Abandon All Fear

What nobody else seems to be saying…

[Whodunnit Pt. 2] Let Him Have It…

Posted by Lex Fear on June 10, 2009

Back in February I had a long comment discussion with an atheist called Postsimian which started on a post at The Friendly Atheist, but went off topic so I brought it here.

Whilst not intended, this makes an excellent follow-up to that post – Killing In The Name Of…

The gist of the discussion was one of hermeneutics. Postsimian argued that ‘if’ there was a God, he was evil, because of the certain events and commands given by God in the Old Testament, taken literally. My argument was that, as well as the need for proper exegetical context, there is a need for a greater perspective on what is written in the OT, which relies heavily on if we deem the events real or made-up.

The crux of the matter was whether God, assumedly being good, could be capable of evil – i.e. killing seemingly innocent people. Postsimians study of the OT led him to conclude that even if God is good, he is capable of evil, whereas my study of the bible leads me to conclude that certain acts of God which seem wrong on the face of it, are not when understood in context.

It later occured to me that this argument is demonstrated aptly in a film I watched years ago based on the true story of Derek Bentley called Let Him Have It. The premise of the film is of a robbery which goes disasterously wrong. During the attempted arrest, brain-damaged Bentley yells out to his younger accomplice “Let him have it” – referring to the gun, and subsequently his accomplice, Christopher Craig, shoots the policeman. For those not in the know, “Let him have it” used to be a turn of phrase in the UK for giving the go-ahead to attack someone. The question is: Did Bentley order Craig to hand over the gun, or fire it at the copper?

The real-life case, in actual fact, did not hinge upon these words, but it does prove useful for this exercise. For the police, by yelling “let him have it” Bentley was giving the order to shoot, and was therefore intending evil, and rightly deserved the death penalty. For the defence, Bentley was ordering Craig to hand over the gun and surrender.

The fact is, without any supporting evidence apart from the reading of Bentleys words, your view of Bentleys guilt will be based on your own preconceptions and bias. If you were not British and raised in the time of the 50’s you may well think that Bentley ordered Craig to surrender. However, if you were around at the time, you may have thought differently.

By now you know what I’m getting at. This is nearly the same problem when it comes to reading biblical texts literally. No, God is not going around in the OT ordering people to shoot other people, but there are times when he has commanded specific instructions and left it for his people to interpret and then act, or intercede.

More and more, it seems to me that what is not written in the OT scriptures, is more important than what is actually written.

In the end, Postsimian may be right after all about one thing, in some cases it seems like it is a mere subtle nuance. However, I must counterbalance this with the truth that in every instance of the OT where God orders the destruction of human life, as the law required (just like the American justice system), when people either interceded or pleaded for mercy, they were shown mercy.

This is why if you are going to honestly critique the Old Testament, you cannot read it literally. You need to be prepared to study a bit of history and culture at the same time. It is also why I feel I cannot emphasise enough, that God is not looking for people to carry out judgement (under the law), but instead he is looking for people to intercede and carry out mercy and forgiveness (when the law has been broken).

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Advertisements

One Response to “[Whodunnit Pt. 2] Let Him Have It…”

  1. intechemistry said

    Dear Alex. I’ve missed you.

    As someone who understands life to be all about our submission to God and worship of Him, and that any ‘query’ of Gods ‘behaviour’ is purely as a result of my own limitedness, I think trying to understand Gods actions and to sit in judgement of God is a absolute stupidity.

    I perceive some of the (punished) people from the OT (and the Qur’an), as being wicked people doing wicked acts, people who rejected God. As God is the All Powerful and life comes from him, he is of course perfectly entitled to ending their lives if he wishes, as if you’ll forgive the dreadful analogy, one puts the toys back in the box after playing with them.

    It is impossible to do the “If God exists then he must be evil”, because it pays acknowledgement to An All Mighty, The All Knowing God, The Creator of everything, which, as I’ve inferred earlier, means man could never sit in Judgement of God and declare him to have a negative trait as man could never ever understand Gods actions in the first place.

    The reason why God is portrayed as malicious (already impossible intersection), by people like Dawkins etc, is because to these people, they already don’t believe in God and so they don’t accept the afterlife. So to them life is everything. The single most precious thing they have. when they die that’s it. Teir being is eternally lost. So, for God to remove life, that is the ultimate bad thing that could ever happen to them. Anything that removes life (or poses a threat to their life) must be removed. Hence they think God removing life means God is bad.

    You will be very hard pressed to get someone who believes in the afterlife as thinking God is bad.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: