How to respond to those who call God a mass murderer?

[Agathon]

TheLittleLady:

to think this was over a “venial mistake” is one of the strangest things I have ever heard!

What was exactly the grave nature of their mistake? To salvage some money from their own peoceeds for their old age?

The fact that they lied about it.

 

[curious_cath]

“Peter was filled with the Holy Spirit.”

Inspired Scripture was right in trying to protect St.Peter’s authority, even as what he did was sheer madness, because he was supposed to be the Rock on which Jesus built his whole church. You build your church with the material that is available. The office of First Bishop, or Pope, was important to be established in Peter.

 

[Aulef]

How can God be a murderer if He is the one Who created us and keep us alive at this very moment???

 

[BoyGenius]

but the killing commanded by God in the Old Testament is stumping me, and I could use some help. Are there any good books that would help me understand the Old Testament better?

Could I suggest taking the Bible Timeline Study by Jeff Cavins? Because, that raised so many questions for me. But even more so, call Patrick Madrid’s show on Relevant Radio. Check out his show times in your timezone. And call in. He does Apologetics questions also. I think you bring up a good question. He may also have books that may also further assist in your inquest.

Now, setting that apart. I to grappled with that question. I mean it haunts me. To think the little lives who were destroyed. Even God Himself did directly act in a way, just after talking to Abraham, wherefore Sodom and Ghomorrah was turned into salt (as the inhabitants were.) Except for Lot and his family. But his wife had to turn her head wondering what was going to happen (kind of like not letting Mortal Sin being left behind in the Confessional and accepting God’s mercy so-to-speak.) She turned into salt as well.

 

[BoyGenius]

I don’t know how to respond to people like this. There is a lot of killing in the Old Testament, much of it commanded by God.

Allow me to take a different approach from a contemporary point of view. Two things: The Branch House Davidian in Waco Texas (which is a sad and tragic event.) And the issue of abortion.

*Branch House: There were women and children caught up into a cult. All being abused (I’d say all forms of it, sadly. Truly sadly.) But nonetheless, Federal Agents tried to fight off the people’s keeping mainly young women and children in that compound. Well, the way the man set up that place, he put explosives or tanks of Oxygen laying around, or munitions, etc. In other words, he made it worse for the government trying to save and rescue the young women and children from that man’s hands. And, with great sadness, the Federal Agents ended having found the children died from all the stuff that the madman put in their way. Which nonetheless was ignited by shots fired by law enforcement. Thus, it was not their fault. And not their intention. God never intends for souls to go to Hell. He doesn’t want them to die, especially in their sins. Remember, God see’s us more than we see Him. He see’s us with the greater potentiality of the fall, in sin. He exceeds time and space. So there’s something more than just this life, what were made for. And doesn’t want us to live in the dastardly place of Hell. And thus must sometimes fight off souls who have fallen so gravely they’ve taken, or take others with them in the same and like manner the tail of the serpent swept a third of the stars and angels with him.

*Abortion: The Church teaches abortion is wrong in all times and every case. If some medical procedure must be done on a woman who so happens to be bearing a child in her womb. And that operation may nonetheless mean the little human life may die as a side effect of that operation. It’s not an abortion, quite obviously. Since abortion is the direct and intentional killing of a unborn human being. And, since a medical operation (i.e. taking out cancer of the ovaries.) The operation is not an act of abortion. So the baby may die. And if the baby does die, it’s because the baby was helpless to the cancer anyways which the mother was being cured of. Which would also mean the cure of the mother also results for being the cure for the baby too. But sadly dies, because of the often difficult procedure to save mom’s life, and child’s life. It’s not intended the baby should die, but is a risk which does incur from an operation as a side effect.

So when God faces off evil men (and/or women), He is trying to save lives from sin, eternal peril, damnation, and punishment. But, He is affronting the evils themselves, rather than the people (i.e. God is fighting the cancer of sin, not the people He is trying to save.) And just like the operation to the Federal Agents, it’s never intended for innocence to die. But nonetheless in a fallen, broken, and human world proceed to be the consequences that come with the fall, not God.

 

[mythbuster1]

Breaking a vow to God, which they had freely entered into. As Peter said, no one forced them to sell the property, nor to pledge the proceeds to the Church, but once they freely chose to do those things, to withhold the full amount of their pledge was to rob God, and when confronted about it, they proceeded to lie.

 

[ericc]

Perhaps, yes. Perhaps, no! All deliberate killing can be construed as murder.

Other than yourself, which dictionary or legal system defines “all deliberate killing as murder”? I have shown you that capital punishment, self defense, killing in war are never construed as murder. Since you persist in classifying them as murder, then you have to substantiate that your definition is correct and mine is wrong
. I can find no support for your definition. I asked you previously whether you have proven Elijah to be a murderer, all you have shown is YOU have defined all killing as murder. All that proves is you have decided to be the judge and jury on the meaning of words. You have not proven Elijah to be a murderer in the common understanding of unlawful killing with malice.

This is a myth. Perhaps, a good myth to discourage named practices in the realm of God’s pedagogy for mankind. But in reality this law was mostly unknown in the history of Israel.

