How to Respond to Old Testament Violence?

[clem456]

Some quotes from the video:
“the only standpoint through which we should read the whole bible is that of Christ Crucified”
“Origen’s point is that if we read the bible in such a way that if we see God as cruel or that he encourages violence, we are ipso facto misreading it.”
“Origen says read these passages in a metaphorical, allegorical, and symbolic way, as about the spiritual struggle”.

 

[Jerurussia]

Saint Augustine was at odds with a literal interpretation of the Bible only as a teacher and pressured Saint Jerome to soften interpretation to aid his job and Jerome refused. Otherwise Augustine was personally a literalist, and willing to accept stuff as fact he did not understand. Augustine was vindicated in Daniel’s Messiah calendar being verified in the 20th century by correlating with the Jewish canonical year.

Many animals will break up disturbances like the kitty that whacked the pit bull that was dragging the little boy. Bears wasting 42 loud thugs isn’t unnatural and handy for God’s prophet Elijah.

God said to waste some tribes, spoil some, spoil none…It all depends, and I would suggest there was a strong health element to it, and the toxicity of the culture as in Canaanites who spread venereal disease and paganism as described by Moses after his warning to stay clear of the Canaanites. The medical model serves here as well as in the Flood story: toxic culture would eradicate all human life with interbreeding of hominids with sentient humans so…Noah alone kept his generation pure. We do have some significant genetic bottlenecks. The four blood types correlate nicely with the four couples on Noah’s Ark. Plus Adam and Eve were for real with Mitochondrial Eve and Genetic Adam verified by genetics.

Touching the Ark of the Covenant as unjust killing? How about sticking your finger in a 220v outlet as unjust killing? This is a force of nature at work! The Ark of the Covenant was a massive condenser, gold inside, gold outside, insulating layer of cedar between. BWAAAAP!

Remember Abraham being called a prince of the people from whom he wanted to purchase the twin caves, Machpelah, to bury Sarah? These groups migrated from northwest India, the Indo-European migration, and were not unknown to each other, and separated by radically different religious views. Ur of the Chaldees, “City of the Chaldees/Khaldees” was the home base of the bad guys, and Abraham and Sarah fled there just as centuries before Sargon the Great’s daughter was almost the victim of rape by the wicked high priest Lugalan from Ur of the Chaldees. This was a satanic center, the same people who earlier threw down the landmarks and took the Promised Land originally from the Woman & Seed culture in the so-called Patriarchal Revolution. God was RETURNING the land to His remnant, so don’t weep for those schmucks who originally enslaved the EN/Queens who distributed land under the Genesis 3:15 mandate to Woman & Seed. Sorry, just a fact and sorry it’s boring. But it’s true. Don’t dis God for being just, or preserving His science project from destruction. Read Savinah Teubal’s misnamed SARAH THE PRIESTESS.

 

[Hans_W]

The four blood types correlate nicely with the four couples on Noah’s Ark. Plus Adam and Eve were for real with Mitochondrial Eve and Genetic Adam verified by genetics.

The Ark of the Covenant was a massive condenser, gold inside, gold outside, insulating layer of cedar between.

Don’t dis God for being just, or preserving His science project from destruction. Read Savinah Teubal’s misnamed SARAH THE PRIESTESS.

I find it funny when people try to read modern science into the Old Testament.

 

[Achilles6129]

The Word of God is not designed to “trump” other forms of evidence. The bible is not a science or history textbook.

The Bible makes historical and scientific claims whether you like it or not. The Creator of the universe says that certain things happened; either those things truly did happen and he’s telling us the truth or they didn’t.

 

[Achilles6129]

** how do you know that if you don’t interpret.? it must be nice that scripture is so crystal clear to you when to us other poor mortals must ponder over it and try to struggle to make certain that we are truly following God.**

It’s not a matter of human interpretation. The Bible itself tells you directly what it’s saying. If it’s using a parable or metaphor then it will be clear. If it’s not, then it will present something as historical fact.

 

[clem456]

The Bible makes historical and scientific claims whether you like it or not. The Creator of the universe says that certain things happened; either those things truly did happen and he’s telling us the truth or they didn’t.

