christians! Come and convert me!

[The Omnissiunt One]

@ superstarr

1. I said my "first" example, not my second. Look back
I answered the first example. You applied the answer to the second example to the first as well; and it didn't apply.

2. Yes God kills, but never murders. This is the distinction. Killing isn't wrong, murder is.

4. Well if Jesus did say that, think of it this way. There are a lot of repulsive things in the Old Testament, and if God wrote and/or inspired the OT, and if Jesus is God, then he DID approve of those things regardless of Jesus mentioning them or not.
In the OT it says "an eye for an eye" (repay evil with evil) and in the NT Jesus says "turn the other cheek" (repay evil with kindness). 1 = people's law. 2 = God's law.

Given that the morally dubious bits of the Bible are often associated with God's commands, it seems to me that your criteria for deciding what is really him are: 'Dodgy bits which advocate genocide and beating slaves= people's law', 'Nice bits which advocate none of the aforementioned= God's law'. Besides, Jesus said he had not come to get rid of the old law, so he presumably approved of most of the Mosaic laws. The New Testament isn't all wine and roses, either. Jesus refuses to help a Gentile woman from Canaan in Matthew 15:26, saying 'It is not meet to take the children's bread, and cast it to dogs'. Furthermore, the idea of vicarious redemption and the idea of hell are both extremely morally dubious. So, what are your criteria, exactly?