Is God A Moral Monster?

[Dibby53]

No that scenario can be inferred from Genesis 6 and following. It is a possible scenario from a reading of the Bible. My point is you don't know God's reasons. If that scenario was true then would you accept the killings?

Why has God decided to cut my life short under the three score years and 10 (70) when I have two young kids? I don't know but it has allowed me to get very near to God and for the first time I sit down regularly with my kids and I teach them the Word of God. Perhaps God knew that was important? Am I happy to give up 10 or 20 years of this life to be close to God. I am joyous, and I really mean that.

The line you are following endangers your salvation. I don't want you to miss out on eternal joy. In love

No. I would not accept the wholesale slaughter of an entire people. It is a fact of human history that those we want to kill we first de-humanise. The Nazis did it. The Communists did it. Islamic terrorists do it.

I,m glad you are joyful. I have decided that the term "Christian " no longer applies to me. It is clear from my conversations on here and elsewhere that it has come to mean a doctrinal and belief system and view of God that I do not share. I have updated my status from "unsure to "non-christian". There is still much I value from the gospels and the life of Jesus; but it is clearer to me that there is much fear based teaching and dogmatism in modern christianity. You yourself gave the example by saying that by seriously thinking about these things and coming to different conclusions I am somehow "in danger"......from a God of Love!

I too wish you well on your journey. I don't think you are in danger. I don't think anyone is in danger from a loving God. The only danger is trying to live without love.

 

[Angela53510]

Hi again Roughsoul

It is simple for me. Yes. Any "god" who demands murder( even of babies) and commands a rapist to marry the one he raped is a moral monster. Period.

You have no clue about hermeneutics, or Bible interpretation, I can tell. Context is vital!

Context in these verse, (I read the passage!) cannot be transposed back 3 1/2 millennium, from today, and over laid on this passage. Basically, this was a protection for the woman.
1. No one married for love. Not men or women. The parents arranged the marriage, as they did up to the 19th and 20th centuries. If the woman didn't like her husband, she could not leave. She had no trade, no way to support herself. That wasn't just the Hebrews, that was all the ancient near east cultures.

2. If a woman was raped, she was considered to be damaged goods. No man would want her, even if they were paid a large dowry. That's just how it was. And considering our divorce rate, where people marry for so-called "love," yet over 50% of all marriages ending in divorce, it sounds like the way we marry, isn't working. By making the man marry her, she didn't have to become a prostitute, and she would have a roof over her head, and children as a legacy. Better than sleeping in the streets, and no prospects ever for a half decent life. The man had to marry the woman as a punishment for his crime, and the woman had a home for many years to come. This is not about the woman, but the man.

3. Just having this deterrent written in the laws was a protection for women, because a man had to realize by raping the woman, he was marrying her. The Hebrews were the only culture that had rules to protect women, who in other countries were second class citizens, with no rights or protections for the women. Compared to the surrounding cultures, the Hebrews were taught by God that women could own property, be a judge, prophesy, and be cared for.

Stop reading PC culture back into the Bible. God is not, and never will be a monster. The monster is your total lack of understanding of God's people, Israel, and that this was done for women's good, not as a punishment for the woman. Step outside your own narrow views, study the context, before you make yourself that woman, and place the incident in 21st century western culture.

You have to have some understanding of culture, the Bible AND the nature of God's character, before you start posting these totally ignorant and simplistic statements.

 

[Flint321]

No. I would not accept the wholesale slaughter of an entire people. It is a fact of human history that those we want to kill we first de-humanise. The Nazis did it. The Communists did it. Islamic terrorists do it.

I,m glad you are joyful. I have decided that the term "Christian " no longer applies to me. It is clear from my conversations on here and elsewhere that it has come to mean a doctrinal and belief system and view of God that I do not share. I have updated my status from "unsure to "non-christian". There is still much I value from the gospels and the life of Jesus; but it is clearer to me that there is much fear based teaching and dogmatism in modern christianity. You yourself gave the example by saying that by seriously thinking about these things and coming to different conclusions I am somehow "in danger"......from a God of Love!

I too wish you well on your journey. I don't think you are in danger. I don't think anyone is in danger from a loving God. The only danger is trying to live without love.

Hey brother, i dont know whats going on, i just looked at this post, are you becoming a non christian? do you understand that if you leave Christ you will burn in eternal fire and even more severly since you have had much light into Christian things?

You know Jesus is a loving God and also a God of wrath right?

 

[Flint321]

Trust me if this is something about being offended over God using Israel to bring his wrath upon people, its much scarier in hell, where the worm never dies and God's righteousness wrath is unleashed for all eternity. Good News though is God is gracious and rich in mercy, something no one deserves, as the wages of our sin is death. God's love and wrath is displayed in the cross and all who repent to God through him alone, shall be saved, if you leave God there is no way to be saved from his wrath, since you have no covering for your sins, youll pay for them in the eternal flame.

