I recently have been introduced to a user by the name of Stephen who has the idea that the God of the Bible is "wicked". I would like Stephen to come on and describe his view of the Biblical God being wicked.
Is the God of the Bible "good" or "wicked"?
Posts
Total:
216
Feed the trolls.
-->
@DavidAZ
Let me try to help with a productive conversation, because I too find this topic interesting.
Can you perhaps define what you think the word "wicked" means in context, just so that when people are pulling bible passages, they're not wasting their time? The other important question is do you feel the old testament is still valid once you read the new testament? I've seen arguments before that say "Well he was way meaner in the OT because that's how he had to be before Jesus." I just think it helps to understand what footing you're on as a believer, so that people argue relevant stuff with you.
Atheists would sooner support Stalin than admit how Christianity is beneficial for society.
-->
@ludofl3x
Thanks!
As for wicked, I am leaving that to be defined by any poster as they see fit. I have seen the God of the bible as rough or stern or even uncaring but never wicked, so I wanted people to chime in, specifically Stephen per our previous posts we had that he had asked me to start. I'm afraid I've ticked him off to much to have a real discussion on it.
The old testament is still valid after reading the new, yes. I would say God is the same throughout the Bible and was never "meaner" in the old as compared to the new.
-->
@DavidAZ
The author of this thread, DavidAZ is being quite disingenuous/sly.
DavidAZ was supposed to start his own thread namely ""Other Aspects of God", which the title should explain itself.
I said I would gladly engage him should he ever decide to actually create his thread. The idea came about because I was highlighting the cruelty of god towards his own loyal and righteous servants with DavidAZ complaining with words to the effect that ;
I only concentrate on what I believe how vile and torturous god is towards his own devout, loyal and righteous servants and not "Other Aspects of God"
DavidAZ wrote: As for me grasping at straws, you fail to recognize any other aspects of the bible where God does deliver someone out of trouble, does help a widow, does revive a child and gives Job twice as much in the end of his affliction. You are only focused on the "bad" of God and will spit nails at anyone who says God is just, righteous or good to them. #108
I replied
Stephen wrote: I suggested he start his own thread explaining these "other aspects of god". #110
I have since reminded DavidAZ of his intentons to start his own thread a few times now and this is the result of what supposed to be his thread explaining his "Other Aspects of God"
So before we go any further on this thread (which some may suggest is "a call out" thread) I would like DavidAZ to reveal these "other aspects of god" as he intended to do in the first instance.
I will the be more than happy to engage him.
The floor is all yours, DavidAZ
-->
@ludofl3x
@DavidAZ
ludofl3x wtote: Can you perhaps define what you think the word "wicked" means in context, just so that when people are pulling bible passages, they're not wasting their time?DavidAZ wrote: As for wicked, I am leaving that to be defined by any poster as they see fit.
Stop it. This is your thread, it has the word "wicked" in its title. You should be able to define the word wicked and give us its BIBLICAL meaning!. We wouldn't want you to start redefining simple words once you find yourself on the back foot.
-->
@DavidAZ
Perfect, thanks for the clarification. Best of luck.
When I think of wickedness, we can start in Genesis, with the flood story. There's also Jephthah. Abraham's story is pretty disturbing, too. Lot's pretty rough too. His stance on slavery, too. His sanctioning of selling children into sexual slavery, that one's pretty wicked too. I'm sure you've gone through these in your past, so feel free to bullet point how, for example, having the hebrews slaughter every Amalekite, including their livestock, is somehow above 'wicked.'
The problem I think you're going to end up with is that when there's a way to solve a problem that doesn't involve harming someone else, that solution is largely viewed as the 'moral' decision. Now, that's a bit of an oversimplification, but for now it'll work. Think of it like if you had the trolley problem, right, but a third option: stop the train before it kills anyone at all. If you have this option, wouldn't you agree that it's the most moral decision to make?
This decision is ALWAYS and ONLY available to the character in the book. He has knowledge of all things, he has all the powers you can think of, so he has every possible option in front of him to solve problems. Any time god doesn't take the 'less suffering' option, in the view of many he's making a wicked choice.
-->
@Stephen
Stephen, I specifically said: POST 162
I actually may start a thread just for you to describe your position on God being wicked. It is a interesting view IMO.
You replied: POST 164
"actually may"!? I will believe it when I see, it.But I told you, I don't care, I am easy.
