God/Jesus sinned. Genocide is a sin of high order.

[Dunemeister]

What do you consider to be the Biblical view?

Here's a start: Fulcrum: The Cross and The Caricatures

See especially the bibliography that follows the article.

 

[ayani]

Penguin ~

man, any militaries have used slogans such as "God is with us". not neccsarily. brute force and military power does not neccesarily mean that God is with you. you may be strong militarily. but many nations / empires have been strong in might, and yet not been doing what is ok in God's sight. and Chrst has said clearly that His kingdom is not of this world. every worldly empire, at some point, declines and crumbles.

human judgement is good, and capable of making morally right decisions, but it's not perfect. God does not foce His Son on anyone- and Christ was clear that no one canome to Him unless the Father opens up the way for that to happen. not everyone will come to know Christ, and become His disciple. not everyone will have that full life in Him. if this is so, why would God condemn those who don't get it to hell for eternity? is a kind, helpful, compassionate Hindu worth less in God's sight than a Baptist pastor who's a jerk? i'd say, surely not.

Pengin, Christ is a choice. He is the Son of God, who willfully gave His life so that we could be reconciled to God. likewise, coming to Him, knowing Him and following Him day to day must also be a choice. He does set us free, and He in Himself does take away that veil of understanding and nearness between us and God, a veil that was placed there after the fall. that's the Biblical view. but understanding something objectively does not mean one is within the thing,nor njoying its blessings.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Thanks for the opportunity of clarifying this. I have been treating the issue quite philosophically, but of course there are real life implications. Let me state unequivocally that such things matter a great deal. The harm of murder matters deeply. Let's take the case of God judging a single person with the result of that person's death, say through disease. That person had friends, associates, and loved ones, all of whom grieved the loss. What should my response be? Well, to grieve with them. For the loss of the man is indeed a loss.

That brings up something that I've wondered about: why grieve?

If the person's death is part of God's Holy Plan, shouldn't it be celebrated? Why not defer to God's Perfect Wisdom, set aside our feelings of loss, and acknoweldge that the man's death through disease serves some good, just and noble purpose, even if we don't know what that purpose right now because of our human limitations?

And if you believe that you'll be re-acquainted with that man in Heaven, shouldn't you react to it with no more sadness than, say, the departure of a loved one for an extended trip abroad? Sure, you'll miss him while you don't see him, but you know it's only temporary, right?

However, you'll have to admit that the loss of Jeffrey Dahmer, guilty of killing and eating dozens of boys, won't be felt nearly so grievously. THIS is the sort of feeling of loss we are supposed to have had over the loss of the Canaanites. They are represented as being such an evil culture that they would routinely sacrifice their own children in bloody and gory rituals.

Much like Abraham would have done, if the Angel of the Lord hadn't prevented him.

It's implied that the mentality that permitted this infected their whole way of life. Thus we are led to understand that the Canaanites had probably lost their humanity, being little better than rabid dogs.

All of them? Their infants? What about the Amekelite livestock that God condemns Saul for not killing in 1 Samuel 15? How were those cows and sheep evil?

How do human beings "lose their humanity"?

What about David's newborn son? Was he "little better than a rabid dog"?

This is the detail lost in this discussion. We're assuming the Canaanites were modern liberal democratic people who exercised a form of religious freedom that God found distasteful. Not a bit of it. These people were evil to the core. At least, that's what the story tells us. So if we're going to judge God's character, let's fill in some of the relevant details.

All right; how about the sentiment expressed many times throughout the Bible, such as in John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

How does the Biblical message that Christ came to save the whole world mesh with your claim, as I see it, that some people are beyond saving?

 

[Elessar]

If God is not a man then he does not deserve to lead or kill us.

Dogs do not tell cats how to behave. An alien God has no clue as to how men are to behave any more than we know better than fish as to how they should behave.

Regards
DL

No but men tell dogs and cats how to behave.

 

[Elessar]

As touched upon in God on Trial, the Nazis who ran the concentration camps had "Gott Mit Uns" on their belt buckles: "God is with us". If we do not have any objective standard by which we can judge the actions of God, how can we be sure that this statement isn't correct?

