paynepauldaniel

Hello All,

I have never seen a Christian face the reality of Yahweh's genocidal, sadistic tendencies without resorting to new covenant explanations. Not only does this out really account for their god's evil actions, but if the new covenant is the best they can do, it also calls into question their doctrine of a changeless god.

Does it not make more sense to see Yahweh as a real, territorial god in contest with other real, territorial gods. And taking account of his actions, assuming the records are to be taken literally, would Yahweh not be a vile territorial god in comparison with other gods (Satan, for example) decried in the scriptural accounts, yet who act with much more decency?

Hail Lord Satan,
Paul Daniel Payne

davidbach

paynepauldaniel, I think that you have the right idea, but have come to it by the backdoor.

The bible is many things in it's various parts, a history book, a medical treatise, a poetry book, a folklore repository, a primitive science primer etc. But detectable in the sketchy and irregular narrative is the key: "what is the meaning of life?", or a similar question posed in various ways. In particular, ancient mythology centred on the origin of mankind and the "creator god(s)", so the meaning of life transmuted to the concept of a deity or deities.

The answer to the question of the nature of god and of life varies with the period in which the book (or part of the book) of the bible was written or redacted. In the Israelite period, for example, the idea of "god" was YHWH, and (s)he was regarded as equal to Baal and other Canaanite deities, and not necessarily the "creator god". Hence the truly horrific acts (if they are to be believed) endorsed by YHWH. We can be sure that the Israelites were of little real faith, ready to follow the "god du jour", as described in many incidents. Who can blame them - life, whatever it's meaning, was often nasty brutish and short for most. For the rulers, any political leverage was appropriate, and an appeal to religion and god, then as now, was a good tool. (and an object lesson!)

Confusion reigns partly due to the translations of the bible, which do not distinguish well the different nature and status of the gods. Then come the inerrantists and fundamentalists who insist that it is the same god - even when the bible clearly refers to different gods. Mainstream Christians promulgate one god for all time, as in the Gloria, but they do not clearly indicate that the one god is not the YHWH of the OT.

All this is rather sad, because the old testament (including apochryphal books) is a remarkable set of documents. It is well worth study for the insights into early civilisation and mores. Remarkably, elements of very old traditions have survived the transition from word-of-mouth or folksong/ballad to the written page. This potential is clouded in the misinterpretation for religious/political purposes. The thesis of this thread is all there - if we can strip away the rantings of the ignorant.

OK, I am off the soapbox now - any thoughts? Anyone want to step up?

David.

Malachi151

The God of the "Old Testament" simply reflects people's experiences in the real world. He is a force of nature, and nature is after all quite cruel. The reality is that life is rough, its unfair, bad things happen to good people, entire cities get destroyed by invading armies and natural disasters, people suffer, etc., and if you believe that there is a God that controls the world then that god must play a part in these things.

The god of the Old Testament is a brutal "horrible" god because the world is a brutal horrible place and the workings of nature were attributed to the workings of God.

paynepauldaniel

Though I respect and used to believe the literary, naturalistic explanations given above, I was hoping to get a literalist to answer the question. I have to believe that the Yahweh described in the bible is an actual god worshiped by the ancient Hebrews, at least most of the time, and that his actions described in the bible are mostly real occurrences. This has led me to (1) see him as abhorrent, and (2) to react by worshiping his adversary, Satan.

Any literalists care to chip in?

Hail Lord Satan,
Paul Daniel Payne

Joan of Bark

davidbach

YES! For more on the different Gods of the Tanakh, see Jack Miles Pulitzer-prize winning God: A Biography (or via: amazon.co.uk). (Miles is a Christian and ex-Jesuit).

As for the OP, whenever I've encountered a literalist and posed this question, they quickly claim that all the horrors the people (Jew-and-non-Jew) endured were just desserts for their sins. Ah, what a loving God!

Joslyn

Supposing for the sake of argument that the bible isn't largerly fiction, you've made an unwarranted assumption here--just because Yahweh is bad does not mean any of these other gods are "good."

As an example, Iran and Iraq were advertsaries for a long time, and while I sympathize with the people living there neither nation-state could be seen as anyting other than vile in its leadership.

paynepauldaniel

You are correct that just because Yahweh is bad does not mean that Satan / Lucifer are good. However, when Satan works as an adversary towards the brain-washing, human slavery efforts of Yahweh, it is reasonable to assume the old motto: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

Hail Lord Satan,
Paul Daniel Payne

Anat

But the satan isn't God's enemy - at least not in Judaism in its various stages of development. The satan serves God in his own way.

paynepauldaniel

True, the biblical writers were a bit schizophrenic on who they even think Satan is. Sometimes he's fighting against Yahweh, sometimes helping him (see the creation story in Genesis compared to the Job story). The bible gives glimpses as Satan in his real character as the adversary of Yahweh.

Hail Lord Satan,
Paul Daniel Payne

Joan of Bark

The serpent in Genesis is not the same character as Satan (at least as far as the OT is concerned).