So I started it and you are easy.
No gotcha points here, no troll threads, no being sly. I wanted your view on why God is wicked. You never really laid out a real case for this. Just a few biblical references. I'm interested in your view on this and have asked you to comment.
BUT, since you have asked me to start:
The God of the old testament has always been considered good or righteous. He helps people when they cry out to him, he delivers his people in dire situations and even cares for a old widow woman during a drought. God can also be severe such as during Noah's flood, the judgement of the Egyptians in the Exodus and the punishment of the Judah and Israel in their exile. Even though God has been rough and severe, he always will bend an ear to those who call on them. He does care for his own but he will not tolerate insolence against his ways. God always gives the best to his people, but will be upset if it is not appreciated. He does command people to fear him, which is not an unusual position to be in when you are in authority. There are people in his plan that were "used" for his good that would seem that he doesn't care or regard the feelings of others just so He can get his way, but most do not recognize the lessons he is trying to teach or the training he is giving. There are times he executes judgement on others that may seem "wicked", but we don't know their whole story and sometimes why God had the judgement drawn.
Now, I also do NOT claim to know everything about God. I can only glean from personal experience and what the Bible tells me. So when others state that God is wicked, it baffles me to hear it. I want someone here to show why they think the God of the Bible is wicked.
When I use the word wicked, I think of evil, demonic, happy at the loss of innocent blood, theft, murder and the such.
-->
@DavidAZ
Lets have your biblical definition of the word " wicked" and "good".
I will take up your post in the morning.
-->
@ludofl3x
Ah! That makes sense.
I would say that in our lives, God is the decision maker for the universe so for him to have the last say is really not mine to judge, but I see your point. Also, God didn't make mankind just to destroy them. When Adam and Eve were in the garden, he didn't kill them like he said (ye shall surely die), he had something else die in it's place (they got coats of animal skins). I would say he is constantly trying to find a way to preserve mankind so at the point of the flood, he may have seen the hearts of men and known that there was no more hope (hearts of men evil continually) and only through the lineage of Noah was there to be goodness.
So when something like a the global flood or the killing of the Amalekites happens, I think it's Gods only solution to this evil. There is no ability to repent at this point so the best thing to do would be to destroy the bad.
I would liken it to our justice system. We will not let a murderer live. He is too bad of a person to keep him around society (death penalty). I think what God is doing in these situations is the same aspect.
As for the sexual slavery stuff, I will have to look into that some more. I never heard of the sexual part. But Hebrew slavery was not like our recent history slavery. They could have been slaves to pay off debts. Also, when the feast of Pentecost came around or the death of the high priest, all slaves went free. It was never a society set upon slave labor such as agriculture in the Southern United States.
We also will define morality by a different standard in today's society than it was just few generations ago (adultery, drugs, abortion, LGBTQ). So I could really see where God would be seen as wicked when he sends harsh judgement to others. I could also see when we don't live by the same standards as they did back then that we can look back a see it as a bad decision.
-->
@Stephen
Lets have your biblical definition of the word " wicked" and "good".
Hmmmm . . I think this is a good question to ask, but I would say someone who hurts others, whether it's financial, spiritual, emotional, physical, for their own happiness or gain without the consideration or improvement of others, would be considered wicked. I.E. Murder, theft, vandalism, assaults
Good would be the opposite: The act or thought of helping others for their benefit or the benefit of society. I.E. giving, loving, helping, also a doctor could do a good thing by cutting out a tumor, hurting someone, but for their benefit.
I do appreciate your time on this Stephen.
This is an interesting discussion, and I too would like to be involved.
-->
@DavidAZ
I recently have been introduced to a user by the name of Stephen who has the idea that the God of the Bible is "wicked". I would like Stephen to come on and describe his view of the Biblical God being wicked.
Good luck with that. What's the bet, he never gives his definition but just asks you to provide it. I wouldn't waste my time. Just put him on block and stop him from trolling you.
He is not worth communicating with and is a chronic liar. More than that he is on a mission to distort as much of the bible as he can. (Ironically though, he seems to have a bigger issue with Islam)
In relation to your question with respect to God being wicked, is this in relation to God as a person or in relation to what he brings about? And to whom?
For instance, if God destroys an entire world of people, save for Noah and his family, is his act wicked? Or is it an act of judgment that is lawful and just and therefore good? I am sure that all those who were destroyed may well subjectively think this was a wicked act. As would millions of people in the world today who think that such an act could not possibly be good or just.
