If the Christian God is good, why did he kill so many people? Does this make him evil? - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!


The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

If the Christian God is good, why did he kill so many people? Does this make him evil?

Opening Argument

PoguePogue 472 Pts
First let's start with the definition that we need.
Good- something that is morally right
The Bible states he created good and evil so they sort of even eachother out so let's look at God's actions. 
I hope we all can agree that killing innocent people is wrong. If we can, why did he do it?
Here are some of the times he killed people (credit to http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2010/04/drunk-with-blood-gods-killings-in-bible.html): 
Killing EventReferenceBible's NumberEstimate
1The Flood of NoahGen 7:2320,000,000
2Abraham's war to rescue LotGen 14:17-191,000
3Sodom and GomorrahGen 19:242,000
4Lot's wifeGen 19:2611
5While they were sore, Dinah's brethren slew all the malesGen 34:1-31Judith 9:2-321,000
6Er for being wicked in the sight of the LordGen 38:711
7Onan for spilling his seedGen 38:1011
8A seven year worldwide famineGen 41:25-5470,000
9There will be blood: The first plague of EgyptEx 7:15-27 , Wis 11:7-810,000
10The seventh plague: hailEx 9:25300,000
11Firstborn Egyptian childrenEx 12:29-30500,000
12The Lord took off their chariot wheelsEx 14:8-266005,000
13AmalekitesEx 17:131,000
14Who is on the Lord's side?: Forcing friends and family to kill each otherEx 32:27-283,0003,000
15Aaron's golden calfEx 32:351,000
16God burns Aaron's sons to death for offering "strange fire"Lev 10:1-322
17A blasphemer is stoned to deathLev 24:10-2311
18When the people complained, God burned them to deathNum 11:1100
19While the flesh was still between their teeth, the Lord smote them will a very great plagueNum 11:3310,000
20Ten scouts are killed for their honest reportNum 14:35-4510110
21A man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day is stoned to deathNum 15:32-3511
22Korah, his companions, and their families are buried aliveNum 16:2739
23God burns 250 people to death for burning incenseNum 16:35250250
24God kills 14,700 for complaining about God's killingsNum 16:4914,70014,700
25The massacre of the AradiesNum 21:1-23,000
26God sent serpents to bite people for complaining about the lack of food and waterNum 21:6100
27Phineas's double murder: A killing to end God's killingNum 25:1-1124,00224,002
28The Midianite massacre: Have ye saved all the women alive?Num 31:1-356200,000
29God slowly killed the Israelite armyDt 2:14-16500,000
30God the giant killerDt 2:21-225,000
31God hardens King Sihon's heart so all his people can be killedDt 2:33-3415,000
32Og and all the men women, and children in 60 citiesDt 3:6160,000
33The Jericho massacreJos 6:211,000
34Achan and his familyJos 7:10-2615
35The Ai massacreJos 8:1-2512,00012,000
36God stops the sun so Joshua can get his killing done in the daylightJos 10:10-115,000
37Five kings killed and hung on treesJos 10:26510,000
38Joshua utterly destroyed all that breathed as the Lord commandedJos 10:28-4277,000
39The genocide of twenty cities: There was not any left to breatheJos 11:8-12220,000
40The Anakim: some more giant killingJos 11:20-215,000
41The Lord delivered the Canaanites and PerizzitesJg 1:410,00010,000
42The Jerusalem massacreJg 1:81,000
43Five massacres, a wedding, and God-proof iron chariotsJg 1:9-255,000
44The Lord delivered ChushanrishathaimJg 3:7-1011,000
45Ehud delivers a message from GodJg 3:15-2211
46God delivers 10,000 lusty MoabitesJg 3:28-2910,00010,000
47Shamgar killed 600 Philistines with an ox goadJg 3:31600600
48Barak and God massacre the CanaanitesJg 4:15-161,000
49Jael pounds a tent stake through a sleeping man's skullJg 4:18-2211
50Gideon's story: The Lord set every man's sword against his fellowJg 7:22120,000120,000
BaconToeswith_all_humility
I could either have the future pass me or l could create it. 

“We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” - Benjamin Franklin  So flat Earthers, man-made climate change deniers, and just science deniers.

I friended myself! 



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
33%
Margin

Details +


Status: Open Debate


Arguments

  • I think it's good to kill good people in Christianity as you ensure they go to heaven and don't live to screw up their karma and end in hell. Killing people currently toy in negative karma is evil for the inverse reason.