Belt buckles mean nothing. Karl XIV and III Johann, the absolute monarch of Sweden and Norway, wore always a military uniform of Sweden, which was light blue, but wore with it the gold-buckled belt of the French Republic, with the noble words inscribed upon it - Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite - none of which he respected in his reign as monarch.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Penguin ~

man, any militaries have used slogans such as "God is with us". not neccsarily. brute force and military power does not neccesarily mean that God is with you. you may be strong militarily. but many nations / empires have been strong in might, and yet not been doing what is ok in God's sight. and Chrst has said clearly that His kingdom is not of this world. every worldly empire, at some point, declines and crumbles.

But how do you tell the ones that are "OK in God's sight" apart from the ones that aren't? If we can't look at the actions of a people and say, "well, that's not something that a good and righteous God would make happen", who's to say that a group as morally reprehensible as the Nazis weren't right when they claimed that God was on their side?

(Setting aside my atheism for a moment) I have no problem conclusively declaring that the Nazis weren't on the side of God and weren't acting as God's servants on Earth, because I am certain that a good, just and righteous God would not have caused to happen the atrocities that they committed.

My rationale for condemning the Nazi's slaughter of the Jews is exactly the same as my rationale for condemning the events described in the Bible like the slaughter of the first-born sons of Egypt or the genocide of the Amakelites: murder is wrong; killing innocent people is wrong; genocide is wrong. It seems like you're trying to excuse these Old Testament events by claiming my rationale isn't valid, but if that's the case, I don't see how you have a rationale to condemn the Nazis: if apparently horrific actions attributed to God can actually be good in one case, why can't they be in the other?

human judgement is good, and capable of making morally right decisions, but it's not perfect.

If it's not capable of telling right from wrong when it comes to matters like torture of innocent children and genocide, I'd say it's not good at all.

 

[Greatest I am]

You could say with equal accuracy that Hitler was not at all times and places prepared to kill people of other ethnicities, too, but that's hardly a justification of Hitler's ethics.

The God of the Bible orders acts that all ethical people agree are evil. Everybody knows this. Believers who understand the Bible stories as being fictional or metaphorical have a much easier time of it than those who insist that the Bible is factual, and are left with the distasteful task of trying to justify unjustifiable acts.

I will be posting this and thought you might enjoy.

Knowing of God and heaven is a curse.
When a non believer things were so simple. I was quite good at disturbing the minds of believers with questions and realities of reading scripture literally.
Some of those realities they could not deal with in any logical way and when a person is in front of you in dialogue then you both recognize these embarrassing, for the believer, realities.
I guess that these all fall under the, God works in mysterious ways saying.
Regardless of these holes, the Bible is still worthy of respect by not the adoration that men give it. It then becomes an idol and we know what God thinks of idols.
Examples of these holes and sins by God/Jesus and other strange oddities of scripture would look like this.
God, the creator of perfect works, creates Adam and Eve, perfect as usual.
Perfect souls and natures.
Eve follows her perfect nature by choosing knowledge over ignorance and for doing what God wants, gains his wrath for all of mankind up to and including the time of Noah’s genocidal flood.
Noah‘s flood happened because God allowed the Sons of God, whatever they are, to use earth women as sexual objects, somewhat as a brothel with ought contraception. This of course comes after he lets a supernatural entity to, was it, abuse, Eve.
God seems to send all of his minion to harm us and the still tells us that if we use our perfect souls and natures, he will send us all to hell.
Stacks the deck and when we loose, sends catastrophes. Not a nice God.
If God wants a sinless man then I wish he would hurry and create on and leave the rest of us in peace.
It also seems strange to me that small time sinners like you and I, have to spend eternity rubbing elbows with the like of genocidal maniacs and traitors to humanity like Hitler, Stalin, Jesus, God, God/Jesus and all of the other Gods.
In secular societies, they do not seem to follow, worship or venerate the philosophies of those and those they deem to be evil.
Why then do Christians associate a good prophet and Rabbi, Jesus, in the archetypal sense, with a genocidal God?
This forces Jesus to be labeled, and rightly so, a traitor to his human side.
If Jesus is to be part of a trinity then he must accept whatever label is earned by the other two.
I can see God having reproduction issues and wanting direct offspring but does he need to treat man so badly in his efforts and failures in creating whatever he is trying to create?
Many questions like this made many a Religionist run for cover. Life was good before being saved.
Knowing of God and heaven is a curse.
Knowing the truth, or better said, finding God and the truth in heaven, makes one want to return and feel the emotion that permeate that place. Not to the point of doing anything to rush my natural process and progress to death, I know why I am here, but more an annoyance that bugs the mind. I passed the test and want to get on with history.