How could God justify killing unborn babies, toddlers, animals, and trees? Were they sinful? Isn't there an implicit notion that destroying them is wicked? If Satan or Hitler did it, then it would be considered the evil or wicked act of a wicked person. What is the distinction?
Personally, I think his destruction of the world was justified perfectly. I don't think God is wicked. Yet I appreciate or at least acknowledge that those who are the recipients of such justice may consider this to be wicked towards them. That of course doesn't change the objective nature of what happened. Every day in court, judges hand out justice and the criminals always feel that the judgment is too harsh and therefore wicked.
God either intends all things to come to pass or he doesn't. If he is omniscient and omnipotent, then whether or not his intention is that such evil acts occur, he still permits it to happen, even though he could stop it. This would make him culpable as well unless everything he does or intends is for a specific holy purpose. The question then becomes a little more interesting. Does the end for a good and holy purpose justify the means? That is a far more profound question. One that Stephen and his boyfriend Brother D Thomas do not even have the capacity to ask.
-->
@DavidAZ
The answer is "good" if the moral reference is constructed upon God. That is how relative morality works. Interpersonal is not entirely equivalent with objective.
depends on your perspective and how you define wicked. If you believe God is the absolute and/or objective morality author, then what he says is wicked, is wicked.
but if not, then its according to your or mankinds perspective, which is as stable as wind.
-->
@Melcharaz
depends on your perspective and how you define wicked. If you believe God is the absolute and/or objective morality author, then what he says is wicked, is wicked.but if not, then its according to your or mankinds perspective, which is as stable as wind.
Agreed.
-->
@DavidAZ
The God of the old testament has always been considered good or righteous. He helps people when they cry out to him, he delivers his people in dire situations and even cares for a old widow woman during a drought. God can also be severe such as during Noah's flood, the judgement of the Egyptians in the Exodus and the punishment of the Judah and Israel in their exile. Even though God has been rough and severe, he always will bend an ear to those who call on them. He does care for his own but he will not tolerate insolence against his ways. God always gives the best to his people, but will be upset if it is not appreciated. He does command people to fear him, which is not an unusual position to be in when you are in authority. There are people in his plan that were "used" for his good that would seem that he doesn't care or regard the feelings of others just so He can get his way, but most do not recognize the lessons he is trying to teach or the training he is giving. There are times he executes judgement on others that may seem "wicked", but we don't know their whole story and sometimes why God had the judgement drawn.
"His people" and "his own". That will be his Holy chosen and treasured people ; Hebrew /Israelites?
“For you [Israel] are a people holy to the Lord your God. The Lord your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession” Deuteronomy 7:6 and Deuteronomy 14:2
"declares the Lord, “I will be the God of all the families of Israel, and they shall be My people.” Jeremiah 31:14.
Please do not waste your own or my time accusing me of "cherry picking" or having a "skewed position". These are direct quotes from god himself as written in the bible. They mean only one thing in any language; God had chosen a group of people and called them, his own, special, holy and "treasured possession".
Your god hated foreigners didn't he? That would be anyone that he didn't choose. Indeed your god hated anything that was foreign, as in the case of Arron's two son's murdered on the spot, no if's or but's because they used the wrong type ( foreign) of fire. Leviticus 10:1-3. I will admit the story on the face is as wicked as it is strange. As is the wicked but strange story of Uzzah.
And what's just as strange is the you tell us that :
DavidAZ Wrote: God knows our hearts but he cannot tell our future actions#79[Or was it;]DavidAZ Wrote: I believe that God can see every possible future depending on our actions.?#102
Or shall we simply take the words of the BIBLE on the matter?
" for the Lord searches all hearts, and understands every intent of the thoughts” 1 Chronicles 28:9
Regardless. I can see this thread quickly turning into pages of whataboutery.
To your own definition of the word "wicked". I say " your own" because you didn't submit a source.
DavidAZ Wrote: [definition of wicked] I would say someone who hurts others, whether it's financial, spiritual, emotional, physical, for their own happiness or gain without the consideration or improvement of others, would be considered wicked. I.E. Murder, theft, vandalism, assaults#12
And what about a complete disregard for justice, truth, honesty, the righteous and righteousness?
As in the case of the sad and unexplainable story of Job being just one example.. But then people get murdered by god for telling the truth don't they?
