Trouble with the Old Testament

[Epistemes]

Hello,

When I read the Old Testament, specifically the more historical books like Joshua through 2 Kings, it’s hard to gather any truly nourishing spiritual matter from these stories and books. More specifically, the nationalistic warrior God of justice, who created all men and presumably, according to Christ, loves all men, has no difficulty in cutting down those who err, those who stray, those who transgress against his commandments (which, it’s likely, other foreign people would never have heard of). I find the actions of King David to be absolutely despicable, and, at times, I’m absolutely embarassed to associate my Christian heritage with him and his sons and other associates!

Now, I know it is an ancient Marcionite heresy to not believe the Old Testament to also be divinely revealed, but no matter how I try to read the New Testament into the Old, it doesn’t seem to change the fact that the Old Testament tells more tales of an unjust, jealous, bloodthirsty tyrant God rather than one whom we Christians preach as loving, just, and merciful even to those who have never heard of his commandments or his Son!

I don’t know how Jews, much less Christians, can be spiritually nourished by anything other than the Prophets and Wisdom Books with selected stories scattered throughout the Torah.

 

[savienu]

I struggle with this, too, and hope that someone can provide some insightful answers.

 

[Robster7]

One thing I get out of reading the Old Testament is the perennial human behavior. There are conspiracies, politics, vengeance, etc.
It’s no different than what you see in the news today.

The image of God presented to some extent reflects the limited understanding of the people at that stage of development. Also,
there are a couple of stories of good people who were not Jewish who were nonetheless favored with miracles and healing. For example, in 1 Kings 17 the widow of Zarephath (a non Jew) had just a little flour and oil. After that was finished, she and son would starve. But the prophet Elijah asked her to use it to make food for him. She did, and for her faith, the flour and oil never ran out.

In 2 Kings 5, Naaman the Syrian (a non-Jew) suffered from leprosy. A Jewish slave girl, apparently thought well enough of her master to refer him to the prophet Elisha for healing, which Naaman received. In both stories, the outsiders (non Jews) received miracles because they had more faith than the Chosen People, who at the time for one reason or another, were on the outs the God.

It is difficult to understand many parts of Scripture. The histories sometimes seem like such a jumble of battles, conspiracies, unfaithfulness, etc. Don’t avoid reading them just because they are difficult. Just set them aside until you receive new understanding. Check out some good commentaries on the Old Testament, which may shed light on the confusing parts.

I hope this helps.

 

[Robbinson]

An understanding of the Old Testatament is critical to a full understanding of the New Testament. Jesus and the 12 Apostles were all Jews steeped in Old Testament theology and traditions. A very significant portion of the New Testatment is directed towards a Jewish audience with allusion to these stories, lessons and traditions. The entire concept of Christ’s sacrafice turns on an understanding of the Old Testament sacraficial system and prefiguring of his sacrafice in the story of Abraham and Isaac - no to imagine the concept of the Messiah and the prophecies regarding his coming and God’s salvation plan.

Even the book of Revelation is a further elaboration of concepts first developed in the book of Daniel.

While the reading may be difficult and some of the concepts foreign to us - it is worth the effort. When Christ talked about the scriptures - he was talking about the Old Testament (the New Testament wasn’t even written yet).

Blessings,

Brian

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

Hello,

When I read the Old Testament, specifically the more historical books like Joshua through 2 Kings, it’s hard to gather any truly nourishing spiritual matter from these stories and books. More specifically, the nationalistic warrior God of justice, who created all men and presumably, according to Christ, loves all men, has no difficulty in cutting down those who err, those who stray, those who transgress against his commandments (which, it’s likely, other foreign people would never have heard of). I find the actions of King David to be absolutely despicable, and, at times, I’m absolutely embarassed to associate my Christian heritage with him and his sons and other associates!

Now, I know it is an ancient Marcionite heresy to not believe the Old Testament to also be divinely revealed, but no matter how I try to read the New Testament into the Old, it doesn’t seem to change the fact that the Old Testament tells more tales of an unjust, jealous, bloodthirsty tyrant God rather than one whom we Christians preach as loving, just, and merciful even to those who have never heard of his commandments or his Son!

I don’t know how Jews, much less Christians, can be spiritually nourished by anything other than the Prophets and Wisdom Books with selected stories scattered throughout the Torah.

Hi one of the things that help me is when reading in the Old testament I am reminded that god not only is all loving and forgiving, but also he is Just What reads to us today as the acts of mercilessness is Justice. If we look at God give time and more time for those that have turned away from him to repent and come back it is only after that a long period of waiting that his justice is dealt out. One of the blessing that we live under today is that God is holding off his justice now till the return of Christ.

