Did Jesus dismiss Yahweh?

[marco]

I have just read Danmark's list of atrocities attributed to Yahweh through the OT, including this Psalm:

Psalm 137:8-9 New American Standard Bible



" O daughter of Babylon, you devastated one,
How blessed will be the one who repays you
With the recompense with which you have repaid us.


How blessed will be the one who seizes and dashes your little ones
Against the rock "


The God depicted is brutal and violent - there are umpteen passages to show this. But let us turn to Christ, the Lamb, the giver of love and mercy.

Did Christ dismiss Yahweh as cruel or as a fiction?
If not, how can we reconcile Christ's message of "love one another as I have loved you" with the apparently psychopathic god of the OT?

[marco]

In other words, don't blame God for the crap in the world or for the occasional need to clean house. It's on us.

God struggles to find a good defence lawyer. We do indeed blame the carpenter for a faulty table, the plumber for faulty piping and God for the flaws he imposed on his toys. And setting Adam up to fall was cruel to the rest of humanity who were not offered any fruit. I am sure had he placed Mother Teresa in Eden, the story would have been different. Why then judge the rest of us on the actions of an idiot?

The words and actions of Jesus contradict what we hear of Yahweh, but Jesus did not voice his disapproval. If we regard Jesus as offering a new covenant, then we are supposing Yahweh's previous behaviour was aberrant, worthy of censure.

[tam]

Peace to you Marco!

Did Christ dismiss Yahweh as cruel or as a fiction?

Christ did not dismiss God (Jahveh); He revealed God (Jahveh).

"If you know Me, you will also know My Father. From now on you do know Him and have seen Him." John 14:7


Christ is the Truth (John 14:6), including the Truth of God; He is the Word of God, He is the Image of God.

He is the reflection of God. If we see Christ, we see His Father. If we know Christ, THEN... we know His Father. Not because they are the same person; but because Christ is the Living Image (and Word and Truth) of the Living God.


Christ is as God is.


The Bible (including the OT) is not the image of God. Nor the Word of God (despite Christendom pushing that particular false claim). Nor the Truth.

Christ is all of these things.

If not, how can we reconcile Christ's message of "love one another as I have loved you" with the apparently psychopathic god of the OT?

Test everything against Christ. Against love also (since God is love).


Perhaps keep in mind a few things as well:

- Not everything that was given or permitted in the OT (such as certain laws, etc) were true from the beginning. Instead some of these things were permitted or given due to the hard-hearts of the people. Indeed, when asked about the law on divorce, Christ said that Moses gave the people this law (where a man could send his wife away for any reason, with a certificate of divorce) because their hearts were hard, but that it was not that way from the beginning.

- The lying pen of the scribes (and that would include translation errors) has handled the law falsely. Even Christ said, 'woe to you scribes.'

- We may not (and if we are not looking at Christ to know God; probably do not) have an accurate understanding of what exactly is going on in many things written. But instead of looking to Christ to gain at least a better and more accurate understanding, many tend to 'fill in the blanks' themselves, in whatever way their religion (or their bias - because bias is not limited to the religious) leads them. All without consulting, looking at or listening to Christ.



But the bottom line, again, is that Christ is the image and Truth and Word of God. Christ is the One who reveals God; who shows us God; who reflects God. Not Israel, not man, not the bible, not religion, not religious leaders, not nature.

Christ.

So again, test all things against the Truth (Christ Jaheshua).


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[marco]

Don't say "Where is God?!" Turn your gaze inward and toward your fellow human beings.

We are dealing with God's atrocities. Contemplating our navel hardly seems appropriate.

But in the extreme scenarios that the bible presents, where we are stretched to consider the corruptibility (or agency, or...) of all things in order to challenge our morality, then we have to enter a mindset where children can be corrupted too.

No we don't have to enter such a horrible mind set, attributing derived evil to babies. This is the kind of excuse that the Inquisition gloried in.

If you have a corrupted vine that is choking out others, be it human, plant, whatever, you pull it out. You destroy its corrupted seed. I can't make it any clearer.

It is inconceivable that humanity had reached a point where destruction of babies was the answer. What would I do? Given God's omnipotence I think I'd easily avoid killing babies. What would the ordinary human do - avoid killing babies. The text does not suggest a caring God rooting out evil in order that good survive; it suggests an aggressive, vengeful brute. You are endowing him with a munificence he does not possess in the text.

Stop ignoring this consistent motive behind God's actions in the bible: God acts to free the oppressed.

No - that is your addition to the text. He acts from anger and vengeance. There is no situation where, after God has acted brutally, we have a benign set-up. We know world history. His gardening exploits were at best inefficient.

Let me spell out the difference:

Hitler acted for Germany (i.e., himself). God acted for the sake of life (i.e., others).

