Actually, Kosta, given our previous discussions I was considering asking you the same thing. :) But you asked first, so here's my answer:
We've discussed how many things in the Old Testament might very well be viewed as allegory, and IIRC you said that it must be viewed in light of the Gospel. I agree. I do not believe that it is essential to the Christian faith to view the entire OT in a strictly historic sense, and in fact doing so can cause some problems. C.S. Lewis opined that as the Hebrews were God's chosen people, so their mythology was God's chosen mythology. Some of the OT may be historical, some may be mythological or allegorical, but it must be read in light of the Gospel, in which "myth became fact." So no, I'm not offended by the OT.
But there is a difference between this and the claim that "It was the Church guided by the Holy Spirit that destroyed what God wanted destroyed!" The latter is driven by a claim of infallibility, much like the rigid historic inerrancy that the Reformed tend to attribute to the OT. Either way, it is nothing more than an excuse that makes God the author of sin.
Thank you.
I do not believe that it is essential to the Christian faith to view the entire OT in a strictly historic sense, and in fact doing so can cause some problems.
No it's not essential. Without the Gospels and the NT, there is no Christianity. One could argue that whatever needed to be known of the Old Testament was quoted by the Apostles in the New Testament.
Lewis opined that as the Hebrews were God's chosen people, so their mythology was God's chosen mythology
Not everything Hebrews did was God's choice, or else He wouldn't have discarded the Old Covenant and given a New One. The other issues is what is meant by God's chosen? I was at a Passover Seder few years back, invited by a Jewish teacher friend of mine, and the rabbi who was there said "Jews are God's chosen people." To which a few younger individuals present approved loudly.
The rabbi looked at them and then said "the privilege of being chosen was to do work." In order words God wanted the Jews to proclaim the God of Abraham to the world (remember "Salvation is from the Jews"), and they took it as some private club membership privilege.
But there is a difference between this and the claim that "It was the Church guided by the Holy Spirit that destroyed what God wanted destroyed!"
In my faith, the Holy Spirit is the Lord, the Giver of Life, not the taker of life. God is the source of life and not the source of death. God is a Maker not a destroyer. He is a giver, not a taker. Love gives and doesn't ask for anything in return.
The latter is driven by a claim of infallibility, much like the rigid historic inerrancy that the Reformed tend to attribute to the OT
What about the infallibility of the NT?
Either way, it is nothing more than an excuse that makes God the author of sin
Mankind has justified a lot of sin in the name of God, and that is wrong. But they get the idea from the Old Testament.