Why does my God allow children to die? Is he evil?

[adi2d]

You might want to read more carefully before responding. I said they were all wrong, unless they were doing it out of self-defense. You can justify the Allies' killing of Germans in WWII because it was necessary for their defense. The examples you used were ones I already in that very post you're responding to called immoral.



Then he defended the moral subsection of humanity in a horribly immoral way.



I realize you're trying to make the argument that God knows so much more than us, so it's impossible to question him, but then he fails as an example or as a teacher. It also makes the false assumption that there is something else to know. God killed almost every human being alive because supposedly they were all evil. It's impossible for them all to have been evil, and for an omnipotent being, killing all those people wold be unnecessary. He would have many other options to accomplish the same goal without resorting to an immoral action like murder.

Like a battered spouse you won't get him too understand what you're saying

'He's a good provider'
He only hits me when I deserve it'

'But he loves me


Sad he can't see that life is as God planned it. Child suffering and all

 

[Skyrim25]

Well this is certainly a unique approach.

1. Moses could possibly have been wrong but it is God who is supposed to have ordered the attack. Was he wrong? Do you know that Moses lied about who ordered it?
2. I have read three secular books on OT warfare. None include anything about promised lands. They record that the Canaanites buried live children in their foundations for luck, burned them alive for false God's, and constantly raided the Hebrews at harvest time year after year producing famines. Is any one of these not reason for a battle?
3. God is recorded to have tried and tried to get the Canaanites to repent. They refused. It was only after God said their cup of iniquity was full that he allowed Israel to attack them.
4. Those are reasons for an attack. Are you claiming that if any race claims to have been promised a land they have the right to kill everyone in it? I was not using promised land as justification for their war.
5. I do not think you are right about Moses being mistaken but that was not part of what I sued for justification. It would be but I do not remember using it.

Oh for crying out loud, the Hebrews were homeless and were promised a geographical area in the ANE. In fact their ancestors had lived their but some had migrated to Egypt during a famine and enslaved. They had rights to the land even if the Bible was all wrong. The context for Jesus words (which were not the promised land anyway) were completely different from Moses' a thousand years earlier.

I agree but what does that have to do with OT warfare and God's actions 3000 years ago.

I agree with all of this and have used the same verses myself in other arguments. However they have nothing to do with literal wars and land. Do you wish to discuss salvation, atonement, the law, wars, the promised land, the acts of God, Moses. or what. Your getting all types of contexts mixed up.

Killing is not wrong if justification exists even for humans. Moses had it. God can kill and have justifications we cannot access. The promised land is exactly hat Moses said. The OT contains literal types and shadows of things that had symbology for spiritual things but were literal truths. Yes the promised land is a spiritual concept, and IT WAS also a literal piece of geography. Are you suggesting God delivered Israel from Egypt's bondage to wonder homeless in the desert. I have never heard anyone claim this.



Well neither of us know whether Moses talked to God or not, or for that matter anyone. Every single test for divine authorship is passed by the Pentateuch and if you doubt that I can put you in touch with a very knowledgeable member of the Nazarene tribe and you can discuss it with him. What you want to believe is not really a debate issue. What you can demonstrate is. As for sin. Sin is almost always based on the wrong use of a thing or concept that has a valid use. What is wrong for children is ok for adults, what is wrong for pets is ok for humans, what is ok for doctors is not ok for amateurs. Competence and knowledge base can make a thing ok for one group and not ok for another. Jealousy is a sin as humans misapply it through envy, etc.. It is not wrong for God to resent a human whirring after false God's because it will ultimately harm the human. You have identified one of the semantic technicalities associated with a language that doe snot have the capacity to fully describe the infinite. God is greater than al the languages combined and is never perfectly described. In fact Jealousy is not even the word used in the OT. It is invalid to interpret quanna with some modern English concept. The word means intolerant of another God or rival and does not apply to human jealousy. So no God is not a sinner. You must look up the Hebrew, Aramaic, or Koine Greek if you are hanging an argument on a word.


No it shows as it usually does, that an OT literal reality was symbolic of a NT spiritual concept. The lambs blood on the door posts as real, and it symbolized Christ's blood. Real slavery was symbolic of spiritual slavery. The atonement offered by literal and real priests was symbolic of Christ's permanent role as high priests. God is a lot bidder than you give him credit for.

1. History says that the Canaanites were Nomads( a peaceful people as it says). They were NOT evil as ONLY Moses has said. Its histories word vs Moses's word. If you look at the evidence the only reason they went into Canaan was because it was there "promise land" as said by Moses and only Moses. There were other evil people out there so why didnt they go after others instead of the Canaanites?...they needed a reason to get them off of their land.

2-3. Does killing some people justified if they dont believe in YOUR God?...Thats why Moses's Laws are broken and is why they killed innocent unarmed women and children.

4. Moses's people had NO justification in going into Canaan other then Moses's claims of evil so they could get their "promise land"!

Moses's people were homeless because of there own actions that lead them to Egypt in the first place(other then the famine). Also there are other people now on the land they once had. Is it right to come back and demand it?...NO!

The laws of Moses that he claims is God's word is what made them kill the Canaanites and it is that same law that killed the Messiah. Both the Messiah and the Canaanites died by the same EXACT circumstances under the same exact laws. They BOTH paid for it in blood...the law is broken!

Would it be righteous for a justified Messiah to take the throne in the temple built on the blood of innocent women and children? The Messiah did NOT take the throne, in fact the throne he took was made of wood that HE was nailed to instead of offering sacrifices of unwilling men women and children as MOSES'S people DID.

