Reconciling the Old Testament Yahweh with modern objections

Faith & Science Conversation
,
1

One common objection I’ve seen posited against Christianity was the actions of God during the Old Testament, such as the wars waged against other peoples in the name of God, destroying the world with a flood, and the killing the firstborn of all Egyptians. I’ve done my best to try and avoid hostile arguments online but sometimes one of these arguments happens across my path. There is one video that I do have on hand of such a criticism. I’ve talked with others in private about it and tried not to let it bother me but found myself still feeling the weight of some of its claims. I’m going to include it here but be warned: it is very stupid (it uses Barbie dolls to mock the Old Testament Yahweh and, judging by the crosses on the Mattel logo at the end, Christianity by extension) but does raise serious questions about how God allows bad things to happen to good people and why would God attack the non-believers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDNGQENmEFI.

If you rationally don’t wish to view the video, I would still like to hear what your thoughts on this sort of “Problem of Evil” is.

1 Like
2

I like the problem of evil as it is entirely a problem for the atheists, those that have eaten one apple too many :slight_smile: If you are into youtube https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL98EC8B73CDBC76C5 might give you a different viewpoint of it.

The plagues and disasters that came upon mankind one look at from the point of view that ones God shows one. Humans have long looked at death as a judgement because they saw it as an adversary to life. It is odd that they believe in God eradicating nearly the entire human population in the flood but think evolution is incompatible with God as most species have died. Just look at death as a home calling instead and it will change your mind.

The death of children has been a plague to humankind forever and only been solved by modern medicine. The OT is actually in part a transmission of behaviours that allowed better survival by ritualising hygiene rules that distinguished the jews from their neighbouring tribes. To declare pigs unclean was a wise decision in times were you could not prevent their worms to get you etc. The meaning of the passover - or what happened there that prevented the death of the jewish community but killed the egyptian children will only be understood in hindsight long time ago but clearly they saw their survival as the consequence of the protecting nature of their God. Its a bit like looking at evolution from the point of “survival of the fittest” or the revenge against the unfit :slight_smile:

As it says in the bible, in creating good God also creates evil, and if you deny the existence of God because it hurts your ego if things are created or create themselves, you are still faced with good and evil but you lack the metaphysical comprehension that allows you to overcome evil. Only the overinflated ego would think that because God - no bad things should happen to his followers. Its the same level of “bright” thinking revealed by anti-vaxers “if you are vaccinated you should not get infected”. The vaccination does not prevent infection, but it alters the outcome as you not dying from the disease as your immune system can fight the disease faster and more efficient. Its a bit like thinking that if you put on a seatbelt would stop you from having accidents :slight_smile:

Watch the infantile thinking revealed in Marshall Brain’s video https://youtu.be/zDHJ4ztnldQ?si=RsGUhrl0lsEkk2To who raises the same question, why would bad things happen to good people. He sounds like he still thinks God ought to be Santa - and because he doesn’t get his presents Santa does not exist. Wonder if he ever grew out of it but his name might be his curse :slight_smile: and hi book “How God works” is testament to his failure of critical thinking that he brags about doing so much of. His claim “why doesn’t God heal amputees” implies that healing means to have the body you wish for. If you watched Harrys Heroes on their expeditions you wonder who needs healing here, or Nick Vujicic etc.

2 Likes
3

You can find blogs about this topic from Biologos Resources. Just search with ‘problem of evil’ and you get several blogs:

https://biologos.org/resources?query=problem%20of%20evil

The problem of evil is an old one and so far, there is no simple answer to it. Suffering is like fever in the sense that many differing mechanisms can cause suffering.

What we call ‘evil’ is partly subjective. For example, predators eat prey and I do not see evil in it. Some think of death as evil but I see death as a natural part of the current life because reproduction without death leads to suffering. If we want to have new life, we have to accept that older life ends at some point.

If we have free will (as I do), that means necessarily a possibility to make decisions that lead to suffering. When we humans make wrong decisions, other persons may suffer.
For some reason, God decided to give us free will and that decision necessarily included the possibility of ‘evil’ decisions that cause suffering.

In a comparable way, our planet formed through the processes of an active, dynamic universe. The cost of the life-enabling processes is that a person who is ‘in the wrong place in the wrong time’ may be injured or killed by the natural processes. That causes suffering but I would not call the processes ‘evil’.

These are just some viewpoints to a multifaceted problem.

3 Likes
4

While I did not watch the video the claim is very common. Many highlight how evil and bloodthirsty Yahweh was in the tanakh and his very different from Jesus he seems. It’s a legitimate argument.

A god that kills babies with an angel of death and who drowns them with a flood and who demands animals to he slaughtered and gave their blood and ashes sprinkled around is a horrifi mix god. It’s worse to when considering some believes this god needed his son killed for forgiveness and casts those not saved into eternal conscious torment.

Thus may or may not help you. But this is how I look at it and why I’m not bothered.

