I love how god or Jesus says âguysâŚâ to everything.
Not a churchy type Christian, but have read the Bible several times. This was funny, and I enjoyed it, but his interpretation of the gospels was not even close.
THE GOSPELS
Jesus: I am the Son of God, and even though you have done the things, the Father and I still love you and want you to live. Donât do the things anymore.
Itâs more like:
Jesus: I am the Son of God, and even though you have done the things, the Father and I still love you and want you to live. In fact, you are incapable of not doing the things, so I will take your punishment for you, since you are unable to not do the things.
I know it doesnât quite fit in with the rest of his interpretation, and isnât funny, but well, facts and stuff.
Good post except for the word facts.
Good doctrine, but itâs funnier the other way.
Oh come on! There are plenty of facts in the Bible!!! Just ask the Texas Board of Education.
âFactsâ probably isnât a synonym for âMy personal theological outlook, which is apparently rooted in medieval-style Christianity which was predicated on pretty bogus pre-Christian notions of âsacrificial economyâ.â
Job : WTF, God?
God: Treat 'em mean, keep 'em keen.
I canât wait for Falcor to start using it, as grumbling signal of impending hunger.
I loved this.
This part of this totally made up story had always irked me. The tree they werenât supposed to eat from was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (right and wrong). So according to this story an all knowing god created an angel named lucifer knowing full well ahead of time that he was flawed and would rebel. The all knowing God put a tree in the garden that he knew in advance that they would eat from. This same god let the best tempter ever created into the garden to tempt two people into doing something relatively benign they were told they shouldnât, except remember they had NO knowledge of right and wrong, in otherwords no ability to differentiate if they should or shouldnât. When they do their punishment is death and eternal suffering and the death and eternal suffering of all their children and childrenâs children for all of time (original sin and damnation). This has to be the most heinous punishment ever for what was basically entrapment of children with a fully known outcome ahead of time. If you had children, and you left a piece of candy on the table knowing full well they were going to eat it, told them not to eat it but let uncle steve come over and try and convince them to eat it, would you then kill and torture your children for all eternity for an action that was a direct result of your not your childrenâs shortcoming, eating something they were told not to. if he was all knowing he could have not made lucifer satan, he could have not put the tree there, he could have given them the ability to know right from wrong. worst parent ever. criminal. even by shabby human standards this god character was a total dick, but of course that is just one of many many stories that confirm that.
crime: eating a piece of fruit they were told not to
sentence: death and eternal suffering for them and their children and their chidrenâs children for all time.
seems a bit harsh. christ what an asshole.
God: Abe, if you really loved me, youâd kill Isaac.
Abe: Er, okay.
God: LOL. j/k.
I have to mention:
Also, Jacob. What a douchebag.
Thereâs no real justification for thinking the snake in the Garden of Eden was Satan. And Satanâs name isnât Lucifer. âLuciferâ is the morning star, and the only people in the Bible given that honorific were a king of Babylon (Isaiah 14:12) and Jesus (Revelations 22:16).
While weâre at it:
Maybe he just wanted to kick them out and make it appear like itâs their own fault?
god âsupposedlyâ created the snake that tempted them, whatever its name was, that wasnât by any means the important aspect of the comment.
whether or not the snake was satan or was being controlled by satan is a very contested subject among theologians, there is plenty of basis for that assumption. it is a lot more muddled then anyone might guess. of course this is all just silly conjecture about a story made up a very long time ago, passed orally, later compiled and edited, so naturally there are many many internal inconsistencies, and it doesnât really matter to the greater point that no matter which way you spin it, the god character in the bible is an a-hole time and time again and responsible for everything from mass infanticides to mass genocides. my point was that he is a crap character in a crap story, and his actions in this particular story are criminal by even the lowest parenting standards we humans have.
a good discussion about the snakeâs identity in the story: http://www.godspointofview.com/public/qanda/was_the_serpent_the_devil.htm
i hadnât see that before, thank you so much for a laugh! 
Jesus, calm down. I meant âfactsâ as in, you know, what the goddamn book says?
And congrats, quite an intrepid appraisal of my entire belief system based on a sentence or two that you completely missed the fucking point of. You must be a hell of a drinking buddy.
Yes, Genesis is more like this
God: I punish you because you are wicked, filthy scum, exactly how I made you, which is why itâs your fault. Now tell me you love me and beg for forgiveness while I beat you some more. Youâre lucky I love so much.
