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

[JM2C]

Okay, let me get this straight, the Hebrew Bible is the Word of God.

The Laws in there, are the Laws of God.

When he said do things, like keep the Sabbath forever or all your generations, I would imagine a believer in the Bible would obey that command.

But, most Christians don't.

But don't all Christians mix some of the commands of the Hebrew Bible?

God gave the Ten Commandments to Moses for the Israelites or the people in Exodus 20.

IOW, God did not give the Ten Commandments to the Gentiles before, during, and after the Lord Jesus Christ ministry here on earth.

The Book of the Covenant [from Exodus 20:22 to 23:33] is the exposition of the Ten Commandments.

Ex 24:8 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people/Israelites, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you/Israel [and not with the Gentiles] concerning all these words.

IOW again, one cannot separate one from the other because one cannot work without the other or they are one piece of law of God. They, the Ten Commandments and The Book of the Covenant, are one piece of law of God designed only for the Israelites during that time.

They are not for the Gentiles during Moses’ and the Prophets’ time, except for the Gentile proselytes, and before and after the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ or of today. IOW, the Law of Moses is not for Gentiles to follow.

For example: In the book of Joshua, every time the Israelites conquer a city in Canaan they don’t do nothing but kill all the people in that city and take their properties.

Jos 8:22 Then the Israelites who were inside the city came out and started killing the enemy from the rear. So the men of Ai were caught in a trap, and all of them died. Not a single person survived or escaped.
Jos 8:27 Only the cattle and the treasures of the city were not destroyed, for the Israelites kept these for themselves, as the LORD had commanded Joshua.

Now, the question is, were they violating two of God’s commandments in the Ten Commandments?

Ex 20:13 Thou shalt not kill.
Ex 20:15 Thou shalt not steal.

NO! Because these two commandments are applicable only within the community of God and that is, the Israelites only. Outside from this community, as long as God is commanding them, they can do anything to anyone without violating the Ten Commandments and The Book of the Covenant.

We could never understand these two commandments of God, if we base it on Joshua 8:22-27, and if we don’t read The Book of the Covenant where it says,

Ex 21:12 “Anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death.
Ex 21:16 And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.

Can we apply these rules to a non-Israelite then and to Christians now?

No! Christians cannot pick and choose which of the Law of Moses to follow because the whole Law of Moses is one piece of law of God that one cannot separate for his or her own purposes.

Another example is, tithing. Many Christians churches use this part of the Law of Moses to collect money from the congregation. They use Malachi 3:8-10 for tithing, but if you read this book, God was talking to the priests and Israelites and not to Gentiles or Christians of today.

IOW, Christians cannot just pick this particular Law of Moses and ignore the rest.

Gal 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.

No explanation needed on this verse. One cannot pick and choose which of the Law of Moses to follow otherwise, one is under the curse of God, or “fallen from grace“.

Gal 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

 

[JM2C]

Just calling it like I see it.

Same here

 

[JM2C]

And you are putting way too much stock in the Bible creation story.

Can you tell to me where you came from

 

[JM2C]

It is absolute BULL that a few people re-populated the world.

Why not? From the flood to Abraham? From Abraham to king David? From king David to the Lord Jesus Christ? And from the Lord Jesus Christ to the present? Yes! It is absolutely possible. You just have to believe.

 

[Ingledsva]

Can you tell to me where you came from

Evolution. :camp: :tribal:


*

 

[Ingledsva]

It is absolute BULL that a few people re-populated the world.

Why not? From the flood to Abraham? From Abraham to king David? From king David to the Lord Jesus Christ? And from the Lord Jesus Christ to the present? Yes! It is absolutely possible. You just have to believe.

It has already been worked out , by multiple people, to be impossible.

There is no way that a few people, could create the diversity, or numbers we have, in that short a span of time.

You actually expect us to believe six people, in under 4000 years, led to the diversity of people on the earth - Negroid, Caucasoid, Mongoloid - etc?

No way - impossible.


*

 

[JM2C]

Evolution. :camp: :tribal:
*

Falsely called knowledge

1Ti 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

 

[McBell]

Speak for yourself. Who are the “we” and the “some of us” you talking about?

Should we stop debating because you and some of your followers do not believe what I believe?

What do you think we should debate about?

baking cookies perhaps?

