Atheist Bible Study 1: Genesis

[Drich]

My understanding based on the text is Abimelech was sincere and meant no harm. You could argue he was bullshitting, but even so, God could just as easily have warned them beforehand anyway.

Again look at what abraham said.. They were a Godless people and no good came from them.
What is harm to a ISIS leader? What is the max they feel they could do to you without doing you what they consider harm? What if what they consider harm was the removal of limbs.. That still leaves a lot of pain and suffering they could do if they did not get their way. Or rather would you rather be under your rival's whim concerning what he considered fair treatment or would you rather have a set or absolute standard where you knew the limits of 'harm?' Now the reason I am pointing this out is if Abimelech wanted to truly do no harm then why wasn't Sarah's word on the matter considered? Clearly she was married to Abraham and clearly as his wife would want no part of some other dude yet Abim married her anyway.. Seem to me Abim at some point was going to want to play alittle "corn hole" with his new wife.





So in your version of 'morality' is it ever ok or rather is it harmful to force a woman to marry you? is it 'harmful' to force a few games of 'corn hole' on her?

To Abim, no forcing a woman to have sex with him is not a harmful thing.

Now consider this. your wife was taken and married to some guy who did force a few games of corn hole onto her.. what would your response be? Now after you burn down his stuff, whether he had ill intentions towards you or your wife, do you think he would allow your actions to go unanswered? what if this was a lawless/godless man? and there were no restrictions in his life?

Despite how he saw himself going into this situation the fact he had no rules concerning or metering back a harmful responce is key here, not only that we also established his version of no harm would put rape on the table.

I'm not sure about your last sentence, by the way. Even if I was a moral hypocrite, this has no bearing on whether what God said and did (as depicted in the Bible) was morally questionable or not. Keep in mind this is how I, as an atheist, see things. I do not assume God exists, therefore God is the arbiter of morality. From my perspective, God (if he somehow exists) should be morally questioned as much as any other sentient being, and even more so. Might does (or should) not make right.

No, what I am saying or asking or just pointing out is that you guys atheists always side with the bad guys. like the people noah let drowned or the egyptians on the exodus or with abim here. despire how the bible frames out these men or people God always seems to be the bad guy despite how the bible frames them.

Again you sided with abim because he said he meant no harm and despite abra's evaluation about be Godless/lawless you assumed your values more closely aligned with a aguy who took a reluctant wife and at some point looked to force her into sex. I meant to point out the fact abra's evaluation of being godless means there are no rules no standards in which abim is obligated to follow, so despite how a man like abim might approach a situation he is not bound by any reason to follow through with any measured restraint.