The bible is a moral book

How is it justified? Again, why does he intervene with free will in order to make people reject him but doesn't do it to make them accept him? It doesn't make sense. Even if you say he was justified in doing so because the pharaoh rejected him several times before, for all you know he may have accepted him this last time. How are we supposed to know when God is the one who hardened his heart this time?Your assumption here is that God doesn't ever intervene to make people accept him. This, however, is completely untrue. Take for example the Apostle Saul, later Paul. Christ appeared before him, and turned him into quite possibly the most successful follower of christ in recorded history. Scripture also tells us that the Holy Spirit strengthens peoples.Eph. 3:16: "That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, that ye may be strengthened with power through his Spirit in the inward man."Col. 1:11: "being strengthened with all power according to his glorious might so that you may have great endurance and patience,"In Job 1:21 we read that God gives and takes away -- such is his right as ruler, creator, and savior.“Naked came I out of my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return thither. The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord.”Even if you say he was justified in doing so because the pharaoh rejected him several times before, for all you know he may have accepted him this last time. For all we know he would've still rejected him as well. His advisors, as I pointed out before, we most likely in a perfectly viable position to stop him, but they hardened their own hearts.Yet, there are also bible verses which seem to contradict this idea:I will not go into this entire discussion, as it is a lot to cover. The important information, however, is that 84% of christian's subscribe to the idea of original sin, and should therefore be given serious consideration when interpreting the morality of any given idea.Ok, suppose it's his children that mock him. He created them. As I explained earlier, we cannot create in the same respect that God cannot. We can only use what is God's to make more stuff, and we therefore have no right to make judgement calls on the lives of others.God seems to be a leader that tells us what to do and doesn't follow what he tells us to do. If you were to apply the "thou shalt not kill" law to god, he did sin. However, I know you'll say those laws don't apply to god for some reason. So are adults hypocrites because they drink alcohol but tell children they cannot? By no means. You're right on when you assume I will say it doesn't apply to God. As I've already explained, we are not on the same level or in the same position as God is. We cannot kill because we don't own anything. Jealousy and Pride are sins because we are in debt to God and we have right to think of ourselves or want more than we already have. God can demand all of our attention in a jealous manner because we are indebted to him because of the price he paid for our sins.Apparently god doesn't realize that people make mistakes. Just because a person makes a mistake, doesn't mean they reject that person as an authority figure. Just because someone didn't mean to break a law, it does not mean they don't pay for that broken law. I am expected reimburse those whom I have caused loss, whether I meant to cause them loss or not. In the same way, our 'mistakes' are actially a serious offense to Gods' standard. He has given us a way out of paying for this, but it does not change the fact that he cannot tolerate mistakes.So, in other words, we're slaves to God and have no rights when it comes to God doing things to us, which seems to indicate even more so that the Bible is immoral. So when we break laws, and we go to prison, we have no rights when it comes to the government putting us in prison? This is an indication of how tainted and wrong our legal system is. This quote is clearly exaggerated and wrong, however, it it reflective of the last point you've made. When we break the rules of a superior, we are indeed indebted to them. Not only are we indebted to an authority, but we are indebted to the person who gave us breath in the first place. Please explain to me how it is immoral for a God, who gave you the right to breath in the first place, to take away the breath he gave you? He has no obligation to serve you. In his grace he has lent himself to us, to help us along the way. When we break his law though, why should we expect him to stick with us? Well he does. He gives us salvation through his son, a way to make the wrongs right. This salvation was by no means his obligation, yet his free choice to give us.These laws, to begin with, are unjust according to most western standards of morality. Who thinks it's okay to murder homosexuals or stone adulterers nowadays? Many people think it is wrong to deny people marriage because they are the same gender. There are many things that would be considered unjust in today's society that God has a law for.Who thinks it is just to question the dictation of a perfect, holy creator. This creator in his omniscience created the whole world and everything there is to know within it. Who are we to question his laws? While each individual law we may not follow, we are not a theocracy. If we were a theocracy, these laws would be perfectly just in light of our subordination to God.