Problem here is you are not debating.
You are merely presenting your opinions and beliefs as though they are facts.

 

[JM2C]

Problem here is you are not debating.
You are merely presenting your opinions and beliefs as though they are facts.

Exactly! How can you believe a lie? My belief is real, it did not come from my self-willed opinion only, and they are not lies.

Define the word debate.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

Exactly! How can you believe a lie? My belief is real, it did not come from my self-willed opinion only, and they are not lies.

Define the word debate.

"My belief is real...they are not lies" ~ Literally every religion ever

 

[Ingledsva]

Evolution. :camp: :tribal:

Falsely called knowledge

1Ti 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

LOL! Very funny coming from someone using invisible men, and Myth.


Also - the word here is "gnosis," and being used as Knowledge, not science, as made obvious by the next verse. These verses are about Differences - between themselves - concerning their doctrinal beliefs.


1Ti 6:3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;

1Ti 6:4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,

1Ti 6:5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.


1Ti 6:20 Oh Timotheus that which is unto you entrusted, guard; and deny access to the profane fruitless discussion and conflict, of the falsely named/called, knowledge.

1Ti 6:21 Which some are professing with respect to the Faith, in error. Grace be with you, Amen.


*

 

[CG Didymus]

Judge not, that ye be not judged. (Matthew 7:1).

Speaking of judging... I know it's wrong to question God, but really, he sounds like a warrior god of an ancient tribal people. Some of the things the Bible says he did aren't that nice. If he was going to save sinners in the end, why didn't he do that from the beginning? Why lead the Jews on for a couple of thousand years into thinking he was their God? Why didn't he make the role of The Satan clear to them? Why did he wait for the NT before he told everybody The Truth about what's going on?

I know it's a small thing for Christians that he allows evil and bad things to happen. I know you think it's all part of his perfect plan, but really? He did some nasty things. Would you drown your family if they were all out of control evil? Would you have one kid stone another on to death for talking bad about you? Especially, if you had the power to change them... to reveal yourself to them in such a way as to radically change them... like he did with Paul.

 

[JM2C]

LOL! Very funny coming from someone using invisible men, and Myth.

Also - the word here is "gnosis," and being used as Knowledge, not science, as made obvious by the next verse. These verses are about Differences - between themselves - concerning their doctrinal beliefs.


1Ti 6:3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;

1Ti 6:4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,

1Ti 6:5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.


1Ti 6:20 Oh Timotheus that which is unto you entrusted, guard; and deny access to the profane fruitless discussion and conflict, of the falsely named/called, knowledge.

1Ti 6:21 Which some are professing with respect to the Faith, in error. Grace be with you, Amen.


*

What is your point here?

 

[1robin]

Half way? Not bad. Let me simplify my question for you. It 's the same one I've asked many times. Did God know that the devil and man would fall? Did he know they would do all sorts of evil things? Did he create the universe with things crashing into each other and exploding? Did he create the Earth in such a way that natural occurrences, like floods, hurricanes and volcanoes would kill a certain amount of people? If yes, then how is it that he's not a least a little bit evil for coming up with such a creation? Yeah, his overall plan has a happy ending, but it's rough going for us all to get there.

I simply deny my and pretty much anyone who ever lived has capacity to know what foreknowledge (I believe he has it, I have no idea how it would play out) would entail. After years of debating the issue the only thing I have ever found that I could firmly adopt was that foreknowledge doe snot short circuit freewill. So there is not a firm enough footing for the trap you think is so destructive to stand upon. It looks like a false optimization fallacy to begin with. That is the claim that only a perfectly optimal world is consistent with God. Given the biblical view that is impossibly flawed. It's first pages predict evil, give the cause, and the solution. Only it's absence would be unbiblical.

I can comment a little on some of the later questions. He did not create the earth as it is today. His removal of constant supervision is what results in natural catastrophes. That is why they do not exist in his permanent state of affairs after this veil of tears is concluded. Find a single tornado, flood, or even instance of pain in Heaven where God re-establishes his constant supervision. The biblical view is that man told God that we did not need him, so he took his hand off of everything to show us we were wrong. In most ancient civilizations tell of a time in the past that was golden and that things had gone terribly wrong because of a moral cause. Most also state that state of affairs will come to an end and it will be as it was.

