The Good, the Bad and God

[blü 2]

The bible attributes a formidable number of atrocities to God. As a small sample –

Genesis 22:9 – God orders a human sacrifice and Abraham takes him seriously (though it’s called off).

God’s rules for buying, owning, disciplining, bonking, selling &c slaves are set out in Exodus 20-21, 22:1-3, 23:12, 26-27, 32, Leviticus 19:20-22, 25:39-55, Deuteronomy 5:14, 15:12-18, 21:10-14, 23:15-16, 24:7. including, famously, how to sell your daughter.

Deuteronomy 7:1-2 Massacres and religious intolerance – “When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations...then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them and show them no mercy." (and again at 20:16)

Numbers 31:9-17 – God orders massacre.

Numbers 31:9-17 – God orders mass rape.

Joshua 1 – God orders the invasion of Canaan so his people can seize the territory.

Joshua 6:17, 6:21 – God orders, and Joshua performs, the massacre of the population of Jericho.

Judges 11 – God makes a deal with Jephthah, miliary victory in exchange for the human sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter. This is done, and Jephthah is elevated to Judge (ruler) of Israel.

2 Samuel 21 – God refuses to call off the famine until seven sons of Saul have been killed by impalement to expiate Saul’s bloodguilt.

2 Kings 2:23 – God murders children for being rude to Elisha about his bald head.

Hosea 13:16 – God condones the ripping open of pregnant women as part of massacring one’s enemies.

Jonah 1:7-15 – God demands the sacrifice of Jonah (though it’s converted to whalery).

NT – God refuses to forgive sin until Jesus is made a sacrifice to him.

John 8:44 Religious intolerance– Jesus says to the Jews, “You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning ... he is a liar and the father of lies.”
​

In Plato’s dialog Euthyphro, Socrates asks Euthyphro to explain τὸ ὅσιον to hosion – that which is pious, proper, permissible, good – to him. This is commonly simplified in English to ‘good’ and the relevant question of Socrates is expressed as –

"Is good loved by the gods because it is good? Or is it good because it is loved by the gods?"​

Some Christians maintain both that the bible is inerrant and that God is entirely good, which is to say, a thing is good because God approves of it, and conversely bad because God disapproves of it.

In that case, all the instances above must be examples of good, because they’re infallibly attributed to the Christian God.

I find every one of the examples (and many more like them not listed) to be morally repulsive, truly vile.

Is God right, or am I?

 

[ChristineM]

The bible attributes a formidable number of atrocities to God. As a small sample –

Genesis 22:9 – God orders a human sacrifice and Abraham takes him seriously (though it’s called off).

God’s rules for buying, owning, disciplining, bonking, selling &c slaves are set out in Exodus 20-21, 22:1-3, 23:12, 26-27, 32, Leviticus 19:20-22, 25:39-55, Deuteronomy 5:14, 15:12-18, 21:10-14, 23:15-16, 24:7. including, famously, how to sell your daughter.

Deuteronomy 7:1-2 Massacres and religious intolerance – “When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations...then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them and show them no mercy." (and again at 20:16)

Numbers 31:9-17 – God orders massacre.

Numbers 31:9-17 – God orders mass rape.

Joshua 1 – God orders the invasion of Canaan so his people can seize the territory.

Joshua 6:17, 6:21 – God orders, and Joshua performs, the massacre of the population of Jericho.

Judges 11 – God makes a deal with Jephthah, miliary victory in exchange for the human sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter. This is done, and Jephthah is elevated to Judge (ruler) of Israel.

2 Samuel 21 – God refuses to call off the famine until seven sons of Saul have been killed by impalement to expiate Saul’s bloodguilt.

2 Kings 2:23 – God murders children for being rude to Elisha about his bald head.

Hosea 13:16 – God condones the ripping open of pregnant women as part of massacring one’s enemies.

Jonah 1:7-15 – God demands the sacrifice of Jonah (though it’s converted to whalery).

NT – God refuses to forgive sin until Jesus is made a sacrifice to him.

