This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful. More informatiion here.
Privacy Overview
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.
It seems to me that we run a risk of tautology here. If we define God’s goodness as that goodness which is revealed in Scripture and add that Scripture tells us that God brings about the destruction of whole peoples, it will follow tautologically that those acts of genocide are consistent with God’s goodness.
Is the real question here whether Scripture gives us a self-consistent description of God’s goodness?
Last point: not all Christians (me for example, Eric Reitan for another) take the attitude to Scripture that you do. You seem to hold that all Christians think all of it equally true. Not so. There are parts that seem to me quite clearly false. Scripture (so say I) is not the faultless deliverance of God; it is rather a human record of contact with the divine. Attributions of genocide to God in Scripture seems to me very good evidence of this.