    Yeah, I don't entirely understand Christianity.
    BaconToes
    Be tomorrow's hero, not today's idol.
  • PoguePogue 472 Pts
    edited April 14
    I think it's good to kill good people in Christianity as you ensure they go to heaven and don't live to screw up their karma and end in hell. Killing people currently toy in negative karma is evil for the inverse reason.

    Yeah, I don't entirely understand Christianity.
    I also don't "understand" it. 

    @with_all_humility What is fallacious (what fallacy) about the opening argument? 
    I could either have the future pass me or l could create it. 

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” - Benjamin Franklin  So flat Earthers, man-made climate change deniers, and just science deniers.

    I friended myself! 
  • The fact is, have you considered the actions of the people leading up to such events. In the events of the flood, the people except for Noah were blasphemous and distasteful in the eyes of God, and to a point, so God did not kill them just because, it was because they refused to accept him and his blessings, and would not have changed their views. God does everything for a purpose, and it is important to know the context of the situation before making a judgement that every killing was wrong. 
    A good debate is not judged by bias, but in the context of the debate, where objectivity is key and rationale prevalent. 
  • PoguePogue 472 Pts
    The fact is, have you considered the actions of the people leading up to such events. In the events of the flood, the people except for Noah were blasphemous and distasteful in the eyes of God, and to a point, so God did not kill them just because, it was because they refused to accept him and his blessings, and would not have changed their views. God does everything for a purpose, and it is important to know the context of the situation before making a judgement that every killing was wrong. 
    Yes. 
    Blessing? What blessing?
    I think everyone does something for a purpose. If everything he does is justified and ok, why did he kill 14,700 killed for complaining about God's killings? What about when he killed 250 people for burning incense? How about when he 50,070 killed for looking into the ark of the Lord? Just because God deems it distasteful doesn't mean it is!
    I could either have the future pass me or l could create it. 

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” - Benjamin Franklin  So flat Earthers, man-made climate change deniers, and just science deniers.

    I friended myself! 
  • Pogue said:
    The fact is, have you considered the actions of the people leading up to such events. In the events of the flood, the people except for Noah were blasphemous and distasteful in the eyes of God, and to a point, so God did not kill them just because, it was because they refused to accept him and his blessings, and would not have changed their views. God does everything for a purpose, and it is important to know the context of the situation before making a judgement that every killing was wrong. 
    Yes. 
    Blessing? What blessing?
    I think everyone does something for a purpose. If everything he does is justified and ok, why did he kill 14,700 killed for complaining about God's killings? What about when he killed 250 people for burning incense? How about when he 50,070 killed for looking into the ark of the Lord? Just because God deems it distasteful doesn't mean it is!
    God has a plan that he sets out for ourselves to complete and fulfill, and in the instance with the flood, the people had disregarded God in every way/shape/form, but keep in mind, God promised that he would never cause such a flood or worldwide disaster. Besides, we can not call God's actions wrong because God is a divine being and we are natural creatures. We are not in a position to judge God's actions, and there are multiple instances in the Bible were Jesus rebukes people for judging God's actions, perhaps notably in Working on Sundays, the Curing in the Temple, and the Wedding Feast parable. 

    Also, you should use Biblical terms and not some estimate, because the estimate could be whatever I want it to be, whereas the Bible gives clear cut answers. 
    A good debate is not judged by bias, but in the context of the debate, where objectivity is key and rationale prevalent. 
  • PoguePogue 472 Pts
    Pogue said:
    The fact is, have you considered the actions of the people leading up to such events. In the events of the flood, the people except for Noah were blasphemous and distasteful in the eyes of God, and to a point, so God did not kill them just because, it was because they refused to accept him and his blessings, and would not have changed their views. God does everything for a purpose, and it is important to know the context of the situation before making a judgement that every killing was wrong. 
    Yes. 
    Blessing? What blessing?
    I think everyone does something for a purpose. If everything he does is justified and ok, why did he kill 14,700 killed for complaining about God's killings? What about when he killed 250 people for burning incense? How about when he 50,070 killed for looking into the ark of the Lord? Just because God deems it distasteful doesn't mean it is!
    God has a plan that he sets out for ourselves to complete and fulfill, and in the instance with the flood, the people had disregarded God in every way/shape/form, but keep in mind, God promised that he would never cause such a flood or worldwide disaster. Besides, we can not call God's actions wrong because God is a divine being and we are natural creatures. We are not in a position to judge God's actions, and there are multiple instances in the Bible were Jesus rebukes people for judging God's actions, perhaps notably in Working on Sundays, the Curing in the Temple, and the Wedding Feast parable. 

