A Way to Think About Free Will and God: Open Theism

As a bit of an aside, but to really drill down into this concept you have of justice, on what basis could it be considered justice to put a sword through a baby ? What could a baby have done that is subject to any concept of justice ?

Oh I get the tribalism thing between human beings, as regards revenge, brutality and general shittiness, which we need to continue to try to eradicate from our world.But I’m more interested in god ordering the massacre of whole tribes, and how this sits with your characterisation of it as justice rather than murder.You say it’s about spiritual contamination. But focus for a second on the babies. They didn’t choose to be born. As yet, they have no beliefs or thoughts beyond wanting milk, cuddles and sleep. They haven’t been taught any belief system. They haven’t been spiritually contaminated. They’re just babies. How can it be justice to put swords through them ?Even if being a member of a tribe somehow contaminates you, they didn’t choose that. They haven’t had the option to leave the tribe as yet. For their murder to be characterised as justice, as an absolute bare minimum they have to have exercised some level of choice. They were never given that choice.Edited by vimesey, : Typo

So what you're saying is that God changes his views as to what is moral and just, every so often, so as to fit with the changing nature and morality of society ? That has to be the logical conclusion of your extract's thesis, that we have to judge god's command in the context of the times in which it was made.Edited by vimesey, : No reason given.

This suggests that unless there's actual God speach being cited, every other injunction in the Bible has to be taken with a pinch of salt, as being the words of men.

Inspired by God you mean ?In other words, the loving and gentle God inspired Moses to order the chosen people to massacre entire tribes, including their babies (who are on any sane standard, utterly innocent of anything) ?

The concept of justice requires more than a guess that someone was possessed by a demon, though, doesn’t it ?To begin with, justice has at its heart a concept of fairness - that you be punished for a serious transgression that you chose to commit. If you choose to commit a transgression, then justice will deliver punishment. That can’t apply to a baby, because they haven’t committed a serious transgression - nor do they possess yet the mental ability to choose to commit it, or to be aware that it’s seen as a transgression.And justice also has a requirement for evidence, beyond reasonable doubt. I know you believe in demons, but you can’t evidence them - no-one can. And to be fair, you acknowledge in your post that you’re only guessing.Characterising Moses’s injunction to enact God’s will by putting swords through babies can’t be called justice. It doesn’t have any of the necessary characteristics of that concept.

There is no way I could do that - blindly accept that a God I followed was acting justly, when on no rational basis could I see any justice.Let me put it this way. You believe that Satan deceives the hearts of men. How could you tell that you were or were not being deceived ?If you believe that something, that on any rational level must be seen as wrong and unjust, must be right and just, because it was written down in the Bible as the word of God, then you forego the right to justify your views and beliefs.If God told me to kill a baby, I’d tell him where to get off.

Nope. You’re advocating following the orders of someone who tells you to kill babies, on the blind assumption that on some utterly unjustifiable level, those orders must be good and just because they come from him, and he’s said he’s good and just.I would spit in his eye before I would allow myself to act in such an evil manner. And if I went to my grave as a result, I would do so knowing that I did the good, honourable and just thing in refusing to follow such evil orders.