05-30-2019, 03:31 PM
1. He claims God scorned Cain's offering because it was vegetation, and demanded a meat offering. This is false; God has always demanded the first fruits of whatever you grow, be it animal or vegetable. God scorned Cain's offering because of Cain's attitude.
2. He goes off on a tangent in portraying God and sacrifice as a predatory relationship. God is the provider; we share with Him in feudal honor. He has no clue about feudalism. God actually demands the best, not the weakest. Dragons demanding their sacrifice is entirely pagan and the Bible militates against that. As a side note, it is a Western notion that one's virgin daughter is somehow more valuable and precious than any other part of your household. That's a Germanic thing that puts a higher blood price on women than on men.
I could go on about those kinds of issues, but the underlying flaw in his discourse is denying the Fall. He says up front that modern (Western) people see no need for salvation, and seems to agree with that. So instead of Christ restoring us to an eternal life outside this life, he suggests that Jesus came to "deify" humans. That's baloney.
2. He goes off on a tangent in portraying God and sacrifice as a predatory relationship. God is the provider; we share with Him in feudal honor. He has no clue about feudalism. God actually demands the best, not the weakest. Dragons demanding their sacrifice is entirely pagan and the Bible militates against that. As a side note, it is a Western notion that one's virgin daughter is somehow more valuable and precious than any other part of your household. That's a Germanic thing that puts a higher blood price on women than on men.
I could go on about those kinds of issues, but the underlying flaw in his discourse is denying the Fall. He says up front that modern (Western) people see no need for salvation, and seems to agree with that. So instead of Christ restoring us to an eternal life outside this life, he suggests that Jesus came to "deify" humans. That's baloney.