The 'evil' in the Old Testament

[Nerthus]

I asked this on another forum, and every answer I got was 'you have to accept it' or 'it's just the way it was back then'. Whilst I understand that in some sense you do have to accept it if you are a Christian, and times were different back then, I was asking why a loving God did those those things. Maybe I'll get some different answers here.

The main thing that I struggle with is the acts in the Old Testament - the stoning, the murder etc. How could God have condoned that?

Even with belief in and what he came to earth to do, you can't ignore the OT. I guess Leviticus is a good example of what I mean.

'Any person who curseth his mother or father, must be killed' (Leviticus 20:9)

'If a man cheats on his wife, or vise versa, both the man and the woman must die'. (Leviticus 20:10).

'Anyone who curses or blasphemes God, should be stoned to death by the community'. (Leviticus 24:14-16)

I know Jesus is good, but the OT confuses me. Why would the God who sent Jesus to save us, the good God who loves us, allow and instruct people to kill and murder others? And, does He expect the same things now?

I am genuinely interested and want to know how Christians do explain it. Maybe it is clear to most people, but for me, I can't quite grasp it because I was always taught that God was good, so why just instruct people to kill.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I think that we should consider when this stuff was written... It was written in a time when Israel was in a state of defeat and desperation in Babylon.

Reflecting on their hardship, they blamed their suffering on the lawlessness of disobedience, unfaithfulness and instability of adultery, and blaspheming God. We can add to this list all kinds of other impurities and regrets - like not killing all of the previous inhabitants of the land of Israel.

 

[Biblestudent_007]

OT Mosaic law was meant for regulating the camp of Israel during the Exodus. ps. (the journey to the promised land)

 

[Dunemeister]

There's also the fact that, in the OT law, God accommodates himself in some respects to his people. Jesus himself points out an example. The OT law permits a man to divorce his wife if he fills out the proper paperwork. But Jesus says that that was not God's original intention for marriage. Citing Genesis 1 and 2, he declared that divorce was impermissable except for adultery. His disciples complained that in that case it would be better not to marry. Jesus pretty much agreed, saying that it was because of the hardness of Israel's heart that God permitted divorce so freely.

Perhaps the same is true in reverse. Perhaps God's personal attitude toward, say, blasphemy is more lenient than what is expressed in the OT, but because of <insert psychologically or sociologically relevant fact about Israel or ancient near eastern peoples here>, God authorized -- temporarily, mind -- harsher punishments or stricter laws.

In other words, one cannot conclude from the details of OT case law God's attitude. The law, after all, was the law. It mediated the covenant between God and Israel. But to do that, it had to be practicable (for the human culture) and perceived as taking serious things (according to the culture) seriously. Otherwise there would have been no buy-in or legitimacy.

 

[bowingtoGod]

Perhaps you should ask a Jew? Whereas a Christian will just shrug it off, a Jew would probably give a more compelling answer.
Hope I helped
salaam

 

[Nerthus]

Perhaps you should ask a Jew? Whereas a Christian will just shrug it off, a Jew would probably give a more compelling answer.
Hope I helped
salaam

Well yeah, of course Jews would be able to give a good answer too. When I posted that, I was thinking about the way many Christians will always express how good God is and how loving He is, but will never like to answer question relating to the bad in the Bible, particularly the OT. Every answer I get from Christians is that God loves us so much, and that's all we need to know. I found it was almost like they were ignoring any of the bad parts, and had this image of a completely moral and loving father figure. But, I struggle to see that.

I should have included that in the OP.