The Bible as Truth?

[queenofnines]

yes i still think that God is justified in any actions he does, because i believe and know my God to be a loving and holy and just and righteous God.

How about the story of the 32,000 virgins?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6hZlZ8WfUg&videos=fQQgg_VTalo

"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived." – Isaac Asimov  ==> happened to me <==

"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully." – Richard Dawkins


I'll probably start another thread at some point about "personal relationships" with god.  Because I honestly don't get it.

[imranmak]

Something I'm having a hard time understanding here...

Why is it that many who believe the Bible isn't 100% the truth call those who don't atheists?  I am not an atheist, and I don't believe that everything in the Bible is the cold hard truth.

From what I can understand, the Bible is open to interpretation.  My Bible is written in a language that historically didn't use vowels, and therefore can be interpreted thousands of ways.  There are stories that are left out of the Bible (i.e. Lilith, the story of Hanukkah, etc.) yet those legends and holidays remain (what do you think a lullaby is?). 

...and there are many that have some major things wrong.  Example...Jehovah is not g-d's name.  The name of g-d is signified by four Hebrew consonants and to aid readers, the vowels from the word "Adonai" meaning "my lord" were transposed on to those four consonants; thus, the pronunciation became "Yehovah." Does that make everything the Jehovah's Witnesses believe incorrect?

I believe firmly that the Bible is a book of lessons that can be learned, but each individual person must read it themselves to determine what those lessons are.  Do I believe Moses parted the Red Sea?  Hell, no.  But I do believe it is important to step forward with conviction before you enter into dangerous territory. 

And, most importantly, I believe it is not up to me to "fix" anyone or "save" anyone.  I believe g-d does not wish for us to be blindly following a faith because we were scared into it, but to research, read, and make a rational choice as to how to live our lives.   I believe wholeheartedly in the golden rule.  I wish more people who claim to be following in the footsteps of Jesus (in whom I personally do not believe as a personal savior, but to each their own) would actually live their lives by the example they claim him to have left.

yes i still think that God is justified in any actions he does, because i believe and know my God to be a loving and holy and just and righteous God.

How about the story of the 32,000 virgins?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6hZlZ8WfUg&videos=fQQgg_VTalo

"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived." – Isaac Asimov  ==> happened to me <==

"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully." – Richard Dawkins


I'll probably start another thread at some point about "personal relationships" with god.  Because I honestly don't get it.

[shernajwine]

there is a lot of rebuttal for this from this website http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/586

for the sake of forum decorum i will try to post the most relevant material in an attempt to explain Numbers 31. but i recommend you visit the site and read the entire passage.

The first five books of the Bible are full of stories of the conquest of Caanan. But one story that sometimes stands out in the minds of skeptics is the one found in Numbers 31, where God seemingly gives no reason for killing defenseless women and male children. In addition, it has been suggested that the young girls mentioned in the account were spared so that the Israelite men could rape them. Such accusations are baseless, however, as is evident when they are viewed in light of other related passages.

The most widely questioned section of Numbers 31 is verses 17-18: “Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women-children, that have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.” To understand this passage, one must realize that Numbers 25 is the “prequel” to the events recorded in Numbers 31. Numbers 25 tells how the Midianites, specifically the women, led the Israelites astray into worshiping the Baal or Peor. The Lord’s anger burned against Israel, and He struck them with a plague. The plague ended when Phinehas, the grandson of Aaron, killed an Israelite man and the Midianite woman he brought into his family (Numbers 25:6-9). The relations with Midianite women were in direct violation of God’s commands in Deuteronomy 7:3-4: “[N]either shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. For he will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of Jehovah be kindled against you, and he will destroy thee quickly.”

As a result of these events, God instructed the Israelites to “Vex the Midianites, and smite them; for they vex you with their wiles, wherewith they have beguiled you in the matter of Peor, and in the matter of Cozbi, the daughter of the prince of Midian, their sister, who was slain on the day of the plague in the matter of Peor” (Numbers 25:17-18). When, in Numbers 31, the army brought back the women, it was in direct violation to God’s order in Numbers 25 to destroy the Midianites, who would lead the Israelites into apostasy.

