Hey, at least you're judging based on the facts of what the Bible says. God is who He is. He's not campaigning. You disagree with Him, but at least it's really Him.

Of course, that puts you in the same position as Job. You want to judge God. You want to put him on trial. You disagree with Him.

And if you have the opportunity to question Him directly, you'll say the same thing Job said.

[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 2 points 40 minutes ago* (last edited 40 minutes ago)

I'm judging a fictional character based on how he's characterized by the book he appears in. There may be a higher power, but the god of the Bible certainly ain't it.

[–] Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

And if you have the opportunity to question Him directly, you’ll say the same thing Job said.

That would be what, "Why are you so weirdly obsessed with Leviathan?" after Job 41?

[–] Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 hour ago

Haha, Leviathan was certainly the "big bad" in Job. I don't know what creature was being referred to (maybe a species of large crocodile?) but yes, he gets a lot of air time.

No, I meant Job 42:3, "Surely I spoke of things I did not understand, things too wonderful for me to know."

[–] FrostBlazer@lemm.ee 4 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

I would add that not every author is writing unbiased in the Bible. We know now for instance that some books near the end of the Bible attributed to Paul may not have been written by him, but by some of the people under Paul in the early church. So adding parts about women not holding positions of authority within the Church more or less served to cement their own positions and authority for the early-Christians that were formalizing the religion.

[–] Maeve@midwest.social 1 points 39 minutes ago

Yep. That's addressed in books the Council left out.