Divine Justice?

[Justice]

... and so, in this case, visits evil upon Egyptians and Israelites alike because Pharaoh missed his chance at repentance?

Snow, in all sincerety and with the upmost concern I can express, I really don't see why you insist on being judge and jury for God. I know that God is loving and wants only to do those things beneficial for man. It's His work and glory. I use that as a basic rule to interpret scripture. It's never failed me, nor will God's love fail us.

[prisonchaplain]

... and so, in this case, visits evil upon Egyptians and Israelites alike because Pharaoh missed his chance at repentance?

Why yes. I'm convinced that part of the purpose of the human sojourn here is so that we might learn well the price of rebellion against God. In a mere 6000 years consider the horrors of human history. And really, most people are good most of the time. Nevertheless...

I'm convinced of God's ultimate goodness and justice, and also that Moses got his basic facts right in his five books. So, I try to learn what I can from these stories, trusting the Holy Spirit to illumine. Egypt and Ninevah were both way bad. The former held fast in rebellion, the latter repented--both largely at the direction of their political leaders. Rather than constantly revisting whether God or Moses might have a skewed morality, I take the general message (repent and stay right with God), and the larger message (the eternal Kingdom of God cannot contain human rebellion).

[Snow]

Genesis seems to indicate that Sarai IS Abraham's sister:

Genesis:

Perhaps "deceive" is a better word than "lie."

[Snow]

Snow, in all sincerety and with the upmost concern I can express, I really don't see why you insist on being judge and jury for God. I know that God is loving and wants only to do those things beneficial for man. It's His work and glory. I use that as a basic rule to interpret scripture. It's never failed me, nor will God's love fail us.

I know you read the OP so I know that you are aware that I am not blaming God.

I said, specifically:

"The author of Exodus blames God for some of the suffering heaped upon both the Israelites and Jews...

Why do some Bible authors have a view of God that is so fundamentally opposed to our understanding of a just and benevolent God?"

What your motivations are in misrepresenting me is a mystery.

[Snow]

I don't understand Hebrew. I never claimed that I did. Do you know what a Young's Analytical Concordance is?

See Just_A_Guy and MormonMama's posts.

As to how they did not all translate it correctly... it was a pronoun usage thing if I remember. Sometimes when "he" is used it's hard to know which he is the subject (could have been Gao or pharaoh). Again, it *seemed* to me, from what I remember, that the "he" could have went either way. And, since I believe God will not harden anyone's heart, it was easy for me to pick who was the subject of "he hardened his heart."

As I also said, I no longer have my Young's. Otherwise I'd be glad to post what I *remember* from years ago. That's also why I asked if someone knew anything about the Hebrew.

It's not like there aren't concordances and lexicons available on line.

If you have any evidence to support your claim that you understand correct translation better than bible translators, I'd be most eager to see it.

[Just_A_Guy]

Why do some Bible authors have a view of God that is so fundamentally opposed to our understanding of a just and benevolent God?

To me, the more interesting question is: could people with such a different view of deity than Snow's own, still be saved?

But as for the original question:

Either 1) they were right, and our understanding of God is shaped by the relatively soft culture in which we live; or 2) we were right, and their understanding of God was shaped by the relatively harsh culture in which they lived.

Or 3) a little of both. Given the failure of the current LDS leadership to renounce several of the OT-style stories you find objectionable--indeed, given their open acceptance of several of them--this is the view I incline towards.

Edited December 14, 2009 by Just_A_Guy

[Snow]

To me, the more interesting question is: could people with such a different view of deity than Snow's own, still be saved?

Interesting that you think that correct interpretation of doctrine and history is a requirement for salvation.

I myself think that, by and large, salvation is more an issue of faith and obedience.

[Justice]

I know you read the OP so I know that you are aware that I am not blaming God.

What your motivations are in misrepresenting me is a mystery.

Snow, I quoted the statement I was questioning.

Besides, it's not the first time you've expressed this attitude. I'm not sure why you're trying to deny it now.

[Justice]

It's not like there aren't concordances and lexicons available on line.

If you have any evidence to support your claim that you understand correct translation better than bible translators, I'd be most eager to see it.

There are indeed. However, try as I might, I haven't found any as easy to use as my paper book I've since misplaced. The ones I've tried to use never give me what I want.