But how can we explain the destruction of the young boys? Why were they not spared along with the young girls?
Those inhabitants were destroyed because of their wickedness (Deuteronomy 9:4; 18:9-14). They were so evil that their Creator no longer could abide their corruption. That they had numerous opportunities to repent is evident from the prophetic books (Nineveh did repent, for example, and for a time stayed the day of destruction). Complaining about Jehovah’s order to destroy innocent children is a vain gesture when one realizes that the children were spared an even worse fate of being reared as slaves under the domination of sin. Instead of having to endure the scourge of a life of immorality and wickedness, these innocents were ushered early into the bliss of Paradise. If the male children had been allowed to mature, they most likely would have followed the pagan ways of their forefathers, and eventually would have taken vengeance on the Israelites. Killing the males not only prevented them from falling into the same abominable sins as their parents, but also kept Israel from having to battle them later.

I know this was a lengthy response but I wanted to get all the pertinent information posted here for people who don't bother to visit the links posted.

[shernajwine]

"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully." – Richard Dawkins

According to Richard Dawkins, Yahweh, the God of the Bible, is "jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."1 Absent from any of Dawkins' description of God is His mercy. People tend to think of the God of the Old Testament as cruel and unforgiving, whereas the God of the New Testament is seen as the God of mercy, who sent Jesus to atone for the sins of the world. The Old Testament prophets were always warning the people about the wrath of God should they stray from the path of righteousness. However, what is usually ignored by atheists is God's mercy for those who did repent of doing evil. Yes, God judged many people groups, but not before warning them.
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/mercy_of_god.html

for anyone who is interested in more about Richard Dawkins you can visit http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/the_god_delusion.html

Richard Dawkins has stepped out of his usual area of expertise, biological evolution, and has attempted to become atheism's greatest apologist. Unfortunately, like so many other atheists, he picks out the easy targets with blinders fully engaged, to avoid having to deal with any serious challenges to his beliefs. Yes, I did use the "b" word, since Dawkins actively promotes the belief that there is no God (hence the title) and that atheists should "come out" of the closet and exhibit abundant "atheist pride." Dawkins seems to be "preaching to the choir," since the vast majority of his apologetics is either old and refuted or strawman in nature. This is a series of articles debunking the atheistic apologetics of The God Delusion. Click on each chapter link for more details.

[queenofnines]

It's one thing for a Christian to have not read their Bible or only know the "good bits", but what saddens me more is the Christians who ARE aware of the evil in the Bible and still walk away with the conclusion that it's okay.  

So you must think natural disasters are today's equivalent of god's wrath, huh?  Funny how we now have the technology to track some of them, though, and escape (or at least prepare for) said wrath.

Surely the world is far more evil today in god's eyes than 4,000 years ago?  Why do large parts of the world remain relatively unharmed then -- surely they are full of wickedness too?

From the Apologetics website: "Complaining about Jehovah's order to destroy innocent children is a vain gesture when one realizes that the children were spared an even worse fate of being reared as slaves under the domination of sin.  Instead of having to endure the scourge of a life of immorality and wickedness, these innocents were ushered early into the bliss of Paradise."

So I guess this is saying that the mothers who drown their 5 kids in a lake are justified, since those kids get a free pass to heaven and all?  Again, I don't see why the religious are against abortion then.


As for the justifications for the rape thing, they are kidding themselves if they think the 32,000 virgins went untouched, as god clearly advocates rape repeatedly in the Bible in other passages:

When you go out to war against your enemies and the LORD, your God, delivers them into your hand, so that you take captives, if you see a comely woman among the captives and become so enamored of her that you wish to have her as wife, you may take her home to your house.  But before she may live there, she must shave her head and pare her nails and lay aside her captive's garb.  After she has mourned her father and mother for a full month, you may have relations with her, and you shall be her husband and she shall be your wife.  However, if later on you lose your liking for her, you shall give her her freedom, if she wishes it; but you shall not sell her or enslave her, since she was married to you under compulsion [force]. (Deuteronomy 21:10-14)

Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst.  And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished; half of the city shall go into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be removed from the city. (Zechariah 14:1-2)

[shernajwine]

the people who read their bible and study it for the purpose of finding God and his goodness, God will be faithful to reveal His truth. the people that are aware of the evil in the bible are aware that it is evil perpetuated by men not God. evil is not okay and the bible clearly states it.

