The Immorality of God - Slavery in the Old Testament

[athrock]

Ever try to teach someone to play the guitar who simply wasn't going to get it? Tone deaf...no rhythm...one arm...unwilling to practice...whatever. Now, multiply this times millions of people who made up the nation of Israel. The problem isn't always with the teacher.

It's a challenge to find that point at which the strongest, most willing and eager are challenged while the weakest are not discouraged. Looking at the history of Israel and Christianity, I think God has found the right balance.

And who, pray tell, made those students?

Your analogy would be apt if I had made those students in an Act of Special Creation. That condition not obtaining, your objection is stripped of value.

God's creation was "good", but man is a free agent, Thump. That he means he can screw up if he chooses to do so. You seem to be suggesting that God could have made perfect students who played the music God wanted played perfectly every single time without deviation. Well, He could have done that...but then we'd be robots merely carrying out God's orders according to how we were programmed. Is that the kind of artistry you'd want in a music student? Just another player piano bang out the notes punched into a roll of paper?

God expresses love in the Old Testament while Jesus re-affirms the existence of hell in the New. They are fully compatible with some differences in emphasis.

With a good concordance, I think you could find examples of all of God's attributes in both testaments.

And I think that claims of these differences are overblown by people who WANT discrepancies...so they find them where they really do not exist.

I was asking about his timeless morality.

But since you brought it up, do you consider your God's expression of love by killing all but eight humans a loving attribute, really?

Perhaps. More on why momentarily.

First, the flood was an act of justice. The people sinned against God, and He punished them. When a killer commits a murder, we punish them. Sometimes, with capital punishment. And we don't have the benefit of being God when we exercise that authority. (I;m not even sure we legitimately have such authority, btw.)

Now, as to your question: it may well have been an act of love. Would it have been loving to allow the sin and corruption to continue? Remember, if the people were wickedly engaging in murder, rape, theft, etc., there were victims of these acts who were suffering. By destroying the wicked, those who MAY have merited heaven would have immediately entered into the joy of God's presence. No more pain. They would have given no more thought to the horror of the flood than you would give to the sweat of a good workout at the gym after taking a hot shower.

An act of love? Sure, if it meant that more children would not be brought into a world that would rape them, abuse them, sacrifice them to idols or even to pervert and twist their thinking to the degree that they themselves became the perpetrators of such evil deeds.

So, yeah, I can see wiping out an evil generation as an act of love because it ends current suffering and prevents future suffering.

I'm a father. If my son were to misbehave, would you think it loving if I killed him as punishment? Would you think it moral?

If so, you're the last person to be delivering lectures on morality. And if not, you've just bought into moral relativity.  

No, I would not consider YOUR act of murder to be an act of love. YOU are not God.