There is no need for you "to spell out" anything as though I were the recipient of esoteric wisdom. Going by what is written in the Bible, there is no difference between the wickedness of Hitler and that of God, except God's is on a greater scale. There is no evidence for the motives you ascribe to Yahweh. There is plenty of evidence for us to accept he acted in brute anger.

Keeping in mind what I said above, you can see Yahweh in the combined forces of the Normandy invasion as much as in the waters that flooded the earth. Or in the Russian forces that liberated Eastern Europe...

I think this is an original, if absurd, parallel. Man struggles to achieve his end; God thinks and it is done. His threat to smash the heads of babies is just brutality, nothing to do with military operations of destroying the forces of oppression.

[marco]

Christ is the Truth (John 14:6), including the Truth of God; He is the Word of God, He is the Image of God. He is the reflection of God. If we see Christ, we see His Father. If we know Christ, THEN... we know His Father. Not because they are the same person; but because Christ is the Living Image (and Word and Truth) of the Living God. Christ is as God is.

Greetings to you Tam. Your image of a benevolent, merciful and loving God is, I agree, seen in Christ who acted with compassion and love. My problem is reconciling the God of Love with the God who threatens to smash babies.

The Bible (including the OT) is not the image of God. Nor the Word of God (despite Christendom pushing that particular false claim). Nor the Truth.

And this differs from the general Christian view but I can agree with this too if we want God to be loving and compassionate. My own view is that the OT God was created in the image of male aggressive warriors. Jesus does not reflect this being in anything he does.

There is no doubt that in your prescriptions and interpretations a lovely follower of Christ emerges. It would be nice to leave it there. However, for many, Yahweh or Jehovah is the dominant truth in the Bible, exactly as he is depicted. His derivative God, Allah, possesses the same vengeful attitude towards "non-believers" and we suffer today from people who take Allah as literal, vengeful truth as once Christians took Yahweh, killing thousands in God's name.

[marco]

If certain OT passages overshadow YHVH's benevolence, then why don't worse passages found in the NT overshadow Jesus' benevolence?

Why give Jesus the benefit of the doubt, but not YHVH?

I accept this, EJ, and withdraw any apparent favouritism I have shown towards Jesus. All the same I think his threats are confined to the bad among us, not the infants. And I am well disposed towards him for the innumerable times he advocates love. I am at a loss to find pleasing parallels for Yahweh. Can you, without straining the imagination or redefining love?

[Elijah John]

If certain OT passages overshadow YHVH's benevolence, then why don't worse passages found in the NT overshadow Jesus' benevolence?

Why give Jesus the benefit of the doubt, but not YHVH?

I accept this, EJ, and withdraw any apparent favouritism I have shown towards Jesus. All the same I think his threats are confined to the bad among us, not the infants. And I am well disposed towards him for the innumerable times he advocates love. I am at a loss to find pleasing parallels for Yahweh. Can you, without straining the imagination or redefining love?

Fair enough, but I think we need to make a distinction between the narrative YHVH, (somewhat of a "storybook" God of the Pentateuch and a few subsequent books) and the YHVH of the Psalmist and the prophets. Granted, an over-generalization, but it works.

In the narrative books of the Bible, we find all manner of primitive and barbaric motives and deeds ascribed to YHVH. "Ascribed" being the key word here. Likely, projections and interpretations of the primitives who wrote those accounts.

As we read further, we encounter a far more benevolent God in the Psalms, the Proverbs and the Prophets. A God who loved and favored King David, who in return loved Him. A God who taught Solomon Wisdom. A God who spoke through Micah, revealing what He expected of His devotees, namely that they practice humility, justice and mercy as a way of life. This does not sound like the same God who relished the slaughter of children and infants. The God who is said to have delighted in such things, contradicts His own Law, (as found in the Ten Commandments), and the benevolent writings of the Prophets.

So it seems to me we need to toss it all out, go to ridiculous lengths to defend every passage, or to rationally, (and with common sense discernment) pick and choose.

Don't forget that the Hebrew Bible,( whose protagonist is YHVH) is Jesus own Bible. So it seems he would not, did not, and could not dismiss YHVH wholesale. Instead, it seems that Jesus too "picked and chose" and latched onto the Benevolent YHVH that he found in his own Scriptures and tradition.

It is unfortunate, though, that Jesus seems to have embraced the notion of hellfire in the process. Something that he and his contemporaries (perhaps) learned from the foreign influences of their Persian captives. Back in the days of exile.

[William]

[Replying to post 46 by Elijah John]

It is unfortunate, though, that Jesus seems to have embraced the notion of hellfire in the process. Something that he and his contemporaries (perhaps) learned from the foreign influences of their Persian captives. Back in the days of exile.

Why not use the same reasoning here then, as you have with the OT ideas of GOD which are obviously so diametrically opposed?

Perhaps Jesus never spoke about hell and this has been ascribed to him?

In relation to words and deeds attributed to Jesus, why can't the same rule of thumb apply?

