What if the bible were rewritten?

[IATIA]

If you read it starting with the supposition that God does not exist, then I can see your point. However, if God does exist, that has massive ramifications to the meaning of what you are reading and every story has to be viewed in a different light. So, when you criticize Christians for "excusing" God in the OT, you are not being accurate. If you believe that God exists, there is no "excusing" required. You have to understand the theology/doctrine regarding the nature of God and only then does his actions make sense in the broader picture.

You are right, there is no excuse for the behaviour of that warmongering tyrant.

You also have to view the ENTIRE OT as leading up to the NT. The events of the NT were a result of the OT. There we learn more about the nature of God and these further revelations help us make sense of the actions from the OT. Many on this forum loves to pick and choose which part of Christianity or God they will mock next--ignoring the fact every little detail is only one among thousands that form a complete understanding of God in general and Christianity specifically.

I think the OT showed us everything we care to know about that evil warlord.

Back to the OP. I don't remember Hitler (or any of your other examples) laying out the groundwork that would bring the possibility of eternal redemption for the entire human race--which is how Christians read the OT (it's also what the OT itself claims to be doing).

Just for sake of argument (as that is being dealt with in other threads), I will let you have that one point (illegitimate as it is), and the rest of the story?

[Coreni]

Oh, for sure. If Yahweh was a human doing all those things, anyone with any moral fibre would call him evil.

The get out of jail free card is that God "defines" morality. If he does it, it must be moral, even when he's poking his dick right in your eye while you're trying to concentrate.

The NT attempt at God is a lot better, but very far from perfect. At least if you randomly pick stuff from the NT there's a chance of coming across something nice sounding. Pretty impossible with the OT.

I disagree.  Jesus goes on and on about hellfire and damnation.  Killing you is one thing, but torturing you forever is in a whole other league of evil.

Whoever invented hell is a sick psychopathic person
What i have most problems is that its not just. Like try to think of a court case. One has killed a person so you are judged according to the law. Now that makes sense. You are judged on what you do. But to judge someone on their beliefs is totally silly to be honest.

[Metis]

I disagree.  Jesus goes on and on about hellfire and damnation.  Killing you is one thing, but torturing you forever is in a whole other league of evil.

Whoever invented hell is a sick psychopathic person

The earliest concept of Hell we know about is part of Zorastrianism, so Zoroasters probably the one you want.

To be fair though his religion didn't have one big guy sat in the sky playing a big game of sims, he had two almost equally powerful Gods representing Good and Evil. You just got to spend eternity with whoever you helped the most in life regardless to if you believed in them or not.

[SteveII]

So, you have decided that God did not have morally sufficient reasons for his actions. Why wouldn't uncaused creator of the universe, who in his nature, defines good, has the benefit of seeing every possible action of every possible person from the beginning to the end of time, have sufficient cause to act as he sees fit.

It amazes me that you can describe him that way and not realize how terrifying he is.  In other words, god needs no moral cover for his actions and can do whatever he pleases and we'd better thank him for it or he'll show us just how many new ways he can make us scream in torment and horror.  And as we see in the OT, he's a needy, emotional wreck just itching for a chance to massively ruin your day.

That's the guy you want to spend eternity with.  And you think he'll never turn on you, for some reason you can't logically defend.  And you don't think there's an argument against god here.  Outstanding.

You are zeroing in on a few of the stories. There are many many places where God shows mercy and a willingness to withhold judgement. Every one of the objectionable stories you are thinking of involved judgement for individual and/or systemic wickedness (which was clearly spelled out prior to the judgment). To support your characterization of God, you would have to show that he did not have the authority to judge wickedness OR that withholding judgement would have resulted in more good (at some point in the future timeline). 

Most of you are missing a very big component. Yes, God is omnipotent, but he has created a world of beings with freewill. Knowing we would choose to sin, he, from the very beginning, planned for a process of redemption (the NT): The Edenic Covenant (Genesis 3:15); Abrahamic Covenant (Genesis 12, 13, 22); Davidic Covenant (2 Samuel 7). 

There is a doctrine of God's foreknowledge which I find philosophically appealing: God (with an infinitely powerful mind), surveyed all possible worlds in which he created beings with freewill, and with knowledge of what every being would freely choose to do in any given circumstance, actualized the world with the greatest eternal good.  This includes his interactions, his commands, his answers/no answers to prayers, and of course an eventual plan of redemption.

