Everything youâve listed are instances of God punishing evil.
Flooding babies.
Killing firstborns.
Sending bears to shred kids for saying âbaldyâ
Torturing Job to win a bet.
Thatâs not âpunishing evilâ. thatâs cosmic tantrums.
If a human did it, youâd call it evil.
You only excuse it because you slap âGodâ on the front. Thatâs divine command theory. might makes right. Which isnât morality, itâs just fear dressed up as worship. Ironically, its the same logic which fascists like Hitler use.
are you suggesting God should let Hitler reign free in heaven?
Strawman. Nobody said âlet Hitler into heavenâ.
But drowning toddlers and nuking towns isnât âjusticeâ, itâs indiscriminate slaughter. If Godâs only two settings are âdo nothingâ or âkill everyoneâ thatâs a design flaw, not justice.
Where did DNA come from? Who made biology?
Same tired âwho made Xâ game.
Who made God?
If you say âHe always existedâ, then congratulations, you just admitted things can exist without being created. Which means biology doesnât need your sky-dad either.
You made dinner with your creativity. Is it cruel to the dinner that you boil it in your stomach acid?
False analogy.
My dinner isnât a conscious being. If I invited you over and drowned your kid in my soup âto punish evilâ you wouldnât call it dinner. Youâd call the cops.
(Furthermore, Iâm vegan, so my meals donât include anything which is/was a conscious being)
One can prove God existsâŠ
Then do it.
Stop dodging. Show reproducible, testable evidence that distinguishes your God from imagination. Until then, youâre just asserting.
Who designed that process?
Nobody âdesignedâ it. Evolution by natural selection explains complexity from simplicity, no designer required. If you think complexity requires design, explain who designed God, who is infinitely more complex.
Atheists cannot even answer at what point human life begins.
Wrong. Biology is clear: human life is a continuum, not a single magic switch. Whatâs disputed is when rights should be granted, which is a moral and legal question, not a scientific one. Youâre just mixing categories.
Sending bears to shred kids for saying âbaldyâ
They were essentially telling Elisha to kill himself. And he used Godâs name in vain.
Torturing Job to win a bet.
Job is now in heaven. I donât think Job cares about the distant point in time when things were bad. Thatâs like calling your parents cruel for banning you from videogames as a kid - although even that is more significant than what happened to Job.
You only excuse it because you slap âGodâ on the front. Thatâs divine command theory.
Thatâs because God is God. If a pig slaughters another pig and eats it, then pigs would find that evil. Yet itâs okay when a human does it.
But drowning toddlers and nuking towns isnât âjusticeâ, itâs indiscriminate slaughter. If Godâs only two settings are âdo nothingâ or âkill everyoneâ thatâs a design flaw, not justice.
Oops! You didnât mention any nuking of towns đ€
Stop dodging. Show reproducible, testable evidence that distinguishes your God from imagination. Until then, youâre just asserting
Finally, thereâs your goalposts. It has to be âreproducibleâ and âtestableâ. Can you show me reproducible and testable evidence that Napoleon existed?
Pre-crime executions of babies? Youâre justifying mass infanticide with Minority Report. Thatâs not morality, thatâs thought-policing unborn futures. By that logic, God shouldâve killed you before you typed this comment.
They were essentially telling Elisha to kill himself.
They yelled âbaldy.â Youâre the one rewriting it as âkill yourselfâ to excuse bears mauling children. Imagine standing in front of a grieving parent and saying âdonât worry, your kid had it coming for making fun of a prophetâs haircut.â
Job is now in heaven.
So torturing someone is fine as long as you reward them later? If I broke your legs today but promised you a PS5 in ten years, would that make me moral? This is abuse with a consolation prize.
If a pig slaughters another pig and eats it, then pigs would find that evil. Yet itâs okay when a human does it.
Wrong twice.
First, might doesnât make right. If God orders genocide, itâs still genocide. slapping âGodâ on it doesnât turn evil into good.
Second, your pig analogy fails with me because Iâm vegan. It isnât okay when humans slaughter pigs. You just admitted your morality boils down to âthe strong can do whatever they want to the weak.â
Thatâs not morality, thatâs predation.
Thatâs because God is God.
Congratulations, you admitted it: divine command theory. If God ordered you to skin your child alive, youâd call it good. Thatâs not morality, thatâs just worshiping raw power.
Oops! You didnât mention nuking towns
Jericho, Sodom, Gomorrah. Ring a bell? The Bible is full of God wiping out entire cities. Pretending otherwise wonât erase the body count.
Reproducible and testable evidence⊠Napoleon.
Strawman.
We donât need to âreproduceâ Napoleon, we verify him through multiple independent sources: letters, accounts, artifacts, battlefields. If you have comparable evidence for God, written by neutral parties, corroborated by archaeology, contemporaneous, and consistent, then put it on the table.
Spoiler: you donât.
All youâve got is one internally contradictory book written by believers.
Pre-crime executions of babies? Youâre justifying mass infanticide with Minority Report. Thatâs not morality, thatâs thought-policing unborn futures. By that logic, God shouldâve killed you before you typed this comment.
If He did, He would be well within His right to. If they werenât going to be totally depraved, He would have rescued them.
They yelled âbaldy.â Youâre the one rewriting it as âkill yourselfâ to excuse bears mauling children. Imagine standing in front of a grieving parent and saying âdonât worry, your kid had it coming for making fun of a prophetâs haircut.â
No. Refer to the text and context.
2 Kings 2:11-12, 23
[11] And as they still went on and talked, behold, chariots of fire and horses of fire separated the two of them. And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. [12] And Elisha saw it and he cried, âMy father, my father! The chariots of Israel and its horsemen!â And he saw him no more. Then he took hold of his own clothes and tore them in two pieces.
âŠ
[23] He went up from there to Bethel, and while he was going up on the way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, âGo up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!â
Basically, Elijah is missing. Elisha is claiming to be his successor. They mock the account of Elijah leaving earth instead of dying, and basically telling Elisha to go disappear with Elijah. Since they possibly didnât believe Elijah was carried up and instead died, theyâd be asking Elisha to do the same.
Job is now in heaven.
So torturing someone is fine as long as you reward them later? If I broke your legs today but promised you a PS5 in ten years, would that make me moral? This is abuse with a consolation prize.
A PS5 isnât comparable to heaven. An eternity in paradise isnât a consolation prize. And God didnât torture Job. Satan did.
your pig analogy fails with me because Iâm vegan.
Fair. I hope youâd agree that killing unborn children is also wrong.
Congratulations, you admitted it: divine command theory. If God ordered you to skin your child alive, youâd call it good.
How would you define morality
Jericho, Sodom, Gomorrah. Ring a bell?
The towns so bad that only one decent person lived in them? Who were spared alongside their family, despite their family also being terrible people?
We donât need to âreproduceâ Napoleon, we verify him through multiple independent sources: letters, accounts, artifacts, battlefields. If you have comparable evidence for God, written by neutral parties, corroborated by archaeology, contemporaneous, and consistent, then put it on the table.
Spoiler: you donât.
I do. There are multiple independent sources pertaining to Jesus, accounts. Alleged artifacts, definitely sites mentioned are proved to have existed. They are contemporary and consistent.
All youâve got is one internally contradictory book written by believers.
No, we donât. The New Testament is 26 separate writings. And even then, there are a few writings outside of it such as Josephus, The Didache, and Polycarp.
Youâre expecting someone to literally see Jesus rise from the dead and write about it and not be a believer? Thatâs like me saying âEveryone who writes pro vaccine material is pro vaccine. Find me some anti vaxxers arguing for vaccines, then Iâll listenâ.
Translation: God killing babies is fine because God did it.
Thatâs not morality, thatâs raw power worship.
If Hitler had been omnipotent, would you have called his actions ârightâ too? Because your standard isnât good vs evil; itâs just strong vs weak.
Basically telling Elisha to go disappear with Elijah.
So the kids didnât say âkill yourselfâ, they said âgo up like Elijahâ Which is mockery, sure, but still not a capital offence.
Youâre still defending child-murder-by-bear for playground trash talk. If your morality system equates insults with death, itâs not morality, itâs authoritarian fragility.
An eternity in paradise isnât a consolation prize. And God didnât torture Job. Satan did.
Wrong. Job 2:3 literally says God gave Job into Satanâs hand âwithout reasonâ. If I hand my kid to a known abuser âas a testâ, Iâm responsible for everything that follows. Passing the blame to Satan doesnât make God look better, it makes Him look like an accomplice.
I hope youâd agree that killing unborn children is also wrong.
Iâm pro-choice. I donât believe potential life has more value than the actual lives of the people carrying them.
But hereâs the kicker: even by your standard, your God fails. The Flood, the plagues, Old Testament wars; unborn children wiped out en masse. You claim to worship the âsanctity of lifeâ but your own deity is historyâs biggest abortionist.
How would you define morality?
Morality = reducing unnecessary suffering and increasing well-being.
By that standard, bears mauling kids, floods drowning babies, and plagues killing firstborns are immoral.
Your definition is âwhatever God saysâ which means if God told you to burn your toddler alive, youâd call it good. Thatâs not morality, itâs obedience.
