Professional Apologist and amoral monster Clay Jones penned this outrageous chapter defending the indefensible God of the old testament. Normally, Christians will hem and haw and say, “That’s the Old Testament. We don’t believe that anymore.” Not Clay Jones.
Clay Jones is a better Christian than you. Clay Jones knows that God could never do wrong. Clay Jones is the kind of person who can modify “bully” with “genocidal” like it’s no big deal to commit genocide. It’s like pulling Susie’s pigtail or giving Mark a swirlie. Bullying isn’t nice, sure. But neither is being a tattle-tale. Even in the title, he’s already trivializing genocide
We Gnu atheists say, no. God is not just a genocidal bully. He’s a genocidal monster that you, for reasons known only to Cod, find worthy of worship.
Of course, it gets worse.
Here are the main rationalizations for genocide:
1. Page 178. Genocide is about the motives of the oppressor, not the effect on the oppressed.
While herem was carried out by the Israelites against a specific people – the Canaanites – it was not motivated by racial superiority or hatred. Therefore, the language of ethnic cleansing or genocide is inaccurate. Idolatry, not ethnicity, is the issue here.
Got that? So the holocaust wasn’t genocide because Hitler went out of his way to point out the christ-killing tendencies of German Jews.
2. Page 174. We can only know genocide is wrong because God gives us an objective moral standard. Since atheists don’t believe in God, they can’t say genocide is wrong, because that would go against the objective moral standard we don’t have.
We are also right to point out that New Atheists’ condemnation of God’s actions and commands makes use of an objective moral standard that they have been unable to adequately justify,… pg.174
3. Page 180. God says to kill all Canaanites, showing no mercy, but then it says to not intermarry with Canaanites. Since it gave rules about intermarriage, they must not have killed all of them.
Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy. Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons, for they will turn our sons away from following me to serve other gods…
Notice the tension. This passage speaks of total destruction and showing no mercy, but then proceeds to instruct the Israelites regarding treaties and intermarriage. But if no Canaanites are going to be around, then why even bother including this?
That’s weapons-grade disingenuousness. It’s as if I told you, “don’t go in my room. Don’t even consider opening the door. Don’t turn on my computer. Don’t rearrange my closet or eat my jellybeans.” And your response was, “Notice the tension! You speak of not going in your room or even opening the door, but then you proceed to instruct me on eating your jellybeans and trying on your clothes. If I’m not even in your room, why bother including this?”
4. Page 183. Even though it totally wasn’t genocide, the Canaanites really did deserve it.
What I learned…was that they were, indeed, desperately wicked…If we don’t tell anyone, they won’t understand God’s true reasons for their destruction.
Sometimes, genocide is ok.
And finally, my personal favorite:
Page 175: It’s ok to murder children for the crime of being Canaanite because they’ll go straight to heaven:
Undoubtedly, some children would have died at the hands of the Israelites during the conquest, but all the children who were killed would wake up in god’s presence.
Killing babies is pretty much a moral imperative. They go straight to heaven if you smash them against the rocks, but if you let them grow up, they might not worship the right god. They’ll go to hell! Why take that risk?
Makes you wonder why they’re opposed to abortion, if killing children guarantees their eternal bliss.