John 8:44 Religious intolerance– Jesus says to the Jews, “You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning ... he is a liar and the father of lies.”
​

In Plato’s dialog Euthyphro, Socrates asks Euthyphro to explain τὸ ὅσιον to hosion – that which is pious, proper, permissible, good – to him. This is commonly simplified in English to ‘good’ and the relevant question of Socrates is expressed as –

"Is good loved by the gods because it is good? Or is it good because it is loved by the gods?"​

Some Christians maintain both that the bible is inerrant and that God is entirely good, which is to say, a thing is good because God approves of it, and conversely bad because God disapproves of it.

In that case, all the instances above must be examples of good, because they’re infallibly attributed to the Christian God.

I find every one of the examples (and many more like them not listed) to be morally repulsive, truly vile.

Is God right, or am I?

It is my belief that some (and more) of the verses listed are the cause of driving me from the church. Christian teaching at its worst. And the vast majority of christianity either accepts it as good and draws their moral values from them or completely ignores the bits of the bible they don't like.

 

[Nakosis]

The bible attributes a formidable number of atrocities to God. As a small sample –

Genesis 22:9 – God orders a human sacrifice and Abraham takes him seriously (though it’s called off).

God’s rules for buying, owning, disciplining, bonking, selling &c slaves are set out in Exodus 20-21, 22:1-3, 23:12, 26-27, 32, Leviticus 19:20-22, 25:39-55, Deuteronomy 5:14, 15:12-18, 21:10-14, 23:15-16, 24:7. including, famously, how to sell your daughter.

Deuteronomy 7:1-2 Massacres and religious intolerance – “When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations...then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them and show them no mercy." (and again at 20:16)

Numbers 31:9-17 – God orders massacre.

Numbers 31:9-17 – God orders mass rape.

Joshua 1 – God orders the invasion of Canaan so his people can seize the territory.

Joshua 6:17, 6:21 – God orders, and Joshua performs, the massacre of the population of Jericho.

Judges 11 – God makes a deal with Jephthah, miliary victory in exchange for the human sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter. This is done, and Jephthah is elevated to Judge (ruler) of Israel.

2 Samuel 21 – God refuses to call off the famine until seven sons of Saul have been killed by impalement to expiate Saul’s bloodguilt.

2 Kings 2:23 – God murders children for being rude to Elisha about his bald head.

Hosea 13:16 – God condones the ripping open of pregnant women as part of massacring one’s enemies.

Jonah 1:7-15 – God demands the sacrifice of Jonah (though it’s converted to whalery).

NT – God refuses to forgive sin until Jesus is made a sacrifice to him.

John 8:44 Religious intolerance– Jesus says to the Jews, “You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning ... he is a liar and the father of lies.”
​

In Plato’s dialog Euthyphro, Socrates asks Euthyphro to explain τὸ ὅσιον to hosion – that which is pious, proper, permissible, good – to him. This is commonly simplified in English to ‘good’ and the relevant question of Socrates is expressed as –

"Is good loved by the gods because it is good? Or is it good because it is loved by the gods?"​

Some Christians maintain both that the bible is inerrant and that God is entirely good, which is to say, a thing is good because God approves of it, and conversely bad because God disapproves of it.

In that case, all the instances above must be examples of good, because they’re infallibly attributed to the Christian God.

I find every one of the examples (and many more like them not listed) to be morally repulsive, truly vile.

Is God right, or am I?

Morality is tied to culture. The Bible reflects the morality of its times.

 

[ecco]

Is God right, or am I?

The actual question is, do we agree with the morals of the members of a comparatively small religious group who lived ~3000 years ago, or have we progressed as a civilization since then?

My answer would be that some of us have progressed.

 

[Hellbound Serpiente]

Morality is tied to culture. The Bible reflects the morality of its times.

Which is why I think ALL the Abrahamic religions are outdated and not applicable anymore. Slavery has been condone in all Abrahamic religions and we know very well slavery is abolished. This little fact, itself, is a concrete proof how Abrahamic religions were only meant for those specific era and those specific people. This puts a wet blanket over all the claims that Abrahamic religions are universal, as their practices depends on the framework given according to the demands of time and place, and it's not applicable objectively in all times and places

 

[Link]

Slavery has been condone in all Abrahamic religions and we know very well slavery is abolished.