The God that I believe in DID NOT order the death of women and children as it says in the Old Testament. I believe for this reason that Moses was wrong and there is plenty of evidence in the NT to suggest that's true as well as proof of commonsense and reason.

 

[1robin]

Like a battered spouse you won't get him too understand what you're saying

'He's a good provider'
He only hits me when I deserve it'

'But he loves me


Sad he can't see that life is as God planned it. Child suffering and all

What was this? Rhetoric can't do what arguments and evidence must. There is not anything here deserving of a contention. You can't contend with irrationality.

As a bonus: Do you know the most self confident group of humans are in insane asylums.

 

[1robin]

1. History says that the Canaanites were Nomads( a peaceful people as it says). They were NOT evil as ONLY Moses has said. Its histories word vs Moses's word. If you look at the evidence the only reason they went into Canaan was because it was there "promise land" as said by Moses and only Moses. There were other evil people out there so why didnt they go after others instead of the Canaanites?...they needed a reason to get them off of their land.

That is not even a little bit true. They have recently dug up foundations with child skeletons embedded in the foundations that were entombed alive. They were never wiped out as instructed and plagued the area for hundreds of years after ward. I have just finished reading a secular book "OT warfare" and have read plenty before this one. I have no idea where you came up with this but it is not true. They were notorious even among wayward heathen tribes for brutality. Do you want to debate just this issue alone?

2-3. Does killing some people justified if they dont believe in YOUR God?...Thats why Moses's Laws are broken and is why they killed innocent unarmed women and children.

That is not why they were killed, neither was race, geography, nor injustice. They were weighed and found wanting.

The key text is Genesis 15:16, which says, "Then in the fourth generation they shall return here, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete." In other words, God postponed Canaanite genocide for 400 years (Gen 15:13) in hopes that they would repent. According to Kaiser, ". . . God waited for centuries while the Amalekites and those other Canaanite groups slowly filled up their own cups of condemnation by their sinful behavior. God never acted precipitously against them; his grace and mercy waited to see if they would repent and turn from their headlong plummet into destruction."
CANAANITE GENOCIDE

He even made his people suffer in waiting until all hope they would repent was exhausted.

4. Moses's people had NO justification in going into Canaan other then Moses's claims of evil so they could get their "promise land"!

You must first show Moses was wrong before an argument is even possible. This also contradicts your earlier claims.

Moses's people were homeless because of there own actions that lead them to Egypt in the first place(other then the famine). Also there are other people now on the land they once had. Is it right to come back and demand it?...NO!

I did not say they all migrated to Egypt. Many stayed behind just as they did in the diaspora AND THEIR LAND WAS TAKEN.

The laws of Moses that he claims is God's word is what made them kill the Canaanites and it is that same law that killed the Messiah. Both the Messiah and the Canaanites died by the same EXACT circumstances under the same exact laws. They BOTH paid for it in blood...the law is broken!

The law has nothing to do with this. It was not given when the Canaanites were killed, and did not contain a commandment to kill them when it was. In fact it says do not murder. What are you talking about? Find any law about the Canaanites ever recorded in the Bible.

Would it be righteous for a justified Messiah to take the throne in the temple built on the blood of innocent women and children? The Messiah did NOT take the throne, in fact the throne he took was made of wood that HE was nailed to instead of offering sacrifices of unwilling men women and children as MOSES'S people DID.

Good grief man. That cross said King of the Jews on it. He had hereditary rights to the throne, he claimed to be the King of the Jews, he claimed to exceed any authority on Earth. Everything was placed under his authority and everything was made through him. Even the Sanhedrin did not question his rights to the throne. They just hated them.

The God that I believe in DID NOT order the death of women and children as it says in the Old Testament. I believe for this reason that Moses was wrong and there is plenty of evidence in the NT to suggest that's true as well as proof of commonsense and reason.

The God that you believe in is not the God of the Bible then. How is what you believe the criteria for what Moses claimed anyway? I am very patient with fellow Christians especially but your are way out of bounds here. How many links do you want about Canaanite depravity? How many links about the authorship and accuracy of the Pentateuch? For crying out loud Christ quoted from it and affirmed it.

 

[Meow Mix]

Murder is always wrong but depending on the circumstances known to God alone, killing may be justified and not murder.

This is a textbook example of special pleading fallacy. It might sound convincing to you, but hopefully you can agree that fallacies aren't admissible as arguments for a reason.

For instance, suppose that your special pleading wasn't fallacious somehow and that it was admissible to absolve God of judgment. Say that you die and you finally make it to heaven -- you're so happy! -- but then perhaps you would be shocked if, now that you finally made it, God gets off His throne and starts flailing you mercilessly with chainsaw whips, all the while laughing maniacally.

"It's ok," you might think to yourself. God has a good reason for this. He's not actually malevolent, you just don't understand the reasons that explain this.

A year goes by, you're still being whipped. Two go by. A hundred. A thousand. You start losing track, but all the while you're just so happy that God is so good, even if you can't understand the reasons that explain how God can be good despite doing this to you.

As you can see, this scenario could literally go on infinitely and you would, if special pleading were admissible as an argument, ostensibly never be able to be convinced that maybe God is malevolent and just lied about being benevolent. God could be burning babies and filling nurseries with tiger bears with sharks for arms and melting peoples' faces off and you would still, using special pleading, simply declare that God is still good "for reasons we don't understand."

