How does this God make you feel?

[St_Francis]

Why so?

Satan and the other devils who rebelled against God lost the beatific vision–he was expelled from Heaven. When we commit a mortal sin, our souls lose sanctifying grace and become spiritually dead–the soul continues to exist of course, but is not able to attain the beatific vision should we die without having reconciled with God.

God created angels, which are spirits without bodies, and humans, which are composed of body and soul. Angels, even bad ones, cannot “die” or be killed because they do not have bodies from which to be separated. Satan cannot be “killed” because he is not the type of created being which can be killed.

 

[St_Francis]

Genocide is still immoral, even if supposedly ordered by God. That anyone would condone the actions of the attackers is alarming.

God is perfectly just. If He orders something to happen, it is a perfectly just action.

 

[crazzeto]

God is perfectly just. If He orders something to happen, it is a perfectly just action.

God knows the hearts of men, as previously posted. If this destruction was ordered by God, then it was because they would not repent, no matter what (this is why he didn’t send a prophit to them, in addition to the fact that they were not at that time selected to be a part of salvation history).

Aboslutly correct St. Francis, terrific post!

 

[Schn]

God is perfectly just. If He orders something to happen, it is a perfectly just action.

But one becomes perfectly just by doing perfectly just actions. Your actions don’t become just just because you declare yourself perfectly just.

 

[St_Francis]

But one becomes perfectly just by doing perfectly just actions. Your actions don’t become just just because you declare yourself perfectly just.

God did not declare Himself perfectly just. He is the Source of justice: justice is what He is.

Consider a photo blown up for a bill board. If you only saw a 1"x1" square, it would make no sense to you, right? It is only when you pull away and can see the entire board that it makes sense. It’s the same way with creation. *Now *you can’t the justice of His action, but one day you will.

 

[Schn]

God did not declare Himself perfectly just. He is the Source of justice: justice is what He is.

Where is the evidence. Many of his actions seem unjust, and that’s because they are unjust.

Consider a photo blown up for a bill board. If you only saw a 1"x1" square, it would make no sense to you, right? It is only when you pull away and can see the entire board that it makes sense. It’s the same way with creation. *Now *you can’t the justice of His action, but one day you will.

Pretty analogy, but it doesn’t matter if there’s no evidence.

 

[St_Francis]

Where is the evidence. Many of his actions seem unjust, and that’s because they are unjust.

They are unjust for us to decide to do. We have limited knowledge, and God is omniscient.

Suppose the police in your town decided to put people in prison without any trial–would that be right? No, because the police do not have enough information to put the people in prison. We have trials *because *we know that our knowledge must be proven to be sufficient before we put people in prison.

However, God is all-knowing so there does not need to be a trial.

Pretty analogy, but it doesn’t matter if there’s no evidence.

We have a sense of justice. Where does that come from?

 

[cynic]

If the story is true then we still don’t know how God would deal with the souls of those people.

It’s still a lot better than the Calvinist God. Their ideas around justice are quite different. Basically God intended sin to occurr so that his anger and judgement could be manifested in creation. Human beings are just a means to an end. I’ll take the Catholic God over that one any day.

 

[Schn]

We have a sense of justice. Where does that come from?

I do not personally know. I suspect it came with altruism as humans lived in larger and larger communities. That we have a sense of justice is not in any way evidence that it came from god.

 

[St_Francis]

I do not personally know. I suspect it came with altruism as humans lived in larger and larger communities. That we have a sense of justice is not in any way evidence that it came from god.

Can something come out of nothing? an we get something better from something worse? Do we often see things which are left alone better better, or do they usually deteriorate?

 

[crazzeto]

Where is the evidence. Many of his actions seem unjust, and that’s because they are unjust.

Pretty analogy, but it doesn’t matter if there’s no evidence.

You wanted evidence of God’s Justice?

http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj11/crazzeto/Random/Station11-Jesusisnailedtothecross.jpg

drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=65&ch=4&l=15&f=s#x
14 Having therefore a great high priest that hath passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God: let us hold fast our confession. ***15 For we have not a high priest, who can not have compassion on our infirmities: but one tempted in all things like as we are, without sin. ***

16 Let us go therefore with confidence to the throne of grace: that we may obtain mercy, and find grace in seasonable aid.

 

[chris_molter]

These things in the Old Testament are often called “Hard Sayings” and for darn good reason. They ARE hard… they should be hard to deal with for a Christian believer. They were really difficult for me to wrestle with when I was returning to the faith and they’re not much easier to deal with now. Jimmy Akin had, IMO, one of the better discussions and explanations of how such things are reconciled with our knowledge of a loving God.
jimmyakin.org/2007/02/hard_sayings_of.html

I don’t think this is going to convince a nonbeliever, of course. It takes more than internet apologistics to work through the myriad and varied objections and underlying assumptions and personal issues behind them. But I thought I’d at least offer what I found helped me.

