The God of the Bible is Evil

First, good and evil are a Human construct and a relative determination that we make. The Bible itself says that God creates both good and evil. God is complete.Second, there are no full and complete descriptions of GOD to be found in the Bible. Instead, what we find are different individual views, characterizations, word pictures that try to describe the concept, GOD.Third, the different stories in the Bible follow along the same pattern as all Epic Tales and Fables. The stories themselves are meant to convey a message. In some cases it was to found an identity, in others to set social norms and still others are meant to teach some moral.In particular, we can find similar traits when we look at other similar types of tales from other areas, peoples and cultures. The Pied Piper is at its root, a horrific story. The peoples of the town welch on a promise to pay the Piper and so the Piper plays all of the children of the village away, never to be seen again.The children were certainly innocent, they had not made the contract, and could not have fulfilled the conditions even if they chose, yet they suffer the full cost and penalty.But the moral of the story, that one should honor ones word when given, is still a valid one even if the story is horrific and the Piper's actions evil.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

No, not at all. First, the passages must be taken in context. Epic tales are quite often horrific and great literary characters complex. The better the story the greater the complexity of the people depicted.The Bible is a construction of humans, I believe inspired by GOD, but still written by just plain folk, with all the limitations and perspective of their culture and milieu. To read such tales through today's eyes is to misrepresent the authors intent.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Well the tales are part of the literal history of the Hebrews, in that they are part of the "mythos" of the peoples. That does not mean that they literally happened as described or even that they even happened at all.The first of your quotes was from a dream sequence, a vision. Visions can be strange things.The second is from the Exodus saga, definitely mythology and folk tale complete with cliff hangers to leave the audience waiting breathlessly for the next nights installment. The Exodus (and many other such stories like the Conquest of Canaan) are true Epic Sagas. They are replete with horrific and wondrous tales.The third was a prophecy (that did not come to pass) from the view point of the oppressed about the comeupence of the oppressor.The moral of the first is that the result of offending God will be suffering, very much as in the Pied Piper.The second is, as I said, part of the Epic Saga of a peoples, of how they came into being. I'll return to it in a moment because it is actually a very important part of the bigger picture.The third is the words of a prophet, speaking to a downtrodden people, assuring them that things will get better and that the oppressor will get what is coming to them.For modern examples, simply look at WWII posters or listen to the news of jihad today, from both sides.The Literal Part of history is that these are the stories that formed the basic identities of a people. The key point is not whether they happened in reality but rather what part they played in forming the culture and mores of the Hebrews themselves.Back to the Exodus Saga.If there is any actuality to the Exodus Saga, it is small and totally unrelated to the tale that grew up. But it is THE key story in the formation of the Jewish peoples. There are three mandatory pilgrimages mentioned in the Torah, and all three are based on the Exodus Saga.The first and best known is Passover, celebrating a truly horrific event, the night when the Angel of the Lord passes through Egypt killing the first born of EVERY family whose lintel was not marked with blood of a ram.Another is Sukkot (also spelled Sukkoth), my favorite while growing up. It commemorates the time spent wandering in the desert during the Exodus. It's great for kids since we got to build tents with a sheet over the table and sleep in them and eat on the floor and get dirty.The third mandatory pilgrimage is Shavuot. It is celebrated at the same time Christians celebrate Pentecost. Like the other two, it is based on the Exodus Saga. It commemorates the return of Moshe with the Torah, when the peoples accepted the Word of God and actually became the People of God.There is also though yet another level beneath even these celebrations that goes back to their agricultural origins. Passover traditionally was celebrated when the first harvest of Barley was brought to the Temple as an offering. Wheat ripes slightly later and Shavuot was the celebration of that harvest. Sukkot happens in the Fall, and again we can see the connection to the land, the world and the harvest.During Sukkot it is traditional to "Shake the four species". To celebrate, you take the Date Palm Frond, some Myrtle and the Willow in the left hand, and hold the Citron in your right. As you bring the two hands together, they are blessed. You then shake them three times to each of the four corners, to North, East, South and West.The ceremony is a prayer of thanks for the year’s bounty and that there be rain enough for all the coming years’ growth.To try to pick pieces parts out of the Bible as you have done is, IMHO, as wrong as the Biblical Christians quotemining the same book for their purposes. Instead, what is needed is to teach the stories in toto, tell the whole tale including the basis and purpose of the creation of the tales.The Bible is an anthology of anthologies, written, edited, redacted and revised by many people over many centuries, moving from oral tradition to written tradition to revised tradition to compiled tradition. It is a complex work of many people.The answer, IMHO is not to condemn the tales or to create the "Evil Bible" but rather even more education so that people can see the stories within the broader context.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Well I covered part of that in Message 15. We can learn what the basis was for the peoples of the period, just as we learn from the stories about the founding of the US or about any other history.We can also learn the basic underlying morality tales such as the value of keeping promises or how you should relate to your peers.There are many things that can be learned from such stories by some.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

