Vengeful, evil God in the Old Testament?

[German guy]

Hello everybody,

I have a question for those of you who believe in a merciful God.

My journey through holy scriptures has brought me to the Old Testament of the Bible again this week. After having read the NT, Quran and several scriptures by Baha'u'llah, I thought I should go back to where it all started, the faith of the Jewish people. It had been quite a while since I read it the last time. I have read up to Esra so far, but also Hiob, Jesaja, Daniel and Jona and had wonderful support by a Jewish friend who helped me with her inspiration and ideas on the tales of the Jewish people.

I asked myself, what does the OT tell me about God?

I have to admit, the OT was quite a challenge for me, much like Quran. On one side, God is merciful, bot on the other side, jalous and vengeful -- and the moral rules by which the culture of the people Israel worked back then are plain evil, by today's standards:

God demands from his people actions, following the exodus from Egypt, which are, by modern standards, a "genocide and war of extermination against the pre-israelite people's of the promised land" -- not much different than Hitler's war of extermination and conquest of land against the USSR. God demands from the Israelites to act out the "ban" against several peoples, which means the murder on all inhabitants, not just soldiers, but of all women and children as well. God even punishes the Israelites when they didn't follow this order to murder all women, but instead took some of them as female slaves (see 3rd Mose/Leviticus to Book of Josua). Additionally, God demands from the Israelites to destroy all cults of their enemies, to pillage their altars and holy places -- like the Taliban in Afghanistan.

God does not just punish the guilty, but entire families, clans, cities and peoples in a broad-brush manner, for the misdeeds of a few among them -- when a father of a family enraged God, his entire family is punished, his wives and children, his sons down to the upteenth generation. When a clean leader misbehaves, his entire city gets destroyed as punishment, including all women and children.

Can you really worship a God who demands genocide, war crimes and religious intolerance? Can you pray to a God who punishes innocents for the deeds of others, children for the deeds of their fathers?

My preliminary answer, the one I have found for myself so far, is the following: This can only be understood in a historical context. Mankind and its civilization was very backwards those days, so God had to demand such things from his people, if anything good on earth could be achieved at all. This cruelty is not God's fault, or a sign of a lack of mercy on God's side, but is rooted in man's low state of development in that time.

God will not give man heaven on earth, because leaving man to the shortcomings of material life is part of the expulsion from paradise -- He will just reveal himself in revelations time and again, to support mankind in this material life on earth ridden by problems and moral imperfection. But these revelations will be worded in a way that is suitable for the humans and their respective state of civilisatory development in each period of time -- the revelation will not be perfect, but be limited by man's capacity to understand and follow it.

The Israelites could hardly follow the simple rules of the Ten Commandments back then, but violated them time and again. So how could God possibly have expected them to follow a much more moral, advanced morality, which would have changed their entire culture? Patriarchy, family honor and blood revenge were the basic pillars of society back then -- God's word could not have changed that at that time, not because of God's lack of perfection, but because of mankind's poor state.

Each of God's revelations -- be that Mose's, Jesus' or Mohammed's -- was the best medicine for mankind's illness in the respective period of time. Mose's law, the Gospels and Quran were a considerable progress of man's morality in the respective period of time. But it would be absurd to still apply the rules literally today, because that which was a progress 2000 or 1400 years ago, would be regress and backwards by today's standards.

So far my take on it.

(And in case if some of you are wondering, yes, I sympathize with the Baha'i faith.)

What do you think about it? Those of you who believe in a merciful God -- how do you reconcile this belief with the cruelty of God in the Old Testament?

What's your answer to this problem?

Best wishes,
German Guy

 

[Verthaine]

What do you think about it? Those of you who believe in a merciful God -- how do you reconcile this belief with the cruelty of God in the Old Testament?

What's your answer to this problem?

I deal with this problem by understanding that, ultimately,the Bible was just the opinion (since all up and down this forum people are still arguing about the validity of the events in the Bible) of the writers of the Bible and it is up to the individual to decide whether they wish to believe it or not..

