God's Morality and Justice

[Vinnie]

@RichardG

Again it is not that simple. In John 14 Jesus admits to not speaking plainly.

Do you see the glaring issue here? You are appealing to a single part of scripture that purports to come from Jesus and are assuming you understand it and that Jesus said it and you are applying it to other sayings of Jesus. There is an inconsistency on your part that looks a lot like cherry-picking.

Not to mention, the gist of material in Mark 11-13 is very plain about the temple’s destrruction. You could argue the meaning of Mark 13 and the second coming is not and that is true. But I have not argued that. Only that Jesus said God is going to cast judgment on the temple. The best case for your position is to claim Mark made significant parts of this up after the fact–its mostly an ex eventu, “see, Jesus predicted this all along” type off deal. Maybe that classifies as your “Each of the Synoptic Gospels has a purpose in mind and quotes Jesus in that light” but once you start chopping away the gospels and Jesus there is not much left to Christianity to me. No longer an actual incarnation, just a bland metaphor for God’s love and justice. I am not interested in that.

Jesus also said: My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:" and also " To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven , but to them it has not been given."

[Vinnie]

@mitchellmckain

Since that is just a matter of arbitrary lines drawn by someone on a map. Things like that can change over time. We ARE talking about ancient texts about times extending into prehistory.

The scholars argue there are issues in Mark’s locale here based on maps and territories of his day. Of course our knowledge here is partial and there is some uncertainty as to how some locals might have colloquially referred to some regions. The way the other gospels treat this and the way the manuscripts have changed over time indicates many ancient people found Mark’s rendering troubling.

[RichardG (Richard Gillett)]

@Vinnie

There is an inconsistency on your part that looks a lot like cherry-picking.

I would claim the difference between specific and gist. You can say it any way you like but the meaning will be the same.

@Vinnie

Not to mention, the gist of material in Mark 11-13

Is Mark 13 about the destruction of the temple that has happened, or the second coming?

I would suggest that it is apocalyptic with the second coming. Which, as I started to say, will seem like the end of the world, because it will be, the end of the world. The net result being that all the destruction is material, including the human bodies that inhabit the material world.

@Vinnie

once you start chopping away the gospels and Jesus there is not much left to Christianity

There is chopping and there is understanding. The gospels should be read as a whole as well as in part. Taking any section out causes problems be it one verse or several chapters. Remember the artificial chapter and verse structure did not appear until the 13th century. It is a mixed blessing in terms of reference and understanding. It is so easy to isolate parts and claim a meaning that may, or may not be intended.

Understanding Scripture is not as simple as people make it out to be. We are told that the real understanding comes from the Holy Spirit, yet there are several people, even here, let alone worldwide, who claim the precise understanding but disagree between themselves.

As I see it Scripture was never meant to be a straightjacket or prison which you lock yourself into. It is the perceived relationship between man (genderism excepted) and God. The important word being perceived. It is human writing that has been decreed sacrosanct. But even that does not make it perfect or immutable. There is a human element that we would rather overlook. There are many who would love to see Scripture redacted and added to but it has been decreed complete.

I, for one, would love to see a new Genesis 1-2:1. It could encompass modern understanding while keeping the spirit of what was originally there. The Gospels are a different matter. We cannot rewrite without the proverbial time machine. We have to accept the scripts for what they are. without trying to superimpose Journalistic, or Historic standards onto them. The Gospels are a unique form of writing with their own rules and structures.

I know that my views on Scripture are seen as heretical by many. They have evolved (if I dare use the word) over a lifetime of walking with, and working with, God. But, they are still only my views. I do not claim any sort of higher ground that others here seem to.

Richard

[ivar]

@beaglelady

A really good place to start is the PBS Nova presentation The Bible’s Buried Secrets with some of the best Bible scholars.

Thank you for the recommendation.

@beaglelady

Why bring up Finkelstein if he doesn’t believe in the conquest?

To show that there are scholars who don’t believe in a Conquest, yet also reject the peasant revolt theory.

@beaglelady

Biblical archaeologists would expect to find some evidence if such a violent conquest took place.

The Book of Judges is clear that the Israelites did not destroy everything. But it is true that a Late Bronze Age exodus has many problems. If we place the exodus in the Iron Age, most of these problems disappear.

There is also no archaeological evidence of Thutmose III’s siege of Megiddo, which is well attested in the historical record.

Archaeology is not the silver bullet we often hope it is.