 

[StrawberryJam]

These things in the Old Testament are often called “Hard Sayings” and for darn good reason. They ARE hard… they should be hard to deal with for a Christian believer. They were really difficult for me to wrestle with when I was returning to the faith and they’re not much easier to deal with now. Jimmy Akin had, IMO, one of the better discussions and explanations of how such things are reconciled with our knowledge of a loving God.
jimmyakin.org/2007/02/hard_sayings_of.html

I don’t think this is going to convince a nonbeliever, of course. It takes more than internet apologistics to work through the myriad and varied objections and underlying assumptions and personal issues behind them. But I thought I’d at least offer what I found helped me.

I’m glad you found his explanations helpful, and agree that it is not going to convince this nonbeliever because it is filled with logical flaws. Too many to list.

 

[crazzeto]

These things in the Old Testament are often called “Hard Sayings” and for darn good reason. They ARE hard… they should be hard to deal with for a Christian believer. They were really difficult for me to wrestle with when I was returning to the faith and they’re not much easier to deal with now. Jimmy Akin had, IMO, one of the better discussions and explanations of how such things are reconciled with our knowledge of a loving God.
jimmyakin.org/2007/02/hard_sayings_of.html

I don’t think this is going to convince a nonbeliever, of course. It takes more than internet apologistics to work through the myriad and varied objections and underlying assumptions and personal issues behind them. But I thought I’d at least offer what I found helped me.

His arguments are decent enough, one aspect though he doesn’t cover is what it means exactly to live in a totally corrupt society (I would argue those of us today, have some taste of this). Even if you’re personally innocent, and even if you are “basically a good person” the problem is you’ve been heavily exposed to totally and completely corrupt values.

As I stated, the Amalekites would burn infants alive in the out stretched hands of a metal statue. Even the innocent 5 year old would have witnessed this, and one may presume great effort would have been made on the part of the Amalekites to ensure this innocent child understands this is a right and proper thing to do.

So now you would have a number of innocent Amalekites, running around telling the Israelites that they should be burning childeren alive on these metal statues. And worst of all, they would be doing this when the Israelites were fresh out of the desert, and very vunerable to these kinds of ideas.

As we would see, some remant of this evil worship would manage to survive the destruction of the Amalekites, and eventually it would make it’s way back to Israel. And when it does, eventually the Israelites would come to embrase it, the Kings them selves would do this until the Israelites them selves became a totally corrupt generation. But, even though that generation was totally corrupt, thanks to the centuries of proper worship they would have some foundation for a return the Lord. And this would happen, after the Exile.

 

[chris_molter]

I’m glad you found his explanations helpful, and agree that it is not going to convince this nonbeliever because it is filled with logical flaws. Too many to list.

That’s a very easy, perhaps trite, answer to a rather involved article. I’d be interested to see at least one or two examples of Jimmy’s logical flaws.

 

[alongexpected]

A lot of reasons. First of all the stories in the old testament were written down hundreds of years after they “happened.” They are fanciful and full of things that are completely impossible. God does not change, yet the difference between Jesus and the God of the Old Testament is night and day. The God of the OT was vengeful, spiteful, jealous, and had different qualities depending on the source that was writing about him (Documentary hypothesis).

So, if God never changes, then why did he directly speak to people all of the time back then? And why would a loving God command Israel to annihilate a group of people? Why would a God that believed in free will kill all creation except a very select few? If the God of the OT is real, did all the things that the OT said that he did, and is the same God as Jesus, he is not worthy of praise. I refuse to believe that the God responsible for the atrocities of the OT is the same God of the NT. This makes me believe the OT is basically all fabricated.

Amen.

 

[alongexpected]

When one considers the behaviour of many of these tribes and nations, actually no it’s really not so disturbing. Particularly as it relates to the Amslekites, as they were followers of Moloch. Part of this faith entailed seasonally going to the metal statue of Moloch, lighting a fire at the base and stoking it to a very great temperature. This statue had outstretched hands to receive gifts, when the “God” was ready (the hands had heated up) you would put an infant in his hands as an offering to the “God” for a good harvest.

The Amslekites were an end stage civilization, they were better off to the world dead than alive. So no, I don’t particularly think that Gods judgment was overly harsh. The Amslekites where completely depraved.

