WELCOME TO THEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES

 

                            Skepticism and Christianity: Part Three

 

Behavior of the Biblical God:   

       It is the Biblical Scriptures that reveals the nature and attributes of the Biblical God. We see numerous examples in Scripture as to how God acts in multiple situations. We come to know and understand the nature and character of the Biblical God based on how we see him interact with the human race and the world in general. Based on how we see God behave in Scripture, skeptics believe we can make judgements as to the right or wrong, the moral or immoral, the good or bad of God’s behavior.

      As discussed in Part One of this series, Christians argue that we cannot make judgements as to the behavior of God.  Christians argue that we can’t judge God based on standards we have developed or even according to the standards God has established for us humans as seen in the moral law He is believed to have established.  The moral law applies to us humans not to God.  Christians maintain that God didn’t establish law for Himself.  He established it for the physical creation and the human race.  Therefore, Christians believe we can’t judge or evaluate God on the basis of His revealed law for mankind. 

       Christians argue that while we can know how God behaves by consulting the Biblical Scriptures, we can’t place value judgements on His behavior because He lives in a totally different realm from ours. Since the Scriptures reveal His ways are above our ways, we have no right to judge his ways as we judge our ways.  Therefore, we can’t judge whether or not God’s behavior is moral or immoral, right or wrong, good or evil. Our understating of morality, right and wrong, evil and good, can’t be used to define God’s behavior. We can't place value judgments on how God behaves because as the creator of all things, God can do with his creation anything He wants. God can't be seen as being right or wrong in what He does. As the supreme power over all things, whatever God does is right by definition. Whatever behavior God expresses is right by virtue of He being infallible which means He is incapable of being wrong. His choice of behavior is always objectively right. 

       Skeptics point out that if you are going to base your belief in God on the basis of what the Biblical Scriptures reveal about God, then you are forced to see Him within the context and through the eyes of what we humans have come to understand as moral and immoral, right and wrong and good and evil standards of behavior. We have no other standards whereby to view God.  It is argued that if we can’t view God in this manner, we cannot relate to him in any intelligible way.

       Furthermore, skeptics point out that the Scriptures teach we are made in the image of God. If this is truly the case, it should mean that God made us to reflect what already existed within Himself?  Therefore, should not our sense of right and wrong, moral and immoral, good and evil reflect that of God’s sense of right and wrong, moral and immoral and good and evil?

       The Scriptures show God to have the passions of love, hate, wrath, anger, jealousy, compassion, mercy, joy, sadness, and disappointment. We have these same passions. In this respect, we do reflect the image of God as He is seen in the Scriptures.  The rightness or wrongness of our human behavior is determined and identified by how we express our passions. Skeptics argue that the rightness or wrongness of God’s behavior can and should be determined and identified in the same manner.  We come to know and understand the Biblical God based on how we see this God behave, how we see Him express His passions and emotions in relation to what we have come to understand as acceptable or unacceptable standards of conduct.

       Skeptics argue that since our human passions and behaviors appear to be the same as those of God, we should be able to determine whether God is moral or immoral, right or wrong, good or evil in the same manner we make such determinations as to our human behavior.  Since God reveals Himself with passions and behaviors that are the same as ours, we can only relate to him in terms of these shared passions and behaviors and draw conclusions as to the right or wrong of His behavior the same as we do with our behavior.  

       While Christians argue that we can’t judge God based on our human understanding of right and wrong, skeptics argue that we can only know and understand the Biblical God by seeing how He conducts and expresses Himself in comparison to our human understanding of right and wrong. We have no other way of knowing or understanding God. It is argued that if, as Christians believe, God has given us the behavioral standards we are to live by, then it is only reasonable to judge God’s behavior based on these same standards.  

       Skeptics believe if the behavior of God is identified as contrary to what we humans have come to see as acceptable behavior, we can only conclude that God is behaving in ways contrary to what we humans have come to see as acceptable behavior. We develop perspectives about God according to how He behaves in relationship to our understanding of right and wrong.

       Based on this perspective, skeptics have examined the behavior of God as revealed in the Biblical Scriptures.  In doing so, skeptics believe they have identified a great deal of behavior that is questionable in light of what we humans have come to believe is right and wrong, moral and immoral, good and evil behavior. 

The Noachian flood:

       Genesis: 6:5-7: The LORD saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. The LORD regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. So the LORD said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.”

       Genesis 6:11-13,17: Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence. God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways. So God said to Noah, “I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth.

       I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish.

       Genesis one through four records God creating the human race and then, starting with the sin committed by Adam and Eve, the human race appears to morally go downhill to the point where God has had enough and decides to wipe out the human race.      

      Genesis records that God came to regret that he had made man because man had become utterly corrupt. He decides to bring a massive flood upon the earth which will kill all land-dwelling life. Only Noah, along with his wife, his three sons and their wives along with chosen animals, are allowed to escape death by drowning.  This is because “Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD” (Genesis 6:8). Because Noah found favor with God, God had Noah build an ark to house Noah and his family during the flood.

         Skeptics question why God would create mankind with a nature that was able to become so behaviorally corrupt to the point that He feels He has to destroy what He created. Christians tend to believe God is omniscient which means He knows everything that will ever happen before it happens. If God knew in advance that His created humans would become corrupt to the point that He would have to destroy them, why would He create them in the first place, knowing full well He was going to destroy them. To the skeptic, this seems bizarre and inexplicable to say the least.  (For further discussion of the omniscience of God issue, go to: (Part Two of "The Doctrine of Original Sin") and to the section dealing with the flesh and the spirit.

       Skeptics question that if God is not omniscient and therefore didn’t know in advance that his creation would become so corrupt, why did He allow it to become so corrupt to the point that He felt it necessary to destroy it. It’s recorded God came to regret having made man. He then, in anger and apparent disappointment and regret with Himself for having made man, brings about the flood to destroy men women, children, babies, and pre-born babies. As discussed above, Christians believe God to be infallible, incapable of making a mistake. Skeptics see God virtually admitting He made a mistake in having created man (Genesis 6:5-7).    

       Skeptics question the morality of destroying humans for behavior they apparently were strongly orientated toward because of the very nature they were created with or   developed subsequent to the supposed sin of Adam and Eve.  Skeptics find it difficult to believe all humans would have been equally corrupt. Were children corrupt?  Were babies corrupt?  This one size fits all approach to punishment is seen by skeptics as unjust and immoral. Skeptics see the life destroying flood as a barbaric act on the part of a God that elsewhere in Scripture is described as loving, kind and compassionate and yet here is seen acting in a very unloving, unkind and uncompassionate manner.

       Side note: It must be pointed out that skeptics, as is true of most geologists, don’t generally believe the flood occurred in the manner described in Genesis. There are flood stories in the writings of many cultures that were extant in the historical past. These stories all include similar events as those seen in the Noachian flood but also significantly differ as to the dynamics involved. Some Christian theologians believe the flood was not world-wide but local in nature. For more on this issue, go to: (Part Four of "Creation versus Evolution").

       Christians respond to the skeptic’s position by pointing out God is sovereign and as such can do anything He wants to do in any way He chooses to do it and we have no right to question Him, let alone judge Him for how He does what He does. Furthermore, Christians point out that what we see recorded in Scripture is a thumbnail sketch of what was occurring at the time before the flood. Therefore, we are in no position to judge the actions of God in this matter. Many Christians believe a major reason God destroyed His human creation was because humans were co-habiting with supernatural Beings (often believed to be fallen angels) based on what is recorded in Genesis 6:1-4.

       When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. Then the LORD said, “My Spirit will not contend with humans forever, for they are mortal; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.” The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.

       Were supernatural Beings co-habiting with humans? For a comprehensive discussion of who are the sons of God and the Nephilim mentioned in Genesis 6, go to: ("The Sons of God").

       Christians also point out that God seemingly gave His humans 120 years (see above passage) to turn things around and avoid the flood. Additionally, it would have taken a number of years for the ark to be built and while it was being built it would serve as a witness as to what was to come. It is believed the people were given ample opportunity to repent and change their ways. If they would have done so, it is believed God would not have brought the flood upon them. 

       The Nineveh event is referenced where God set out to destroy the people of Nineveh because of their wickedness but when they repented, He relented and did not destroy the people of Nineveh (See the Book of Jonah). It is pointed out that this shows God is just and will turn from His wrath when people repent, a thing that is seen throughout the Scriptures. Christians point to what is written in Ezekiel and Exodus.

       Ezekiel 33:11: Say to them, ‘As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! Why will you die, people of Israel?’

       Exodus 34:5-7: Then the LORD came down in the cloud and stood there with him (Moses) and proclaimed his name, the LORD. And he passed in front of Moses, proclaiming, “The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.”

       Christians believe these passages identify both the mercy and the justice of God. It is shown here that God does not want his created Beings to experience the consequences of sin but if they choose to continue to sin, He has no choice but to punish them for their sin. Christians see this as no different than we humans providing opportunity for individuals to adjust their behavior to be compliant with laws we enact and when they refused to do so, we punish them in various ways. 

         Skeptics point to it being said that God “punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation” (Exodus 34:7). It is questioned how it can be just to punish children and grandchildren for the sins committed by grandfathers and great-grandfathers. Christians point to Exodus 20:5-6 where God warns against idol worship and says “You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.” 

       Christians see this as explaining that children are not being punished for their parents and grandparents’ sins but they are being punished for their continuing in the sins of their parents and grandparents as witnessed by the phase “of those who hate me.” Christians point out that this is further clarified in Ezekiel.

       Ezekiel 18:20: The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them.

Sodom and Gomorrah/Babylon:

       Christians point to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah as an example of God’s mercy in the face of wickedness. God determined to destroy these two cities and their neighboring towns because of their extreme wickedness.  However, He was willing to spare these cities if just ten righteous people could be found living in these cities. Ten could not be found so the cities were destroyed along with their neighboring towns (See Genesis 9 and 10 and Jeremiah 49:18, 2^nd Peter 2:6, Jude 1:7).