-->
@DavidAZ
Okay, I forgot to ask another key question, so I'll rectify that now: do you think the god of the bible, according to the bible, can be surprised? In other words, does he have a PLAN for everything, or just an IDEA. I can address some of the other stuff that doesn't really bear on that question in the meantime.
I would say he is constantly trying to find a way to preserve mankind so at the point of the flood, he may have seen the hearts of men and known that there was no more hope (hearts of men evil continually) and only through the lineage of Noah was there to be goodness...So when something like a the global flood or the killing of the Amalekites happens, I think it's Gods only solution to this evil....
This is where we start to get into why I think the character is indeed wicked. For god, in the bible, how is it possible that there could be "no hope"? He literally controls everything, number one, and he literally made everyone alive. Could he not "change" or "edit" the populace in such a way that he'd be pleased with them? Is that not possible for god (through whom all things are possible, I've heard)? If the answer is no, why? if the answer is yes, then you can see that he actively chose the path that led to widespread devastation, from all other paths. Again, he's got three options for the trolley problem: kill one, kill many, or kill none. He chose kill many. If you chose to kill any when you could achieve the same end without killing at all, would you not be rightfully called wicked? Does god EVER only have one solution? Does this character, the one many think has knowledge of all things and all times and created everything and everyone, does the author bear no responsibility for the actions of his characters?
There is no ability to repent at this point so the best thing to do would be to destroy the bad.
There's no ability for the people he created, knowing what they'd do and how they'd be, for every second of their lives, to repent, I get that. What I don't get is why his only solution is to destroy "the bad." I mean, didn't he also create the Amalekites? What was so bad about them besides they weren't Hebrews, that not only did they have to die, but their women and children were taken as slaves (the bible calls them "wives" as a euphemism) and their livestock was killed? That sure doesn't sound like our justice system to me. :)
I would liken it to our justice system. We will not let a murderer live. He is too bad of a person to keep him around society (death penalty). I think what God is doing in these situations is the same aspect.
Would we still use the death penalty, or even prisons, if we had the ability to completely mentally reprogram the murderer without him ever knowing, so that he's a good member of society? I'm not talking about prison system rehab we try to say we're doing now. I mean ACTUAL rehabilitation, beyond question, completely effective, like a real reprogramming.
But Hebrew slavery was not like our recent history slavery. They could have been slaves to pay off debts.
Was it ever MORAL to own a human being?
We also will define morality by a different standard in today's society than it was just few generations ago (adultery, drugs, abortion, LGBTQ). So I could really see where God would be seen as wicked when he sends harsh judgement to others. I could also see when we don't live by the same standards as they did back then that we can look back a see it as a bad decision.
This is a great argument for subjective morality, be careful :). I say that somewhat flippantly as I'm not sure where you stand on those issues personally, but I would imagine as a normal human being you do not think that gay men should be put to death here in 2023, and I doubt you have to grit your teeth and resent that they don't. Maybe you're not comfortable with them, that's your right (again, I'm presuming, so apologies if I have you wrong), but I very much doubt you'd vote for legislation demanding they be dragged into the street and killed. That's in Leviticus, I'm sure you know, and again, that to me would be wicked.
Compliments on the rational discussion, it's encouraging that we can disagree so vehemently on something (I'm talking about the existence of god now, I bet we don't disagree so vehemently on these particulars) and get through three posts without calling each other names.
-->
@Tradesecret
@Melcharaz
I am under the same opinion as you Melcharaz. I do believe God sets the standard and we should line up to it and not accuse God of wicked judgement.
I could see where people could be appalled by the idea of God demanding that all fear him, but God also shows that he doesn't only want the fear, but also wants to show his love and appreciation. I believe God has so many aspects of him that we cannot define him with only one attribute like the pagans would have one God for each aspect of life.
-->
@Stephen
Stephen, MISS TRADESECRET
Well, if a "call out thread to a specific member" is allowed by the moderators by DAVIDAZ to you, then I can make mention of another thread relating to the #1 Bible Stupid Fool, Miss Tradesecret in return.
Can you believe that the #1 Bible fool Miss Tradesecret has the audacity to enter this thread subsequent to making an outright bible fool of herself in another thread, as embarrassingly for her shown in the links below?!:
MISS TRADESECRET QUOTE IN THIS THEAD TOWARDS STEPHEN: "He is not worth communicating with and is a chronic liar."
