I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things

[ChristineM]

How many people lived?
What were the circumstances that led to these deaths? If the bible is the source for these figures, and they are deemed accurate. Then the bible's justification of these deaths must also be deemed accurate.

Skipping the bible stories, the same logic can be applied to childhood diseases and chronic debilitating illnesses. If these conditions are rare, and the good far exceeds the evil, then the judgment that the theorhetical creator of the rare conditions is evil is not justified.

So you accept that the Abrahamic god kills. If you read the bible you will see those claimed to be killed were not "gods chosen people". Being omni everything, he made them to kill.

Have you ever seen someone die of leukemia? Trust me there is no good in that. Creating such illness can only be evil. And excusing it, i am not going to comment

 

[Wildswanderer]

Let’s imagine I created a Robot, armed it and sent it into town to Kill as many people as possible.
Am I not Guilty, should I stand accused.

God created Satan, yet everyone points the finger at Satans deeds, Satan is doing what God created him to do.

So God is the creator of Evil but gets a free pass, why?

Because Satan isn't doing what God created him to do.

 

[viole]

I realise that, that’s why I’m complaining about people pointing the finger at Satan.

Well, they need to point the finger at someone, if they assume their God to be omni good. They actually need Satan.

ciao

- ciole

 

[dybmh]

forcing a rape victim to marry her rapist;

This is false, common misconception. Rape is explicitly prohibited a few a verses back.

smashing infants' heads against rocks

This is true, and it's a fair criticism.

ordering the death of witches

This is true and is a fair criticism.

God commanding his "chosen people" to kill an entire populace of foreign nations for their land in a conquest to possess a "promised land"

This is half true. The assumption is that the 7 nations who were commanded to be eradicated were peaceful, lovely people. But if the bible stories are true, then they were nothing of the sort. They were murders, rapists, kidnappers, sacrificed their children, etc... and if any of them survived, these practices would persist. Accepting the story that the Israelites were commanded to possess the land, means also accepting the rationale given.

So, the criticism is only partially fair, because, in theory not all of the people were bad, certainly not the infants.

God being irrationally angry and committing global genocide by killing every living creature and eradicating the entire human race (aside from Noah and his family) in a worldwide flood.

This is also half true. It's not irrational to be angry at humanity that as devolved into pure violence and corruption. Killing the animals, is a fair criticism though.

them against the rocks." So much for the biblical commandment of "Thou shalt not kill."

Sorry for all the corrections, but, this also is slightly off. The commandment is not to murder. It doesn't say do not kill.

And this article, "Violence in the Bible: Greatest Hits," has several other instances of severe violence in the Bible.

Only focusing on the OT stories, a few of these are good examples. Although the author of the article in spite of claiming that others ignore things in the bible, they themself ignore things too. More than half of the examples brought from the OT are negative examples of what NOT to do.

 

[dybmh]

So you accept that the Abrahamic god kills. If you read the bible you will see those claimed to be killed were not "gods chosen people". Being omni everything, he made them to kill.

Have you ever seen someone die of leukemia? Trust me there is no good in that. Creating such illness can only be evil. And excusing it, i am not going to comment

The rationale given is not that they are not "chosen". The rationale given is that their practices should not continue.

Yes, I acknowledge that God kills, but I also acknowledge that God saves. And the point I was making by comparing numbers is that God saves much much more.

Looking at the numbers, including all childhood cancer, of which luekemia is the most common, it is 1 in 285 children. That is .004 %. That's rare. Gratefully, there are improvements in treating childhood luekemia. Some are looking very promising.

So, considering God evil because of the condition of .004 %, and ignoring the 99.996% who do not have the condition is not justified. Further, the same natural world that allows for disease is being leveraged to cure the disease.

What is a logical conclusion? The world is imperfect, but can be improved over time. What is evil about that?

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

This is false, common misconception. Rape is explicitly prohibited a few a verses back.

This is true, and it's a fair criticism.

This is true and is a fair criticism.

This is half true. The assumption is that the 7 nations who were commanded to be eradicated were peaceful, lovely people. But if the bible stories are true, then they were nothing of the sort. They were murders, rapists, kidnappers, sacrificed their children, etc... and if any of them survived, these practices would persist. Accepting the story that the Israelites were commanded to possess the land, means also accepting the rationale given.