“Are you not like the Cushites to me, O people of Israel?” declares the LORD. “Did I not bring up Israel from the land of Egypt, and the Philistines from Caphtor and the Syrians from Kir?

(Amos 9:7, ESV)

They got the origin of the Philistines correct, they migrated from Crete. So I also trust the Israelites to be correct about the history of their own origin, which happened at the same time.

@beaglelady

I think he missed a few things.

Let’s agree to disagree.

[beaglelady]

@Vinnie

I’d be willing to bet quite a few students in my high school would not know the answer to that question and Rhode Island is one state over.

Well, that disqualifies them from writing about geography.

You seemed to copy everything you could find from the internet.

@Vinnie

Unless you are perusing fundamentalist atheist sites, the geography problem in Mark has little to do with the accounts potential historicity.

It was from a book from Raymond Brown. He was a Roman Catholic scholar. Not an atheist. Of course you’ll use every opportunity to accuse me of awful things, as usual.

I’ve already said it’s a genuine story of healing, with some details added post-production.

Where does God warn the Canaanites?

@Vinnie

Either God commanded this or not. If he did and people use it to justify their personal warmongering and sins then that is irrelevant to the issue under consideration. You are engaging in fallacious thinking. People can abuse God’s commands and use the Bible to do things God doesn’t want. Okay. What is your actual argument? Either God commanded this or not.

That’s fundamentalist thinking.

@Vinnie

I could use thinking like this. Nature solves lot of “problems” this way as well. It is very violent. “Rape” in the animal kingdom is pretty prevalent.

Nature is sometimes violent. How is rape prevalent in the animal kingdom?

@Vinnie

These types of arguments you are making reek of desperation and can be used to argue all sorts of silly things. They are non sequiturs.

Why so mean and nasty? What is wrong with you?

@Vinnie

I would report the man to the authorities. His views are not my scared scripture or a part of inspired salvation history. This is another red herring.

No, it’s a serious question. What if a man who thought God wanted him to murder a whole family for their sins shared all of your religious views? Would it be possible that he really heard God?

[beaglelady]

@ivar

To show that there are scholars who don’t believe in a Conquest, yet also reject the peasant revolt theory.

So what is his view?

@ivar

The Book of Judges is clear that the Israelites did not destroy everything. But it is true that a Late Bronze Age exodus has many problems. If we place the exodus in the Iron Age, most of these problems disappear.

Not everything, but it does describe a very violent and bloody conquest. No matter when you place the exodus you still have the problem of a lack of evidence. There are something like 3 Canaanite city-states found destroyed–but over a period of 1000 years.

@ivar

Archaeology is not the silver bullet we often hope it is.

It’s a science, and as such is based on evidence.

@ivar

They got the origin of the Philistines correct, they migrated from Crete. So I also trust the Israelites to be correct about the history of their own origin, which happened at the same time.

They knew how to write history when they wanted to (the Babylonian Captivity is an example), but they sometimes told their important stories as if they were historical.

[beaglelady]

@Jen57

What is interesting is that God dealing with evil is judged so heavily by some and seems to be the focus … instead of children suffering excruciatingly. As tho it is better that they live even tho they are suffering in agony… and even dying slowly while in agony… in a situation where there is no other way out… then it is to be taken by God, where there is no more pain. It absolutely boggles me.

Not sure what you are getting at. Wouldn’t it be agonizing for a baby’s head to be crushed by a sword?
Are you making a case for euthanasia?

But anyway, if you think I shouldn’t object to God’s ordering children to be slaughtered, because that’s God’s way, and we don’t see everything, etc. let me ask you a question. If a man who shared all of your religious views decided that God wanted him to murder an entire sinful family with a sword (or maybe strangulation, poison, or whatever), what would you think of that? Could it really be God he was hearing? Why or why not?

(btw, capital punishment doesn’t eliminate evil. It’s also irrevocable, and sometimes they execute an innocent person.)

[Vinnie]

@beaglelady

Well, that disqualifies them from writing about geography.

I had an ex that drove one day while we were both in college. I was working 50 hours a week and commuting full time to university and taking an overloaded schedule (5 classes including physics lab) so I was tired. We live in CT and were going to the aquarium. She woke me up and said I think we are going the wrong way when she saw a sign that said “Massachusetts welcomes you.” I said 'Yup, the ocean is in the other direction." Locals make mistakes and can mix up directions. I’ve conflated two similarly sounding places in my own state before. Imagine 2000 years ago without our easy access to good maps and GPS. Mark has some geography snafus but they are overblown.

