Rabbi Mike Profile picture
Mar 17 17 tweets 6 min read
There was a request for me to do a #thread on the multiple facets of God in the Bible, dismissing the much later inventions that God is Omnipotent, Omniscient, and Omnipresent. These are very new ideas (respectively), so let's get started. #threadstorytime #threadseries
Because Genesis 2/3 is based on Enuma Elish, and contains the ideas of Near Eastern gods (see other threads about this), it makes sense that the god of Genesis 2/3 is not any of the three O's. Genesis 3 shows this well: /1
For one, God is "moving" or walking about in the garden which makes God not omnipresent. More importantly, God asking Adam "Where are You?" This is not a play on words. The God of this chapter literally does not know where Adam is. This God also does not know what occurred/2
...between the man, the woman, and the snake. The conversation is not a formality. This god has questions, wants to know the answers, and is disappointed and surprised when hearing them! The same occurs when God asks Cain "where is your brother?" /3
Genesis 6 shows this again, that God has regret and is sad on God's creation. God did not know what would happen to the humans or else God would not have been sad about it! A God with regret is not an omniscient God! /4
Additionally, the entire discussion with Abraham and S&G shows a very non-Omniscient divine being, because if God knew who was guilty and who was innocent, what would be the point of the discussion? God is not toying with Abraham, this is a discussion. Moreover, Abraham/5
...scolds God which means that God makes mistakes, which is not an omniscient God. God who "know all" do not make mistakes, nor do they need to be convinced by humanity. What about outside of Genesis? How about Numbers! /6
Numbers 22:9 God asks a genuine question of Balaam, "what do these people want from you?" An Omniscient God does not ask these questions. /7
Okay, now time for my favorite examples of how God is not Omnipresent. When the Tabernacle (the Ark) was brought out in battle, according to the text, they would open the "God Box" and God would come out and destroy! When God had finished, they called back "Return!" /8
They are calling, "back into the box, God!" This is literally a dwelling place of God, not a symbol, but they are literally carrying God from place to place and taking God into battle. The God Box was why they won their wars! ADVANCE! and then RETURN! Cool right? /9
This idea carried on all the way to the building of the Temple with Solomon, when they "transferred" God from the tabernacle, the God Box, into the Temple which was the House of God. Literally the HOUSE for God. The cloud, the presence of God filled the House! /10
Now, for those who are going to try the "I thought it was the ten commandment pieces!" That's CLEARLY a scribal insert by later omnipresent scribes. I mean...it's so awkward. Verse 9 just doesn't belong. Nice try, redactors! /11
Even the late late texts show God as not omniscient, like in Job! What the crap is God asking HaSatan "where have you been?" If God already knows, why waste the time? /12
There are large questions that occur when we look at the meta-narrative of the Torah. Why an omnipotent God would allow the enslavement the Israelites for 400 years, etc. But there are specific incidents that raise questions, such as Judges 1:20: /13
What the crap? Why? If God is with Judah, Judah should be able to do anything, even take over those with iron chariots! Don't ya think? Don't get me wrong, the God of certain aspects of the Bible is mighty, very strong, and sung about in that way, but all-powerful? No. /14
There are many more examples, but the important thing to remember is that a very late idea of God being Omnipotent, Omniscient and Omnipresent, is a foolish thing to implant upon the text. You will find yourself doing mental gymnastics instead of reading the text correctly. /15
By placing these late ideas (such as divine authorship, perfection, the three O's, and other later theological thoughts) onto the biblical text, you miss the meaning of the text, and only see what your pastor wanted you to see. Think about why that is!
/END