But that is not what the Bible says. The Bible says that God creates both good and evil. There is no mention of some other individual. Further, in the Bible Satan is not evil but rather just an agent of God who only does the will of God, a tester.Of course one great thing about the Bible is that you can find support for anything in it. There is no God of the Bible, rather there are many Gods described in the Bible. The God of Genesis 1 is entirely different than the God of Genesis 2.That is only reasonable. The Bible is written by many different people and the different parts served different purposes. Later, the product was put together by many different redactors over a very, very long period of time. The big question that comes up is why, for example, did the redactors include two mutually exclusive descriptions of God in the Genesis stories?The answer I believe is that they realized that the two stories picture two differing visions of God. In Genesis 1 we see an overarching, transcendent God. The God of Genesis 1 is supremely competent, creating simply by speaking things into existence.But that God is also separate, aloof, distant. There is no interaction with creation.The God of Genesis 2 and other Genesis stories is far more human, personable, approachable. She creates by hand and is intimately involved directly with the created. This God walks with creation, is somewhat fumbling and unsure, but shows feelings and consideration.What we call evil though is still part of GOD's creation. It is humans that assign such values and that is part of the story of the GOE.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I think you need to expand more on the whole point of the story.Human sacrifice was not unknown both in that region, and actually throughout the world. There is also a certain logic to it. To try to sway the God or Gods towards some favorable outcome, usually basic things like good weather for crops but sometimes specific endeavors such as war on a neighboring kingdom, a bargain or contract was the norm.A general belief was that there had to be some parity between what was being asked and offered. The more valuable the thing offered, the more likely that the God or Gods would respond favorably.What could be more valuable than human life, specifically a human life that was personally valuable to the person asking the boon.So the request to sacrifice ones own child was not out of line with belief systems of the day.BUT...as you pointed out, this is a really poor choice for Jon Paine to pick.The passage being quoted answers the question. God in this story does NOT demand that the son be sacrificed. Instead, God in this story stops the act even though it seems reasonable to Abraham, and even follows through by providing a ram instead.This particular tale is a great one to teach kids. As with the other examples Jon Paine has presented so far, the problem is not with the story, but with the presentation of the story and with quotemining parts out of the story, taking them out of context.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

But that is exactly what this story does. It is one, (just one) of such moments.This particular story is one such basis for God telling Man that human sacrifice is wrong. I'm not at all sure how you arrive at such an assertion. I think you will find that I (I can only speak for myself) have always said that the concentration of Biblical Christianity (particularly the US Christian Cult of Ignorance) on the merit of Blood Sacrifice was a perversion of the message of the Bible.This story is a great example of that. It is one of God telling folk to "stop, stop, stop it this instant!"

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Again, I don't think you can point to where I have asserted that God is all-knowing. In fact, the Bible stories themselves contain examples of God not knowing everything. Why is it ridiculous to suggest that if you are to learn what it is the Bible says, that you should look at it in context? Setting aside for the moment the issue of whether or not GOD as opposed to individual depictions of God as presented in various Bible stories is All-Knowing, this story does exactly what you say it should be doing.I believe you also make a mistake thinking that human sacrifice it is related to a low regard for human life. Human sacrifice is actually exactly the opposite of a low regard for human life. The whole point of human sacrifice is that life is held not just in high regard, but the highest regard.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

The topic is "The God of the Bible is Evil" and in support of that position, several quotations and instance from the Bible have been introduced.So far, I do not believe that they have supported such an assertion, and, as a matter of fact, some actually refute such a position.The question you raise is also irrelevant. Whether or not GOD is All-Knowing or ignorant has nothing to do with either the topic or what has been presented so far. Frankly, there are Bible stories that support either position.The point is, the stories in the Bible were meant to help man understand relationships, GOD's relationship with Man, Man's relationship with God, Man's relationship with his fellowman and with the world we all live in.What this topic addresses is whether the God of the Bible is evil. So far no one has introduced or supported such an assertion.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Sorry but you have never shown any supporting evidence for any of those assertions. In fact, so far the examples cited have actually refuted the assertion that the God of the Bible is Evil.We are discussing the "God of the Bible" in this thread.As I have pointed out several times in this thread, there is NO God of the Bible. Instead, there are many different depictions found in the Bible and those tales should be looked at within the context of the full story.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

The passage implies that God watches what people do and so is aware. It does not imply any foreknowledge.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

But women were property, and were treated as property, somewhat more valuable though than a goat or cow.Again, the stories need to be considered within the context of the peoples that wrote them. Sorry but that is not just my assertion, it is what some of the stories in the Bible say.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Or that God did not write the Bible or that God did do something and is doing something about it. Today, in many parts of the world, women are no longer property. I don't think that I have made that case. But I do agree that the thread is pretty weak, but I also think that some good can be made of it.The value I see in the thread lies in trying to teach folk how to actually read the stories in the Bible.The value is in looking at the messages within the context of the stories themselves. For example, the issue of women as property is an important one. At the time many of these stories were written, women were property. The stories give us a picture of how the peoples at the time saw women.It is different than we see them today.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Again, there is not one Biblical God. Instead there are many different and separate stories each with a very human portrayal of some tale.So far several examples have been introduced. None have shown an evil God.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Well, since you have not specified what it is you are referring to, I assume that it is Samuel 15. If so, it was hardly on a whim.That is a very interesting story and the point seems to have slipped past you.Like the tale of the Pied Piper, the point is different than the images used to push the thought home. In this case the point of the story was that simple ceremony or profession is not what counts, it is actually listening and doing what God wants you to do and that neither ceremony or position will count.The story is harsh when seen through today's lens, but not much different than many other similar tales. The important thing IMHO is to teach the whole story, not just pieces parts of it, but to go on and show the story within the context of the time and culture.If you are referring to some other passage, please let me know and we can discuss it.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion