The Goodness of God, Scripturally Considered

Also also...

I'd really rather this thread not get closed because of personal insults, my brother.

Click to expand...

Okay...I suppose that could be construed as such, though it wasn't the intent.

The verses are Jesus explaining that being born-again and saved was analogous to being as a child, thereby being innocent in God's eyes. "Innocent" meaning that yes, children can and do commit evil, but they are innocent of why it is considered as such. They haven't reached the age of accountability for their thoughts and actions...and that age is different for everyone.

I could give chapter and verse that supports this, but since the dismissal of such support is so common lately, it seems rather pointless...

FireDragon76 said:

The whole argument trying to attack the Biblical character of God based off the Amalekits example is ridiculous. We are so far removed from those circumstances... it's just ridiculous.

Click to expand...

I think that's the point. The biblical god is not supposed to change. But we have. We can see now that the orders he gave back then were horrible and wrong.

I will say that those who criticize the Biblical witness on this point as "barbaric" display a provincial attitude towards justice, one very much trapped within the 18th century enlightenment, devoid of any considerations of collective responsibility.

Click to expand...

Thanks!

Davian said:

That does beg the question: if one has an all-powerful deity on their side, why could not these "wrongs" have been prevented from happening? What does wiping out the Amalekites fix? Nothing.

Well, there is the apparent blood lust of the deity in question to satisfy, I would guess. There is that.

Click to expand...

TheImmortalJellyfish said:

When the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, how many of your parents, grandparents and/or great grandparents do you think wanted vengeance? How about 9/11? Did we want to bomb the entire nation, or just, y'know...pick out the bad guys? This was the beginning of the nation of Israel. War was necessary. There were other tribes who also wanted to "be the best" and would've done probably far worse. At least God's instruction was swift kills and not torturous.

Click to expand...

You did not address my question: if one has an all-powerful deity on their side, why could not these "wrongs" have been prevented from happening?

Could this "God" not have done better than standing by while Israel is attacked? Of what use is a god like that?

Davian said:

That does beg the question: if one has an all-powerful deity on their side, why could not these "wrongs" have been prevented from happening? What does wiping out the Amalekites fix? Nothing.

Click to expand...

I will start by addressing your last question first.

What does wiping them out accomplish?

1. They would no longer prey upon defenseless children and older people who were the most vulnerable in any given society at that time.

2. They would be examples of what would happen to others if they were thinking of preying upon the helpless and defenseless. This is what we would refer to as a "deterrent".

3. The land would be purged and cleansed from their evil influence and their victims and victim's families would have been avenged. Vengeance is mine, I will repay saith the Lord.

I can think of more things but this gives you an idea.

To address your first question I will simply say that God did not prevent the Amalekites from attacking the weak and helpless of Israel for the same reason He does not prevent you from doing the evil things that you do. He created you, and the descendants of Amalek to be a human beings, not robots, or something that is stopped in its tracks and "reset" every time it is about to do something wrong like a child stops and starts a video game or wind up toy when it does not do what it wants it to do.

And as far as God responding to the Amalekite's deleterious choices to pillage, rape and plunder the young and very old, God's response was fitting, just what you would have wanted had you been a victim of their egregious deeds.

Omnipotence does not mean the ability to do the logically impossible. It is not logically possible to "force" someone do something "freely". It is no more possible for God to do that than it is for Him to make a "married bachelor" or a "round square".

essentialsaltes said:

Yes. I would not call for the slaughter of infants.

Click to expand...

Right, you would have called that they be left to die a slow and agonizing death due to starvation and exposure to the harsh elements. Or maybe you would have called for them to be left to the wild scavenging animals that prowled the lands, seeking for any vestige of life sustaining sustenance.

Yes, your plan would have been far less wicked....

essentialsaltes said:

Yes, and the Amalekites (if any remained) would have to watch helplessly as their loved ones were brutally cut down by godded, evil savages.

Click to expand...

The Amalekites would not have been watching helplessly as judgment came knocking upon their door. You seem to think they were some sort of Amish community or peaceful utopia wherein the people spent their days in peaceful pursuits of knitting sweaters and socks and picking daisies. The Israelites charged with purging and cleansing the land of these people whose pursuits cut a path of destruction through the lands in which they traveled would have been met even before they got to their town by battle hardened, cruel, uncaring soldiers first and foremost. These soldiers would have been supported and equipped and supplied and supported by their families, yes that means women and children. The women were not the proverbial stay at home soccer moms you envision, but were also callous and hardened by their lifestyle and would slit your throat with a jagged piece of flint or rusty metal quicker than you can say "no!". The children in turn were not unlike the adults that reared them. Cruel, callous and hardened, trained to wield bows, trained to use spears, javelins, and swords. These were a warring people, not some Mr. Rogers, do no wrong, let's all just sing songs and hold hands and roast marshmallows people.

Tell it like it is when you seek to judge the actions of God towards these people. Not how you want it to be.

essentialsaltes said:

At the risk of Godwinizing, were they worse than the Nazis? We didn't call for all Germans to be exterminated down to their infants.