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Rabbi Mike

Rabbi Mike Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @RabbiHarvey

Mar 14
Well, a lot of you have been asking about a David/Jonathan thread, about not how they were just lovers but married! @maklelan and @sohelpmejesseca were just talking about it too! Here it goes! #threadseries #thread
So let's get the obvious stuff out of the way. David was bisexual, and he and Jonathan were lovers. The evidence in the text of this is strong. And while some may deny it, those are the same men who scream that Song of Songs is about Israel and God. So let's go through this./1
We read in 1st Samuel 18 that Jonathan's "nefesh" his soul, became "nik'sh'ra" (bound up or binded) with the "nefesh" of David. Soul on soul love. Deep love. This is not friendship. This is soulmates. Moreover, from a Hebrew point of view, the word "nik'sh'ra" is.../2
Read 23 tweets
Mar 11
Well friends, we've been seeing a lot of Christian nonsense about the David/Bat Sheva story and a few of you wonderful followers, especially @_nomadic_soul have been asking for a #thread on the matter, so how can I say no? Sit back, and enjoy this one. #threadsofthreads
As a Jew, and biblical scholar, it is difficult to see how anyone could read this story as a David apologist, but apparently it's out there and I think it's important to understand the biblical author's intentions, and the commentator's reactions, and who they were. /1
These are men who are the authors, men who are the commentators, and men who are the church fathers later looking to make David their hero and unblemished. But let's set the stage: /2
Read 23 tweets
Mar 3
Quick lesson friends on debunking that Matthew was the "Most Jewish Gospel." While this is a popular Christian talking point, it is simply untrue. Christians believe this because of Matthew's use of Jewish genealogy, his repeated quoting of Jewish scripture.../1
...and that Matthew’s Jesus firmly upholds and extends Jewish Law:
"Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfill them."
HOWEVER, Luke also employs genealogy, Luke-Acts cites Jewish scripture even more extensively/2
...than does Matthew, Yet Luke is not widely deemed Jewish on either account. Matthew is composed in Greek drawing on 92% of the verses in the Greek Mark, Matthew’s Primary Source, reproducing 51% of Mark’s very words.
Matthew models Jesus on a legalistic Moses.../3
Read 8 tweets
Mar 3
Happy Friday and Happy #thread Day!
You wanted to know about the meaning(s) behind Genesis 1? Well here it is! But buckle up because it's not what you think!
#ThreadsOfLight #threadstory #threads #THREADOFTHREADS
The very first question we should be asking ourselves about Genesis 1 is not "is this true?" That's a Sunday School question, and we're at the adults table. The question is, "Who wrote it?" Genesis 1 is what scholars denote as a "P" Source, meaning the author(s).../1
...were or considered themselves, descendants of Aaron or representing the priestly descendants’ interest. They were most likely from the kingdom of Judah, the Southern Kingdom, and were very familiar with priestly practices and had access to these documents.../2
Read 31 tweets
Feb 28
Okay folks, as requested, here is my #thread about ANGELS in Judaism and might even tap into the differences between Judaism's angels and those within Christianity (if I have time).
#threads #threadseries #judaism #Christianity
So, before we even begin with angelic presence in the Torah and Tanakh, I think it's important to to note where angels are NOT present. Let's start with Genesis 1. While it is a popular idea that the "us" here refers to God and the angels, that is a much later idea imposed.../1
...upon the text. Instead, this refers to the pantheon, polytheistic beginnings. This is true for "b'nai elohim" (sons of god, people of god, etc), this does NOT refer to angelic beings. The transposing of angels on these polytheistic aspects of the Torah are the work.../2
Read 28 tweets
Feb 26
Today I was asked to teach the origin of the Exodus myth. If there is no archaeological evidence that the Israelites were ever in Egypt (and there is none), then where did the myth come from? Well friends, let's do this! #thread #threads #exodus #teaching
And God said to Abram, “Know well that your offspring shall be strangers in a land not theirs, and they shall be enslaved and oppressed four hundred years; 14 but I will execute judgment on the nation they shall serve, and in the end they shall go free with great wealth.  /2
You'll notice here that Egypt is not mentioned by name.

There is no direct evidence that people worshipping Yahweh sojourned in ancient Egypt, let alone during the time the Exodus is believed to have happened.
The names of the reigning Egyptian kings are not given; /3
Read 42 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(