Is God Entitled to Take Lives?

[MrsFoundit]

Isn't your God all powerful, and with unlimited resources to do the good that he really wants to do?

No.

 

[MrsFoundit]

No, you said “wouldn't this undermine the principle of parental responsibility to care for their children?”

Which does not really amount to suggesting that having one’s parental responsibility undermined is worse than having you kids killed.

The post you were replying to says:

let's assume the nanny option was considered by God... would this or wouldn't this undermine the principle of parental responsibility to care for their children?
When other people see angel nannies coming from the sky to care for Canaanite babies... would they or wouldn't they just drop off their children right there?.

You were asked some questions, and as is, it looks like you cannot answer them. Maybe you can, I will wait and see.

 

[BigV]

No.

That's not very omnipotent of him then. Are you sure of your identification as a Christian?

 

[thomas_t]

Thomas, why are you doubting so?

No I'm not doubting. He is mighty. He holds the earth in the hollow of his hand, indeed! He is the Lord of Hosts, as you say - it's amazing - where did you get that from . And the master of all, very well put Interested. God also feels for babies, of course.
However, the babies were accomanied by the women.

And giving the manna* to those women means giving it to those who later sacrifice to their Baal-god giving him thanks for the manna although it directly came from God...
And since they would sacrifice some of the manna to their God, then again the manna wouldn't suffice to feed them all and then what?
At this point, you would say again "wouldn't this mighty and powerful God have means enough to ensure the survival of either the Israelite or the other babies providing a slightly bigger portion of manna so it would suffice for all?"
Following your logic, God himself would give sacrifices to the other god via giving more and more manna to the new Midianite wives. Then, realizing that offering sacrifices to their Baal-god obviously would result in ensuring ever greater amouns of manna, they would make even bigger sacrifices to their baal-god, and so on... It's a vicious circle.
There is a line in the sand, I suppose.

* I suppose they still needed the manna at that time. This isn't explicitely stated in the Bible. However, they didn't have a home yet at that time, so I suppose they still were dependent on manna. They already had some plunder by that time but it wasn't enough, I think.

 

[thomas_t]

It is amazing, the level of mental acrobatics you need to resort to, to justify your "good and moral" God killing women and children.

I just wanted to test the level of mental acrobatics the atheists here offer to show that God would easily save lives without altering the nature of his creation...
So... how would you do it? What's your scenario in which babies would survive despite their parents having gone?

Can you imagine living in the ancient Israel, assuming Bible stories are true, and witnessing people being pelted with stones to death?

the stories were all true, I believe.
Innocent and brave believers have been stoned to death indeed. History shows that there are plenty of Christians being stoned to death, see Acts 7:59 for instance. I'm not saying that I would have been brave enough to have undergone this procedure.

 

[MrsFoundit]

That's not very omnipotent of him then. Are you sure of your identification as a Christian?

Totally, belief in free will which prevents God omnipotent nature from amounting to total control of human behaviour and thereby events on earth, is absolutely mainstream. You are applying a concept of omnipotence as if free will does not exist.

 

[MrsFoundit]

I just wanted to test the level of mental acrobatics the atheists here offer to show that God would easily save lives without altering the nature of his creation....

Anthropomorphism of God is some serious mental acrobatics Christians do not conduct. It seems universal to the atheists in this thread. I do not suppose a new poll asking "Is God a fallible human being who cannot make objective moral choices and did not design the universe?" would help.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

I just wanted to test the level of mental acrobatics the atheists here offer to show that God would easily save lives without altering the nature of his creation...

And yet God intervenes in human affairs all the time. When He parted the Red Sea, he intervened to save people who otherwise would have died. Jesus went against the natural order to multiply food and to cure diseases. So I'm just puzzles where you say that God would not intervene to save innocent lives when He clearly has no trouble doing that.

Innocent and brave believers have been stoned to death indeed. History shows that there are plenty of Christians being stoned to death, see Acts 7:59 for instance. I'm not saying that I would have been brave enough to have undergone this procedure.

And would you have stoned people who acted against God's laws?

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Anthropomorphism of God is some serious mental acrobatics Christians do not conduct. It seems universal to the atheists in this thread. I do not suppose a new poll asking "Is God a fallible human being who cannot make objective moral choices and did not design the universe?" would help.

All we're doing is following the Christians' lead. Christians say that God loves us and is all-powerful. Moreover, Christian stories are full of instances in which God intervened in the physical world to save people. The fact that God commits atrocities is your problem, not ours. All we do is point it out.

 

[Tom 1]

All we're doing is following the Christians' lead. Christians say that God loves us and is all-powerful. Moreover, Christian stories are full of instances in which God intervened in the physical world to save people. The fact that God commits atrocities is your problem, not ours. All we do is point it out.

Yes, very selectively . The bible also says that God is vengeful, slow to anger but terrible in wrath, jealous, intensely committed (I will carve your name on the palm of my hand - said of Israel), and a whole range of other things. If you want to address how God acts, or how people act in the name of God, in history, you have to look at the whole picture, which includes the whole spectrum of claims made about god, what people do, and what the implications of living during the respective periods of history are. I would suggest you also need to cross reference that with the conduct of nations which have specifically tried to control or eradicate belief in God.

 

[thomas_t]

When He parted the Red Sea, he intervened to save people who otherwise would have died.

you are making a good point here. And yet the Red Sea could be one again, afterwards. The world was the same again, once the Israelites reached the Eastern shore.
However, if God would have sent angels to save the babies... these angels never would have had a reasonable opportunity to leave some time after, without risking the lives of the saved ones and many other babies also, I'm afraid.
This would have been a continuous angel nanny presence that never would have stopped. But this would have been another creation, one with a visible continuous angel presence and that's not the world we live in.