This is clearly nonsense, and I hope you will agree. It should be simple enough to say "You're engaging in a fallacy" and that should be that, I just wanted to explain why this fallacy is sloppy thinking.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

This is clearly nonsense, and I hope you will agree. It should be simple enough to say "You're engaging in a fallacy" and that should be that, I just wanted to explain why this fallacy is sloppy thinking.

Perhaps this fallacy isn't sloppy thinking for reasons known to god alone.

 

[Meow Mix]

Perhaps this fallacy isn't sloppy thinking for reasons known to god alone.

Yo dawg, I herd u liek fallacies so I special pleaded for special pleading so you can be fallacious while yer fallacious!

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Yo dawg, I herd u liek fallacies so I special pleaded for special pleading so you can be fallacious while yer fallacious!

You can never be too fallcious while engaging in fallacies.

For reasons known to god alone.

 

[Skyrim25]

That is not even a little bit true. They have recently dug up foundations with child skeletons embedded in the foundations that were entombed alive. They were never wiped out as instructed and plagued the area for hundreds of years after ward. I have just finished reading a secular book "OT warfare" and have read plenty before this one. I have no idea where you came up with this but it is not true. They were notorious even among wayward heathen tribes for brutality. Do you want to debate just this issue alone?

That is not why they were killed, neither was race, geography, nor injustice. They were weighed and found wanting.

The key text is Genesis 15:16, which says, "Then in the fourth generation they shall return here, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete." In other words, God postponed Canaanite genocide for 400 years (Gen 15:13) in hopes that they would repent. According to Kaiser, ". . . God waited for centuries while the Amalekites and those other Canaanite groups slowly filled up their own cups of condemnation by their sinful behavior. God never acted precipitously against them; his grace and mercy waited to see if they would repent and turn from their headlong plummet into destruction."
CANAANITE GENOCIDE

He even made his people suffer in waiting until all hope they would repent was exhausted.


You must first show Moses was wrong before an argument is even possible. This also contradicts your earlier claims.

I did not say they all migrated to Egypt. Many stayed behind just as they did in the diaspora AND THEIR LAND WAS TAKEN.

The law has nothing to do with this. It was not given when the Canaanites were killed, and did not contain a commandment to kill them when it was. In fact it says do not murder. What are you talking about? Find any law about the Canaanites ever recorded in the Bible.

Good grief man. That cross said King of the Jews on it. He had hereditary rights to the throne, he claimed to be the King of the Jews, he claimed to exceed any authority on Earth. Everything was placed under his authority and everything was made through him. Even the Sanhedrin did not question his rights to the throne. They just hated them.

The God that you believe in is not the God of the Bible then. How is what you believe the criteria for what Moses claimed anyway? I am very patient with fellow Christians especially but your are way out of bounds here. How many links do you want about Canaanite depravity? How many links about the authorship and accuracy of the Pentateuch? For crying out loud Christ quoted from it and affirmed it.

ok here we go...

1. This is about your information regarding the ACTUAL info on the Canaanites... The Old Testament is based on ONLY the views from Moses's people since Moses wrote the first 5 books. On the Wiki site it states that the Canaanites were "Nomads"(peaceful people) that traveled with the seasons for there harvests. It also states that they were made up of city states(people unorganized to have a military on their own). This is farther evident by the fact that in the OT itself states that by the time they were able to form a military it was too late. You can study the OT all you want but the view points in it are ONLY from the ones killing unarmed women and children...you have to look at outside bible's information too.

2. Are you telling me that NOT worshiping God is a SIN? Did God "postpone" killing them because they did not worship him? If you answered yes to this question then you and I are on different I.Q. levels. What validates one God over another?...just because "they" said so? If God is worried about people not worshiping him enough to kill innocent people then the God you worship maybe the greatest deceiver of all time wearing the mask of God...Satan!... and you would never even know you were even worshiping him instead. keep in mind that Satan also wanted to be a God and he is also a great deceiver!

3. you said this... You must first show Moses was wrong before an argument is even possible. This also contradicts your earlier claims.

There is a lot of evidence to show that Moses was wrong...

The Ten Commandment were NOT of God...

[Jesus says this about the Jewish people...For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.[Romans 10]

-Even the Ten Commandments (the holiest part of the Law) has come to be a "ministration of death" (2 Corinthians 3:7). Its "glory was to be done away" (2 Corinthians 3:7). Paul spoke of its conclusion as "that which is abolished" (2 Corinthians 3:13).

we are now "dead to the Law" (Romans 7:4);

That they have been "delivered from the Law" (Romans 7:6);

That the Law is now in a state of decay (Hebrews 8:13);

That it has been disannulled (Hebrews 7:18);

That the Law was only a schoolmaster intended for spiritual infants to which are no longer subject (Galatians 3:24–25);

as a consequence of these things, are no longer under Law (Romans 6:14).

Moses's law was wrong. Moses's law judges things that are NOT of fairness and are NOT on equality...this means that the laws he had are UNJUSTIFIED.

Moses states that God is a Jealous God but how can a righteous and perfect being be weak and sinful when it also says that Jealousy is a sin?...Is God a sinner?...is God a selfish being then if he says he is Jealous(jealousy is only born in selfishness)?

4. The law had EVERYTHING to do with the Canaanites being killed. They were judged according to Moses's laws of worship ...OUR...God or die!