@beaglelady

You seemed to copy everything you could find from the internet.

No, I have a lot of PDFs of full books and commentaries.

@beaglelady

was from a book from Raymond Brown. He was a Roman Catholic scholar. Not an atheist. Of course you’ll use every opportunity to accuse me of awful things, as usual.

I know Brown well. I have Physical copies of at least 6 of his works. Here is what his NT Intro says:

17Cf. Matt 12:43–45. There is a major geographical problem in Mark’s location of the scene where the pigs can run down the embankment and drown in the sea. Gerasa is a site over thirty miles from the Sea of Galilee, and the alternative reading Gadara is no real help since that is about six miles from the sea.

But Notice FN 83 (emphasis. mine):

83Mark 5:1, 13 betrays confusion about the distance of Gerasa from the Sea of Galilee (n. 17 above). Mark 7:31 describes a journey from Tyre through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee in the midst of the Decapolis. In fact one goes SE from Tyre to the Sea of Galilee; Sidon is N of Tyre, and the description of the Sea of Galilee in the midst of the Decapolis is awkward. That a boat headed for Bethsaida (NE side of the Sea of Galilee) arrives at Gennesaret (NW side: 6:45, 53) may also signal confusion. No one has been able to locate the Dalmanutha of 8:10, and it may be a corruption of Magdala. In judgment on confused directions as a criterion of origin, however, one must admit that sometimes even natives of a place are not very clear about geography.

@beaglelady

That’s fundamentalist thinking.

A hand-wave dismissal of something you don’t agree with is fundamentalist thinking which is exactly what you are doing. Merely labeling something fundamentalist thinking is an ad hominem argument. It carries no weight an says nothing.

@beaglelady

Where does God warn the Canaanites?

Been a while since I read the whole story, I was going by the Thinktank article because if I were to accept it as happening that is how I would view it:

1.Summary:* The Israelites had been promised a specific area of land, since the time of Abraham. Most of the local indigenous peoples were either descendants of Abe or very familiar with the traditions of those people. When the “time had come,” God judged the Canaanites and decreed for them to be expelled from the Land. Their tenure was up–they were evicted. New tenants were moving in. The Canaanites were given decades and decades of notice–in many ways and at different times. And they understood clearly–all the records we have of their understanding of their plight is TOTALLY in line with the Land-Grant of YHWH.

With the ‘eviction notice’ published, the Canaanites could decide to either vacate the premises peacefully or deal with military force. If they vacated peacefully, they could choose their locations, mode of travel, and not have to deal with unpleasant military overseers. If they chose to challenge Israel’s God and His expressed intentions, then they did so with complete knowledge of His power–as displayed in Egypt.

Even though they were the ‘scourge’ of the earth at that time–by international consensus–God did not desire to annihilate the people. His expressed intentions were to move them away from His people. He gave them ample opportunity to leave peacefully before Israel arrived, and even allowed the bulk of the ‘less institutionalized’ to have a little longer. His people were not instructed to hunt them down in neighboring nations at all.

Israel was severely restricted in the Conquest. They were not allowed to be simple ‘land grabbers’ or ‘wealth seekers’ or ‘self-righteous’ or ‘land scorchers’ or ‘international empire builders’ or ‘captive-abusive’. At the same time, they were to eliminate the threat of Canaanite destructive influence (both spiritual and physical) if called upon.

And God allowed no double standards. When Israel began to look like ‘Canaanites’, God judged them IN THE SAME WAY…and ‘vomited’ them from the Land as well. This expulsion was also accompanied by the harsh measures of warfare faced by the Canaanites.

The punishment of the Amorites/Canaanites was thus one of ‘deportation’–NOT one of genocide.

You can see his arguments preceding the summary at the link posted if interested.

@beaglelady

No, it’s a serious question. What if a man who thought God wanted him to murder a whole family for their sins shared all of your religious views? Would it be possible that he really heard God?

I already stated I would call the authorities. Aside from one verse about stoning disobedient children, which thankfully no one seems to have ever listened to, there is nothing in the whole of scripture where I see God commanding a person to go and slaughter their family. My view is not that the total annihilation of the Canaanites is historical. I don’t think of the Bible as having a lot of history in terms of genre. But to claim this scene is somehow inconsistent with God’s character in the NT or in Jesus is false.
God casts judgment against sinful people and nations. That is found cover to cover and affirmed by Jesus multiple times as the Gospels present him. If you want to talk about recurring attestation including on the lips of our Lord and Savior, this one passes with flying colors. I;d like to see a hermeneutic which

1. takes the bible very seriously as God’s inspired text
2. dismisses a major recurring theme that occurs from cover to cover
3. that is also found affirmed numerous times in the words and teachings of Jesus as the Gospels depict him.