 

[Dibby53]

Trust me if this is something about being offended over God using Israel to bring his wrath upon people, its much scarier in hell, where the worm never dies and God's righteousness wrath is unleashed for all eternity. Good News though is God is gracious and rich in mercy, something no one deserves, as the wages of our sin is death. God's love and wrath is displayed in the cross and all who repent to God through him alone, shall be saved, if you leave God there is no way to be saved from his wrath, since you have no covering for your sins, youll pay for them in the eternal flame.

You make my point beautifully.

 

[Dibby53]

You have no clue about hermeneutics, or Bible interpretation, I can tell. Context is vital!

Context in these verse, (I read the passage!) cannot be transposed back 3 1/2 millennium, from today, and over laid on this passage. Basically, this was a protection for the woman.
1. No one married for love. Not men or women. The parents arranged the marriage, as they did up to the 19th and 20th centuries. If the woman didn't like her husband, she could not leave. She had no trade, no way to support herself. That wasn't just the Hebrews, that was all the ancient near east cultures.

2. If a woman was raped, she was considered to be damaged goods. No man would want her, even if they were paid a large dowry. That's just how it was. And considering our divorce rate, where people marry for so-called "love," yet over 50% of all marriages ending in divorce, it sounds like the way we marry, isn't working. By making the man marry her, she didn't have to become a prostitute, and she would have a roof over her head, and children as a legacy. Better than sleeping in the streets, and no prospects ever for a half decent life. The man had to marry the woman as a punishment for his crime, and the woman had a home for many years to come. This is not about the woman, but the man.

3. Just having this deterrent written in the laws was a protection for women, because a man had to realize by raping the woman, he was marrying her. The Hebrews were the only culture that had rules to protect women, who in other countries were second class citizens, with no rights or protections for the women. Compared to the surrounding cultures, the Hebrews were taught by God that women could own property, be a judge, prophesy, and be cared for.

Stop reading PC culture back into the Bible. God is not, and never will be a monster. The monster is your total lack of understanding of God's people, Israel, and that this was done for women's good, not as a punishment for the woman. Step outside your own narrow views, study the context, before you make yourself that woman, and place the incident in 21st century western culture.

You have to have some understanding of culture, the Bible AND the nature of God's character, before you start posting these totally ignorant and simplistic statements.

I totally understand that context is everything and that things were pretty awful in those days. So the rapist married the woman that he raped as a " punishment" to him, but for her own good? I do understand the historical context and the barbarism of the times. But since you probably believe that God wrote the bible and spoke to those people, is that seriously the best he could come up with?? As history it is tragic enough, but to believe that an all loving, wise and good universal God commanded it is devoid of all reason and compassion.
Unless, like me, you believe that the bible is really a journey into a greater understanding of God? That they wrote of their understanding of the God, rather than God speaking directly as he is?

 

[PS]

Many Christians are not, but you seem to be taking it to the level of reinventing the Bible to fit your views, in effect creating a new religion.

One of the possible reasons put forward for the 'genocide' is that in Genesis it could be saying that fallen angels raped human women creating unnatural offspring and an ungodly, perhaps demonic gene pool which had to be removed. Would you then accept the need for the killings, given you accepted the slaughter of every baby and child on earth in the flood?

To the Israelites their land was the whole world. Please do not make the mistake of thinking the whole globe was flooded.

Second, even today people wrongly attribute natural events to God.

 

[Dibby53]

Trust me if this is something about being offended over God using Israel to bring his wrath upon people, its much scarier in hell, where the worm never dies and God's righteousness wrath is unleashed for all eternity. Good News though is God is gracious and rich in mercy, something no one deserves, as the wages of our sin is death. God's love and wrath is displayed in the cross and all who repent to God through him alone, shall be saved, if you leave God there is no way to be saved from his wrath, since you have no covering for your sins, youll pay for them in the eternal flame.

I,m not leaving God.

 

[PS]

No. I would not accept the wholesale slaughter of an entire people. It is a fact of human history that those we want to kill we first de-humanise. The Nazis did it. The Communists did it. Islamic terrorists do it.

I,m glad you are joyful. I have decided that the term "Christian " no longer applies to me. It is clear from my conversations on here and elsewhere that it has come to mean a doctrinal and belief system and view of God that I do not share. I have updated my status from "unsure to "non-christian". There is still much I value from the gospels and the life of Jesus; but it is clearer to me that there is much fear based teaching and dogmatism in modern christianity. You yourself gave the example by saying that by seriously thinking about these things and coming to different conclusions I am somehow "in danger"......from a God of Love!

I too wish you well on your journey. I don't think you are in danger. I don't think anyone is in danger from a loving God. The only danger is trying to live without love.

I am a Christian because I believe Jesus is in the image of God, and although Jesus was present in the Old Testament, we have to search to find him there, I believe the central character in the OT was Satanic and not the I AM..

I hope and pray you will continue to follow the Good Shepherd.

 

[PS]

Neither do I believe the Creator was the destroyer of life who we see exhibited in the OT.

 

[Dibby53]

I am a Christian because I believe Jesus is in the image of God, and although Jesus was present in the Old Testament, we have to search to find him there, I believe the central character in the OT was Satanic and not the I AM..