If you can show it condoned in Quran, I understand Islam as is, condone it, but if you can show it condoned in Quran, I will abandon the Quran.

The translations make it appear condoned but to my understanding, those verses are really about Muta.

 

[Hellbound Serpiente]

The very fact that The Holy Qur'an set specific rules and regulations regarding how to deal with slaves and their treatment is a proof in itself that Qur'an condones slavery. If Qur'an really didn't condone slavery, it would have outright prohibited it's followers from indulging in it's practice rather than setting a framework of how to implement it properly.

 

[Link]

The very fact that The Holy Qur'an set specific rules and regulations regarding how to deal with slaves and their treatment is a proof in itself that Qur'an condones slavery.

IF you can show any of those verses I will leave my creed.

If Qur'an really didn't condone slavery, it would have outright prohibited it's followers from indulging in it's practice rather than setting a framework of how to implement it properly.

That's true, and so that's what I find, it outright prohibited it.

 

[Link]

Did God ever command to slavery per Quran?

See that topic.

 

[Hellbound Serpiente]

"And if ye fear that ye will not deal fairly by the orphans, marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four; and if ye fear that ye cannot do justice (to so many) then one (only) or (the captives) that your right hands possess. Thus it is more likely that ye will not do injustice." - 4:3 (Picktall)

"And all married women (are forbidden unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery. And those of whom ye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions as a duty. And there is no sin for you in what ye do by mutual agreement after the duty (hath been done). Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise." - 4:24 (Picktall)

"And whoso is not able to afford to marry free, believing women, let them marry from the believing maids whom your right hands possess. Allah knoweth best (concerning) your faith. Ye (proceed) one from another; so wed them by permission of their folk, and give unto them their portions in kindness, they being honest, not debauched nor of loose conduct. And if when they are honorably married they commit lewdness they shall incur the half of the punishment (prescribed) for free women (in that case). This is for him among you who feareth to commit sin. But to have patience would be better for you. Allah is Forgiving, Merciful." - 4:25 (Picktall)

"And serve Allah. Ascribe no thing as partner unto Him. (Show) kindness unto parents, and unto near kindred, and orphans, and the needy, and into the neighbor who is of kin (unto you) and the neighbor who is not of kin and the fellow traveller and the wayfarer and (the slaves) whom your right hands possess. Lo! Allah loveth not such as are proud and boastful," - 4:36 (Picktall)

"And Allah hath favored some of you above others in provision. Now those who are more favored will by no means hand over their provision to those (slaves) whom their right hands possess, so that they may be equal with them in respect thereof. Is it then the grace of Allah that they deny?" - 16:71 (Picktall)

"Save from their wives or the (slaves) that their right hands possess, for then they are not blameworthy," - 23:6 (Picktall)

"And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms, and not to reveal their adornment save to their own husbands or fathers or husbands' fathers, or their sons or their husbands' sons, or their brothers or their brothers' sons or sisters' sons, or their women, or their slaves, or male attendants who lack vigor, or children who know naught of women's nakedness. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And turn unto Allah together, O believers, in order that ye may succeed." - 24:31 (Picktall)

"And let those who cannot find a match keep chaste till Allah give them independence by His grace. And such of your slaves as seek a writing (of emancipation), write it for them if ye are aware of aught of good in them, and bestow upon them of the wealth of Allah which He hath bestowed upon you. Force not your slave girls to whoredom that ye may seek enjoyment of the life of the world, if they would preserve their chastity. And if one force them, then (unto them), after their compulsion, Lo! Allah will be Forgiving, Merciful." - 24:33 (Picktall)

"O ye who believe! Let your slaves, and those of you who have not come to puberty, ask leave of you at three times (before they come into your presence): Before the prayer of dawn, and when ye lay aside your raiment for the heat of noon, and after the prayer of night. Three times of privacy for you. It is no sin for them or for you at other times, when some of you go round attendant upon others (if they come into your presence without leave). Thus Allah maketh clear the revelations for you. Allah is Knower, Wise." - 24:58 (Picktall)

