Posted on 08/07/2025 7:17:55 AM PDT by CondoleezzaProtege
In The God Delusion, atheist Richard Dawkins vents:
“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.”
It seems odd that Dawkins, who has made a career out of pillorying a God he says does not exist, charges this fictional character with a plethora of crimes, including ethnic cleansing.
But the question itself is a valid one.
Dealing with difficult passages
A better way to approach the Canaanite passages is by adopting a “literal-typological” approach. That is, the commands should be taken as literal in their immediate historical context, but their full significance is found in the way they prepare the way for Christ, who fulfills the law and the prophets (Matt. 5:17).
God is exceptionally patient. The conquest of Canaan comes only after Yahweh delays (by more than 400 years) giving Abraham’s offspring the Promised Land.
God’s longsuffering is evident in the New Testament as well. Jesus directs a number of His parables to the Jewish people, calling them to repent before judgment falls, which it does in A.D. 70. And Peter makes it clear that Christ’s delay in returning is to give us time to repent (2 Peter 3:9).
He further notes that God issues no command to pursue the Canaanites who leave the land. Presumably, only those who stay and fight are to be destroyed.
Context is key. The story of the conquest of Canaan is woven into a rich biblical tapestry in which God creates, humans rebel, and God calls people and nations to repentance and redemption.
(Excerpt) Read more at mbcpathway.com ...
God had a plan from the beginning of creation to reconcile all of humanity to him through the life and death of Jesus Christ. And it involved the Jewish people being in a particular place at a particular point in history.
Anything necessary to achieve that goal was righteous when viewed through that lens.
It is amusing to note the above. Atheism itself is a word which requires "theos" to have any meaning at all.
In a debate with an avowed atheist, I made mention of this and suggested we had no debate because he kept talking about God in order to assert there was no God. He was neither amused nor able to mount a reply without "God" in his blather. He really, really needed "θεος" to get to "ἄθεος."
1. Atheists mocking and denigrating God - no surprises there, except for them, later.
2. For these peoples that were ‘genocided’ - how many of these critics ever met/encountered these peoples? Not say I know anything, but when the Judge of all eternity makes that call, there might be something more to the story.
It is also worth noting that G-d was indeed cleansing, he was cleansing a very corrupt spiritual bloodline never meant to be introduced into humanity.
I know that may be a bit much for some to take in but it is very much Biblical. Something was introduced into God’s creation of man that was never meant to be there, and it was being corrected. The flood was also, in part, for that reason.
I can guarantee you that these same leftists would have no issue with going back in time and killing Hitler as a baby.
If God orders the death of someone, it is because he knows the future and what that person or their offspring will reap.
Atheists regarding the Old Testament: Why was God so cruel to those who killed babies, enslaved others and worshipped other Gods?
Atheists also say: If God exists why do cruel people get away with doing such evil?
If we stopped talking about people like Dawkins, they would just die in obscurity.
For people who don’t believe in God, atheists sure spend a lot of time, energy and money trying to keep others from knowing Him.
It’s also notable that he is very judgemental (ignorantly I might add) about a God he claims is judgemental
He sure gets wound up about a God he claims doesn’t exist. One could say God is living in his head rent free lol.
Weren’t the populations where every man, woman, child, and beast were to be killed actually Nephelim, or demonic? Some were giants. The groups that He instructed the people to destroy needed destroying.
Whever these tortured theological arguments appear, it validates the observation that humans are the only species known to have the capacity to have highly complex mystical thoughts and constructions. It is that mystical thinking that is at the core of wonderment, inquiry and even logical often faulty constructions.Even hardened athiests and communists have mystical thinking and if they are observed closely ,it gets expressed in the many ways.
There is not a box big enough for ANY human to fit Him into.
some were, but the fact remains that if God acts, he has a good reason to act regardless of how those acts might be seen from a human perspective.
This is why Abraham was justified through faith in his willingness to sacrifice his son Isaac. Abraham didn’t question Gods motivation or holiness, he just did what God commanded.
Satan is the one that is prowling the Earth, looking for those he can devour.
🔝🔝🔝
They’re actually working for the Enemy.
And it seems to me that most of them
know it too.
🔝🔝🔝
“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.”
There is no such thing as "independent morality." Morality is defined exclusively by G-d. Therefore not to have exterminated the Canaanites would have been a sin.
It's amazing that scientific materialists, who claim there is no meaning and that the universe is a gigantic random coincidence, insist on being moralists.
And to see those return to running after vain idols after you have invested so much to save them is grievous. What coach who cared for troubled youth and rescued them from a destructive life, making a real team out of them, unselfishly investing much in them in that effort, would be wrong in wanting them to stay faithful as they were trained, and be upset when they ran after gang leaders?
Of course, since no one is perfect, no one has warrant to require devotion to them above all for all time, but if one is perfect, which also means perfectly unselfish, not acting out of egotistical selfish need or want, then it is only right and best to require such. And in certain cases, such as a DI training soldiers, one best give undivided attention.
In charging God with selfishness, atheists cite:
Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; (Exodus 20:5)
For thou shalt worship no other god: for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God: (Exodus 34:14)
So just how does this equate to ego fulfillment. Commanding devotion be directed toward the only source that is Omniscient and Omnipotent, who this never fail, rather then making something created your god, meaning your ultimate source of security and object of devotion and obedience is for mans benefit.
Jealousy is not envy. The grounds for jealousy is that of injustice, that of misplaced devotion to someone or thing that it does not belong to rather to its warranted object. a coach can be jealous of the devotion his players to video games over his instructions to the the team.
In contrast envy is coveting that which is not rightfully yours, though the justification for it is often excused as justice (the indolent having a right to what others earned).
Meanwhile by giving man freedom then God - whom Scripture (which is what you must stick with if your objection is to it) says needed God needs nothing (Psalms 50:7–15; Acts 17:35 - receives grief when man chooses to use his will to do that which is evil.
Thus this anti-theist argument is a non-sequitur one, for it simply does not follow that God’s commands to set devotion upon the only Being worthy of it, must mean this is for his own ego, and not because it is simply right and to the benefit of man.
And what standard of ultimate morality does profoundly ignorant (only knowing effects of actions for a silver of existence) finite man use to judge an omniscient, omnipotent being, whose choices are made in the light of the knowledge of even every thought and intent, and the effects of choices for time and eternity?
The very nature of being omniscient and omnipotent being qualifies such a being to define morality. Omniscience refers to knowing everything there is to know, which of course includes what is right and wrong, and what all the effects will be of even our most seemingly insignificant actions and inactions.
And not only in this life - which is less than a silver of existence - but for eternity. And being omnipotent=all powerful means that you can make all things, all choices, to ultimately work together for Good, with justice as well as showing mercy and giving grace.
And thus the morality of God’s own actions are manifest in the light of eternity, in which they were done, not only their immediate ones, of their ultimate effects. Meanwhile ignorant finite man simply has no standing to judge an omniscient, omnipotent, despite the railings of anti-theists who seek to present a moral case against the God of the Bible, in order to justify their will-full rejection of Him.
Consider just one example of such irrational railings, that of accusing God of iniquity for killing all air-breathing life on earth via the Flood of Noah. Yet there was (and is) not one living who was not given that gift of life - as well as a other abilities and every good thing - by the Giver of Life. And who alone is justified in taking it in the light of His omniscience, which includes knowing the depth and scope of the iniquity of man, including every thought and intent.
And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. (Genesis 6:5-6)
(Note that God can know what man will do with his God-given ability to make choices, and yet be grieved by their very manifestation, somewhat akin to a father who knew what his rebellious child will do once given freedom from home, but then sees it)
And which drowning delivered animals from further abuse of various kinds, as well as innocent children, and also delivered the latter from becoming like their parents and culture and their particular damnation, not being morally culpable (note also that God’s sentences are determined relative to the degree of ability, as well as the nature of the crime). As well as other abuse of the beautiful earth God gave to men as a steward of it
Thus the Flood was an act of mercy as well as effectively dealing with rejecters of their creator, including rapists, murderers, and other abusers of God’s gifts. Yet while they rail against God’s judgement of such, antitheists rail against God when He allows iniquity to occur, as if God does not know what all the effects will be of every single choice, and cannot make all work together for ultimate Good, with justice for those who hate Him and love darkness over Light, and mercy and grace for those of repentant faith.
And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. (John 3:19-21)
For the redeemed are those who come to God as sinners knowing their desperate need of salvation - not as souls saved by their works or religious heritage, but as destitute of any means or merit whereby they may find salvation - and with a humble and penitent heart (that at least implicitly wants a new life following Christ) believe on the crucified and risen Lord Jesus who alone can save them on His account, by His sinless shed blood and righteousness. (Romans 3:9 - 5:1)
And thus the morality of God’s own actions are manifest in the light of eternity, in which they were done, not only their immediate ones, of their ultimate effects. Meanwhile ignorant finite man simply has no standing to judge an omniscient, omnipotent, despite the railings of anti-theists who seek to present a moral case against the God of the Bible, in order to justify their will-full rejection of Him.
Consider just one example of such irrational railings, that of accusing God of iniquity for killing all air-breathing life on earth via the Flood of Noah. Yet there was (and is) not one living who was not given that gift of life - as well as a other abilities and every good thing - by the Giver of Life. And who alone is justified in taking it in the light of His omniscience, which includes knowing the depth and scope of the iniquity of man, including every thought and intent.
And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. (Genesis 6:5-6)
(Note that God can know what man will do with his God-given ability to make choices, and yet be grieved by their very manifestation, somewhat akin to a father who knew what his rebellious child will do once given freedom from home, but then sees it)
And which drowning delivered animals from further abuse of various kinds, as well as innocent children, and also delivered the latter from becoming like their parents and culture and their particular damnation, not being morally culpable (note also that God’s sentences are determined relative to the degree of ability, as well as the nature of the crime). As well as other abuse of the beautiful earth God gave to men as a steward of it
Thus the Flood was an act of mercy as well as effectively dealing with rejecters of their creator, including rapists, murderers, and other abusers of God’s gifts. Yet while they rail against God’s judgement of such, antitheists rail against God when He allows iniquity to occur, as if God does not know what all the effects will be of every single choice, and cannot make all work together for ultimate Good, with justice for those who hate Him and love darkness over Light, and mercy and grace for those of repentant faith.
And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. (John 3:19-21)
For the redeemed are those who come to God as sinners knowing their desperate need of salvation - not as souls saved by their works or religious heritage, but as destitute of any means or merit whereby they may find salvation - and with a humble and penitent heart (that at least implicitly wants a new life following Christ) believe on the crucified and risen Lord Jesus who alone can save them on His account, by His sinless shed blood and righteousness. (Romans 3:9 - 5:1)
Exactly!
God is a sin cleanser. Sometimes, whole nations and/or ethnic groups need to be cleansed to destroy the sin. Sodom and Gomorrah is just one example for obvious reasons. No, S & G was not destroyed because they didn’t offer sufficient “hospitality.”
🙄
Although, wanting someone’s guests to come outside so they could be raped was NOT very hospitable. Canaan is another for their child sacrifices and idol worship, as you stated.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.