Bisexuality, Sullivan, Dreher and Desire

Posted in Daily Links and Notes | Leave a comment

John Oliver on the Miss American Pageant

Posted in Daily Links and Notes | Leave a comment

Revisiting a Disturbing Carousel

CT

“It is possible dear, for someone to hit you, hit you hard, and it not hurt at all.” That’s the film’s thesis, delivered by Julie to her daughter, and it’s hard today not to see the results all around us, every day, of young girls being taught that physical pain and humiliation is an acceptable price to pay for a little attention from (I won’t say “the love of”) a not so good man.

Posted in Daily Links and Notes | Leave a comment

All Men Should Be Farmers

CT

Posted in Daily Links and Notes | Leave a comment

Escape from Duggarville

Hi profile quiver-full women becomes atheist rejects patriarchy

Posted in Daily Links and Notes | Leave a comment

Three Christian Books on my shelf Addressing the Genocidal God Objection

20140924_104344_AndroidThree Books on my Shelf

Continuing on the subject of the Moral Monster Objection

These are not new objections and there is a body of literature discussing it. Most people raising the objection today probably do very little reading or research into it. Again, as I’ll get into later, this is because they are dealing with moral intuitions, not really arguments.

There are three contemporary books on my shelf that deals with this subject:

Before I get into this I want again to say that I doubt reading these books would convince a skeptic. Why not? Because again these objections for many lie at the level of moral intuition, not argument. These books will probably be most helpful

  • to people who WANT to believe but are struggling with these passages
  • scholars or philosophers who want to wrestle with the questions as arguments

Peter Craigie: The Problem from Above

Craigie’s The Problem of War in the Old Testament Nicely categorizes the issues in three pots.

  • The problem of God: The OT Warrior vs. Jesus’ God of love
  • The problem of revelation: how and why all this material is in the Bible at all
  • The problem of ethics: how should all of this inform our own ethics

Craigie addresses these things from a scholarly perspective with things to think about and plausible assertions. Again, I doubt the book would satisfy skeptics. It’s primarily written for pastors and Christian thinkers who wrestle with the issues but probably aren’t hovering over “the line”. This is more of a “high brow” approach

Christopher Wright’s Question and Answer Book

Christopher Wright’s The God I Don’t Understand approaches the book from a “middlebrow” elevation.

He takes on the subject in two chapters “Three Dead Ends” and “Three Frameworks”. Dead ends first.

  • It’s an OT problem that the NT puts right (the Problem of God)
  • The Israelites thought God said it but they got it wrong (The Problem of Revelation)
  • It’s an allegory for spiritual warfare (Church Father’s approach)

Wright races objections to all three responses. He asserts that we take a “framework” approach, which is basically the task of “re-framing” events through a narrative.

  • The Framework of the OT Story (this is how those cultures talked and thought)
  • The Framework of God’s Sovereign Justice (The Canaanites serve as an example of evil. Israel will fall under the same justice. )
  • The Framework of God’s Plan of Salvation (It’s all part of the larger plan).

Again I think Wright’s treatment may help calm the fears of believers who are trying to make sense of this but I doubt they would convince someone guided by their moral feelings or intuition.

Peter Enns’ “I’m really understanding you” approach

Peter Enns’ The Bible Tells Me So is much more of a pop-culture approach. He, like Wright will try to reframe the questions basically by trying to reframe and correct the flat way that evangelicals tend to approach scripture as a flat, literal answer manual. Emergents who like Rachel Held Evans approach to things will feel right at home. Enns is comfortable, witty and fun to read.

Enns will make some points that will anger evangelicals

  • God didn’t command the genocide but this was Isreal’s self-understanding by virtue of their cultural context
  • The genocide didn’t happen anyway

God never told the Israelites to kill the Canaanites. The Israelites believed that God told them to kill the Canaanites.

