Chris raises an important issue, one that resurfaces every generation because people continue to read the Old Testament through philosophical lenses the biblical writers never used. As someone who was mentored by Dr. Michael S. Heiser, I want to affirm the core of Chris’s argument: the problem is not Yahweh’s character but our categories the we try to fit him into.
Modern critics, whether atheists, neo‑Gnostics, or post‑Enlightenment skeptics, consistently make the same mistake:they impose Greek metaphysics onto a Hebrew text and then blame the text for not fitting their imported framework.
1. The Problem Isn’t Yahweh, It’s the Lens
The Hebrew Bible never presents God as an emotionless abstraction.Heiser used to say, “If you want to understand the Bible, you must read it like an ancient Israelite, not a Greek philosopher.”
The Greeks equated perfection with impassibility.Israel equated perfection with covenant faithfulness.
Those are not the same thing.
So when modern readers accuse Yahweh of being “unstable” or “immoral,” they are not critiquing the biblical God, they are critiquing a caricature created by philosophical categories foreign to the biblical worldview.
2. The Gnostic Echo: A Very Old Heresy Wearing New Clothes
Chris is right to identify the Gnostic impulse behind the accusation that Yahweh is evil.Gnosticism has always despised embodiment, covenant, and the God who enters history.
The Gnostic demiurge myth was an ancient smear campaign against the God of Israel, a theological hit job.Modern atheists simply recycle the same talking points with new vocabulary.
But the biblical writers, and the earliest Christians, unanimously rejected the idea that Yahweh was anything less than the Most High God.
3. The Documentary Hypothesis: A Solution in Search of a Problem
Chris’s critique of the Documentary Hypothesis is well‑placed.Heiser himself repeatedly emphasized that JEDP is:
methodologically weak
textually unsupported
historically uninformed
and built on philosophical assumptions rather than data
The Dead Sea Scrolls alone should have ended the debate.The Torah appears unified, not fragmented.The ancient Jewish community, the people closest to the text, never heard of J, E, D, or P.
When a theory requires imaginary documents to explain real ones, the theory is the problem.
4. Yahweh’s Emotions Are Not Flaws, They Are Revelations
The biblical writers never saw divine emotion as a threat to sovereignty.Emotion is not instability.Emotion is not imperfection.Emotion is not moral failure.
Emotion is relational intentionality.
Yahweh’s anger is always judicial.Yahweh’s compassion is always covenantal.Yahweh’s grief is always redemptive.Yahweh’s patience is always purposeful.
The God of Israel is not a passive abstraction, He is the living God who acts, responds, judges, forgives, and saves.
That is not weakness.That is holiness in motion.
5. The “Unmoved Mover” Was Never the Biblical God
Chris is correct: the Greek “unmoved mover” is a philosophical construct, not a biblical description.
The God of Israel:
speaks
listens
responds
relents
judges
forgives
enters covenant
and ultimately becomes incarnate
A deity incapable of relationship is not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.It is the god of Aristotle.
The biblical God is not unmoved, He is unmanipulated.He is not impassible, He is incorruptible.He is not static, He is sovereign.
6. The Old Testament Narrative Shows a Consistent Pattern of Mercy
Chris highlights this well. From Eden to the Flood, from Babel to Abraham, from Israel’s rebellion to the Exile, the pattern is unmistakable:
Humanity sins.God responds with patience.Judgment comes only after prolonged mercy.And redemption is always the final word.
The culmination of that pattern is Christ, Yahweh in the flesh, who absorbs the consequences of human evil and defeats death itself.
That is not the story of a capricious deity.It is the story of a God who refuses to abandon His creation.
7. The Real Issue: People Want a God Who Never Disagrees With Them
The modern discomfort with Yahweh’s emotions is not intellectual, it is moral.
A God who judges sin is offensive to a culture that denies sin.A God who defines goodness is intolerable to a culture that worships autonomy.A God who enters history is inconvenient to a worldview that denies transcendence.
So critics reinvent God in their own image, or reject Him altogether.
But the biblical God refuses to be domesticated.
Yahweh Is Not the Problem, Our Assumptions Are
Chris is right: the accusations against Yahweh arise from philosophical confusion, not textual evidence.
When we read the Old Testament on its own terms, in its own worldview, the picture is clear:
Yahweh is sovereign.
Yahweh is good.
Yahweh is relational.
Yahweh is emotionally invested in His creation.
Yahweh’s actions are always just, always purposeful, always redemptive.
And in Christ, Yahweh’s character is revealed with perfect clarity.
This is not a God to be dismissed.This is a God to be worshiped.
Sadly, this is all truth that I discovered just in the past few years. As a child, it was never explained to me WHY God punished Pharaoh, WHY He made the flood, WHY He enacted any of His judgements. It was far more told as a threat, if you don’t behave in this way God will severely punish you.
Why would I want to follow, believe in, a God who basically hated me? Or so I was taught, intentionally or not.
And you parents, you MUST make sure that your kids understand the whys of what God did so that it isn’t a reason they turn away from Him! Make a promise to your kids, and to our Lord, the great I AM, that you will do your best to teach them the truth. Ask for His help with that, He is glad to assist!
Chris raises an important issue, one that resurfaces every generation because people continue to read the Old Testament through philosophical lenses the biblical writers never used. As someone who was mentored by Dr. Michael S. Heiser, I want to affirm the core of Chris’s argument: the problem is not Yahweh’s character but our categories the we try to fit him into.