"O Prophet! Lo! We have made lawful unto thee thy wives unto whom thou hast paid their dowries, and those whom thy right hand possesseth of those whom Allah hath given thee as spoils of war, and the daughters of thine uncle on the father's side and the daughters of thine aunts on the father's side, and the daughters of thine uncles on the mother's side emigrated with thee, and a believing woman if she give herself unto the Prophet and the Prophet desire to ask her in marriage, a privilege for thee only, not for the (rest of) believers. We are aware of that which We enjoined upon them concerning their wives and those whom their right hands possess that thou mayst be free from blame, for Allah is Forgiving, Merciful." - 33:50 (Picktall)

"It is not allowed thee to take (other) women henceforth nor that thou shouldst change them for other wives even though their beauty pleased thee, save those whom thy right hand possesseth. And Allah is Watcher over all things." - 33:52 (Picktall)

"It is no sin for them (thy wives) (to converse freely) with their fathers, or their sons: or their brothers, or their brothers' sons, or the sons of their sisters or of their own women, or their slaves. O women! Keep your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is Witness over all things." - 33:55 (Picktall)

"Save with their wives and those whom their right hands possess, for thus they are not blameworthy;" - 70:30 (Picktall)

 

[Link]

What is translated as right hands possess or slaves in 33:55 can refer to a different concept and I believe it does:

Malakat Aymanihim - And translations

Language is contextual, and I believe the translation should be "who they have authority (to have sex with) through their oaths (of either marriage or Muta)". Malakat aymanim mentioned as alternative to marriage is due to Muta, which is a relationship allowed in Islam but has conditions like if there is a child, the father is responsible to make sure it's raised well, and takes responsibility as a father over it. It maybe there were even further rules that have been lost like it might've been obligatory to extend to a full marriage if a child was ensued but I don't know. So many things lost in Islam it's hard to say.

What is noted is that through verses, this works both way. The Husband is that to the wife as well, so what is making sense to me, is the wife actually has the right to demand sex from the husband just like the husband has the right to. In fact, the mother is also probably as responsible over the child as the father through Muta, which to me suggests there are some lost rules in this regard. But there is no doubt in my mind that slavery is not what is meant by this term.

That was from the other thread.

 

[Hellbound Serpiente]

My apologies, I didn't read your topic. In fact, I feel like you maybe on to something, as I've forgotten most about Islam. But really, the fact that slavery has been practiced by Muslims since the invention of Islam without it prohibiting and even criticizing the practice goes against the belief that Islam doesn't condone slavery and right hands possess or slaves in 33:55 refer to a different concept

 

[Link]

My apologies, I didn't read your topic. In fact, I feel like you maybe on to something, as I've forgotten most about Islam. But really, the fact that slavery has been practiced by Muslims since the invention of Islam without it prohibiting and even criticizing the practice goes against the belief that Islam doesn't condone slavery

That would make sense if Ahlulbayt were followed, but the Authorities to be followed, were oppressed, it makes sense, like Ahlulbayt (a) say regarding Quran, "they (God's representatives) found your book distorted and the way of your Prophet abandoned".

 

[InvestigateTruth]

That would make sense if Ahlulbayt were followed, but the Authorities to be followed, were oppressed, it makes sense, like Ahlulbayt (a) say regarding Quran, "they (God's representatives) found your book distorted and the way of your Prophet abandoned".

Then from the very beginning of Islam, almost all Muslims misunderstood the term "your right hand possess". Couldnt God reveal the Quran more clearly, so, they were not going to misunderstand such term " your right hand possess"?
You see, it has caused almost all Muslims to misunderstand!

 

[Hellbound Serpiente]

Then from the very beginning of Islam, almost all Muslims misunderstood the term "your right hand possess". Couldnt God reveal the Quran more clearly, so, they were not going to misunderstand such term " your right hand possess"?
You see, it has caused almost all Muslims to misunderstand!