The towns so bad that only one decent person lived in them.
Even if you take that at face value, God still torched everyone; children, infants, livestock. Collateral damage doesnât vanish just because you declare âeveryone there was badâ. Thatâs exactly the justification every human tyrant has ever used.
We do have independent sources for Jesus⊠Josephus, Didache, Polycarp.
None of those are contemporary.
Josephus was born after Jesus allegedly died, and his passage about Jesus is widely considered tampered with by Christians.
The Didache and Polycarp are Christian writings, believers repeating their own story, not neutral evidence. Thatâs like Mormons citing Joseph Smithâs buddies as âindependent sourcesâ
Also, proving Jesusâ existence doesnât prove his divinity. I dont care if a person named Jesus lived 2,000 years ago.
And no, your vaccine analogy fails. We have independent, testable, reproducible data for vaccines. If all we had were 26 internally inconsistent pamphlets from believers claiming vaccines worked, weâd laugh them out of the lab.
Your entire defense boils down to this: âGod is good because Heâs Godâ. Thatâs not an argument. Thatâs an abdication of morality. Youâd excuse anything; genocide, torture, infanticide; as long as it had divine branding.
Which means you donât have a moral compass at all.
Youâve outsourced it to a book that justifies things youâd call evil in any other context.
Thatâs not âpunishing evilâ. thatâs cosmic tantrums.
If a human did it, youâd call it evil.
You only excuse it because you slap âGodâ on the front. Thatâs divine command theory. might makes right. Which isnât morality, itâs just fear dressed up as worship. Ironically, its the same logic which fascists like Hitler use.
Strawman. Nobody said âlet Hitler into heavenâ.
But drowning toddlers and nuking towns isnât âjusticeâ, itâs indiscriminate slaughter. If Godâs only two settings are âdo nothingâ or âkill everyoneâ thatâs a design flaw, not justice.
Same tired âwho made Xâ game.
Who made God?
If you say âHe always existedâ, then congratulations, you just admitted things can exist without being created. Which means biology doesnât need your sky-dad either.
False analogy.
My dinner isnât a conscious being. If I invited you over and drowned your kid in my soup âto punish evilâ you wouldnât call it dinner. Youâd call the cops.
(Furthermore, Iâm vegan, so my meals donât include anything which is/was a conscious being)
Then do it.
Stop dodging. Show reproducible, testable evidence that distinguishes your God from imagination. Until then, youâre just asserting.
Nobody âdesignedâ it. Evolution by natural selection explains complexity from simplicity, no designer required. If you think complexity requires design, explain who designed God, who is infinitely more complex.
Wrong. Biology is clear: human life is a continuum, not a single magic switch. Whatâs disputed is when rights should be granted, which is a moral and legal question, not a scientific one. Youâre just mixing categories.
They were going to be evil otherwise.
They were essentially telling Elisha to kill himself. And he used Godâs name in vain.
Job is now in heaven. I donât think Job cares about the distant point in time when things were bad. Thatâs like calling your parents cruel for banning you from videogames as a kid - although even that is more significant than what happened to Job.
Thatâs because God is God. If a pig slaughters another pig and eats it, then pigs would find that evil. Yet itâs okay when a human does it.
Oops! You didnât mention any nuking of towns đ€
Finally, thereâs your goalposts. It has to be âreproducibleâ and âtestableâ. Can you show me reproducible and testable evidence that Napoleon existed?
Pre-crime executions of babies? Youâre justifying mass infanticide with Minority Report. Thatâs not morality, thatâs thought-policing unborn futures. By that logic, God shouldâve killed you before you typed this comment.
They yelled âbaldy.â Youâre the one rewriting it as âkill yourselfâ to excuse bears mauling children. Imagine standing in front of a grieving parent and saying âdonât worry, your kid had it coming for making fun of a prophetâs haircut.â
So torturing someone is fine as long as you reward them later? If I broke your legs today but promised you a PS5 in ten years, would that make me moral? This is abuse with a consolation prize.
Wrong twice.
First, might doesnât make right. If God orders genocide, itâs still genocide. slapping âGodâ on it doesnât turn evil into good.
Second, your pig analogy fails with me because Iâm vegan. It isnât okay when humans slaughter pigs. You just admitted your morality boils down to âthe strong can do whatever they want to the weak.â
Thatâs not morality, thatâs predation.
Congratulations, you admitted it: divine command theory. If God ordered you to skin your child alive, youâd call it good. Thatâs not morality, thatâs just worshiping raw power.
Jericho, Sodom, Gomorrah. Ring a bell? The Bible is full of God wiping out entire cities. Pretending otherwise wonât erase the body count.
Strawman.
We donât need to âreproduceâ Napoleon, we verify him through multiple independent sources: letters, accounts, artifacts, battlefields. If you have comparable evidence for God, written by neutral parties, corroborated by archaeology, contemporaneous, and consistent, then put it on the table.
Spoiler: you donât.
All youâve got is one internally contradictory book written by believers.
If He did, He would be well within His right to. If they werenât going to be totally depraved, He would have rescued them.
No. Refer to the text and context.
2 Kings 2:11-12, 23 [11] And as they still went on and talked, behold, chariots of fire and horses of fire separated the two of them. And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. [12] And Elisha saw it and he cried, âMy father, my father! The chariots of Israel and its horsemen!â And he saw him no more. Then he took hold of his own clothes and tore them in two pieces. ⊠[23] He went up from there to Bethel, and while he was going up on the way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, âGo up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!â
Basically, Elijah is missing. Elisha is claiming to be his successor. They mock the account of Elijah leaving earth instead of dying, and basically telling Elisha to go disappear with Elijah. Since they possibly didnât believe Elijah was carried up and instead died, theyâd be asking Elisha to do the same.
So torturing someone is fine as long as you reward them later? If I broke your legs today but promised you a PS5 in ten years, would that make me moral? This is abuse with a consolation prize.
A PS5 isnât comparable to heaven. An eternity in paradise isnât a consolation prize. And God didnât torture Job. Satan did.
Fair. I hope youâd agree that killing unborn children is also wrong.
How would you define morality
The towns so bad that only one decent person lived in them? Who were spared alongside their family, despite their family also being terrible people?
I do. There are multiple independent sources pertaining to Jesus, accounts. Alleged artifacts, definitely sites mentioned are proved to have existed. They are contemporary and consistent.
No, we donât. The New Testament is 26 separate writings. And even then, there are a few writings outside of it such as Josephus, The Didache, and Polycarp.
Youâre expecting someone to literally see Jesus rise from the dead and write about it and not be a believer? Thatâs like me saying âEveryone who writes pro vaccine material is pro vaccine. Find me some anti vaxxers arguing for vaccines, then Iâll listenâ.
Translation: God killing babies is fine because God did it.
Thatâs not morality, thatâs raw power worship.
If Hitler had been omnipotent, would you have called his actions ârightâ too? Because your standard isnât good vs evil; itâs just strong vs weak.
So the kids didnât say âkill yourselfâ, they said âgo up like Elijahâ Which is mockery, sure, but still not a capital offence.
Youâre still defending child-murder-by-bear for playground trash talk. If your morality system equates insults with death, itâs not morality, itâs authoritarian fragility.
Wrong. Job 2:3 literally says God gave Job into Satanâs hand âwithout reasonâ. If I hand my kid to a known abuser âas a testâ, Iâm responsible for everything that follows. Passing the blame to Satan doesnât make God look better, it makes Him look like an accomplice.
Iâm pro-choice. I donât believe potential life has more value than the actual lives of the people carrying them.
But hereâs the kicker: even by your standard, your God fails. The Flood, the plagues, Old Testament wars; unborn children wiped out en masse. You claim to worship the âsanctity of lifeâ but your own deity is historyâs biggest abortionist.
Morality = reducing unnecessary suffering and increasing well-being.
By that standard, bears mauling kids, floods drowning babies, and plagues killing firstborns are immoral.
Your definition is âwhatever God saysâ which means if God told you to burn your toddler alive, youâd call it good. Thatâs not morality, itâs obedience.
Even if you take that at face value, God still torched everyone; children, infants, livestock. Collateral damage doesnât vanish just because you declare âeveryone there was badâ. Thatâs exactly the justification every human tyrant has ever used.
None of those are contemporary.
Josephus was born after Jesus allegedly died, and his passage about Jesus is widely considered tampered with by Christians.
The Didache and Polycarp are Christian writings, believers repeating their own story, not neutral evidence. Thatâs like Mormons citing Joseph Smithâs buddies as âindependent sourcesâ
Also, proving Jesusâ existence doesnât prove his divinity. I dont care if a person named Jesus lived 2,000 years ago.
And no, your vaccine analogy fails. We have independent, testable, reproducible data for vaccines. If all we had were 26 internally inconsistent pamphlets from believers claiming vaccines worked, weâd laugh them out of the lab.
Your entire defense boils down to this: âGod is good because Heâs Godâ. Thatâs not an argument. Thatâs an abdication of morality. Youâd excuse anything; genocide, torture, infanticide; as long as it had divine branding.
Which means you donât have a moral compass at all.
Youâve outsourced it to a book that justifies things youâd call evil in any other context.