 

[tobinatorstark]

Sometimes Bible Commentaries help understand the meaning of verses and such with the Bible. I would recommend the Haydock Bible Commentry
haydock1859.tripod.com/

 

[fewnotmany]

. . . More specifically, the nationalistic warrior God of justice, who created all men and presumably, according to Christ,** loves all men**, has no difficulty in cutting down those who err, . . .

IMHO, part of your difficulty in understanding God in the Hebrew Bible is the mistaken belief that God loves every man, woman, child that ever lived.

When I began to get it clear in my mind that God in the Hebrew Bible (same God in the Christian Bible) does not love everyone that ever lived, I was able to better make a distinction between those that God favors vs. those He hates.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

IMHO, part of your difficulty in understanding God in the Hebrew Bible is the mistaken belief that God loves every man, woman, child that ever lived.

When I began to get it clear in my mind that God in the Hebrew Bible (same God in the Christian Bible) does not love everyone that ever lived, I was able to better make a distinction between those that God favors vs. those He hates.

If God does not and did not Love all men, Then why did He send Jesus to be Savior for the World? Why would Jesus have said to take the Gospel to all nations?

 

[fewnotmany]

If God does not and did not Love all men, . . . .

Allow me to address the first part of your statement.

1 Tim 2:4 . . .(God our Savior,)
who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

This verse does not mean that God has willed that everyone should come to salvation, for elsewhere Paul clearly teaches that only those who believe in Christ will receive salvation (Rom 1:16, 17, 3:21-26; 5:17). Christ died for the sins of all, but only those who believe receive the benefits of that sacrifice (2 Cor. 5:14, 15).
What Paul might be saying here is that the Savior God extends the offer of salvation to all (Jew or Gentile).

Also, the word ‘all’ in 1 Tim 2:4 is the same greek word, pantos in Acts 22:15. . . .

When Ananias tells Paul “You will be his witness to all (pantas) men of what you have seen and heard”(Acts 22:15), was it Paul’s duty to speak personally to each and every human being? The idea being expressed is that the gentiles shall share in the Spirit along side the jews. The all (pantas) is clearified in Acts 22:21 and 1 Tim 2:7.

Acts 22:21
“Then the Lord said to me, 'Go; I will send you far away to the Gentiles.”

1 Tim 2:7
And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

Allow me to address the first part of your statement.

1 Tim 2:4 . . .(God our Savior,)
who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

This verse does not mean that God has willed that everyone should come to salvation, for elsewhere Paul clearly teaches that only those who believe in Christ will receive salvation (Rom 1:16, 17, 3:21-26; 5:17). Christ died for the sins of all, but only those who believe receive the benefits of that sacrifice (2 Cor. 5:14, 15).
What Paul might be saying here is that the Savior God extends the offer of salvation to all (Jew or Gentile).

Also, the word ‘all’ in 1 Tim 2:4 is the same greek word, pantos in Acts 22:15. . . .

When Ananias tells Paul “You will be his witness to all (pantas) men of what you have seen and heard”(Acts 22:15), was it Paul’s duty to speak personally to each and every human being? The idea being expressed is that the gentiles shall share in the Spirit along side the jews. The all (pantas) is clearified in Acts 22:21 and 1 Tim 2:7.

Acts 22:21
“Then the Lord said to me, 'Go; I will send you far away to the Gentiles.”

1 Tim 2:7
And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles.

No were in all of that is there any indication that God does not love all men. I realize that all men will not receive Salvation that is through their free will. God Judgment will be upon those that choose in opposition to his plan of Salvation. But that does not mean that the offer of it is not made for all to either accept or reject.

 

[Newbie2]

No were in all of that is there any indication that God does not love all men. I realize that all men will not receive Salvation that is through their free will. God Judgment will be upon those that choose in opposition to his plan of Salvation. But that does not mean that the offer of it is not made for all to either accept or reject.

Agreed

One thing I get out of reading the Old Testament is the perennial human behavior. There are conspiracies, politics, vengeance, etc.
It’s no different than what you see in the news today.

.

Exactomundo, me too, especially when one looks at Israel’s relationship to the Almighty. They stray, things go bad, God bails them out, they obey…they stray, things go bad, God bails them out, they obey…repeat ad infinitum.

Look at the decline of Rome, the greatest society to date in their time. Look at the US…I see many similarities as our nation slowly turns away from God.

