Whatever God Commands Must Be Okay?

[POI]

(1 Samuel 15:1-3) Samuel said to Saul, ‘The Lord sent me to anoint you king over his people Israel; now therefore listen to the words of the Lord. 2 Thus says the Lord of hosts, “I will punish the Amalekites for what they did in opposing the Israelites when they came up out of Egypt. 3 Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.”

*****************************

For Debate: (yes or no) - Is genocide only okay if this action is commanded by the Bible God? If your answer here is yes, please explain. If your answer here is no, please explain.

[POI]

Did the Bible god order the event which happened in 1 Samuel 15:1-3 or not?

I believe so.

Then your believed upon god ordered genocide. Which means genocide can be good.

[POI]

As stated in my last response, humans cannot logically be held to the same standard as the claimed Bible god.

I agree with that. So, how could we judge His actions, if we don't have the same information?

Easy. If you had the same capabilities as god, would you STILL kill in the same fashion as humans sometimes do? The answer is no. You could easily remove the ones opposed to you and spare the ones indifferent or not opposed -- (like some women, children, and infants in such a tribe or region). The action ordered in 1 Samuel is no different than a military commander merely wiping out an entire region (just in case). Humans are limited in capabilities; such a claimed god would not be. The OT passage reads as if the command came from human thinking alone. And you have also provided example(s) of humans doing such action(s). Hence, exactly what distinguishes 1 Samuel 15:1-3 from any of the examples you brought up to Haven?

I have no reason to think God ordered destruction to anyone who would not deserve it.

The only reason you have is pure blind faith alone. Just because a passage is written in an ancient collection of writings, does not validate the claim. How might ALL the children and infants be deemed "evil" when they have not yet reached the "age of enlightenment"? You see 1213, your beliefs are illogical. I would assume you can bring up all sorts of humans who are "pure evil". And yet, god does not exterminate them before they are allowed to commit all their wanted "evil". Again, the storyline reads of human thinking alone. Not instead that of a claimed all just, all powerful, all good, all knowing, and/or all loving god. Meaning, the tribe was likely killed out of vengeance/other. Just like any other run-of-the-mill act of ordered genocide you can bring up.

By knowing their hearts.

"Pure evil" only existed way-back-when, during OT times?.?.?.?

It would be wrong to disobey a direct order, unless you admit it is okay to pick and choose which orders to follow, verse not?

It is possible that humans make mistakes. Killing other's because of a mistake would be bad, therefore, before doing so, it would be good to be absolutely sure that it is true and correct message from the God, and not from impostor.

How would one be 'absolutely sure'? Without appealing to blind faith alone, how do we know the orders in 1 Samuel 15:1-3 were 'absolutely sure' to have come from the Bible god?

Jesus and the OT god share the same morality, don't they?

I think so, and according to the Bible, Jesus told what God had commanded him to say.

That does not mean that situations can't change. If one lives by what Jesus said, it is best not to kill anyone.

Then, according to YOU (in bold above), 1 Samuel 15:1-3 should never have happened. Which means you think (1 Samuel 15) was wrong.

[Haven]

For example because the other nation started it.

How is this a justification for genocide? Would it have been moral to kill infants in Germany and destroy the German people because Nazi Germany started WWII?

Bible shows God kills or orders to kill, when the killed is utterly evil. So, the reason for extermination is always evilness.

Can babies, young children and nonhuman animals be “utterly evil?” Because the Bible claims that your god kills them and orders their killing.

That is a good question. Because it is possible we don't know surely, it would be best to avoid doing so. And nowadays that we have the teachings of Jesus, we can be sure such a message is not from God, because we have the message in the Bible that tells we should not kill.

So God changed his mind?

After Jesus such an order would be not compatible. That does not mean it could not have been true before Jesus.

Why would Jesus change the morality of slaughtering, enslaving or raping babies, children and nonhuman animals? Why would it justify the slaughter, enslavement or rape of any civilians whatsoever?

As I’ve said before, one of the best things about being an atheist is moral consistency. I get to use evidence, reason and compassion to make moral judgments, and don’t have to twist my mind and heart into pretzels to justify what are plainly horrific atrocities.

[1213]

How is this a justification for genocide? Would it have been moral to kill infants in Germany and destroy the German people because Nazi Germany started WWII?

After Jesus, I don't think humans have the right to kill anyone.

Can babies, young children and nonhuman animals be “utterly evil?”

I believe it is possible.

That is a good question. Because it is possible we don't know surely, it would be best to avoid doing so. And nowadays that we have the teachings of Jesus, we can be sure such a message is not from God, because we have the message in the Bible that tells we should not kill.

So God changed his mind?

I don't think so. We just are no allowed to do some things.

Why would Jesus change the morality of slaughtering, enslaving or raping babies, children and nonhuman animals?...

The morality is still the same, the wage of sin is death and evil people will die. But, Christians (disciples of Jesus) should not kill.