You define this as “fundamentalist thinking.” Im just trying to take Jesus and scripture seriously as best I can despite its flaws. It has errors. That doesn’t mean I can just dismiss whatever I want as if my modern, limited and culturally determined sense of morality should dictate God’s actions throughout time and history. It is a question of intellectual consistency and honesty for me. Jesus teaches that God casts judgment on groups of people and that means collateral damage is a reality.

[Jen57 (Jennifer E Nyffeler)]

No. That would not be God…

“If a man who shared all of your religious views decided that God wanted him to murder an entire sinful family with a sword (or maybe strangulation, poison, or whatever), what would you think of that?”

For one thing, please pardon my “you’s”… but whom you speak of DO not hold the same views of God that I do. I am sorry, but this shows how little you know about me, and what I know about God, (I guess I’ve learned somethings in my 47 yrs as a believer)… and then what you know about God and His message to us as a whole, from Genesis to Revelations.

There are many people that have interpreted scripture from a position of not knowing God or having His Spirit in their hearts and lives… and who, like you are coming at it like a color-blind person who has never seen color yet argue… with those who have seen color… what color looks like.

If you want to know, at least a little bit, the bible is not a bunch of writings that that have no correlation with one another. From Genesis to Revelations God is showing us His plan to draw us close to Himself, show us Who He is… as well as show us who we are and what we were meant to be… and then for our redemption. The bible is more a spiritual book than anything else… which is why one needs spiritual eyes to see what it is really saying. ~ BTW, something everyone is invited to partake!

I believe that essentially, the OT is to show us several important things… one, being our nature. That we like to be guided by rules… yet, we also love breaking them… which shows right after the 1st set of just 10 rules that were given by Moses. The people had a wild party and began worshipping a golden idol THEY created! They behaved totally against every single command they were given. Lol… Rules that were SO basic, yet they couldn’t obey even one of them!

Two, to show God’s authority and power, and how He could handle sin if we stayed on the same path. If we continued being governed by rules (the law), then judgement would have to follow… as the examples in the OT attest to. Because sin spreads and ultimately destroys. So sin must be dealt with… or it does spread. A modern day example is Hitler. Sin started as a thought in his head, then spread because no one stopped him… to the point of millions of people suffering so greatly, then death.

Three, to show God’s love, mercy and patience with very stubborn people… as well as His character and wisdom… which is shown in the OT through many stories. (Whether some stories were metaphors or more the viewpoints of the writers, if you have God’s Spirit to enlighten them for you, then you would have the wherewithal to understand their meanings and their inclusion into the biblical narrative)

Four, to ultimately show us our need for a Savior. For a better way to handle the problem of sin. As Jesus came to incurr all judgement and extend total forgiveness to every single person. Then to send His Spirit into our hearts, making us new inside and giving us access to His direction and power over sin… then also showing us a better way to see and treat others. Jesus made it quite clear… in Matthew 5: 43-48 “You have heard the law that says, ‘Love your neighbor’ and hate your enemy. But I say, love your enemies! Pray for those who persecute you! In that way, you will be acting as true children of your Father in heaven. For he gives his sunlight to both the evil and the good, and he sends rain on the just and the unjust alike. If you love only those who love you, what reward is there for that? Even corrupt tax collectors do that much. If you are kind only to your friends, how are you different from anyone else? Even pagans do that. But you are to be perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect."

I’m sorry beaglelady, but you’re color blind. And actually, that is the only difference between us. What I’ve had access to, you also do.

[Vinnie]

An argument can be made that viewing God as ordering the murder of babies is based on black and white literalism and those who see God through the lens of Christ’s sacrificial death know he would not do this and are the ones seeing in color. Jesus did correct parts of the OT he disagreed with and told us to love our enemies. I have tried to show, however, that a careful look at Jesus shows he seems to accept that God’s judgment of sinners is sever and does sometimes have collateral damage.

But claiming you have special, spiritual knowledge others lack doesn’t usually fly too well on the internet in a public discussion forum.