It's like trying to look through a dictionary on line. Sure, you can type in a word, but I can't seem to find one that let's you just look through words alphabetically.

[MormonMama]

That's untrue.

In Abraham 2 (22-25) the author or translator of the Book of Abraham has God instructing Abraham to lie.

You apparently missed my later post. Next time you might want to read the entire thread before you respond.

In addition, I do not believe that the author of Exodus was confused. As someone else said, I believe that a later translator of that passage simply mistranslated the original (or even a later) text.

[Just_A_Guy]

Interesting that you think that correct interpretation of doctrine and history is a requirement for salvation.

I myself think that, by and large, salvation is more an issue of faith and obedience.

Sounds very pretty, until you ask the question: Obedience to what?

Doctrine?

Hmm . . .

[Snow]

You apparently missed my later post. Next time you might want to read the entire thread before you respond.

... and I might want to drink a gallon of uncooked cake batter but don't count on it.

In addition, I do not believe that the author of Exodus was confused. As someone else said, I believe that a later translator of that passage simply mistranslated the original (or even a later) text.

Specifically - which words were improperly translated and how should they have been translated instead?

[Snow]

Snow, I quoted the statement I was questioning.

Besides, it's not the first time you've expressed this attitude. I'm not sure why you're trying to deny it now.

No, you didn't quote a statement. You quoted a question I poised to another poster. The question was asked because I obviously disagreed with the poster.

You are either woefully misinformed or not truthful. Anyone who reads my posts know that I believe that God is just, good and benevolent and any scriptural accounts (primarily the OT) that portray God in any other light are inaccurate and should not be understood as literal and historical.

[Justice]

No, you didn't quote a statement. You quoted a question I poised to another poster. The question was asked because I obviously disagreed with the poster.

Yeah, but Snow, your comment, question, statement or whatever you want to call it, comes across as questioning God's way of doing things. This comes up over and over in your posts. I'm still puzzled why you're acting as if it doesn't. I'm not the only person to gather this. Others have stated this long before I did.

You are either woefully misinformed or not truthful. Anyone who reads my posts know that I believe that God is just, good and benevolent and any scriptural accounts (primarily the OT) that portray God in any other light are inaccurate and should not be understood as literal and historical.

Yeah, it's all me, and you mentioned the only possible 2 options. There's no way it could be that that's the way your words come across, whether you meant them that way or not. We're all just out to make you look bad.

I remember several discussions where you question, even seem to disagree, with the way God has handled situations. Now, I'm completely open to the possibility that I've misunderstood your words. But, accusing me of being woefully misinformed or lying is a way to start a contentious argument... that's something I won't do.

You're entitled to your opinion about God. And, if I have misunderstood your opinion, then you're entitled to your opinion about why I misunderstand. I just wish you'd be a little more gracious toward people when you involve yourself in discussions, and maybe give people the benefit of doubt. Not everyone is lying or misinformed if they disagree with you.

[MormonMama]

... and I might want to drink a gallon of uncooked cake batter but don't count on it.

Wow, you're just full of snot today, aren't you?

Specifically - which words were improperly translated and how should they have been translated instead?

I've already referred you to the JST. Or didn't you read my post about that either?

Seriously, if you're not going to really read someone's posts, then you shouldn't respond. You only end up looking foolish.

Your original question was basically why do some authors of the Bible paint God in such a negative light? Our response was that they didn't, their words have been translated incorrectly over time to give such an impression. But you don't want to hear that answer. Why bother to ask a question if you've already decided that there are certain answers you won't accept, especially on a forum where you know those are the answers you will get? You've been here long enough to know what many LDS beliefs and views are, so you can't claim ignorance.

Edited December 14, 2009 by MormonMama

[Snow]

Yeah, but Snow, your comment, question, statement or whatever you want to call it, comes across as questioning God's way of doing things. This comes up over and over in your posts. I'm still puzzled why you're acting as if it doesn't. I'm not the only person to gather this. Others have stated this long before I did.

Yeah, it's all me, and you mentioned the only possible 2 options. There's no way it could be that that's the way your words come across, whether you meant them that way or not. We're all just out to make you look bad.

I remember several discussions where you question, even seem to disagree, with the way God has handled situations. Now, I'm completely open to the possibility that I've misunderstood your words. But, accusing me of being woefully misinformed or lying is a way to start a contentious argument... that's something I won't do.