"Either we need to toss it all out, go to ridiculous lengths to defend every passage, or to rationally, (and with common sense discernment) pick and choose."

[marco]

As we read further, we encounter a far more benevolent God in the Psalms, the Proverbs and the Prophets. A God who loved and favored King David, who in return loved Him. A God who taught Solomon Wisdom.

I am not sure that allowing Solomon a thousand wives and concubines was a good advert. It rather suggests that man can use woman. I like David, more from his vulnerability and his falling from grace than for his sanctity. His lament is one of my favourite pieces. I think Jehovah is certainly a creation, an artefact made in the image of the male brutes who valued force and cruelty. He is too savage to be true, thankfully.

Seneca spoke as generously and as humanely as Jesus. I wonder if Jesus gave us anything that wasn't replicated by someone else? The God that Jesus directs us to is not the God of the OT.

[tam]

Peace to you, Marco!

Christ is the Truth (John 14:6), including the Truth of God; He is the Word of God, He is the Image of God. He is the reflection of God. If we see Christ, we see His Father. If we know Christ, THEN... we know His Father. Not because they are the same person; but because Christ is the Living Image (and Word and Truth) of the Living God. Christ is as God is.

Greetings to you Tam. Your image of a benevolent, merciful and loving God is, I agree, seen in Christ who acted with compassion and love.

Hence it would be His image of God, and not mine : )

I'm just looking at and pointing to the Image God GAVE us, of Himself.

My problem is reconciling the God of Love with the God who threatens to smash babies.

Did He then? Did He threaten to smash babies?

If one 'presented' image of God is in conflict with the Image God sent us of Himself (in Christ), then which image should we go with? Especially considering that the written descriptions are subject to the lying pen of the scribes; the hard-hearts of the people; translation issues; bias of the people; misunderstanding; perhaps even the boasting of a small nation to their enemies, to make those enemies think twice about attacking them?

The Bible (including the OT) is not the image of God. Nor the Word of God (despite Christendom pushing that particular false claim). Nor the Truth.

And this differs from the general Christian view but I can agree with this too if we want God to be loving and compassionate.

Or if we simply want to listen to Christ.

Which a Christian SHOULD be doing, yeah?

My own view is that the OT God was created in the image of male aggressive warriors. Jesus does not reflect this being in anything he does.

Some parts, perhaps. But there are also those which are in line with the image Christ gives us of God:

"Is this not the fast which I choose, To loosen the bonds of wickedness, To undo the bands of the yoke, And to let the oppressed go free And break every yoke? 7"Is it not to divide your bread with the hungry And bring the homeless poor into the house; When you see the naked, to cover him; And not to hide yourself from your own flesh? Then your light will break out like the dawn, And your recovery will speedily spring forth; And your righteousness will go before you; The glory of the LORD will be your rear guard. Then you will call, and the LORD will answer; You will cry, and He will say, 'Here I am.' If you remove the yoke from your midst, The pointing of the finger and speaking wickedness, 10And if you give yourself to the hungry And satisfy the desire of the afflicted, Then your light will rise in darkness And your gloom will become like midday... (from Isaiah 58)

"I desire mercy, not sacrifice." (Hosea 6:6)

And one of EJ's favorites:

He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God? Micah 6:8


(There is more... so much more... and there are misunderstandings as well; where people see God as destroying... rather than as protecting the seed (Christ of course; and those who belong to Him) from those who would destroy the seed; His children. Then of course there is the lying pen of the scribes.)

There is no doubt that in your prescriptions and interpretations a lovely follower of Christ emerges. It would be nice to leave it there. However, for many, Yahweh or Jehovah is the dominant truth in the Bible, exactly as he is depicted.

There is a conflict in how God is depicted, even in the OT. How do you choose which view is true? Look to THE Truth: Christ!

His derivative God, Allah, possesses the same vengeful attitude towards "non-believers" and we suffer today from people who take Allah as literal, vengeful truth as once Christians took Yahweh, killing thousands in God's name.

Yes this does happen. Islam suffers all the same problems as Christianity (as does Judaism as well, and any other religion). Their holy books are also subject to the erring pen of the scribes. Their religious leaders do the 'interpreting' and those people who follow those religious leaders simply follow along in their error. My guess is that there are as many Muslims who don't actually know their Quran (except those parts that are preached to them most often), as there are "Christians" doing the same thing.


But it is in there: "mercy over sacrifice; mercy over punishment; etc." That is in all holy books as far as I know; and of course mercy comes from LOVE (and love is the law of God; written upon the HEART long before being written down on paper or stone tablets for those who had forgotten and/or whose hearts were too hard for it to be written upon).


Holy book or no holy book... each of these religions acknowledges that God is love. If God is love, then of course His law would BE love! There is no law against love; and love covers over a multitude of sins.


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Elijah John]

The God that Jesus directs us to is not the God of the OT.

Do you think Jesus would agree with that statement?