    Also, you should use Biblical terms and not some estimate, because the estimate could be whatever I want it to be, whereas the Bible gives clear cut answers. 
    Why can't we judge his actions? If anything stands up to criticism, it is likely true. God made us this way anyway. The chart uses estimates if the Bible did not say how many were killed.
    I could either have the future pass me or l could create it. 

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” - Benjamin Franklin  So flat Earthers, man-made climate change deniers, and just science deniers.

    I friended myself! 
  • edited April 16
    @Pogue

    I don't believe to ask why God did something is wrong, that is seeking to understand.  But to judge God would be considered blasphemy.  Most people believe the word blasphemy to mean taking the Lord's name in vain, using His name as a curse word.  However, blasphemy has a much deep definition as well, when you judge or deem God's commandments to be unfitting for you or mankind.  You have elevated yourself to His level or higher, this is also considered blasphemy.  Sometimes we want to believe that the Bible is democratic like our modern society, however, it is far from being a democracy, it is more of an autocracy.

    So, one is to show reverence in addressing God and His judgments, commandments, and actions.  Just so you know why some pushback on certain terminology.  It's not to say we are to have a "blind" faith as well, to have a blind faith in God is just as wrong.
    WilliamSchulz
  • I think it's good to kill good people in Christianity as you ensure they go to heaven and don't live to screw up their karma and end in hell. Killing people currently toy in negative karma is evil for the inverse reason.

    Yeah, I don't entirely understand Christianity.
    Actually, those recorded events took place under Old Testament times, not during the New Testament.  There was a purpose for this, but I just want to quickly point out the events cited above have nothing to do with Christianity.  It is the same God, but as I wll explain in a separate post there was a reason for this.  
  • The premise is:

    First, let's start with the definition that we need.
    Good- something that is morally right
    The Bible states he created good and evil so they sort of even each other out so let's look at God's actions. 
    I hope we all can agree that killing innocent people is wrong. If we can, why did he do it?

    We need to further define what is moral if the definition is simply something that is good.  Then you don't have morality, you have subjectivity. Because what is good for one person may not be good for another.  Morality is a guiding principle that resulting in objective goodness.  To have objective goodness a moral must be timeless (transcending),  demands accountability, precedes humanity and is value adding to human life.  If we remove any one of the four criteria, you no longer have a moral. [1]

    Transcending: First, goodness entails a moral authority which crosses all times, places, and cultures. Must have a standard. People groups can’t make up their own values. Instead, value applies to all people regardless of what anyone thinks about it.  That’s what philosophers mean by “mind-independent.” The Nazis can’t be justified in doing what they did no matter how many people agreed with it.  Instead, goodness must extend beyond the individual mind or community consensus to be the standard by which ALL people and cultures are compared. The value inherent in objective goodness must transcend humanity in this way.

    Preceding:  Second, goodness cannot have been invented by the first humans. After all, any values established by man can be later undone by men. [2] It would be absurd to think the first humans could come up with whatever value system they wanted because they were first on the scene.  It doesn’t take much effort to see the advantage of lying or stealing as virtues. No, that isn’t an option available to us. Goodness wasn’t invented. It was already there. (Consider Romans 1.28-29)
    • Romans 1.28-29:  And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them
    Holding Accountable:  Third, there is no objective goodness if evil goes unpunished. In other words, where there’s no justice, there’s no injustice. When people are allowed to do bad things without any consequences, there is no justice. Objective goodness demands justice. But there’s not always justice in this world. 

    • In a purely natural world with no accountability for all people, there’s no justice for all people. If there’s no justice for all people, there’s no justice at all. If that’s not good, then goodness must include universal human accountability and chaos may ensue 

    Value Giving:  Fourth, objective goodness must include the intrinsic value inherent in all human life.  By intrinsic, I mean they all have equal worth just for being part of the species and not for any act, experience, or attribute they have or lack.  It would make no sense to violate the rights of a human being if they aren’t valued in the first place. Evil and suffering experienced by humans only makes sense if the species has worth beyond itself and that their value is an objective fact of reality

    The second argument - The Bible states he created good and evil so they sort of even each other out so let's look at God's actions. 