       Skeptics point out that there must have been a number of children, babies and pre-born babies destroyed and ask what justice is there in destroying innocent children. Skeptics ask the same question about the destruction of the Amalekites where God ordered that the Amalekites be totally destroyed and all that belongs to them. They were to “put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys” (1^st Samuel 15:3). The same thing was done to Jericho (Joshua 6:21), Ai (Joshua 8:25-26), Bashan (Deuteronomy 3:6) and the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites. (Deuteronomy 20:16-17). 

       The killing of children and infants appears to be perfectly acceptable in God’s facilitation of war carried out again various nations. Psalm 137 pictures the Israelites in Babylonian captivity and seemingly dreaming about the day the Babylonians will be destroyed and that happy will be the one who seizes Babylonian infants and dashes them against the rocks (verse 9).  

       In Isaiah 13 God is seen as destroying Babylon in retribution for their having taken Israel captive. It is written that “Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses will be looted and their wives violated. See, I will stir up against them the Medes, who do not care for silver and have no delight in gold. Their bows will strike down the young men; they will have no mercy on infants, nor will they look with compassion on children” (Isaiah 13:16-18).  

       Skeptics see infants and children as innocent humans (victims) that the God of Israel appears to have no qualms about destroying along with those deemed to be wicked. Yet you see a number of OT passages where God rails against those who shed the blood of innocents. Skeptics see this as contradictory to say the least. It is seen as a typical "do as I say," "don't do what I do" scenario. 

       Jeremiah 22:3: This is what the LORD says: Do what is just and right. Rescue from the hand of the oppressor the one who has been robbed. Do no wrong or violence to the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow, and do not shed innocent blood in this place.

       Skeptics point out that OT Scripture speaks of God facilitating the Babylonian captivity of Israel in judgement against Israel and then facilitating the destruction of Babylon for what they did to Israel. In other words, Babylon is punished for doing the will of God. They are punished for doing what God intended for them to do.  Skeptics see this as an absurdity.       

An aside:

       Scripture speaks of Babylon being totally destroyed and never to again to be inhabited. In prophesying against Babylon, Isaiah wrote that “Babylon, the jewel of kingdoms, the pride and glory of the Babylonians, will be overthrown by God like Sodom and Gomorrah. She will never be inhabited or lived in through all generations; there no nomads will pitch their tents; there no shepherds will rest their flocks” (Isaiah 13:19-20). 

       Isaiah prophesied that Babylon “will never be inhabited or lived in through all generations.” The implication is that once conquered, Babylon would never again be inhabited. The Medo/Persian Empire conquered Babylon in 539 BC.

       Secular history shows that under Medo/Persian rule; Babylon flourished as a center of art and education.  Cyrus made Babylon his administrative headquarters for his entire empire. Two hundred years later, during the reign of Alexander the Great, Babylon is shown to be a thriving city. Alexander actually died at Babylon in 323 BC.  After Alexander, Babylon was taken over by the Seleucid dynasty in 312 BC.  However, after the time of Alexander, Babylon rapidly declined as an important city.  Today Babylon continues to exist as a city about 55 miles south of Baghdad Iraq. It is largely uninhabited but is a site for archaeological excavations.

         Some Christian apologists will argue that Isaiah did not reveal how long it would take for Babylon to never again be inhabited and that after the seventh century AD Muslim conquest of the area, the city began a steep decline.  The last known habitation of the area as a small village referred to as "Babel" dates from around 1000 AD. By the 17th century, European travelers only reported ruins at the site. In other words, it is believed Isaiah was looking to a lengthy period of time that would pass before Babylon would be completely abandoned. 

        Skeptics respond that it is quite a stretch to believe it took over 1000 years for Babylon to become uninhabited when it is evident Isaiah indicated its abandonment would follow on the heels of its conquest in 539 BC. It being said that Babylon would not be inhabited from generation to generation and that no one will live there, is seen in the context of its 6^th century BC destruction. Skeptics point to Jeremiah’s prophecy about the conquest of Babylon.

        Jeremiah 50: 39b-40: It will never again be inhabited or lived in from generation to generation. As I overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah along with their neighboring towns,” declares the LORD, “so no one will live there; no people will dwell in it.    

       If Isaiah and Jeremiah were prophesying a literal permanent abandonment of Babylon at the time of its 539 BC destruction, which the context of their prophecies appear to indicate, history shows this wasn’t the case. Therefore, while we know from secular history that Babylon was indeed conquered by the Medes and Persians around 539 BC, we also know from secular history that Babylon did not become uninhibited for over 1000 years later. Therefore, skeptics believe these two prophets were mistaken and are therefore false prophets. 

       There is a similar problem with prophecy that said Tyre was to be completely destroyed and never be rebuilt (Ezekiel 26 -27).  However, Tyre has been rebuilt many times and stands to this very day.  Skeptics see this as another failed prophecy (Go to: Are the Biblical Scriptures reliable? Part Six for a comprehensive discussion of this issue).

       Some Christian scholars believe that the Scriptural statements about killing men, women and children are stereotypical/hyperbolic expressions for describing the killing of  the inhabitants of a particular region. This is seen as common language among Near East military leaders of that era. It is believed that when entire cities are described as being destroyed, it is largely citadel cities that are referred to. These were cities that housed government facilities and the military. It is believed the general populations of people associated with these cities lived in rural areas outside the city and where not the ones killed.      

       Some authors have stated that archaeological evidence indicates that no civilian populations existed at Jericho, Ai or other cities mentioned in the Book of Joshua. It is pointed out that while Joshua said that all the nations were destroyed (Joshua 11:12) that   Moses had directed be destroyed (Deuteronomy 20:16-17), the Scriptures show that some of these nations were not completely destroyed as some appear in be living among the Israelites subsequent to Israel taking over the “Promised Land.” Therefore, it is concluded that Joshua, as was true of the contemporaries of his day, used hyperbolic speech in describing his military victories.

       Joshua 15:63: Judah could not dislodge the Jebusites, who were living in Jerusalem; to this day the Jebusites live there with the people of Judah.

       In Judges 3, it is recorded that that LORD left some Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites in the land to test the Israelites to see whether they would obey the LORD’s commands, which he had given their ancestors through Moses. It’s recorded that He did this to teach warfare to the descendants of the Israelites who had not had previous battle experience.

       It is recorded in 2^nd Chronicles 2:7-8 that during the reign of Solomon there still were Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites living in the land who the Israelites had not destroyed.  

       This all being said, skeptics point out that it is evident from the narrative in Joshua that more than the residents of the cities were destroyed. It is apparent from the following Scriptures that entire populations (city and rural) were wiped out. We see villages being destroyed and livestock taken. Livestock would have been in the countryside and not in the city.  Therefore, it should be apparent that non-combatants, including children, infants, and the pre-born were killed. It is to be noted that all this mayhem was done in response to the command of God (Deuteronomy 20:17).

        Joshua 8:1: Then the LORD said to Joshua, “Do not be afraid; do not be discouraged. Take the whole army with you, and go up and attack Ai. For I have delivered into your hands the king of Ai, his people, his city and his land.    

       Joshua 10:37: They took the city and put it to the sword, together with its king, its villages and everyone in it. They left no survivors. Just as at Eglon, they totally destroyed it and everyone in it.

       Joshua 10:39-40: They took the city, its king and its villages, and put them to the sword. Everyone in it they totally destroyed. They left no survivors. They did to Debir and its king as they had done to Libnah and its king and to Hebron. So Joshua subdued the whole region, including the hill country, the Negev, the western foothills and the mountain slopes, together with all their kings. He left no survivors. He totally destroyed all who breathed, just as the LORD, the God of Israel, had commanded.

       Joshua 11:21: At that time Joshua went and destroyed the Anakites from the hill country: from Hebron, Debir and Anab, from all the hill country of Judah, and from all the hill country of Israel. Joshua totally destroyed them and their towns.

       Joshua 11:14: The Israelites carried off for themselves all the plunder and livestock of these cities, but all the people they put to the sword until they completely destroyed them, not sparing anyone that breathed.

       The book of Joshua is a history of God using the military forces of Israel to destroy numerous nations. What skeptics fine deplorable is that God is seen as hardening the hearts of the leadership of these nations so they would make war against Israel so that Israel could exterminate them without mercy. 

       Joshua 11:20: For it was the LORD himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the LORD had commanded Moses.

       While the Biblical God is described as loving and merciful in the OT, He is shown to be anything but merciful in His treatment of the nations He was out to destroy so Israel could take over their land (The Promised Land). Skeptics point out that God is seen throughout the OT as vindictive, wrathful, vengeful, angry and retributive.

       In Deuteronomy 32: 41-42, God is quoted as saying “when I sharpen my flashing sword and my hand grasps it in judgment, I will take vengeance on my adversaries and repay those who hate me. I will make my arrows drunk with blood, while my sword devours flesh: the blood of the slain and the captives, the heads of the enemy leaders.”

       God’s vengeance is mentioned dozens of times in the OT. So is His wrath and anger. Skeptics believe God’s war-like behavior is in total contradiction to His purported nature of love, mercy and compassion. Skeptics see as abominable His brutal treatment of the humans he supposedly created. God’s apparent unconcern with the massive amount of suffering His war-like behavior has caused is seen as indefensible.  This is seen as willfully inflicting suffering on humans supposedly made in His image and likeness (Genesis 1:26-27).

       Skeptics also find the language of Deuteronomy 32:41-42 very strange. Here God is quoted as having a flashing sword, arrows drunk with blood, a sword that devours flesh, the blood of the slain. For the supposed God of all creation to be described in this manner is seen as bizarre to say the least.  Skeptics see God here described as a blood thirsty monster.   

         In regard to the killing of men, women children and infants, Christians point out that there is always collateral damage when judgment is exacted upon the wicked. During World-War II we bombed the daylights out of Germany in which many innocents were killed. When we dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki we killed many innocents. This is the simple reality of warfare and judgement and always has been.  This is the case whether it is God facilitated or human facilitated warfare and judgement.      

