Let's put it another way. The "Deity" represents our "concept" of "G-d," but we are assuming that there is an "actual G-d" as well. Anyone passionately demanding that "actual G-d" is exactly the same as their "Deity," sincere as the belief may be, has little credibility in a rational debate.The fact that the "Deity" is a human creation, a work of art, if you will, a canvas that has been tweaked over multiple millennia, improved at times and damaged at other times by various "artists," in no way changes the characteristics of "actual G-d" if He, She, or It exists. Personally, I don't feel qualified to comment on "actual G-d," I humbly admit that I don't know how to describe "Him." However, I believe that, even in this article, we have followed both the "evolution" of the "deity" as well as the "devolution." From blatantly unethical gods worshiped purely out of fear and jealousy to one ethical creator, working by contract, to a god who tries to be fair by redeeming the lives of good people, the "deity" evolved. Through the teachings of Hillel and Jesus "He" further evolved into a universal, as opposed to a local entity to be "loved," but still showing no sign of love for his worshipers. Admittedly, by making the very human qualities of Hillel and Jesus, love and compassion, available to the model, the "Deity," could finally love his creations. In fact, finally, the vision of the Jewish prophets, a "kingdom" could now be created in "G-d's" honor that could be an example to everyone. Then came Paul. Now, infants were suddenly born with someone else's sins and no matter how they struggled or sacrificed for the good of their fellow "man," their ultimate fate depended on the whim of Paul's "Deity." In fact, they could profess their belief in Paul's mythology and perhaps game their way into a boatload of rewards in a far off place called "Heaven." Of course, you need not worry, if your best friend or your wife or children didn't make it there, Paul would be there. So would his fellow murderers, liars, thieves, and hate mongers to whom Paul revealed those magic words: "I believe!"
According to Wikipedia, 63% of the people in the U.S. profess to be Christians. I assume that, fortunately, most of them follow Jesus (more or less), but we know that the vast majority vote for candidates that seem to follow Paul. Like I said, "A Perfect Autocratic Storm."
A Self Quiz for both Christians and non-Christians:
What does it mean to believe in Jesus?
If you found out that Jesus' "miracles" never happened, should you still believe in him?
Should Jesus' teaching, his actions and the fact that he gave his life for his principles suffice for you to believe in him?
Would you believe in what Paul said if his vision were just a dream and he did not actually converse with Jesus?
Would Paul's teaching, his actions, and his principles suffice for you to believe in him?
Can you imagine the difference between a country run on the principles that the "human" Jesus taught before Paul's encounter with his "ghost" as opposed to what Paul taught afterward?
Al Finkelstein
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
