The God of the old testament is not immoral.

Again, Sir, I would like to respectfully remind you that your debate topic is "The God of the Old Testament is Not Immoral" so in order to back up that claim, I am a little perplexed at why you keep saying that if I want to debate the moral argument to reach out to you outside of this debate. You chose the debate topic, So I feel as though you should back up your claim. The "interpretation" of the bible does not stand under scrutiny otherwise there would not be so many atheists and I would not be continuing this debate. I no more believe in your god than the other thousands of gods that people worship because they do not stand under scrutiny, Not matter how the believers of said gods decide to interpret it. You made the statement, And verbatim said "God deciding to punish us for our sins is not inherently wrong but instead right just like a parent disciples their children God disciples us as he is our parent literally and figuratively. " So I responsded according to your statement that a decent parent would never discipline their children in such a manner. Now you are changing your statement to say god is unlike our parents, But again you are the one that made that comparison. If you want to say god is unlike our parents and can"t be compared, Fine but again the same exact thing can be said for many other gods. What solution would I have suggested for god? Maybe not killing a bunch of innocents in a flood, Maybe not punishing all of humanity eternally for the mistakes of his first creations? The bible states the flood was global but interpret it as you wish. I understand men were bound to treat women horribly, I understand this because as an agnostic atheist I know that there is almost certainly no god and that"s just what went down those days. Certainly if there was a god, He would intervene with this kind of treatment towards women and non-virgins and children, He would at least speak out on it as you stated he did regarding "foreigners/aliens" despite the fact that they were culturally viewed as lesser beings in this time period. Implications in the bible also state that women can be bought and sold into marriage so I"m missing where the consent is? I don"t know if "god" told paul to write the bible anymore than Zues did, Or Allah did, Or if he was schizophrenic or if he was simply just telling stories for entertainment or to control the masses as many religions do. Again, I can read between the lines of any religious text or any fictional book. That means nothing in regard to the accuracy or truth behind it. The bible chooses to speak literally and outright claim some issues as being sinful when it feels like it, For all else that goes against things we know are factually and morally wrong let"s just leave it to interpretation. Saying if "god didn"t do it people would have done it regardless" really takes away from what god is supposed to be. Why is god doing something that people would on their own, Is he not supposedly above that? I mean, I am glad that the new testament eventually realized how shameful practically everything the old testament stood for was and had a change of heart, However as jesus stated "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. " It"s appalling to me that god had to have his son publically be brutally murdered to offer forgiveness for what he himself created and allowed. I get the bible is up to interpretation, Just like all religions and fables, The interpretation is no more rational of christ. I get that humans have sinned (as god made them and allowed them to do) and i surely get that he will issue wrath upon those who don"t believe because the only time god chooses to intervene is with violence and wrath when it would really be quite lovely and inspiring if he could use his selectional intervenence on starving people, Cancer and rape victims. But you know, Free will and all that. Christianity has been influenced by paganism, Zoroastrianism, Ecclesiastes, Canaanite, Numerous ancient Egyptian scriptures, Etc. It is important to note the violence ensued by christians against other religions in regards to influence. If you are going around destroying other peoples property and sacred texts and murdering them and your group has more money or power, Then yes you will come out dominant. Being the dominant party does not mean you are correct and the best out of the other groups. I mean, Look at the rise of Nazism. All religions are equally "valid". There are other monotheistic, Deistic gods. And for the religions that aren"t monotheistic, Who is really to say theyre wrong when things are backed up by faith and interpretation. I"ve yet to see any evidence or reason from your arguments, It is simply your belief like every one else"s. Your "answers" to my questions are simple in the sense that that exact same argument can be used for any belief, Albeit with a few words switched out. No matter which "god" it is I would surely not want to worship and spend eternity with one who claims to be all knowing and capable of anything yet does nothing when it is truly needed, Yet does the most no matter who is hurt when his pride is hurt. When I say evidence I mean supporting proof that can lead a logical person to the conclusion that their god exists, Evidence that is not reliant on faith or interpretation. Evidence that applies to their god specifically and not any other mythical creature or religion. My argument is not based solely on the moral agreement (even though that was your debate topic), But my argument stems from there being no evidence, From believing that interpretion does not equal facts and can be extremely differentiated depending on the interpreter, And from the valid statement that your claims hold no more confirmation than many other religious sentiments and beliefs. Zeus & Athens bless.