       As seen above, skeptics say we can only judge God in terms of how God behaves as measured by the moral standards we humans have come to live by whether they be divinely or humanly generated. While Christians do not believe we can judge God by the standards we humans live by, they do point out that God and we humans act much the same way when it comes to rewarding good and punishing evil.

       Both God and humans act in the same way when facilitating war and administrating justice. In human facilitated war we produce collateral damage where innocents are killed no different than when God facilitates war. We humans see war as a righteous act when it is directed toward evil doers just as God does. We punish criminal behavior (behavior contrary to established law) just as God punishes behavior contrary to the standards He has established for his created humans.

       This being the case, Christians ask skeptics why they judge God as being immoral for killing children, babies and the pre-born when we humans do the same thing and believe it to be acceptable behavior, justified by the circumstances extant at the time. Skeptics shoot back that God should be better than this. God should be able to facilitate punishment without having innocents suffer. Skeptics believe that the fact God kills innocents along with the guilty just as we humans do, shows God is no better than we humans as to how human life is treated when in reality He should be.

       Skeptics point out that we humans have facilitated many unjust wars of aggression and conquest. Historically, most of human initiated wars have been wars of aggression and conquest where the land and peoples of one nation are forcefully taken over by another nation.  

       The takeover of Native American land by the European immigrants to America is seen as a prime example of this. The acquisition of land that had been occupied and lived on for thousands of years by the cultural group known as Indian, is seen as nothing less than mercenary. It resulted in the killing of tens of thousands Native Americans with many thousands more dying from diseases brought over by the Europeans. The historical record shows that entire Indian settlements were arbitrarily massacred. As westward expansion continued, massive numbers of buffalo were killed which was foundational to Indian culture. Consequently, Indian civilization was virtually destroyed.   

       The US government justified its treatment of Native Americans by embracing the doctrine of Manifest Destiny. This was a widely held belief that American settlers were divinely ordained and justified in expanding their dominion and democratic institutions across the entire North American continent. In other words, the destruction of Indian civilization was seen as God directed.

       Skeptics see the same thing happening in ancient Israel. Here the Biblical God is seen as facilitating the removal of nations from the so-called Promised Land in order to give it to the Israelites. Skeptics see this as nothing more than a mercenary war of aggression and conquest like so many other wars throughout history. Skeptics see the God instigated takeover of foreign territory by Israel an unjust, arbitrary and malicious act of displacement of indigenous peoples.     

      Joshua 24:13:  So I gave you a land on which you did not toil and cities you did not build; and you live in them and eat from vineyards and olive groves that you did not plant.' "

       Skeptics point out that historically, the gods of the various cultures around the world are seen as involved with and facilitators of wars of aggression and conquest, defensive wars, and many other destructive events.  Since these pagan gods do not really exist, it is believed that it is humans and humans alone facilitating such wars and events. Skeptics believe it is no different with the Biblical God. The Biblical God is seen as behaving in the same war-like manner as the pagan gods and facilitating destruction and mayhem of all kinds, either directly or thought humans. It is concluded that this God no more exists than do the pagan gods.

       It is pointed out that the Old Testament record of God facilitating war and destruction has numerous parallels with the activity of pagan gods throughout human history. Skeptics see this as nothing more than a reflection of an evolved and developed human nature that tends to associate and often attribute their activity and behavior, including war, to the intervention and presence of supernatural forces. Skeptics believe all human behavior is generated by humans and has nothing to do with supernatural forces.

       Skeptics don’t necessarily deny that the events recorded in the Old Testament happened, they just don’t believe such events were initiated and facilitated by a supernatural entity. They do not believe a supernatural entity was involved with these events back then or at any time since. They believe the Israelites, as was true of the nations around them, were of the ancient mindset to associate human events and activity with supernatural powers when in fact there was no supernatural involvement. 

Killing of the first born of Egypt:

       The story of King Herod killing the under two years of age children of Bethlehem (Matthew 2) in an attempt to kill the Christ child is generally seen as an evil act on the part of Herod. Yet the God facilitated killing of the first born of Egypt (Exodus 12) is seen as justified. The killing of the first born of Egypt, as were the other God facilitated plagues brought upon Egypt, is seen as ok because this was necessary to convince the Egyptian Pharoah and the Egyptian leadership to let the Israelites go.  

       Skeptics believe if this really happened, it was a great evil perpetrated by an evil god. It is asked how you can justify all the pain and suffering inflicted upon the Egyptian people because of the supposed stubbornness of the Egyptian rulership. Surely, God could have found a less brutal way of facilitating the release of the Israelites and thus spared the general population of Egypt from the trauma they had to experience.

       Christian apologists generally see the plagues inflicted upon Egypt being done to invalidate the existence of the pagan gods worshiped by the Egyptians.  Whole books have been written comparing each plague with Egyptian gods and how such plagues negated the efficacy of such gods.

       The plague of the water being turned into blood was against Hapi and Osiris, the Egyptian gods of the Nile. The plague of frogs was against the frog goddess Heqet, the goddess of fertility. The plague of the killing of livestock was against Apis, the bull god of livestock fertility. The plague of darkness was against Ra, the sun god and so forth.  

       Skeptics recognize the associations between the plagues and the gods of Egypt but see no Scriptural reason to believe the plagues occurred as a witness against the ineptitude of the Egyptian gods. There is nothing in the Scriptures that indicate this. The Scriptural account of the Exodus shows the reason for the plagues was the failure of the Pharoah and Egyptian leadership to allow the people of Israel to leave. Skeptics insist a good God would have provided a less painful way to facilitate the exodus. Since this was not the case, the Biblical God is seen as not to exist or if He does, He is an evil God.

       Furthermore, it is asked why a “good” God would allow the children of Israel to live under Egyptian bondage for some 430 years [Genesis 15:13, (400 years), Exodus 12:40-41, 430 years)] before doing something to free them. If indeed these descendants of Abraham were God’s chosen people, why would God allow millions of them to suffer as slaves of the Egyptians for centuries before doing anything about it?  

       It is recorded in Exodus 3 that the LORD saw the misery of His people in Egypt and had heard them crying out because of their slave drivers and that He was concerned about their suffering. Verse 9 says, “And now the cry of the Israelites has reached me, and I have seen the way the Egyptians are oppressing them.” Skeptics ask why it took God so long to see and become concerned about their sufferings and for their cry to reach Him?  

       Christians point to Genesis 15:13-16 where God tells Abraham, who was living in Canaan at the time, that his descendants, after 400 years of being enslaved and mistreated under Egyptian rule, will return to the land of Canaan when the iniquity of the Amorites is complete. This is interpreted to mean that God was being patient and merciful with the Amorites, and by extension other Canaanite nations, in not punishing them and removing them from the land until it became clear they would not depart from their evil behavior. 

       Genesis 15:13-16: Then the LORD said to him (Abraham), “Know for certain that for four hundred years your descendants will be strangers in a country not their own and that they will be enslaved and mistreated there. But I will punish the nation they serve as slaves, and afterward they will come out with great possessions. You, however, will go to your ancestors in peace and be buried at a good old age. In the fourth generation your descendants will come back here, for the sin of the Amorites has not yet reached its full measure.”

       Acts 7:6: God spoke to him (Abraham) in this way: ‘For four hundred years your descendants will be strangers in a country not their own, and they will be enslaved and mistreated.

       Skeptics see this as making no sense at all as it appears predetermined that God would drive out the nations that lived in the land of Canaan so Israel could take possession of the "Promised Land" (Genesis 12:7, 17:8).   It is believed God knew in advance that He would displace the Amorites and other Canaanite nations. Therefore, this has nothing to do with He being patient or merciful with these nations hoping they would change their ways. If indeed he was being patient and merciful with the Canaanite nations, he was doing so at the expense of the Israelites suffering for 400 years. It is asked where His mercy was in regard to the Israelites for 400 years.

       Some Jewish and Christians scholars offer a different perspective on the length of time the Israelites lived in Egypt and were slaves of the Egyptian rulership.         

       Genesis 15:13-16 and Acts 7:6 says that the descendants of Abraham would be strangers in a county not their own for 400 years and they will be enslaved and mistreated. These Scriptures do not tell us at what point during the 400 years they would be enslaved and mistreated or the location of this enslavement. Some Jewish Rabbis and Christian apologists believe the 400-year period began when Abraham entered Cannan. 

       This 400-year period is broken down in the following manner: Abraham arrived in Cannan at age 75 (Genesis 12:4). Abraham became the father of Isaac 25 years later when he was 100 years old (Genesis 21:5). Sixty years later Jacob was born (Genesis 25:26). Jacob was 120 years old when he came to Egypt (Genesis 47:9). 

       So, Abraham was in Canaan for 25 years before the birth of Isaac. Sixty years passed from the birth of Isaac to the birth of Jacob. Jacob moved to Egypt at the age of 130.  By adding 25, 60 and 130, you get 215 years which is seen as the period of time Abraham and his descendants lived as strangers in Cannan. After this period of time, Abraham’s descendants moved to Egypt because of the famine where they stayed until the exodus. This would have been a period of 185 years in Egypt or 215 years in Egypt depending on whether you go by the 400-year period seen in Exodus 15:13-16 or the 430-year period seen in Exodus 12:40-41.  

       Most English renderings of Exodus 12:40 indicate Israelite people lived in Egypt for 430 years.  “Now the length of time the Israelite people lived in Egypt was 430 years. At the end of the 430 years, to the very day, all the LORD’s divisions left Egypt” (NIV and dozens of other English renderings). This rendering is from the Masoretic Text, the text most used in translating the Hebrew Scriptures into English and other languages.

       The Masoretic Text is so named because it is based on the work of a group of Torah scholars and scribes called Masoretes who between the 7^th and 10^th centuries AD worked on copying various manuscripts of the Hebrew Scriptures that were extant at the time but are no longer extant. This work resulted in the production of the Masoretic Text of the Old Testament. 