Perhaps Link have a point here. Yes, God could reveal the Quran more clearly, but this ambiguous verses might actually have been a test for the believers. This is my personal theory, don't take it as a fact. But I personally feel like God revealed these ambiguous verses on purpose to test Muslims, and just like you said, almost all Muslims misunderstood [and failed the test]. Check out this verse to see what I mean:

"Shakir: He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical; then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation. but none knows its interpretation except Allah, and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding." --- Surah Ali 'Imran [3:7]

I personally feel like Muslims made the very mistake God is talking about in the verses above --- They took the allegorical verses and twisted it to suit the interpretation most suitable to their personal agenda.

I might be wrong, but it doesn't matter. Slavery is unacceptable. Islam and other Abrahamic religions needs reformation to get rid of evils practices like killing of apostates, homosexuals, stoning, oppression against women, jizya, denouncing Sharia as a whole along numerous other unjust practices attributed to Islam to become compatible with our modern era. Either that, or Islam AND Christianity and Judaism needs abolishment.

 

[Link]

Then from the very beginning of Islam, almost all Muslims misunderstood the term "your right hand possess". Couldnt God reveal the Quran more clearly, so, they were not going to misunderstand such term " your right hand possess"?
You see, it has caused almost all Muslims to misunderstand!

You should read hadiths about the sorcery, the fact is the sorcerers cast a sorcery regarding Abu Bakr and Umar right after Prophet (s) died, or even near his death, they started spreading false lies to the Prophet (s) a long with casting sorcery.

There is still till this day, a dark spell pertaining to not only these verses, but other verses. By language, it's actually very clear.

According to you, because Ulil-Amr (a) were taken to be tyrants like Yazeed or the stooges in form of scholars that said to obey tyrants (scholars of sunnis), the term Ulil-Amr and it's context, is ambiguous in Quran.

Yes, Muslims became totally blind to the Quran, the companions who understood it were a minority now surrounded by a majority that opposed them and even fought them in the start and oppressed them and tortured them for believing.

The fact was, the Jibt (sorcery) was believed in, the Taghut that which was really worshipped, and God and his chosen were defeated.

So now, don't tell me majority. Majority are in hell, they are not authority.

 

[Link]

Perhaps Link have a point here. Yes, God could reveal the Quran more clearly, but this ambiguous verses might actually have been a test for the believers. This is my personal theory, don't take it as a fact. But I personally feel like God revealed these ambiguous verses on purpose to test Muslims, and just like you said, almost all Muslims misunderstood [and failed the test]. Check out this verse to see what I mean:

"Shakir: He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical; then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation. but none knows its interpretation except Allah, and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding." --- Surah Ali 'Imran [3:7]

I personally feel like Muslims made the very mistake God is talking about in the verses above --- They took the allegorical verses and twisted it to suit the interpretation most suitable to their personal agenda.

I might be wrong, but it doesn't matter. Slavery is unacceptable. Islam and other Abrahamic religions needs reformation to get rid of evils practices like killing of apostates, homosexuals, stoning, oppression against women, jizya, denouncing Sharia as a whole along numerous other unjust practices attributed to Islam to become compatible with our modern era. Either that, or Islam AND Christianity and Judaism needs abolishment.

It's the sorcery that makes Quran unclear, otherwise, it's as clear as a book can get.

 

[Link]

3:7 means two things come from Quran, clear bright signs (in form of proofs, and doesn't mean one verse necessarily) and the other thing that comes from it, is ambiguity, and so those with betrayal in their hearts, they follow what which is ambiguous, seeking to interpret it.

And this means you build only on what is clear. To follow anything unclear from it as opposed to bright signs from it, will, make you immersed in a cloud of darkness from Iblis.

But to show the way forward, because God wants to heal all hearts, he reminds of the firmly rooted in knowledge which is the Leaders of guidance, the Ahlulbayt, just like the family of Abraham were a guidance in the past.

Just like Jesus (a) was a true authority on the Torah and Gospels was revealing the true way to see the main foundations, which was ironically the holy position of the Guides over scholars who were claiming to represent Moses and Prophets.

The guidance would be clear, God would be seen by all, and there would be no doubt, but the problem is Iblis. Iblis and his forces, they always cast regarding every revelation and every explanation, and every will or wish of a Prophet get's distorted due to it. Then God confirms his signs somehow or another, and then it's a trial, do we hold on the sorcery or believe in the light.

