The trial of the biblical god

[Damian]

God destroys the fetuses of those who do not worship him:
“You shall acknowledge no God but me. . . . You are destroyed, Israel. . . . The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open.” (Hosea 13:4, 9, 16 New International Version)

God approves the massacre of a peaceful people so one of his tribes could have a place to live.
“And in those days the tribe of the Danites was seeking a place of their own where they might settle, because they had not yet come into an inheritance among the tribes of Israel. . . . Then they said to [the priest], ‘Please inquire of God to learn whether our journey will be successful.’ The priest answered them, ‘Go in peace. Your journey has the Lord’s approval.’ . . . Then they took what Micah had made, and his priest, and went on to Laish, against a people at peace and secure. They attacked them with the sword and burned down their city. . . . The Danites rebuilt the city and settled there.” (Judges 18:1–28 NIV)

 

[friardchips]

Hi. The contrast between the OT and the NT often presents a challenge to many. I think that approaching things on practical terms, without pointing towards the allegorical and prophetical layering, is what you are wishing to do. The angle that you are coming from, is that everything in Scripture is to be taken literally (we are not supposed to believe that everything in the Bible is to be taken literally).

The only explanation I can offer, then, is that God takes people where they are. He is Good (factually / objectively good) and all ‘good’ is summed up in God as the measure because only He is truly Good. What God deems as good is in accordance with where people are, both as individuals, and as a collective peoples, as He invites us to follow His ways, and in the OT, literally forms a righteous people for His own, through which salvation can eventually arrive. In the NT, there is no more wandering, because God comes to us in the flesh - all is provided, in every way. Not one letter of the law falls away.

Take for example, the transcript of the conversation between Our Lady of Guadeloupe and St. Juan Diego, in Mexico, some centuries ago - Our Lady did not say how wicked all the slaughter was, regarding the savagery of the Aztecs and no doubt a host of other native tribes, but rather, she said that they did not have to do what they were doing anymore because God had already given Himself as a sacrifice for our sins. This doesn’t mean that God likes killing (objectively) but that those who were doing those things, thought they were offering sacrifices to what the identity of God was, to them.

In the book of Wisdom (I think), it says that the people of faith were to be patient with those who make monstrous carvings because they were just trying to reach Him. God is the Judge of History.

Thanks.

 

[OsculeturMeOsculo]

I don’t think this will be a fruitful discussion so I wouldn’t bother. Engaging will probably be a stressful mess.

 

[Wesrock]

A daughter is burned as an acceptable sacrifice to God.
“And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord: ‘If you give the Ammonites into my hands, whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites will be the Lord’s, and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering.’ . . . When Jephthah returned to his home in Mizpah, who should come out to meet him but his daughter, dancing to the sound of timbrels! . . . After the two months, she returned to her father, and he did to her as he had vowed.” (Judges 11:30–39 NIV)

This one just vastly misunderstands context. Judges as a whole relates a lot of events without spelling things out. By this time in Israel’s history, human sacrifice and child sacrifice were absolutely and clearly called out as abominations. If you think this was considered “acceptable” to anyone (even the Lord, even in the context of the sotry) and that the Israelite/Jewish tradition around this story didn’t consider it a horrible event which resulted in a great evil, you’re someone who lacks the use of reason.

 

[Wesrock]

The cannibalistic God makes people eat human flesh.
“And if ye will not for all this hearken unto me, but walk contrary unto me; Then I will walk contrary unto you also in fury; and I, even I, will chastise you seven times for your sins. And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat.” (Leviticus 26:27–29 King James Version)

This also just lacks all context. God here isn’t threatening to make anyone eat human flesh. He’s warning them that they’ll carry their own selves away into such evils by turning away from what is good and just.

 

[OsculeturMeOsculo]

Not to mention the verses from Jeremiah, Hosea, and Isaiah are somewhat allegorical since they are prophets. Revelation as a prophetic book uses a lot of imagery so I don’t know why the Prophets should be treated differently. I feel like someone didn’t look at the context.

 

[Delphinus]

I’m inclined to agree, here. Any one of these will require HOURS of discussion and take more time than I have energy for, especially if there’s no point. I’ll leave some helpful tips for the OP, though, if he or she is really trying to understand this.

1. God’s pronouncement of plagues, curses, judgements are almost never Him actually DOING them, but rather him explaining what is going to happen as a natural result of their sin. These people will, in effect, do this to themselves.
2. Old Testament writings were written for a specific people in a specific time with a specific purpose. Each book was written by a different author, with a different intent, and the writings span the course of thousands of years. Each of these citations would require HOURS of explanation as to historical context and theological implications. There are literally hundreds of books out there unpacking them.

Truth is, at the end of the day, it comes down to a simple choice. To use a quote I love:

To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible. -Thomas Aquinas

 

[Wesrock]

If we’re talking about context in Judges, take for example Samson coming across a dead lion, taking meat from its carcass, and feeding it to his parents without telling them how he got it.

No explanation is spelled out in the text that, as a Nazirite, Samson was forbidden from touching dead carcasses (which is why he doesn’t tell his parents). The audience understood Samson was breaking the vows he was sworn to because of their contextual knowledge. And, specifically, the keepers of the scriptural traditions knew this and, when teaching scriptures, would have known this and been able to expand on what was not written. They’d read between the lines, offer context, etc… Similarly with Jephthah.

 

[po18guy]

Ever torn up a drawing or letter that you wrote? You had the right to do that and did not sin.

Those who attempt to put the Lord on trial strike me as spiritually lazy and perhaps simply seeking reasons to not believe. In stark contrast, Bruce Springsteen sang about reason to believe.