Questions about the God of the Old Testament

[_Melchett]

To believe this you'd have to be that the Bible is riddled with mistakes. Then what value would it have? How would we know which parts are true, and which parts or false?

I have a top hat and a rock. Would that help?

[_Stormy Waters]

I have a top hat and a rock. Would that help?

That's not a bad idea! We could release a new version of the Bible where we edit out all the parts that make God look like a tyrant.

[_Stormy Waters]

I am absolutely blinded by all this enlightenment.

I understand if you want to keep worshipping God, I mean you certainly don't want to end up eating the flesh of your sons or daughters.

[_Aristotle Smith]

As a believing Christian I think I have good answers for some of the Old Testament problems. On others I think I have o.k. answers. On the rest I freely admit I have no good answers.

Having said that I really can only say two things.

First, each of these issues is very difficult and needs to be handled on a case by case basis. But, I have yet to see a message board post generate the kind of patient reflection needed to work through the issues.

Second, before one flushes a worldview down a toilet based on problems that worldview certainly has, one has to realize that one has to have a worldview (you can't inhabit what philosophers call "The view from nowhere"). I think most serious thinkers will admit that their preferred worldview will have major problems for which there are no good answers. Having said that, you will find no shortage of people (on this board and elsewhere) who are willing to blithely sweep aside the problems in their own worldview without much thought while not allowing the same privilege to those holding opposing worldviews.

[_just me]

I am absolutely blinded by all this enlightenment.

What would be your answer to the OP?

[_Buffalo]

As a believing Christian I think I have good answers for some of the Old Testament problems. On others I think I have o.k. answers. On the rest I freely admit I have no good answers.

Having said that I really can only say two things.

First, each of these issues is very difficult and needs to be handled on a case by case basis. But, I have yet to see a message board post generate the kind of patient reflection needed to work through the issues.

Second, before one flushes a worldview down a toilet based on problems that worldview certainly has, one has to realize that one has to have a worldview (you can't inhabit what philosophers call "The view from nowhere"). I think most serious thinkers will admit that their preferred worldview will have major problems for which there are no good answers. Having said that, you will find no shortage of people (on this board and elsewhere) who are willing to blithely sweep aside the problems in their own worldview without much thought while not allowing the same privilege to those holding opposing worldviews.

These people are known as "believers."

[_Stormy Waters]

Second, before one flushes a worldview down a toilet based on problems that worldview certainly has, one has to realize that one has to have a worldview (you can't inhabit what philosophers call "The view from nowhere"). I think most serious thinkers will admit that their preferred worldview will have major problems for which there are no good answers. Having said that, you will find no shortage of people (on this board and elsewhere) who are willing to blithely sweep aside the problems in their own worldview without much thought while not allowing the same privilege to those holding opposing worldviews.

This is false. One could simply say that they don't know the origin of the world, or have a philosophy on life. Of course that would leave you with nothing to counterattack instead of answering these questions.

But even if you were right, and I'm forced to choose, I'll take the worldview that doesn't involve a God who murders children.

[_cksalmon]

This is false. One could simply say that they don't know the origin of the world, or have a philosophy on life. Of course that would leave you with nothing to counterattack instead of answering these questions.

I don't see AS as trying to preempt the discussion, but rather posit, rather non-controversially to my mind, that all worldviews are susceptible to legitimate critique.

To take the example you've given, even if we profess ignorance with regard to the origin of the word, or it doesn't strike us as a particularly bothersome or pressing issue, it's still a philosophical problem.

---------

One could simply say that they don't know the origin of the world, or have a philosophy on life. Of course that would leave you with nothing to counterattack instead of answering these questions.

By parity of argument, mightn't one simply say that he doesn't know why God saw fit to kill infants, for example, as in your citations (1 Samuel 15:3, et al)?

Would that, as a matter of course, leave you with nothing to counterattack instead of answering any questions raised against your own worldview?

I think you've raised a good question; I'm trying to feel out the position from which you're arguing.

Would you feel comfortable providing a thumbnail sketch of your own worldview?

At any rate, I appreciate your raising the issue as it causes me to think about difficult issues.

[_zeezrom]

The people of the Old Testament who acted out the atrocities believed in God, right? They likely felt they had a personal relationship with God. God was real to them. It was God.

People are able to have a personal relationship with God today, so we are left with two possibilities:

1. God is the same and people have changed.
2. People are the same and God is different (possibly even a different being entirely)

We can't jump to conclusions and rule out #2.

Zee.

[_cksalmon]

The people of the Old Testament who acted out the atrocities believed in God, right? They likely felt they had a personal relationship with God. God was real to them. It was God.

People are able to have a personal relationship with God today, so we are left with two possibilities:

1. God is the same and people have changed.
2. People are the same and God is different (possibly even a different being entirely)

We can't jump to conclusions and rule out #2.

Zee.

Zee,

What would rule out, to your thinking:
(3) God is the same and people are the same
?

It appears that you've concluded that (3) is to be ruled out from the start. Or, I could be totally misreading your thought experiment, in which case I'm sorry for having done so and would welcome correction.