Genocide in the Old Testament

[John V]

Every time you've made the mistake of going down this route, I simply ask you why you hold your allegedly perfect God to the same low standards as you hold for the obviously imperfect human race, but only apply this inconsistency when you think it helps your argument? Because, all it demonstrates is your rank hypocrisy. If God exhibits the behavioral flaws of humans, you simply handwave it. If humans exhibit the behavioral flaws of God, it means they deserve death.

Huh? I’m agreeing that humans have rights over species with less intellectual capacity, and consistently concluding that god has rights over humans (plus rights as a creator which we don’t have over other species, but that’s not necessary in this argument). Where’s the hypocrisy? Go to the store. Look at the meat section and the pest control section. It is people who charge god with murder who are the hypocrites.

Isaiah 13:18: they will have no mercy on infants, nor will they look with compassion on children.

This comes from a prophecy from God telling Isaiah not only to single out children and infants for slaughter, but to do it with no compassion or mercy, to make that slaughter as horrifying as his imagination inspires him to do. And, this is the second command specifically targeting infants for killing; a couple of verses before this, you get a command from God to dash their infants to pieces in front of them.

To God, it's not enough that they die. They have to die in the most barbaric way the inventors of this sick tale could conceive. God instructs his killers to not only be brutal, but to have fun doing it. Enjoy yourselves. Rape their wives (also Verse 16).

He’s not telling Isaiah to do this, he’s telling Isaiah it will happen. He is using nations against other nations. Not that this matters to you, just wanted to straighten that out.

Aside from that – yes, God’s wrath is brutal. I wouldn’t want to be caught in it.

To conclude, John, you're full of shit. These children aren't going to heaven just for being children.

And you know that how exactly? We can discuss the age of accountability doctrine if you like.

Whether or not a killing qualifies as murder has nothing to do with the eventual afterlife destination of the murder victim.

It certainly does. Think about it - from god’s POV, there really is no such thing as killing, as on what we call death, people just move from one place to another.

It has to do with whether or not there was malicious intent on the part of the killer. As demonstrated above, God is most certainly malicious towards infants and children, not content to merely snuff out their lives but to make an absolute bloodbath of it.

Bloody can be momentary. Atheists argue that temporal crimes are nothing compared to eternal torment. Temporal suffering is therefore nothing compared to eternal happiness. You can’t have it both ways.

It would mean that God is most certainly just a cruel psychopath who created a universe and filled it with victims to torture.

No, as there would be no victims. “I think, therefore I am.” If omniscience means that God preprograms all the thoughts, then there is no “I” that thinks.

According to you, God's is the highest. He's perfect. Therefore, unlike humans, God is incapable of killing by accident, and is always capable of solving any problem without killing.

No, perfection does not imply that any problem can be solved without killing.

Yeah, it's too bad we're not omnipotent and omniscient, so that we could solve every pest or food problem in the world without ever harming a single living creature.

False dichotomy. We could easily extend the bans on killing cuddly animals to ants. We don’t, because we don’t give a crap about ants.

No. Those under went to heaven, as already noted. Those above had sin of their own.

So, when God ordered the killing of children and infants in Babylon with a specific demand that neither mercy nor compassion be shown towards them, it was because they had no sin of their own?

No, as noted, those under went to heaven.

Nobody is ever actually harmed in a novel because the people in it aren't real.

Bingo!

Give me just one example of humans killing animals, plants, bacteria, any reason you like, and explain to me why your perfect and omnimax God cannot solve his problems in a different way, and you'll have your answer.

Whiskey tango…? I have no idea what you’re trying to say.

The problem is, according to the things you are saying, you enjoy the idea of mass murder because your religion tells you that mass murder is okay.

No, my religion tells me that God can judge his creation, and I agree with that concept. I also believe that people deserve judgment based on observation of myself and others. You disagree. Most people do – that’s why the Bible is a story of a faithful remnant and a rebellious majority. People don’t like being judged.

Take note of how hard you attempt to equivocate humans with insects and vermin every time this topic arises,

I apply my opponents’ own principles consistently. They resort to special pleading.

a play right out of the Nazi handbook.

Ah, equivocating believers with Nazis, a play right out of the atheist handbook. I don’t believe you put those two back to back. Well, yes, I do believe it, because you’re arguing more from emotion than reason.

---

The problem with this is, it's how genocide fans like John can say "well, humans are less intelligent than God, so what's the problem?".

Yes, for hypocrites like yourself, that is a problem.

The intelligence and capabilities of the killer are just as big a factor as the intelligence and capabilities of the victim. We generally frown upon the idea of, say, a mentally retarded person being charged for murder in the same capacity as someone who is not, just as we consider the murder of children more heinous than the murder of a fit adult.

Oh wow, are you really adding in a stupidity defense? This is brilliant!

Our limitations in both the physical and mental realm make it necessary, sometimes, for us to kill other beings, the key words being 'limitations' and 'necessary'.

Steaks are necessary in your imagination only. We eat them because they're tasty. Have you never heard of vegans? And where are the laws prohibiting use of pesticides unless it's really necessary?

Intelligence may justify necessary killing in some circumstances. It never justifies any killing which is not necessary.

Are non-vegans therefore murderers?