[derefr]

Oh, I do get that; I'm more asking why a timeless god wouldn't tell the Jews 4000 years ago to e.g. not construct or partake of social-networking apps (and other such things where they'd have no idea what their God was on about.) An intercessor god dreamed up today would certainly give commandments like that; so why wouldn't a god giving commandments 4000 years ago, but who "exists outside of time", do the same?

[bostonsre]

Maybe it changed its mind or maybe it drip feeds the laws over time since it knows humans could misinterpret laws for things that do not exist yet. (disclaimer: completely agnostic)

[thaumasiotes]

> Maybe it changed its mind

Change is a temporal concept. How could it occur "outside of time"?

[bostonsre]

Why would it need to occur outside of time?

[thaumasiotes]

Because the mind in question exists outside of time.

[krapp]

God cannot be both omnipresent and only exist outside of time.

And God does change his mind more than once in the Bible, so clearly that God at least exists within the temporal universe.

[ars]

> God cannot be both omnipresent and only exist outside of time.

How so? God exists simultaneously at all the moments that exist. Time was created by God, just like the universe was.

> so clearly that God at least exists within the temporal universe.

Imagine you are writing a book, where you, as the author, are also a character. You can interact with your characters as they do things - but you can also go back and change anything you want, and you can see the ending as well.

(Keep in mind that God always maintains free will - God doesn't force any human to act in any particular way, it's always their own choice.)

[DonHopkins]

So clearly that God is a fiction, exactly like the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Thor, and all the other millions of gods that people made up.

[bostonsre]

What is the reasoning behind that tho? If the big dude created the universe, why couldn't he also experience time?

[ars]

God also created time. So he's certainly aware of it, but it's something he causes, rather than something that happens to him,.

[sterlind]

or give laws that are simple to articulate, but cover lots of future scenarios via precedent and emergent behavior.

the golden rule has held up pretty well (in terms of being applicable, not in terms of being adhered to.)

[derefr]

The commandments that generalize are the exception, not the rule.

You know there are mitzvot about which positions of the priesthood should or should not be allowed to eat specific varieties of grapes (that only grew in Canaan) during specific growing seasons, right?

Those are pretty concrete rules, that don't really generalize. The sort of thing you'd expect to see matched by modern equivalents. And yet, these are believed to be literal divine law, just as much as "thou shalt build an ark" etc. is.

Also, there are separate mitzvot for kosher-ness rules for basically each kind of animal, starting with general classes, but then getting increasingly specific and obscure/unlikely-to-be-eaten-by-humans. (Almost exactly as if a series of people were actively pestering a High Priest with trivia questions like "but when is it ritually-impure to eat flying insects, though?", where they then felt the need to make a ruling.)

If you're curious: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_commandments#Canonical_ord...

[im3w1l]

It's a stretch, but maybe you could extract from the rule about eating grapes a general principle, perhaps even one consistent with Japanese tea ceremonies.

[FooBarBizBazz]

Your post got me thinking about the Golden Rule.

I had thought that the Golden Rule was stated explicitly in the New Testament but not in the "Old Testament", or Torah. But that turns out not to be true. (Of course, I was aware that there were some very old statements of it, even from ancient Egypt, predating even Abraham.)

In the New Testament I find Matthew 7:12 and Luke 6:31 cited online. I would also add Matthew 22:36-40 to that, because I think it's simply a more important and more widely referenced quote.

But the Golden Rule is also present, earlier, in what Christians know as Leviticus and Orthodox Jews know as Vaikra, 19:18.

Here are the KJV versions of all of these:

"Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lord." Leviticus 19:18

"Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets." Matthew 7:12 (presumably citing Leviticus earlier)

"And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise." Luke 6:31

And IMO the most important to Christianity, from Matthew 22:36-40:

  36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

  37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

  38 This is the first and great commandment.

  39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

  40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

[DonHopkins]

And if God isn't a sociopathic asshole, then why didn't he bother to throw in a commandment explicitly prohibiting slavery? That would have been pretty simple to universally and unequivocally articulate:

Thou Shalt Not Own Other Human Beings, Nor Treat Them As Property.