Conversely, and easily shown in the links above, Miss Tradesecret is the epitome of being an outright LIAR relating to Jesus' inspired words! LOL!
If Miss Tradesecret wants to stay within this thread, and doesn't run away and HIDE like she has done before many times when confronted with biblical axioms, that she obviously didn't even know existed in the first place, then of course Jesus' inspired words and I will continue to make her the Bible fool again upon this threads topic as well, praise Jesus!
.
-->
@DavidAZ
when you say fear. do you mean actually be afraid of? or to honor him?
The God of the Bible is good.
He does nothing sinful.
He is the source of all good in the world.
Hell is not a lava lake like some think. It is separation from God.
So everything God is, Hell isn't. God is everything. Hell is nothing.
-->
@ludofl3x
Ludo,
Okay, I forgot to ask another key question, so I'll rectify that now: do you think the god of the bible, according to the bible, can be surprised? In other words, does he have a PLAN for everything, or just an IDEA. I can address some of the other stuff that doesn't really bear on that question in the meantime.
This is a little harder to explain and I know I butchered it on another thread, but here goes:
I believe God has an ultimate plan on how the world and mankind will run it's course. Let's say a blueprint to a house.
I also believe that God has an idea on how he will get that plan done. As in who he wants to hire to build that house.
So God knows the thoughts and intents of man but he does not know the exact action that we will perform. My example would be the test to Abraham. God knew Abraham loved him and was willing to obey (thought), he also knew that Abraham would decide on carrying out the plan (intent), but would he actually use the knife on his own child's throat when his own emotions and doubts are clouding his intents? Also, could Abraham be swayed at the pleading of his own child before he carried through with the act? At a certain point of the sacrifice ceremony, God knew it would be carried out and stopped him with the angel saying, "NOW I know".
So to answer your question, can God be surprised, I suppose in some extreme cases like above. But to say that God didn't see something coming or to be blind sighted is not true.
I hope I explained this as to not create more confusion.
This is where we start to get into why I think the character is indeed wicked. For god, in the bible, how is it possible that there could be "no hope"? He literally controls everything, number one, and he literally made everyone alive. Could he not "change" or "edit" the populace in such a way that he'd be pleased with them? Is that not possible for god (through whom all things are possible, I've heard)? If the answer is no, why? if the answer is yes, then you can see that he actively chose the path that led to widespread devastation, from all other paths. Again, he's got three options for the trolley problem: kill one, kill many, or kill none. He chose kill many. If you chose to kill any when you could achieve the same end without killing at all, would you not be rightfully called wicked? Does god EVER only have one solution? Does this character, the one many think has knowledge of all things and all times and created everything and everyone, does the author bear no responsibility for the actions of his characters?
I see where you are coming with this reasoning. If God is all powerful and he wants mankind to live and thrive, then why doesn't he just create a scenario where all could live and not fight, correct? I think one missing aspect in this train of thought is the decision of mankind. God gave mankind freewill. The ability to choose. So mankind can choose to serve and love God or choose to do their own thing without God. With our decisions comes the consequences of our actions, hence reward or judgement. It's an archaic concept, I know, but the simplest of ideas will come to this.
I would also liken the "perfect world" reasoning above to the concept of communism. Everybody gets the same thing (for the most part) and everybody gets assigned a job to do and where to live so society can run smoother as a whole. Just like a set of working ants, everybody does their assigned parts and life is pleasant! The problem with this design is the will of the human spirit will throw a wrench into the gears. What if one wants to be a doctor instead of a concrete worker? What if one wants to live in the mountains and not the plains? What if one has a drive to change his town into the best ever, but can only lay bricks? Our drive will help determine our outcome and the same for with God's ways with us. He lets us decide. So if we get too far without him, deny him, and reject him to the extent that our hearts turn fully evil, then a turn of judgement may be in order. This judgement may or may not include death from him. I suppose that's up to God.
