went later.
Send the sword: Often taking the stand for good puts you at odds with people.
Calling names: Perhaps because they were causing public scandal, they must be publicly rebuked.
Curse father or mother: Perhaps Christ is angry with the Pharisees because the Pharisees allowed a man to abandon his parents if he paid something to the Pharisees. It seems people who abandoned their parents were supposed to be put to death.
The dogs: It seems to be only a figure of speech, meaning: Do you want me to be for the Gentiles as well as the Jews? Of course, for us, to call a person a dog is a harsh insult.

Also, I believe that every human being has an eternal destiny, whether they live on this earth for 2 months or 80 years. It seems people die needlessly in the Bible, but that is not the case, for it is in accordance with their destiny.

Simoli:
If you think about it, that which is existence itself does not have to be brought into being. I would ask myself the question: How is it that God exists? The only explanation seems to be that He not only exists, but is existence itself.

Willravel:
I think if man were to "create" God, it would not be for objective purposes, but for subjective, for our own consciousness is more important to us than the fact that we inhabit time and space.

SteveS:
But we experience life on the subjective plane as well as the objective, therefore our regular experience of life can also include God since He is subjective.
At any rate, I don't think you actually have to see God to get an idea what He is like. You can't see a black hole but you can get an idea what it is like i.e. you know its there.
I think the answer to the time question is that you perhaps content yourself with the fact that God is all eternity at once, timeless.

[Tom62]

The Bible is a difficult book to understand.

You are wrong there. The bible is not a difficult book to understand, as long as you read it in context.

The bible was written many centuries ago by a bunch of religious people with morals that are similar like the present day's Taliban. Due to  the fact that so many people worked independently on it over many, many years, the book is incoherent and contains many contradictions. Not only that, the bible has been altered over the centuries to fit the needs of particular christian sects.  It is well known that many christian scholars were very inventive in the way they were handling their "sacred" texts. We can therefore find many examples of fraudulous behaviour in the bible.

The bible is therefore a flawed book. You cannot rely on its accuracy and you can't use it at a guidebook for moral behaviour. What is morally wrong in one verse, is approved or contradicted in others. It is in fact so flawed that even the christians don't know any more what is right or wrong. If the bible is so clear, why do have so many christian sects that all claim to own the truth?

The bible is a very convenient book to keep the masses under control. If a christian sect wants to justify immoral behaviour or forbid something, it is very likely that they find some convenient bible verses (slavery, homophobia, witch-burning, killing and maiming, everything is allowed if you know the right verses). When bible verses are used against christian sects, they are the first ones to scream "out of context" and "that is only an analogy and should not be taken literally".