You're entitled to your opinion about God. And, if I have misunderstood your opinion, then you're entitled to your opinion about why I misunderstand. I just wish you'd be a little more gracious toward people when you involve yourself in discussions, and maybe give people the benefit of doubt. Not everyone is lying or misinformed if they disagree with you.

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

I just got through telling you that I do not question God - that my questions revolve around how HUMANS incorrectly characterize God and now here you are acting like you still don't get it. If you are not being untruthful, as you just said, then why are you now representing my position in a way that contradicts what I just described?

[Snow]

Wow, you're just full of snot today, aren't you?

What do they call it when one person accuses another of what they they selves do?

Would you like a hint?

I've already referred you to the JST. Or didn't you read my post about that either?

Seriously, if you're not going to really read someone's posts, then you shouldn't respond. You only end up looking foolish.

Your original question was basically why do some authors of the Bible paint God in such a negative light? Our response was that they didn't, their words have been translated incorrectly over time to give such an impression. But you don't want to hear that answer. Why bother to ask a question if you've already decided that there are certain answers you won't accept, especially on a forum where you know those are the answers you will get? You've been here long enough to know what many LDS beliefs and views are, so you can't claim ignorance.

My post was rhetorical. I knew that you had no idea which had idea which words, if any had been mistranslated... that is, you were bluffing. Joseph Smith's Inspired Version wasn't a "translation." He didn't work off any manuscripts that he then translated into modern English. What he did was make additions, changes and harmonizations to "correct" the text according to his understanding of the gospel.

On the other hand, if you want to stick by your story, please post the specific Hebrew words that you feel were mistranslated and then tell us what the words really mean in English.

Contrary to your lament, I'll gladly accept your answer if you can provide evidence for your claim.

[Maxel]

Another question that might be worth looking into is what judgments will the Lord level on a people because of the wickedness of their rulers?

Regarding this theme:

Alma 10:27:

And now behold, I say unto you, that the foundation of the destruction of this people is beginning to be laid by the unrighteousness of your lawyers and your judges.

(Note that under standing Nephite law, lawyers and judges were the highest legal authority except for the chief judge)

Mosiah 29:17-18

17 For behold, how much iniquity doth one wicked king cause to be committed, yea, and what great destruction!

18 Yea, remember king Noah, his wickedness and his abominations, and also the wickedness and abominations of his people. Behold what great destruction did come upon them; and also because of their iniquities they were brought into bondage.

A wicked ruler inevitably brings wickedness into the lives of his people- wickedness which opens them up for the Lord's judgment, even unto destruction. Can we honestly assume, assuming Pharoah was a man so hardened in his heart as to deny the power of God in the plagues, that his people were righteous and above judgment? Indeed, the Israelites had to perform a specific sacrifice and ritual to save their firstborn children, and suffered through the plauges with their Egyptian masters.

The idea that the Lord is at fault in this case goes hand-in-hand with the denial that it is the Lord's right, as the Atoning one, to bring life and death to the people of Earth.

And the Lord does punish a people for the greivous sins of one among them:

In Joshua 7, we read that Israel suffered defeat in battle and feared for its safety because one man- Achan- disobeyed the Lord's commandments and took some of Jericho's spoils.

It's my belief that this is one of the reasons that we are commanded to excommunicate the unrepentant who have sinned grievously- lest they are judged and, because they still belong to the Church, the Church is negatively affected.

[Gatorman]

*says prayers for all, especially Snow.

At least in this way, I am not wasting my time.

[MormonMama]

I knew that you had no idea which had idea which words, if any had been mistranslated... that is, you were bluffing. Joseph Smith's Inspired Version wasn't a "translation." He didn't work off any manuscripts that he then translated into modern English. What he did was make additions, changes and harmonizations to "correct" the text according to his understanding of the gospel.

Nope, I wasn't bluffing. Really, you seem to think you know more about what's going on in other people's minds than you do. I referred you to the JST because I DO believe that it is an inspired retranslation of parts of the Bible that had been incorrectly translated over time. If you don't believe it, that's fine, but I do. So don't say I'm bluffing because I didn't refer you to "specific Hebrew words". I've never read Hebrew in my life, nor did I ever claim I have, so how could I refer you to such?

