God - Chapter 12 (Infanticidal)

In chapter 12 of Barker's GOD, he argues that the God of the Israelites is infanticidal, although he immediately qualifies it. For Barker, this is one of those moments where the English language is simply not enough to describe the horrors of the god of this world. What he really means, he reveals, is that YHWH kills children indiscriminately, although this is an accessory to general bloodthirstiness (chapter 7) & racism (11).

"There are many places, however, where the God of the Old Testament was clearly infanticidal by the strictest definition. In the early 6th century B.C.E., Jerusalem was invaded & conquered by the Babylonians."

In response, YHWH dictated this to his stenographers in the 137th Psalm:

"Happy shall they be who pay you back what you have done to us! Happy shall they be who take your little ones and dash them against the rock!" (8-9)

YHWH also shows his obvious unforgiving character (chapter 4) as well. The Psalms are actually songs. Declarations like the above were "meant to be intoned during worship." Chilling, but not at all really surprising based on what we have been exposed to as biblical proof text thusfar in Barker's book:

"The command to be happy killing babies is consistent with God's character & actions elsewhere, as we have seen in other chapters in this book." 

YHWH continues, in the Book of Isaiah:

"I will punish the world for its evil...whoever is found will be thrust through, & whoever is caught will fall by the sword. Their infants will be dashed in pieces before their eyes; their houses will be plundered & their wives ravished...Their bows will slaughter the young men...their eyes will not pity children" (13:11-18, RSV)

In this type of verse, YHWH almost seems comical in the literary & visual quality of the Hebrew violence fantasies (which is what, I am coming to understand, much of the Bible really is.) This tendency toward violent fantasy is not only referred to & suggestive of the ancient Hebrew culture in general, but is much more understandable when one takes into account that the Hebrew culture was provincial, backward, histrionic in its own pronouncements. When Jesus (our alleged savior) emerged in the early 1st century AD, he attracted the attention of none of the heralds of the day. 'Jesus Christ' is only attested to in Christian scriptures, and these do not date back that early. 

In several of the biblical proof texts, we see a disturbing obsession with 'children eating their parents' & vice-versa. A strange concept, & one I suspect has some sort of greater meaning in this religio-cultural superstructure of symbols. Barker quotes Ezekiel 5, one of the aforementioned passages to round out the chapter.