I also understand that the ancient Israelites wasn't the only game on the planet at that time,and that other cultures had their own perspectives and explanations about how they view the nature of reality.

I believe it is important to understand what the ancient pagans,Taoists,Buddhists,Zoroastrians,Hindus,Confucians,etc had to say about the subject of 'God" around that time rather than relying on one, and only one source (The Bible).

 

[German guy]

I deal with this problem by understanding that, ultimately,the Bible was just the opinion (since all up and down this forum people are still arguing about the validity of the events in the Bible) of the writers of the Bible and it is up to the individual to decide whether they wish to believe it or not..

I also understand that the ancient Israelites wasn't the only game on the planet at that time,and that other cultures had their own perspectives and explanations about how they view the nature of reality.

I believe it is important to understand what the ancient pagans,Taoists,Buddhists,Zoroastrians,Hindus,Confucians,etc had to say about the subject of 'God" around that time rather than relying on one, and only one source (The Bible).

May I ask if you are religious, and if yes, which religion to you follow?

 

[Goshin]

Hello everybody,

I have a question for those of you who believe in a merciful God.

My journey through holy scriptures has brought me to the Old Testament of the Bible again this week. After having read the NT, Quran and several scriptures by Baha'u'llah, I thought I should go back to where it all started, the faith of the Jewish people. It had been quite a while since I read it the last time. I have read up to Esra so far, but also Hiob, Jesaja, Daniel and Jona and had wonderful support by a Jewish friend who helped me with her inspiration and ideas on the tales of the Jewish people.

I asked myself, what does the OT tell me about God?

I have to admit, the OT was quite a challenge for me, much like Quran. On one side, God is merciful, bot on the other side, jalous and vengeful -- and the moral rules by which the culture of the people Israel worked back then are plain evil, by today's standards:

God demands from his people actions, following the exodus from Egypt, which are, by modern standards, a "genocide and war of extermination against the pre-israelite people's of the promised land" -- not much different than Hitler's war of extermination and conquest of land against the USSR. God demands from the Israelites to act out the "ban" against several peoples, which means the murder on all inhabitants, not just soldiers, but of all women and children as well. God even punishes the Israelites when they didn't follow this order to murder all women, but instead took some of them as female slaves (see 3rd Mose/Leviticus to Book of Josua). Additionally, God demands from the Israelites to destroy all cults of their enemies, to pillage their altars and holy places -- like the Taliban in Afghanistan.

God does not just punish the guilty, but entire families, clans, cities and peoples in a broad-brush manner, for the misdeeds of a few among them -- when a father of a family enraged God, his entire family is punished, his wives and children, his sons down to the upteenth generation. When a clean leader misbehaves, his entire city gets destroyed as punishment, including all women and children.

Can you really worship a God who demands genocide, war crimes and religious intolerance? Can you pray to a God who punishes innocents for the deeds of others, children for the deeds of their fathers?

My preliminary answer, the one I have found for myself so far, is the following: This can only be understood in a historical context. Mankind and its civilization was very backwards those days, so God had to demand such things from his people, if anything good on earth could be achieved at all. This cruelty is not God's fault, or a sign of a lack of mercy on God's side, but is rooted in man's low state of development in that time.

God will not give man heaven on earth, because leaving man to the shortcomings of material life is part of the expulsion from paradise -- He will just reveal himself in revelations time and again, to support mankind in this material life on earth ridden by problems and moral imperfection. But these revelations will be worded in a way that is suitable for the humans and their respective state of civilisatory development in each period of time -- the revelation will not be perfect, but be limited by man's capacity to understand and follow it.

The Israelites could hardly follow the simple rules of the Ten Commandments back then, but violated them time and again. So how could God possibly have expected them to follow a much more moral, advanced morality, which would have changed their entire culture? Patriarchy, family honor and blood revenge were the basic pillars of society back then -- God's word could not have changed that at that time, not because of God's lack of perfection, but because of mankind's poor state.

