Evidence for God from Science

GOD never changes right, then that mean God was the same in the past as he is now , so when God command the isralites to destroy others groups of people ,then it would be ok to do it now ,for instance the isralites were told to destroy the cannanites because they sacrfice they're children to Molech among other thing. Then that person who blew up the abortion clinic(don't know exactly when it happened) was right for doing it,because abortions is just the same as what the cannanites were doing i don't know i just really turn on this issue when people kill and say it was for God i want to refute it but there was a time when God did command the killing of people so why wouldn't he Know

goldmoor,

God Himself (character, morality, etc.) never changes, but that does not mean that He does not change His mode of operation. God created and then stopped and He will create again in the future. The Holy Spirit did not permanently indwell believers back then, now He does. There was no Spirit powered "salt and light" in the world, back then. Although, Israel was to be God's witness.

Romans 12:14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and curse not.
15 Rejoice with those who rejoice, and weep with those who weep.
16 Be of the same mind toward one another; do not be haughty in mind, but associate with the lowly. Do not be wise in your own estimation.
17 Never pay back evil for evil to anyone. Respect what is right in the sight of all men.
18 If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men.
19 Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY," says the Lord.
20 "BUT IF YOUR ENEMY IS HUNGRY, FEED HIM, AND IF HE IS THIRSTY, GIVE HIM A DRINK; FOR IN SO DOING YOU WILL HEAP BURNING
COALS UPON HIS HEAD. "
21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
Romans 13:1 Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are
established by God.
2 Therefore he who resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.
3 For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise
from the same;
4 for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an
avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil.

As Paul stated it, individuals are not allowed to take revenge. It is a matter for those in authority to decide.

Even when God gave the LAW He made this clear, Exodus 21:22, 22:8-9; Numbers 35:9-31: Deuteronomy 19:1-21.

[quote="dayage"]goldmoor,

As Paul stated it, individuals are not allowed to take revenge. It is a matter for those in authority to decide.


i agree ,but i meant when someone take Gods authority in their own hands

goldmoor wrote:GOD never changes right, then that mean God was the same in the past as he is now , so when God command the isralites to destroy others groups of people ,then it would be ok to do it now ,for instance the isralites were told to destroy the cannanites because they sacrfice they're children to Molech among other thing. Then that person who blew up the abortion clinic(don't know exactly when it happened) was right for doing it,because abortions is just the same as what the cannanites were doing i don't know i just really turn on this issue when people kill and say it was for God i want to refute it but there was a time when God did command the killing of people so why wouldn't he Know

Well the example you gave is wrong in comparing to the Isrealite conquest since it was filled with a deep will of God(deeper than the immediate punishment for sin like the one described in your example) and there can be a lot of descussion of why God did anything pertaining to the Isrealites(covanents). The question I thnk is right is, why would God limit his sovereignty willingly with covanents(since the conquest was for the covanent)? This question relates to why we were created in the first place. Questions about God's actions always/law boil down to the question of fundamental creation, why are we even created.

why are we even created.

Love.

And marriage...

Goes together like a horse and carriage, sorry couldn't help myself.

Dan

Danieltwotwenty wrote:Love.

Gman wrote:And marriage...

Danieltwotwenty wrote:Goes together like a horse and carriage, sorry couldn't help myself.

Dan

you guys

You are correct that God does not change. Further, I can happily concede that God could order a nation to attack and destroy another nation for certain evils if He so chose. It is not unjust to destroy if that destruction is an execution of divine judgment.

The difference, of course, between blowing up an abortion clinic and the Canaanite Conquests is two-fold: 1) abortion clinics are not nations as was Canaan. They are, instead, a part of our nation. God expects us, then, to deal with them insofar as we are dealing with ourselves. Just as Israel was commanded to repent and get rid of idolatry, so America ought to repent and get rid of that sort of detestable act. 2) The clinic bomber cannot claim to act as an agent of divine judgment. God had a direct order for Joshua. He has given no such order to any Christian.

There are also differences relating to the nature of the land as a whole. To take only one example, Canaan was (and is) a geographical promise to the descendants of Israel. No Christian can make a similar claim on the corner on which your local abortion clinic sits.

The bottom line is that while there are similarities between the two cases you cite, there are more than enough differences that prevent us from applying the situation of one directly to the situation of the other. What can be applied, however, is that if God detested the Canaanites for sacrificing their children--and that sin put them in serious danger of judgment--so, too, God detests the sacrifice of our unborn children at the altar of liberalism, and that places the abortionist (primarily) and the society that allows them to operate (us, secondarily) at risk of similar judgment.