Some excellent points. Hellmut does correctly point out that we can’t assume the infallibility of scripture (it is, after all, written by men), but we know that God’s ways are not ours, and that what is good and true may seem cruel at the time, or long afterwards.

Since I noticed the exhortation to love our enemies not only in the Sermon of the Mount but also in Leviticus 3, I have concluded that the old and new covenant simply do not work. It is merely self-serving and arrogant Christian propaganda.

Rather, I consider it dangerous to accept every line in scripture as the word of God. Of course, I have no way of knowing what is from God and what isn’t but I do think that one can reasonably determine human interests behind some biblical passages.

For example, the claim that David slew Goliath is Davidian propaganda. The story of Lot’s incestuous rape is a convenient justification for Hebrew domination of Israel’s neighbors.

With respect to Samuel’s genocidal instructions, I am led to wonder what it would say about God if we accepted them as a divine obligation. Ultimately, blaming Samuel is less sacrilegious than attributing the responsibility for mass murder to God.

On a side note, I really would have liked to have heard more in “The Mormons” from Will Bagley regarding what specific evidence he relies upon to conclude that Brigham ordered the massacre.