Each of God's revelations -- be that Mose's, Jesus' or Mohammed's -- was the best medicine for mankind's illness in the respective period of time. Mose's law, the Gospels and Quran were a considerable progress of man's morality in the respective period of time. But it would be absurd to still apply the rules literally today, because that which was a progress 2000 or 1400 years ago, would be regress and backwards by today's standards.

So far my take on it.

(And in case if some of you are wondering, yes, I sympathize with the Baha'i faith.)

What do you think about it? Those of you who believe in a merciful God -- how do you reconcile this belief with the cruelty of God in the Old Testament?

What's your answer to this problem?

Best wishes,
German Guy

I'd say you pretty much nailed it. You have to view these things with an understanding of the historical context, and how primitive humanity was at the time.

 

[Verthaine]

May I ask if you are religious, and if yes, which religion to you follow?

I tend to be more irreligious (and spiritual) than religious.

Taoism,Zen Buddhism,Erisianism.

 

[Temporal]

I'd say you pretty much nailed it. You have to view these things with an understanding of the historical context, and how primitive humanity was at the time.

I agree... but it's hard to translate this to modern times. In 500 years we will be considered primitive, so what does that tell us about how we relate to our major religions right now?

The biggest flaw of modern religion that I'm seeing is the notion that the Bible is infallible, yet people such as yourself have no problem writing off parts of the OT. To people during the time of the OT, that would be completely and utterly blasphemous.

Everything must be subject to critique and inquiry - everything - if we are to continue evolving our consciousness. The fact that we are currently modern should make no difference. The modern becomes the primitive faster and faster.

 

[rathi]

I wonder how people rationalize the killing of the Egyptian first born children. God could have just as easily freed the slaves by teleporting them across the red sea. Even if he wanted to get violent, he could killed Pharaoh and the people actually responsible for the enslavement. What reason is there for such cruelty on innocent targets?

 

[DarkWizard12]

I wonder how people rationalize the killing of the Egyptian first born children. God could have just as easily freed the slaves by teleporting them across the red sea. Even if he wanted to get violent, he could killed Pharaoh and the people actually responsible for the enslavement. What reason is there for such cruelty on innocent targets?

To show pharaoh, he had no excuse.

 

[German guy]

I agree... but it's hard to translate this to modern times. In 500 years we will be considered primitive, so what does that tell us about how we relate to our major religions right now?

The biggest flaw of modern religion that I'm seeing is the notion that the Bible is infallible, yet people such as yourself have no problem writing off parts of the OT. To people during the time of the OT, that would be completely and utterly blasphemous.

Everything must be subject to critique and inquiry - everything - if we are to continue evolving our consciousness. The fact that we are currently modern should make no difference. The modern becomes the primitive faster and faster.

Yes, I agree with you, everything must be subject to critique and inquiry. Science has already found the Bible is hardly a document that can be taken literally, but that the way it was written, assembled and canonized was a very complicated process, dependent on the respective historic context. But of course, as a believer, you cannot discard it entirely, but have to find a way to understand it on a spiritual level.

Faith should be in accordance to science. The Baha'i say that faith without science is bigotry, but science without faith is empty materialism -- both are the two wings a bird needs to fly. I like this stance.

 

[Goshin]

I agree... but it's hard to translate this to modern times. In 500 years we will be considered primitive, so what does that tell us about how we relate to our major religions right now?

The biggest flaw of modern religion that I'm seeing is the notion that the Bible is infallible, yet people such as yourself have no problem writing off parts of the OT. To people during the time of the OT, that would be completely and utterly blasphemous.

Everything must be subject to critique and inquiry - everything - if we are to continue evolving our consciousness. The fact that we are currently modern should make no difference. The modern becomes the primitive faster and faster.

To address the bolded item...

It's not really a question of "writing off" parts of the OT. It isn't nearly that simple. It is a matter of understanding that some laws and promises were specific to a particular time period, or a particular people or tribe or family, and do not apply outside that context. Also, understanding that God deals with us "as we are", while at the same time trying to make us better... and realizing that the historical period in question was a barbarous age, a time of savagery and ruthlessness almost incomprehensible to modern man. In a sense, I feel that if you were able to have a conversation with God about it, he would give you a huge shrug and point and say "Eh, look what I had to work with here!!" :lol:

But no, it isn't simply a matter of ignoring inconvenient portions of the OT. There are specific and scriptural reasons why much of the OT is no longer considered "applicable" to Gentile Christians in this dispensation.