It is in heaven as it is on earth. Most do not recognize how important man is to God and heaven.
We create all that is. Without mans sentience, there would be no recognition of God. Only the few who reach gnosis can ever put God’s words to reality. Hence the Bible emphasis on that word. Unfortunately as a group, we cannot ever know who is saying those words. We all profess to be telling truths.
See you in heaven.
Debate and question.

If you knew that you would have to become a fool to further your God’s cause and you knew it was going to be hard and you would actually have to give all you have to the poor to follow your God, would you?

Regards
DL

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Belt buckles mean nothing.

I agree they're not evidence of truth or falsehood of anything, but they're evidence of a claim. Putting yourself in the shoes of someone in the 1940s, how would you refute the claim "God was with the Nazis" in a way that doesn't also condemn the actions of God and the Israelites in the Old Testament?

 

[Greatest I am]

No, I don't. God is that which provides the basis for morality, so what sense can there be in making a judgment against him?

Man is the only one who can voice the morality of God.

Follow your God then. I cannot.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

No, you've missed the logic. There are cases in scripture where God orders the destruction of entire cultures (heck, the whole world in one episode). However, the handlers of those very same scriptures never found in those stories an implied command to go out and kill everyone who is not of their faith or their race. Quite the contrary, in fact. Please explain, if these texts mean what they say they mean, the people of this God haven't formed this moral imperative.



As seyorni said, it's unethical for us to kill each other. I don't see why it would be unethical for God to do so.

Some of this may be pertinent.

Knowing of God and heaven is a curse.

When a non believer things were so simple. I was quite good at disturbing the minds of believers with questions and realities of reading scripture literally.
Some of those realities they could not deal with in any logical way and when a person is in front of you in dialogue then you both recognize these embarrassing, for the believer, realities.
I guess that these all fall under the, God works in mysterious ways saying.
Regardless of these holes, the Bible is still worthy of respect by not the adoration that men give it. It then becomes an idol and we know what God thinks of idols.
Examples of these holes and sins by God/Jesus and other strange oddities of scripture would look like this.
God, the creator of perfect works, creates Adam and Eve, perfect as usual.
Perfect souls and natures.
Eve follows her perfect nature by choosing knowledge over ignorance and for doing what God wants, gains his wrath for all of mankind up to and including the time of Noah’s genocidal flood.
Noah‘s flood happened because God allowed the Sons of God, whatever they are, to use earth women as sexual objects, somewhat as a brothel with ought contraception. This of course comes after he lets a supernatural entity to, was it, abuse, Eve.
God seems to send all of his minion to harm us and the still tells us that if we use our perfect souls and natures, he will send us all to hell.
Stacks the deck and when we loose, sends catastrophes. Not a nice God.
If God wants a sinless man then I wish he would hurry and create on and leave the rest of us in peace.
It also seems strange to me that small time sinners like you and I, have to spend eternity rubbing elbows with the like of genocidal maniacs and traitors to humanity like Hitler, Stalin, Jesus, God, God/Jesus and all of the other Gods.
In secular societies, they do not seem to follow, worship or venerate the philosophies of those and those they deem to be evil.
Why then do Christians associate a good prophet and Rabbi, Jesus, in the archetypal sense, with a genocidal God?
This forces Jesus to be labeled, and rightly so, a traitor to his human side.
If Jesus is to be part of a trinity then he must accept whatever label is earned by the other two.
I can see God having reproduction issues and wanting direct offspring but does he need to treat man so badly in his efforts and failures in creating whatever he is trying to create?
Many questions like this made many a Religionist run for cover. Life was good before being saved.
Knowing of God and heaven is a curse.
Knowing the truth, or better said, finding God and the truth in heaven, makes one want to return and feel the emotion that permeate that place. Not to the point of doing anything to rush my natural process and progress to death, I know why I am here, but more an annoyance that bugs the mind. I passed the test and want to get on with history.

