Wes Huff, Paul Copan, Biblical Violence, and the Apologetics Spin Room
3:09 - 3:27
I'm willing to assume that the project you reference really doesn't talk about the rare times when "the (primary) "God" (of Biblical lore) does something nice or sane.
I'm still landing on this conclusion:
Your assessment of that project is not a fair assessment.
Why not?
Because you already admitted, earlier in this same video, that the purpose of that project was to identify every time the biblical "God" fails today's rational and ethical standards.
It wouldn't make any sense for that project to list all the times when something is said about "God" that the project takes no objection to.
It's not the job of the prosecution to list all the times when Ted Bundy took calls as an operator of a Crisis Helpline or helped a stranded motorists without exploiting those opportunities to do evil.
It's not the job of a prosecutor of any domestically violent abuser
... to list and praise all the times when an abuser
fed, housed, or protected their own abused family.
Nor does it exonerate a severe abuser to list all the times they did something really nice.
Nor does offering strangers in a foreign land
the "opportunity" to become your slaves and avoid violent deaths if they refuse ... count as benevolence.
In the story of Jonah,
"God" is sending Jonah to be a mafia thug on The Big Boss's behalf,
to execute a protection racket.
Why did the Big Boss single out the people of that specific foreign land?
I'm unsure.
I've never tried to research current academic theories about that specific question.
However, ...
it's not a true "kindness", no matter why those people were singled out.
Just as importantly, basic and reliable decency of character, as assessed by the utterances, actions, and impacts of an individual, ... isn't a spread-sheet tally for a quantifiable moral-points system.
There is no "extra credit" the "God"-character in bibles can take home and hand in the next day, to make up for extreme atrocities they regularly commit (and will be committing more of later).
Seriously, Randal. Get your head right.
I'm willing to assume that the project you reference really doesn't talk about the rare times when "the (primary) "God" (of Biblical lore) does something nice or sane.
I'm still landing on this conclusion:
Your assessment of that project is not a fair assessment.
Why not?
Because you already admitted, earlier in this same video, that the purpose of that project was to identify every time the biblical "God" fails today's rational and ethical standards.
It wouldn't make any sense for that project to list all the times when something is said about "God" that the project takes no objection to.
It's not the job of the prosecution to list all the times when Ted Bundy took calls as an operator of a Crisis Helpline or helped a stranded motorists without exploiting those opportunities to do evil.
It's not the job of a prosecutor of any domestically violent abuser
... to list and praise all the times when an abuser
fed, housed, or protected their own abused family.
Nor does it exonerate a severe abuser to list all the times they did something really nice.
Nor does offering strangers in a foreign land
the "opportunity" to become your slaves and avoid violent deaths if they refuse ... count as benevolence.
In the story of Jonah,
"God" is sending Jonah to be a mafia thug on The Big Boss's behalf,
to execute a protection racket.
Why did the Big Boss single out the people of that specific foreign land?
I'm unsure.
I've never tried to research current academic theories about that specific question.
However, ...
it's not a true "kindness", no matter why those people were singled out.
Just as importantly, basic and reliable decency of character, as assessed by the utterances, actions, and impacts of an individual, ... isn't a spread-sheet tally for a quantifiable moral-points system.
There is no "extra credit" the "God"-character in bibles can take home and hand in the next day, to make up for extreme atrocities they regularly commit (and will be committing more of later).
Seriously, Randal. Get your head right.
Comments
Post a Comment