Your god gave children cancer

[Pitchforkpat]

In Samuel 1: 4-5, the Israelites have just lost 4,000 men in battle with the Philistines. They bring the Ark of the Covenant into the camp in order to help. Unfortunately for them it doesn’t, and they lose another 30,000 men in the next battle. In the process the Philistines capture the ark.

The ark is brought home to the Philistine town of Ashod and the god of the Hebrews gets mad. He strikes the people of Ashod with what the KJV calls “emerods” (an archaic form of the word hemorrhoids). Scholars now believe this was actually something like bubonic plague and that the people were struck with tumors in the groin which were fatal. This is in part due to the presence of rats which accompanied the plague. Most modern Bibles us the term tumors. The Bible tells us that Yahweh inflicted these fatal tumors on both old and young:

“He afflicted the people of the city, both young and old, with an outbreak of tumors (1 Sam 5:9).

If Yahweh wasn’t happy with the Philistines taking his ark, all he had to do was have the ark disappear and reappear back with the Israelites, or even if he wanted to demonstrate his power he could have made it lift off into the air, turn around and float off back to the Israelites. He didn’t really have to give children cancer (malignant tumors). This was his personal choice of punishment (if you believe the legend).

Have you ever been to a children’s cancer ward? I have. It really makes you think. If you’ve never been, I suggest you go and then ask yourself if a “loving” “merciful” god would give children cancer.

[Hamster]

Scholars now believe this was actually something like bubonic plague and that the people were struck with tumors in the groin which were fatal.

citation needed

[Thersites]

Your goal here is obvious-- to make an emotional argument against theism. However, I think your argument could be as easily made by noting that God invented cancer, or that God made a universe in which the atomic bomb was possible... or even that God allows the common cold! So what?

On a side note, do you consider atheism to be a logical conclusion or an emotional one? If you think that atheism is mainly or completely the result of logical thought, why bother with these arguments from outrage?

[Pitchforkpat]

citation needed

Em...modern Bibles are not written by amatuers. I gave you a quote from the NIV. You can look up the others yourself. If still think these scholars are wrong you can ask for more evidence.

[Pitchforkpat]

Your goal here is obvious-- to make an emotional argument against theism

It’s always easier to attack the messenger than deal with the issue. Christians are great at that. Thanks for demonstrating this once again.

However, I think your argument could be as easily made by noting that God invented cancer, or that God made a universe in which the atomic bomb was possible... or even that God allows the common cold!

Not really. The children themselves hadn’t done anything deserving of such brutal treatment. This was spiteful behavior. Yahweh chose to give them cancer. My point was that directly inflicting cancer on children is not the actions one would hope a “loving” “merciful” deity would exhibit. If you think giving cancer to children is justified here then I’d like to hear your argument. Do you have one?

[Manwë Súlimo]

Ain't sin a terrible thing? It's almost as if the wages of it was death.

[Thersites]

It’s always easier to attack the messenger than deal with the issue. Christians are great at that. Thanks for demonstrating this once again.

It sounds like an emotional argument to me. Logic doesn't require childrens' cancer wards. Just sayin'

Not really. The children themselves hadn’t done anything deserving of such brutal treatment. This was spiteful behavior. Yahweh chose to give them cancer. My point was that directly inflicting cancer on children is not the actions one would hope a “loving” “merciful” deity would exhibit. If you think giving cancer to children is justified here then I’d like to hear your argument. Do you have one?

If I had one prepared, I would have posted it already. Sorry to disappoint

But still, I don't see how you differentiate between an atomic bomb and children with cancer. It's basic Theodicy either way.

[Pitchforkpat]

Ain't sin a terrible thing? It's almost as if the wages of it was death.

And what sin did the children commit that deserved cancer?

[fm93]

If Yahweh wasn’t happy with the Philistines taking his ark

There are plenty of other reasons why he wasn't happy with them.

if he wanted to demonstrate his power he could have made it lift off into the air, turn around and float off back to the Israelites.

This was first and foremost a judgment against the Philistines. What makes you think he wanted to demonstrate his power?

He didn’t really have to give children cancer (malignant tumors).

The text doesn't say they all died from it.

Have you ever been to a children’s cancer ward? I have. It really makes you think. If you’ve never been, I suggest you go and then ask yourself if a “loving” “merciful” god would give children cancer.

Why don't you go and ask yourself if a morally good God should allow people to do harmful things without being punished? People give themselves and others cancer.

[Pitchforkpat]

But still, I don't see how you differentiate between an atomic bomb and children with cancer.

Here’s one way. Humans aren’t supposed to be perfectly merciful and good so when they drop a bomb on someone, it’s not too much of a surprise. When a god gives children cancer out of spite, it’s hard to make the argument that this deity is perfectly good and merciful. Feel free to take a moment and try.

[Manwë Súlimo]

And what sin did the children commit that deserved cancer?

The sin that every single human being commits - rebellion in one form or another against God's moral law. Also, nobody lives in a vacuum. The actions of one can and will affect the lives of everybody around them. Nobody is good and nobody deserves everlasting life. Not even children.

[Manwë Súlimo]

Here’s one way. Humans aren’t supposed to be perfectly merciful and good so when they drop a bomb on someone, it’s not too much of a surprise. When a god gives children cancer out of spite, it’s hard to make the argument that this deity is perfectly good and merciful. Feel free to take a moment and try.

Being merciful doesn't mean you are obligated to extend mercy to everyone, all of the time. God will show favor upon those that he will show favor. What is it to us?

[Thersites]

Here’s one way. Humans aren’t supposed to be perfectly merciful and good so when they drop a bomb on someone, it’s not too much of a surprise. When a god gives children cancer out of spite, it’s hard to make the argument that this deity is perfectly good and merciful. Feel free to take a moment and try.

Wow... you don't understand either end of the "problem of evil." I am surprised by that. I really am.

[Pitchforkpat]

There are plenty of other reasons why he wasn't happy with them.

What was he mad at the children for?

This was first and foremost a judgment against the Philistines. What makes you think he wanted to demonstrate his power?

I was preempting a typical Christian response. I think the writer thought his god to be an angry, spiteful god, just like the other gods of antiquity and saw nothing wrong in killing Philistine children with cancer.

The text doesn't say they all died from it.

It says many did. Please, is that the best you can do? “Well he left some of the children without cancer. He’s soooo nice”.

Why don't you go and ask yourself if a morally good God should allow people to do harmful things without being punished?

My point, which you seem to have missed, is that the punishment is unnecessarily harsh instead of merciful.

[Pitchforkpat]

Wow... you don't understand either end of the "problem of evil." I am surprised by that. I really am.

Only, this isn't a POE argument. Sorry, didn’t think I had to spell it out. It’s not about allowing evil in the world. It’s about the choice of punishment and the spiteful nature of it in consideration of the crime. What had the children done? You have to reconcile Christians’ claims about their deity’s perfectly merciful nature with the specific choice of punishment in this context. If you have an actual defense, I’d like to hear it.