So, for example, you believe that God created the world in literally 6 - 24 hour days. You believe that is scientific and historic literal fact, correct?
If you do not believe that, then what better evidence do you see scientifically and historically about the development of the world?
Do you believe the bible’s inspired purpose is to “trump” as you say, other intellectual pursuits which use the brain that God gave us?

 

[dmar198]

Achilles6129:

The Bible itself tells you directly what it’s saying. If it’s using a parable or metaphor then it will be clear. If it’s not, then it will present something as historical fact.

I don’t think that’s accurate and I’m wondering why you think so. Here’s why I don’t: I’ve always gotten the impression that ancient Hebrew literature uses hyperbole, metaphor, and allegory much more freely than modern English literature, and you have to understand ancient Hebrew culture in order for its literary conventions to be clear to you. Just like we don’t expect someone to understand Paradise Lost by John Milton if you don’t study the culture which produced it, we apply the same standard of interpretation to the Bible. And within that context, there are several schools of thought regarding how to distinguish metaphor from literal. Thus, it’s not always obvious. Does that make sense?

 

[Sky_River]

Time period, culture, ethnicity,custom all effect morality.
Less then a hundred years ago young girls married men two, three times their young age .15 &!6 year old married men in their 30 's,40’s ,50’s. The young women would be considered wise to make such a match while older men were not looked upon as perverts as they are now.
Illegitimate children were unadoptable.
Slavery was commonplace (still is for some nations). It had been practiced for thousands of years.It was a way to pay off your debts. If you were an Israelite you would be released after a while. All slaves were given a protection under the Law.
50 to 75 years ago lobotomizing the mentally ill was considered humane and not barbaric- like it is now. Eugenics was considered forward thinking and sterilizing women of certain ethnicity and race was accounted as moral and righteous. It help to aid the Nazis to form a rationale for the “Final Solution.”
These things are considered immoral now. In the past they were considered progressive. An enhancement of life for all the"right " kind of people.
Are the barbarities of the present less horrific then that of the past?
Is a justice system that unfairly puts the poor and indigent in jail at a much higher rate, then the wealthy ;that’s the justice system , I don’t hear folks reeling against that.Do you.
HISTORY changes everything. Art, science ,music, philosophies ,customs, manner, child rearing- the list goes on and on.
Harshness of punishment is relative to time period.

Not in God’s eyes. Hebrews 13:8 says, “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.”. Jesus is God. God’s standards of right and wrong and morality is not determined by time period.

 

[DomSavio2]

Not in God’s eyes. Hebrews 13:8 says, “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.”. Jesus is God. God’s standards of right and wrong and morality is not determined by time period.

Yes, I agree with you completely. God is unchanging and is the ultimate moral absolutist. However, it was Jesus himself who said that God allowed divorce in the Law of Moses because of the Israelites’ hardness of heart. It’s not that God was comprising His morals in the Old Testament, but rather that he patiently worked with a people to bring them to moral perfection. He knew that it would be foolish to automatically outlaw divorce and so He at first placed restrictions on it and gradually revealed to humans that His ultimate will is that there be no divorce whatsoever. This is but one example of mitigation under the Law of Moses and there are many more situations like it.

 

[clem456]

Yes, I agree with you completely. God is unchanging and is the ultimate moral absolutist. However, it was Jesus himself who said that God allowed divorce in the Law of Moses because of the Israelites’ hardness of heart. It’s not that God was comprising His morals in the Old Testament, but rather that he patiently worked with a people to bring them to moral perfection. He knew that it would be foolish to automatically outlaw divorce and so He at first placed restrictions on it and gradually revealed to humans that His ultimate will is that there be no divorce whatsoever. This is but one example of mitigation under the Law of Moses and there are many more situations like it.

Is it really the case that divorce was ever compatible with God’s will? A person’s culpability would be another issue.

8Jesus replied, “**Moses permitted **you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.

And in the context of this thread, did God ever condone, let alone command, the slaughter of innocents?
It cannot be the case that God gradually invited humans to respect human life. Note that

From the beginning he made them

in his image

. It cannot be the case that at one time innocent human beings were disposable in God’s eyes, and at other times they were precious.
We were simply ignorant and hard hearted. I think we must be careful not to project our ignorance onto God, as if he is made in our image, rather than the other way around. Doing this, it is easy to justify our pride and ignorance as being God’s will.
Yes God has revealed himself to us over time. Our ability to understand him, and submit ourselves to his revelation has been less than perfect. Thank God we have the Catholic Church as God’s instrument.