Daniel C. Dennett, Professor of Philosophy and Co-Director of the Center for Cognitive Studies at Tufts University, says that if God is responsible for the good things, He must be responsible for the bad also....
If Dennett knew anything about geology, he would have known that plate tectonics (the process that produces earthquakes and volcanoes) is absolutely required for advanced life to exist on our planet. Earthquakes are caused by the movement of continental plates that float on a molten mantel. Without the mantel, the earth's Van-Allen radiation shield and the earth's magnetosphere would not exist and advanced life could not exist on the land due to deadly solar radiation. In addition, tectonic activity is required to prevent all land from being washed into the oceans through the water cycle, which is required for all life. All these concepts are developed more thoroughly on our  natural evil page.
So, why did all those people have to die in that earthquake?
Natural or moral evil?

As a lifelong resident of California, my first question was why all those people died in Haiti during a 7.0 earthquake. I have personally survived several Southern California earthquakes of magnitude 6.6 or greater. In fact, for each of the California earthquakes over the last century, the death toll has been, at most 115 - in the Long Beach earthquake of 1933. Most of those deaths were caused by building collapse due to poor construction standards, which resulted in the rewriting of California's construction codes. Likewise, Haiti has virtually no building codes and construction has been done to minimize costs at the expense of safety.6 The only multi-story building to survive the earthquake unscathed was the American Embassy, which was constructed according to U.S. codes. So, the vast majority of deaths caused in the earthquake in Haiti were probably due to moral evil (i.e., greed), rather than natural evil.

For example, just 6 weeks later, an earthquake in Chile, measuring 8.8 (500 times more powerful than the earth quake in Haiti), caused only a few hundred deaths. However, having suffered from the largest recorded earthquake in 1960 (9.5), Chile had instituted strict building codes that prevented the kind of damage seen in Haiti.


that is only one example taken from the website which i have been quoting from about God and Natural Disasters.

So I guess this is saying that the mothers who drown their 5 kids in a lake are justified, since those kids get a free pass to heaven and all?  Again, I don't see why the religious are against abortion then.

No the mother was evil for murdering...but God did not see those babies deaths as tragedies because babies go to heaven (the mother's actions were a tragedy because of it's sinful nature)

And as for the scripture quote from Deuteronomy
Let us consider the facts of the matter:
To begin with, we may note Deuteronomy 20:10 states, "When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace."

Assuming that war ensues, once it is over they were to "remain outside the camp seven days; whoever has killed any person, and whoever has touched any slain, purify yourselves and your captives on the third day and on the seventh day. Purify every garment, everything made of leather, everything woven of goats' hair, and everything made of wood" (Numbers 31:19-20).
This ensures the health of soldier and war captives.

In the case of the women mentioned in the texts noted above, if a man was interested in one of them he was to:
Provide her with housing.

Allow her one month to mourn.

Then they may get married.

And if they later divorce, she was to go free and not be mistreated (see Deuteronomy 21:10-14).

No rape at all anywhere. Rather, cleansing after a war, the provision of a home, time to mourn, marriage and if need be, freedom and protection from mistreatment.

Let me state that as disturbing as the atheists find the cherry-picked-Bible-pull-quotes, I find it very disturbing that they read these texts and infer rape.

They are inventing the idea of rape and reading it into the text (this is eisegesis and is hermeneutically inappropriate
http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/does-bible-command-rape

As for Zechariah 14:1-2
If you read the passage carefully, Zechariah is prophesying to Jerusalem about a battle that is forth coming....he is prophesying what the enemies of Jerusalem are going to do to their nation. God is not condoning it, Zechariah is warning of future hardships. Nowhere does it say that God is commanding the "ravishing" of women and the ravishing was being foretold as being done by enemies of God against God's own people.

[queenofnines]

Thank you for all of your hard work, Sherna! 

