The Biblical Actions of the Christian God are Inconsistent with Its Biblical Attributes (et al)

First, it is necessary to rectify a few of my opponent's opening statements, as they are simply incorrect... >> "If I can show you in these 5 things that God is not contradictory then I show that any other contradiction you put forth is more than likely out of context and without understanding. I asked for your 5 strongest." CORRECTION - you asked for 10; I gave you 5 - I reserve the right to continue with 5 others... ("You challenging me will allow you to layout the top 10 things that you believe have the most weight towards our God being a "bad" God."). >> "So rather than go to people that clearly hate God and have no knowledge about Him, I went and asked God." Obviously, this is inadmissible as evidence because God is not an objective source by any means. Furthermore, God provided no recorded material, so any quotes from God are inadmissible. ********************************** Additional Responses: >> "God setup marriage so we do not run around raping women, small boys...etc." This seems to be a ludicrous notion - monogamous relationships have been around for a very, very long time. >> "The Jews were given many laws and many "allowances" in the "Law" that was specifically for them and not reflective of the Character of God." None of which are the subject of this debate. I'm talking about "laws" and "allowances" concerning things like killing homosexuals and committing genocide, not things like eating only "clean" animals. >> "Justin Martyr ( 2nd Century AD) said it great. Dialogue with Trypho Chapter 21:1-Ch 23:1 - The entire text brings out the reason for the Jewish Laws and why they appear to contradict God. Because of their constant rebellion they were "allowed" certain sins that were against the Character of God." This makes no sense... just because some people have sinned it's OK to commit genocide? That's simply nuts. Furthermore, your own source highlights the contradictory nature of God's character - "Therefore, we must conclude that God, who is immutable, ordered these and similar things to be done only because of sinful men, and at the same time we confess Him to be sympathetic toward all men, prescient, needful of nothing, just, and good." >> "God is not talking out of both sides of his mouth… because we sin and he knows there are certain ones we could not overcome." So... in other words, God lays down laws he knows we will break and then punishes us for breaking them. Contradictory to a moral and just god... ***************************** >>> On Slavery. > My opponent's source on this issue has nothing to do with the actual issue - it talks about redemption of sins, not slavery. Furthermore, my opponent concedes that god was "severely against" oppression, yet not against slavery due to "avoid starvation and poverty." For some reason, he seems to think that conquering a nation and enslaving the people is not a form of oppression. The contradiction stands. >>> On Righteousness. > My opponent references Heb 4:14-16 as having to do with righteousness and the concept of Jesus. The passage reads: "Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need." I see no mention of righteousness in this passage. The issue of God's righteousness revolves (for one point) around the fact that God spared Lot from the destruction of Sodom because he was a righteous and just man, even though he offered his virginal daughters to an angry mob to be raped, and then later committed incest with them. My opponent's argument on this section is a complete red herring. >>> On Perfection of God's Law. > My opponent has apparently not read Hebrews 8, as he completely misunderstands the quote. Here is a brief summary of Hebrews 8: The writer is speaking of Jesus and how he fulfills the prophecies of a high priest that now "is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens" and replaces the tabernacle that Moses constructed to honor the first covenant. Then the writer explicitly states that the second covenant is "a better covenant, which was established upon better promises." God makes these covenants and the promises therein... if a better covenant is required, the first covenant was flawed in some sense. Regardless of who broke the covenant, if the law of God was perfect, a newer covenant could not be made on better promises because the first covenant would have been perfect by its nature of being God's law. Clearly, the contradiction remains. >>> On Mercy and War/Peace > My opponent makes the analogy of God:Man :: Parent:Unruly Child. However, he completely fails to address the issue that sometimes (by his analogy) the parent INSTRUCTS the child to do evil things. Was there something about the following that my opponent did not understand??? 1 Sam 15:2a, 3 - "Thus saith the LORD of hosts... Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and a$$." Exo 15:3 - "The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name." Psa 144:1 - "Blessed be the LORD my strength which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight:" Exo 12:29 - "And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle." God commands genocide, is explicitly referred to as a "man of war," teaches the Israelites how to kill people, and smites all the firstborn, even the little babies. What a merciful and peaceful god... Obviously this contradiction remains. ************************************ I would like to call the reader's attention to my opponent's following statement: "There are inconsistencies to God's Bible because God's standards (which He holds himself to) and those standards, which He holds us to, are in conflict." I thank him for conceding the debate.