So, the criticism is only partially fair, because, in theory not all of the people were bad, certainly not the infants.


This is also half true. It's not irrational to be angry at humanity that as devolved into pure violence and corruption. Killing the animals, is a fair criticism though.


Sorry for all the corrections, but, this also is slightly off. The commandment is not to murder. It doesn't say do not kill.

Only focusing on the OT stories, a few of these are good examples. Although the author of the article in spite of claiming that others ignore things in the bible, they themself ignore things too. More than half of the examples brought from the OT are negative examples of what NOT to do.

I think that's a fair assessment of my personal opinions of the scriptures I cited in my post. Thanks for sharing your opinions with me.

 

[SkepticThinker]

God, as our creator and judge has the authority to kill us also.

Says who?

 

[ChristineM]

The rationale given is not that they are not "chosen". The rationale given is that their practices should not continue

Who decides?

Yes, I acknowledge that God kills, but I also acknowledge that God saves. And the point I was making by comparing numbers is that God saves much much more.

So a mass murderer saves a youngster from certain death, should he be absolved of all the murders?

Looking at the numbers, including all childhood cancer, of which luekemia is the most common, it is 1 in 285 children. That is .004 %. That's rare. Gratefully, there are improvements in treating childhood luekemia. Some are looking very promising.

1 in 285 is 0.35%, not .004%.

So, considering God evil because of the condition of .004 %, and ignoring the 99.996% who do not have the condition is not justified. Further, the same natural world that allows for disease is being leveraged to cure the disease.

Oh, that makes an innocent childs death all good then. Sorry, I don't understand your thinking here.

What is a logical conclusion? The world is imperfect, but can be improved over time. What is evil about that?

So you are saying your god ****ed up but we can improve on his mistakes.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Because Satan isn't doing what God created him to do.

Nobody is, apparently.
What a great design, eh?

 

[SDavis]

Let’s imagine I created a Robot, armed it and sent it into town to Kill as many people as possible.
Am I not Guilty, should I stand accused.

God created Satan, yet everyone points the finger at Satans deeds, Satan is doing what God created him to do.

So God is the creator of Evil but gets a free pass, why?

Indeed God created everything - all emotions that angels and humans feel come from God he gave it to us. And God gave both angels and humans free will to choose whether to allow negative emotions are positive emotions rule their choices.

God did not make Satan or the angels that followed him stage a coup.
Lucifer staged a coup because he wanted to be God, he wanted to rule heaven, he wanted to be the most high.
Just like here on Earth when the prince wants to be the king and will try to overthrow the king to gain kingship for himself instead of waiting until the King dies. (From the human point of view that could be a reason why Satan did what he did because God can't die)
I have read that the Jewish people say that Satan is not evil, that he is doing the work of God by testing mankind. Yet in Isaiah 14:12-15 and Ezekiel 28:3 tells us that Satan / Lucifer was a cherubim that covereth, that he walked in the garden of God, and on mountains of fire, had all the precious jewels, was the most beautiful of his creation, wise until pride and evilness was found in him (meaning until Satan/Lucifer let it out.)

 

[ChristineM]

This is false, common misconception. Rape is explicitly prohibited a few a verses back.

It seems to me that Deuteronomy 22:28-29 is pretty clear.

Rape is explicitly forbiden now but it doesn't stop rapists

 

[dybmh]

Who decides?

It's just based on what's written. If I'm wrong, though, I'm wrong. My recollection is that the reason for wiping out those nations is because the Jewish people would be tempted to do what they do. It's about their practice, their actions, not an arbitrary "chosen" status. The types of practices that they are theorhetically doing are the practices which are outlawed. That's the story.

So a mass murderer saves a youngster from certain death, should he be absolved of all the murders?

That's not what I'm describing. The "mass murderer" is saving millions while thousands suffer and die. This person isn't a mass-murderer at all. They're more like a general who knowingly sacrifices a platoon to save the entire nation.

1 in 285 is 0.35%, not .004%.

Yes. Thank you. That was my mistake. So we are comparing 0.35 % with 99.65%. Quite a bit different, but it still doesn't affect the point I'm making.

Oh, that makes an innocent childs death all good then. Sorry, I don't understand your thinking here.