[shernajwine]

you're an incredible person and regardless of our disagreements on these things i am blessed to know you  

[shernajwine]

i want to note here a good website that helps with scripture interpretation. it helps in understanding at least the bible from a christians perspective vs atheists or non believers perspective.
it is beneficial if you want to use a scripture as a reference but don't want to read an entire chapter or book and still get and understanding the the peoples and culture that the scripture is referencing too. anyone is susceptible to misinterpretation but you already know an atheists interpretation so i think it's worth knowing the christians interpretation so you can make a decision based on the two sides.
of course interpretations vary with doctrine but you won't find a doctrine that thinks God is the type of God Richard Dawkins describes so it will give a general interpretation that gives an acceptable idea of the average christian interpretation.

http://www.bibletrack.org/
 

[Falconer02]

A friend of mine came across this-
1 Timothy 2:11-12
“Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.” -Paul

So all of you bible-humping women posting in this thread need to realize this is a man's world! SHUT UP! SUBMIT! OBEY! Only I can teach in this thread! Because I am.....the man.

Seriously though, it's things like these that I get a kick out of-- people either skim over these verses or find them and then go "Oh! But they translated it wrong!". They'll even go as far as to pick it apart word-for-word and then rebuild it to mean whatever they want it to mean. It's extremely convenient. I would find it quite a burden for a woman to practice this in our culture. You know you don't have to follow it. Just as you do not have to follow a lot of the bogus laws and philosophies in the bible. Be open-minded. Be free. If you believe it because it's in the bible and it's the truth, walk the walk and get back in the kitchen.

So, the vast majority of deaths caused in the earthquake in Haiti were probably due to moral evil (i.e., greed), rather than natural evil.

I think this guy does not realize he comes from a greedy capitalist country. And yet he compares their 'greedy' standards to ours. Which brings me to this conclusion--

For example, just 6 weeks later, an earthquake in Chile, measuring 8.8 (500 times more powerful than the earth quake in Haiti), caused only a few hundred deaths. However, having suffered from the largest recorded earthquake in 1960 (9.5), Chile had instituted strict building codes that prevented the kind of damage seen in Haiti.

Scientific studies + natural disaster lessons = greater defense against natural disasters. We're on our own. That's really all there is to it.

[queenofnines]

If Dennett knew anything about geology, he would have known that plate tectonics (the process that produces earthquakes and volcanoes) is absolutely required for advanced life to exist on our planet.

I feel this is a really weak justification for a natural phonemena.  God could just snap his fingers and provide whatever kind of "benefit" that this statement is claiming earthquakes provide.  Why does god continually chose methods that can be explained without him?  It would be like us discovering how lightning works naturally but still persist in attributing it to Thor.

the vast majority of deaths caused in the earthquake in Haiti were probably due to moral evil (i.e., greed), rather than natural evil.

This is absolutely shameful, author dude.  Most citizens don't know how to build buildings, you know.  So 200,000+ innocent people should die/suffer simply because they were unlucky enough to be born/live in a country with poor safety codes?  Yeah, that's fair.

No the mother was evil for murdering...but God did not see those babies deaths as tragedies because babies go to heaven (the mother's actions were a tragedy because of it's sinful nature)

Why is it not a sin when god murders...er, "kills" innocent children?  The true tragedy is those 5 kids were each deprived of their one and only life.

Let us consider the facts of the matter:
To begin with, we may note Deuteronomy 20:10 states, "When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace."

What can an atheist say to someone who believes god was justified in killing millions of people because he apparently "gave them a chance to repent"?  I think you're misled, and I don't see how your god is any different than Allah or any other wrath-filled deity that primitive man has come up with to explain the world.

No rape at all anywhere. Rather, cleansing after a war, the provision of a home, time to mourn, marriage and if need be, freedom and protection from mistreatment.

What about what the woman wants in all of this?  It is still a FORCED MARRIAGE.  What if she didn't want anything to do with the ugly thug?  This is one of the many reasons Yahweh gets labeled as sexist.

[queenofnines]

So all of you bible-humping women posting in this thread need to realize this is a man's world! SHUT UP! SUBMIT! OBEY! Only I can teach in this thread! Because I am.....the man.
...If you believe it because it's in the bible and it's the truth, walk the walk and get back in the kitchen.

   Aahahaha!  Well apparently Jesus Camp tries to justify it my saying Paul was only referring to one particular woman...which is a lie because if you read the whole chapter, it's quite clear that he's not speaking to anyone else.  As a Christian, I always wondered whenever I saw the pastor's wife preaching how she could justify doing such a thing...  Also you forgot the last line of that verse:

"Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety." (1 Timothy 2:15)

Sammiches AND babies!  Don't forget the babies!!