       The oldest-known complete copy of this text is the Leningrad Codex which dates to the early 11^th century AD.  Many centuries of time had passed between the original writing of the Hebrew Scriptures and their being incorporated into what became known as the Masoretic text. We have no knowledge of how many times the original writings were copied or how far back the copies go that were used to produce the Masoretic text.

       Unlike the Masoretic Text, from which most English translations of the OT are made, the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (LLX) renders Exodus 12:40 as, "And the sojourning of the children of Israel, while they sojourned in the land of Egypt and the land of Canaan, was four hundred and thirty years."  The LXX includes Canaan in the rendering of Exodus 12:40. This supports the perspective that the 400/430-year timeframe included the time spent in Cannan before the move to Egypt. The Torah was translated into the Greek language around 250 B.C.

       The Samaritan Pentateuch [SP], a Hebrew text of the Torah produced by the Samaritans in 1st century BC/AD, renders Exodus 12:40 as, “Now the sojourning of the sons of Israel, and of their fathers, which they sojourned in the land of Canaan and in the land of Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years.”

       Josephus, (First century AD Jewish historian) in his Antiquities 2.15.2 §318, records: “They left Egypt in the month Xanthicus, on the fifteenth day of the lunar month; four hundred and thirty years after our forefather Abraham came into Canaan, but two hundred and fifteen years only after Jacob removed into Egypt.”

       The LLX, SP and Josephus readings all point to the 430 years starting from Abraham’s entry into Canaan rather than Israel’s entry into Egypt. This aligns with Galatians 3:17 where Apostle Paul notes that the Law given at Sinai came 430 years after the promise to Abraham.

       Galatians 3:16-17: The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise.

       Here, the 430 years begins with the Abrahamic covenant (Genesis 12, 15. 17) and extends to the giving of the Law at Mt. Sinai (Exodus 19). Paul’s interpretation places the period of 430 years partly in Cannan and partly in Egypt.

       The descendants of Abraham weren’t known as Israelites until Jacobs name was changed to Israel (Genesis 35: 9-10) which occurred after 11 of his 12 sons were born in Paddan Aram where Jacob was working for his uncle Laban. Paddan Aram was a region far north of Cannan near Haran where Abraham was from. The twelfth son, Benjamin, was born after Jacob returned to Cannan. It is apparent Jacob lived in Paddan Aram only 20 years (Genesis 31:21) and then returned to Cannan.  This change in name apparently occurred shortly after Jacob and his sons moved back to Cannan after which his children could rightly be called the children of Israel.

       After arriving in Egypt, it may have been years before the Israelites were enslaved and mistreated as indicated in Scripture. Since only 70 arrived in Egypt (The Masoretic text reads 70, the Septuagint reads 75), it would have taken many years for the Israelite population to reach the numbers necessary for they to be used as slaves.

       Scripture shows Joseph died 71 years after his family arrived in Egypt (Gen 41:46, 45:6, 50:26). It was only after his death, and after a new king came into power that the Israelites became enslaved. We don’t know when the new king came into power or how long after the new king came into power that the Israelites became enslaved. Based on various genealogical/generational data in Genesis and Exodus, scholars have postulated the enslavement lasted between 80 and 144 years.   

       Genesis 1:6-11: Now Joseph and all his brothers and all that generation died, but the Israelites were exceedingly fruitful; they multiplied greatly, increased in numbers and became so numerous that the land was filled with them.  Then a new king, to whom Joseph meant nothing, came to power in Egypt. Look,” he said to his people, “the Israelites have become far too numerous for us. Come, we must deal shrewdly with them or they will become even more numerous and, if war breaks out, will join our enemies, fight against us and leave the country.” So, they put slave masters over them to oppress them with forced labor, and they built Pithom and Rameses as store cities for Pharaoh.        

      All of the above being said, it is of interest that fragments of Exodus 12:40 have been found in the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS). Exodus 12:40 is found in manuscript 4Q14 of the DSS’s and reads as follows: "Now the residing of the sons of Israel during which they resided in the land of Egypt was 430 years." 4Q14 is a Hebrew manuscript from Cave 4 at Qumran which was written in the Herodian period using Hebrew manuscripts of the Torah extant at the time.

       This reading appears to align with the Masoretic Text rendering of Exodus 12:40. Fragment 2Q2 of the DSS’s also includes Exodus 12:40, and supports the Masoretic Text rendering. The DSS manuscripts are the oldest extant Hebrew texts we have. They are over 2000 years old. The agreement of the DSS rendering of Exodus 12:40 with the Masoretic rendering of this passage tells us the Hebrew texts they used must of had this rendering. We don't know how old such texts were.

      We know that the Septuagint Torah was produced around 250 BC and therefore must have used Hebrew manuscripts extant at that time. Unless for some reason the Septuagint writers purposely added to the narrative, it is apparent the Hebrew manuscripts they used spoke of the sojourning of the children of Israel in the land of Egypt and the land of Canaan during their 430-year sojourn and that is why we find the rendering we do in the Septuagint. Apparently, at some point in years subsequent to the production of the Septuagint Torah, scribes either purposely or accidently deleted the narrative about living in Cannan. It apparently was manuscripts with this deletion that the Masoretes’ used in producing the Masoretic text.

       Since the Samaritan Pentateuch speaks of living in Cannan, it is possible the scribes who produced that document used the Septuagint as a source for their rendering of the Torah. It was common in the first century to use the Septuagint as the source for reading the Torah. Many quotes of Scripture of OT Scripture by NT writers are from the Septuagint. It is also possible Josephus had the Septuagint rendering of Exodus 12:40 in mind when he made the comments he made regarding the dynamics of the 430 sojourn. Scholars know from their analysis of NT Scripture that Apostle used the Septuagint in quoting OT Scripture. It is likely that it was the Septuagint rendering of Exodus 12:40 that Paul had in mind when he wrote what he wrote in Galatians 3:16-17.  Studies have shown that over 90% of Paul's OT Scriptural quotations are derived from the Septuagint.       

       This all being said, it is of interest that Josephus, in addition to writing what he did as shown above, also wrote, “And four hundred years did they (Israel) spend under these afflictions; for they strove one against the other which should get the mastery, the Egyptians desiring to destroy the Israelites by these labors, and the Israelites desiring to hold out to the end under them” (Antiquities 2.204).  Here Josephus appears to contradict what he wrote in his Antiquities 2.15.2 §318 were he supports an apparent sojourn in Cannan and a 215-year sojourn in Egypt.  In Antiquities 2.204, he appears to support a 400-year enslavement in Egypt.  In the paragraphs preceding Antiquities 2.204, he speaks of the various ways the Egyptians worked the Israelites.

       It is also to be noted that Apostle Paul appears to contradict what he wrote in Galatians 3:16-17 as quoted above.

       Acts 13:17-20: The God of the people of Israel chose our ancestors; he made the people prosper during their stay in Egypt; with mighty power he led them out of that country; for about forty years he endured their conduct in the wilderness; and he overthrew seven nations in Canaan, giving their land to his people as their inheritance. All this took about 450 years.

       Here Paul says nothing about the Israelites living in Cannan but suggests they lived in Egypt for around 400 years and God made them prosper. Its interesting he says nothing about their enslavement.

        In summary, there appears to be good scriptural and historical support for concluding that the 400/430 years of Israel's sojourn included time spent in both Cannan and Egypt and that their time of enslavement in Egypt was a lot shorter than is generally believed.  However, the statement of Josephus in Antiquities 2.204 and Paul’s statement in Acts 13:17-20, make this conclusion problematical.

       Skeptics would argue that whether the enslavement was 400, 430 or 80 to 144 years as some scholars believe, it makes no sense whatsoever for such enslavement and suffering to have occurred to a people the Scriptures identify as the special chosen people of God.  Furthermore, since skeptics see no archeological evidence that this enslavement took place or the exodus occurred, skeptics see all this as fiction.    

The killing of the Levite Uzzah:

       Here we have what skeptics feel is a very bizarre account of God killing an innocent man.  Uzzah tried to keep the ark of the covenant from falling off a cart that was being pulled by oxen who apparently stumbled. It is reported that God’s anger burned against Uzzah because of “his irreverent act” (2^nd Samuel 6:7, 1^st Chronicles 13:10) and God killed him.

       Skeptics see this episode as revealing a God that is impetuous and rash in His behavior. The act of Uzzah is seen as an instinctive reaction to save the ark from possible damage. Uzzah’s reaction is seen as reflexive and aimed only at protecting the ark.  To be punished with death for such an instinctive and good intentioned act is seen by skeptics as reprehensible. It is seen as a childish act reminiscent of the behavior seen in the pagan gods of antiquity.     

       Christians explain that God had explicitly instructed that the ark be equipped with poles and carried on the shoulders of the Levites (Exodus 25:14-15, Deuteronomy 10:8, 1^st Chronicles 15:2 and 15).  In Numbers 7:9, we read that carts were not to be used to carry the ark.  It is pointed out that holy things were not to be touched by humans (Numbers 4:15) and the ark was one of those holy things.

       Hebrews 9:2-4: A tabernacle was set up. In its first room were the lampstand and the table with its consecrated bread; this was called the Holy Place. Behind the second curtain was a room called the Most Holy Place, which had the golden altar of incense and the gold-covered ark of the covenant. This ark contained the gold jar of manna, Aaron’s staff that had budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant.

       Because of the explicit instruction as to how the ark was to be handled and because it was a holy object, it is believed God was justified in doing what he did.  Not only was the ark not to be touched, it wasn’t supposed to be carried on a cart.   

       Skeptics respond that this action of God killing Uzzah is contradictory to how He is characterized in Scripture. Psalm 145:8 records that “The LORD (YHWH) is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and rich in love.”  Skeptics conclude that if God was truly gracious, compassionate and slow to anger, He would not have punished with death a man who was doing nothing more than instinctively trying to limit the damage that might have occurred due to the oxen stumbling. Even David appears to have recognized this reaction of God was over the top. In is recorded in 2^nd Samuel 6:8 that “David was angry because the LORD’s wrath had broken out against Uzzah, and to this day that place is called Perez Uzzah” (to burst out against Uzzah).