Well, my attempt at logic, ignoring the math blunder, is that a natural flawed world is created. This flawed world has potential for many many people to have horrible diseases, but the creator protects the overwhelming majority of those people.

So you are saying your god ****ed up but we can improve on his mistakes.

Yes and no. Yes, the world is flawed, yes we can improve on those flaws. But it wasn't a mistake if improvement is valued.

 

[dybmh]

It seems to me that Deuteronomy 22:28-29 is pretty clear.

Rape is explicitly forbiden now but it doesn't stop rapists

What I said was rape is explicitly forbidden just a few verses back. And it is. Deuteronomy 22:25. The key word in this verse is "forced". Not all translations include this word specifically, but the majority do. The ones with a more literal word-for-word translation definitely do. The ones that don't translate the verse and include the word "rape".

Verses 28 and 29 do not include the word for force. Rape is clearly defined, and punishable by death if the woman/girl is forced, that's verse 25. If people ignore that verse, or don't know it's there. Sure, 28-29 are misunderstood.

A few english translations indicate 28-29 is a rape. But they're not the majority. The idea of seizing her, is not the same as forcing her.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Nobody is, apparently.
What a great design, eh?

We were designed to have freedom of the will.
I guess you might prefer to be a robot.

But this life is a test.

 

[ChristineM]

That's not what I'm describing. The "mass murderer" is saving millions while thousands suffer and die. This person isn't a mass-murderer at all. They're more like a general who knowingly sacrifices a platoon to save the entire nation.

If that's how you rationalize it

Yes. Thank you. That was my mistake. So we are comparing 0.35 % with 99.65%. Quite a bit different, but it still doesn't affect the point I'm making.

Nor to the point im making

Well, my attempt at logic, ignoring the math blunder, is that a natural flawed world is created. This flawed world has potential for many many people to have horrible diseases, but the creator protects the overwhelming majority of those people.

Why was it created flawed?

And just bad luck for the unlucky few eh?

Yes and no. Yes, the world is flawed, yes we can improve on those flaws. But it wasn't a mistake if improvement is valued.

So you say a food manufacturer can create a food that kills a countable percentage of the population but its ok because they can make it better next year or next century?

 

[ChristineM]

. The idea of seizing her, is not the same as forcing her.

 

[dybmh]

If that's how you rationalize it

The point is, it's not a mass-murder, it's the opposite of mass murder. Posting a statistic with only the numbers of the dead and not posting the numbers who lived is a completely one sided misleading statistic.

Nor to the point im making

Which is? God is evil if one ignores all the good things which overwhelmingly outnumber the bad things?

Why was it created flawed?

Because improvement is valued. So that God can see that it is good. That means "not good" must exist, and must be subdued or eliminated.

And just bad luck for the unlucky few eh?

The reasons are unknown to us. Using the military analogy, maybe they are the ones who are most capable.

So you say a food manufacturer can create a food that kills a countable percentage of the population but its ok because they can make it better next year or next century?

They create a food that feeds millions, and 1000s of people are deathly allegic? Sure, that's peanut butter.

 

[dybmh]

It's not the same. Forcing a woman/girl results in death. That's 3 verses back. Explicitly stated. I understand that it erases a skeptic's talking point. But that's the simple truth.

 

[ChristineM]

It's not the same. Forcing a woman/girl results in death. That's 3 verses back. Explicitly stated. I understand that it erases a skeptic's talking point. But that's the simple truth.

The simple truth is a rapist has no convience and doesn't care about the law no matter how many times it repeated in the past

 

[ChristineM]

The point is, it's not a mass-murder, it's the opposite of mass murder. Posting a statistic with only the numbers of the dead and not posting the numbers who lived is a completely one sided misleading statistic.

The point is murdering en mass is mass.murder. You may excuse it for whatever reason. I don't.

Which is? God is evil if one ignores all the good things which overwhelmingly outnumber the bad things?

Do they?

Because improvement is valued. So that God can see that it is good. That means "not good" must exist, and must be subdued or eliminated.

Interesting you onow what your god sees here

The reasons are unknown to us. Using the military analogy, maybe they are the ones who are most capable.

Nut not here

They create a food that feeds millions, and 1000s of people are deathly allegic? Sure, that's peanut butter.

Not good with figures are you?
That would be tens of thousands.