Really, I don't waste my time with all this God stuff and Bible stuff and I just live my life.

O really...?  You're not a True Christian (TM) then and you're headed for hell.  Their words, not mine.  

I can live my life like there is a God, it does make everything seem everlasting and beautiful.

Life is MORE beautiful when it's not reduced to a magical sky being zapping everything here.

I still believe I will be swept off my feet by prince charming and ride off into the sunset on his horse (car) after being married and live happily ever after.

Sorry, that's never going to happen either.  Women expecting a fairytale with their marriage is why people get divorced.

Why take that from me? Dare to dream.

We're not trying to take that from you.  However, that kind of impossible thinking does have negative consequences.  People are already living their lives without a god, they just trick themselves into thinking they aren't.

[shernajwine]

On "keeping silent in church" - Women are more verbal than men, and when they get together, they tend to move from subject to subject. In the synagogues, the women were segregated from the men. If they had any questions on the worship or the teachings, they would have had to shout them over to the men, or discuss them among themselves, which would have resulted in an inability to maintain order. In addition, Paul emphasizes that his rules for church are given so that everything would be "done in a fitting and orderly way." (1 Corinthians 14:40)39  Disorderly communication, such as uninterrupted speaking in tongues, was also prohibited.40

On "not being permitted to teach" - Some interpret this passage to mean that women should never teach in the assembled church. However, commentators point out that Paul did not forbid women from ever teaching. Paul's commended co-worker, Priscilla, taught Apollos, the great preacher (Acts 18:24-26).41 In addition, Paul frequently mentioned other women who held positions of authority in the church. Phoebe worked in the church (Romans 16:1).8 Mary, Tryphena, and Tryphosa were the Lord's workers (Romans 16:6, 12).8 Paul was very likely prohibiting the Ephesian women, not all women, from teaching. To understand these verses (Ephesians 2:9-15), we must understand the situation in which Paul and Timothy worked. In first-century Jewish culture, women were not allowed to study. When Paul said that women should learn in quietness and full submission, he was offering them an amazing new opportunity. Paul did not want the Ephesian women to teach because they didn't yet have enough knowledge or experience. The Ephesian church had a particular problem with false teachers. Evidently, the women were especially susceptible to the false teachings (2 Timothy 3:1-9), because they did not yet have enough Biblical knowledge to discern the truth. In addition, some women were apparently flaunting their new-found Christian freedom by wearing inappropriate clothing (1 Timothy 2:9). Paul was telling Timothy not to put anyone (in this case, women) into a position of leadership who was not yet mature in the faith (1 Timothy 3:6). The same principle applies to churches today.
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sexism.html#n16
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
It is distressing that natural disasters are often termed “acts of God” while no “credit” is given to God for years, decades, or even centuries of peaceful weather. God created the whole universe and the laws of nature (Genesis 1:1). Most natural disasters are a result of these laws at work. Hurricanes, typhoons, and tornados are the results of divergent weather patterns colliding. Earthquakes are the result of the earth’s plate structure shifting. A tsunami is caused by an underwater earthquake.
In much the same way that God allows evil people to commit evil acts, God allows the earth to reflect the consequences sin has had on creation.We can understand why natural disasters occur. What we do not understand is why God allows them to occur
God is good! Many amazing miracles occurred during the course of natural disasters that prevented even greater loss of life. Natural disasters cause millions of people to reevaluate their priorities in life. Hundreds of millions of dollars in aid is sent to help the people who are suffering. Christian ministries have the opportunity to help, minister, counsel, pray, and lead people to saving faith in Christ! God can, and does, bring great good out of terrible tragedies (Romans 8:28)
http://www.gotquestions.org/natural-disasters.html
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Why is it not a sin when god murders...er, "kills" innocent children?  The true tragedy is those 5 kids were each deprived of their one and only life.

So you think it better that the children survive, parent less, homeless, without food, and without a way to care for themselves? I prefer God's mercy in taking these children to heaven where there is no more suffering and pain.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

What can an atheist say to someone who believes god was justified in killing millions of people because he apparently "gave them a chance to repent"?  I think you're misled, and I don't see how your god is any different than Allah or any other wrath-filled deity that primitive man has come up with to explain the world.