Wow. Thinking like this is ridiculous. Scary. Terrifying, actually. Don’t you know what you sound like? You sound like a crazy religious zealot who would justify killing others who are far from your own religion.

And even so, do we really KNOW that the Amslekites were this bad? I mean, the amount of history that goes unrecorded, misinterpreted, and screwed up through the years would shock us. And are those Amslekite babies monsters as well?

 

[StrawberryJam]

That’s a very easy, perhaps trite, answer to a rather involved article. I’d be interested to see at least one or two examples of Jimmy’s logical flaws.

That life is a “gift” and the giver can take away as they see fit.

Some use the potter/clay analogy, and they all seem to rely on ownership rights. I can own something, and no one can stop me from destroying it- and no one can have recourse against me for doing so, but it does not make it moral in all cases if I do.

 

[Luke_K]

To the OP, here is my explanation.

The Israelites were very quick to turn away from God and practice the idolatry of their neighbors. They were supposed to be God’s chosen people from whom God would come into the world as a man and preach the message that God wanted from the beginning, and reconcile man to Himself. This would not be possible if they were left in idolatry, because there would be no place for Jesus’ message to start from. God had to raise up a nation from which his message would have an effect on the world.

The motive for God dooming the Amalekites and other nations is made clear in Deuteronomy:

“After the Lord, your God, has thrust [the greater and stronger nations] our of your way, do not say to yourselves, ‘It is because of my merits that the Lord has brought me to possess this land’; for it is really because of the wickedness of these nations that the Lord is driving them out before you. No, it is not because of your merits or the integrity of your heart that you are going to take possession of their land; but the Lord, your God, is driving these nations out before you on account of their wickedness and in order to keep the promise which he made on oath to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob…” -Dt. 9:4-5

“But in the cities of those nations which the Lord, your God, is giving you as your heritage, you shall not leave a single soul alive. You must doom them all…as the Lord, your God, has commanded you, lest they teach you to make any such abominable offerings as they make to their gods, and you thus sin against the Lord, your God.” Dt. 20:16-18

“When you come into the land which the Lord, your God, is giving you, you shall not learn to imitate the abominations of the people there. Let there not be found among you anyone who immolates his son or daughter in the fire, nor a fortune-teller, soothsayer, charmer, diviner, or caster of spells, nor one who consults ghosts and spirits or seeks oracles from the dead. Anyone who does such things is an abomination to the Lord, and because of such abominations the Lord, your God, is driving these nations out of your way.” -Dt. 18:9-12

God gave us perfect life in the beginning, and we chose to reject it. The Amalekites and all of us have forfeited our lives by saying to God with our actions, “I don’t want to partake in the life that you have given me, God.” It was and still is perfectly just for God to destroy all of us right now for our sins, but instead he chose to take the punishment on himself by becoming one of us, and extending his mercy to all of us, even to the Amalekites that died before Jesus. The Church teaches that the just people who died before Jesus went to the “bosom of Abraham” where Jesus came after his death to lead them to heaven. Therefore, it it highly possible that any infants and innocent Amalekites are in heaven right now, and are even thanking God for keeping them from learning the wicked ways of their fathers.

God probably chose to remove the Amalekites through the sword instead of a natural disaster in order to strengthen the Israelites’ resolve against practicing their pagan ways.

 

[crazzeto]

Wow. Thinking like this is ridiculous. Scary. Terrifying, actually. Don’t you know what you sound like? You sound like a crazy religious zealot who would justify killing others who are far from your own religion.

And even so, do we really KNOW that the Amslekites were this bad? I mean, the amount of history that goes unrecorded, misinterpreted, and screwed up through the years would shock us. And are those Amslekite babies monsters as well?

Well you can check Wikipedia for a start

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moloch

Actually it has a decent accounting of it all, if you’re really interested in an answer then I would suggest you move beyond wikki and start looking for books on the subject. Google books is a terrific resource.

At any rate, we can be sure that the Molochs were that bad, the evidence is there. Even if you want to try and twist the evidence and say “well I don’t know”, what we’re discussing here is a biblical accounting of those people, thus I would say to you it is improper for you to try and use an argument like “well how do you know they were that bad”. Well let me remind you, your source for this argument is the bible, if you are going to believe the bible when it says they where exterminated by the Israelites, then you better believe it when it says the exterminated bunch were burning infants alive in the hands of a super heated statue.

Which brings me to your “religious zealot” argument. I’m sorry, but I don’t even need God to recognize how supremely evil a society as described in the bible is. It’s not “simply their culture”. It’s not “in their society burning infants alive is ok, so for them it’s OK. But in our culture it’s wrong”. Burning infants alive (along with all their other iniquities) is objectively evil.