Your questions besides being unknowable are also impossibly vague. To answer just three of them I would have to give the entire history of Earth, the entire history of he universe, and know what knowing he future entails. I don't, no one does, no one ever will. Now if you want to state your concern as a more manageable philosophical exercise then maybe I could at least direct you to some scholar who could shed some light on it, but I can't revisit the history of the universe in general.

 

[1robin]

Speaking of judging... I know it's wrong to question God, but really, he sounds like a warrior god of an ancient tribal people. Some of the things the Bible says he did aren't that nice. If he was going to save sinners in the end, why didn't he do that from the beginning? Why lead the Jews on for a couple of thousand years into thinking he was their God? Why didn't he make the role of The Satan clear to them? Why did he wait for the NT before he told everybody The Truth about what's going on?

I know it's a small thing for Christians that he allows evil and bad things to happen. I know you think it's all part of his perfect plan, but really? He did some nasty things. Would you drown your family if they were all out of control evil? Would you have one kid stone another on to death for talking bad about you? Especially, if you had the power to change them... to reveal yourself to them in such a way as to radically change them... like he did with Paul.

The God of the old testament and the new are identical but their intentions and role for people was not. The OT was the events that led to setting up and protecting the people who would be the conduit for God's revelation and to usher in the messiah and make his message have a great impact on mankind. He succeeded. In the NT it was to record the life of that messiah and discourse on what it means. To set up a church based on that very life and to indicate what would occur from that point forward. He succeeded. The same General on the battlefield also goes home and plays with his children. Different roles, same person.

 

[1robin]

What is your point here?

Plausible or even implausible denial of what is inconvenient.

 

[Ingledsva]

LOL! Very funny coming from someone using invisible men, and Myth.

Also - the word here is "gnosis," and being used as Knowledge, not science, as made obvious by the next verse. These verses are about Differences - between themselves - concerning their doctrinal beliefs.


1Ti 6:3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;

1Ti 6:4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,

1Ti 6:5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.


1Ti 6:20 Oh Timotheus that which is unto you entrusted, guard; and deny access to the profane fruitless discussion and conflict, of the falsely named/called, knowledge.

1Ti 6:21 Which some are professing with respect to the Faith, in error. Grace be with you, Amen.

What is your point here?

Simple - he called Evolution - false knowledge - then posted a verse with a mistranslation of the use of knowledge in that text - as science.

-

Falsely called knowledge

1Ti 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

I showed that in context, it shows that they are talking about doctrinal knowledge differences between their own groups, - and not science.



*

 

[s2a]

This was brought out many times by Atheists and agnostics, I would like to discuss it with you in a rational and respectful manner. My disclaimer is I am a true 5 point Calvinist and If that is offensive to you,You are free to close the thread now. If I may suggest , we leave out all slander against My God in the process of this discussion, slander being pre-defined as name calling as If he were real and present.Questioning scriptures depiction of God however you interpret is allowed. Example: Is God evil? Fair enough?

Here is my premise,
this is my belief based upon my scriptures.
God not only allows children to die, He has pre-ordained them to die. Hard for us to fathom, granted, but True nevertheless in Scripture. If we say he did not cause it and only allowed it to happen then God would be reacting to free will of man to accomplish their own destruction, thus putting too much power in men and essentially tying God's hands. God ordained for this latest tragedy for his own purposes, we cannot know them, we are not our creator, so The bible tells us we must accept that their is a divine plan and God is in control completely.

So you have asked, where is the comfort in that? Why do religious peoples comfort families of these tragedies with this premise of a God in control? Well let me ask you Atheists would you attempt to comfort these mothers with your precept that there is no God? No heaven and no hell? That their children are reduced to dust as they came? That the man who murdered them who took his life is also Dust and there is no justice for them either? Both parties cease to exist, one guilty, one innocent, both have the same fate in the end.

Or could it be more comforting that a God in control is with their babies now, that they know no suffering,feel no pain have no more tears and the man that took their life will be punished by a Just and perfect God. Where is the evil in my premise and the lack of evil in yours? I find evil in evildoing going unpunished.I find evil in a life given for no purpose but to die and cease to exist.
What say you?

Evidence suggests...

....yep.

Faith has many other stories....