@Jen57

Two, to show God’s authority and power, and how He could handle sin if we stayed on the same path. If we continued being governed by rules (the law), then judgement would have to follow… as the examples in the OT attest to. Because sin spreads and ultimately destroys. So sin must be dealt with… or it does spread. A modern day example is Hitler. Sin started as a thought in his head, then spread because no one stopped him… to the point of millions of people suffering so greatly, then death.

The issue here the others have raised is that God can do this without murdering babies. Many have little issue with God punishing sinners. But the babies were not sinners. At least not yet. Killing babies is a deal breaker for many. Right or wrong, that has the correct spirit at least because murdered babies is about as bad as it gets in the world.

And there is no s at the end of Revelation.

[RichardG (Richard Gillett)]

@Vinnie

God’s judgment

Is like any prophecy. It tells you the worse case scenario. It does not make it happen.

For there to be a concept of Heaven you need the yang of Hell it does not mean it has to exist, only that it is the opposite.(concept) Jesus did not mince words. He was blunt to the nth degree. We must bear that in mind when we claim meaning and understanding.

The crucifixion is God’s way of deflecting His judgement away from the cruelty you seem intent on viewing.

Richard

[Jen57 (Jennifer E Nyffeler)]

Thanks Vinnie for your thoughts. I still am stuck on the suffering part of this. Excruciating pain part of this. Please tell me how God should stop the gross sins of these barbaric societies otherwise. Please. Without putting those outside of that society at peril who may feel “called” to go in to such a terrible situation and rescue the innocent. Like those who attempted to battle Hitler and hide the Jews during WWII. Tell me, how would they have even survived the attempt… as many of those who did try would attest to.

Additionally, in my mind, you are talking about fairness. But… how choosing to sin operates… the nature of it… is unfair. The innocent ALWAYS get affected when we choose to sin. Why do you think God gave the 1st people a severe warning about what would happen if they decided to eat of that tree?? (Obviously it was not the tree. It could have been anything. But that is what God used.)

So, people are blaming God for alleviating the suffering of the innocent? He is God and He sees that this life IS temporal and what is beyond this life is eternal… so He sometimes operates in that capacity??? SHAME on God! He sometimes chooses to take the results of the sin that WE LET into the world (suffering and death) OUT of our hands… and make the decision when death will occur… as only God should have the right to… and we get mad at Him for being God? Yea know… He does not need me to rescue Him and His reputation… so I’ll stop right here.

But first, NO, that does not mean that people have the same rights as God… or to try and act like God. Obviously.

[RichardG (Richard Gillett)]

@Jen57

Please tell me how God should stop the gross sins of these barbaric societies

Why should He?

If we are the cause of it? Or God has given us the free will? Why should He then take it away because you (or anyone else) is uncomfortable? At what point do we take away personal freedom? The judicial system seems to offer one answer, but it is hampered by truth and deceit. (and some other human attributes)
The only answer is the Biblical New heaven and New Earth, but it comes at thre price of true freedom. It can be argued that any freedom has constraints in terms of practicality and reality, but The New heaven adds the constraint of “no harm” and that has so many consequences to enforce.
Suffering is intolerable. It is cruel and can be unbearable, but it is the price of freedom. To be free to live you have to be free to die (or suffer)

We know God weeps, but He also must let things be. He only intervenes if asked, and then it is within the constraints He Himself has decreed. Satisfying one request will almost certainly impinge on someone else’s desires or freedom.

Richard

[Jen57 (Jennifer E Nyffeler)]

Thank you Richard for making several very good points. The strongest is that God doesn’t answer to us. He doesn’t have to. What is interesting to me is that you hear all the time about “not playing God”. That we should not be making the decisions or doing the things that only God has the right to do. Yet, then “we” turn around and harshly critisize God for being God… and making those hard decisions.

Well, I am going to let this topic go. It has morphed into something… arguments… that I don’t see as something I want to be a part of anylonger.

Please take care! Blessings to you!

[RichardG (Richard Gillett)]

@Jen57

Well, I am going to let this topic go. It has morphed into something… arguments…

I am sorry. It does seem that despite the guidelines all discussions degenerate. faith is so emotive.

@Jen57

“we” turn around and harshly critisize God for being God

I think we all end up being our own .god to a certain extent. Humility is impossible. You cannot claim it, but maybe we strive for it in our own minds. We need to bring these things into the open, even if not to resolve, but to realise that they are there.

Please do not stop asking or questioning.

Richard

[bluebird1 (Robin)]

Hello Jen and thanks for the great topic…weelllll…great and “greatly” controversial…

I am part of the way through the lecture that Christy gave us the link to.