So you think the people that God destroyed should have been left without judgment while burning their sons and daughters in sacrifices to other Gods?("You shall not behave thus toward the LORD your God, for every abominable act which the LORD hates they have done for their gods; for they even burn their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods. (Deuteronomy 12:31))

Or maybe you think homosexual gang rape and greed should go unpunished. Ezekiel 16:49 calls Sodom arrogant, overfed and unconcerned;they did not help the poor and needy.
Genesis 19:5 They called to Lot "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them"
The whole town saw the coming of strangers as a chance for homosexual gang rape. And Abraham asked God from a 50 count to a 10 count....if he found 10 righteous people in Sodom would God destroy it and God said no. No such 10 people existed. The few who were innocent were warned in time to flee so they would not suffer the judgment.

Also your list of scriptures that you try to portray as God being a merciless killer of innocents and children, you haven't studied the scriptures and biblical history.
one example you gave in 2Kings 2:23-24. The correct translation of the word "children" is originally used in a form of Hebrew that would indicate rather that they were young adults...they Mocked him — With great petulance and vehemency, as the word signifies; deriding both his person and ministry, and that from a profane contempt of the true religion, and a passionate love to that idolatry which they knew he opposed. Go up — Go up into heaven, whither thou pretendest Elijah is gone. Why didst not thou accompany thy friend and master to heaven? Bald-head - So they mock his natural infirmity, which is a great sin. The repetition shews their heartiness and earnestness, that it was no sudden slip of their tongue, but a scoff proceeding from a rooted impiety and hatred of God and his prophets.

What about what the woman wants in all of this?  It is still a FORCED MARRIAGE.  What if she didn't want anything to do with the ugly thug?  This is one of the many reasons Yahweh gets labeled as sexist.

Firstly ALL marriages were arranged in cultures represented in the bible.  The women of God's chosen people had more rights and consideration than the surrounding nations that worshiped idols. If you study the people of biblical times you will find this to be true. But I'm guessing you think the women should have been left alone to flee to another nation where she would be put into servitude and more probably prostitution, rather than have the conquering people offer her a home and marriage where she would be taken care of?? You're trying to take the society of today and supplant it into the cultures of people who lived in a completely different society. Thus God's instructions to his people on how women should be treated. His people were set apart to live holy lives and were set with strict instructions to make them different then the other nations of the world at the time.  But if you are looking for God to be evil in these scriptures then you haven't opened yourself to even the possibility that God is a loving God.

The book of Proverbs (which records the wisdom of Solomon) describes the ideal wife in its last chapter.14 She is, by no means, a weak woman who grovels at the feet of her husband. Instead, she takes charge over the care and needs of her family, and, in addition, the needs of the poor. She also manages her servants. In addition, she maintains her own business and from her own earnings buys land and plants vineyards. She is described as being wise, strong, and dignified, yet able to laugh. She is praised by her husband and children, who appreciate her hard work and commitment.

There are many strong women of the bible that God used...Deborah, Esther, Ruth. Jesus showed no domination over women but shocked his own disciples by even speaking to a woman (john 4:9)

In the book of Ephesians, this love is to be "just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her." Such a love is not one that dominates and subjugates another person, but a self-sacrificing love that will give up its own life for another's. Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her..Ephesians 5:25
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28)37

[queenofnines]

What we do not understand is why God allows them to occur  
God is good! Many amazing miracles occurred during the course of natural disasters that prevented even greater loss of life. Natural disasters cause millions of people to reevaluate their priorities in life. Hundreds of millions of dollars in aid is sent to help the people who are suffering. Christian ministries have the opportunity to help, minister, counsel, pray, and lead people to saving faith in Christ! God can, and does, bring great good out of terrible tragedies

Talk about tough love!  I heard Pat Robertson saying the same thing on The 700 Club: "There was a little girl who lost everything, her school was flooded away...praise Jesus that we can deliver aide to these people and show them Christian love."  I was like, Is he serious?!  God has to make things so freaking bad, because us scummy sinners simply wouldn't "get it" if there was less evil in the world??

