Is God A Moral Monster?

New Atheism began after the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers, Pentagon, and Flight 93.

It radicalized atheists who now believed religion only poisoned the minds of its followers and they began to try to prove this by looking at history and taking verses like I provided above to prove this is why violence happens. So Dawkins is mocking Christians for following a God who committed in his eyes such horrible acts.

Here is a quote from a leading New Age Atheist.

Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion

Due to confusion from other threads on this very issue. I will in detail speak on this issue.

Most Christians believe the Bible to be the Word of God. To be true. And God to have certain characteristics like all loving but also all just. This is the typical belief. And for the time being I will assume we do not need to go into Biblical evidence or on how we can know the Bible to be true. I will start with that conclusion that the Bible is 100% true.

So with this in mind it is intellectually honest for people to question scriptures that deal with the killing of woman, children, God causing miscarriages, or a raped woman is forced to marry the rapist, or even slavery is brought up by critics. Now remember we say the Bible is true and the Word of God.

I will list 1 example of each.

1 Samuel 15:2-3, 8 New International Version (NIV)

2 This is what the Lord Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt.
3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’”
8 He took Agag king of the Amalekites alive, and all his people he totally destroyed with the sword.

Numbers 5:21-22 New International Version (NIV)
21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. 22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.”
“‘Then the woman is to say, “Amen. So be it.”

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 New International Version (NIV)
28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

Exodus 21:20-21 New International Version (NIV)
20 “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property.

Those verses will fill your church pews wont they?

I'll start with 1 Samuel 15.

Let us remember God is Holy. A Holy being is perfect. God cannot sin but is all good and loving. But being Holy he must be just because sin cannot dwell with God. Adam cursed all of mankind.

Romans 5:12 New International Version (NIV)
12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—

Was the Amalekites innocent? In God's eyes no one is innocent in less you in the OT followed the ceremonial sacrifices or in the NT put faith in Christ who became the ultimate sacrifice.

This was a point in history, a season in history, where God is the immediate king of a people, Israel, different than the way he is the king over the church, which is from all the peoples of Israel and does not have a political, ethnic dimension to it.

With Joshua there was a political, ethnic dimension, God was immediate king, and he uses this people as his instrument to accomplish his judgment in the world at that time.

The Amalekites was heavily pagan and seeping so deep in demonic evil for a very long time and God patiently waited as he does with any nations judgement in the OT. Their time had ran out and when God decides to judge a nation he is Just for doing so.

When God takes life he isn't a murderer but is well within his resume as the creator of life. Dealing with the Amalekites, Saul failed to kill all as God commanded and the Amalekites just a couple of decades later, there were enough to take David and his men’s families captive (1 Samuel 30:1-2). After David and his men attacked the Amalekites and rescued their families, 400 Amalekites escaped.

If Saul had fulfilled what God had commanded him, this never would have occurred. Several hundred years later, a descendant of Agag, Haman, tried to have the entire Jewish people exterminated (see the book of Esther).

So, Saul’s incomplete obedience almost resulted in Israel’s destruction. God knew this would occur, so He ordered the extermination of the Amalekites ahead of time.

I will add in time 3 more explanations of the next 3 scriptures critics like to pick out. I'll post this first one. Feel free to add more details for the new in faith.

I read the quote and then saw who it was by and didnt need to read it anymore. Dawkins is hilarious the God Delusion has had many commentaries tearing it to shreds. His Psuedo scientific theories about other things are far more ridiculous then the way he makes Christianity sound. In essence his too erratic with his theories to be a humanistic athiest but not religious by any means either so his stuff is a waste of time for both Christian and non Christians.

Dawkins obviously does not accord divinity to the Messiah, so he is totally wrong. However, with regard to any and all gods of destruction, he is right.

The post wasn't really focused on Dawkins. He just so happened made a comment that fit the narrative of the post. The idea was to oppose the idea and explain a few scriptures that critics like to use.

The post wasn't really focused on Dawkins. He just so happened made a comment that fit the narrative of the post. The idea was to oppose the idea and explain a few scriptures that critics like to use.

Why would you want to legitimise the pagan Jewish god of war?

I know, he just tends to pop up in atheist discussions. I cant think of to many other who religiously preach its lack of benefits to humanity as much as him.