       Some Christian teachers have concluded that David wasn’t angry with God but angry with himself and/or those responsible for allowing the ark to be carried on a cart which he knew was contrary to God’s command. David is believed here to be taking personal responsibility for what happened to Uzzah. 

       Skeptics see this as irrelevant as the main problem here is the seeming insensitivity of God to the circumstances of the situation and what is therefore believed to be reckless behavior on the part of the God of Israel. Skeptics view this episode as another example of the God of the Bible being no different than the pagan gods of antiquity and since they didn’t really exist, neither does the Biblical God exist or if it should be that He does exist, He is a malevolent God.   

David takes a census:

       In 1^st Chronicles 21:1 it is recorded that “Satan rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel.”  David commanded his army commander Joab to do the census. Joab was against doing this but was overruled by David. In verse seven we read, “This command was also evil in the sight of God; so he punished Israel.” David comes to recognize he has sinned by taking this census. Verse eight records that “David said to God, “I have sinned greatly by doing this. Now, I beg you, take away the guilt of your servant. I have done a very foolish thing.”

       It is then recorded that God gives David three options of punishment for doing what he did and asks David to choose one of the options. The options are either three years of famine, three months of being swept away by David’s enemies or three days of a plague in the land of Israel. David responds by saying to Gad, “I am in deep distress. Let me fall into the hands of the LORD, for his mercy is very great; but do not let me fall into human hands.”

       It is then recorded that “the LORD sent a plague on Israel, and seventy thousand men of Israel fell dead. And God sent an angel to destroy Jerusalem. But as the angel was doing so, the LORD saw it and relented concerning the disaster and said to the angel who was destroying the people, “Enough! Withdraw your hand.”

       In verse 17 it is recorded that “David said to God, “Was it not I who ordered the fighting men to be counted? I, the shepherd, have sinned and done wrong. These are but sheep. What have they done? LORD my God, let your hand fall on me and my family, but do not let this plague remain on your people.”

       Skeptics see David expressing reasonableness regarding this issue and clearly expressing more common sense and compassion than God.  David clearly sees that it is he that should be punished and not the people. Skeptics see David as acting righteously in this matter while God is seen acting as a fool.

       This same account is recorded in 2^nd Samuel 24 with a few differences. Here it is said that “the anger of the LORD burned against Israel, and he incited David.”  Rather than Satan inciting David, we here have the LORD (YHWH) inciting David. In the 1^st Chronicles account, we have Joab reporting there were one million one hundred thousand men who could handle a sword, including four hundred and seventy thousand in Judah.  In the 2^nd Samuel account, we have Joab reporting there were in Israel eight hundred thousand able-bodied men who could handle a sword, and in Judah five hundred thousand. Here we see one of the many number’s discrepancies in Scripture (See “The Numbers Game” at http://theologicalperspectives.com/scriptural-reliability-part-four)

       Skeptics find this event in the life of David and the people of Israel an absolute absurdity. First of all, there is nothing in Scripture that tells us why David taking a census was a sin. Skeptics point out that God had ordered Moses to take a census of Israel to determine who of those twenty years old or more would be able to serve in the army of Israel (Numbers 26:2). 

       Be that as it may, David came to see what he did as a sin and repented of it before God. Rather than God being merciful and forgiving David, he sets out to punish him by offering three options. David leaves it to God to choose the option and God seeming arbitrarily chooses to bring a plague upon the people wherein 70,000 were killed. David rightly recognizes it was his fault that the census was taken and implores God not to allow the plague to continue on the people.  

       So here we have the God of Israel either directly or indirectly through Satan enticing David to do a census which God apparently saw as sinful. So, we see God enticing David to sin. When David recognizes his sin and repents of it, God proceeds to punish, not David, but the people for something David himself clearly acknowledges was his doing and his doing alone. 

       Skeptics ask, what kind of God is this. The Hebrew Scriptures characterize this God as good, loving, compassionate and merciful and then he is seen as pulling off a stunt like this.  Rather than demonstrating David’s portrayal of God as “his mercy is very great,” we see this God as being anything but merciful to David, let alone the people of Israel.  Rather than forgiving David upon his repentance and leaving it go at that, He instead brings a plague of punishment upon the people for something David and David alone was responsible for. Skeptics fine this troubling to say the least.  

       This author could not find any evidence-based explanation or defense offered by Christian apologists as to what was going on here or how the behavior of God can be justified toward David and Israel in this recorded episode.  All that can be said is that it appears to be an unusual event which probably involved dynamics that are not identified in Scripture which if they were, would provide us with a better understanding of what happened here. Skeptics see this as an argument from silence and therefore of little to no value.

       Skeptics point out that when this account is taken at face value and looked at from our human perspectives as to what is ethical and non-ethical behavior, this account raises serious questions about the behavior of the Biblical God. Some skeptics feel that because of the bizarre nature of this episode, this is evidence that the Biblical God is a manufactured God no different than is true of the many pagan gods of antiquity.  The pagan gods are often seen as doing strange things. 

A lion kills the prophet: 

1^st Kings 13:1-34:  

       In this chapter is the account of an unnamed prophet who traveled from Judah to Bethel to inform Jeroboam, the king of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, that he would in the future be replaced by a man named Josiah who will cleanse Israel of pagan religion. Jeroboam invites the prophet to his home for dinner.  The prophet says that he was commanded by the word of the LORD (YHWH) to not eat bread or drink water and to return to Judah a different way from that which he came. So off he goes back to Judah a different way from the way he came.

        The narrative goes on to tell of an old prophet who lived in Bethel who when he heard about the unnamed prophet traveling back to Judah and found out what way he was going, he took out after him and when he found him, he invited the prophet for dinner. The Judah prophet tells the Bethel prophet basically the same thing he told Jeroboam which was that he was told by the LORD that he could not eat or drink anything and had to return to Judah a different way from the way he came.

       The prophet from Bethel tells the prophet from Judah that he also was a prophet and he had been told by an angel of the LORD to bring the prophet from Judah to his house for dinner. The Judah prophet complied and went to the Bethel prophet’s house for dinner. However, the narrative tells us the Bethel prophet lied about the angel talking to him.  Here is where it gets really bizarre.

       1^st Kings 13:20-21: While they were sitting at the table, the word of the LORD came to the old prophet who had brought him back. He cried out to the man of God who had come from Judah, “This is what the LORD says: ‘You have defied the word of the LORD and have not kept the command the LORD your God gave you. You came back and ate bread and drank water in the place where he told you not to eat or drink. Therefore, your body will not be buried in the tomb of your ancestors.”

       After dinner, the prophet from Judah then resumes his journey back to Judah only to be met by a lion who kills him.  His body is left lying on the road with both the donkey he was riding and the lion standing beside it.  Upon finding out about what had happened to the Judah prophet, the Bethel prophet says this:

       1^st Kings 13:26: When the prophet who had brought him back from his journey heard of it, he said, “It is the man of God who defied the word of the LORD. The LORD has given him over to the lion, which has mauled him and killed him, as the word of the LORD had warned him.”

       The Bethel prophet then travels to where the Judah prophet is lying in the road and it is recorded that the donkey and the lion are still standing beside the body and that the lion had neither eaten the body nor mauled the donkey. It is then recorded that the Bethel prophet picks up the body of the Judah prophet, lays it on his donkey, and brings it back to his own city to mourn for him and bury him in his own tomb. After burying him he says to his sons  

       1^st Kings 13: 31-32: “When I die, bury me in the grave where the man of God is buried; lay my bones beside his bones. For the message he declared by the word of the LORD against the altar in Bethel and against all the shrines on the high places in the towns of Samaria will certainly come true.”

       Skeptics see this episode as another example of an evil God doing evil things. The Judah prophet was doing what God told him to do but was deceived by the Bethel prophet. Rather than taking the deception into account in judging the behavior of the Judah prophet, God lashes out at him and has him killed by a lion. Then we have the bizarre behavior of the lion who does not eat his prey and apparently does not interfere with the Bethel prophet removing the body of the Judah prophet.  Skeptics see this whole episode as being improbable and an example of what they believe are numerous fictious stories found in the Biblical Scriptures.    

       Christians see this story as demonstrating the sovereignty and authority of God in demanding absolute obedience to His commands and punishment for failure to be obedient to His commands.  Christians suggest that the Judah prophet should have verified the words of the Bethel prophet about an angel appearing to him. The fact that he didn’t, resulted in his behaving contrary to the command of God and God rightly judged him for it.  The odd behavior of the lion is seen as facilitated by God so that the Judah prophet would have a proper burial, a thing very important in Jewish culture.

The mauling of forty-two boys:  

       2^nd Kings 2:23-24: Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the LORD. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.

       While the mauling of the boys is not directly attributed to God, it is apparent that God carried out the facilitation of the curse as the curse is seen as being done in the name of the LORD (YHWH). Skeptics see this as another of example of unjustified cruelty on the part of God. 

       Some Christian apologists have written that the Hebrew word rendered “boys” actually means adult men. This doesn’t appear to be the case as the Hebrew in this passage speaks of these being little boys. The Hebrew adjective qatan is used which means “small and young.” The ESV renders the passage “small boys.” The NET renders it “young boys.” The KJV renders it “little children.”  The ASV renders it “young lads.”  It should be apparent that translators understand that small children is what is intended here. 

       Skeptics argue that even if these were adult men, it still is absurd to have bears maul them because they mocked somebody. The punishment doesn’t fit the crime. Christians will say they were mocking a prophet of God and this was unacceptable before God as it is seen as tantamount to mocking God. Therefore, their punishment was justified. Some teach that these boys were seen as a threat to the safety of Elisha and the bears attacking them is seen as God protecting Elisha from harm. Both of these apologetic perspectives are speculative. Again, as is the case with the events discussed above, Christians argue that there may have been undisclosed dynamics that if known, would alter the way we view this and other recorded Biblical events that on the surface appear strange to our thinking.  