So you think it better that the children survive, parent less, homeless, without food, and without a way to care for themselves?

So there were no compassionate people back in Biblical times who could have adopted these children?

So you think the people that God destroyed should have been left without judgment while burning their sons and daughters in sacrifices to other Gods?

I don't doubt that it happened; I do doubt that there is a god who was jealous about it.  As for people burning their kids...not cool...but this type of cruelty has been common throughout history for a variety of wacked reasons.  It's lessened today (at least in America) not because god has intervened to stop it, but because we've evolved as a people and realized that doing such barbaric things is not conducive to a happy, healthy society.

Also your list of scriptures that you try to portray as God being a merciless killer of innocents and children, you haven't studied the scriptures and biblical history.

No Scripture study is required for god's greatest flaw: hell.  This is what your godandscience website says:

"So why doesn't God make everyone into perfect beings and allow them all into heaven? It would actually be more cruel if God were to do this, since many people prefer hell to the alternative (complete submission to God)."

This is the biggest load of crock!  Many people prefer to be burned and tortured forever?!  Is this author sane??  No, I would NOT prefer to be burned and tortured forever, thanks (nevermind the little problem of how I will be able to feel pain without nerve endings, being dead and all).  If I really believed such a place existed, you can bet your communion wafer that I'd be next in line to kiss god's behind.  Because I'm not a masochist.  

"All the people who end up going to hell will have done so because they actually prefer hell to being forced into the presence of God for all eternity. People like to live in their favorite sins and answer to no one else. They know that if they accept Jesus as Lord and Savior that God will want them to change their lives and they might have to give up some of their autonomy."

Ugh, ugh, ugh.  Lies and propaganda galore right here.  What these sentences are essentially saying is that all people who reject god are drug-dealing, baby-killing, lying, stealing, raping sluts.  Or in shorthand: BAD people.  That's all you need to know, Christians.  An atheist might claim their lack of belief in god is due to insufficient evidence and common sense, but let's face it, that's really just code for: LET ME SIN!!!  

"At this time in history, there is more evidence demonstrating the existence of God than at any time in the past."

Quite the contrary.

"Although the gift is "free," it will cost you your sin, selfishness, and pride. Since none of these character traits are allowed into heaven, those who insist upon holding onto these traits cannot enter into heaven, but must be separated from God in a place called hell. Therefore, those who go to hell do so voluntarily, preferring hell to complete submission to a holy and just God."

More lies and lack of common sense.  I have some good videos on this "free gift" business:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Rwioe1SGkQ&videos=OxmtWfAVQeA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUtSM2oVy_E&videos=nwW9EDeluPQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGkgmU9vG_o&videos=IJUnLYU4KGg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urlTBBKTO68&videos=dHxwxxveNVk

[shernajwine]

God doesn't make things bad. He made the universe subject to physical laws and by these physical laws natural disasters occur, however through these natural disasters God is able to use it by sending people who love God to demonstrate the love of God through unselfish giving and aid. It is tough love and it is the purest and most honest love there is.

So you think it better that the children survive, parent less, homeless, without food, and without a way to care for themselves?

So there were no compassionate people back in Biblical times who could have adopted these children?

Firstly I was referring to current disasters such as the earthquake in Haiti. But as for adopting children instead of killing them in biblical times: (this is an example of the reason for the killing of children in the earlier referenced Numbers 31)  If the male children had been allowed to mature, they most likely would have followed the pagan ways of their forefathers, and eventually would have taken vengeance on the Israelites. Killing the males not only prevented them from falling into the same abominable sins as their parents, but also kept Israel from having to battle them later. http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/586


Once again, you are perceiving the death of children to be so cruel, because you are looking at it from your atheist point of view. Death is not the end of life according to Christians and therefore the killing of these children means they go where there is no pain, suffering, sadness, or sickness. If, even as an adult, I was warned of a disaster of extreme devastation and was told that I could either die or be left to try and survive through it..I would choose death because I believe death is only the end of my physical body not my spirit.

Secondly in applying adoption to the current world we live in there is approximately 130 million orphans in the world today.  Are you going to be compassionate enough to adopt one or more of them to keep them from suffering through "the one life they have?"