5. You said this...
Good grief man. That cross said King of the Jews on it. He had hereditary rights to the throne, he claimed to be the King of the Jews, he claimed to exceed any authority on Earth. Everything was placed under his authority and everything was made through him. Even the Sanhedrin did not question his rights to the throne. They just hated them.
You dont know why they even judged him!...They judged him because he did not fit the picture of the Messiah...THEY...expected! Let me break it down for you. The Messiah was to come in and take the throne in the temple on the promise land. Jesus comes in and says that the promise land is in YOU and not actual land at all and Jesus also says that...HE HIMSELF...is the temple to be broken. If Moses was right then the Temple was NOT Jesus's body as JESUS HIMSELF STATES or was the throne so either Jesus is wrong or Moses is wrong because they both had different views on what the promise land was and what the kingdom of God is. Remember that Moses is the ONLY one that ever said the promise land was Canaan. Jesus proved that wrong with his death!

6. you said...

The God that you believe in is not the God of the Bible then. How is what you believe the criteria for what Moses claimed anyway? I am very patient with fellow Christians especially but your are way out of bounds here. How many links do you want about Canaanite depravity? How many links about the authorship and accuracy of the Pentateuch? For crying out loud Christ quoted from it and affirmed it.

I dont believe in the criteria of Moses claims! The God of the OT is a unforgiving God and a God without mercy who has had innocent children killed in more then one situation in the OT for...HIS...glory. If you have to kill unarmed women and children for your glory then YOUR glory is not worth crap I take in the toilet. Again let me remind you that the first 5 books were written by Moses that ALL of this comes from!...that means that you cant trust them because its Moses's words in question.

Jesus took the throne by the innocence of his own blood rather then the innocent blood of others. This is proof that the God that Jesus speaks of is DIFFERENT then the OT's version of God because they OT's version of God would have had the Messiah sacrifice the enemies of the Jewish people instead of being the sacrifice himself! OTHER WISE THE CANAANITES WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SACRIFICED TO GOD LIKE THEY THE OT SAYS THEY WERE...point being is that no matter your crimes the one TRUE God would never kill others before killing himself as payment of sin...Proves Moses's version of God(OT version) wrong. God is not unforgiving nor is he without mercy unlike the OT's version where God is more then willing to kill anyone.

OT and the NT contradict each other! Moses's version of the promise land vs Jesus's version of the promise land

 

[1robin]

This is a textbook example of special pleading fallacy. It might sound convincing to you, but hopefully you can agree that fallacies aren't admissible as arguments for a reason.

There is not the slightest bit of pleading or fallacy involved here. What I am discussing is a foundation in every system of law ever made by rational cultures. Killing has circumstances that can justify it. Murder is killing without justification. There is no mystery here. Circumstances effect almost all moral and legal truths and always have.

For instance, suppose that your special pleading wasn't fallacious somehow and that it was admissible to absolve God of judgment. Say that you die and you finally make it to heaven -- you're so happy! -- but then perhaps you would be shocked if, now that you finally made it, God gets off His throne and starts flailing you mercilessly with chainsaw whips, all the while laughing maniacally.

So I should deny the only hope for mankind on the basis he may act contradictory to every action credited to him. My doctor may kill me in the next operation but trust him not to. Why is it that the decision mechanisms you use for every other issue in your entire life become suspend for theological claims, alone?

"It's ok," you might think to yourself. God has a good reason for this. He's not actually malevolent, you just don't understand the reasons that explain this.

God could have killed me and still can and not violate his nature. I have reasoned faith to think he will not. I have reasoned faith an apple has no razor blades in it, I have reasoned faith general dynamics can build a jet engine that can get me to Miami without exploding, I have reasoned faith my inoculation is not the rabbis virus. I admit and act consistent with reasoned faith. Why only in this subject do you not?

A year goes by, you're still being whipped. Two go by. A hundred. A thousand. You start losing track, but all the while you're just so happy that God is so good, even if you can't understand the reasons that explain how God can be good despite doing this to you.

As you can see, this scenario could literally go on infinitely and you would, if special pleading were admissible as an argument, ostensibly never be able to be convinced that maybe God is malevolent and just lied about being benevolent. God could be burning babies and filling nurseries with tiger bears with sharks for arms and melting peoples' faces off and you would still, using special pleading, simply declare that God is still good "for reasons we don't understand."

This is clearly nonsense, and I hope you will agree. It should be simple enough to say "You're engaging in a fallacy" and that should be that, I just wanted to explain why this fallacy is sloppy thinking.

Your entire argument is a hypothetical of a thing that has no exceptions known, might have. Do you hold a pistol on your pet if it is near you? Do you plan for your family blowing your house up? Do you think the police will arrest you for no reason? Then why do you think God might suddenly be not God? I am baffled and your usually rational even if not correct.

 

[idav]

So I should deny the only hope for mankind on the basis he may act contradictory to every action credited to him. My doctor may kill me in the next operation but trust him not to. Why is it that the decision mechanisms you use for every other issue in your entire life become suspend for theological claims, alone?

Trusting humans is not at all like trusting God. At least with humans you can use evidence and logic to determine any ill will. With God we just have to trust with no real objective evidence on how such a God treats humans. We trust a doctor because he has been doing operations for years, but we don't know what god has been up to or whether he is into chainsaws.

 

[1robin]

ok here we go...
1. This is about your information regarding the ACTUAL info on the Canaanites... The Old Testament is based on ONLY the views from Moses's people since Moses wrote the first 5 books. On the Wiki site it states that the Canaanites were "Nomads"(peaceful people) that traveled with the seasons for there harvests. It also states that they were made up of city states(people unorganized to have a military on their own). This is farther evident by the fact that in the OT itself states that by the time they were able to form a military it was too late. You can study the OT all you want but the view points in it are ONLY from the ones killing unarmed women and children...you have to look at outside bible's information too.