       Skeptics respond that we can only make evaluations based on the information provided and the information provided makes the Biblical God often look like anything but the good, compassionate and merciful God He is purported to be.  Skeptics contend that even if it should be true that we can't evaluate or judge the behavior of the Biblical God based on human standards as Christians believe, it should be clear that the recorded behavior of the Biblical God is often bizarre to say the least and therefore should raise questions about the legitimacy of this God. 

Samson and his wife:

       In Judges, chapter 14, is the bizarre account of events related to Samson and his wife. Samson marries a Philistine woman. He then holds a seven-day feast to celebrate his marriage and is given thirty men by his wife to be his companions in holding the feast. Samson tells the men a riddle and tells them that if they can figure it out, they will receive thirty linen garments and thirty sets of clothes from Samson. If they can’t figure out the riddle, they must give Samson thirty linen garments and thirty sets of clothes.

       The men can’t figure out the riddle so they persuade Samson’s wife to learn the meaning of the riddle from Samson and pass the answer along to them.  She learns the meaning of the riddle from Samson and passes the information on to the thirty men. The men tell Samson the meaning and this obligates Sampson to provide what was promised to them.

       Samson comes to realize his wife had revealed the meaning of the riddle to the men. In order to fulfill the promise to give thirty linen garments and thirty sets of clothes to the men who solved the riddle, we see the following:

       Judges 14:19-20: Then the Spirit of the LORD came powerfully upon him (Samson). He went down to Ashkelon, struck down thirty of their men, stripped them of everything and gave their clothes to those who had explained the riddle. Burning with anger, he returned to his father’s home.  And Samson’s wife was given to one of his companions who had attended him at the feast.

       Skeptics see this story as completely off the wall. If God wasn’t involved, the story could be simply seen as an oddball occurrence. However, Samson is seen as doing what he did to the men of Ashkelon as being done through the power of the Spirit of the LORD (YHWH). This presumes Samson had the approval of YHWH to do what he did.

       So, in order to fulfill his obligation to the men who solved the riddle, Samson, through help received from God, strikes (Hebrew: way·yaḵ = to kill) down thirty other men, robs them of their clothing and gives the cloths to the men who solved the riddle.  He then gives his wife away, supposedly because she had leaked the meaning of the riddle to the thirty companions.    

       Skeptics see Samson’s use of the Spirit of God to kill thirty men to fulfill an obligation to a different set of thirty men as absolutely ludicrous. They see this interaction between God and Samson as representative of the kind of interactions seen between pagan peoples and their gods. Since the pagan gods don’t really exist, it is concluded the Biblical God doesn’t really exist either but is a creation of the mind of men as is true of the many other gods of human history. Skeptics generally consider stories such as these to have nothing to do with the existence of an actual god.  Christian apologists don’t have much to say about this event. 

Judges 19-21:

       In these chapters is the story of a Levite whose concubine/wife was raped by the men in a town of the area of Israel occupied by the tribe of Benjamen. The woman died and her husband cut her dead body into twelve pieces and sent the pieces to the other tribes of Israel. The tribes of Israel then make war with the Benjamites and multiple thousands were killed on both sides of the battle.  After the war was over, the other tribes allowed the remaining Benjamite men to virtually abduct some of the women of the other tribes to take them as wives so that the tribe of Benjamen could begin to be restored (Judges 21:21).

       While this story is bizarre in and of itself, what is more troublesome is that YHWH is seen as being involved in sanctioning the war against the Benjamites (Judges 20:1, 18, 23,) and bringing about their destruction (verse 28).

       Judges 20:28: The LORD (YHWH) defeated Benjamin before Israel, and on that day the Israelites struck down 25,100 Benjamites, all armed with swords.

       We then see the people of the other tribes grieving for Benjamin, “because the LORD had made a gap in the tribes of Israel” (Judges 21:15).

       Skeptics ask why God would sanction the destruction of Benjamites in general rather than simply have the men who committed the rape punished. This is seen by skeptics as another example of God’s indiscriminate punishment where collateral damage is ignored and people not involved in the reason for the punishment are made to suffer. 

God wanting to kill Moses:      

       In Exodus chapter 3 and 4 is the account of God speaking to Moses out of the burning bush. God instructs Moses as to what he is going to do through Moses to free the Israelites from Egyptian bondage. Exodus 4 shows Moses with his wife Zipporah leaving their town of Midian and traveling to Egypt. On the way they make a stop and we read this:

       Exodus 4:24: At a lodging place on the way, the LORD met Moses and was about to kill him. 

       The context of Exodus 4 indicates that God was angry with Moses because he had failed to circumcise his son. No other details are given as to the dynamics involved. Circumcism had been mandated for all male Israelites and non-Israelites who joined the community of Israel. It was the sign of a covenantal relationship with God. Failure to be circumcised had drastic consequences.

       Genesis 17:14: Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”  

       The Hebrew word rendered “kill” in 4:24 means exactly that. It is found 839 times in the OT and clearly means to be put to death. The Hebrew words for “cut off” in 17:14 appears 289 times in the OT and in most cases appears to mean to be separated.

       Christian apologists have reasoned that Moses’ non-Israelite wife Zipporah was against circumcism and Moses wasn’t taking charge and insisting that it be done. Since God had chosen Moses to be the one to deliver Israel, it was essential that Moses follow the procedure for establishing a covenantal relationship with God and circumcise his son. Failure to do so was an afront to God. Therefore, God is seen as being justified as to His response to this situation.

       Skeptics see God wanting to kill Moses for neglecting to have his son circumcised as being another example of the impetuous, hotheaded behavior of the Biblical God. Skeptics believe this could have been handled in a much more civil manner. God had just told Moses that he would be the one to bring Israel out from under Egyptian bondage and now he is ready to kill him over a matter that should have been resolved in a congenial way.  To threaten Moses with death over this issue is seen as absurd.    

The angry God of Mt. Sinai:

       In Exodus and Deuteronomy is the account of God giving the Law to Moses on top of Mt. Sinai.  Apparently, Moses was gone a long time from the camp of Israel located at the base of the mountain and the people talked Moses’ brother Aaron into making a golden calf which the people set before them and said, “These are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt” (Exodus 32:4).   God becomes aware of this and says the following to Moses.

       Exodus 32:7-10: Then the LORD said to Moses, “Go down, because your people, whom you brought up out of Egypt, have become corrupt. They have been quick to turn away from what I commanded them and have made themselves an idol cast in the shape of a calf. They have bowed down to it and sacrificed to it and have said, ‘These are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.’ “I have seen these people,” the LORD said to Moses, “and they are a stiff-necked people. Now leave me alone so that my anger may burn against them and that I may destroy them. Then I will make you into a great nation.”

       It is next recorded that Moses sought the favor of the LORD his God. He asks God why His anger should burn against His people whom He brought out of Egypt. He goes on to point out that if He should destroy Israel, the Egyptians will conclude it was for evil intent He brought them out of Egypt. Moses asks God to turn from His “fierce anger; relent and do not bring disaster on your people" (Exodus 32:12).   

       Moses goes on to remind God that He had sworn to Abraham, Isaac and Israel (Jacob) that He would make their descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and give them a land that will be their inheritance forever. It’s then recorded that “the LORD relented and did not bring on his people the disaster he had threatened” (verse 14).  

       Skeptics find this event as pure nonsense.  Here you have the supposed God of the universe becoming extremely angry and ready to destroy the people He just brought out of Egyptian slavery and start something new through Moses. Moses is seen as the more level headed one of the two and talks the God of the universe our of bringing this disaster upon the people.  Moses points out how bad this would look to the Egyptians and how He would be going back on His word to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. God is seen as being talked out of bringing the disaster He was threatening.

       Moses is seen as talking the God of the universe out of something He wanted to do and doing so by pointing out to this God the consequences of He doing what He threatened to do.  Skeptics point out that surely if this was the God of the universe being addressed, you would think this God, who is believed to be omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent, would know the consequences of His actions without having to be told by a human. You would think He would have better control of His emotions. Skeptics see this as a vivid example of the anthropomorphization of God which is the attribution of human traits to a non-human entity. Pagans were seen as doing this all the time in manufacturing gods of their own making having human qualities.

       What the skeptic sees as even more bizarre is what happened next. After Moses is seen as destroying the calf, he is seen as determining who among the people is for the LORD and who is not. Then, at the command of God, Moses orders those who are for the LORD to “go back and forth through the camp from one end to the other, each killing his brother and friend and neighbor” (verse 27). This results in about 3000 people being killed.

       Moses is then seen as asking God to forgive the people for making the golden calf and if God won’t forgive them Moses asks that he be blotted out of the book God has written.  God replies that, “Whoever has sinned against me I will blot out of my book.” This chapter ends with “And the LORD struck the people with a plague because of what they did with the calf Aaron had made.”  Skeptics see this whole episode as highly indicative of the God of the Israelites being a man-made God.  This god is seen as being capable of emotional outbursts and making unwise decisions just as humans do. Skeptics see this god as not worthy of being seen as an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent God of the universe.    

       Overall, skeptics see the golden calf incident as another example of the impetuous, rash and impulsive nature of the Biblical God should He really exist. They point out that this dispels the notion that this God is infallible which, as discussed above, means He can’t make a mistake or change His mind. Skeptics also point out that this episode with Moses contradicts Scriptural statements that picture the Biblical God as incapable of changing His mind (See Numbers 23:19, 1^st Samuel 15:29).

       Christians see God changing his mind as demonstrating His mercy, compassion and reasonableness in resolving issues. In Numbers 23 and 1^st Samuel 15, where it is said God does not change His mine, it is believed this pertains to the particular circumstances spelled out in the context where these statements are found and not that this defines an absolute trait of God. There are other examples of God changing his mind in Scripture. He determined to destroy Nineveh but decided not to do so when the people repented (See book of Jonah). There are other examples where upon the repentance of the people, God relented and did not bring the judgement He had determined to bring.      