Many people prefer to be burned and tortured forever?!  Is this author sane??...If I really believed such a place existed, you can bet your communion wafer that I'd be next in line to kiss god's behind

I believe in the video you sent me to with the debate between Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort vs Rational Response, the woman named Kelly said (and I quote) "I would rather go to hell than go to heaven and worship a megalomaniacal tyrant."

So I think the key phrase in your comment is IF you believed such a place existed....well I do believe such a place exists and I think it would be unfair of God to take Kelly to heaven since she so obviously doesn't want to go there. Hell is not a flaw of God it is a place He will send people who reject Christ. Not people who are bad because we are all bad in the sense that we all sin....hell isn't a place for sinners, it is for people who reject Christ.

An atheist might claim their lack of belief in god is due to insufficient evidence and common sense

Romans 1:20
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
20 For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.New Living Translation

I think the lack of common sense falls on those that have put on blinders to the truth of God. Whatever you reasons you hold for not believing that God exists, is no excuse in light of this scripture.

Let's use some common sense right here:
"Unlikely things happen all the time." This is the mantra of the anti-design movement. However, there is an absolute physical limit for improbable events to happen in our universe. The universe contains only 1080 baryons and has only been around for 13.7 billion years (1018 sec). Since the smallest unit of time is Planck time (10-45 sec),5 the lowest probability event that can ever happen in the history of the universe is:

1080 x 1018 x 1045 =10143

So, although it would be possible that one or two constants might require unusual fine-tuning by chance, it would be virtually impossible that all of them would require such fine-tuning. Some physicists have indicated that any of a number of different physical laws would be compatible with our present universe. However, it is not just the current state of the universe that must be compatible with the physical laws. Even more stringent are the initial conditions of the universe, since even minor deviations would have completely disrupted the process. For example, adding a grain of sand to the weight of the universe now would have no effect. However, adding even this small amount of weight at the beginning of the universe would have resulted in its collapse early in its history.

Even though many atheists would like to dismiss such evidence of design, cosmologists know better, and have made statements such as the following, which reveal the depth of the problem for the atheistic worldview:

    * "This type of universe, however, seems to require a degree of fine-tuning of the initial conditions that is in apparent conflict with 'common wisdom'."6
    * "Polarization is predicted. It's been detected and it's in line with theoretical predictions. We're stuck with this preposterous universe."7
    * "In all of these worlds statistically miraculous (but not impossible) events would be necessary to assemble and preserve the fragile nuclei that would ordinarily be destroyed by the higher temperatures. However, although each of the corresponding histories is extremely unlikely, there are so many more of them than those that evolve without "miracles," that they would vastly dominate the livable universes that would be created by Poincare recurrences. We are forced to conclude that in a recurrent world like de Sitter space our universe would be extraordinarily unlikely."8

The newest "solution" to design in the universe is a belief in the multi-universe theory
What scientific evidence exists to support the multiverse model? None! Not only is there no evidence, the physics of our own universe requires that we will never be able to obtain any evidence about any other universe (even if it does exist). Even secular websites admit that such ideas amount to nothing more than unfalsifiable metaphysics:

    "Appeals to multiple or "parallel" cosmoses or to an infinite number of cosmic "Big Bang/Crunch" oscillations as essential elements of proposed mechanisms are not acceptable in submissions due to a lack of empirical correlation and testability. Such beliefs are without hard physical evidence and must therefore be considered unfalsifiable, currently outside the methodology of scientific investigation to confirm or disprove, and therefore more mathematically theoretical and metaphysical than scientific in nature. Recent cosmological evidence also suggests insufficient mass for gravity to reverse continuing cosmic expansion. The best cosmological evidence thus far suggests the cosmos is finite rather than infinite in age."10
godandscience.org

Evolutionary Scientists try to explain the origin of life and the universe by the most difficult calculations and the most complicated theories....you used the term Occams Razor....I'll use it here.  The simplest solution the design vs evolution theory is....design.

No more excuses.

It's lessened today (at least in America) not because god has intervened to stop it, but because we've evolved as a people and realized that doing such barbaric things is not conducive to a happy, healthy society.

Well, of course it is probably pointless to mention that there is approximately 2.1 billion confessed christians in the world and the United States being one of the countries with the most christians??