 

[garysibio]

Hello,

When I read the Old Testament, specifically the more historical books like Joshua through 2 Kings, it’s hard to gather any truly nourishing spiritual matter from these stories and books. More specifically, the nationalistic warrior God of justice, who created all men and presumably, according to Christ, loves all men, has no difficulty in cutting down those who err, those who stray, those who transgress against his commandments (which, it’s likely, other foreign people would never have heard of). I find the actions of King David to be absolutely despicable, and, at times, I’m absolutely embarassed to associate my Christian heritage with him and his sons and other associates!

Now, I know it is an ancient Marcionite heresy to not believe the Old Testament to also be divinely revealed, but no matter how I try to read the New Testament into the Old, it doesn’t seem to change the fact that the Old Testament tells more tales of an unjust, jealous, bloodthirsty tyrant God rather than one whom we Christians preach as loving, just, and merciful even to those who have never heard of his commandments or his Son!

I don’t know how Jews, much less Christians, can be spiritually nourished by anything other than the Prophets and Wisdom Books with selected stories scattered throughout the Torah.

I played around with how to word my response so that it wouldn’t sound insulting but couldn’t come up with anything. I don’t mean to be insulting but I felt I should ask you if you have ever considered that it is not the OT that has the problem but you. Jesus certainly didn’t reject the OT. He said not a bit of it will pass away until it was all fulfilled. There is no way of rejecting the OT on moral ground without also claiming to be morally superior to Jesus.

Gary

 

[fewnotmany]

Quote:
Originally Posted by oneGODoneCHURCH
No were (sp?) in all of that is there any indication that God does not love all men. I realize that all men will not receive Salvation that is through their free will. God Judgment will be upon those that choose in opposition to his plan of Salvation. But that does not mean that the offer of it is not made for all to either accept or reject.

Agreed

Disagreed.

From were do you extrapolate that God loves everyone?

 

[fewnotmany]

No were (sp?) in all of that is there any indication that God does not love all men.

That was not what I was attempting to do.If you would like for me to reference Scriptural citations where God hates all workers of lawlessness, I will do so – but not try to get off topic.

The purpose of the post was to point out that your understanding of the English word ‘all’ is not the same as the original Greek word from which it has been ambiguously translated into.

With respects to ’ , , , the offer of (salvation) is not made for all to either accept or reject.’ I disagree…however, in an interest of staying on topic, I will not comment further.

 

[Douglas_Naaden]

The Old Testament is one of the best commentaries on the frailty of human nature. Yes, I agree it is lurid and grotesque in many ways, but that’s not unique to that time period. What is so insightful is that it is presented in the proper light; the rejection of God and the ensuing havoc. It is a much fuller presentation than the secular snapshot we get of our own more modern history, in which any number of despicable crimes are described in isolation from God.

Perhaps a better view of the Old Testament is that it is primarily a family story about the descendants a line of people who were faithful (albeit barely) to God. It is only with the advent of Jesus that the world family is able to reunite as one. Prior to this you had other peoples who were basically seducing the Israelites away from God. These other peoples chose not to worship the one true God in spite of hearing of His mighty deeds. The doctor doesn’t hate an amputees’ leg, but he must cut it off to prevent the spreading of disease. From a certain point of view, someone might say that the doctor hates the leg, though. Also, if God was simply nationalistic His chosen people would have spent more time governing instead of spending most of their time in captivity.

You know, I’ve felt sorry for kids after observing them disciplined by their parents, only to realize later that they really deserved what they got. In the Old Testament you get a lot of snapshots of peoples being wiped out and stuff, and you’re understandably like ?!?!?! But these are people who have, for hundreds of years, been sinning it up.

I would submit that the OT stories provide starkly realistic metaphors for our lives. Some of the things David did are just outrageous, but God forgave Him, just as He forgave the Ninevites. We sell out for so little, and God is just waiting for us to go back to Him. If we don’t we make ourselves into His enemy, and we are handed over to sin. It would be easier for you to understand David if instead of being shocked at his misdeeds, you tried to understand his motivations and identify the similar patterns of sin and repentance in your own life.

Anyhow, God still isn’t adverse to dishing out punishment in the New Testament (cf. Acts 5:1-11 Ananias and Sapphira). That doesn’t prevent John from saying that God is Love (1 John 4:8).

 

[Newbie2]

Disagreed.

From were do you extrapolate that God loves everyone?

John 3:16, for one. “For God so loved the world…”

There’s plenty more; I’m not a bible scholar.