It is in heaven as it is on earth. Most do not recognize how important man is to God and heaven.
We create all that is. Without mans sentience, there would be no recognition of God. Only the few who reach gnosis can ever put God’s words to reality. Hence the Bible emphasis on that word. Unfortunately as a group, we cannot ever know who is saying those words. We all profess to be telling truths.
See you in heaven.
Debate and question.

If you knew that you would have to become a fool to further your God’s cause and you knew it was going to be hard and you would actually have to give all you have to the poor to follow your God, would you?

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

If good laws, then the lawmaker need not break his own law.

Deuteronomy 32:4
He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.

God's laws are perfect. Even God in person would be hard put to show why breaking perfect laws is good.
If it were then Eve would be exonerated.

Regards
DL

 

[Elessar]

I agree they're not evidence of truth or falsehood of anything, but they're evidence of a claim. Putting yourself in the shoes of someone in the 1940s, how would you refute the claim "God was with the Nazis" in a way that doesn't also condemn the actions of God and the Israelites in the Old Testament?

I'd say a hint would be they were trying to massacre the people who were given the words in the Tanakh 3,000 years ago.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I'd say a hint would be they were trying to massacre the people who were given the words in the Tanakh 3,000 years ago.

So... massacres can be okay, so long as it's not Jews being massacred? :sarcastic

Let's take the notion of "God's Chosen People" out of this equation. If the Hutu groups who slaughtered the Tutsis in Rwanda claimed that they were doing the work of God, what justification would you use to refute it? Would you refute it?

 

[ayani]

Penguin ~

we do have a standard and a guide- God has ultimately given us His Son, to teach us what God would like us to do, and be. Christ is the Living Message- sent by the Father. Christ is clear on what is right in His Father's sight- violence and forceful oppression is not among them.

but i hear what you're saying- like how do we know God didn't "use the Nazis" for His purpose? He used the Assyrians, so why not the Nazis? honestly, that's not someting i think anyone could answer. what i do know is that there are amazing stories of God's miraculous saving power rescuing many, many Jews and non-Jews from death during the Holocaut. yet millions of innocent men and women and kids were still killed.

the world is evil, and human plans are often selfish and sometimes cruel. what i do know is that evil will not win the day, and that even in the midst of suffering caused by evil, God is still there. i believe there is such a thing as spiritual warfare, such a thing as satanic power. and that while we often can't on our own understand the greater picture from where we now stand, a Christian puts His faith in God even in great trials, and worships Him regardless of circumstance, loving Him more than self, and like Christ, knowing that His presence and purpose is there, even in great and perplexing suffering. without the supreme example of the cross, and the resurrection, such great hope, faith, and perseverence would not be possible for us.

Greatest ~

dude... God is guiding our steps even now. He is the Master of the Universe. in Him we live an move and have our being, whether we recognize Him personally, or not. you or anyone can chose to disregard His word, His commandments, His wisdom, or His Son. one can deny His existence or claim that God has no power over them, yet that human claim does not make atheism a cosmological truth.

 

[Dunemeister]

That brings up something that I've wondered about: why grieve?

If the person's death is part of God's Holy Plan, shouldn't it be celebrated? Why not defer to God's Perfect Wisdom, set aside our feelings of loss, and acknoweldge that the man's death through disease serves some good, just and noble purpose, even if we don't know what that purpose right now because of our human limitations?

No, it shouldn't. Elsewhere in scripture, God says he takes delight in the death of no one. So if he is brought to the point of destroying a person or a culture, it's an act of deep necessity and sadness to him, even if he's right in doing so. Frequently, perhaps usually, there's no joy in executing judgment.