Ok, then substantiate that with evidence it is a myth. Are you claiming Moses didn’t provide the Israelites with all those laws in Leviticus and Numbers? If he didn’t , who did? It’s in the OT. Are you claiming the OT is a myth too? Are you claiming believers of Judaism that the laws of Moses they believed in are myths? Since when did the Mosaic laws became myths? Evidence please!

I did not accuse Elijah of heinous crime, I stated the bare fact by Scripture that he murdered 450 innocent people for unknown reason.

Murder is a heinous crime. I provided you with the reason, I listed the relevant verses to substantiate the capital punishment he meted out. The reason is not unknown. Why are you not refuting my evidence if you disagree with it? If you have stated Elijah killed 450 prophets, I’d not have objected. But your deliberate choice of word “murder” shows you have some other motive because murder is defined unlawful as commonly understood. Do you agree that Elijah’s killing of those 450 prophets is lawful according to Mosaic laws? If you disagree, then explain why you disagree.

But one critical factor which you have not justified is your definition of ALL killing is murder. Says who?

No. For whatever reason it was not a public appearance! Only 3 Jewish apostles could see it who brought the news to the people of Jerusalem as part of divine pedagogy.

He appeared to 3 apostles. That is more than one. And that appearance is now public knowledge. But that is besides the point.

 

[Agathon]

Inspired Scripture was right in trying to protect St.Peter’s authority, even as what he did was sheer madness, because he was supposed to be the Rock on which Jesus built his whole church.

If there was sin in what Peter did, Scripture would have mentioned it. On the contrary, Peter’s words were the Spirit speaking through him.

 

[curious_cath]

Peter’s words were the Spirit speaking through him.

We should have some kind of criteria deciding when is the Holy Spirit involved or not in a given situation. What is for sure is that the Holy Spirit is God, the third person of the Holy Trinity, therefore it cannot act against God! So the first criterion should state that if one’s action is against the teaching of Jesus, then this person’s reference to the Holy Spirit is fake and untrue. False prophets are coming who claim the Holy Spirit is with them. But is it?

 

[curious_cath]

substantiate that with evidence it is a myth

If there would have been a law in Israel’s history to ban the worship of Baal, Hadad and Asherah, then people would have been informed of that. But the people living in the Holy Land for centuries after centuries knew about this law nothing!

Moses lived in about 1300 BC. There would have been enough time to follow the law if existed. We are talking about Israelites who attended services to polytheist gods as late as in 600 BC. How is this possible? Archaeological artifacts abound. This is the proof.

 

[curious_cath]

I can find no support for your definition.

I did not talk about definition, I talked about murder. It is you who is talking about definitions all the time. What is your point? There is no definition in the Bible.

It is not even sure Elijah executed anyone. It was a custom at the time to brag about doing terrible things. Assyrian soldiers and kings used to brag about paling hundreds and hundreds in war. You ability of freely murdering others was perceived as power and might. That is why even Elijah wore it as a badge of honor.

Murder is a heinous crime.

Please, prove that! What is your definition of heinous? You have to look at these things through the lense of salvation history. There was no chance to live without murder before Jesus came to espouse his teaching about the true nature of God!

Great men in the Old Testament were murderers or preachers of free killing. They agreed that one is free to deliberately kill another. This was the cultural understanding of the worth of biological life of man at the ancient times. But this is by no means the teaching of Jesus who rather died himself for us!
.

 

[ericc]

If there would have been a law in Israel’s history to ban the worship of Baal, Hadad and Asherah, then people would have been informed of that. But the people living in the Holy Land for centuries after centuries knew about this law nothing!

Moses lived in about 1300 BC. There would have been enough time to follow the law if existed. We are talking about Israelites who attended services to polytheist gods as late as in 600 BC. How is this possible? Archaeological artifacts abound. This is the proof.

You are asking for historical proof whether there was a law against idolatry or blasphemy? That is a separate subject entirely. We are discussing Elijah a biblical figure. We are discussing the books of Moses. The books of Moses describe these laws in detail. We are talking about compliance with Mosaic laws. We are not discussing whether you are able to find historical evidences for such laws. You may wish to start a separate thread for that.

So, let me ask you this:

If Mosaic laws exist and are not myths, would Elijah’s killing of those prophets be deemed capital punishment in accordance of such laws? Yes or no?

 

[Agathon]

My claim was not entirely accurate. The passage doesn’t say Peter was filled with the Spirit. But it explains Peter’s argument pretty well.

1Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. 2With his wife’s full knowledge, he kept back some of the proceeds for himself, but brought a portion and laid it at the apostles’ feet.

3Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and withhold some of the proceeds from the land? 4Did it not belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, was it not at your disposal? How could you conceive such a deed in your heart? You have not lied to men, but to God!”

5On hearing these words, Ananias fell down and died. And great fear came over all who heard what had happened. 6Then the young men stepped forward, wrapped up his body, and carried him out and buried him.

7About three hours later his wife also came in, unaware of what had happened. 8“Tell me,” said Peter, “is this the price you and your husband got for the land?”

