It's Kind of Like This...
At one time the search for knowledge was all one. Science, history, religion, philosophy; at first there was no distinction between these.
I retell the obvious. The Bible was one of the earliest attempts to consolidate knowledge of the world.
Now, we can agree on the historical and archaeological importance of the Bible.
We can agree that in terms of explaining the scientific workings of the universe it is an early and inaccurate attempt.
We can agree that philosophically the earliest parts of the Bible reflect a harsh patriarchal attitude toward man and nature. Not the entire Christian Bible, of course, but we haven't worked our way through the whole thing yet.
What we fail to agree on from the outset is the existence of God. So discussing the development of our perception of God becomes tricky. The evolution of thought from God the Puppet master, to the God of Judgement, to the God of Love seems irrelevant if you don't believe there is a God.
Cervantes, I understand the point you are trying to make with regard to what we have read thus far. You are not ineffective in your debate.
Has the universe changed? Or has our knowledge of it improved?
Has God changed? Or has our perception of God improved?
To quote another blogger with regard to our perception of God...
"So don’t tell me that loving is easy. Love will turn you inside out and upside down. It will delight you, move you, inspire you, transport you---and it will ultimately destroy you.
Love will kill you, if you do it right.
Jesus showed us how to do it. He didn’t call down the armies of Heaven as he hung dying on the cross. Didn’t call for any more smiting or bashing. Didn’t call for the judgment we so richly deserved.
He called for Love."