Opinion of Old Testamemt God?

[The Mikado]

It's not in the Hebrew Bible that you're going to find gruesome descriptions of unending torment of the dead in a lake of fire where the worm dieth not etc. It's not the "Old" Testament that has vivid and lengthy ramblings about people getting tortured for all eternity!

What happens to the followers of Korah, clear "sinners" by God's ethics in Numbers?

28 And Moses said, “This is how you shall know that the Lord has sent me to do all these works; it has not been of my own accord: 29 If these people die a natural death, or if a natural fate comes on them, then the Lord has not sent me. 30 But if the Lord creates something new, and the ground opens its mouth and swallows them up, with all that belongs to them, and they go down alive into Sheol, then you shall know that these men have despised the Lord.”

31 As soon as he finished speaking all these words, the ground under them was split apart. 32 The earth opened its mouth and swallowed them up, along with their households—everyone who belonged to Korah and all their goods. 33 So they with all that belonged to them went down alive into Sheol; the earth closed over them, and they perished from the midst of the assembly. 34 All Israel around them fled at their outcry, for they said, “The earth will swallow us too!” 35 And fire came out from the Lord and consumed the two hundred fifty men offering the incense.

They were sent directly to Sheol. A pit for the undead where they just...sit and wait. Like the rest of the dead. New Testament God would've dropped them straight into, well, Hell. Because Jesus loves talking about Hell, when eternal punishment of the dead is barely even a relevant concept in Judaism.

Why do you get all these grisly ends? Maybe because people need to die in horrible ways because there's not a promise they'll keep getting tormented afterwards. Jezebel getting her corpse eaten by dogs is all kinds of messed up, but II Kings needs to make it clear you get the point that Jezebel got what was coming to her without the automatic inference of "eternal pit of fire time!"

Seriously, this idea that God is more compassionate in the New Testament when it's all about eternal torture of any dead nonbeliever is really inaccurate. God never ever hints he's planning a divine punishment for those who don't believe in the Old Testament, just that he has a special covenant with increased upsides and downsides for the Children of Abraham. There wouldn't be laws for Righteous Gentiles and a non-believer described as an Annointed Messiah (Cyrus the Great, sharing that status only with King David himself) if God considered all non-believers in him doomed to eternal torment.

[Kingpoleon]

I'm not answering this poll because there should be no Christian focus on the distinction between the two books in terms of the God there and I agree with Al's take here.

Will say that overall, in my opinion, God as he's described across works of all three religions is pretty horrible. One example- that time when a bunch of children insulted Prophet Elisha by calling him bald and he + He summoned a bunch of bears to maul them all to death. Yeah.

It is likely that the term was used up until the age of thirty or forty. Beyond that, it is generally considered normative to “curse God and die.” The Book of Job is indeed foremost among theological texts on the subject, if you’re actually interested in it.

[America Needs R'hllor]

I'm not answering this poll because there should be no Christian focus on the distinction between the two books in terms of the God there and I agree with Al's take here.

Will say that overall, in my opinion, God as he's described across works of all three religions is pretty horrible. One example- that time when a bunch of children insulted Prophet Elisha by calling him bald and he + He summoned a bunch of bears to maul them all to death. Yeah.

It is likely that the term was used up until the age of thirty or forty. Beyond that, it is generally considered normative to “curse God and die.” The Book of Job is indeed foremost among theological texts on the subject, if you’re actually interested in it.

Most interpreters agree that Elisha did send bears to maul them to death. What's not agreed is whether it was him or God (I don't see how the former makes sense- curses in the bible only work if God wills it) and whether they meant that he's literally bald or that he stole their job. That's not very nice!

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

The God of the very earliest Biblical texts is if anything more human than that of the monotheistic religions that followed. Like most religions, polytheism was gradually dropped by the Israelites, and the central divine figure was understood less as akin to Zeus, more an entity that operated at an entirely separate level to humanity.

(This is one of those trends that occurs again and again in the development of religions - even in ths greco roman world, belief in Jupiter and the gang was seen as a largely antiquated ritual as early as the Nerva-Antonines, with worship of an all powerful sun god becoming state policy by the 3rd century).

[buritobr]

According to today's values, what He did to Abraham and Isaac could be considered trolling. "Hey, you have to execute your son!", "no, I was jut joking!"

[Kingpoleon]

Most interpreters agree that Elisha did send bears to maul them to death. What's not agreed is whether it was him or God (I don't see how the former makes sense- curses in the bible only work if God wills it) and whether they meant that he's literally bald or that he stole their job. That's not very nice!

It’s not that abnormal. In the Methodist Church, our enemies have often been struck dead or gone mad even as they preached against us. I do not know if this holds true for other denominations, but it would not surprise me if it does.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

From a Christian perspective there is no theologically distinct "Old Testament God", so this question can only really be cogently answered from a Jewish perspective, and as someone who isn't religiously Jewish I don't feel equipped to say.

I mean God’s characterization in the Old Testament

Which parts of the Old Testament? There are anywhere from 39 to 49 books in it.

I'm still waiting for one of our red or yellow avatar Bible experts to answer this very simple question.

It’s just his overall characterization across the entire Old Testamemt

In the J source? The E source? The Deuteronomistic History? The Nevi'im and Ketuvim? Why is this (again, outside a specifically Jewish theological context) a relevant category in a way that a version of the category that includes New Testament writings is not? Are we looking at the neo-Marcionite stereotype of muh Old Testament God, or at the actual Old Testament? Are we admitting midrashim as relevant? Quasi-midrashic interpretations by Christian Old Testament scholars like Walter Brueggemann and Kathy Darr? Both? Neither? Work by Old Testament-focused devotional writers like Rachel Held Evans (pbuh)? What makes this a political question that needs to be in the Individual Politics board? So many questions, so little time!