I am respecting the Bible’s ancient voice, trying to understand what that ancient voice is saying, and then (and only then) make a decision, as best as I can, about what to do with it. Where the “get God off the hook” solutions all falter is that they are not asking ancient questions, but modern ones.

Enns, Peter (2014-09-09). The Bible Tells Me So: Why Defending Scripture Has Made Us Unable to Read It (Kindle Locations 790-792). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.

I haven’t finished going through Enns’ book having read enough of him I think I understand his approach.

While I always enjoy reading Enns, and I learn a ton from him, and I very much appreciate what and why he is doing what he’s doing, as with the other authors I doubt he’s make much of an impression on my skeptical friends.

My Request for You

If you’ve got other books that you’ve found helpful, drop them in the comments. Thanks. pvk

Lists

PS: Later Addition

0529100819_3

If you’re a pastor and looking for a very evangelical, perspectival book check out Skeletons in God’s Closet. It’s a lovely, winsome book that intends to “flip the script” and give a gospel presentation through these difficult questions.

Posted in Culture commentary, philosophical reflection | Tagged , , , , | 5 Comments

The “God is a Moral Monster” Objection Stated

Tissot_The_Conquest_of_the_Amorites

I find this objection to Christianity to be increasingly common among Christian defectors. I thought it might be worth while exploring it further. As you’ll see later in this series, I don’t really thing it is as much an argument as it is an objection or a rationale.

The God of the Old Testament is Not Moral

The objection is that Yhwh, the God who takes Israel out of Egypt, does or commands immoral things. The list usually includes at least some of the following:

  • Commands Abraham to sacrifice Isaac
  • Drowns most of humanity and the animals in a world wide flood
  • Brings plagues against Egypt and kills the first born of Egyptian people and flocks
  • Commands Israel to take the land of Canaan and commit genocide by clearing out the Canaanites.

Because of these things God fails a morality test, a standard that many in Western culture would consider to be obvious, basic and self-evident.

In very few cases do I actually hear people articulate the moral standards that are violated. I’ll try to do this:

  • Human sacrifice is wrong
  • It is immoral to kill people and animals indiscriminately (flood and plagues)
  • It is immoral to bring genocide (mass, indiscriminate killing or extermination) against a national, cultural or religious group.

How I Chose to Stand With Respect to this Immoral God, Real or Imagined

Because this God as portrayed, embraced and espoused is immoral, the people asserting the objection tend to make the following statements:

  • “I don’t wish to associate with this God, therefore I’ll renounce any allegiance or identification with Christianity or a religion connected with the Hebrew Scriptures”
  • “I don’t wish to obey any such religion or teacher of this religion nor encourage my children to be exposed to this.”
  • “Because I believe the presentation of this God disqualifies him as a moral God or a moral judge I will reject any other teachings of these religious traditions as suspect unless I embrace them on a case by case basis independent of their connection with him. (In other words I can still agree with “you shall not kill” or “you shall not steal”…)”
  • “Because this God is morally objectionable I don’t believe any God exists.”
    • I should point out right away that this point looks silly as quickly as you write it down and look at it. Someone’s moral quality doesn’t impact their existence. We’ll have to come back to this one later too.
  • “God’s moral character should disqualify him from being worshiped or having people pledge allegiance to him.”
  • “Promotion of this God and the moral rules in the Hebrew Scriptures encourages people to do harm to women, children, gays, Palestinians and offers believers justification to do violence against their enemies.”

My Request for You

If I’ve short changed my argument or am missing something, please throw it in the comments section for me. Thanks. pvk

Posted in Culture commentary, philosophical reflection, theological, Understanding the Bible | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

declining marriage rates

In other words, marriage has gone from being a way that people pulled their lives together to something they agree to once they have already done that independently.

Posted in Daily Links and Notes | Leave a comment

Do we need a new way to credential pastors?

Christianity Today

Posted in Daily Links and Notes | Leave a comment

Drinking and Sexual Assault at College

Chronicle of Higher Education

Posted in Daily Links and Notes | Leave a comment