I have already covered this. Since it had no effect I will not elaborate beyond the fact the God of (or one of the major God's of) the Canaanites was Moloc. Moloc was associated with human sacrifice more than any other aspect. Here are a few better links than Wikipedia.
Killing the Canaanites: A Response to the New Atheism
https://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=11&article=1224

I can't help but add a bit more. The entire pantheon on Canaanites God's were incestuous, justified bestiality, as well as DEMNANDING child sacrifice. Now my God's consistency can be seen in the fact that when the Canaanites never were wiped out according to command they corrupted Israel just as Go said they would. King Ahab and the famous Jezebel "whored after" Canaanite Gods including Molech and began justifying infanticide. Did God say because they were of his people that was all just fine or did he judge them just as he did Canaan. It showed back up yet again in Josiah's reign in Judah and Josiah punished it severely. Not only is cannonade atrocity not a mystery but even it's predicted infestation among Israel came true and God consistently punished it.

2. Are you telling me that NOT worshiping God is a SIN? Did God "postpone" killing them because they did not worship him? If you answered yes to this question then you and I are on different I.Q. levels. What validates one God over another?...just because "they" said so? If God is worried about people not worshiping him enough to kill innocent people then the God you worship maybe the greatest deceiver of all time wearing the mask of God...Satan!... and you would never even know you were even worshiping him instead. keep in mind that Satan also wanted to be a God and he is also a great deceiver!

Duh!! IN what way could it not be a sin. That has nothing whatever to do with why the Canaanites were killed. By the way no genocide ever occurred concerning them. They keep popping up screwing up things for hundreds of years. So my answer is yes to sinful not to God's wrath concerning the Canaanites.

Reality validates one God over another but in this case not demanding you take your kids and kill them would even if two existed. God specifically asked Abraham to kill Isaac for two reason to indicate and test Abrahams faith and specifically to enable him for once and all to forbid any human sacrificing any other human as tribes all over the ANE did. You asked a question then assumed the answer and built a case about worship and the Canaanites. Why?

3. you said this... You must first show Moses was wrong before an argument is even possible. This also contradicts your earlier claims.

There is a lot of evidence to show that Moses was wrong...

Good luck with that.

The Ten Commandment were NOT of God...

No other set of rules I human history are more associated with any God. I think it will take more than conjecture.

[Jesus says this about the Jewish people...For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.[Romans 10]

Yes they never comprehended the full righteousness of God nor perfectly obeyed the part they did know. So?

-Even the Ten Commandments (the holiest part of the Law) has come to be a "ministration of death" (2 Corinthians 3:7). Its "glory was to be done away" (2 Corinthians 3:7). Paul spoke of its conclusion as "that which is abolished" (2 Corinthians 3:13).

Even if you and I agree that the ten commandments may be done away with as far a salvation is concerned that has nothing to do with what the Canaanites and Moses did nor whether the law was indeed true. Is it no longer wrong to murder?

we are now "dead to the Law" (Romans 7:4);

Former alcoholics may become dead to whiskey but whiskey has existed and did not kill the Canaanites.

That they have been "delivered from the Law" (Romans 7:6);

That the Law is now in a state of decay (Hebrews 8:13);

That it has been disannulled (Hebrews 7:18);

That the Law was only a schoolmaster intended for spiritual infants to which are no longer subject (Galatians 3:24–25);

as a consequence of these things, are no longer under Law (Romans 6:14).

Moses's law was wrong. Moses's law judges things that are NOT of fairness and are NOT on equality...this means that the laws he had are UNJUSTIFIED.

No longer being under a thing has nothing to do with whether the thing existed.

Moses states that God is a Jealous God but how can a righteous and perfect being be weak and sinful when it also says that Jealousy is a sin?...Is God a sinner?...is God a selfish being then if he says he is Jealous(jealousy is only born in selfishness)?

Have I not explained about the definition to the original language use being "intolerant of other God's" instead of modern day where it means to envy another's possessions" I even gave the Hebrew word that was used. Why should I post anything if it will be dismissed or ignored and the same point stated anyway? This is a very silly Biblical exegesis you have going on.

Continued below:

 

[1robin]

4. The law had EVERYTHING to do with the Canaanites being killed. They were judged according to Moses's laws of worship ...OUR...God or die!

No they were not. Not in any way shape form or type.

5. You said this...
Good grief man. That cross said King of the Jews on it. He had hereditary rights to the throne, he claimed to be the King of the Jews, he claimed to exceed any authority on Earth. Everything was placed under his authority and everything was made through him. Even the Sanhedrin did not question his rights to the throne. They just hated them.

Well all of a sudden what I said pops up. Why here and not before?

You dont know why they even judged him!...They judged him because he did not fit the picture of the Messiah...THEY...expected! Let me break it down for you. The Messiah was to come in and take the throne in the temple on the promise land. Jesus comes in and says that the promise land is in YOU and not actual land at all and Jesus also says that...HE HIMSELF...is the temple to be broken. If Moses was right then the Temple was NOT Jesus's body as JESUS HIMSELF STATES or was the throne so either Jesus is wrong or Moses is wrong because they both had different views on what the promise land was and what the kingdom of God is. Remember that Moses is the ONLY one that ever said the promise land was Canaan. Jesus proved that wrong with his death!

This is like an anti-eater explaining Calculus to Newton. I left the misapprehensions and misunderstandings you have, 15 years ago if I ever held them.

