Violence in the Biblical Old Testament

[Night FM]

While violence in the the Bible is often used as a point of criticism (and has been even historically, with the Gnostics having criticized the violence in the Old Testament), I think it should at least be put into some historical context.

The violence and draconian laws in the Old Testament originated in the Iron Age where similar laws would have been a norm across cultures. (These would have included laws proscribing capital punishment for various crimes, and acts of war). These were simply the laws and practices of a particular place and time (just as how laws in the 19th century US which permitted slavery would be considered barbaric by modern standards), and there is no Biblical requirement to perpetuate such practices in modern times, such as how Christians do not typically believe that they have to follow the dietary laws of the ancient Israelites (or how Paul, in the New Testament, specifically stated that Gentiles should not be expected to practice circumcision).

[Phi for All]

Science does a much better job of separating the wheat from the chaff. Theory is provisional where it applies, and it stops being a theory as soon as it's shown false or fails at prediction. We don't build on a rotten foundation.

The Abrahamic religions ignore many parts of the Bible that are unphysical or are contradicted by other texts of the time. They feel free to drop the inconvenient parts like Mosaic law or Catholic canon (Hamburgers on Friday!) as they see fit, yet want us all to believe the system is still good despite being built on a lot of Iron Age ignorance. 

In particular, the violence of the OT seems to accentuate the choice to believe in human kindness and benevolence, but we see very little of that historically. The churches have raped and pillaged their way throughout the pages of history, never holding any real moral high ground, pretending to care about people while simply setting themselves up exactly like the worst offenders from scripture. After thousands of years, we still have this horrible vertical moral scale that judges everybody based on a perfect father figure, who is still often used to justify modern violence done in the name of religion.

[iNow]

7 hours ago, Night FM said:

there is no Biblical requirement to perpetuate such practices in modern times, such as how Christians do not typically believe that they have to follow the dietary laws of the ancient Israelites (or how Paul, in the New Testament, specifically stated that Gentiles should not be expected to practice circumcision).

Further evidence that the bible cannot possibly bet the source of human morality.

Since humans review the commands of the bible and choose to accept only some of those commands while rejecting others, it's apparent that they must have a pre-existing moral framework against which to analyze and compare those commands.

If the bible were the source, then all would need to be accepted equally, ergo the "yes this, not that" approach essentially ALL believers take confirm for us that bible itself cannot be the source of that moral framework. 

What is the source? Our existence as a tribal species learning from one another inside a culture or community which reinforces from birth what behaviors are allowed and which behaviors are not. Evolution then selects for social mores and ostracizes those who fail to adhere to them since separation from the group reduces access to food, protection, and potential mates. 

[Sensei]

Every history book is full of violence.

The Jews and Palestinians recently added another chapter to their book.

[exchemist]

8 hours ago, Night FM said:

While violence in the the Bible is often used as a point of criticism (and has been even historically, with the Gnostics having criticized the violence in the Old Testament), I think it should at least be put into some historical context.

The violence and draconian laws in the Old Testament originated in the Iron Age where similar laws would have been a norm across cultures. (These would have included laws proscribing capital punishment for various crimes, and acts of war). These were simply the laws and practices of a particular place and time (just as how laws in the 19th century US which permitted slavery would be considered barbaric by modern standards), and there is no Biblical requirement to perpetuate such practices in modern times, such as how Christians do not typically believe that they have to follow the dietary laws of the ancient Israelites (or how Paul, in the New Testament, specifically stated that Gentiles should not be expected to practice circumcision).

Yes, this has always been understood by thinking Christians  - and, I’m sure, Jews. The problem can be with literalists and other idiots, not excluding  idiot critics😄.