    This premise is based on King James Version of Isaiah 45.7, where it states..."I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things."  Many would like for the word evil in this verse to mean 

    1. profoundly immoral and malevolent.
      "his evil deeds" · 
      synonyms: wicked · bad · wrong · morally wrong · wrongful · immoral · sinful [3]

    However, there is evidence to the contrary.  More modern versions of Isaiah have translated the verse as...

    We can also examine the original Hebrew meaning from a lexicon. 

    7451.  רַע raʿ, rah; from 7489; bad or (as noun) evil (nat. or mor.):—adversity, affliction, bad, calamity, + displease (-ure), distress, evil ([-favouredness], man, thing), + exceedingly, × great, grief (-vous), harm, heavy, hurt (-ful), ill (favoured). + mark, mischief (-vous), misery, naught (-ty), noisome, + not please, sad (-ly), sore, sorrow, trouble, vex, wicked (-ly, -ness, one), worse (-st), wretchedness, wrong. [4]

    Notice how the "Evil" connotation carries either a natural event or an evil man/thing. If we go a little further in-depth and evaluate the sense of the word we find...


    Two things to be noted from the Bible Sense Lexicon: 1) the sense of the word is an event resulting in loss or misfortune. 2) Looking to the arrow we find Isa 31.2 has the same Hebrew word with the same sense.




    Notice from both Isa 32.1 and 45.7 both verses have the same Hebrew word רַע raʿrah; and they both carry the same sense of the word.  One is interpreted as a calamity and the other a disaster.  If we look at the entire verse of Ish 31.2 we find the word evildoer or doer of evil.  

    Isaiah 31.2"  Yet He also is wise and will bring disaster, and will not call back His words, but will arise against the house of evildoers, and against the help of those who work iniquity.[5]



    Now we can see how רַע raʿrah; is used to mean a natural event/misfortune and רָעַע râʿaʿ, raw-ah´; is a doer of evil.  Now let's evaluate the sense of the word.

     

    Here we can see the Hebrew word that denotes one who does evil.  So, the only logical conclusion is Isa 45.7 does not carry the idea that God is a creator of evil or a doer of evil as thought of in our modern English definition and usage of the word evil.

    Evil can be thought of as the absence of good, just as darkness is the absence of light.  Let's evaluate some verses that testify to God's goodness. 

    • Genesis 1:31  And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.
    • Psalm 100:5  For the LORD is good; his steadfast love endures forever, and his faithfulness to all generations.
    • Luke 18:19  And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.
    • Romans 12:2  Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.

    A verse that testifies to God not being associated with evilness, sin, or wrongdoings.

    • Psalms 5:4  For You are not a God who takes pleasure in wickedness, Nor shall evil dwell with You.
    Recall that there is no morality without accountability.  Just as in modern times, why have a law if the law is not going to be enforced?  Here are some verses that speak to God hold mankind accountable.  
    • Ecclesiastes 12:14:  For God will bring every work into judgment, Including every secret thing, Whether good or evil.
    • Amos 5:14-15:  Seek good and not evil, that you may live; So, the LORD God of hosts will be with you, as you have spoken.  Hate evil, love good; Establish justice in the gate. It may be that the LORD God of hosts Will be gracious to the remnant of Joseph.
    • Romans 13:4:  For he is God's minister to you for goodBut if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.
    • James 1:13-14:  Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am tempted by God"; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone.  But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed.
    • 1Peter 3:17:  For it is better if it is the will of God, to suffer for doing good than for doing evil.
    • Romans 6:23:  For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

    The book of Hebrews reveals that Old Testament events served as a Copy for the Shadows of things to come.  In other words, physical Israel served as a copy of what happens in the Spiritual realm or what is know as Spiritual Israel in the Christian age (shadow). 

    • Hebrews 8.2-7: a minister in the holy places, in the true tent that the Lord set up, not man. For every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices; thus it is necessary for this priest also to have something to offer. Now if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, since there are priests who offer gifts according to the law. They serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things. For when Moses was about to erect the tent, he was instructed by God, saying, “See that you make everything according to the pattern that was shown you on the mountain.” But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second.[6] 

    Taking the totality of what we've revealed to this point we know God is not evil, the events recorded in the Old Testament are there for our learning so we may understand how our physical actions impact our spiritual wellbeing.  We also know that morals must entail accountability, be of a standard that transcends all of humanity, precedes humanity and have an intrinsic value for human life.  Eliminating anyone factor leaves mankind with an unstable opinion that relies on one's own perspective and may result in a conundrum of what might be good for one, may not be good for another.  