Are you a Documentary hypothesis fan?   I found RJ Alter persuasive against it in The Art of Biblical Narrative, myself.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

From a Christian perspective there is no theologically distinct "Old Testament God", so this question can only really be cogently answered from a Jewish perspective, and as someone who isn't religiously Jewish I don't feel equipped to say.

I mean God’s characterization in the Old Testament

Which parts of the Old Testament? There are anywhere from 39 to 49 books in it.

I'm still waiting for one of our red or yellow avatar Bible experts to answer this very simple question.

It’s just his overall characterization across the entire Old Testamemt

In the J source? The E source? The Deuteronomistic History? The Nevi'im and Ketuvim? Why is this (again, outside a specifically Jewish theological context) a relevant category in a way that a version of the category that includes New Testament writings is not? Are we looking at the neo-Marcionite stereotype of muh Old Testament God, or at the actual Old Testament? Are we admitting midrashim as relevant? Quasi-midrashic interpretations by Christian Old Testament scholars like Walter Brueggemann and Kathy Darr? Both? Neither? Work by Old Testament-focused devotional writers like Rachel Held Evans (pbuh)? What makes this a political question that needs to be in the Individual Politics board? So many questions, so little time!

Are you a Documentary hypothesis fan?   I found RJ Alter persuasive against it in The Art of Biblical Narrative, myself.

I was taught the documentary hypothesis as established fact but I wouldn't say I'm a "fan" exactly. I respect Alter very much but haven't read that book; what's his argument?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

From a Christian perspective there is no theologically distinct "Old Testament God", so this question can only really be cogently answered from a Jewish perspective, and as someone who isn't religiously Jewish I don't feel equipped to say.

I mean God’s characterization in the Old Testament

Which parts of the Old Testament? There are anywhere from 39 to 49 books in it.

I'm still waiting for one of our red or yellow avatar Bible experts to answer this very simple question.

It’s just his overall characterization across the entire Old Testamemt

In the J source? The E source? The Deuteronomistic History? The Nevi'im and Ketuvim? Why is this (again, outside a specifically Jewish theological context) a relevant category in a way that a version of the category that includes New Testament writings is not? Are we looking at the neo-Marcionite stereotype of muh Old Testament God, or at the actual Old Testament? Are we admitting midrashim as relevant? Quasi-midrashic interpretations by Christian Old Testament scholars like Walter Brueggemann and Kathy Darr? Both? Neither? Work by Old Testament-focused devotional writers like Rachel Held Evans (pbuh)? What makes this a political question that needs to be in the Individual Politics board? So many questions, so little time!

Are you a Documentary hypothesis fan?   I found RJ Alter persuasive against it in The Art of Biblical Narrative, myself.

I was taught the documentary hypothesis as established fact but I wouldn't say I'm a "fan" exactly. I respect Alter very much but haven't read that book; what's his argument?

I should clarify he doesn't go as far as some have in abandoning the documentary hypothesis totally, but he shows where there is a strong internal coherence in theme, language and imagery tying together elements that have been attributed to the different sources. So he shows how the story of Judah and Tamar are closely connected to the Joseph story rather than just an unrelated interpolation, and he challenges the idea that what a modern scholar might see as contradictory duplicate accounts side by side really are so.

[Kingpoleon]

I should clarify he doesn't go as far as some have in abandoning the documentary hypothesis totally, but he shows where there is a strong internal coherence in theme, language and imagery tying together elements that have been attributed to the different sources. So he shows how the story of Judah and Tamar are closely connected to the Joseph story rather than just an unrelated interpolation, and he challenges the idea that what a modern scholar might see as contradictory duplicate accounts side by side really are so.

Van Seters also put forwards the supplementary hypothesis, which doesn’t sound that dissimilar to what you’re saying.

[Хahar 🤔]

From a Christian perspective there is no theologically distinct "Old Testament God", so this question can only really be cogently answered from a Jewish perspective, and as someone who isn't religiously Jewish I don't feel equipped to say.

I mean God’s characterization in the Old Testament

Which parts of the Old Testament? There are anywhere from 39 to 49 books in it.

I'm still waiting for one of our red or yellow avatar Bible experts to answer this very simple question.

It’s just his overall characterization across the entire Old Testamemt

In the J source? The E source? The Deuteronomistic History? The Nevi'im and Ketuvim? Why is this (again, outside a specifically Jewish theological context) a relevant category in a way that a version of the category that includes New Testament writings is not? Are we looking at the neo-Marcionite stereotype of muh Old Testament God, or at the actual Old Testament? Are we admitting midrashim as relevant? Quasi-midrashic interpretations by Christian Old Testament scholars like Walter Brueggemann and Kathy Darr? Both? Neither? Work by Old Testament-focused devotional writers like Rachel Held Evans (pbuh)? What makes this a political question that needs to be in the Individual Politics board? So many questions, so little time!

Are you a Documentary hypothesis fan?   I found RJ Alter persuasive against it in The Art of Biblical Narrative, myself.

I was taught the documentary hypothesis as established fact but I wouldn't say I'm a "fan" exactly. I respect Alter very much but haven't read that book; what's his argument?

This gives me a good spot to note that I've been (very slowly) reading Alter's translation of the Bible, and it also gives me an excuse to link to this post I made about it a few days ago on my blog: http://naveedchowdhury.wordpress.com/2021/04/02/the-voice-of-the-past/