Cognitive Dissonance: The True Nature of The Good Book
NOTE: This blog is one in a series of companion pieces to my book God Loves You: Some Restrictions May Apply (And Many Other Christian Dilemmas). References to chapters and other topics of discussions are to that book.
“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”
— Richard Dawkins
Assume you grow weary of all the uncertainties of life. You find yourself needing a source of true knowledge that is reliable, consistent, enlightening, and comforting. Not to worry, dear friend, the all-knowing creator of the universe, gave us an extraordinary book. This book not only tells us how to deal with the difficulties we face; it is ineffable, perfect in every way — no better book has ever been written. However, when you read this book yourself and try to discern the meaning and importance of the contents, something seems amiss. Perhaps, like me, you found reasons to question the veracity of this book. Maybe some of the stories don’t add up. Perhaps this book, the Bible, isn’t really the Good Book after all.
As someone who grew up in the profoundly religious American South, I could not help but wince at the quote from Richard Dawkins above. I was not too fond of it when I first heard it even though I was already an unbeliever. I thought it was unfair. I don’t know a single Christian (personally) who could be described in this way or even be mistaken for someone who would follow a god like that. But there is a problem. If you want to take issue with Professor Dawkins on this, you’d better have more than the Bible on your side, because there is ample justification for all of his statements. The Bible very clearly supports his assertion almost word-for-word.
Do you doubt me? Let’s look at the quote again, this time inserting biblical citations for each claim: “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction [This is the one subjective statement, but Dawkins did qualify it with “arguably.”]: jealous and proud of it [Exodus 34:14]; a petty [Deuteronomy 13:15], unjust [too many examples to list, but consider just two: original sin (Romans 5:12–21) and substitutionary atonement (1 Peter 2:24)], unforgiving control-freak [Matthew 12:32, Mark 3:29], a vindictive [Genesis 6:7], bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser [Deuteronomy 20:17; Judges 11:32–33]; a misogynistic [1 Corinthians 11:3–5, 1 Corinthians 14:34–35], homophobic [Leviticus 20:13], racist [Leviticus 20:1–3], infanticidal [Exodus 13:2], genocidal [Deuteronomy 7:1–3], filicidal [Genesis 22:2, Judges 11:39], pestilential [Ezekiel 14:19], megalomaniacal [Deuteronomy 7:4], sadomasochistic [Exodus 21:20–21], capriciously malevolent bully [Leviticus 27:28–29].”
Here we find one of many Christian dilemmas. Christians (most theists for that matter) have painted themselves into a corner morally and philosophically speaking. If you ask most theists about the values, norms, and mores they hold dear — or ask them what kind of people they wish their children to become — and then critically read the Bible in search of those values, you might be amazed at what you find. The characteristics most Christians want in their children are often more in keeping with the writings of Epicurus, Democritus, Siddhartha Gautama, and Confucius (and a host of more modern moral philosophers) than with the Bible. This is a dual dilemma for the Christians who claim that our morality comes from God when the Bible is not only morally ambiguous (to be generous), it is the sole source of what Christians claim to know about God’s moral nature.
We often experience a natural psychological discomfort when confronted with evidence that effectively challenges a cherished myth. This psychological discomfort exists for several reasons; not least is that we so strongly desire these beliefs to be true. When we believe something is not only true but also desperately hope that it is true, we are bothered by evidence that indicates we may be wrong. Another reason for this unease is that we have often fashioned our lives and actions around these beliefs. We’ve often “invested” in these beliefs. We often have much to lose if we admit we are wrong. We also, however, have much to gain if we honestly accept our errors. So while it is often difficult, intellectual honesty should always be our goal. Let us now honestly discuss the Bible.
How many among us have ever honestly contemplated the assertion that the Bible is the Good Book even though it directs us to kill insubordinate children (Deuteronomy 21:18–21), sanctions human sacrifice to God for his assistance in killing other human beings (Judges 11:30–39), and directs the victim of rape to marry her rapist (Deuteronomy 22:28–29) or that she be killed for not resisting her rapist hard enough (Deuteronomy 22:23–24).
This evaluation of the Bible is approached in the spirit of Benedict de Spinoza when considering his own similar task: “I determined to examine the Bible afresh in a careful, impartial, and unfettered spirit, making no assumptions concerning it, and attributing to it no doctrines, which I do not find clearly therein set down.” His last thought is especially critical: “attributing to it no doctrines, which I do not find clearly therein set down.” Yes, it was worth repeating. When the Bible clearly says to kill an entire race of people, man, woman, and child, that is genocide; and any theologian or apologist who argues “that’s really not what God meant” is simply misusing words and what he’s saying is meaningless palaver. If there are exegetical issues of mitigation or extenuation which make genocide, rape, slavery, and other evils, actually conducive to a “greater good,” that is one thing — a thing for which I have seen no evidence by the way — but it is a position which at least does not deny the fact that these things are presented in the Bible as God’s will.
With the exception of framing the biblical discussion with a few introductory thoughts, I take care to write nothing here that is not actually found in the pages of the Bible. Of necessity, I will begin with a discussion of biblical origins and touch on the broader nature of biblical claims, reliability, and consistency before addressing specific biblical positions on important issues. I have also not taken things out of context, no doubt an accusation I will receive. I usually have not even provided a context but only reported what’s in the book.
Some may consider this lack of context a failing, but the intent is not to argue theology in this case but rather to educate the reader about what is actually in the Bible. Interestingly, the “context” excuse is only used when addressing the “bad parts” of the Bible. Conveniently, for the parts of the Bible that actually are good, context is never needed; the words are okay on their own.
Finally, some may find this blog and those that will follow as a sort of ad hominem attack on God. But there is no other way to address the actual nature of the Christian God, if there is a god, than to refer to the pages of the Bible. We can argue about the possible existence of God, discussing the pros and cons of the cosmological and teleological arguments, for example. Still, these conversations only address the possibility that some god may or may not exist. They do not talk about his nature. If we are to talk about what we believe God might be like, we must turn to the scriptures. It is the Christian operator’s manual! The only possible exception to this is found in the use of the argument from morality, which I address in chapter 4 of my book (and will likley post a blog on) and explain why this does not stand up to scrutiny.
When we actually read the entire Bible and do not just cherry-pick “the good parts,” we are left with the question asked about God by Kenneth C. Davis in the book, Don’t Know Much About the Bible: Everything You Need to Know About the Good Book but Never Learned:
“Is it the angry, jealous, temperamental, punishing Yahweh? The war God celebrated by Moses? The God who swept life off the face of the earth in the Flood, killed the first born in Egypt, helped conquer the people of Jericho and had them put to the sword, and silently accepted the sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter? The God who took pleasure from the smell of burnt animal flesh?
Or is it the merciful, just, patient, forgiving God? The tender Shepherd of the Twenty-third Psalm? The hunky ‘lover’ of Song of Solomon? The “perfect” Father of Jesus? And could they all possibly be the same God?”