And if you believe that you'll be re-acquainted with that man in Heaven, shouldn't you react to it with no more sadness than, say, the departure of a loved one for an extended trip abroad? Sure, you'll miss him while you don't see him, but you know it's only temporary, right?

Well, if we're dealing with cases in which God has directly judged a person, and the death is a direct result of that judgment, it's unlikely (although not impossible) to expect the object of God's wrath to appear in heaven.

But in the case of a Christian who dies, Christians grieve, but not in the same way as those who have no hope. We grieve because we are saddened by the loss of someone we care about. We will miss him for the time we are separated from him. But you're right; our sadness is tempered by the knowledge that we will be reunited after God has set the world to rights, which means above all that we will enjoy a world together that is without sorrow or death. But it doesn't mean that we should celebrate the person's death, for death is a symptom, a reminder that the world is not as it ought to be.

Much like Abraham would have done, if the Angel of the Lord hadn't prevented him.

Yes, except that there's a major difference between our high-handed killings, where we take the role of God upon ourselves to decide who lives or dies, and a killing specifically commanded by God, who has the right to make such decisions. Besides, one of the things that gets little air time in scripture but appears quite frequently in oral tradition, is the intense inner struggle endured by Abraham over this apparently scandalous demand. But in the end, Abraham's obedience and God's faithfulness won out. Abraham proved himself faithful, and so did God. God fulfilled his promise to Abraham that out of Isaac he would make a great nation; Abraham fulfilled his promise to God to abandon idols and follow only YHWH.

It's worth pointing out, too, that there's a frequently repeated motif in scripture about the painfulness of following God. It's not an easy road. Remember that Jacob, after wrestling with God, walked with a limp the rest of his life.

All of them? Their infants? What about the Amekelite livestock that God condemns Saul for not killing in 1 Samuel 15? How were those cows and sheep evil?

As to the infants: Let's remember that there is another story where God displays his judgment: Sodom. There, the prophet Abraham asks "Will not the judge of the all the earth do right?" Will God slay the righteous with the wicked? The answer is no. Whether we can understand it or not, the answer is no. Even if we have no categories or traditions to help us get our head around it, the answer is no.

As for the Amalekites, in warfare, livestock is generally booty. By ordering the destruction of the livestock, God was actually standing in the way of Israel's enriching themselves at the Amalekite's expense. This was a test of Israel's faithfulness and a check on their greed, not a judgment on the livestock.

How do human beings "lose their humanity"?

I give you such people as Jeffrey Dahmer as exhibit A and ask you simply to consider whether he was still fully human at the time he was committing and concealing his crimes. I have my doubts. It's possible for a person to have his conscience so seared that he ceases to bear the image of God. The image is so marred as to be defaced altogether.

What about David's newborn son? Was he "little better than a rabid dog"?

Why insist that every case have the same explanation? Why insist that I (or God) explain every case? My guess is that whatever explanation is given, regardless how right or plausible (or not), you will insist on your own judgment over that of God. What can I say to that?

No, David's newborn son was not guilty of anything. His death was a punishment for David, not for the baby. I trust God is now taking care of that baby and will continue to do so. It also may well be that by allowing the baby to die, God spared the child a life of unimaginable horror. God knows, I don't, and so I defer to his judgment.

All right; how about the sentiment expressed many times throughout the Bible, such as in John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
How does the Biblical message that Christ came to save the whole world mesh with your claim, as I see it, that some people are beyond saving?

What's the problem? Why can't God take action such that "whoever" believes shall not perish but have everlasting life while admitting that some "whoevers" won't believe?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Penguin ~

we do have a standard and a guide- God has ultimately given us His Son, to teach us what God would like us to do, and be. Christ is the Living Message- sent by the Father. Christ is clear on what is right in His Father's sight- violence and forceful oppression is not among them.

And by that standard and guide, I think it's very easy to condemn many of the actions of God described in the Old Testament.

but i hear what you're saying- like how do we know God didn't "use the Nazis" for His purpose? He used the Assyrians, so why not the Nazis? honestly, that's not someting i think anyone could answer.