 

[German guy]

In a sense, I feel that if you were able to have a conversation with God about it, he would give you a huge shrug and point and say "Eh, look what I had to work with here!!" :lol:

That's exactly my thought to the point, and a funny way to put it! Thanks for that!

 

[Slartibartfast]

To address the bolded item...

It's not really a question of "writing off" parts of the OT. It isn't nearly that simple. It is a matter of understanding that some laws and promises were specific to a particular time period, or a particular people or tribe or family, and do not apply outside that context. Also, understanding that God deals with us "as we are", while at the same time trying to make us better... and realizing that the historical period in question was a barbarous age, a time of savagery and ruthlessness almost incomprehensible to modern man. In a sense, I feel that if you were able to have a conversation with God about it, he would give you a huge shrug and point and say "Eh, look what I had to work with here!!" :lol:

But no, it isn't simply a matter of ignoring inconvenient portions of the OT. There are specific and scriptural reasons why much of the OT is no longer considered "applicable" to Gentile Christians in this dispensation.

Yep. This is why I believe that the creation story was told as it was. How can you explain advanced concepts of science and physics to people in huts?

 

[obvious Child]

To show pharaoh, he had no excuse.

By making innocent people who had no say in the matter pay the price?

How does that show pharaoh he has no excuse?

 

[scourge99]

I wonder how people rationalize the killing of the Egyptian first born children. God could have just as easily freed the slaves by teleporting them across the red sea. Even if he wanted to get violent, he could killed Pharaoh and the people actually responsible for the enslavement. What reason is there for such cruelty on innocent targets?

To show pharaoh, he had no excuse.

isn't god the one who hardened the pharoahs heart.

 

[Goshin]

Well, this one went a whole twelve posts before the Horsemen of the Atheist Apocalypse showed up.... :lol:

Buh-bye....

 

[scourge99]

You are baiting, Goshin. its against forum rules. but i suppose you get a free pass since you are a moderator

http://www.debatepolitics.com/forum-rules/28594-forum-rules.html

3. Baiting/Flaming/Trolling -To bait someone in a general sense is to make a comment with a purposeful intent to coerce some form of response from the individual. In some cases this device can be a useful tool of debate, eliciting responses to highlight a point or reveal an underlying truth concerning someone’s argument. However, in other cases the intent of the bait is less focused on debating.

 

[DarkWizard12]

By making innocent people who had no say in the matter pay the price?

How does that show pharaoh he has no excuse?

Did the jewish people had a say in the matter when the egyptians drowned their children, and turned them into slaves?

Innocent blood is shed when great sin is committed, it's sad but it's true. But, even this points to G-d's patience, and shows the real evil here lies with egypt. As evil as the egyptians were, God was still patient enough to give them a choice every step of the way, from prophecy, to 1 plague, 2 plagues, and so on, to the 10th plague. It took the slaying of the first born before Egypt let them go.

 

[DarkWizard12]

isn't god the one who hardened the pharoahs heart.

He gave pharaoh choices that he didn't want to make, thats what it means by "God hardened Pharaoh's heart".

 

[obvious Child]

Did the jewish people had a say in the matter when the egyptians drowned their children, and turned them into slaves?

Innocent blood is shed, it's sad but it's true. As evil as the egyptians were, God was still patient enough to give them a choice every step of the way. It took the slaying of the first born before Egypt let them go.

How does that show he had no excuse? If God really loved his chosen people, he would have gotten them out of there way before that mess. Abrahamic God makes no sense.

 

[DarkWizard12]

How does that show he had no excuse? If God really loved his chosen people, he would have gotten them out of there way before that mess.