[Cato]

There is a doctrine of God's foreknowledge which I find philosophically appealing: God (with an infinitely powerful mind), surveyed all possible worlds in which he created beings with freewill, and with knowledge of what every being would freely choose to do in any given circumstance, actualized the world with the greatest eternal good.  This includes his interactions, his commands, his answers/no answers to prayers, and of course an eventual plan of redemption.

What was Carlin's line? "If this is the work of a supreme being I am not impressed. This looks like the resume of an office temp with a bad attitude".

[SteveII]

There is a doctrine of God's foreknowledge which I find philosophically appealing: God (with an infinitely powerful mind), surveyed all possible worlds in which he created beings with freewill, and with knowledge of what every being would freely choose to do in any given circumstance, actualized the world with the greatest eternal good.  This includes his interactions, his commands, his answers/no answers to prayers, and of course an eventual plan of redemption.

What was Carlin's line? "If this is the work of a supreme being I am not impressed. This looks like the resume of an office temp with a bad attitude".

More accurately, it is the work of people with freewill. You have to admit that if God exists, this is way more complicated than most of the one-liners you get on this forum.

[Tonus]

You are zeroing in on a few of the stories. There are many many places where God shows mercy and a willingness to withhold judgement. Every one of the objectionable stories you are thinking of involved judgement for individual and/or systemic wickedness (which was clearly spelled out prior to the judgment). To support your characterization of God, you would have to show that he did not have the authority to judge wickedness OR that withholding judgement would have resulted in more good (at some point in the future timeline).

The fact that some stories exist where god acted in anger and with extreme violence tell us that it is part of his nature.  I don't have to show that god isn't authorized to judge, I only have to point out that he is free to act and willing to take certain action, and you have a god who can and will do anything at anytime, and is unstoppable.

Job was "blameless and upright; he feared God and shunned evil."  There was no  wickedness to judge; no judgment to withhold.  When the devil complained that Job's good behavior resulted in god's protection, god did not defend this sensible idea.  Instead, he unleashed satan to massacre Job's children and servants and afflict him with disease and misery and suffering.  At the end, god himself chastised Job for expecting an explanation for what he had suffered.

In other words: even being a good person and devoted follower of god doesn't mean he won't unleash savagery upon you and your family for the purposes of 'testing' you.  And you'd better like it, because he doesn't appreciate someone who questions his methods.  I find that terrifying.

Most of you are missing a very big component. Yes, God is omnipotent, but he has created a world of beings with freewill. Knowing we would choose to sin, he, from the very beginning, planned for a process of redemption (the NT): The Edenic Covenant (Genesis 3:15); Abrahamic Covenant (Genesis 12, 13, 22); Davidic Covenant (2 Samuel 7).

There is a doctrine of God's foreknowledge which I find philosophically appealing: God (with an infinitely powerful mind), surveyed all possible worlds in which he created beings with freewill, and with knowledge of what every being would freely choose to do in any given circumstance, actualized the world with the greatest eternal good.  This includes his interactions, his commands, his answers/no answers to prayers, and of course an eventual plan of redemption.

Then I'll ask you the question I've asked a few others: if --instead of granting us free will-- god was to decide our fate for us, would he ever send any soul to hell?  And if not --if every person whose fate was decided by god went to heaven-- isn't that the best possible outcome?  Hasn't god consigned billions of people to eternal torment by leaving it in our hands?  How is that "the world with the greatest eternal good"?

[robvalue]

I disagree.  Jesus goes on and on about hellfire and damnation.  Killing you is one thing, but torturing you forever is in a whole other league of evil.

Whoever invented hell is a sick psychopathic person
What i have most problems is that its not just. Like try to think of a court case. One has killed a person so you are judged according to the law. Now that makes sense. You are judged on what you do. But to judge someone on their beliefs is totally silly to be honest.

Yes. It's incredibly stupid! Not least because beliefs are not something you can choose. Either someone or something must convince me, or I pretend to believe...?

God wants you to come to irrational conclusions where you ignore all your critical thinking, ignore the lack of evidence and just take people's word for things. That's pretty insulting to any kind of God, to expect him to be so deranged. What kind of properties in people is he looking for like this, and why does he want people to not use their brains to their full potential?

That's on top of the mind-bendingly arrogant assumption that the creator of the whole universe cares about our grimy, insignificant puke of an existence above everything else, even down to an individual level.