1. They killed him because he was stripping them of followers and power.
2. They did not indict him for that. They accused him of blasphemy and had to lie to do that.
3. I find it much more important what Christ was than what a corrupt Sanhedrin had to say about him.
4. The point was they could not even lie and claim he had no rights to the throne because their own careful geologies gave him perfect rights on both sides of his family tree.
5. Jesus had legal title and claim to both the throne of David AND the throne of heaven.

MATTHEW 2:2 Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews
MATTHEW 27:29 Roman soldiers mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews !
MATTHEW 27:37 Roman soldiers set a sign over his head his accusation written, THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS.
MATTHEW 27:11 the governor asked him, saying, Art you the King of the Jews ? And Jesus said to him, You sayest. ( That is what you say, not what I say )
MARK 15:2 Pilate asked him, Art you the King of the Jews [S#2453] ? And he answering said to him, You sayest it. (NOT I )
MARK 15:12 Pilate ask the crowed wanting Jesus Executed What will you have done to him whom you call the King of the Jews [S#2453] ?

Your saying that guy had no claim to the thrown?

6. you said...

The God that you believe in is not the God of the Bible then. How is what you believe the criteria for what Moses claimed anyway? I am very patient with fellow Christians especially but your are way out of bounds here. How many links do you want about Canaanite depravity? How many links about the authorship and accuracy of the Pentateuch? For crying out loud Christ quoted from it and affirmed it.

I dont believe in the criteria of Moses claims! The God of the OT is a unforgiving God and a God without mercy who has had innocent children killed in more then one situation in the OT for...HIS...glory. If you have to kill unarmed women and children for your glory then YOUR glory is not worth crap I take in the toilet. Again let me remind you that the first 5 books were written by Moses that ALL of this comes from!...that means that you cant trust them because its Moses's words in question.

So basically your are saying you do not like the OT so it can't be true. If the entire human population went bad and was not destroyed but left to corrupt and send straight to Hell the following thousand generations then that is an evil God. A God who punishes wrong is juts the type of God that is just. Christ quoted the OT constantly.

Jesus took the throne by the innocence of his own blood rather then the innocent blood of others. This is proof that the God that Jesus speaks of is DIFFERENT then the OT's version of God because they OT's version of God would have had the Messiah sacrifice the enemies of the Jewish people instead of being the sacrifice himself! OTHER WISE THE CANAANITES WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SACRIFICED TO GOD LIKE THEY THE OT SAYS THEY WERE...point being is that no matter your crimes the one TRUE God would never kill others before killing himself as payment of sin...Proves Moses's version of God(OT version) wrong. God is not unforgiving nor is he without mercy unlike the OT's version where God is more then willing to kill anyone.

God was setting up and protecting a conduit for his revelation and messiah. That is why they are so different in character as a billion Christians know very well. Anything that must include the vagaries of fallible human freewill will be messy. What you like has no relevance to what exists nor even to what is true of a benevolent God.

OT and the NT contradict each other! Moses's version of the promise land vs Jesus's version of the promise land

Is that why 2000 years of the best scholars and thinkers in theology, Christ, and the apostles did not claim it but instead claimed the very opposite. You are using preference to define what is true and at least now why your are claiming what you are is apparent. I could not figure out why a Christian or a Jew would claim what you have until preference reared its ugly head. Reality is not defined by wishful thinking or else cancer, aids and "liberals" would not exist.

 

[1robin]

Trusting humans is not at all like trusting God. At least with humans you can use evidence and logic to determine any ill will. With God we just have to trust with no real objective evidence on how such a God treats humans. We trust a doctor because he has been doing operations for years, but we don't know what god has been up to or whether he is into chainsaws.

I disagree. There are very good reasons to think the God of the Bible is good. There are virtually no ways to prove any concept of God is good. I for example would never trust Allah even if there was any reasons to think he did exist. If he is in heaven I do not want to be. I have far more evidence for what God has been up to for a much longer time that any doctor. Let me negate the reply to that I know is coming by using another example. Actually let me reverse directs and use every claim. There is no way what so ever to KNOW that we are not brains in a vat somewhere being fed information yet no one (out side the matrix believes this). What is the difference? If you are hurt in Saudi Arabia you will place trust in someone and a system you have no knowledge of. Christians have a direct knowledge of God even if our Biblical faith is lacking in personal verification.

 

[Skyrim25]

I have already covered this. Since it had no effect I will not elaborate beyond the fact the God of (or one of the major God's of) the Canaanites was Moloc. Moloc was associated with human sacrifice more than any other aspect. Here are a few better links than Wikipedia.
Killing the Canaanites: A Response to the New Atheism
https://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=11&article=1224


I can't help but add a bit more. The entire pantheon on Canaanites God's were incestuous, justified bestiality, as well as DEMNANDING child sacrifice. Now my God's consistency can be seen in the fact that when the Canaanites never were wiped out according to command they corrupted Israel just as Go said they would. King Ahab and the famous Jezebel "whored after" Canaanite Gods including Molech and began justifying infanticide. Did God say because they were of his people that was all just fine or did he judge them just as he did Canaan. It showed back up yet again in Josiah's reign in Judah and Josiah punished it severely. Not only is cannonade atrocity not a mystery but even it's predicted infestation among Israel came true and God consistently punished it.

This is where you and i are getting two different bits of info...Your getting yours from the OT(like the URL you gave me^). Iam getting my info from history at places like Wiki Who Were the Canaanites? Canaanites in the Old Testament & History Canaanite religion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Canaan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Canaanites were only talked about being evil and doing evil things from the OT and NOT from what we have found in history.

Also...Even IF the Canaanites killed kids so too did the Jewish people so what makes Moses's people any better anyway? Nothing!