Because God loved the gentile as well. Afterall, it would make sense for God to just wait and see what the egyptians did with the jewish people. It wasn't long before when the egyptians had a jew(joseph) as their "prime minister" and, as a result, egypt prospered. Instead, egypt turned on them, and God wanted to see how far egypt was going to let their hatred go. Afterall, if he started with the 10th plague, egypt could say "we had no fair warning, you are a cruel God!". Instead, all the evil that was caused, was caused by them, and them alone. Blame God as you wish, but the person who whipped the israelite was not God, but an egyptian.

Abrahamic God makes no sense.

I don't think he has to, he is over all things. He makes as much sense as we choose to learn from him.

 

[scourge99]

He gave pharaoh choices that he didn't want to make, thats what it means by "God hardened Pharaoh's heart".

did you make that up yourself? if not then please source it since it is an extreme interpretation that diverges from a straight foreward reading.

 

[DarkWizard12]

did you make that up yourself? if not then please source it since it is an extreme interpretation that diverges from a straight foreward reading.

....

read the story... damn, i knew this before I was old enough to go to bible school Just imagine yourself in pharaoh's position, and then ask yourself how that line of thought does NOT make sense. :/

"an extreme interpretation" he says :lol: You read the bible(well, the english translation of it) more literally than fundamentalists do, if your going to go with that interpretation of the text! I suppose we are to believe that God harden's all people's hearts, now? Could you use that as a legal excuse in court? lol

 

[scourge99]

read the story...

I have. Have you?

Exodus 10

1Then the LORD said to Moses, "Go in to Pharaoh, for I have hardened his heart and the heart of his servants, that I may show these signs of mine among them, 2and that you may tell in the hearing of your son and of your grandson how I have dealt harshly with the Egyptians and what signs I have done among them, that you may know that I am the LORD."

...

19And the LORD turned the wind into a very strong west wind, which lifted the locusts and drove them into the Red Sea. Not a single locust was left in all the country of Egypt. 20But the LORD hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he did not let the people of Israel go.

Exodus 11

10Moses and Aaron did all these wonders before Pharaoh, and the LORD hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he did not let the people of Israel go out of his land.

Exodus 14

1Then the LORD said to Moses, 2"Tell the people of Israel to turn back and encamp in front of Pi-hahiroth, between Migdol and the sea, in front of Baal-zephon; you shall encamp facing it, by the sea. 3For Pharaoh will say of the people of Israel, 'They are wandering in the land; the wilderness has shut them in.' 4And I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and he will pursue them, and I will get glory over Pharaoh and all his host, and the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD." And they did so.

....damn, i knew this before I was old enough to go to bible school

Maybe thats an indication you have FALSE PRECONCEIVED notions. Time to do some "big boy" studying.

Just imagine yourself in pharaoh's position, and then ask yourself how that line of thought does NOT make sense. :/

I don't need to imagine myself in pharoah's shoes. All I have to do is READ the bible and it clearly reads that god hardened his heart so god could show off his power to the Egyptians. Presumably the Pharaoh would have agreed to let them go otherwise god would have no need to harden his heart.

...."an extreme interpretation" he says

I notice you continue to squirm and wiggle when you cannot show anything to backup your claims.
Tell me, have you ever been wrong about anything in the Bible? your only argument is that you believed this since you were a child therefore it must be true.

You read the bible(well, the english translation of it) more literally than fundamentalists do

This isn't a parable or a metaphor. It quite directly says MULTIPLE TIMES that god hardened pharoahs heart.

....if your going to go with that interpretation of the text! I suppose we are to believe that God harden's all people's hearts, now?

Why would I think that? That makes no sense.

....Could you use that as a legal excuse in court? lol

This is irrelevent.

 

[BDBoop]

 

[German guy]

@scourge99:

So did pharao have a choice, or did he not have a choice, because God hardened his heart? If I understand you correctly, you believe he had no choice (correct me, if I'm wrong). But this means it was not his fault the plagues came over Egypt -- God hardened his heart, so God decided they would come. Ergo, God is responsible for these plagues, not paharao's stubbornness.

Which leaves us with the question how a merciful God can punish innocents for the deeds of their leader/someone else. What do you think about that?

Please correct me, if I misread you.