“Yes,” she answered, “that is the price.”

9“How could you agree to test the Spirit of the Lord?” Peter replied. “Look, the feet of the men who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out also.”

Ananias’s sin was in lying to the community. As Peter stated, it was his money so he could have chosen not to give the full money and actually been honest about it. The wicked couple instead chose to deceive the community and sinned against the Holy Spirit.

 

[ericc]

I did not talk about definition, I talked about murder. It is you who is talking about definitions all the time. What is your point? There is no definition in the Bible.

You want to talk about a subject, you better define what it is so that all of us know what it is. You can not run away from defining what something is or isn’t if you want to accuse someone of an act. What is that act? Killing ? Yes. Murder? Define what is murder first. My point is what is it you are accusing Elijah of? You said murder. What is murder? You said murder is intentional killing. I said that is not what common understanding of what murder is. I ask you to cite your source that tells us what murder is. You responded with nothing. So what point are you trying to make in accusing Elijah of being a mass murderer by judging him by your own standards?

You don’t want to define murder but you did in your very first post. Murder is intentional killing. I disagree with that definition. So I ask you to substantiate your very first definition. I provided you with a list of intentional killings that are not considered murder by any yardstick. You provide us with none whatsoever. If your point is to accuse of one of God’s Prophets of being a mass murderer, you have failed. No one here going to take your postings seriously if you don’t substantiate your assertions.

It is not even sure Elijah executed anyone. It was a custom at the time to brag about doing terrible things. Assyrian soldiers and kings used to brag about paling hundreds and hundreds in war. You ability of freely murdering others was perceived as power and might. That is why even Elijah wore it as a badge of honor.

If you are not even sure whether Elijah executed anyone, why accuse him in the very first place? Do you go around accusing people of doing bad things when you are not even sure whether they did it in the very place? What sort of ethics is this? So now you are accusing Elijah of lying, of claiming he did things which he didn’t? With no evidence to show that he lied?

Please, prove that! What is your definition of heinous?

Malicious unlawful intentional killing. Repeating all intentional killing is murder does not help your case other than showing you are ignorant of the meaning of murder or engaging in the fallacy of argument by repetition.

 

[Agathon]

If there would have been a law in Israel’s history to ban the worship of Baal, Hadad and Asherah, then people would have been informed of that

“You shall have no strange gods before Me”
“You shall not carve for yourself any graven image.”

 

[guanophore]

What was exactly the grave nature of their mistake? To salvage some money from their own peoceeds for their old age?

What gave you the impression there was any mistake?

 

[curious_cath]

We are discussing Elijah a biblical figure.

It is a myth that at the time of Elijah there were Mosaic laws in effect. You are creating hypothetical situations for your own entertainment. You think every question arising from the Bible can be answered by formal logic.This is highly questionable.

Under a law of free killing no free killing would be unlawful because that is your law. But free killing is still murder. This is where your exaggerated definitions fail. Jesus did not define anything. He himself was the living definition of everything important for your faith.

 

[curious_cath]

“You shall have no strange gods before Me”

“You shall not carve for yourself any graven image.”

It is not clear if the fragment of the Book of Deuteronomy found in the 7th century BC, at the time of the king Josiah was written by Moses or not. Moses lived in the 13th century BC, some 600 years earlier. Probably, the book had not existed before that date at all.

So the commandments you quote might be of that late. Then the people living in the Holy Land couldn’t have heard about these laws while they were following the cults of Baal, Hadad and Asherah.

 

[curious_cath]

Ananias’s sin was in lying to the community.

Who said lying to the community was such a grave sin that deserved capital punishment? Would lying in self defense be a bigger sin than killing in self defense? Private data was being compromised by a communistic interrogation that respected no privacy and no private property. Ananaias and Sapphira became victims of an overreaching ideological assault on their private lives. That is why the church had to backtrack later from the excesses of its first Bishop, Peter.

 

[goout]

These are different moral situations.
In the first place, God is not subject to morality. So your questions can serve as thought experiments but cannot be direct analogies.

The heart of the question at hand is whether it is in God’s nature to command one human being to kill another innocent human being. In light of Christ, the best and fullest answer must be “no”. The Church allows her children a lot of latitude in scripture interpretation for sure. At the same time not all interpretations are objectively as sound as others.
Sound scripture interpretation helps inform the answer to this question of God’s nature, or essence. Namely: are we going to proof text passages of God literally commanding these things, or should they be read in the context of the whole bible.

Catholic thought as expounded by the Magisterium is clear on this: you must read one scripture passage in the context of the whole bible, and you read scripture in light of the Word made flesh, Jesus Christ.
We hold Jesus Christ to be God’s full and final Word to us.

So, these passages are surely rooted in history. They convey God’s saving truth just as God wills it, and at the same time they are God’s Word in human words. The writers are not God.
And the writers are not CNN journalists with tape recorders, and they are not modern scientists, and they are not clairvoyant to the literal mind of God. God can and does accomplish his inerrant will through weak, sinful, and yes, stupid human beings. God can do that.