Richard Dawkins: "The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully." [1]
David T. Lamb: "While I applaud Dawkins for bringing these problems into the open for discussion, I don't agree with his conclusions. He simply isn't reading his Bible well." [2]
Forthcoming- A review of God Behaving Badly: Is the God of the Old Testament Angry, Sexist and Racist? by David T. Lamb
Stand firm in Christ,
Resources:
1. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, p. 51
2. David T. Lamb, God Behaving Badly: Is the God of the Old Testament Angry, Sexist and Racist?, p. 16
Comments
To the true non-believer, God never wins.
Take care
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/exploringourmatrix/2011/12/a-jealous-god-and-divine-domestic-violence.html
It's important to remember that arguments such as these, even if successful, only serve to call God's character into question, not His existence.
That being said, it seems that your friend may be guilty of not "reading his Bible well." :-)
Here is an interesting counter counter perspective.
Respectfully
Further, if Old Testament ethics is a stumbling block for you, might I suggest the following books:
God Behaving Badly: Is the God of the Old Testament Angry, Sexist and Racist?
and
Is God a Moral Monster? by Paul Copan
Take care
The following quote from the link you provided:
"I love you, but so help me, if I ever see you so much as look at another god, I'll break your neck."
Is this really the type of jealously God has towards his people? Consider this quote from Lamb's book.
"The Sinai covenant was like the wedding between Yahweh and Israel, in which they committed to be faithful to each other (Ex 19:5-6; 24:3-8). But on the honeymoon the Israelites had sex with someone else. That seems like a legitimate cause for anger."
God's jealously is not driven by revenge and a desire for control. It is a jealously driven by love and justice.
If my wife were to break her commitment to me I would be angry and I would desire justice, because justice is deserved. However, I cannot deal out that justice because I do not have the right to. God does have the right to deal out justice when justice is due.
Consider another quote from Lamb:
"Anger and love are not mutually exclusive. Love for people can lead to anger over a broken relationship. Love for people can also lead to anger about injustice."
By the way, in the incident Lamb mentions in the quote above, God was ready to destroy the Israelites but He changed His mind and showed them mercy. Throughout the entire Old Testament this pattern is seen. God delivers Israel, they complain, he is patient, they promise to obey and then not long after they disobey, God becomes angry and punishes them. God is quick to love and slow to anger.
God bless
So, that is why I don't try to justify those seemingly barbaric passages. They have a kernel of truth (see Chase's comment), but given the background that's informed by the scholarly consensus opinions I've mentioned, they cross the line.
This post deals directly with Old Testament ethics and the interpretation of certain Old Testament passages.
While the very answerable points you raise about Old Testament reliability and inerrancy are interesting, they are not the topic of this particular post.
Let’s try to stay on track.
Respectfully
OK, but what about my point about how our underlying view of the texts themselves directly affects how we interpret the seemingly immoral passages? Surely it is the main reason we would try to justify such ideas.
As I'm sure you've heard from Bayes' Theorem, the background knowledge we have about a claim will affect its prior probability of being true.
So, if we have a disfavorable prior probability that these passages are actually true due to the scholarly consensus opinions I (tried to) mention, then such harmonizations of them don't necessarily "work."
You point is understood and well taken; however, in this context we are dealing with whether or not the OT God is immoral as the text stands.
This is preciously what Dawkins does in the above quote and in The God Delusion.
Respectfully
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3xghfxJAO4&feature=youtu.be
I am not sure what you are getting at by posting the video regarding the Muslim woman. Please clarify.
Thanks.