And would you have stoned people who acted against God's laws?

no idea, it's too far away from my reality.

 

[BigV]

Totally, belief in free will which prevents God omnipotent nature from amounting to total control of human behaviour and thereby events on earth, is absolutely mainstream. You are applying a concept of omnipotence as if free will does not exist.

Free will doesn't exist for anyone in Hell. In other words, God has absolutely no issues with throwing people into eternal punishment against their will, or in spite their wishes. I know you don't believe in Hell, but it is something the OP probably believes in and it's a mainstream Christian position.

 

[BigV]

I just wanted to test the level of mental acrobatics the atheists here offer to show that God would easily save lives without altering the nature of his creation...
So... how would you do it? What's your scenario in which babies would survive despite their parents having gone?

Assuming I had God's powers, I would have chosen suitable foster parents and would have given them so much love for these orphaned children, that these new parents would take in the orphaned children and embrace them as their own.

the stories were all true, I believe.
Innocent and brave believers have been stoned to death indeed. History shows that there are plenty of Christians being stoned to death, see Acts 7:59 for instance. I'm not saying that I would have been brave enough to have undergone this procedure.

My point was that God himself told the killers (or the punishers) to pelt others with stones and kill them as a result. It's one thing to suffer in the New Testament, it's another to be killed at the command of your God.

 

[thomas_t]

Assuming I had God's powers, I would have chosen suitable foster parents and would have given them so much love for these orphaned children, that these new parents would take in the orphaned children and embrace them as their own.

well, it's your supposition that these kinds of families existed. I doubt it.
There is also free will. When people say "no" to further children besides their own... it's no.

 

[BigV]

well, it's your supposition that these kinds of families existed. I doubt it.
There is also free will. When people say "no" to further children besides their own... it's no.

Remember, I am omnipotent. You asked me what I'd do, and I told you. I would figure out a way instead of coming up with excuses.

 

[BigV]

When people say "no" to further children besides their own... it's no.

What happened to the free will of people who are going to be thrown into the fiery Hell even if they don't want to? God will tell them that it's too bad. So, God has no problems with acting against people's wills. Interesting thing is that he will never force people into heaven, but will gladly throw them into Hell.

 

[thomas_t]

Remember, I am omnipotent.You asked me what I'd do, and I told you. I would figure out a way [to find foster parents]

you truely are . Free will is a given though. Free will is free will. When people say "no", it's really no with God.
The onus is on you to show that, given free will, there would be even one family - i.e. a human family as apposed to nice angel families - that are ready to accept foster children at that time (around 1500 BC).
Can you give me a little proof for your power to convince people at Bronze Age?
Let me quote @Silmarien "you guys don't seem to understand the concept of historical context and what Bronze Age civilization actually looked like. This is all very anachronistic."

What happened to the free will of people who are going to be thrown into the fiery Hell even if they don't want to?

God has to accept the free will of their former victims who don't appreciate to be victimized any more once they left earth. That's my opinion.

but will gladly throw them into Hell.

no, not gladly.

 

[ananda]

If the Christian God exists (I still deny he's plausible) then we would have no right to question his entitlements. That's not something we would be entitled to do. I'm not sure that such a questioning wouldn't come dangerously close to blasphemy.

If there was a man on earth who claimed that he was "God", are you therefore suggesting that he cannot be questioned?

 

[BigV]

Free will is a given though. Free will is free will. When people say "no", it's really no with God.

Again, if I tell God that I don't want to go to Hell, after I die and meet him, he would just ignore my request, right? He will have to send me to Hell in accordance with his will, regardless of whether I want to be there or not.

Let me quote @Silmarien "you guys don't seem to understand the concept of historical context and what Bronze Age civilization actually looked like. This is all very anachronistic."

I don't need to understand Bronze Age. I can only read what God says in the Bible.
Perhaps a different question can be asked. How come a Christian God is influenced by Bronze Age so much? And by recording his will for posterity, he made the Bronze Age last longer than it should have lasted, perhaps?

God has to accept the free will of their former victims who don't appreciate to be victimized any more once they left earth. That's my opinion.

I think you are missing something about free will. Let me explain it this way. Lets say a person A wants to rape/kill/etc.. person B. God will not interfere in person A's decision, as I understand your position, because he must respect their free will, right? However, by not interfering, God is actually not respecting person B's will NOT to get raped/killed/etc... If person A succeeds, person B will suffer against their will.

This is just one free will problem. And then, what' worse, if person B decides to reject God because of their experience, God will further traumatize them by throwing them into hell!

no, not gladly.

Well, if God doesn't gladly throw people into Hell, then why does he do it? Doesn't he want to throw people into Hell? And I'm not talking about masochists.

 

[MrsFoundit]

Again, if I tell God that I don't want to go to Hell, after I die and meet him, he would just ignore my request, right? He will have to send me to Hell in accordance with his will, regardless of whether I want to be there or not.

No

I think you are missing something about free will. Let me explain it this way. Lets say a person A wants to rape/kill/etc.. person B. God will not interfere in person A's decision, as I understand your position, because he must respect their free will, right?

This is not how free will works. I think you are missing something about free will.

Well, if God doesn't gladly throw people into Hell, then why does he do it?

Because they do not want to be with Him. This is how free will works.