Diogenes, I’m not exactly sure where your line of questioning is going. I will, however, explain that as David Simmons corrected me, the concept of annihilation of Amalek and the Seven Caananite Nations was commanded by God. It was never actually carried out, except that one time in the book of Samuel. Joshua battled, David battled, and there was an ongoing war of conquest throughout the time of the First Temple.
Are you angry that God commanded the Jews to annihilate the people, or are you angry at the Jews who never accomplished the command? I can tell you that regardless of whether you believe that it was a good or bad command (I know, it was evil - I didn’t make it up), it was impossible to do one Sancherev relocated all of the peoples living in and around Israel and Judea at the time.
After the relocation, no one tried to hunt down the people whom God put on the “KILL UTTERLY” list. It became a null command, impossible to fulfill. We cut our losses over this commandment, and went on living. Are you saying that God is bloodthirsty, and so we shouldn’t worship God, or what exactly is your point?
Yes, I’m saying that the literary character of “God,” as presented in the Tanakh, is bloodthirsty and evil and can’t be believed as an accurate representation of God if God is good.
Either God is not good or the Bible is wrong. That’s my point.
People who believe that God gave the Jews the Torah while standing around Mount Sinai also believe that God handed down an oral tradition which explains an awful lot about details left out of the text, some of God’s reasoning, some of the “behind the scenes” in a lot of commandments and historical issues that are never explained in the text itself.
The text says “to observe the Sabbath and keep it holy,” but it never says what it means. The Oral Law (now known as the Talmud) explains a series of law, in great detail, which Jews strive to follow to the letter every week.
There is a lot that is explained about God’s kindness and love, or large portions of Psalms (particularly chapter 136) makes no sense.
Now, if you don’t believe a word of the Oral Transmission, then I see where your problem is. The text, all by itself, can be scary. From the time we were given it, Jews have held that the text largely makes no sense unless it is learned alongside of the Oral Tradition.
If you say that a belief system is false, it helps to understand the whole of it and not just half. Especially when you don’t particularly like what you see, if you are only looking at the tip of an iceberg. I don’t claim to know all the answers. I do claim that a lot of the answers you are looking for (which may be entirely beyond me) are actually in the Talmud. If you don’t believe in its veracity, nothing I say can help you.
Well, if we suppose that the Old Testament description is accurate and God is evil, the whole skin-falling-off thing makes a little more sense. Perhaps this evil God is recruiting rather than punishing.
Think about it. A woman with artificial skin sounds like a promising candidate for the next Bond villain. Perhaps we won’t be so eager to thank God when this lady is trying to take over the world.