[SteveII]

You are zeroing in on a few of the stories. There are many many places where God shows mercy and a willingness to withhold judgement. Every one of the objectionable stories you are thinking of involved judgement for individual and/or systemic wickedness (which was clearly spelled out prior to the judgment). To support your characterization of God, you would have to show that he did not have the authority to judge wickedness OR that withholding judgement would have resulted in more good (at some point in the future timeline).

The fact that some stories exist where god acted in anger and with extreme violence tell us that it is part of his nature.  I don't have to show that god isn't authorized to judge, I only have to point out that he is free to act and willing to take certain action, and you have a god who can and will do anything at anytime, and is unstoppable.

Job was "blameless and upright; he feared God and shunned evil."  There was no  wickedness to judge; no judgment to withhold.  When the devil complained that Job's good behavior resulted in god's protection, god did not defend this sensible idea.  Instead, he unleashed satan to massacre Job's children and servants and afflict him with disease and misery and suffering.  At the end, god himself chastised Job for expecting an explanation for what he had suffered.

In other words: even being a good person and devoted follower of god doesn't mean he won't unleash savagery upon you and your family for the purposes of 'testing' you.  And you'd better like it, because he doesn't appreciate someone who questions his methods.  I find that terrifying.

Most of you are missing a very big component. Yes, God is omnipotent, but he has created a world of beings with freewill. Knowing we would choose to sin, he, from the very beginning, planned for a process of redemption (the NT): The Edenic Covenant (Genesis 3:15); Abrahamic Covenant (Genesis 12, 13, 22); Davidic Covenant (2 Samuel 7).

There is a doctrine of God's foreknowledge which I find philosophically appealing: God (with an infinitely powerful mind), surveyed all possible worlds in which he created beings with freewill, and with knowledge of what every being would freely choose to do in any given circumstance, actualized the world with the greatest eternal good.  This includes his interactions, his commands, his answers/no answers to prayers, and of course an eventual plan of redemption.

Then I'll ask you the question I've asked a few others: if --instead of granting us free will-- god was to decide our fate for us, would he ever send any soul to hell?  And if not --if every person whose fate was decided by god went to heaven-- isn't that the best possible outcome?  Hasn't god consigned billions of people to eternal torment by leaving it in our hands?  How is that "the world with the greatest eternal good"?

You seem to be confusing anger with acting in anger. There is no indication that God acted rashly or hastily. 

Regarding Job, he understood the point God was making and concluded:

Job
42 Then Job replied to the Lord:

2 “I know that you can do all things;
    no purpose of yours can be thwarted.
3 You asked, ‘Who is this that obscures my plans without knowledge?’
    Surely I spoke of things I did not understand,
    things too wonderful for me to know.
4 “You said, ‘Listen now, and I will speak;
    I will question you,
    and you shall answer me.’
5 My ears had heard of you
    but now my eyes have seen you.
6 Therefore I despise myself
    and repent in dust and ashes.”

You think that God is somehow bound by what we consider just or fair. That is simply not the case. All life is to be considered a gift of God and if it is taken (or other calamities befall us), we are so far from being able to comprehend the bigger picture, we can only trust God that it is for the greatest possible eternal good. Terrifying?, yes, if you are not looking at the end game. 

Regarding your hypothetical if God created beings without freewill, would he send them to Hell (which is best defined as eternal separation from God). No, that would not be within the character of God being the greatest conceivable being. But we do have freewill, so the burden shifts to us.

[Tonus]

You seem to be confusing anger with acting in anger. There is no indication that God acted rashly or hastily.

But he did act in anger, yes?

You think that God is somehow bound by what we consider just or fair.

On the contrary, I am aware that god is NOT bound by what we consider just or fair. God is not 'bound' by anything, because no one can challenge his power. It doesn't matter if his actions regarding Job were just or fair, and this is indeed what god made clear to Job, and what Job finally understood. Note that when god addresses Job, he doesn't speak of obligations or fairness; he compares his magnificent and near-limitless power to that of the weak little human before him. Job had no recourse. God has no obstacles.

Regarding your hypothetical if God created beings without freewill, would he send them to Hell (which is best defined as eternal separation from God). No, that would not be within the character of God being the greatest conceivable being. But we do have freewill, so the burden shifts to us.

So why wouldn't god choose for us? We have free will because he gave it to us, and apparently the only possible use for it is to get on his bad side, seeing as no human as yet has managed to avoid sin. Job apparently did all he could to get on god's good side, and he was raked over the coals for it. I'd just as soon that god choose to save us all than that he leave us foundering in a situation where the vast majority of us will end up suffering eternal torment. That cannot be the best possible outcome.