 

[juliamajor]

The very act of Creation of the universe by God shows his love for every creature that has been created. Didn’t God say that creation of mankind was a "good " thing? The OT looks forward to christ and as Christians can only be viewed in the light of Christ. Though you have inspired authors you still have human beings putting pen to paper - The HS didn’t use the human authors like robots or dictation machines- their own prejudices and emotions come out vividly toward us.-to Control His creature would be against God’s own edict of free will.

 

[nuntym]

I think one source of trouble accepting the Old Testament is the seemingly innumerable instances were God “kills” in the OT. I refer you to the topic discussing this (my post there is on page 7)

Another source of trouble accepting the OT is why it was so long before Jesus came to save the world. The topic discussing this is here. I love Chesster’s answer, the third response. My answer compared to his/hers is so incomplete and ugly

But the main reason for contention for accepting the OT as described by the original poster is being Yahweh as the God of War; about how nationalistic and even petty God seemingly is, so loose in chastising and killing those who disagree with the Jealous God.

However, I just have to ask: what would have happened if Yahweh was NOT a Jealous God? What would have happened to Israel … to the WORLD! … if Yahweh was as friendly to Baal and Moloch and Ishtar and all the other gods of the Mediterranean as Zeus was to the other inhabitants of Mount Olympus?

Please read the excerpt in the next post (a bit long, but please bear with it) from G.K. Chesterton’s The Everlasting Man.

 

[nuntym]

From G.K. Chesterton’s The Everlasting Man, Part I, Chapter 4, “God and Comparative Religion”

It is true in this sense, humanly speaking, that the world owes God to the Jews. It owes that truth to much that is blamed on the Jews, possibly to much that is blameable in the Jews. …] It is often said with a sneer that the God of Israel was only a God of battles, ‘a mere barbaric Lord of Hosts’ pitted in rivalry against other gods only as their envious foe. Well it is for the world that he was a God of Battles. Well it is for us that he was to all the rest only a rival and a foe. In the ordinary way, it would have been only too easy for them to have achieved the desolate disaster of conceiving him as a friend. It would have been only too easy for them to have seen him stretching out his hands in love and reconciliation, embracing Baal and kissing the painted face of Astarte, feasting in fellowship with the gods; the last god to sell his crown of stars for the Soma of the Indian pantheon or the nectar of Olympus or the mead of Valhalla. It would have been easy enough for his worshippers to follow the enlightened course of Syncretism and the pooling of all the pagan traditions. It is obvious indeed that his followers were always sliding down this easy slope; and it required the almost demoniac energy of certain inspired demagogues, who testified to the divine unity in words that are still like winds of inspiration and ruin. The more we really understand of the ancient conditions that contributed to the final culture of the Faith, the more we shall have a real and even a realistic reverence for the greatness of the Prophets of Israel. As it was, while the whole world melted into this mass of confused mythology, this Deity who is called tribal and narrow, precisely because he was what is called tribal and narrow, preserved the primary religion of all mankind. He was tribal enough to be universal. He was as narrow as the universe. In a word, there was a popular pagan god called Jupiter-Ammon. There was never a god called Jehovah-Ammon. There was never a god called Jehovah-Jupiter. If there had been, there would certainly have been another called Jehovah-Moloch. Long before the liberal and enlightened amalgamators had got so far afield as Jupiter, the image of the Lord of Hosts would have been deformed out of all suggestion of a monotheistic maker and ruler and would have become an idol far worse than any savage fetish; for he might have been as civilised as the gods of Tyre and Carthage. …] [T]he world would have been lost if it had been unable to return to that great original simplicity of a single authority in all things. That we do preserve something of that primary simplicity that poets and philosophers can still indeed in some sense say an Universal Prayer, that we live in a large and serene world under a sky that stretches paternally over all the peoples of the earth, that philosophy and philanthropy are truisms in a religion of reasonable men, all that we do most truly owe, under heaven, to a secretive and restless nomadic people; who bestowed on men the supreme and serene blessing of a jealous God.

Source

 

[kentuckyliz]

I remember hearing OT readings in Mass when I was a child, and thinking, God’s a jerk, I don’t like God, but I like Jesus.

Unintended consequences of the Lectionary revision of 1970.

OK now the traditionalists will start using that as ammo in their cannons.

Seriously, work through Our Father’s Plan or the Great Adventure through the Bible. Hahn and Cavins do a great job contextualizing.

I think we’re much more barbaric today…killing our own babies. That is more inhumane and less understandable than herem warfare.