Those with hard hearts cling to what the sorcery of Iblis pertaining to the holy book or guidance of the Prophet (s), while the believers gain knowledge, and see Iblis as a result clearly. They know of the dark magic and move swiftly away from the dark visions of Iblis towards the light.

The family of Mohammad (s) cannot be separated from Quran. They are one.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Perhaps Link have a point here. Yes, God could reveal the Quran more clearly, but this ambiguous verses might actually have been a test for the believers. This is my personal theory, don't take it as a fact. But I personally feel like God revealed these ambiguous verses on purpose to test Muslims, and just like you said, almost all Muslims misunderstood [and failed the test]. Check out this verse to see what I mean:

"Shakir: He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical; then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation. but none knows its interpretation except Allah, and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding." --- Surah Ali 'Imran [3:7]

I personally feel like Muslims made the very mistake God is talking about in the verses above --- They took the allegorical verses and twisted it to suit the interpretation most suitable to their personal agenda.

I might be wrong, but it doesn't matter. Slavery is unacceptable. Islam and other Abrahamic religions needs reformation to get rid of evils practices like killing of apostates, homosexuals, stoning, oppression against women, jizya, denouncing Sharia as a whole along numerous other unjust practices attributed to Islam to become compatible with our modern era. Either that, or Islam AND Christianity and Judaism needs abolishment.

Yes, there are ambiguous verses which are to test the Muslims. But, if we think that, the term "your right hand possessed" also is an ambiguous term, meant to test the Muslims, wouldn't it be unfair to the Slaves? What is the fault of slaves, that they become a mean for Muslims to be tested? Can we still say the God of Quran is fair?

 

[Kenny]

The bible attributes a formidable number of atrocities to God. As a small sample –

Genesis 22:9 – God orders a human sacrifice and Abraham takes him seriously (though it’s called off).

God’s rules for buying, owning, disciplining, bonking, selling &c slaves are set out in Exodus 20-21, 22:1-3, 23:12, 26-27, 32, Leviticus 19:20-22, 25:39-55, Deuteronomy 5:14, 15:12-18, 21:10-14, 23:15-16, 24:7. including, famously, how to sell your daughter.

Deuteronomy 7:1-2 Massacres and religious intolerance – “When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations...then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them and show them no mercy." (and again at 20:16)

Numbers 31:9-17 – God orders massacre.

Numbers 31:9-17 – God orders mass rape.

Joshua 1 – God orders the invasion of Canaan so his people can seize the territory.

Joshua 6:17, 6:21 – God orders, and Joshua performs, the massacre of the population of Jericho.

Judges 11 – God makes a deal with Jephthah, miliary victory in exchange for the human sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter. This is done, and Jephthah is elevated to Judge (ruler) of Israel.

2 Samuel 21 – God refuses to call off the famine until seven sons of Saul have been killed by impalement to expiate Saul’s bloodguilt.

2 Kings 2:23 – God murders children for being rude to Elisha about his bald head.

Hosea 13:16 – God condones the ripping open of pregnant women as part of massacring one’s enemies.

Jonah 1:7-15 – God demands the sacrifice of Jonah (though it’s converted to whalery).

NT – God refuses to forgive sin until Jesus is made a sacrifice to him.

John 8:44 Religious intolerance– Jesus says to the Jews, “You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning ... he is a liar and the father of lies.”
​

In Plato’s dialog Euthyphro, Socrates asks Euthyphro to explain τὸ ὅσιον to hosion – that which is pious, proper, permissible, good – to him. This is commonly simplified in English to ‘good’ and the relevant question of Socrates is expressed as –

"Is good loved by the gods because it is good? Or is it good because it is loved by the gods?"​

Some Christians maintain both that the bible is inerrant and that God is entirely good, which is to say, a thing is good because God approves of it, and conversely bad because God disapproves of it.

In that case, all the instances above must be examples of good, because they’re infallibly attributed to the Christian God.

I find every one of the examples (and many more like them not listed) to be morally repulsive, truly vile.

Is God right, or am I?

mIss-applications,
Christophobia
Tanakophobia
lacking in substance...

So... God.