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:
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, 2nd 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” (1st 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).
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 2nd 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.
Skeptics see the Biblical God doing the same thing. For example, this 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 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.
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, Exodus 12:40) 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 become concerned about their sufferings and for their cry to reach Him?
Christians point to Exodus 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.
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.
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” (2nd Samuel 6:7, 1st 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, 1st 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 2nd 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 1st 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 2nd 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 1st 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 2nd 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:
1st 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.
1st 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:
1st 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
1st 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:
2nd 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 golden calf incident:
Skeptics point to the account of Moses going up to Mt Sinai to receive the Ten Commandments. While there, the Israelites made and worshiped a golden calf. God was so infuriated over this that He told Moses He was going to destroy the whole bunch and begin all over again with Moses. Moses is seen as talking God out of this decision and it is recorded that God relents (Exodus 32:1-14).
Skeptics see this as another example of the impetuous, rash and impulsive nature of the Biblical God and also 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, 1st Samuel 15:29).
Christians see God changing his mind as demonstrating His mercy, compassion and reasonableness in resolving issues. In Numbers 23 and 1st 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 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.
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.