I hope and pray you will continue to follow the Good Shepherd.

Blimey! Even I didn't go that far lol! But I understand your point entirely.

 

[posthuman]

Unless, like me, you believe that the bible is really a journey into a greater understanding of God? That they wrote of their understanding of the God, rather than God speaking directly as he is?

By which you mean to say as nicely as you can figure out how to -

"you don't believe the Bible is true"

That makes you not a small hypocrite.

 

[Hullexile]

To the Israelites their land was the whole world. Please do not make the mistake of thinking the whole globe was flooded.

Second, even today people wrongly attribute natural events to God.

Which does not change my point. How many babies and children were killed in the flood? More than a few suffered a horrible death. God claims those deaths. How about the horrendous deaths in Jerusalem in AD70 which Jesus foretold and claimed. Josephus states a million deaths and babies being eaten. What about revelation and the day of judgement?

It is wrong to just pick the nice cuddly pieces of the Bible. I wish we could but worshipping the bits of God you choose to like is not worshipping God.

When you enter a relationship it is all or nothing. "Do you take this man to be your lawful wedded husband?".
" Yes but only the lovely bits"

 

[Dibby53]

Which does not change my point. How many babies and children were killed in the flood? More than a few suffered a horrible death. God claims those deaths. How about the horrendous deaths in Jerusalem in AD70 which Jesus foretold and claimed. Josephus states a million deaths and babies being eaten. What about revelation and the day of judgement?

It is wrong to just pick the nice cuddly pieces of the Bible. I wish we could but worshipping the bits of God you choose to like is not worshipping God.

When you enter a relationship it is all or nothing. "Do you take this man to be your lawful wedded husband?".
" Yes but only the lovely bits"

I go by my direct experience of God. I have yet to encounter anything wrathful in that experience. In fact the love that I have experienced from that encounter puts me at odds with much of the bible ( the hellfire and genocide bits) but in tune with its more enlightened bits. So why should I go with someone else's experience of God?

 

[posthuman]

I go by my direct experience of God. I have yet to encounter anything wrathful in that experience. In fact the love that I have experienced from that encounter puts me at odds with much of the bible ( the hellfire and genocide bits) but in tune with its more enlightened bits. So why should I go with someone else's experience of God?

does God, who made your body out of dust, have the right to turn your body back into dust?

 

[posthuman]

I go by my direct experience of God. I have yet to encounter anything wrathful in that experience. In fact the love that I have experienced from that encounter puts me at odds with much of the bible ( the hellfire and genocide bits) but in tune with its more enlightened bits. So why should I go with someone else's experience of God?

sure. why go with what the Bible says about God when you've got a much more palatable idea in your mind?

and here you go saying the Bible has 'more enlightened' bits and 'less enlightened' bits! who do you think you are?
gwan stage your intervention with the Almighty. tell Him 'clean up your act!'
the heart of the wise is in the house of mourning!

 

[posthuman]

I don't think anyone is in danger from a loving God. The only danger is trying to live without love.

non-sequitur.

if no one is in danger from a loving God, there is no danger whatsoever for anyone - even those, according to you, who hate God and call Him an evil murderer.

the only danger is if God is not only loving, but holy and just, and you try to live without Him - if you think you can pretend He's someone He's not, or think you can get away with hating Him without reprisal. the name Jesus means God is Salvation: the existence of Salvation undeniably implies there's something to be saved from. you know something called 'danger' exists - you said it. it's an intrinsic part of your vocabulary. what do you figure it is that necessitates the existence of salvation?

 

[tourist]

hmm yea proper translation is quite important

Deu 22 28/29
28If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; 29Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

That was certainly an expensive one-night stand with lasting repercussions.

 

[Hullexile]

I go by my direct experience of God. I have yet to encounter anything wrathful in that experience. In fact the love that I have experienced from that encounter puts me at odds with much of the bible ( the hellfire and genocide bits) but in tune with its more enlightened bits. So why should I go with someone else's experience of God?

You are of course free to believe what you like as long as you understand the consequences. You are not believing in God but a god of your own. Sorry to sound harsh but that is the case. God is the God in the Bible, any other God is not God.

In their own personal experience people don't usually experience God's wrath. Remember the Bible covers thousands of years and God is very patient. He waits hundreds or thousands of years to give people the chance to repent.

This is why it is important to read the whole Bible and understand it so you get the whole picture.

 

[PS]

Which does not change my point. How many babies and children were killed in the flood? More than a few suffered a horrible death. God claims those deaths. How about the horrendous deaths in Jerusalem in AD70 which Jesus foretold and claimed. Josephus states a million deaths and babies being eaten. What about revelation and the day of judgement?

It is wrong to just pick the nice cuddly pieces of the Bible. I wish we could but worshipping the bits of God you choose to like is not worshipping God.

When you enter a relationship it is all or nothing. "Do you take this man to be your lawful wedded husband?".
" Yes but only the lovely bits"

You make a good case for God being a "Moral Monster." Personally I attribute the events you mention to nature and the wickedness of man.