OK, from the previous thread, we're discussing God's using Israel as an instrument of punishment in taking lives, and if Scripture is accurate, that He sometimes ordered the taking of even the lives of pagan infants and children. A VERY difficult subject.
First, I'll address Neo on infants and children:
Ultimately, the children were not the target or the cause of the punishment – but, and that is IF this passage is truly saying what it APPEARS to – God had an instant and glorious plan for those infants and children. If they had remained to grow up as pagans, they would have been lost for eternity. Why He did not have Israel adopt them? I don't know. It is very disturbing, and understandably so!Neo: “The logic Philip has used unintentionally, not realizing (and I call it an evil logic) and I questioned him on that, is that those infants would go to heaven.
But how could they?
1. If they were sinless then God had innocents killed?
Again, God requires repentance and faith of those whom are able to understand and do so – and infants and children obviously cannot. David clearly thought his dead child (from Basheba) was with the Lord. God does not punish for what one CAN'T do, but for what one CAN do and yet refuses to.Neo: 2. If they were not sinless than how would they go to heaven?
When David receives news that the child has died, he quits mourning and fasting and changes his clothing. The prophet Nathan comes to David and asks him why he quit mourning the loss of his son.
David replies, "While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, 'Who knows, the LORD may be gracious to me, that the child may live.' But now he has died; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me (2 Sam. 12:22-23)." The text seems to imply that the child went to Heaven since David says, "I will go to him, but he will not return to me"; and elsewhere Scripture indicates that David went to Heaven (Ps. 16:10-11; Heb. 11:32-33).
As for whether Scripture is truthful concerning things it says God ordered that seem unthinkable to us - even repulsive:
Neo, I think you are being very selective on what you think God cannot or doesn't do.
First off, He most certainly has put us in a world in which EVERYONE eventually dies – most unpleasantly, often in illness or disease. Where did the biological origins of why we are all mortally doomed come from to begin with? God! God built the consequences of our biology into the system. He allows and ultimately controls natural disasters. He sees babies die in unthinkable situations. But we know that God is not just focused on NOW – He sees eternity in which this will be just a blink of the eye. But there is purpose in this “blink,” no matter how terrible, we know God has purpose in all of it.
But we tend to think of the above more as INDIRECT causes of death and suffering – although we logically know God originated what is possible within certain parameters, and that He ultimately allows, disallows or intervenes as He so sees fit. Of course, man is the cause of much suffering, but the possibilities of what can happen, even though man is the cause, was designed by God.
OK, so let's see what God has done in Scripture: We see that God wiped out ALL of humanity except Noah and his family on the Ark. EVERYONE else – men, women, children, babies – they ALL drowned or were somehow killed by the flood. Oh, but that's probably an OT mythical tale, one might say. But then why is it referenced significantly in the NT? (See: (Matthew 24:38–39; 1 Peter 3:20; 2 Peter 2:5; 2 Peter 3:6; Hebrews 11:7; Luke 17:27). Were the babies (totally unaware, not yet immersed in deliberate sin) and children (not yet aware of God, their own sin, their responsibiltiy for that sin) being punished. No! It was the evil adult pagans that were well aware of their own evil that God so punished. What about Sodom: “... the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the Lord out of heaven.” Just adults there? Certainly not!
Well, IF we believe Scripture, we can see that God did things that we find unthinkable, seemingly immoral, and yet we see that these things were confirmed in the NT. If you believe that the NT is Scriptural and “God breathed,” then you have no choice but to believe this is true about the OT. The very NT Scriptures that tell us all of what we know about Jesus also show that He confirms the OT as Scripture. It is constantly referenced. And neither Jesus or ANY Apostle ever once said, “Well, you know, there are some things assumed to be Scripture that aren't – the Flood, the conquest of Canaan, Sodom and Gomorrah. God never did such terrible things.” Or, “There are many problems in what is mixed in with actual Scripture – so, be aware of these things.” And if that were the case, not only would we expect an Apostle to correct the false understandings, that such things weren't actually Scriptural - you'd also expect to see some specific warnings about key passages. Yet not the least whisper that ANY of the OT was not God given!
In Matthew 23:35, Jesus confirms ALL of the OT by framing it. Not one referenced did He ever make to ANY of it not being God's Word or false. Exactly the opposite! Here's a good primer on how Jesus viewed the OT and Scripture: https://carm.org/questions/about-jesus/ ... -testament.
My question would be, if you doubt what Scripture records in the OT, but you believe in Jesus and what God requires of men based upon the NT, then why do you cherry pick which parts of the NT you accept? How can you discern between them? How are you even sure if you need a Savior IF Scripture is riddled with errors? How could you trust ANY of it? And what does it say about God's power to build and astounding universe, HOLD IT TOGETHER, and yet He got sloppy with how His Word to man was recorded and preserved – allowed it to get blended with hideous untruths and outright lies and fiction – to the point He would have well known we wouldn't have a clue as to which is WHICH? If Scripture is a blended hodgepodge of fact and the mere lies and myths of men, of what possible good would it be to us? As how would we know the differences? We wouldn't and we couldn't.