Evidence for God from Science

As a Christian turned agnostic, there are two general areas that I have trouble getting past with what I know. One of them are some of the laws in Deuteronomy. For example Deut 13, 6-9 instructs the reader to kill anyone who tries to lead them away from God. Other areas of concern I have are God ordering the deaths of the Canaanites to include their children and livestock. Stoning of a girl accused of being a non virgin at marraige, and rebellious children. There are other examples in the Old Testatment that along with the ones I mentioned, atheists reference to support their positions the Christian God is inconsistent. I understand that Israel was a theocracy and the Canaanites were a threat to it as would be one who talks against God. Also that there are vast differences in ancient cultures, that are extremely difficult for someone raised in our modern culture to understand. It's just hard to imagine Jesus being on board or complicent in those ideas.

Though I don't mean to imply my ideas are comparable to or better than God's, it seems like the benevolent God of the New Testament could come up with a less violent way of handling things. Thanks in advance to anyone willing to help me to understand.

Hi cnk12.

What about posting one problem at a time?
Also we discussed some things in other thread http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 98#p127877.

cnk12,

If you want to understand the old testament, there is a book called, "Is God a Moral Monster," by Paul Copan. It deals with all the difficult questions, and helps us to understand the cultural idioms of the ancient near east when the OT was written. There are difficult things to understand in the bible, and so we need to make sure that we are viewing the Bible through the proper lens.

Also, if you will review the forum and use the search feature, you will find that all of this has been addresses at one level or another.

To begin this topic, I'd say that these things don't make God inconsistent. I'm guessing you're thinking this makes Him so because of the "thou shalt not kill" portion of the Ten Commandments. Problem is the word 'Kill' itself. The Hebrew word for "kill" is "ratsach," which literally means "to murder, slay." (Source: http://concordances.org/hebrew/7523.htm) Therefore, that Commandment is more accurately translated as "thou shalt not murder," which is to kill without justification.

Murder is unlawful killing, while killing is simply killing. If you kill someone in self-defense, it is not murder. So first I'd recommend you telling us why the violence that raises issues for you was indeed unlawful.

I do recommend giving jlay's book recommendation a try.

jlay wrote:"Is God a Moral Monster," by Paul Copan

I downloaded the book to my Kindle and have started reading it. It appears to be just what I hoped for. Thank you.

Please correct me if I'm wrong here ... In the passing of judgement on the Canaanites, does anyone have any idea why it would have been necessary to kill their livestock (anything that breathes) as well? If nothing else it seems like a waste of resources, not to mention unnecessary cruelty.

A possible answer occurs to me...maybe there was a problem with disease in their livestock. Any other ideas would still be appreciated.

cnk12 wrote:I downloaded the book to my Kindle and have started reading it. It appears to be just what I hoped for. Thank you.

Please correct me if I'm wrong here ... In the passing of judgement on the Canaanites, does anyone have any idea why it would have been necessary to kill their livestock (anything that breathes) as well? If nothing else it seems like a waste of resources, not to mention unnecessary cruelty.

A possible answer occurs to me...maybe there was a problem with disease in their livestock. Any other ideas would still be appreciated.

That was just typical descriptive language of the ANE, it was not meant to be take literally ( as in killing everything that breathes) and it was NOT take that way.
It was the descriptive language of the time, just like we have now.
It was showing to what degree God was upset with Canaan and what they had done.
Much like we would say " flatten that city " ( when refereeing to bombing) or "leave no mountain standing", " no stone unturned", etc.
It was a descriptive way of demonstrating the "totality" of the war and the judgment on Canaan.

Thanks Paul, I get it.