The first is that I think those stories are mostly fiction. It’s ancient myths. It’s accomondationism. I suggest looking into accomondationism. We know there was never a global flood or all of humanity driven down to that 8 or so people.

There is also evidence that perhaps Yahweh and El were two different gods from two different tribes that got merged together. That maybe Yahweh was worshipped by Kenites or maybe Jethro from Egyptian influence. They then combined with the Jews.

2 Likes
5

In the end it comes down to how we understand reality and that fundamental cause. Our understanding of God has clearly changed with Jesus. After all, what we have written down as Gods word is what we perceived it to be and what the people who collected the history of their tribe perceived it and agreed on it. Its a bit like the understanding of the Atom and the understanding of it getting better and better.

As I said, the understanding of how the sprinkling of blood on the doorsteps might have rescued the jews from the angel of death going round is quite multi-layered. the understanding of the ten plagues is scientifically complex and suggests the link to the survival of the jews by their distinct ritual behaviours based on divine inspiration. I got into an interesting conversation with Gemini to see if the blood mixed with things could make it a biocide or if it was the self inflicted quarantine and it became quite interesting

2 Likes
6

I guess scientific understanding is only needed for those modern persons who try to explain everything through a modern materialistic* worldview.

A more fruitful approach to the ten plagues would start from the context.
What is told happened in an ancient Near East culture, apparently dominated by the ancient Egyptian worldview but probably mixed with beliefs originating from Levant/Syro-Palestine region. Hebrews belonged to the people Egyptians called ‘aamu’ (West Asiatic foreigners) and they seemed to retain at least some of the cultural beliefs originating from Levant/Syro-Palestine regions.

How did those people interpret what happened? How were the events interpreted from the ancient Egyptian cultural worldview? How did the ‘aamu’ cultural heritage affect the interpretations?
This kind of questions may clarify the significance of what is told.

Did everything happen exactly as told in the Torah is another question. Some believe it, some think that the descriptions intend to tell crucial religious/spiritual/divine messages based on some real events, rather than a ‘neutral’ report that is accurate in all historical details.

(* materialistic = ontology is tied to matter)

3 Likes
7

thanks. The point is that they mix life experiences with coded cultural messages, particularly to transmit content to people who could not even read and write to allow them to lie in a meaningful relationship with reality that even children could make sense of.

What it comes to is ones interpersonal approach to life, the ability to think of others in positive ways or to love thy neighbour, not to write them off as intellectually inept.

Science is the systematic interrogation of reality with the aim to understand it better. I would not say it is materialistic

1 Like
8

The most interesting part of the Old Testament to me is the one related to the giants. There is no dogmatic or univocal interpretation of that part, and I’ve personally always found it very intriguing.

P.s: happy Easter to all!

9

As has been told earlier, science is limited by the methods it uses to what can be observed, measured or calculated. What can be measured or calculated is basically material. Material includes matter and energy that obeys the predictable natural laws of the universe. If someone expects or demands scientific proof, that demand is tied to the materialistic ontology because of the limitations of the scientific methods.

Materialistic ontology is not the same as atheist or agnostic worldview. Even creationists may limit themselves to modern materialistic worldview if they expect that scientific results need to confirm their interpretation of the Genesis and attack against such scientific results that do not fit to their expectations.

2 Likes
10

Χριστὸς ἀνέστη! (Khristòs anésti!) - È veramente risorto!

The greatest annual celebration of Christianity. Today more people in the world than ever (about 2.4 billions) remember and celebrate what happened almost 2000 years ago.

It is amazing if we think of the situation at the time of crucifixion. There was a small group of followers of Jesus in a remote region of the world and they lost their hope when the leader of the Jesus movement was tortured to death with the most cruel and shameful execution method of the Roman empire. Only a few followers (mainly women) witnessed the death and where the body was put after the death - most of the disciples had dispersed because of fear. When scattered news about the resurrection started to spread, the remaining disciples were perplexed and still fearful, meeting behind locked doors. Not a promising start for a movement that later spread through the world.

5 Likes
11

sorry, but a many creationists are materialists with the belief that they have a pizza boy in God fulfilling their wishes for themselves. And how many of us take out of the resurrection their visions of the after life the hope to become eternal selves. It becomes really dodgy when it involves the acquisition of 72 virgins. Just we should ask ourself by what features we want to be recognised in the afterlife that makes us distinguishable from Jesus.

Regarding scientific interrogation of reality, what for example can be measured is the survival rate of cultures in the past and how it was influenced by their worldview, these elements are quantifiable but the based on physical and metaphysical parameters.

1 Like
12

I don’t understand what you mean by this. Christianity has always affirmed that personal identity will not be dissolved. Your statements seem to imply that you believe personal identities will be absorbed into the Godhead, which is a induist concept, not a Christian one.

And yes, in the final Resurrection everyone will be raised in a glorified spiritual body, just like Jesus. I don’t see how that would be compatible with the loss of personal identity.