The Numbers 11 incident: 

       In Numbers 11:1, we read “Now the people complained about their hardships in the hearing of the LORD, and when he heard them, his anger was aroused. Then fire from the LORD burned among them and consumed some of the outskirts of the camp.”  It is then recorded that the people cried out to Moses about this fire and Moses prayed to the LORD and the fire died down. It is then record that the Israelites started to complain about having no meat to eat.  It is recorded that “The LORD became exceedingly angry, and Moses was troubled” (Verse 10). Then we read this:

       Numbers 11:18-20: Tell the people: ‘Consecrate yourselves in preparation for tomorrow, when you will eat meat. The LORD heard you when you wailed, “If only we had meat to eat! We were better off in Egypt!” Now the LORD will give you meat, and you will eat it. You will not eat it for just one day, or two days, or five, ten or twenty days, but for a whole month—until it comes out of your nostrils and you loathe it—because you have rejected the LORD, who is among you, and have wailed before him, saying, “Why did we ever leave Egypt?” ’ ”

       What we see next is that in His continuing anger, God gives them quail to eat in such abundance that they had a hard time dealing with it. Then we read this:

       Numbers 11:33: But while the meat was still between their teeth and before it could be consumed, the anger of the LORD burned against the people, and he struck them with a severe plague.

       Skeptics see this whole episode as bizarre behavior on the part of the God of Israel. Here you have Israelites complaining about the conditions they were living under and instead of doing what is necessary to make things more accommodating for the people, God becomes angry with them and acts out His anger by first creating fire among them with it only being assuaged when Moses intercedes on behalf of the people. Then we see God continuing to act out his angry at the people by giving them so much quail that it becomes loathsome to them. 

       If this isn’t enough, He strikes them with a plague. Skeptics see the god depicted here as vindictive and emotionally out of control. This god is seen as acting like an unruly child acting out his emotions because of not getting his way. Skeptics find it improbable that this is the God responsible for the creation and maintenance of the universe. Skeptics see the god depicted here as being in the image of man as this is the way man can and at times does act.  

The Midianite destruction:     

       In Numbers 31 is the story of God commanding Israel to destroy the Midianites. This is seen as carrying “out the LORD’s (YHWH’s) vengeance on them” (Numbers 31:3). The Israelite military is seen as burning all the towns where the Midianites had settled, as well as all their camps. They are seen as killing every man but taking captive the Midianite women and children and taking all the Midianite herds, flocks and goods as plunder. The plunder is divided among the soldiers and the rest of the community of Israel

       When the military returned after the slaughter of the Midianite men, Moses was displeased that they had not killed the women and boys. So, he orders that all the boys. and every woman who has slept with a man be killed but they could save for themselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

       According to Numbers 31:35, thirty-two thousand persons were captured and these persons were all women who had not known a man intimately. Of this number of virgins, half were given to the soldiers who fought in the battle, and half were given to the rest of the people of Israel. Of the 16,000 given to the soldiers, 32 were given to Eleazar the priest as a tribute to the Lord. Of the 16,000 given to the rest of Israel, 320 were given to the Levites, who maintained the tabernacle. It is apparent that these 32,000 virgin girls were either made servants or taken as wives. Deuteronomy 21:10-14 defines the process by which an Israelite man could marry a female prisoner of war.

       Why the vengeance against the Midianites?

       Numbers 25:16-18: The LORD said to Moses, “Treat the Midianites as enemies and kill them. They treated you as enemies when they deceived you in the Peor incident involving their sister Kozbi, the daughter of a Midianite leader, the woman who was killed when the plague came as a result of that incident.”

       What led up to the incident at Peor that got God so angry against the Midianites? The story begins in Numbers 22.  A Moabite named Balak (apparently the king of Moab) sends officials to the prophet/seer Balaam to hire him to curse Israel for which he would receive reward from Balak. YHWH God is seen as speaking to Balaam and advising him not to curse Israel so Balaam refused to curse Israel.

       Not to be deterred, Balak sends higher ranked officials to Balaam to offer a greater reward to Balaam if he would curse Israel. Balaam again inquired of the LORD what he should do and the LORD advises him to go with the men Balak had sent (22:20).  Then it is recorded that:

       Numbers 22: 21-22: Balaam got up in the morning, saddled his donkey and went with the Moabite officials. But God was very angry when he went, and the angel of the LORD stood in the road to oppose him. Balaam was riding on his donkey, and his two servants were with him.

       So here we have God telling Balaam to go with the Moabite officials but then becoming angry with him when he did. There is no explanation as to why God became angry with Balaam for doing something God told him to do.  We then have the strange story of the angel preventing Balaam’s donkey from going forward and the donkey talking to Balaam. Then the angel is seen talking to Balaam and telling him to go with the men, but speak only what the angel tells him to speak. So, Balaam goes with Balak’s officials to see Balak.

       In Numbers 23-24 we see Balaam refusing to curse Israel and instead blesses Israel. In Numbers 25:1, it is recorded that while Israel was staying in Shittim, the men began to indulge in sexual immorality with Moabite women. These women invited them to the sacrifices to their gods and the people ate the sacrificial meal and bowed down before these gods. It’s then reported that Israel yoked themselves to the Baal of Peor (a pagan deity) and this angered The LORD greatly.  God is seen as judging Israel for this sin with a plague that killed 24,000 people.

       Numbers 25:4-5: The LORD said to Moses, “Take all the leaders of these people, kill them and expose them in broad daylight before the LORD, so that the LORD’s fierce anger may turn away from Israel.” So Moses said to Israel’s judges, “Each of you must put to death those of your people who have yoked themselves to the Baal of Peor.” Verse 9: those who died in the plague numbered 24,000.

       In Numbers 25:6-8, an Israelite man brings into the camp a Midianite woman right before the eyes of Moses and the whole assembly of Israel. When a relative of Aaron the priest saw this, he drove a spear into both of the them.  It is then reported that the plague against the Israelites was stopped.

       Here is where skeptics see a big problem with this account. Christian apologists argue that the reason God was so angry with the Midianites is because the Midianites led the Israelites to worship the Baal of Peor and engage in sexual immorality. However, the men of Israel, while staying in Shittim, are seen as indulging in sexual immorality with Moabite women (Numbers 25:1), not Midianite women.

       Numbers 25:1: While Israel was staying in Shittim, the men began to indulge in sexual immorality with Moabite women.

       The only mention of Midianite involvement is the single woman in the passage Numbers 25:16-18, quoted above. Skeptics ask why the Midianites are being punished when it is the Moabites who appear responsible for Israel going astray. There is no mention of the Moabites being punished. Yet it is Balak, King of Moab and the Moabites who are seen as the primary adversary of Israel in Numbers 22-31. 

       In Numbers 31:16, it is recorded that the woman spared by the soldiers in the war with the Midianites were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the LORD in the Peor incident. 

       Numbers 31:16: “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the LORD in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck the LORD’s people.

       Here Balaam is identified as being responsible for leading the Israelites astray, apparently through the virgin Midianite women spared by the soldiers. This seems to contradict what is said about Moabite women leading Israel astray (Numbers 25:1).

       Balaam is seen as being killed in the war with the Midianites (31:8).  Yet Balaam was not a Midianite or a Moabite. He was not a prophet of Israel. Numbers 23:7 identifies him as an Aramean. The text states that King Balak of Moab brought Balaam from Aram, who was at Pethor, near the Euphrates River, which is seen as his native land. (Numbers 22:5). Pethor is generally believed to be the ancient Aramean city of Pitru, located in what is today northern Syria.  It appears Balaam was some kind of independent seer who was able to communicate with the God of Israel

       Numbers 31:16 is the only direct reference to Balaam’s culpability in the matter of the Israelites being led into idolatry and sexual immorality. Elsewhere, Balaam is seen as not able or not willing to go against the will of YHWH.  He is actually seen as being loyal to the God of Israel. For a comprehensive discussion of Balaam, go to: https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/hebrew-bible/balaam-part-one/

       Deuteronomy 23:4 mentions Balak trying to hire Balaam to curse Israel. Micah 6:5 mentioned Balak plotting against Israel and that Balaam did not cooperate with him. Joshua 13:22 records that Balaam practiced divination and was put to the sword. In Joshua 24:9-10, Joshua is quoting God telling the Israelites of how when Balak prepared to fight against Israel, he sent for Balaam to put a curse on Israel but God would not listen to Balaam, so Balaam blessed Israel and God delivered Israel out of his hand. Nehemiah 13:2 records similar narrative. 

       These passages suggest that Balaam was trying to convince God to curse Israel but God resisted Him and turned the curses into blessings. Christian apologists believe this explains what’s said about Balaam in Numbers 31:16 and why God became angry with him when he set out to meet Balak. It is believed that God telling Balaam to go to Balak is seen as a test of Balaam’s true intentions.

       The Dead Sea Scrolls mention Balaam in two non-biblical texts where he is listed among a list of false prophets who arose in ancient Israel. This is also how he is characterized in other Jewish texts, including the Targum and the works of Philo of Alexandria. He is seen as a false prophet in commentaries and writings of the early Church Fathers, such as Origin and Augustine.

       In both Jude 11 and 2nd Peter 2:15, sinful people are compared to Balaam who it is said “loved the wages of doing wrong.”  These texts speak of Balaam seeking a fee for cursing Israel.  Revelation 2:14 suggests that the church in Pergamum engaged in idolatry and sexual sin by holding to the teachings of Balaam. However, while there is OT narrative that associates Balaam with the idolatry and sexually immorality committed by the Israelites, Balaam is seen as rejecting Balik’s offers of reward and insisting on only speaking the words that God gives him.

       Skeptics, as well as some Biblical scholars, point out that these NT writers, as well as writers of extra Biblical narrative as cited above, appear to be putting a spin on the behavior of Balaam that is not clearly evident from or supported by the OT narrative.  It is believed that either the writers of this extra-canonical and NT narrative had access to additional material about Balaam, or they were drawing conclusions based on tradition and not on solid OT evidence as to Balaam’s behavior.    