I know the answer: what the Nazis did was evil. The Holocaust is incompatible with good, therefore it could not have been the will of a good God.

By the same token, slaughtering the first-born sons of Egypt or exterminating the Canaanites, Moabites, Amekelites, etc., would have been evil if it had occurred. These actions could not have been the will of a good God. This leaves us with a few possibilities:

- the events occurred, but were not the will of God.
- the events occurred and were the will of God, but God is not good.
- the events did not occur.

No, it shouldn't. Elsewhere in scripture, God says he takes delight in the death of no one. So if he is brought to the point of destroying a person or a culture, it's an act of deep necessity and sadness to him, even if he's right in doing so. Frequently, perhaps usually, there's no joy in executing judgment.

I don't think that makes any sense at all.

Christians regularly pray to God "thy will be done"; if God's will includes the death of a loved one from disease, then that prayer effectively asks that this person die. Why would you be unhappy about getting what you asked for?

Well, if we're dealing with cases in which God has directly judged a person, and the death is a direct result of that judgment, it's unlikely (although not impossible) to expect the object of God's wrath to appear in heaven.

Do you think that disease is generally an expression of God's wrath against the victim of that disease?

But in the case of a Christian who dies, Christians grieve, but not in the same way as those who have no hope. We grieve because we are saddened by the loss of someone we care about. We will miss him for the time we are separated from him. But you're right; our sadness is tempered by the knowledge that we will be reunited after God has set the world to rights, which means above all that we will enjoy a world together that is without sorrow or death. But it doesn't mean that we should celebrate the person's death, for death is a symptom, a reminder that the world is not as it ought to be.

But as an element of God's Holy Plan, it's one step closer to the world being as it should. No?

Yes, except that there's a major difference between our high-handed killings, where we take the role of God upon ourselves to decide who lives or dies, and a killing specifically commanded by God, who has the right to make such decisions. Besides, one of the things that gets little air time in scripture but appears quite frequently in oral tradition, is the intense inner struggle endured by Abraham over this apparently scandalous demand. But in the end, Abraham's obedience and God's faithfulness won out.

Suppose the Angel of the Lord hadn't stopped Abraham and he had actually sacrificed Isaac. Would the outcome still have been scandalous?

It's worth pointing out, too, that there's a frequently repeated motif in scripture about the painfulness of following God. It's not an easy road. Remember that Jacob, after wrestling with God, walked with a limp the rest of his life.

So much for the yoke being easy and the burden light.

As to the infants: Let's remember that there is another story where God displays his judgment: Sodom. There, the prophet Abraham asks "Will not the judge of the all the earth do right?" Will God slay the righteous with the wicked? The answer is no. Whether we can understand it or not, the answer is no. Even if we have no categories or traditions to help us get our head around it, the answer is no.

I disagree. We do have "categories or traditions" to get our heads around it: morality. It is immoral to kill infants needlessly. For an almighty God, there would never be any need; he'd be free to choose some other option to do His will in a just manner.

As for the Amalekites, in warfare, livestock is generally booty. By ordering the destruction of the livestock, God was actually standing in the way of Israel's enriching themselves at the Amalekite's expense. This was a test of Israel's faithfulness and a check on their greed, not a judgment on the livestock.

The passage says that they took the livestock to sacrifice to God, not to keep for themselves.

I give you such people as Jeffrey Dahmer as exhibit A and ask you simply to consider whether he was still fully human at the time he was committing and concealing his crimes. I have my doubts. It's possible for a person to have his conscience so seared that he ceases to bear the image of God. The image is so marred as to be defaced altogether.

I don't believe that humans are the image of any God, so I don't think such a thing has been marred, even by Jeffrey Dahmer. And yes, I think he was still fully human. Not a good human, certainly, but still human.

But as has been pointed out here, God is perfect. Even the best human is very flawed and imperfect. If you're arguing that Jeffrey Dahmer is so flawed that he cannot bear the image of God, I can somewhat see where you're coming from... but what makes a "good" person fit to bear that image?