Unless with death of the self you mean the Pauline understanding of putting to death the “old man” enslaved to sin.

Romans 6:6: “For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin”.

13

Great questions. I don’t know the whole answer.

Greg Boyd, a pastor in Minnesota who studied along with Bart Ehrman under Bruce Metzger, tried to write a book defending the violence in the OT, and couldn’t. He wrote a book called “Crucifixion of the Warrior God,” followed by a condensed version, “Cross Vision,” which posited an incomplete understanding of God prior to Christ–accommodationism. Another book by Caryn Reeder, “Enemy in the Household, “ examines the relative morality that demanded in small bands that people absolutely avoid gluttony or disrespect, etc, as that really threatened the lives of everyone else. Caryn Reeder - The Enemy in the Household | OnScript

Jared Diamond, who worked in Papua New Guinea, wrote “Guns, Germs, and Steel,” which is really a very detailed defense that situations define material wealth, rather than intrinsic personal worth. In it, he does describe how small, nomadic groups often wound up killing off all males and absorbing children and women into their group, similar to some American Indians, New Guineans, etc; that, in my mind, may explain some of the thinking in the ancient Near East, too. Paul Copan wrote that much of the OT was hyperbole, but I have not really read his book, “Is God a Moral Monster.” Randal Rauser, who I really admire a lot (a Canadian theologian) wrote several books, including “Jesus Loves Canaanites.” One quote by him was

: It is far from clear that the appropriate response to a culture that murders some of its children is to kill everyone in the culture, including the children.

Two other quotes I really like:

“The dangers of believing in a God whom we cannot but regard as evil, and then, in mere terrified flattery calling Him ‘good’ and worshiping Him, is still greater” (C S Lewis)

If it be said by any that God does a thing which seems to me unjust, then either I do not know what the thing is, or God does not do it…Least of all must we accept some low notion of justice in a man, and argue that God is just in doing after that notion (George MacDonald.)

However, I do think that much of the notions of justice flow from our own interpretation of our environment. The ANE folks, despite their extreme behavior, were known for hospitality and faithfulness; and caring for their children was their lifeblood and hope, I think. They may be way ahead of me in ways I have no idea.

Best wishes!

1 Like
14

Do you have any other books, especially from which those quotes came? That is really heavy but sounds like they go somewhere more theological than in the surface.

15

A recent thought I had about this is that maybe God was acting according to the rules of those He was engaging with. A pharaoh would have had no qualms about killing off the firstborn of an entire enemy nation, so God just acted according to pharaoh’s view of things – i.e. to get His point across He acted in terms they would understand, and did so without endorsing those terms.

3 Likes
16

it needs an understanding of sin, e.g. to act in any way different from the eternal self of God. If you are a perfect copy of God you can however not be distinguished from him. So tell me what identifiable feature of your self you want to carry into eternity that differentiates you from Jesus?

1 Like
17

Nobody can be a “perfect copy” of God. The very name of the Archangel Michael testifies to this, since in Hebrew it means, “Who is like God?” For this reason, Michael was the angel who led the war against Satan and the fallen angels when they rebelled (Revelation 12:7). He knows that no one can be like God, and he draws his strength not from independence, but from obedience.

I don’t understand the meaning of this question. I obviously want to remain myself, sanctified and purified, yes, but still myself. And God cares so deeply about preserving our personal identities that, at the final judgment, He will even give us a resurrected and glorified body.

So He will not merely preserve our personal identities (which He could do simply by allowing us to exist as disembodied souls for eternity) but will also resurrect and glorify our bodies.

Much of what you have written across several posts seems very close to the Hindu concept of the ultimate return of the individual soul (ātman) to the one universal supreme reality (Brahman). According to that teaching the ultime goal of the soul is the dissolution of individual identity and merger into the infinite, impersonal consciousness they call Brahman. But that is not a Christian concept, nor has it ever been (thank God).

2 Likes
18

There is really no problem with the existence of evil. Knor Kai makes good points. I would add that God gave us free will because it is necessary to fulfill the purpose of this phase of our life. How can we be judged as acceptable to live with God forever if we do not have the free will to decide to do good or evil? God generally lets things play out and judges the actions after death. The presence of evil is also important because our actions to confront it or to mitigate it demonstrate out love for God. As to the actions that God has done as described in the Bible, well, sometimes he punishes evil doers directly perhaps as a lesson to us. We think of ourselves as being important but it is only God’s love for us that makes us important. We are created beings whose existence needs to be sustained by God otherwise we would cease to exist.
There is a song that makes a good point. The singer responds to the evil in the world by shaking his fist at God, demanding that God do something about it. God replies: I did something about it, I created you. In other words, this is your opportunity to show me how much you care for others and whether you truly obey my commandment to love others. True love is sacrificial love. Many these days have forgotten it but that message is dramatically presented in Jesus on the cross. That is love.

4 Likes
19

Could you elaborate please?

20

“In Him we live and move and have our being.”

2 Likes