       The fact that Balaam is seen in the NT and extra Biblical literature as a false prophet and yet in the OT is seen as having dialog with the God of Israel and following His instructions, is seen as contradictory.  Skeptics ask why would this non-Israelite prophet/seer have such access to the Israelite God and be obedient to His will and yet be considered a false prophet? Skeptics question from where did Balaam obtain the ability to communicate with the God of Israel seeing that he doesn't appear to be a prophet of YHWH?  Skeptics also see the talking donkey as an improbable event. Then there’s the matter of the 32,000 virgins being distributed among the soldiers, priests and others in the community of Israel.

       It is asked why 32 virgins were given to Eleazar the priest as a tribute to the Lord. In what manner were these 32 virgins being used as a tribute to the LORD.  Why were the Levites given 320 virgins?  Was it to help maintain the tabernacle or was it for nefarious purposes? It is pointed out that it was common in pagan religions to have temple prostitutes. Skeptics ask if this is what was going on here. It is asked what happened to the remaining virgins who were distributed among the soldiers and the Israelite community in general?  Skeptics see the involvement of YHWH in the account of Balaam, Balak and the destruction of the Midianites as strange to say the least.

Instructional contradiction:        

       Skeptics point out that the Biblical Scriptures are filled with instruction and admonition to love one another. Jesus said that we are to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us (Matthew 5:44). Yet the disposition we humans are born with does not lend itself to our behaving in this manner. Jesus is asking humans to behave contrary to the nature we were born with. The history of  humanity clearly shows the failure of Jesus' instruction.

       In Luke chapter 6, Jesus says we are to love our enemies and do good to those who hate us. We are to bless those who curse us and pray for those who mistreat us. If someone slaps us on one cheek, we are to turn to them the other also. If someone takes our coat we should give them our shirt also. Jesus instructs that we should give to everyone who asks of us and if anyone takes what belongs to us, we are not to demand it back. Jesus goes on to say we are to do to others as we would have them do to us.

       Then, Jesus says something that skeptics point to as totally contradictory to the kind of behavior we see of God as discussed above. Jesus instructs that if we do the things as described in Luke 6, our reward “will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked.” Jesus concludes His remarks by saying, “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful” (Luke 6:35-36).

       Skeptics find what Jesus said about the nature of the Father to be absolutely contradictory to the recorded behavior of the Biblical God (the Father) as seen in the above narrative. Jesus telling us to be like the Most High (the Father) who He identifies as being kind and merciful to the ungrateful and the wicked, is seen as a total disconnect with what we see in Scripture as to the behavior of the Biblical God.

       It is asked how the Most High God was kind and merciful to the ungrateful and wicked humans he killed in the Noachian flood and Sodom and Gomorrah. How did this God demonstrated kindness and mercy to the ungrateful and wicked Israelites when He wanted to kill them all over the golden calf incident? It is asked how this God showed kindness and mercy to the peoples that occupied the Promised Land when He facilitated the killing of men, women, children and infants. If indeed God was behind the AD 70 destruction of the temple, the city of Jerusalem and the tens of thousands of Jews who were killed, it is asked where was God's kindness and mercy to the ungrateful and wicked people of that generation? 

       In view of the recorded events of God’s actual treatment of those considered ungrateful and wicked, Skeptics see Jesus describing the Most High as being kind and merciful to the ungrateful and wicked to be an absolute absurdity, to be totally out of touch with reality.      

Supernatural Involvement:

       Skeptics are very skeptical about the validity of supernatural involvement in Old Testament history in general. While they don’t necessarily question the recorded events as having occurred, they do question the involvement of a deity in these events. Skeptics see little difference between the Israelites and the non-Israelites of Biblical history as to their belief in the involvement of deity in human affairs. The pagans saw the involvement of their multiple deities in much of what happened in their lives. Skeptics believe the monotheistic Israelites saw their one deity in much the same way and since the pagan deities didn’t really exist, it is concluded the deity of Israel didn’t exist either.   

       In the OT, punishments inflicted on Israel and other nations are often depicted by the prophets as judgements by God brought upon these nations because of sin. Some argue that the destruction of the temple and the city of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD 70 was punishment from God upon the Jews for their unrighteous behavior and failure to recognize Jesus as the Messiah.  It is believed the teachings of Jesus and the apostles reflect this perspective (See:“When Does Christ Return” for an exposé of this perspective).

       Skeptics argue that the Biblically recorded invasions of the north and south kingdoms of Israel by the Assyrian and Babylonian armies were not God directed judgements upon Israel as depicted in the OT Scriptures. These were simply the normal activity of powerful nations expanding their territory, a phenomenon common throughout human history. The prophets attributing these invasions to God's judgement for sin is seen as an attempt to provide rationale for what happened by attributing what happened to the involvement of a supernatural power when in reality no such supernatural power is involved. All recorded conflicts between nations are seen as geo-political forces at work and nothing more than that.

       The destruction the Jews experienced in AD 70 is seen as simply the natural result of their rebellion against Rome and not as a punishment brought upon them by God. The first century historian Josephus records that there was much infighting among the Jews themselves which led to much death and destruction. This infighting and its consequences are seen as the natural result of political differences and competitions extant at the time and not the result of Divine judgement.  Skeptics see the Roman destruction of Jerusalem not as a divinely generated judgement against the Jews but as Rome responding to a rebellion/insurrection of a province under their control, something that has been done repeatedly throughout history. 

       It is questioned why a supposed omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient and immutable creator God would be so directly involved with the affairs of puny man (comparatively speaking). The writers of OT Scripture speak of God as a transcendent Bring having power and creative ability beyond any human capacity to understand or comprehend. It is questioned why a Being of this magnitude would be involved in the kind of menial interactions with human as seen in the foregoing examples. Why would this God be involved in the mauling of forty-two boys, the killing of the Levite Uzzah, the killing of a prophet by a lion and the Sampson event.  Why would a being that is touted as the creator and sustainer of the universe be involved in ordering the killing of men, women and children and being involved in numerous wars and other types of havoc seen throughout the OT narrative?   

       Skeptics question that if God was so involved in human affairs as recorded in the OT, why isn’t that the case today?  Why hasn’t this been the case for the past 2000 years. It is asked where is this God who is seen in OT history as actively involved in human affairs. How come we don’t see Him active in human affairs today or in recent history?  While many Christians believe God is active in their lives, skeptics see this belief as illusionary.  

       As discussed in Part One of this series, not all skeptics are atheists or agnostics. Some are deists/theists who believe in a higher power being responsible for the existence of the universe and life forms. However, this power is not seen as being directly involved in the process of creation or maintenance of such creation. Deists believe a supernatural power has set in motion processes that have brought about the physical universe and life forms and allows these processes to do their thing. This being the case, this power (call it deity if you will) is not and never has been involved in the affairs of the human race. Skeptics see man’s belief that deity is involved in human affairs as illusionary. 

       The Biblical accounts of divine involvement in human affairs where human passions, emotions and behaviors are seen as being expressed by a divine Being is seen by skeptics as nothing more than the anthropomorphization of God.  Anthropomorphization is the act of attributing human characteristics, emotions, passions and behaviors to non-human entities. This is seen as historically common in pagan religious systems. Skeptics see this as being the same in the Judeo/Christian religious system. Skeptics see God being made in the image of man and then imagined to be an outside force in the affairs of man. This is seen as no different than what is evident in pagan religion.

       Christians respond by pointing out that NT personalities from Jesus on down quote from the OT and are seen as believing in the reality of the OT God as a divine Being.  Jesus, Paul, Peter, James and John all clearly see the OT God as the one true God and as being active in the affairs of mankind as seen throughout both OT and NT history.  If this God is anthropomorphic as claimed by skeptics, these NT personalities were all relating to a god that didn’t really exist. In other words, they were all deceived, including Jesus, who claimed to be the son of this God.

       Skeptics believe this is exactly the case.  They believe the NT personalities were steeped in OT history and theology which they believed was divinely connected when in reality, as skeptics see it, it was not divinely connected but only imagined to be so as seen in pagan religion. Skeptics believe the NT personalities took OT history and built upon it with the result being the Christian theological system as seen in the NT narrative. Skeptics believe the Judeo/Christian religious system is a man-made system based on man generated beliefs.  This is seen as no different from how all other religious systems extant throughout human history have come to be.

       In Part Four of this series, I will deal with the issue of doctrinal disillusionment. 

       PART FOUR  

 

SKEPTICISM

          AND

    CHRISTIANITY

    NAVIGATION

     PART ONE

The problem of evil and the existence of God

The nature of evil

Behavioral evil

The freewill argument

Does God create evil?

The necessity of evil

Natural disasters 

The after life

The Christian position

The skeptic position

Skeptic response to the freewill argument

Skeptic response to the sovereignty argument

      The deist               alternative                                PART TWO

Morality and the existence of God

Moral relativity/situation ethics

Moral behavioral consistency

Objective right and wrong

Moral Law and Divine Purpose

Summary

PART THREE

Behavior of the Biblical God

The Noachian flood

Sodom and Gomorrah

Killing of the first born of Egypt

The killing of the Levite Uzzah

David takes a census

A lion kills the prophet

The mauling of forty-two boys

Samson and his wife

Judges 19-21

God wanting to kill Moses

The angry God of Mt. Sinai

The Numbers 11 incident 

The Midianite destruction

Instructional    contradiction   

Supernatural involvement

PART FOUR

Doctrinal Disillusionment

Overview of Christian belief

The skeptic     perspective   

 Diverse Christian Beliefs

The nature of God

After death theology

The return of Christ

  Kingdom of God

 Miscellaneous doctrinal differences

 Celebration of Christ's birth

Good Friday/Easter Sunday tradition

 Saturday or Sunday?

 Water baptism

 Scriptural integrity

Salvation theology

 The “unsaved” dead

Payment of the penalty for sin

Strange sayings of Jesus

Unanswered Prayer

A Christian  response 

 The skeptics last word

Conclusion