Why did God condone/command this?

[joseie]

I have briefly gone through some commentaries on the book which is available in plenty in the net.Extract of one such commentary is reproduced below which is self explanatory

The Literal Meaning of Genesis offers an incredible amount of insight into Augustine’s beliefs about the origin of the world and his understanding of the Bible’s first chapter. It is also possible to discover many of the questions people asked about Genesis during his time. Finally, this commentary reveals a great deal of Augustine’s attempts to reconcile the words of Scripture with the scientific understanding of his day. It is this point that must be examined in some detail because his archaic beliefs often led him to an improper interpretation. Ultimately, this problem can be blamed on his hermeneutic of allowing prevailing scientific and philosophical beliefs to override the clear words of Scripture…

It may be seen that his views are not any sacrosanct.He himself at one stage was fot literal interpretation.So not much credence need be given to his opinions in this regard.
In short my view that the plain and literal meaning of the verse wherever it is clearly available should be adopted stands for the reasons already mentioned…

 

[Atreju]

What about when the “clear, literal meaning” contradicts what can be empirically shown to be true?

 

[goout]

God has rights? Well, ok. I think God is beyond having rights as we understand them but I get the point.

The bigger question is:
does the fact that God has the power to do anything mean that it’s in God’s nature to do anything we can imagine God doing?
Can God contradict God’s revealed nature?

 

[goout]

What about when the “clear, literal meaning” contradicts what can be empirically shown to be true?

Can you flesh the question out a little? By empirically shown are your referring to scientific knowledge?

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

I was mostly talking about the adults and I forgot about the infants.

 

[goout]

Because the adults were evil.

Where in Catholic theology do you find that a child (or any other person for that matter) should be killed for the evil committed by someone else?

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

That’s not my position.

 

[goout]

You are claiming that children can be killed because their parents committed evil. correct me if I am wrong

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

You are wrong.

 

[Gorgias]

You are claiming that children can be killed because their parents committed evil. correct me if I am wrong

It’s not so much that you’re ‘wrong’… it’s that you’re insufficiently specifying the context. For humans, children cannot be killed for their parents’ evil; that would be immoral for us to do, because we do not give life and therefore, it does not belong to us. God, however, is the author of life. If it is His will that one of his children return to Him, then it is not immoral.

 

[Atreju]

Scientific knowledge and in a few cases mathematical (a couple verses if read very literally say that pi is exactly equal to 3). You also end up thinking the earth has corners and other stuff. You and I agree strict literalism is improper interpretation.

 

[Atreju]

Yeah but we aren’t talking about a child dying naturally, were talking about a commandment to murder children. Think of the spiritual damage such a commandment would have even on those carrying it out.

 

[Gorgias]

Yeah but we aren’t talking about a child dying naturally, were talking about a commandment to murder children. Think of the spiritual damage such a commandment would have even on those carrying it out.

The Binding of Isaac. .

 

[Atreju]

So on this view, there isnt actually anything wrong with child sacrifice as long as it is to the right god.

 

[TULIPed]

There were plenty of infants that perished in the Noahic flood, no? There is a particularly compelling (at least for me) painting by a French artist from the late 19th century Gustave Dore titled “The Flood”. It depicts a mother and father trying desperately to push their infants up on a small piece of high ground, which they share with a female tiger and her cubs.

How we hold God’s sovereignty over his creation (the potter and the clay) in tension with his great love for his creatures (John 3:16) is perhaps one of the catalysts through which we approach our salvation with fear and trembling.

 

[Gorgias]

So on this view, there isnt actually anything wrong with child sacrifice as long as it is to the right god.

No. What it means is that human-initiated murder is immoral.

But hey – that was a cute way to spin it.

 

[catholicray]

First, the Church protects right interpretation of Scripture. For a Catholic we discover the truth of God through the synergy of Church AND Sacred Scripture. It is important to note how dependent our understanding of Scripture is of interpretation, regardless of our process of interpretation.

Second, if God did in fact command mass genocide, it would NOT necessarily contradict his moral character. In order to understand this fact, we must recognize a real difference between God and man. If a human murders another human, he has no means to return that which he has taken (life). His debt to the other person is absolute. He took what he did not give and what he can not reimburse.

If God takes a human life, He has not incurred debt because he gave that life in the first place. Humans are always in debt to God absolutely for their own lives. However, even if it could be conceded that God incurs debt when He takes human life, the difference is that God can reimburse equally or beyond what He has taken. To destroy the frail finite life that one has and reimburse it with eternal life, is possible for the Lord.

Thus in the particular case of taking life God does not have to be held to the same moral standard of a human in order to maintain moral superiority.

 

[goout]

goout:

You are claiming that children can be killed because their parents committed evil. correct me if I am wrong

It’s not so much that you’re ‘wrong’… it’s that you’re insufficiently specifying the context. For humans, children cannot be killed for their parents’ evil; that would be immoral for us to do, because we do not give life and therefore, it does not belong to us. God, however, is the author of life. If it is His will that one of his children return to Him, then it is not immoral.

That’s a different case.
The case we are talking about is infanticide.
Huge distinction.

We can’t refer to morality in speaking of God. Morality evaluates human acts. Infanticide is a human act.

 

[goout]

First, the Church protects right interpretation of Scripture. For a Catholic we discover the truth of God through the synergy of Church AND Sacred Scripture. It is important to note how dependent our understanding of Scripture is of interpretation, regardless of our process of interpretation.

Second, if God did in fact command mass genocide, it would NOT necessarily contradict his moral character. In order to understand this fact, we must recognize a real difference between God and man. If a human murders another human, he has no means to return that which he has taken (life). His debt to the other person is absolute. He took what he did not give and what he can not reimburse.

If God takes a human life, He has not incurred debt because he gave that life in the first place. Humans are always in debt to God absolutely for their own lives. However, even if it could be conceded that God incurs debt when He takes human life, the difference is that God can reimburse equally or beyond what He has taken. To destroy the frail finite life that one has and reimburse it with eternal life, is possible for the Lord.

Thus in the particular case of taking life God does not have to be held to the same moral standard of a human in order to maintain moral superiority.

I am amazed at how many people miss the key point.
The key point of contention isn’t that God is all good and if someone goes to eternity by his will (who doesn’t ?), that’s good.

The point is, it’s not in God’s nature to command a human being to slaughter another innocent human being. So we look for another sense that is in keeping with the whole of revelation.

 

[Gorgias]

We can’t refer to morality in speaking of God. Morality evaluates human acts. Infanticide is a human act.

So – although I think we’re heading down a path that will lead us to a “if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there, does it make a sound?” conclusion – how would you evaluate the killing of children when commanded by God?