Duh!! IN what way could it not be a sin. That has nothing whatever to do with why the Canaanites were killed. By the way no genocide ever occurred concerning them. They keep popping up screwing up things for hundreds of years. So my answer is yes to sinful not to God's wrath concerning the Canaanites.

REALLY?!..."worship me or be condemned forever" is not wrong?!?!?!...what is the purpose of worship to the degree of it NOT being a sin and why is it needed over all else?...what is evil about NOT giving yourself up as a servant to another? Its the MASTER that has the sin, not the servant...the servant is the victim. Love is the one true salvation, not worship. Can love be achieved without God?...YES!...it happens everyday! What Iam getting at is for you to answer the question of what good is the worship for and what classifies it as salvation over the salvation of love?...HOW IS WORSHIP MORE MEANINGFUL THEN LOVE? Now you start to see some of the problems with religion and with the OT.

Reality validates one God over another but in this case not demanding you take your kids and kill them would even if two existed. God specifically asked Abraham to kill Isaac for two reason to indicate and test Abrahams faith and specifically to enable him for once and all to forbid any human sacrificing any other human as tribes all over the ANE did. You asked a question then assumed the answer and built a case about worship and the Canaanites. Why?

If reality validates anything it validates YOUR God no different then Zeus. It also validates that God in the bible is NOT real! I believe in God but I think that 80% of the bible is NOT accurate at all...the Dead Sea Scrolls make that clear.

No other set of rules I human history are more associated with any God. I think it will take more than conjecture.

Actually there as been plenty of rules from other Gods of time. Most was lost to time as the Catholic church in the early days did everything it could to stamp out any and all beliefs that was not of its own. They did a good job because now most of the worlds religion involve the "Jewish" God of Abraham. This makes a another good point...Like ALL OTHER GODS of time they were ONLY restricted to ONE kind of peoples. In this case the God of Abraham was only God to his people and His people alone... JUST LIKE ALL THE OTHER GODS EVER MADE. They were ALL tied to there specific race or country or nation. A REAL God would not play favorites of race but would instead focus on EVERY race and EVERY nation as... HIS....people. Moses states that God is there God and no one else, Jesus states that God is to ALL...Moses was wrong and this is how it has everything to do with the Canaanites.

Yes they never comprehended the full righteousness of God nor perfectly obeyed the part they did know. So?

If they were not righteous then how are they "chosen" if they are no different then any others of that time? It also means that Moses was wrong in his saying that the promise land was Canaan if the Ten Commandments are done away with in the eyes of God!..Do you understand now?

Even if you and I agree that the ten commandments may be done away with as far a salvation is concerned that has nothing to do with what the Canaanites and Moses did nor whether the law was indeed true. Is it no longer wrong to murder?

Yes it does! The Commandments were told by Moses to be from God but God himself through Jesus states that the Ten Commandments DONT bring salvation as MOSES HIMSELF STATED THAT THEY DO! This is what brings us the the un-justified attack on Canaan!...Follow the patterns! No it is not right to murder but what is wrong with the commandments is what they impose!

Have I not explained about the definition to the original language use being "intolerant of other God's" instead of modern day where it means to envy another's possessions" I even gave the Hebrew word that was used. Why should I post anything if it will be dismissed or ignored and the same point stated anyway? This is a very silly Biblical exegesis you have going on.

No, your just not following the ethical and moral situations that are present in the OT and your not following the patterns of where the bible should NOT be taken as 100% truth. Example: Moses states that he talked to God on Mt Zion and said that God told him to tell everyone that they need to wroship God or else. This is wrong in two ways

1. Its wrong to force others to worship...do you agree? Other wise you would have no problem killing anyone today that does not worship God! Could you kill or throw in prison anyone that does not meet this requirement?...If not then the Commandment is NOT JUSTIFIED nor is it justified for God himself to judged us for not worshiping him...Its called Commonsense and reason!

2. Jesus himself states that the commandments are not just and to be done away with.

This means two answers to this problem...

1. Moses either misunderstood the promise or lied about talking to God on mt Zion and made it all up or
2. God is not real and Moses made it up.

This now brings us to the Canaanites.

If Moses didnt talk to God then He also either lied or made up that the promise land was Canaan. Jesus himself states that the promise land is in YOUR heart and that HE HIMSELF is the temple! If Moses's people made a temple on Canaan but yet Jesus says that the Temple is his body and the promise land is in your heart then MOSES IS WRONG BY EITHER BEING A LIAR OR JUST MISUNDERSTOOD the promise. This means that Canaan was NOT the promise land and it was NOT JUSTIFIED TO enter Canaan, even Jesus's death proves this by Jesus taking the throne nailed on wood instead of the throne sitting in the Temple the Jewish people made on Canaan!

The Promise Land is NOT Canaan and neither is the Temple to the Kingdom in Canaan as per Jesus! [/QUOTE]

 

[Skyrim25]

This is like an anti-eater explaining Calculus to Newton. I left the misapprehensions and misunderstandings you have, 15 years ago if I ever held them.

1. They killed him because he was stripping them of followers and power.
2. They did not indict him for that. They accused him of blasphemy and had to lie to do that.
3. I find it much more important what Christ was than what a corrupt Sanhedrin had to say about him.
4. The point was they could not even lie and claim he had no rights to the throne because their own careful geologies gave him perfect rights on both sides of his family tree.
5. Jesus had legal title and claim to both the throne of David AND the throne of heaven.

