I notice you didn't parallel love and hate; or love and anger or forgiveness and vengeance or life and death. That would be contradictory, and require human standards for you I'm guessing. So those pairings need avoiding.
I disagree. The Bible says plainly that God hates sin:
Heb 1:8-9 : 8 But about the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom. 9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy."
[Jesus speaking:] Rev 2:6 : But you have this in your favor: You hate the practices of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.
As I said earlier, that God is love does not prohibit Him from having other aspects to His essence as well. God can walk and chew gum at the same time. Therefore, it is not impossible for God to love one thing and hate another. Jesus showed anger at the moneychangers' tables, yet He was without sin. Is that contradictory? I would say "no".
FK: "I see a denial of a part of God's essence because by human standards it makes Him appear to be mean or cruel."
We do get that with a literal reading of parts of the OT don't we?
AG gave an excellent scriptural answer, so my conversational answer is "yes", that is exactly what we get IF we use human standards. But why would we EVER apply human standards to God? His standards are definitional, and are not to be questioned by the sorry likes of you or me. :) Therefore, I simply accept them as they are revealed to me in scripture. Sure, some of the stories in the OT sound harsh, but this is all about God, not what we think of Him or His actions. If God does it, it is good. Period! There is no need to second guess. What I try to do is to reorder my thought patterns to match His, as revealed to us. It's not always easy, but I believe it is a discipline that is very worthwhile.
FK: "My view is that our human standards are irrelevant when contemplating the essence of God that is actually revealed to us in scripture."
I wouldn't use the word "essence" here, but yes if you take everything literally, some standards are gonna have to go to keep your "compatibility". Actually, the standard of compatibility would have to go from a 100% literal reading.
Well, no Reformer does take everything in the Bible literally. We strive to take everything as intended, which includes interpretation of visions, parables, prophecy, and passages which "appear" to contradict with other passages in scripture. When I consider an interpretation I put much more emphasis on internal consistency than I do on having it make sense to me in human terms. I will not deny that I consider whether something makes sense to me, that's human nature. But I like to think I can accept the God that is presented in the whole of scripture, whether I would have created that God or not if given the chance. In all honesty, I am secretly pleased that (if I had the power) I would not have created the God that is actually revealed in the Bible. How weird is THAT? :)
Who says give up on the OT? You can keep it and even some of your human standards.
I don't know how the OT can be reconciled with the view that the human interpretation of "God is love" precludes Him from also being a God of justice or a God of wrath or a jealous God, etc. I believe all of these things are possible at the same time, but that's not the message I'm getting from some on the Apostolic side. :) What are your views on all the OT stories that have God either directly killing or ordering execution? Are they true?
FK, what was Jesus’s Good News?