Click to expand...

We called for the Germans to be brought to swift and total justice for the evil they had done. Thousands of men and women risked their lives to see this realized so important they thought it was for the wrongs to be righted and for the victims of this deleterious regime to be avenged.

Do not make the mistake of trying to portray as equivalent the circumstances and response of the Allied nations to the Nazis with God's response to the Amalekites.

The two could not be more distinct. There were no modern "correctional institutions" or war crime trials taking place thousands of years ago when Israel came up out of Egypt. There were no firing squads, lethal injections, or sanitary asylums for those guilty of killing, raping, plundering, and looting the weak and elderly.

Comparing Israel's theocracy, and the Allied democracies of recent years is like comparing apples to oranges my friend.

essentialsaltes said:

I don't believe in any gods, but yes I would long for justice. But infants are blameless, and I would abhor any 'vengeance' that required slaying infants. Because that would be wicked. Not good.

Click to expand...

Like I said, you would have rather had the infants, and this is assuming that there were actually infants among them at the time, just be left to die a slow agonizing death by starvation and exposure. Or maybe to have been left to be devoured by the ravenous beasts that never failed to make a showing when dead bodies were lying around, being baked by the scorching sun.

Yes, your way would have been far more humane....

Back to genocide apologetics it appears. Staying classy I see.

The Old Testament is like the shadow of the New Testament. It shows the shape, but that also means the light is behind the New Testament or NT. God is revealed in the New Testament better because, we have the Old as a foundation to build on, to show more than a simple revelation. Jesus shows us himself and his father as love in all cleanness and wisdom...

Jesus approached a Samaritan woman, we would not know this goodness were it not for Moses and the prophets on how God did not permit non elite Jews and assimilated gentiles into the assembly. We may otherwise think Jesus saw her as good looking or that he liked her for carnal reasons.

It seems God had to wait for centuries before he showed us the full extent of his love, grace, power over Satan and his light. Satan is defeated.

The last word about slavery in the Bible condemns it. Revelations.

In the NT is a message to soften hearts, no divorce as under Moses.

In the NT Jesus mixes his spit with mud, with bull dust in it most probably, and heals someone of blindness. That offended the Pharisees and challenged their traditions. They were part from Moses and part man made, the latter over riding the Father.

The measures of the OT were in times of separation from God and grace, and were for simple people. That connection of God and man were at risk from corruptions taking over Israel. So measures had to be taken or the whole human race could have become useless and we could have been finished off. Victory to Satan. But No God won over Satan seen in the resurrection of Jesus.

We have a perfect high priest who knows our frailty. Full compassion.

We have a judge who preferred to take the penalty in our place before judging us.

Our King is our servant. He prepared a place for us.

The curse on the Earth was sickness, sin and death. Wars, famines... but Jesus took our sickness and heals us, overcame the power of sin and gives moral strength and justification and mercy, and rose from the dead as the first of us who will.

He loved us that much!

Jeremy E Walker said:

Right, you would have called that they be left to die a slow and agonizing death due to starvation and exposure to the harsh elements. Or maybe you would have called for them to be left to the wild scavenging animals that prowled the lands, seeking for any vestige of life sustaining sustenance.

Yes, your plan would have been far less wicked....
...
We called for the Germans to be brought to swift and total justice for the evil they had done. Thousands of men and women risked their lives to see this realized so important they thought it was for the wrongs to be righted and for the victims of this deleterious regime to be avenged.

Do not make the mistake of trying to portray as equivalent the circumstances and response of the Allied nations to the Nazis with God's response to the Amalekites.

The two could not be more distinct.

Click to expand...

Exactly, the Allies did not kill all the Germans, men, women, children, and infants. "Total justice" did not require that. Nor did we leave people to starve or be eaten by animals. Rather, the US sent CARE packages into postwar Germany to feed the starving.

Like I said, you would have rather had the infants, and this is assuming that there were actually infants among them at the time, just be left to die a slow agonizing death by starvation and exposure.

Click to expand...

Yes, i know you just said that. The important thing is that I didn't say anything like that, and the only reason you assume this is what I would do is because the only opponent you can defeat is one made of straw.

Jeremy E Walker said:

I will start by addressing your last question first.

What does wiping them out accomplish?

1. They would no longer prey upon defenseless children and older people who were the most vulnerable in any given society at that time.

2. They would be examples of what would happen to others if they were thinking of preying upon the helpless and defenseless. This is what we would refer to as a "deterrent".

3. The land would be purged and cleansed from their evil influence and their victims and victim's families would have been avenged. Vengeance is mine, I will repay saith the Lord.

Click to expand...

A vengeful god indeed. That still leaves all of those defenceless people dead.

Jeremy E Walker said:

I can think of more things but this gives you an idea.