Modern critics, whether atheists, neo‑Gnostics, or post‑Enlightenment skeptics, consistently make the same mistake:they impose Greek metaphysics onto a Hebrew text and then blame the text for not fitting their imported framework.
1. The Problem Isn’t Yahweh, It’s the Lens
The Hebrew Bible never presents God as an emotionless abstraction.Heiser used to say, “If you want to understand the Bible, you must read it like an ancient Israelite, not a Greek philosopher.”
The Greeks equated perfection with impassibility.Israel equated perfection with covenant faithfulness.
Those are not the same thing.
So when modern readers accuse Yahweh of being “unstable” or “immoral,” they are not critiquing the biblical God, they are critiquing a caricature created by philosophical categories foreign to the biblical worldview.
2. The Gnostic Echo: A Very Old Heresy Wearing New Clothes
Chris is right to identify the Gnostic impulse behind the accusation that Yahweh is evil.Gnosticism has always despised embodiment, covenant, and the God who enters history.
The Gnostic demiurge myth was an ancient smear campaign against the God of Israel, a theological hit job.Modern atheists simply recycle the same talking points with new vocabulary.
But the biblical writers, and the earliest Christians, unanimously rejected the idea that Yahweh was anything less than the Most High God.
3. The Documentary Hypothesis: A Solution in Search of a Problem
Chris’s critique of the Documentary Hypothesis is well‑placed.Heiser himself repeatedly emphasized that JEDP is:
methodologically weak
textually unsupported
historically uninformed
and built on philosophical assumptions rather than data
The Dead Sea Scrolls alone should have ended the debate.The Torah appears unified, not fragmented.The ancient Jewish community, the people closest to the text, never heard of J, E, D, or P.
When a theory requires imaginary documents to explain real ones, the theory is the problem.
4. Yahweh’s Emotions Are Not Flaws, They Are Revelations
The biblical writers never saw divine emotion as a threat to sovereignty.Emotion is not instability.Emotion is not imperfection.Emotion is not moral failure.
Emotion is relational intentionality.
Yahweh’s anger is always judicial.Yahweh’s compassion is always covenantal.Yahweh’s grief is always redemptive.Yahweh’s patience is always purposeful.
The God of Israel is not a passive abstraction, He is the living God who acts, responds, judges, forgives, and saves.
That is not weakness.That is holiness in motion.
5. The “Unmoved Mover” Was Never the Biblical God
Chris is correct: the Greek “unmoved mover” is a philosophical construct, not a biblical description.
The God of Israel:
speaks
listens
responds
relents
judges
forgives
enters covenant
and ultimately becomes incarnate
A deity incapable of relationship is not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.It is the god of Aristotle.
The biblical God is not unmoved, He is unmanipulated.He is not impassible, He is incorruptible.He is not static, He is sovereign.
6. The Old Testament Narrative Shows a Consistent Pattern of Mercy
Chris highlights this well. From Eden to the Flood, from Babel to Abraham, from Israel’s rebellion to the Exile, the pattern is unmistakable:
Humanity sins.God responds with patience.Judgment comes only after prolonged mercy.And redemption is always the final word.
The culmination of that pattern is Christ, Yahweh in the flesh, who absorbs the consequences of human evil and defeats death itself.
That is not the story of a capricious deity.It is the story of a God who refuses to abandon His creation.
7. The Real Issue: People Want a God Who Never Disagrees With Them
The modern discomfort with Yahweh’s emotions is not intellectual, it is moral.
A God who judges sin is offensive to a culture that denies sin.A God who defines goodness is intolerable to a culture that worships autonomy.A God who enters history is inconvenient to a worldview that denies transcendence.
So critics reinvent God in their own image, or reject Him altogether.
But the biblical God refuses to be domesticated.
Yahweh Is Not the Problem, Our Assumptions Are
Chris is right: the accusations against Yahweh arise from philosophical confusion, not textual evidence.
When we read the Old Testament on its own terms, in its own worldview, the picture is clear:
Yahweh is sovereign.
Yahweh is good.
Yahweh is relational.
Yahweh is emotionally invested in His creation.
Yahweh’s actions are always just, always purposeful, always redemptive.
And in Christ, Yahweh’s character is revealed with perfect clarity.
This is not a God to be dismissed.This is a God to be worshiped.
Sadly, this is all truth that I discovered just in the past few years. As a child, it was never explained to me WHY God punished Pharaoh, WHY He made the flood, WHY He enacted any of His judgements. It was far more told as a threat, if you don’t behave in this way God will severely punish you.
Why would I want to follow, believe in, a God who basically hated me? Or so I was taught, intentionally or not.
And you parents, you MUST make sure that your kids understand the whys of what God did so that it isn’t a reason they turn away from Him! Make a promise to your kids, and to our Lord, the great I AM, that you will do your best to teach them the truth. Ask for His help with that, He is glad to assist!
May your season of Lent be greatly blessed!
Deep dive, Courageous! Going to have to see what you put out next. I wrote a similar topic recently too. God's grace is good all the time! https://www.truthandprosperity.com/p/in-the-beginning-god?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Thanks, for sharing, bro. Hanging with family today, but I will read it soon. Looks interesting. 🙂