...maybe a belief in a major Santa seems unfair.

Your call really.

 

[JM2C]

Simple - he called Evolution - false knowledge - then posted a verse with a mistranslation of the use of knowledge in that text - as science.

I showed that in context, it shows that they are talking about doctrinal knowledge differences between their own groups, - and not science.

Oh, I see where you coming from. What ticks you off is the word “science [allergy perhaps] -KJV, or “Knowledge” -ASV” which translate as “gnosis” or “knowledge” is not a negative word by itself.

“Gnosis” or “knowledge“, primarily a seeking to know, an enquiry, investigation [akin to ginosko], denotes, in N.T., knowledge, especially of spiritual truth. -Vines

What you did not see is the word before “gnosis” and that is, Falsely meaning “pseudonumus” in Greek, and if you put them together it should say “falsely knowledge” or “pseudonumos gnosis”.

IOW, Evols is “false knowledge” or “pseudonumos gnosis” compare to Christianity‘s “knowledge“ or “gnosis” of the “spiritual truth“. Any teachings against Christianity are falsely called knowledge/science. As “falsely science/gnosis” in KJV or “pseudonumos gnosis” or “false knowledge” in reference to the teaching of the Gnostics. Evols is “false knowledge“ or “pseudonumos gnosis”.

IOW, “science-KJV” and “knowledge-ASV” both have the same meaning and that is, “gnosis/knowledge” which translate to “knowledge of spiritual truth“ that Paul was teaching, but if you add another word like “falsely/pseudonumus” it becomes negative or “falsely knowledge“ as what the oppositions/antithesis were teaching.

You rightly quoted Paul with these verses,

1Ti 6:3 If any man teacheth a different doctrine, and consenteth not to sound words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;

1Ti 6:4 he is puffed up, knowing nothing, but doting about questionings and disputes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,

“teacheth a different doctrine” is one word in Greek and that is, “heterodidaskaleo” If any man teach a differenct doctrine “he or she is puffed up, knowing nothing” or understand nothing.

That is the reason why Paul said “falsely knowledge” or “falsely science” or “pseudonumos gnosis” to the oppositions/antithesis because they understand nothing about the right doctrine. They, the "falsely science", were just speculating.

 

[Ingledsva]

Oh, I see where you coming from. What ticks you off is the word “science [allergy perhaps] -KJV, or “Knowledge” -ASV” which translate as “gnosis” or “knowledge” is not a negative word by itself.

“Gnosis” or “knowledge“, primarily a seeking to know, an enquiry, investigation [akin to ginosko], denotes, in N.T., knowledge, especially of spiritual truth. -Vines

What you did not see is the word before “gnosis” and that is, Falsely meaning “pseudonumus” in Greek, and if you put them together it should say “falsely knowledge” or “pseudonumos gnosis”.

IOW, Evols is “false knowledge” or “pseudonumos gnosis” compare to Christianity‘s “knowledge“ or “gnosis” of the “spiritual truth“. Any teachings against Christianity are falsely called knowledge/science. As “falsely science/gnosis” in KJV or “pseudonumos gnosis” or “false knowledge” in reference to the teaching of the Gnostics. Evols is “false knowledge“ or “pseudonumos gnosis”.

IOW, “science-KJV” and “knowledge-ASV” both have the same meaning and that is, “gnosis/knowledge” which translate to “knowledge of spiritual truth“ that Paul was teaching, but if you add another word like “falsely/pseudonumus” it becomes negative or “falsely knowledge“ as what the oppositions/antithesis were teaching.

You rightly quoted Paul with these verses,

1Ti 6:3 If any man teacheth a different doctrine, and consenteth not to sound words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;

1Ti 6:4 he is puffed up, knowing nothing, but doting about questionings and disputes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,

“teacheth a different doctrine” is one word in Greek and that is, “heterodidaskaleo” If any man teach a differenct doctrine “he or she is puffed up, knowing nothing” or understand nothing.

That is the reason why Paul said “falsely knowledge” or “falsely science” or “pseudonumos gnosis” to the oppositions/antithesis because they understand nothing about the right doctrine. They, the "falsely science", were just speculating.

Actually exactly as I said - the use of gnosis here, is "knowledge" - not "science," - obviously - as they are talking about doctrinal knowledge differences.



*