There's no ability for the people he created, knowing what they'd do and how they'd be, for every second of their lives, to repent, I get that. What I don't get is why his only solution is to destroy "the bad." I mean, didn't he also create the Amalekites? What was so bad about them besides they weren't Hebrews, that not only did they have to die, but their women and children were taken as slaves (the bible calls them "wives" as a euphemism) and their livestock was killed? That sure doesn't sound like our justice system to me. :)
I would agree with you if we only saw this situation at a distance. It looks like like God sends his people in for some holy genocide to all the inhabitants so he can clear a way for the Israelites to live. But, let's take a deeper look into what was actually going on at that time. God told his people after they got out of Egypt to not take on the ways of the "heathen" around them (Leviticus 18). He established laws to help the Israelites not do what the nations around them were doing. If you read through some of those laws, the nations were very corrupt, nasty and evil, according to God's word. At this point, the driving out of these nations was again the judgement of God to these heathen nations and the nation of Israel was the tool he used to work this judgement. Again, the ultimate judge in this scenario will be God and not us.
I will chime in and say on this point that we don't know the standard that was given to those nations that could have been considered bad or wrong. God may have had a certain lenience to the heathen since they did not have the law or the covenant with Abraham and they still blew through the standards, therefore enacting the judgement, but this is all speculation on my part.
Would we still use the death penalty, or even prisons, if we had the ability to completely mentally reprogram the murderer without him ever knowing, so that he's a good member of society? I'm not talking about prison system rehab we try to say we're doing now. I mean ACTUAL rehabilitation, beyond question, completely effective, like a real reprogramming.
In theory, the death penalty may be abolished if this were the case, but also keep in mind justice to the victim's family. There was still a horrendous wrong. Who is going to pay?
Was it ever MORAL to own a human being?
The ownership of another human is immoral if the circumstances are immoral on how they obtained them. Example, if I were a poor Hebrew man in those days, it may be better for me to contract myself as a servant (slave) to a rich Hebrew family, learn from them and then be set free after 7 years to try a new start at life with the new knowledge I have. There is a ton of debate regarding how slaves were obtained and treated in the bible. Some state that any ownership is punishable by death (Exodus 21:16) while others say the bible states it is permissible depending on the circumstances (war). There is one thing agreed that they are all set free on the Jubilee.
This is a bigger subject that is above my pay grade to really comment on.
This is a great argument for subjective morality, be careful :). I say that somewhat flippantly as I'm not sure where you stand on those issues personally, but I would imagine as a normal human being you do not think that gay men should be put to death here in 2023, and I doubt you have to grit your teeth and resent that they don't. Maybe you're not comfortable with them, that's your right (again, I'm presuming, so apologies if I have you wrong), but I very much doubt you'd vote for legislation demanding they be dragged into the street and killed. That's in Leviticus, I'm sure you know, and again, that to me would be wicked.
I am a very conservative person, so I don't agree with the list I gave, but like you said, I don't think killing the ones that do this is the best way to stop it. It's a moral issue that needs to be adjusted in society as a whole since the lack of morality caused these things to become so blatant. Every one of the issues I mentioned was illegal in America at one time. As for Leviticus, I figure that if a country wants to create laws against such behavior, then that's up to them, but keep in mind there was a reason the laws were made against these behaviors and why the execution of the law was so harsh. I doubt it was because they were just intolerant, but rather that a breach in morality would cause a huge problem in that society. Everyone had to be speaking the same thing in order for them to be moving as one people. Otherwise, if they got divided, they would easily fall apart.
Compliments on the rational discussion, it's encouraging that we can disagree so vehemently on something (I'm talking about the existence of god now, I bet we don't disagree so vehemently on these particulars) and get through three posts without calling each other names.
Same here! This has been enlightening and fun to discuss. Thanks for the civil discourse!
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Do you follow the divine command theory? This states that whatever god does is good because he does it, that by dictum his actions are all moral. So when he turned Lot's wife into a pillar of salt for turning around, then had Lot get double teamed by his daughters, that was by definition all moral. What do you think?
-->
@Melcharaz
when you say fear. do you mean actually be afraid of? or to honor him?
I believe the biblical reference to the word "fear" is more of an honor or reverence. It is the same idea as your feelings to your father (assuming your father was a good man) when you were a kid. You loved your dad and enjoyed being around your dad, but cross dad and, whoowee!, get ready for some correction. You know dad had the power to make your life miserable but you also know that your dad loved you so you stayed on his good side, knowing that insolence could land you some painful lessons.
-->
@Sidewalker
You, me, and David can handle ‘em.
-->
@DavidAZ
So to answer your question, can God be surprised, I suppose in some extreme cases like above. But to say that God didn't see something coming or to be blind sighted is not true.
