I came into this with an open heart.  I really did.  You see, I was completely anti-religion when I was younger.  Though I find flaw in the great majority of Marxist thinking, I always believed he was spot on when he said that "Religion is the opiate of the people."  Now that I'm a bit older (right at thirty--I''m technically not over thirty, yet), and have had more world experience, and learned to have intelligent discussions with people without flying off the handle, I have mellowed out a bit.  People have a right to their beliefs and there is no reason for constant turmoil over minor disagreements.  As I have mentioned before, I have no true religious affiliation.  My family comes from a long line of Lutherans, though none in my memory are actually practicing.  Yet, up until my birth, they have all been baptized in that faith.  My folks figured that I could decide for myself what, if any, religion I wanted to practice.  Consequently, I never read the Bible.  I did think that maybe I would find some comfort and peace within those pages.  Of course I realized that the Bible was not all peaches and cream, but most of it so far I have found either ridiculous or appalling.

Such as the story of Jacob.  This person is really considered to be holy and deserving of a covenant with God?  He is not only sickeningly deceptive, but a coward as well.  After he and his mother trick both Esau and Isaac(one of the few people in Genesis who is actually half-way decent), he runs away because he knows that his brother is not only fully capable of whooping his ass, but also has every right to do so.  He finds himself a new father-in-law to screw over after fourteen years, though I do concede that his father-in-law tricked him into taking Leah over Rachel.  But this little bit of the story tells me two things about Jacob:  1) He can dish it, but he sure can't take it; and 2) He can really hold a grudge.  Of course he eventually returns to his homeland, after he gets one last good one in on his father-in-law, and all is well for slow-witted Esau has forgiven him.  At this point in the story there are still clear examples of his cowardice.  He divides the camps into two regiments so that one half can escape if Esau chose to attack the other half.  Genesis 32:24 says, "And Jacob was left alone: and there he wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day."  So, after dividing the camps, and sending a lavish offering of apology to his brother, Jacob sat somewhere alone.  I interpret this to mean that he was not in either of his two camps, and therefore is not at risk of being slaughtered with his wives and children.  And what is the deal with this random guy with whom he allegedly wrestles all night?  Plotz explains that it is an angel, and upon a second reading I found that both men were evenly matched, and Jacob refused to let the guy go until he received a blessing.  The "angel" obliged.  I put angel in quotes because I'm not convinced Jacob has enough sand to keep even with an angel in a wrestling match--he couldn't even face Esau.  Jacob's quite the blessing whore, is he not?  I think this is perhaps symptomatic of a lack of confidence.  That would also explain why he sucks so much as a human being. So in conclusion, not a big fan of Jacob.

Now on to the end of Exodus where the priestly writer describes in painstaking detail how God wants His people to set up the tabernacle.  In these passages, God's personality is akin to petulant A-list stars who want only green M&Ms in the candy bowls in their hotel rooms.  He's God for godssakes!  What possible use does he have for all that material stuff?  This seems more like a weak, human desire to have more stuff than anybody else, rather than a Godly decree.  And by the way, aren't the people supposed to not covet thy neighbors' stuff?  Now segue into all those crazy commandments.  Exodus 21: 28 states:  "If an ox gore a man or woman, that they die, then the ox shall be surely stoned, and his flesh will not be eaten."  Seriously?  What is the purpose here?  Are all the other oxen made to witness such stonings so as to discourage further bad behavior from them?  And why can't the flesh be eaten?  And is Exodus 22:29 actually commanding parents to sacrifice--as in kill--their firstborn infant sons?!  I truly would like an answer to this if anybody reading this blog would be so kind. Then of course there is the whole golden calf debacle.  Plotz already  expounds upon the shortcomings of Aaron, so I won't go there.  Obviously God's chosen people have thoroughly pissed Him off, but He forgives them once those in the house of Levi massacre 3,000 of their brethren.  That's nice, isn't it?  I must admit, though, that choosing to worship the golden calf was very poor judgement on behalf of the Israelites.  One would think they ought to know how God is by now.  Especially after witnessing what went down with the Egyptians. 

This whole, long rant does have a point.  Exodus 22:20 clearly forbids sacrificing unto any other god, and 22:28 says not to "revile the gods."  Gods, as in plural.  So there are other gods?  I think I'll take my chances with one of them.  What could they possibly do that's worse than the God of the Old Testament?  With friends like that God, who needs enemies?