Why does God not stop the evil?

[seeking Christ]

It said to go and kill the Amalekites. They were singled out because of who they were, being Amalekites.

No sir, I already snipped out for you the relevant part of the text you're willfully skipping over, so you couldn't miss it. You can see WHY God intended for them to die, and that has nothing to do their tribe; instead it is judgment for action.

What we are left with is God judges us, and it sux to be in that position. This presents a moral dilemma, which is the whole purpose of both the story and its inclusion in what we call Scripture; but I just took 3 steps WAY ahead of what you're stuck on. Go back and establish WHY.

In another section of the Bible priests were sacrificed on altars because they belonged to a specific religion which is again genocide.

That stretches the definition beyond all meaning. Again, this is judgment for action.

So what is the purpose of killing infants?

Too vague and general to answer, and frankly those specific situations are much more difficult to deal with than the other situations that you're still having difficulty with, so lets resolve those first.

 

[seeking Christ]

God does stop evil, and this is that process.

That's what I've been saying. This is the Tl;Dr format

 

[seeking Christ]

Kill them because they have human sacrifices. To show them that it is wrong, use their priests as human sacrifices. It would seem to me that the only difference between the Chosen People and the civilizations they were told to conquer is that the Hebrews won (supposedly). It would appear that winning the war makes you moral.

How many people would these Priests sacrifice upon the altar during their lives? Killing that Priest is akin to shooting a would-be mass shooter before he can take his next victim. At Sandy Hook this judgment would have been most welcome, and by all except Adam Lanza. Why are you against it now?

 

[bricklayer]

That's what I've been saying. This is the Tl;Dr format

One of the things that God cannot do is create something that does not change.
God's creation is a process; it is a prescribed sequence of changes.
We creatures are processes. We are intellectual, emotional, willfull and biological processes.
We are defined by our changes.

Another thing that God cannot do is change.
God cannot come to know, come to feel, come to will or come to be.
God exists necessarily; He actually is what He is necessarily.

Adam and Eve sinned before they were sinners.
They were very good, but they had to change.
The best possible creation is the one we have, the one changing toward God.

This really is the "straight line between the two points".
This is the process of the revelation of God's glory; it is a never ending process.
Creation will always be a process, a prescribed sequence of changes revealing an unchanging Creator.

 

[seeking Christ]

Wonderful way of putting it!

 

[Elioenai26]

How many people would these Priests sacrifice upon the altar during their lives? Killing that Priest is akin to shooting a would-be mass shooter before he can take his next victim. At Sandy Hook this judgment would have been most welcome, and by all except Adam Lanza. Why are you against it now?

Very well put. I could not have said it better myself.

 

[Loudmouth]

How many people would these Priests sacrifice upon the altar during their lives?

Is that immoral? If their god ordered it, then that god's purpose is stopping evil which makes human sacrifices moral, does it not?

 

[seeking Christ]

Is that immoral? If their god ordered it, then that god's purpose is stopping evil which makes human sacrifices moral, does it not?

No it does not. That god's purpose was creating evil, sacrificing their infants in the fire. Can you even imagine? Baby BBQ.

This was one of the main distinctions between the God of the Israelites and the gods of the surrounding tribes, btw.

 

[Loudmouth]

No sir, I already snipped out for you the relevant part of the text you're willfully skipping over, so you couldn't miss it. You can see WHY God intended for them to die, and that has nothing to do their tribe; instead it is judgment for action.

A judgement for action against a nation, and that punishment called for the wiping out the entire nation including innocent infants. That is immoral. That is genocide.

What we are left with is God judges us, and it sux to be in that position.

Whose god? The Hebrew god or the Amalek god? If the Amalek god says that you must sacrifice a human to prevent evil, who are you to say otherwise? Isn't that moral?

 

[Loudmouth]

No it does not. That god's purpose was creating evil, sacrificing their infants in the fire.

Then the purpose of the God in the Bible is likewise the creation of evil by visiting genocide on children.

 

[seeking Christ]

A judgement for action against a nation, and that punishment called for the wiping out the entire nation including innocent infants. That is immoral. That is genocide.

You base your decision upon paper thin non-arguments, and not having information. Don't let me stop you, but it is not a recommended way of arriving at good decisions.

If the Amalek god says that you must sacrifice a human to prevent evil, who are you to say otherwise? Isn't that moral?

So you support Molach by being pro-abortion. Same thing. Same god. Same barbarism, different day.

 

[seeking Christ]

Then the purpose of the God in the Bible is likewise the creation of evil by visiting genocide on children.

Now you're getting somewhere!

Zepheniah 1:12 And it shall come to pass at that time, [that] I will search Jerusalem with candles, and punish the men that are settled on their lees: that say in their heart, The LORD will not do good, neither will he do evil."

So we see in these passages you bring up, a moral dilemma that for God to put a stop to evil (the thread title) He must create evil.

This is reasoning for us to REPENT.

And know you understand the stories, and a good deal more that has modern day application, including the answer to the question posed in the thread title.

 

[Loudmouth]

You base your decision upon paper thin non-arguments, and not having information. Don't let me stop you, but it is not a recommended way of arriving at good decisions.

You base your argument on a blindingly obvious double standard.

Let's do this. If a god orders his followers to visit genocide on another population, we deem that this god is evil. If this god commands his people to sacrifice the priests of a competing religion on their own altars we should conclude that this god is evil.

I want to apply this to all religions equally. You want to apply them to all religions but your own.

So you support Molach by being pro-abortion. Same thing. Same god. Same barbarism, different day.

Bindlly following the commands of a deity and calling it morality is barbarism? Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[Loudmouth]

So we see in these passages you bring up, a moral dilemma that for God to put a stop to evil (the thread title) He must create evil.

No, he doesn't. That's the whole point. God is omnipotent. God doesn't have to resort to genocide to prevent evil.

This is reasoning for us to REPENT.

How does a 6 month old baby repent?

 

[seeking Christ]

No, he doesn't. That's the whole point. God is omnipotent. God doesn't have to resort to genocide to prevent evil.

Anytime you want to stop just making stuff up and deal with reality, let us know.

 

[seeking Christ]

Let's do this. If a god orders his followers to visit genocide on another population, we deem that this god is evil. If this god commands his people to sacrifice the priests of a competing religion on their own altars we should conclude that this god is evil.

Its always nice to broad brush with generalities rather than dealing with all those messy details, isn't it?

 

[Loudmouth]

Anytime you want to stop just making stuff up and deal with reality, let us know.

The only make believe I see are those who claim that an omnipotent deity is so limited in power that he has to make his followers do his bidding and commit genocide.

 

[Loudmouth]

Its always nice to broad brush with generalities rather than dealing with all those messy details, isn't it?

It's called an objective morality. Heard of it? Or do you follow moral relativism?

 

[seeking Christ]

The only make believe I see are those who claim that an omnipotent deity is so limited in power that he has to make his followers do his bidding and commit genocide.

And yet no matter what info is presented to you you ignore in and return to your folly. How does that pass for honest conversation again?

 

[seeking Christ]

It's called an objective morality. Heard of it? Or do you follow moral relativism?

False dichotomy. Ever heard of higher principles being involved? No, you'd have to look up to see that.