In the interest of brevity I'm going to trim some of these passages and try to respond to most of the content, but if I miss something it's not intentional or trying to take you out of context. What you say above is contradictory: if he didn't see it coming, then he can be surprised, which means an outcome he didn't expect happens. Also, the test of Abraham is not really a test in my view. Explained it here, actually: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/9056/posts/381958
As to the plans and house thing, you're saying that he rather has an end goal and no real 'step by step' of how it gets there, right? I'm afraid this is trying to have it both ways, which is why it's confusing. He either knows everything, or he doesn't. It sounds to me like you think he doesn't, there's some subset of knowledge he doesn't have (and it included Abraham). THat's fine, we can proceed with a less than all knowing god in mind, but it's unusual.
God gave mankind freewill.
This is compatible with a less than all knowing god, so I agree under these parameters that everything makes just a little more sense.
Our drive will help determine our outcome and the same for with God's ways with us. He lets us decide. So if we get too far without him, deny him, and reject him to the extent that our hearts turn fully evil, then a turn of judgement may be in order. This judgement may or may not include death from him. I suppose that's up to God.
Who wrote those drives into the people in this case?
God may have had a certain lenience to the heathen since they did not have the law or the covenant with Abraham and they still blew through the standards, therefore enacting the judgement, but this is all speculation on my part.
If god is truly less than all knowing, and apparently less than powerful enough to convince the Amalekites, whom he also made, maybe, but again, he has ALL THE POWERS. Appreciate the speculation admission, at least you didn't pretend it was in the bible :).
This is a bigger subject that is above my pay grade to really comment on.
David! I'm going to give you more credit than this. My question is very simple. Was it ever moral to OWN another human being? To be able to pass them down to your children like you would furniture? Not to have them work for you, to own them. Was it ever MORAL to own a prisoner of war, or their children? I don't think it's above your paygrade to comment on that. And I do not believe for one second that you think it's okay to own slaves in the American agricultural context, even if they were somehow acquired by moral circumstances. Would inheritance qualify as a moral circumstance?
It's a moral issue that needs to be adjusted in society as a whole since the lack of morality caused these things to become so blatant.
Here we're referring to stuff like gay guys getting killed for being gay, I just would like a little clarification here on what this means before I comment on it. Without clarification though, I would ask what on earth god made gay people for, this is a problem that god could have solved a million ways (not even counting raining sulfur down on gay towns!). Do you think a society like the Taliban, let's say, is morally superior to American culture because they punish their gays according to their faith? I don't think you do, this is why I'm asking for clarification of the above.
-->
@Stephen
Stephen,
MISS TRADESECRETS QUOTE IN TRYING TO DEFEND JESUS AS GOD: “How could God justify killing unborn babies, toddlers, animals, and trees? Were they sinful? Isn't there an implicit notion that destroying them is wicked? If Satan or Hitler did it, then it would be considered the evil or wicked act of a wicked person. What is the distinction?”
First thing, I have accepted that Jesus as God is truly a bloody and brutal serial killer, especially of innocent infants as shown within the Bible, and at the same time He is to be considered all loving (1 John 4:8) and forgiving (1 John 1:9)!
What the Bible Stupid Miss Tradesecret doesn’t comprehend in using Satan and Hitler as an example in killing people would not be accepted, whereas Jesus as God doing this brutal act in His Great Flood scenario is to be accepted, is the FACT that Jesus being God is omniscient (1 John 3:20), and anything less wouldn't be a God! Therefore, Jesus knew beforehand that He was going to have to brutally murder His creation in the future in His Great Flood scenario because of them turning evil (Genesis 6:5-7), and where Jesus was guilty of “Premeditated Murder” which is the distinction that the Bible fool Miss Tradesecret calls for!
Whereas, in part, in Jesus murdering innocent animals in the Great Flood which had NOTHING to do with His creation of man being evil, Jesus turned Himself into a WICKED ABORTIONIST with women with child in His Great Flood where they were drowned by Him, and of course, innocent babies drowning a suffocating death as they cried out to their mothers as they took their last gasp of air and drowned an horrific death!
Yes, the above circumstances are represented by my seemingly ever loving and forgiving God named Jesus, of which the Christian rarely talks about these circumstances shown above with unbelievers because of their embarrassment.
.
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
Brother D.
I am confident that DavidAZ will be along shortly to explain to you why none of the vile acts that you have highlighted above at #29 and committed by his god are not "wicked".