Oh their are plenty lol they are just not popular. The popular argument currently is the atheist claiming that all the burden of proof is on the theist and then revert to the 100s of so called Bible contradictions, errors or so believed atrocities recorded in the OT.

yeah the "contradictions" are always a popular one. With actual reading a vast majority are taken care of. Out of context verses usually have the biggest problem.

Yes only a few take some good study like on why doesn't the genealogy of Jesus match in Matthew and Luke.

Why would you want to legitimise the pagan Jewish god of war?

"Is God a moral monster?"

The question presupposes the idea that we humans can conceive of any coherent concept of morality that is not based at least distantly on the nature of God. We can't.

The question also presupposes that we have any right or authority to judge God. We don't.

I was unaware of that one. I just researched it. Its a tough one lol. But I got good answers. I always notice that with every atheist complaint there is a more than valid counter point if you look for it.

The Israilites acted in disobedience to God who said not to kill. Yet the god of Moses apparently told them to commit mass murder. Now make your excuses for the Jewish god of war. I have heard them all before

Where the eye roll emoji? If you have heard them all then our discussion is pointless. God is the same in both the Old and New Testaments. This is mainline Christian belief.

God is the same yesterday, today and forever, but that does not mean they followed the Word who created the heavens and the earth, in fact Jesus told them they did not know the Father. Worse still they killed the promised one. Coming to the present day, people who only believe Jesus was a prophet like Moses, without believing He was the Messiah, falsely call themselves Christians, while all the time practising Judaism, never having communion, celebrating Easter, or remembering His birth, but using Him as a scapegoat, while at the time preaching the Jewish sabbath.

No the god of the Old Testament is not the God of the New Testament. Saul/Paul is a witness to that.

How can you justify that between Hitlers opinion if you have no absolute source of authority? If the Bible is not trustworthy as true then how can you take anything from it as true?

Also there are many meanings of love. The world thinks tolerance is love. Or no boundary sex is love. Is their opinion correct or just yours? But still no matter in less you have a absolute source to define love then it is only your opinion of love.



You will have to define perfect in this context.

Again no evidence of what? The Bible as truth? Or the Bible as a accurate source of the Prophets, Judges, Kings, Believers, Apostles, and Disciples?

Do we need the original copies to know what the original said?

Hi Roughsoul,
I take your point about the word love having a range of flavours , as it were. Obviously the greek had more words for different sorts of love. The Agape love of God has a specific meaning.....the unconditional love of God that seeks the best for everyone. It is the twisting of murders and rape and sexual slavery into a definition of love that I object to. As this empties the word of any connection to the experience, common sense tells us is loving.

The bible is trustworthy as a guide in our relationship with God and man, but it is the living relationship with the living Word that is primary. To me, while the bible is inspired ( not infallible, in fact does it even claim to be inerrant and infallible?......just curious), the Word of God is the wisdom that we receive from our contemplation of the written word, not the words themselves. They need spiritual discernment. Because I see it as a guide and not absolute it frees me to question.

It is the twisting of murders and rape and sexual slavery into a definition of love that I object to. As this empties the word of any connection to the experience, common sense tells us is loving.

To me, while the bible is inspired ( not infallible, in fact does it even claim to be inerrant and infallible?......just curious)

God is the same yesterday, today and forever, but that does not mean they followed the Word who created the heavens and the earth, in fact Jesus told them they did not know the Father. Worse still they killed the promised one. Coming to the present day, people who only believe Jesus was a prophet like Moses, without believing He was the Messiah, falsely call themselves Christians, while all the time practising Judaism, never having communion, celebrating Easter, or remembering His birth, but using Him as a scapegoat, while at the time preaching the Jewish sabbath.

No the god of the Old Testament is not the God of the New Testament. Saul/Paul is a witness to that.

No the god of the Old Testament is not the God of the New Testament. Saul/Paul is a witness to that.

God is the same forever. True. Gods commands are written down. We know what was commanded of God and what was rebelled against or ignored. Scripture is clear of this.

If you do not believe the scriptures then that is on you to work out in faith and understanding. When Jesus said they didn't know the Father was not what you are implying. They had the correct scrolls but chose to abuse the teachings for selfish reasons. All he meant was they was good actors but wasn't truly following the God in their scrolls or what we call the OT.

This is a false teaching and I would advise to be very careful with the theology I am sure you are about to lobby for.