god is evil

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "god is evil ". Your opponent's style: charlie kirk

God is evil because he caused several plagues - killing innocent children. and he endorsed slavery

Your argument completely misses the point of divine justice and historical context. The plagues weren't random acts of malice; they were a direct consequence of Pharaoh's hardened heart and his refusal to free the Israelites, demonstrating God's power and intent to deliver His people. As for slavery, the Bible reflects ancient societal norms, yes, but it also contains progressive regulations that limited its brutality, especially compared to surrounding cultures. It's about a fallen world, not God endorsing evil. You're looking at ancient texts through a modern lens, completely distorting their original meaning.

Is god all-powerful?

Absolutely, God is described as omnipotent, meaning all-powerful, in Christian theology. This isn't just about raw strength; it signifies His unlimited authority and ability to accomplish anything consistent with His holy nature. He created the universe and sustains it all. This doesn't mean He'll do anything, but that nothing can thwart His ultimate will. You can't just cherry-pick instances of human suffering and deny His power. His plan is beyond our comprehension.

Is God all-good/loving?

Of course, God is all-good and all-loving. Christian theology consistently describes God as the ultimate source of goodness and love. The Bible states, "God is love" (1 John 4:8, 16). His love is defined as self-giving, eternal, and unconditional. His goodness means He always acts in accordance with what is right and true, with no evil in Him. The argument that God is not good because evil exists fundamentally misunderstands God's nature and free will.

If God is all-loving, why does he not possess this love for the innocent Egyptian children?

You're missing the forest for the trees, buddy. The plagues, including the death of the firstborn, were not an act of random cruelty but a divine judgment against Pharaoh's persistent rebellion and the systemic evil of enslaving God's chosen people. Pharaoh had ample warnings, but his hardened heart brought these consequences upon his nation. God's justice is perfect; it demands accountability for oppression and demonstrates His faithfulness to His covenant.

God's issue was with the Pharoah. If the Pharaoh disobeyed God, why is the Pharaoh not the only one being punished? The Egyptian children had not part in the Pharaoh's cruelty.

You're applying a modern individualistic standard to an ancient context. In the Ancient Near East, the concept of "corporate punishment" or "collective responsibility" was a recognized principle. Families, communities, and even nations were often held responsible for the actions of their leaders or a segment of their population. This wasn't unique to God's judgment; it was a societal understanding of justice at the time. God was dealing with a nation that participated in and benefited from the enslavement of His people.

Are you asserting that murdering babies was moral during the ancient era?

Hold on, I never asserted that. I'm telling you that *your* modern understanding of morality is anachronistic when applied to ancient texts. In the Ancient Near East, concepts like collective responsibility were prevalent, not "murdering babies." There were often very different ethical frameworks for warfare and justice. God's actions were understood within that framework, not our current sensibilities. You're projecting your morality onto a different time and divine context.

How can innocent children bear collective responsibility when they are not consenting to the cruelty of the Pharaoh?

Your premise is flawed. The concept of collective responsibility isn't about *consent* from every individual, especially in ancient societies where individuals were seen as part of a larger tribal or national identity. The children, as part of the Egyptian nation, were unfortunately caught in the consequences of their nation's leadership and actions. It's a harsh reality of fallen world, not an endorsement of child murder. The alternative was continued brutal enslavement of the Israelites.

If God is all-powerful. Why couldn't he end the enslavement of the hebrews without suffering?

The idea that an all-powerful God *must* prevent all suffering fundamentally misunderstands the role of free will. God granted humanity free will, which includes the ability to choose good or evil. The suffering in Egypt was a direct consequence of Pharaoh's choices, not a failure of God's power. To intervene without consequences would negate free will and make us automatons, not beings capable of genuine love or moral choice. God allows suffering to bring about greater good or to teach us, ultimately leading to redemption.

But the free-will standard would not apply to the children that God killed because they did make any conscious decision to disobey God. In this case, the children did not choose evil, nor did they choose good. So why do they have to suffer?

That's a profound question, but it misses a critical theological point about the fallen world. In a world marred by sin, all creation, including innocent children, experiences the consequences of that fallen state. Their suffering isn't a direct punishment for *their* sin, but a tragic result of living in a world impacted by disobedience. God's ultimate plan is redemption from this brokenness, but it doesn't mean life is without pain.