    I will stop my rebuttal of the premise for now and address the events state below from the author of the source material in the premise.  The author claims the examples to be the hardest to answer in proving God as not being an immoral entity. I will not have time rebut all 50 events listed, but to prove that all the events can be refuted as not being immoral acts of God, you can send me a message and let me know which event(s) you would perfer to be argued.  

    Author's List: Such examples are bears mauling 42 children, Jephthah sacrificing his daughter, God killing King David's child to punish David, God inflicting thousands if not millions of civilians with tumors, Moses' army killing women and children, etc.[7]


    [1] http://pleaseconvinceme.com/2017/debating-atheists-arrival-of-evil/ ;
    [2] Gregory Koukl, The Story of Reality, p73 
    [3] https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/evil
    [4]  Strong, J. (2009). A Concise Dictionary of the Words in the Greek Testament and The Hebrew Bible (Vol. 2, p. 109). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
    [5]The New King James Version. (1982). (Is 31:2). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.
    [6] The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. (2016). (Heb 8:2–7). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.
    [7] http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2010/04/drunk-with-blood-gods-killings-in-bible.html  
    WilliamSchulz
  • In the events of the flood, the people except for Noah were blasphemous and distasteful in the eyes of God, and to a point, so God did not kill them just because, it was because they refused to accept him and his blessings, and would not have changed their views. God does everything for a purpose, and it is important to know the context of the situation before making a judgement that every killing was wrong. 
    Oh Jesus(haha, I am blasphemous), if they didn't accept God when he** showed himself** to them, why would we be accepting him**?(btw, still waiting for evidence on God).
    I swear to God*, if he** pops up anytime in my life time, and I am deemed mentally sane, I would believe in him(i mean, who wouldn't?)

    *assuming he/she/it/they/per/ve/xe/ze/ey exists.
    **Other pronouns apply too, she/it/they/per/ve/xe/ze/ey

    Fist Bump = Borderline assault with your fist
    Informative= Not bothering to read your 500-word essay
    Funny= Idiotic comment
  • BaconToes said:
    In the events of the flood, the people except for Noah were blasphemous and distasteful in the eyes of God, and to a point, so God did not kill them just because, it was because they refused to accept him and his blessings, and would not have changed their views. God does everything for a purpose, and it is important to know the context of the situation before making a judgement that every killing was wrong. 
    Oh Jesus(haha, I am blasphemous), if they didn't accept God when he** showed himself** to them, why would we be accepting him**?(btw, still waiting for evidence on God).
    I swear to God*, if he** pops up anytime in my life time, and I am deemed mentally sane, I would believe in him(i mean, who wouldn't?)

    *assuming he/she/it/they/per/ve/xe/ze/ey exists.
    **Other pronouns apply too, she/it/they/per/ve/xe/ze/ey

    You will be waiting as long as I will be to see a dust of the earth become a living organism.   :grin:

    Also, I'm not sure if I buy Shulz's argument either, he is making an assumption that people rejected God during the time of Noah.  However, the Bible actually teach to the contrary.  

    The Bible is divided into three time periods of Law instituted by God.  The Patriarchal Dispensation, The Mosaic Dispensation, and Christian Age.  The Bible never clearly states what the requirements of the Patriarchal Law were during that time period.  We have the recorded law given to Moses as well as what some call the law of the prophets (which was the same requirements as the Mosaic Law) and the New Testament Law.  Nothing is revealed for the period before the time of the flood.


