I have to toss in here that not every act described in the Bible is approved by God. Certainly not every custom is required by or even sanctioned by God.
Many of the orders cited are the arbitrary decisions of men, and God had nothing to do with it except they did things supposedly for God without his asking it done. Others purport to be the words of Moses who was supposedly speaking the words of Jehovah to the people, yet in places "Moses" spoke things that would have only applied after the complete conquest of the Promised Land, long after Moses' death.
My conclusion is (1) finding examples of recorded atrocities does not make them less of an atrocity, (2) human attribution of atrocities to the will of God does not make the act an act of God's in ancient times any more so than attributing the atrocities of our modern day to God makes such actually God's atrocities, (3) the site doesn't really broadly analyze the scope of the content of the Bible so the premise of the thread presents a falsehood but it examines the Bible only from an extremely narrow scope, and (4) the Bible is not a code book full of laws for Christians, nor is this why I call the Bible a good book.
I call the Bible a good book because it provides ample demonstration of the need for the law of Christ. None of the atrocities cited could be committed by anyone who was genuinely striving to apply the law of the Christ.
As to Jesus lying, the examples cited by the site's author make him or her seem pretty pathetic to me. I find that the opposite is true in my case. I find that Jesus didn't lie. The author invites a test: "This is clearly a lie, and can be proven to be a lie by any believer. Simply pray for me to be converted to Christianity right away."
God will not violate his own will in response to prayer. A Christian would never pray for such a thing and expect to be answered, because of love for neighbor and love for God (the law of Christ). Such a contravention of the exercise of free will would be counter to Christianity.
With regard to his "God is impossible" hypothesis, he commits a glaringly fatal logical fallacy when he assumes a paradigm for perfection which may or may not be reality: "If God is perfect, there can be no disequilibrium. There is nothing he needs, nothing he desires, and nothing he must or will do."
Nothing He needs, if perfect? Agreed. Nothing He must do, if perfect? Agreed. However, our Web site author ventures too far when asserting that there is nothing a perfect God could desire and nothing a perfect God will do. He assumes perfection is a state of utterly disaffected Nirvana and in so doing deflates his entire argument on a premise that cannot be established in fact.
"Humans were the crown of his creation, since they were created in God's image and have the ability to make decisions." Once again, the author assumes facts not in evidence. According to the Bible humans were not the crown of his creation. Therefore, the author has made another fatal error in argumentation.
From here on out you should be able to spot the rather pedestrian fallacies that pepper the remainder of the section.
In all, I think it was a rather exhaustive and entertaining attempt to discredit the Bible as evil based largely on religious dogma (even that recorded within the Bible) rather than on the Bible itself. Broad in analytical scope? To me, the idea is laughable.
Respectfully,
AuldSoul