You do ask some good questions. It is great to think about these things…And your ER-nurse’s stories are hard to read… I am sure that seeing or hearing those things would make you think about many things–but the ER is not Canaan and I think you are mixing different issues here…

Regarding matters like “genocide in the Old Testament” – which comes up from time to time…last summer, I listened to the lectures of a couple biblical scholars… When it came to the matter of biblical commands that seem to endorse genocide-- these speakers noted that extermination of entire groups of people was not possible given the weaponry and tactics and societal development of the times of the ANE in which the biblical text inhabits. Most often, people caught up in such battles were sent into slavery. Now how this impacts your example of the Canaanites being punished or wiped out is hard to say. They were not wiped out by the way. The Canaanites began the development of the alphabet you and I are using now. DNA studies of Canaanite remains show, apparently, that they from various other spots around the Mediterranean area. The Philistines --who came later – had Canaanite DNA in them. So I am not sure that supposing there was a complete wiping out of the Canaanites – really works…even if it was only the adults.

You are right in that God is the One who determines morality. And beyond that, .we as “moderns” are not so good at determining it as well.

As for the biblical text “originally” being without error—I think most had their start as oral tradition, especially the early Old Testament texts. There is a whole debate on all of that .But the Dead Sea Scrolls gave scholars manuscripts that were 2000 years old by which they could compare more recent biblical books and determine “original readings” . A whole other subject but the sense I have gotten from most sources is that the nature of the original text has been reasonaly well determined (with disputes, of course but not enough to affect major doctrines.

Just wanted to say something about that…OK all for now. Welcome to the discussion!

[beaglelady]

@Vinnie

Been a while since I read the whole story, I was going by the Thinktank article because if I were to accept it as happening that is how I would view it:

Where does the Bible say all this?

@Vinnie

I already stated I would call the authorities. Aside from one verse about stoning disobedient children, which thankfully no one seems to have ever listened to, there is nothing in the whole of scripture where I see God commanding a person to go and slaughter their family.

But God in the past has commanded that Canaanite families be slaughtered, correct? Not just families, an entire ethnic group! (Except that Rahab the harlot got a free pass her and her family.)

@Vinnie

You define this as “fundamentalist thinking.” Im just trying to take Jesus and scripture seriously as best I can despite its flaws. It has errors. That doesn’t mean I can just dismiss whatever I want as if my modern, limited and culturally determined sense of morality should dictate God’s actions throughout time and history. It is a question of intellectual consistency and honesty for me. Jesus teaches that God casts judgment on groups of people and that means collateral damage is a reality.

So could it happen today-- could God cast judgment on groups of people and order them to be slaughtered?

[beaglelady]

@Jen57

For one thing, please pardon my “you’s”… but whom you speak of DO not hold the same views of God that I do. I am sorry, but this shows how little you know about me, and what I know about God, (I guess I’ve learned somethings in my 47 yrs as a believer)… and then what you know about God and His message to us as a whole, from Genesis to Revelations.

I know enough about you.

@Jen57

I’m sorry beaglelady, but you’re color blind.

The pot has called the kettle black.

@Jen57

No. That would not be God…

You are dancing around my question. Why couldn’t it be God? Your original post was about how God ordered the Canaanites to be slaughtered, and we shouldn’t really comment on the morality of this, because we shouldn’t question God, and so on.

So why couldn’t God decide tomorrow to order somebody to kill a sinful group of people?

btw, It’s not unusual even in this day and age for somebody to claim that God orders them to commit murder. Have you read the book “Under the Banner of Heaven”? Or sometimes God orders suicide, or whatever.

We have laws, the FBI, the police, etc. but sometimes people do murder in the name of God before they can be stopped.

[beaglelady]

@Jen57

Randy, Thank you! Very gracious of you!. I guess it is kind of a different culture in here than I am used to…? I’ve been very involved in another large online forum for over 7 years, and I guess it just has a different way of doing things… Also, I guess I get mixed messages in here. That I am not to directly disagree, or challenge people in here… especially established members? Or maybe because Im new I can’t do that? Kind of like getting into an exclusive club? Anyway…

Do not expect this place to be an echo chamber. Your views can and should be challenged.

[heymike3]

@beaglelady

So why couldn’t God decide tomorrow to order somebody to kill a sinful group of people?

Because it would contradict the teaching of Jesus, which neither contradicts God’s judgment in times past.