Board index ‹ Jesus

[Cyborg]

Imagine you're in a debate forum and you make a sock puppet account. You use your prime account to curse, swear and insult other users; while using your sock puppet account to act nice and rational.

And that's exactly how God behaves. It's undeniable that he's a total horrible psycho jerk in the OT; yet in the NT he's represented by Jesus to be all-loving . The OT God is the prime account and Jesus is the sock puppet account.

Funny how Christians thrive to be ''Christ-like''. There's nothing wrong to be all-loving and generous and whatnot, but here's the thing: since Christ is God, to be Christ-like is to be God-like; and according to the OT, ripping pregnant women apart and banging babies onto rocks is definitely God-like.

Let's say I'm a teacher. The naughty kids piss me off and I beat the shit outta them everyday, and I really wish they were nice. So I bring my son to class, beat the shit outta my son and say that he's paid the fine for everyone's naughtiness; so that anyone who acts like my son won't be beaten the shit outta them by me.

You see how f***ed up that is? That is the God you worship. You follow Christ yet you obviously don't follow the God of the OT, even though they're supposed to be the same thing. You don't want God to beat the shit outta you, so you follow his all-loving sock puppet.

In addition, many Christians in real life use Jesus as THEIR sock puppet to justify their hatred toward certain groups and whatnot. Poor Jesus, huh?

[jimwalton]

Just about everything you have said is incorrect, so I'm glad to dialogue with you.

First of all, the God is of the Old Testament (OT) is not just cursing, swearing, and insulting others. You have completely misread, misinterpreted, and distorted the OT. The OT speaks of God's love, mercy, patience, and grace just as much as of his wrath. The NT shows Jesus to be the judge just as much as of love.

Secondly, it's VERY deniable that God is "a total horrible psycho jerk in the OT." Such a claim gives evidence that you have not read much of the OT, nor have you read it objectively. We can talk about specifics as you wish.

Third, yes, "Christians thrive to be ''Christ-like''. But in Ephesians 5.1 we are taught to be imitators of God. Since Jesus is God, the nature of the two Persons is identical: Love, mercy, forgiveness, grace, patience, holy, righteous, justice, and judgment. God in the OT is all loving, as is Jesus. God in the OT is the judge, as is Jesus. You're making an illegitimate distinction and separation.

Fourth, "and according to the OT, ripping pregnant women apart and banging babies onto rocks is definitely God-like"???? Oh my. This is an atrocious interpretation of a text you have obviously misunderstood. You're referring to Hosea 13.16. Hosea is using a literary technique called metonymy. In verses 12-13 it is clear that Hosea is using the image of a pregnant women and the fetus inside as a metonym for discipline (judgment). God’s disciplinary judgment is “growing in the womb,” and it is about to be born. While God has been patiently waiting, the time of delivery is upon the rebellious and the evil. Its onset is imminent, just like a woman in labor. So when the time of judgment comes, it will not just be a calm and normal birth, delivering the child gently by candlelight, but it will be as if the child were ripped from its mother’s womb and dashed to the ground, their evil has been so great and their judgment so deserved.
In addition, Hosea is using a rhetorical technique. Common ancient Near Eastern warfare rhetoric included wiping out populations (though that was rarely done), burning young children (though that was even more rare), and even tearing open pregnant woman (almost nonexistent). But it was the way they spoke when they were expressing their intent to devastate the enemy.
In other words, none of this is literal. It is metonymy and rhetoric to express the depth of God’s wrath and the completeness of the judgment.

Fifth, "Let's say I'm a teacher. The naughty kids piss me off and I beat the shit outta them everyday, and I really wish they were nice." This is horrible analogy and not even close to being an accurate parallel. It's not even worth commenting on.

"That is the God you worship." Not even close. We can talk further, but your understanding of the Bible and God is inaccurate to the extreme. I don't know whether it's bias, hurt, or just uninformed, but we need to go back to square one to talk about a correct understanding of God and the Bible.

[Gin Dog]

Jesus told parents to kill their children. In Matthew 15:4-7 Jesus (God) is simply reaffirming what the Holy Trinity God already said in previous chapters like Deuteronomy.

[jimwalton]

Thanks for the reference. In Matthew 15.4 Jesus isn't commanding parents to kill their children. We have to be good readers, and certainly better readers than to interpret this as "Jesus told parents to kill their kids." You have to read the whole text to get all of what Jesus is saying. He is saying the parents are supposed to be the visible representatives of God in the home, for teaching the truth and exerting moral authority. If the parents are fulfilling their role as such, then to rebel against them is equivalent to rebelling against God. When children don’t respect their parents, they reject all forms of authority in life. If that continues, they become moral misfits before they become adults, and become a force for evil in the community. If children don’t learn to submit to human authority, they will never learn to submit to divine authority, and will be destructive to society. The point of the law in Exodus is that someone who is unresponsive to authority and who becomes a danger to the populace should be judged by that community to preserve a just and moral society.