    As for the destruction of civilization during the time of Noah we are told. Gen 6:3  And the LORD said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years."  To be of the flesh is to be corrupt/immoral/sinner consider the following verses. 
    • 1Corinthians 15:50  Now this I say, brethren, that flesh, and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption.
    • Rom 8:8  So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God
    • Rom 8:13  For if you live according to the flesh you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.
    Notice God gave man a period of 100 years to stop their wickedness. Durning this period Peter tells us, Noah, preached to those of the time to get the wicked to repent of their wicked ways.
    • 1 Peter 2.19-20:  by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. [1]
    • I. God’s resolution not always to strive with man by his Spirit. The Spirit then strove by Noah’s preaching (1 Pt. 3:19, 20) and by inward checks, but it was in vain with the most of men; therefore, says God, He shall not always strive [2]

    Gen 6:5 Verse 5 records the consequence of v. 1–4: the Lord “saw” and condemned the unprecedented corruption of the human family. Here is an intentional mimicry of the sons of God, who “saw” that the daughters of men were “beautiful” (tôb, “good”; 6:2). The wording in vv. 2 and 5 contrasts this deplorable scene with the pristine setting of creation. God “saw” his creation and evaluated his handiwork as “very good” (tôb mĕʾōd, 1:31), but here the sons of God have taken the “good” (“beautiful”) and defiled it. This is reinforced by the play between man’s “great (rabbâ) wickedness” (v. 5) and human “increase in number” (lārōb; v. 2). It serves as a sad commentary on the divine command at creation to “increase in number” (rābû, 1:28). The blessing of reproduction is realized in v. 2 by the grace of God, but humanity has distorted God’s plan and reaped along with their progeny a harvest of sin.

    Verse 5, therefore, accentuates the decadence of the period: “how great man’s wickedness,” “every inclination,” and “only evil all the time.” Whereas human society deems these violent gibbōrîm as “men of renown,” God’s response is repulsion at their wickedness. So monstrous becomes the sin of Noah’s generation that the gravest of measures is the only proper response from heaven. The recurring phrase “on the earth” (vv. 5–7) anticipates the necessary purging of the now-polluted land by the waters of the flood (v. 13), and it also is reminiscent of the ground stained by Abel’s blood, which resulted in Cain’s life as a vagabond “on the earth” (4:12). But there would be no mercy for the murdering gibbōrîm as there had been for evil Cain.

    Wickedness is an inner compulsion that dominates their thoughts and is not just overt action; they plot evil as a matter of lifestyle. Our phrase “inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil” is similar to God’s utterance after the flood (8:21), where sin is attributed to humanity from his youth. The flood does not change the essential sinful character of the human heart, but it does exact justice and rescue the lone remnant of a blessed lineage.[3]

    The evidence given in the scriptures is that the world was destroyed due to the corruptness or the unrighteousness of mankind.  There's no evidence that God destroyed the world just because man rejected Him.

    There has only been two recorded laws or testaments given to mankind.  The Mosaic and Christ's/New Testament Law; the book Hebrews states the first was made obsolete.  

    • Heb 8:13:  In that, He says, "A NEW COVENANT," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.
    In the book of Romans, it states the Gentiles were under a different law, separate and apart from the Law of Moses.
    • Rom 2:12-16:  For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves, their thoughts accusing or else excusing them)  in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.

    This speaks to the moral conscience that is imprinted in every human's brain since the casting out of Adam and Eve from the garden.  There are studies that conclude babies as young as 3 months old can distinguish good from evil. [4]


    I believe the evidence points to the reason God destroyed the inhabitants of the world as a result of the Genesis flood is that mankind at the time violated the natural moral law spoken of in Romans 2 and revealed in phycology studies today with infants.  Thus rendering William Schulz conclusions to be invalid.  



    [1]  The New King James Version. (1982). (1 Pe 3:19–22). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

    [2]  Henry, M. (1994). Matthew Henry’s commentary on the whole Bible: complete and unabridged in one volume (p. 22). Peabody: Hendrickson.

    [3]  Mathews, K. A. (1996). Genesis 1-11:26 (Vol. 1A, pp. 340–341). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

    [4] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/are-babies-born-good-165443013/  



  • Elisha Is Jeered, the Maulling of 42 Boys

    2 Kings 2.23-24

    v23 From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldly!” they said. “Get out of here, baldly!” v24 He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.