 

[juliamajor]

Not in God’s eyes. Hebrews 13:8 says, “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.”. Jesus is God. God’s standards of right and wrong and morality is not determined by time period.

But people’s understanding of right and wrong does change.God doesn’t change but humanity does. Humans perceive themselves and the world around them through their senses,their history, their geography,their psychology,their life experiences and much more.We define ourselves,and everything important to us by the world around us.

 

[PRmerger]

It’s not a matter of human interpretation.

All things in Scripture are a matter of human interpretation, Achilles. We read, and then we must interpret. There is no other way to understand Scripture without interpreting it.

The Bible itself tells you directly what it’s saying. If it’s using a parable or metaphor then it will be clear. If it’s not, then it will present something as historical fact.

This is a man-made tradition.

There is no Bible verse that tells you that the Bible will tell you if it’s using a parable or metaphor.

For example, when the Bible states,

“Our soul waits for the LORD,
who is our help and our shield,
For in him our hearts rejoice;
in his holy name we trust.”

what verse in Scripture tell us whether this is a parable, metaphor, a historical fact or scientific fact?

Please cite the book, chapter and verse that tells us how to interpret the above verse in Psalms.

 

[meltzerboy]

All things in Scripture are a matter of human interpretation, Achilles. We read, and then we must interpret. There is no other way to understand Scripture without interpreting it.

This is a man-made tradition.

There is no Bible verse that tells you that the Bible will tell you if it’s using a parable or metaphor.

For example, when the Bible states,

“Our soul waits for the LORD,
who is our help and our shield,
For in him our hearts rejoice;
in his holy name we trust.”

what verse in Scripture tell us whether this is a parable, metaphor, a historical fact or scientific fact?

Please cite the book, chapter and verse that tells us how to interpret the above verse in Psalms.

I agree, PR. Without (layers of) interpretation, Judaism would have to close shop.

 

[Achilles6129]

All things in Scripture are a matter of human interpretation, Achilles. We read, and then we must interpret. There is no other way to understand Scripture without interpreting it.

“20 But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, 21 for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.” 2 Pet. 2:20-21 (NASB)

Nothing in Scripture is a matter of human interpretation because human beings don’t get to decide what it means and what it doesn’t mean.

This is a man-made tradition.

There is no Bible verse that tells you that the Bible will tell you if it’s using a parable or metaphor.

It’s simple logic: if God is good, then he’ll be honest and not try to distort, misrepresent, or hide the truth. God’s statements will be true and he will say them in a way that we can understand. He will make it clear to us when he is speaking literally and when he isn’t. If he doesn’t, then that’s simply called being dishonest.

That interpretative principle is based upon the very nature of God himself - so yes, it is in the Bible.

If you believe otherwise, then you believe in a God who deliberately confuses, deliberately deceives, and deliberately hides. This does not agree with the nature of God.

 

[PRmerger]

“20 But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, 21 for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.” 2 Pet. 2:20-21 (NASB)

Amen!

We are commanded to interpret the Scriptures in the manner that God wants it interpreted.

But interpret it, we must. And as we are humans, we can only use human interpretation.

Nothing in Scripture is a matter of human interpretation because human beings don’t get to decide what it means and what it doesn’t mean.

It’s simple logic: if God is good, then he’ll be honest and not try to distort, misrepresent, or hide the truth. God’s statements will be true and he will say them in a way that we can understand. He will make it clear to us when he is speaking literally and when he isn’t.

Fair enough.

But since the Bible never states “He will say them in a way that we can understand. He will make it clear to us when he is speaking literally and when he isn’t”…

you are following a man-made tradition.

Are we agreed on that? That the Bible never states that God is going to make it clear when he is speaking literally and when he isn’t.

Otherwise, you’re going to have to post the Bible verse that tells us whether God is speaking literally regarding Psalm 33:20-22.

Is Psalm 33: 20-22 literal, metaphorical? And what verse in Scripture are you using to tell you this?

That interpretative principle is based upon the very nature of God himself - so yes, it is in the Bible.

Book, chapter and verse for this, please.