Why insist that every case have the same explanation? Why insist that I (or God) explain every case? My guess is that whatever explanation is given, regardless how right or plausible (or not), you will insist on your own judgment over that of God. What can I say to that?

"Steve's a very moral person. He only killed three people; most of the time, he's quite pleasant."

Is that statement valid? If not, don't you think that even one immoral act would be a blemish on a supposedly good and perfect God?

I would not associate anyone who tortured and killed even one newborn baby to punish the baby's father. We're not talking about a small thing here; it's a horrendous act that would require something extraordinary to justify. Don't try to brush it off as minor.

I could accept the argument that the events are allegory and didn't actually happen. I could also accept the argument that the child did die, but this was only falsely attributed to God. However, I can't accept the argument that God did do this, but it's not so big a deal that it needs to be addressed.

No, David's newborn son was not guilty of anything. His death was a punishment for David, not for the baby. I trust God is now taking care of that baby and will continue to do so. It also may well be that by allowing the baby to die, God spared the child a life of unimaginable horror. God knows, I don't, and so I defer to his judgment.

That makes no sense either. In the story, God punishes David by killing his son (but not until he had been subjected to seven days of torment, I should add). If what God was actually doing was saving David's son from a life of even greater horror, that wouldn't have been a punishment at all, would it?

What's the problem? Why can't God take action such that "whoever" believes shall not perish but have everlasting life while admitting that some "whoevers" won't believe?

You don't think that this diminishes the sacrifice of Christ? Please don't make me dig up the verses that describe Christ's sacrifice as being for the whole world, because I bet you already know them.

 

[cardero]

Dunemeister writes: God is powerful. Thus we don't have to worry about the fate of the children. Yes, they died early, but in the eschatological story told in scripture, this present earth is not the end of things. There is hope for the future, even for the dead. And perhaps God has rewards and compensations in store for those children who died early or perhaps even in innocence. There is a world to come in which wrongs -- real and apparent -- shall be understood, ended and resolved.

Cardero responds: If this is what people believe then the question begs: “Why did God not perform the killing Himself?”

 

[Greatest I am]

Penguin ~

we do have a standard and a guide- God has ultimately given us His Son, to teach us what God would like us to do, and be. Christ is the Living Message- sent by the Father. Christ is clear on what is right in His Father's sight- violence and forceful oppression is not among them.

but i hear what you're saying- like how do we know God didn't "use the Nazis" for His purpose? He used the Assyrians, so why not the Nazis? honestly, that's not someting i think anyone could answer. what i do know is that there are amazing stories of God's miraculous saving power rescuing many, many Jews and non-Jews from death during the Holocaut. yet millions of innocent men and women and kids were still killed.

the world is evil, and human plans are often selfish and sometimes cruel. what i do know is that evil will not win the day, and that even in the midst of suffering caused by evil, God is still there. i believe there is such a thing as spiritual warfare, such a thing as satanic power. and that while we often can't on our own understand the greater picture from where we now stand, a Christian puts His faith in God even in great trials, and worships Him regardless of circumstance, loving Him more than self, and like Christ, knowing that His presence and purpose is there, even in great and perplexing suffering. without the supreme example of the cross, and the resurrection, such great hope, faith, and perseverence would not be possible for us.

Greatest ~

dude... God is guiding our steps even now. He is the Master of the Universe. in Him we live an move and have our being, whether we recognize Him personally, or not. you or anyone can chose to disregard His word, His commandments, His wisdom, or His Son. one can deny His existence or claim that God has no power over them, yet that human claim does not make atheism a cosmological truth.

Yes God is our standard and guide and to have him teach that it is good to us genocide on man is the sigh of a demigod, not a God.

Following Jesus would be like Jews following Hitler.

No thanks.

If you do not recognize evil then you have a ways to go to wisdom.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Cardero responds: If this is what people believe then the question begs: “Why did God not perform the killing Himself?”

It seems that God is powerful enough to kill millions but is too weak to create a sinless man. Strange.

Regards
DL

 

[Elessar]

It seems that God is powerful enough to kill millions but is too weak to create a sinless man. Strange.

Regards
DL

To create a sinless man would defeat the purpose of man.