To address your first question I will simply say that God did not prevent the Amalekites from attacking the weak and helpless of Israel for the same reason He does not prevent you from doing the evil things that you do. He created you, and the descendants of Amalek to be a human beings, not robots, or something that is stopped in its tracks and "reset" every time it is about to do something wrong like a child stops and starts a video game or wind up toy when it does not do what it wants it to do.

And as far as God responding to the Amalekite's deleterious choices to pillage, rape and plunder the young and very old, God's response was fitting, just what you would have wanted had you been a victim of their egregious deeds.

Click to expand...

No, if I were a victim of their "egregious deeds" I would be dead.

A more modern analogy would be the child rapist and the child. God has to let this happen? Why?

What is it that what you would tell those rape victims? Imagine if it were your own child.

Jeremy E Walker said:

Omnipotence does not mean the ability to do the logically impossible. It is not logically possible to "force" someone do something "freely". It is no more possible for God to do that than it is for Him to make a "married bachelor" or a "round square".

Click to expand...

From what I gather from apologists such as yourself, God is unable to act in a manner that would demonstrate that he actually exists, outside of a character in a book.

SillyFool said:

In my OP I made a comment about how, "God could have responded [to sin] like an insecure, hasty control-freak, wildly deleting His creations from existence as the damage spread, undoing their choices, or restarting the whole system. But He never does."

And He really never ever does. He doesn't respond to things "not going His way" by altering the fundamental rules of reality (and I'm not talking about the "Laws of Physics"). He doesn't change people's choices (though He sometimes enhances them), and He doesn't always shield anyone from the consequences of choices (their own or others'). The intersection between human authority and God's authority is a wild place.

Click to expand...

God does not seem to respond in a manner that is outside of the believers' imaginations.

SillyFool said:

You can learn His character through experience, but He's difficult to nail down (heh... no pun or blasphemy intended).

Click to expand...

ouch.

God has everyone but a few die. 120 years of life approximate maximum. No access to the tree of life, guarded instead by angels.

God did not invent death but uses it. And there has been killing and eating before Adam as it is designed into the teeth, so we can see it.

Death is better than eternal life in the flesh for evil doers otherwise would live on and get continuously worse.

Davian said:

A vengeful god indeed. That still leaves all of those defenceless people dead.



No, if I were a victim of their "egregious deeds" I would be dead.

A more modern analogy would be the child rapist and the child. God has to let this happen? Why?

What is it that what you would tell those rape victims? Imagine if it were your own child.


From what I gather from apologists such as yourself, God is unable to act in a manner that would demonstrate that he actually exists, outside of a character in a book.

Click to expand...

God has blessed me with twins. If one of them were to be raped or both, I would be very sad and angry. I would try to comfort them and assure them that everything would be alright. I would love them and seek God's guidance on how to handle the situation.

I would reach out to the rapist. I would let him or her know that what they did was wrong and that they will have to answer for their crime. I would also tell them that I loved them and that God loves them and that they could be forgiven the same way God forgave me for the evils I committed when I came to Him in repentance. I would let them know that there is no sin too big that God cannot forgive. I would let them know that they could be restored and that they could have hope in Christ and that if they did not accept Christ's offer of salvation then they would have to answer to Him on judgment day.

My spouse was hit by a man who had stolen a car and was fleeing from the police. When he hit her in the rear, the impact was so violent and great that it caused her car to become airborne and flip at least three times in the air, hitting trees in the median and eventually landing on the opposite side of the road into oncoming traffic. The car landed on its roof and my wife was pinned in the car while the gas tank was leaking and could not escape. She was able to call me in a frantic panic screaming and crying. She kept yelling: "I am stuck Jeremy!, I can't get out and the car is still running!"

I will never forget the shear terror in her voice.

She was taken to the hospital and eventually recovered. My children could have been left without a mother and I could have been left without a wife.

If I am given the chance, I will reach out to the man who hit her (he is now incarcerated and facing decades in prison) and let him know that yes, what he did was wrong, and yes he will have to live with it, but that I do love him and want only the best for him. I would tell him that God loves him and wants to have a relationship with him. I would use the opportunity God has given me to show him love and mercy, because God has shown me love and mercy.

So yes, bad things happen to Christians. But when they do (not if they do) we can use those times to show people love and mercy and grace because God has been merciful and gracious and loving to us.

That my friend is what Christianity is about. It is about forgiving, it is about loving. It is about forgiving the unforgivable and loving the unlovable because those who have come to Christ know that they have no right to withhold that grace, that mercy, and that love that God showered upon them in Christ while they were yet sinners.

Jeremy E Walker said:

God has blessed me with twins. If one of them were to be raped or both, I would be very sad and angry. I would try to comfort them and assure them that everything would be alright.

Click to expand...

It will not be 'alright'. If they survive the ordeal, they could be emotionally and physically scarred for life.

Jeremy E Walker said:

I would love them and seek God's guidance on how to handle the situation.
<snip>

Click to expand...

Do you make efforts to protect your children, or will you allow people to do such things to your children and then "love them and seek God's guidance on how to handle the situation"?