[Cyborg]

> The OT speaks of God's love, mercy, patience, and grace just as much as of his wrath.

God sounds like someone who can't control his temper. Kinda like a toxic father or something.

> The NT shows Jesus to be the judge just as much as of love.

You're diverting attention. ''Just look at the NT'' won't do anything to clear the horrors of the OT.

It's VERY deniable that God is "a total horrible psycho jerk in the OT."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_violence

> Third, yes, "Christians thrive to be ''Christ-like''. But in Ephesians 5.1 we are taught to be imitators of God. Since Jesus is God, the nature of the two Persons is identical: Love, mercy, forgiveness, grace, patience, holy, righteous, justice, and judgment. You're making an illegitimate distinction and separation.

No, it's the Bible and most Christians who are making the illegitimate distinction. I already said that in the OP that since Christ is God, to be Christ-like is to be God-like. And doing violent stuff definitely is God-like, but somehow not Christ-like.

> Oh my. This is an atrocious interpretation of a text you have obviously misunderstood. You're referring to Hosea 13.16. Hosea is using a literary technique called metonymy.

Fine, I concede that I might be wrong about Hosea.

> Common ancient Near Eastern warfare rhetoric included wiping out populations (though that was rarely done). In other words, none of this is literal.

Really? So you're saying that ALL the violence, genocide, infanticide, rape commanded by God in the OT are all somehow metaphorical? How? By this line of reasoning, I can go one step further and say that God himself is metaphorical, and is just a personalization of the desires and insecurities of the Israelites.

> "Let's say I'm a teacher. The naughty kids piss me off and I beat the shit outta them everyday, and I really wish they were nice." This is horrible analogy and not even close to being an accurate parallel.

How is it wrong?

Teacher=God
Naughty kids=sinful humans
Beat the shit outta them=wage of sin is death
Really wish they were nice=God's will

Are you simply offended by my wording?

[jimwalton]

> God sounds like someone who can't control his temper. Kinda like a toxic father or something.

Not at all. In the Bible God's wrath is never an emotional outburst. It is always a settled response to, shall we say, "criminal" activity. When someone experiences the wrath of a judge, it's not that his or her honor is flying off the handle, but rather that he or she knows what the right punishment is and delivers it.

> You're diverting attention. ''Just look at the NT'' won't do anything to clear the horrors of the OT.

I'm not diverting attention, but rather address your question and your points. You're the one who said, " It's undeniable that [God's] a total horrible psycho jerk in the OT; yet in the NT he's represented by Jesus to be all-loving." So I should be allowed to speak accurately of how the NT represents and portrays Jesus.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_violence

Your wikipedia link is meaningless. I know a lot of people misunderstand what the Bible teaches about God's wrath and God's violence. Linking me to the writings of those who misunderstand doesn't establish your point.

> No, it's the Bible and most Christians who are making the illegitimate distinction. I already said that in the OP that since Christ is God, to be Christ-like is to be God-like. And doing violent stuff definitely is God-like, but somehow not Christ-like.

* Matthew 25.31-46: Jesus is the judge of the people of the world, separating them for blessing or punishment.
* John 5.22, 27; Acts 10.42: God has given to Jesus the authority to judge.
* Romans 14.9-10; 2 Cor. 5.10: Jesus is the one who will sit in the seat of judgment.
* John 9.39: Jesus came into the world to be the judge
* Revelation 19.11: It is Jesus who will judge the world

Jesus as judge is no different from God as judge.

> Really? So you're saying that ALL the violence, genocide, infanticide, rape commanded by God in the OT are all somehow metaphorical? How? By this line of reasoning, I can go one step further and say that God himself is metaphorical, and is just a personalization of the desires and insecurities of the Israelites.

Metaphor has nothing to do with it.

There was no genocide. In the Conquest, the Israelites burned only 3 cities: Jericho, Ai, and Hazor. The objective was the drive the Canaanites from the land, not wipe them out. Armies were fought against and killed, but civilian populations were not slaughtered.

There was no infanticide. "Kill them all" was warfare rhetoric (not literal intent). We do the same thing in sports or with siblings when we say we're gonna "kill 'em." It's not a metaphor but rather rhetoric. In the ancient Near East: "Kill all the men, women, children, and animals" was rhetoric for "Win a decisive victory. There was no genocide or infanticide.

> rape commanded by God.

Now you're way off to the side. There is no command by God to rape. Not literal, not metaphorical, not rhetorical. As a matter of fact, it was quite the opposite. If a man wanted to take a woman, he had to bring her back, go through 30 days of purification rituals, and take her as a lawful wife. Israelite law strictly forbade warfare rape.

> How is it wrong?

It's a terrible analogy because God never acts like a person emotionally annoyed by misbehaving children and who, in turns, beats and abuses them every day. You can't just make up stuff and expect me to accept that as a legitimate analogy.

> Are you simply offended by my wording?

I'm not offended by your wording. It's just that your analogy isn't close to being analogous. For an analogy to work, the point is to find parallel conditions and situations. You've haven't even come close.