MATTHEW 2:2 Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews
MATTHEW 27:29 Roman soldiers mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews !
MATTHEW 27:37 Roman soldiers set a sign over his head his accusation written, THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS.
MATTHEW 27:11 the governor asked him, saying, Art you the King of the Jews ? And Jesus said to him, You sayest. ( That is what you say, not what I say )
MARK 15:2 Pilate asked him, Art you the King of the Jews [S#2453] ? And he answering said to him, You sayest it. (NOT I )
MARK 15:12 Pilate ask the crowed wanting Jesus Executed What will you have done to him whom you call the King of the Jews [S#2453] ?

Your saying that guy had no claim to the thrown?

You are the ant-eater actually...I never said that Jesus didnt have claim to the throne. Iam saying the opposite. He had claim but he was supposed to take the throne in the temple and he never made it into the temple before over turning tables in rage over the blasphemes things Moses's people had turned the promise into. His throne of "King" was a throne in the hearts of people and Moses misunderstood this as an actual land and an actual temple. Jesus takes his throne as per the promise...it just was not the throne of "King" that the Jewish people were expecting!...Thats why even today they dont believe in Jesus as the Messiah because he never took the throne THEY expected.

So basically your are saying you do not like the OT so it can't be true. If the entire human population went bad and was not destroyed but left to corrupt and send straight to Hell the following thousand generations then that is an evil God. A God who punishes wrong is juts the type of God that is just. Christ quoted the OT constantly.

OMG LOL! Did you know that the most awful things done in history have been in the name of God! Also if God is evil then there WOULD be a hell...and we are corrupt.

The difference in what is just or not in punishing people for a Crime that is what THAT crime actually is. In this case the "crimes" in the OT are NOT justified in any way at all.

Jesus contradicted his own teachings toward the end because he would have been stoned if he started his teachings right out of the box. Example: he trys to say that he is not the son of God without actually saying he is not and then later he says "Iam" to them meaning that he IS the son of God. Its then they tried to stone him.

God was setting up and protecting a conduit for his revelation and messiah. That is why they are so different in character as a billion Christians know very well. Anything that must include the vagaries of fallible human freewill will be messy. What you like has no relevance to what exists nor even to what is true of a benevolent God.

Is that why 2000 years of the best scholars and thinkers in theology, Christ, and the apostles did not claim it but instead claimed the very opposite. You are using preference to define what is true and at least now why your are claiming what you are is apparent. I could not figure out why a Christian or a Jew would claim what you have until preference reared its ugly head. Reality is not defined by wishful thinking or else cancer, aids and "liberals" would not exist.

I have already put this comment to shame^ so Iam not going to type it again.

 

[CG Didymus]

"worship me or be condemned forever" is not wrong?!?!?!

Right there you've hit on a good point. Christians often say God isn't the evil one, it is us. And, the only reason he made us this way is because he wanted us to freely come to him by our choice, using the freewill he so graciously gave us. But then, he condemns us for making the wrong choice? So is that really a choice? If the Christian Bible really made sense, why would we be so stupid and make the wrong choice? But it doesn't make perfect sense, it only makes sense to those who have chosen one of the many "Christian" interpretations of the Bible. There is enough in the book and enough in most Christians' lives to doubt that it is real. Most Christian religions are too much like "you better be good or else." What if religious leaders invented their respective religions to control people's behavior? And when a Christian says, "No, I can feel God's love in my heart." So do other people in other religions. So what's the difference? And, great points in the rest of your post.

 

[CG Didymus]

Who controls the wind? Jesus, allegedly, stopped the wind. How did that happen? I mean the physical reality of making that happen? Here we have Christian men, woman and children dying in the Philippines. They must be praying, but the wind keeps blowing. Why doesn't God listen? Stopping the wind should be an easy miracle. But no. It's almost like nature does what it does regardless of whether or not there is a God or not. However, if there is a God, and he doesn't listen to his people when a storm hits, when does he listen? I know, I know, everything will work for the good in the end.

 

[Mycroft]

My explanation for this has always been that God created the universe, but gave people free will. This free will can cause evil people to do evil things, and god does not come down and intervene when say 13 children die. There are murders deaths and atrocities committed everyday throughout the world. People have their own free will, which we take for granted. As the question for why would a good god let evil things happen? It is exactly that. In the religious sense, the death of an innocent is not necessarily an evil thing. They are taken from their families and cause grief for others in their life, but they are in a better place now.

Nice explanation. Certainly one of the better ones. However, it doesn't factor in the fact that there is no free will (free-will here meaning action without cause).

 

[Mycroft]

Right there you've hit on a good point. Christians often say God isn't the evil one, it is us. And, the only reason he made us this way is because he wanted us to freely come to him by our choice, using the freewill he so graciously gave us. But then, he condemns us for making the wrong choice? So is that really a choice? If the Christian Bible really made sense, why would we be so stupid and make the wrong choice? But it doesn't make perfect sense, it only makes sense to those who have chosen one of the many "Christian" interpretations of the Bible. There is enough in the book and enough in most Christians' lives to doubt that it is real. Most Christian religions are too much like "you better be good or else." What if religious leaders invented their respective religions to control people's behavior? And when a Christian says, "No, I can feel God's love in my heart." So do other people in other religions. So what's the difference? And, great points in the rest of your post.

Well the 'Worship me or face condemnation' thing is essentially someone holding a gun to your heard and threatening to pull the trigger unless you agree to be their friend. Now if a human being put a gun to your head and said 'be my friend or face death' you would probably agree to being their friend. But you'd also realise you had a psychopath or, at least, a very disturbed person on your hands.