Originally Posted by DBT

Then you should be grateful that it isn't.

Originally Posted by Darklighter

Hello, I’m still new here so I apologize if this has been discussed before. But here goes…

I’m well aware of the fact that many Christians are ditching the traditional hellfire doctrine (i.e. eternal torment), since it obviously doesn’t jibe with the ‘fact’ that “God is love.” I too have held that rationalization. It just does not make sense that a loving God could torture an individual for an eternity, regardless of their crimes. That said, how long would a loving god torture someone?

I ask because of the account of the she-bears at 2 Kings 2:23, 24. I recently saw a very disturbing viral e-mail video of a lion attacking and then EATING an idiot tourist who got too close. Although he was obviously being stupid, I obviously felt really bad for him and his family (who were forced to watch the whole thing). It was not a quick death. It was long, bloody, and obviously painful (thankfully much of it was censored). This is the kind of death I would not wish on my WORST enemies. Yet, God saw fit to have 42 children die exactly this type of death for calling a prophet “you bald-head.” (One side note: Elisha “called down evil upon them” and God killed them, yet Jesus stopped 2 of his apostles from “calling down evil” upon a crowd of [likely] ADULTS that were harassing them. Inconsistent, much?) Again these were CHILDREN. Why not just zap them out of existence? Why torture them for a few minutes? Why subject them to one of the most agonizing deaths imaginable? Couple this with the several times that the Israelites were commanded to kill the babies of their enemies. Christians react with sadness and horror the account of Pharaoh ordering the deaths of all male Hebrew children, yet react in ‘righteous admiration’ of God’s justice when the Israelites were commanded to do the same thing!!!

I can’t remember off-hand the scripture where it says it, but, it supposedly never occurred to God to demand/accept the sacrifice of children (let’s pretend the Abraham/Isaac account never happened, oh, and lest we forget Jephtha’s daughter). But apparently the sacrifice of children is a good thing in God’s eyes as long as it’s not done in a “formal” way. How do you reconcile this with God’s love? Please I’m dieing to know.

I would like to end this post with an appropriate question: If God (and you were sure it was him) appeared to you and told you to kill your neighbor’s infant son, would you do it? Why? Please do not respond to the above without briefly addressing this question.

Originally Posted by Robert Byers

Abraham call to sacrifice his son was a test of his faith. Abraham knew that even if he killed his son that God would raise him from the dead.
Rob Byers

Originally Posted by Robert Byers

Only a fool wouldn't do what God tells him to do.
These children are just small adults. They choose to do evil and rightly were punished. They did not just hate a man but someone they knew was from God so they hated God.

Abraham call to sacrifice his son was a test of his faith. Abraham knew that even if he killed his son that God would raise him from the dead.
Rob Byers

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Well, to be fair, these stories are not really that bad.

Originally Posted by Malachi151

If you think of them as having something to do with some imagined god, then yeah, its sounds like a horrible god.

When you simply acknowledge that they are ancient stories written by people who lived in a very violent world thousands of years ago, it is really to be expected, and indeed the Jewish scriptures are actually very moderate compared to literature from comparable times.

A lot of people, for example, complain about the story of Abraham and Isaac, talking about how horrible a god is that would tell someone to sacrifice his child.

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Well, that's a stupid way to even understand the story.

The story is very likely a tale about the end of human sacrifice among the Semitic people. Human sacrifice was widely practiced by ancient people around the world, including in Mesopotamia. Even the Greeks and Romans were practicing ritual human sacrifice over a thousand years after the Jews likely stopped.

The story was clearly meant to tell people that human sacrifice was no longer needed or acceptable.

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Trying to criticize stories from 3,000 - 2,000 years ago based on modern moral standards is pretty absurd really, especially when you put them in context. I mean when the Gospels were being written the Romans, the most civilized people, were killing thousands of people a year, in some cases hundreds a day, in spectator sport.

Unfortunately, however, it is Christian literalism and the claim that this stuff was "authored by God" that even makes this stuff an issue.

The real fact is that by Christians claiming that the Bible is the timeless word of God, they do more harm to the credibility and beauty of the scritpures than anyone. It is very easy to appreciate the scritpures as works of ancient men. It is impossible to appreciate them as the works of a god.

Originally Posted by Robert Byers

Only a fool wouldn't do what God tells him to do.

Originally Posted by Robert Byers

These children are just small adults. They choose to do evil and rightly were punished. They did not just hate a man but someone they knew was from God so they hated God.

Abraham call to sacrifice his son was a test of his faith. Abraham knew that even if he killed his son that God would raise him from the dead.
Rob Byers

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

In a way, this falls into questions like "Can God create a rock so heavy that He can't lift it?" and other logically impossible scenarios. Can an omnipotent God do the "undoable"? Can an omniscient God know the unknowable? Can an omnibenevolent God act non-benevolently?

Logically, an omnibenevolent God wouldn't ask you to do something unless it was "for the best". Therefore, to NOT do it, means that something even worse would occur.

It's a moral dilemma that doesn't really have anything to do with God. You can in fact remove God from the equation and still ask the same question. Would you kill your neighbour's infant son in order to avoid something even worse from happening? That is what the scenario resolves down to.

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Well, to be fair, these stories are not really that bad.

If you think of them as having something to do with some imagined god, then yeah, its sounds like a horrible god.

When you simply acknowledge that they are ancient stories written by people who lived in a very violent world thousands of years ago, it is really to be expected, and indeed the Jewish scriptures are actually very moderate compared to literature from comparable times.

A lot of people, for example, complain about the story of Abraham and Isaac, talking about how horrible a god is that would tell someone to sacrifice his child.

Well, that's a stupid way to even understand the story.

The story is very likely a tale about the end of human sacrifice among the Semitic people. Human sacrifice was widely practiced by ancient people around the world, including in Mesopotamia. Even the Greeks and Romans were practicing ritual human sacrifice over a thousand years after the Jews likely stopped.

The story was clearly meant to tell people that human sacrifice was no longer needed or acceptable.

Trying to criticize stories from 3,000 - 2,000 years ago based on modern moral standards is pretty absurd really, especially when you put them in context. I mean when the Gospels were being written the Romans, the most civilized people, were killing thousands of people a year, in some cases hundreds a day, in spectator sport.

Unfortunately, however, it is Christian literalism and the claim that this stuff was "authored by God" that even makes this stuff an issue.

The real fact is that by Christians claiming that the Bible is the timeless word of God, they do more harm to the credibility and beauty of the scritpures than anyone. It is very easy to appreciate the scritpures as works of ancient men. It is impossible to appreciate them as the works of a god.

Originally Posted by Darklighter

Actually I understand quite well what the story is supposed to mean. It's supposed to represent the pain of the sacrifices God makes in our behalf, and one of his children reciprocating that love. Your human sacrifice angle makes no sense from a religious, particularly Christian, standpoint. But again, this is not the issue I raised.