Sad thought about Jesus.

[orangebox21]

No I have not distorted a thing. Your problem is that you swallowed the book without skepticism so of course you don't read it objectively. Just like if you point out the nasty parts of the Koran a Muslim will jump all over you as well.

How do you know that?  How do you know he didn't struggle with some doctrines or wonder to himself "can that really be true" as he read through the text?  Do you know his inner most thoughts?

Now, instead of saying my short summery is a distortion because you don't like my book review, try understanding it like you would if you saw a bad movie or read a bad work of fiction.

It's a distortion because it misrepresents the claims.

From the start, as the book goes, the head character is an unmovable figure who does everything by himself and doesn't ask anyone for consent, he simply does it.

There was literally no one other than himself, at the start.  Who would He ask?

In reality outside that book, the west has gotten away from the concept of kings and lords which are dictators. The royalty that still exists in Europe and Japan have been neutered to basically diplomat status. 

Take your deity googles off. Back in all of antiquity even in polytheism the ruling class where at best puppet governments even in Rome. Some allowed more self governance but ultimately even a Cesar could override what the senate did. Even they moved up through family rule, by the death of those prior or the murder by a competitive family member.

 
Starting to sound eerily like modern day America.

Now again, the head character is not the nice guy you interpret him as. I get that you like him and want to view him like that, but that character was mistaken as real, but he was not written like that for modern society, he is a reflection of the false perceptions of the people back then and their own desires. Just like you'd rightfully accept the Native American's spirit gods are a reflection of what their social norms were back when people made them up.

So when people "made God up" in the scriptures they projected themselves upon the concept of God.  Then why did they write things like:  "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways And My thoughts than your thoughts" (Isaiah 55:9).  If this was a god of a societies own making, then he would think and act in the same manner as they do.  Certainly the author claimed that God is an entity separate from, and not a reflection of, his social norms.

There is no way to paint the god of Abraham as objectively pluralistic. Being kind some of the time or to some people, and even trying to get out of the concept of hell through cherry picking still puts him in absolute power.

The stipulations of God's favor were clearly stated.  Do good [follow my commandments] and live, or do evil and perish.  

In real life, our elected officials don't have absolute power. The god of the bible is not elected like a PM or President in the west. Now instead of seeing that as an insult go back and read the bible word for word and don't skip anything and don't try to justify clinging to that book, just simply read it like you had never picked it up before.

In real life, elected officials are not omniscient nor omnipotent.  Why would you expect the same attributes and rules to apply to God as you would to man?

He is a dictator, there is simply no polite way to put it. That is what you call an immovable position.

Why is that wrong?  The best elected official in the world would be an all knowing, all powerful, perfectly just, and merciful being.  You would elect him/her in a heartbeat.  Then again maybe you wouldn't.  Maybe in your autonomy you would deny the validity of his/her attributes.