 

[PRmerger]

It’s simple logic

I am a Catholic, and therefore understand that logic and reason are gifts from God and we are commanded to use logic to come to an understanding of the world.

But your response “It’s simple logic” prompts the question: do you permit Catholics to use this same paradigm to defend their beliefs?

For example, when you ask, “Why do you believe in Purgatory? It’s not found in the Bible”

is it acceptable for me to say, “It’s simple logic”?

That is, we know that none of us is pure. We all need cleansing. And nothing that is dirty can stand before the eternal throne of heaven…

therefore logic dictates that if we die with even a smidgen of dirt on our souls, we need to be cleaned up before standing before the Beatific Vision, yes?

 

[juliamajor]

Scripture has layers of meanings-not just one. Some folks have an either/or view of scripture and some have both/ and. Catholics are both/
and.
To eliminate depth of meaning is to reduce scripture to the mundane. The vibrancy of scripture lays in it’s ability to be seen by each generation as having a meaning particular to them. interpretation of scripture is done by everyone.Verses of scripture can have a potent meaning to an individual that someone else cannot see. The bible is like a rose in which each petal is a layer of meaning.
Scripture is a deep well of living water.The bucket doesn’t stay at the top but goes into the depths of the water. It gets the freshest water there because it rises out of hidden springs.
What are types but interpretations?
Scripture never says scripture is to be used alone.
using scripture to explain scripture?
Hmm if you are confused by one line of scripture how can you possibly understand it through another. Why do people constantly ask about a verse-What does this mean.
If the bible is so self evident why have Bible study, bible colleges , bible education of any kind.
The Jewish people have been studying and interpreting the scripture for thousands of years. And you know what? They still haven’t finished! The understanding of scripture is not static. It is the Word of God alive and kicking.

 

[PRmerger]

SWhy do people constantly ask about a verse-What does this mean.
If the bible is so self evident why have Bible study, bible colleges , bible education of any kind.

Egg-zactly.



And why have sermons given by preachers?

Every church service would consist of a reading from the Bible, and the preacher standing up and saying, “Since the Bible is so clear, go and live what it just said. And now, let us sing a hymn…”

 

[clem456]

Amen!

We are commanded to interpret the Scriptures in the manner that God wants it interpreted.

But interpret it, we must. And as we are humans, we can only use human interpretation.

But since the Bible never states “He will say them in a way that we can understand. He will make it clear to us when he is speaking literally and when he isn’t”…

you are following a man-made tradition.

Are we agreed on that? That the Bible never states that God is going to make it clear when he is speaking literally and when he isn’t.

…

That’s right. We all depend on those who came before us to understand God’s revelation. God’s entrusts his revelation to humanity, in the first place to a virgin named Mary. No way around it.
One cannot fully understand the Scriptures in a purely literalist and self-sufficient way, detached from others. And that doesn’t imply we aren’t smart enough to understand the word of God. It just means we aren’t each of us our own little gods.

Think about it…If Christ is God’s only and final word, and Christ draws all humanity into communion with him, then we are not meant to live and understand the Scriptures in a personal bubble. We are meant to help each other understand, we are meant to acknowledge and submit to genuine authority from other human beings.

 

[dmar198]

It’s simple logic: if God is good, then he’ll be honest and not try to distort, misrepresent, or hide the truth. God’s statements will be true and he will say them in a way that we can understand. He will make it clear to us when he is speaking literally and when he isn’t. If he doesn’t, then that’s simply called being dishonest.

… If you believe otherwise, then you believe in a God who deliberately confuses, deliberately deceives, and deliberately hides. This does not agree with the nature of God.

How does that square with passages like these:

2 Peter 3:16 - “There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures.”

Acts 8:30-31 - “Philip ran to him, and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet, and asked, ‘Do you understand what you are reading?’ And he said, ‘How can I, unless some one guides me?’ And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.”

Hebrews 5:12 - “For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need some one to teach you again the first principles of God’s word. You need milk, not solid food.”

When you say “in a way that we can understand,” your whole sentence sounds to me like you are talking about the whole Bible. But the Bible says some things in it are hard to understand and Acts 8:30-31 seems to me to suggest that we need someone to guide us in order to understand it.

You said “He will make it clear to us” but God seems to say some of it is unclear. How do you explain these passages?