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Matt. 25:46
For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 6:23

[1213]

...You could easily remove the ones opposed to you and spare the ones indifferent or not opposed -- (like some women, children, and infants in such a tribe or region). The action ordered in 1 Samuel is no different than a military commander merely wiping out an entire region (just in case). Humans are limited in capabilities; such a claimed god would not be....

I have no reason to believe people were killed just in case.

...How might ALL the children and infants be deemed "evil" when they have not yet reached the "age of enlightenment"? ....

I believe it is possible that person can be evil when he is young. But, if there was people who were not evil, I believe they are saved in eternal life with God. And then I don't see a problem, if God allowed someone righteous to die bodily. In Biblical point of view, the death of a body is not the end.

...the tribe was likely killed out of vengeance/other...

Good that you say likely. Then everyone can see that you are just making guesses.

...Then, according to YOU (in bold above), 1 Samuel 15:1-3 should never have happened. Which means you think (1 Samuel 15) was wrong.

Please explain logically why do you think so?

[POI]

[Replying to 1213 in post #25]

2nd request:

1) Exactly what distinguishes 1 Samuel 15:1-3 from any of the examples you brought up to Haven?

2) "Pure evil" only existed way-back-when, during OT times?.?.?.?

3) Is it okay to disobey the Bible god's direct order?

4) How would one be 'absolutely sure' an order came from the Bible god or not? Without appealing to blind faith alone, how do we know the orders in 1 Samuel 15:1-3 were 'absolutely sure' to have come from the Bible god?

1213 I have no reason to believe people were killed just in case.

POI You missed my point. My point is we humans cannot read all people's 'hearts'. We humans also do not have the ability to pinpoint and individually kill any/all 'evil' alone. Sometimes, we are forced to make hard decisions, for the 'greater good'. Such a claimed Bible god would not be hindered by any of these limitations. Aside from the Bible's say-so alone, why did the Bible god order the extermination of all women, children, and infants too? They were not fighting. Were they confirmed to all be "pure evil" too? If not, then he ordered pure genocide, just like human commanders would/could do.

1213 I believe it is possible that person can be evil when he is young. But, if there was people who were not evil, I believe they are saved in eternal life with God. And then I don't see a problem, if God allowed someone righteous to die bodily. In Biblical point of view, the death of a body is not the end.

POI Then I guess no ordered genocide is wrong, as all the good ones go to heaven anyways?

1213 Good that you say likely. Then everyone can see that you are just making guesses.

POI Aside from the Bible's say-so alone, please demonstrate why the women, children, and babies had to be killed?

1213 Please explain logically why do you think so?

POI Because of what you stated in bold. --> "it is best not to kill anyone.", which means that according to you, killing is never good. And yet, your god ordered quite a bit of killing and genocide.

[Haven]

[Replying to 1213 in post #14]

, in any case, I think God has the right to decide how long life He gives. And I have no problem, if He doesn't allow evil people live forever.

Why? Is there a reason why you think this, or is it just “faith-think” that you’ve internalized? I’m not following the logic. The sentient being (created or not) still has an interest in living.

Also, how are you defining “evil?” What is “evil?”

I believe it is possible.

[in reference to my question on if it’s possible for babies and young children, as well as nonhuman animals to be evil]

This is simply absurd. Evil is about action + intent, and babies aren’t capable of either. Yet another example of how faith-think blinds us to obvious truths.

[Haven]

I believe it is possible that person can be evil when he is young. But, if there was people who were not evil, I believe they are saved in eternal life with God.

This is completely unfalsifiable. Either way, you’d conclude it was justified.

And there’s still the issue that God ordered the brutal killing of innocents, traumatizing them and depriving them of life. “Saving” them afterward doesn’t justify taking their lives, otherwise why would murder be wrong at all?

And then I don't see a problem, if God allowed someone righteous to die bodily. In Biblical point of view, the death of a body is not the end.

Then any and all murder would be justified, as POI pointed out.

I think you’ve illustrated exactly why faith is not a path to morality.

[1213]

...otherwise why would murder be wrong at all?

Murder is unjustified/unlawful killing. It is never right.

[1213]

[Replying to 1213 in post #14]

, in any case, I think God has the right to decide how long life He gives. And I have no problem, if He doesn't allow evil people live forever.

Why? Is there a reason why you think this, or is it just “faith-think” that you’ve internalized? I’m not following the logic.

Person who gives a gift, has the right to decide what kind of gift he gives. For example if you would buy a cake for your friend, would it be ok, if he then demands that it should be a bigger cake? Or would you think he is ungrateful and should not have the cake at all?

Also, how are you defining “evil?” What is “evil?”

For example wanting bad things to happen to others.

This is simply absurd. Evil is about action + intent, and babies aren’t capable of either.

I believe babies can have intents, will and thoughts. And they are enough to tell is person evil or not. But, obviously adults don't understand them well, so it is better that humans don't judge babies, which is why I think abortion is wrong.

Do you think humans have right to abort babies?