Again, you're twisting my response to your original question. You asked why the authors of the Old Testament sometimes present God as such an uncaring, or even devious, individual. I say they didn't, but that subsequent incorrect translations just make it seem that way to some. That is why I'm grateful to have the inspired JST, to clarify those mistranslations. If you think Joseph just changed things around to suit his understanding of what the gospel should be, well then I can't help you there.

I know you just like to be contrary, but at least do so without resorting to being deliberately combative, putting words in people's mouths, and flat-out accusing people of lying. I don't think you really want an answer to your question at all.

[Traveler]

Why yes. I'm convinced that part of the purpose of the human sojourn here is so that we might learn well the price of rebellion against God. In a mere 6000 years consider the horrors of human history. And really, most people are good most of the time. Nevertheless...

I'm convinced of God's ultimate goodness and justice, and also that Moses got his basic facts right in his five books. So, I try to learn what I can from these stories, trusting the Holy Spirit to illumine. Egypt and Ninevah were both way bad. The former held fast in rebellion, the latter repented--both largely at the direction of their political leaders. Rather than constantly revisting whether God or Moses might have a skewed morality, I take the general message (repent and stay right with God), and the larger message (the eternal Kingdom of God cannot contain human rebellion).

From time to time there are things that surface from the religious community that trouble me greatly. Please do not think that I am just picking on you, PC (though I am picking on just you in this thread). But what bothers me is when the religious community justifies G-d’s “punishment” of others and then in the next breath reject that they could be punished for the exact same thing in the eternal scheme of things.

I realize that it is so easy to condemn Adam and Eve, Pharaoh, the society of the flood, Sodom and even Islamic extremist and many others the we say rebelled against G-d because they did not do what we think G-d asked them to do – then in another breath pronounce a doctrine that loyalty to G-d and keeping the commandments that come from G-d are not “necessary” for salvation.

I personally reject the notion that it is okay to G-d that anyone is allowed to suffer for their personal indiscretions and not someone else; especially if that someone else knows the better and has the benefit of being directed in their personal lives by the holy spirit of G-d. I interpret rebellion as knowledge of G-d’s will (having received instruction and understood it came from G-d) and not doing it for whatever reason. Who more understand this than someone that believes in G-d and publicly declare their belief. And then to knowingly not keep the commandments (I believe that thinking the commandments of G-d “are necessary” is the first step and the minimum effort to keeping the commandments). To imply that keeping the commandments is not necessary – for whatever reason is a blatant and open rebellious act of sedition and treason against G-d, his kingdom, his law, his justice and even his mercy.

The Traveler

[Justice]

I just got through telling you that I do not question God - that my questions revolve around how HUMANS incorrectly characterize God and now here you are acting like you still don't get it. If you are not being untruthful, as you just said, then why are you now representing my position in a way that contradicts what I just described?

OK. Fair enough.

So, you're saying the Old Testament was mistranslated into God hardening Pharaoh's heart. It was man who mis-characterized God by mistranslating what happened.

We are in perfect agreement. :)

[prisonchaplain]

But what bothers me is when the religious community justifies G-d’s “punishment” of others and then in the next breath reject that they could be punished for the exact same thing in the eternal scheme of things.

Actually, there are many prophetic voices suggesting this very thing--that America, in particular, is due for some of God's punishment. David was a man after God's own heart. Nevertheless, he suffered dearly for his "indiscretions." Indeed, just who are we that we believe we are exempt from God's judgments? I agree with you.

I realize that it is so easy to condemn Adam and Eve, Pharaoh, the society of the flood, Sodom and even Islamic extremist and many others the we say rebelled against G-d because they did not do what we think G-d asked them to do – then in another breath pronounce a doctrine that loyalty to G-d and keeping the commandments that come from G-d are not “necessary” for salvation.

Christians may well suffer more for their indiscretions than non-believers. To whom much is given much is required. Whoever says they have the fullness of God should live up to that knowledge.

[Justice]

Whoever says they have the fullness of God should live up to that knowledge.

Amen.

[Snow]

OK. Fair enough.

So, you're saying the Old Testament was mistranslated into God hardening Pharaoh's heart. It was man who mis-characterized God by mistranslating what happened.

We are in perfect agreement. :)

No, I didn't say anything at all about the Old Testament being mistranslated. In fact I have challenged another poster on this very thread to substantiate her claims that it has been mistranslated - she has yet to do so (and she won't because she is just making it up in order to support her pov). If you are going to try and put words in my mouth, please put the right ones.