    A little bit of context so you can understand more of what going on here.  One of the Godliest prophets of the Bible was Elijah, he was such a good servant of God's, that Jehovah told him he would not suffer death. Elijah is one of two men who perhaps never died not that they were immortal, God just took them to paradise (and that's a maybe), we're not told exactly where God took them to. It was not heaven, because Christ tells us in the NT no man has ever been to heaven. Paradise is referred to being part of Hades the unseen realm of the dead. (Read Luke 16.19-31 from more on Hades.) The first man was Enoch, who was a descendant of Adam through Adam's son Seth. We don't know anything about Enoch other than Genesis 5.24: And Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him. That's it that's all we're told about Enoch.  We are not really told why God took Elijah either, in 2 Kings 2.11 is says "Then it happened, as they continued on and talked, that suddenly a chariot of fire appeared with horses of fire and separated the two of them"[1]

    You're probably starting to wonder what does this have to with bears and boys.  Well, Elisha was Elijah's successor to be a prophet of the Lord. Picking up in 2 Kings 2.13-14: And he took up the cloak of Elijah that had fallen from him and went back and stood on the bank of the Jordan. Then he took the cloak of Elijah that had fallen from him and struck the water, saying, “Where is the Lord, the God of Elijah?” And when he had struck the water, the water was parted to the one side and to the other, and Elisha went over. What this tells Elisha is that while Elijah is gone, God is not, He is still with him. The prophets who witness the whole scene understand that Elijah’s spirit, the spirit of zeal and power, now rests on Elisha. In v16-18 Apparently there was still some doubt about whether Elisha could really replace Elijah, though it seems that he has at least laid claim to the status once reserved for Elijah among the company of the prophets

    2 Kings 2.19-22 A second miracle reveals Elisha’s prominence to the men of Jericho. The city’s water supply is bad, which renders the land as “unproductive” or barren. Elisha purifies the water while performing a ritual involving salt. Use of salt most likely symbolized a break with the past, such as was declared when offerings were made holy by the rubbing of salt (Lev 2.13; Num 18.19; Eze 43.24). The fact that Elisha declares the water healed because of God’s word indicates that no magic has occurred. Rather, the prophet has demonstrated the importance of the event through the use of a symbolic act and has then relayed a message concerning God’s will on the matter. Two groups have now seen evidence of Elisha’s special status.

    2 Kings 2.23–25 With the ascent to Bethel the journey of Elisha is taken a step further. He is now retracing the steps both he and Elijah took earlier in the chapter and we see a third, less respectful group learns of Elisha’s power. Some young boys from Bethel come out of the town to mock and jeer at the prophet. These boys parallel the soldiers in 1 Kings 1.9–12 who order Elijah to come with them, for both groups seem to lack respect for the prophets’ authority and position. The specific insult cast at Elijah is, “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!” Elijah was said to be a very harry man (2 Kings 1.8); so this phrase may refer to some physical marking Elisha took on or to a literal baldness, since artificial baldness was legislated against in Israel (Deuteronomy 14.1), making Elisha’s condition was a natural one.  Either way, the insult was directed specifically at Elisha as a prophet and therefore at the Lord whom he represented. The "jeering" or rude attitude of “Go on up!” may be a reference to Elijah’s translation, with the sense of “Go away like Elijah,” perhaps spoken in “scornful disbelief.”

    Elisha pronounces a swift curse on the group of boys, and bears maul forty-two of the boys. This punishment comes as a punishment of the Lord, in whose name the curse was offered (look at Leviticus 26:21–22). The youths were typical of a nation that, “Mocked God’s messengers, despised his words and scoffed at his prophets” (2 Chronicles 36:16). Some commentators think this story was originally meant “to frighten the young into respect for their reverend elders,” while others believe the account is legendary and represents the worst notions of certain prophetic circles. Others believe that the account demonstrates Elisha’s “effective use of the name of Yahweh” and his role as new “father” of the prophets. It is also true that the scornful have discovered Elisha is no more to be trifled with than Elijah was. Three groups of characters are now aware of Elisha’s prominence. Others have yet to learn this fact, however, so further miracles may be required.

    This final story in the chapter raises some serious questions which are not answered by the author. The death of forty-two boys is hardly to be seen as a characteristic prophetic activity. Suffice it to say that, like the events of Elijah and the soldiers of Ahaziah, this incident is characterized by excess.  Like in 2 Samuel 6.6-7, a man is killed instantly for trying to catch the arc of the covenant when it starts to fall off the cart. 

    Concluding to ridicule a sacred prophet of God’s must have been rewarded by the harshest of punishments. Because in ridiculing the representative of Jehovah’s was in essence to mock and ridicule Jehovah Himself.  The incident is also reminder of 1 Kings 13:20–24 and 20:35–36.

    I know this was long but wanted to thoroughly explain the reason for events that unfolded. 

     

     

    [1] The New King James Version. (1982). (2 Ki 2:11). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2018 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch