The Biblical God cannot be shown immoral

I feel my thought on this issue has developed and hope others have found the debate informative and thought-provoking as well. With all of that said, I would remind the audience that the original premise made in the first post was not simply that God could be shown immoral, but that this be done "demonstrably" with no "definitely complicit" actions by God so that God's actions "can be justified. " The original challenge was to prove God's immorality demonstrably and definitely so that the possibility of God's justification was removed. I argue that I have shown conclusively that God's actions, according to the Bible, can indeed be justified in the aforementioned cases. Ultimately, the reasoning for such a high standard of proof is that if we are to judge one innocent until proven guilty beyond all shadow of a doubt in court of law, this certainly should be the standard our Creator is held to as well. It makes no sense to protect our fellow man from careless condemnation, yet be careless in condemning the God who made us and to whom we will be ultimately accountable to. That being said, I will address the newest arguments:Premise 1: Ultimately children die prematurely all the time. To make the argument that premature death is immoral is similar to the argument that temporal death in this life itself is immoral, yet since all mankind is guilty of death before God for wrongdoing (Romans 3:23; 6:23) how can one criticize God for exacting that penalty? Ultimately, all die in this life sooner or later (Romans 5:12), and we should fear eternal death rather than death in this life only. A child who God knew would become wicked would be better off not born at all (Mt. 10:28) so God actually does a child who He believes will become wicked a mercy by preventing their being born into this life so that they will avoid eternal condemnation and torture; receiving instead a blessed life in eternity. (Job 3:11-19) Ultimately, we do not have the knowledge of what the child was like or would become that God did, and would be premature in assuming that God made the wrong decision. We cannot assume God's decision was incorrect without assuming we have knowledge of what occurred equivalent to God, yet are given only a paucity of information from the chapters and should not assume that. Premise 2: Ultimately this sets the standard for the Bible to fully explain every single detail of God's actions so that everything He does is perfectly understood which I would argue is unrealistic even for a book as detailed as the Bible. What we do know is that all mankind is guilty of death before God which is why death, including premature death, occurs, and that Biblically death is not the end, but unborn children go to a place of peace and eternal rest. Thus we have enough knowledge to see how God could be justified in His actions, and if accepting the Bible at face value, one will thus believe God could be justified. Premise 3: Essentially it comes down to whether one gives God the benefit of the doubt or not. The evidence is inconclusive to show that God acted immorally due to a lack of detail about God's intentions, but we are told enough from the Bible to see how God could be justified. Given that, I argue that God, as with any person in court of law, should be considered innocent until proven guilty, and that the case against God's justification here is hardly ironclad. Concerning the additional arguments made by Con:Con is correct that neither Rom. 3 or Ps. 58 indicate God's righteousness as a judge, other texts such as Ps. 9:8; 96:13; 98:9; Is. 11:4; and Rev. 19:11 would be necessary to reference this. I won't address 'original sin' since it's a hypothetical construct debatable as to its Biblical nature; blasphemy could be considered wrong as a form of slander against God, or false condemnation. While the Bible makes clear that many such blasphemies will be forgiven by God in the end (Mk. 3:28) it is ultimately God's prerogative whether to do so or not, as He is the one being wronged. Ultimately, the Bible makes clear that all have sinned and the entire world is guilty before God. (Rom. 3:19,23) As Romans 6:23 says, "the wages of sin is death. " Indeed, death itself is only a consequence for all because all do evil. Romans 5:12 Therefore, by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; so death passed upon all men because all have sinned. (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. ) Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those that had not sinned after the manner of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. Furthermore, cases before the coming of Christ involving death such as that of David's child were not wholly under God's jurisdiction as it were, for it was the devil who had the power of death. Jesus actually came in part to destroy the devil and free mankind from Satan's power. Hebrews 2:14-15 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. All mankind was ultimately doomed to die and fall under the power of the devil until Jesus came to remove that power. Before that, even the most righteous people like Moses were under Satan's power. (Jude 1:9) Ultimately, the Bible makes clear that all mankind is guilty of death and as such was under Satan's power. All die in this life, it is where they spend their eternal destinies that ultimately matters, not when they pass from this life. To assume that God was unjustified in the case of David's child assumes perfect knowledge of the afterlife, David's child, and the guilt of the unborn that we simply do not have from what few details the passage gives us. We do have enough information to see how God could be justified. Concerning Job 3, Job is referring to the Biblical concept of 'sheol' where the dead go deep in the Earth, a place divided in two halves by a great gulf for the good and bad (Lk. 16:26). It is a common misconception that the Bible says the dead go to heaven. The word 'sheol' is used 65 times in the Old Testament, 8 times in the book of Job, and is translated by the KJV 31 times as "the grave," 31 times as "hell," and 3 times as "pit. " Job uses the word 'sheol' in 7:9; 14:13; 17:13,16; 21:13; 24:19; ad 26:6. . http://www.biblestudytools.com...Ultimately, I argue that God could be justified in a global Flood if it involved the equivalent of Old Testament child sacrifice which the nations in the book of Judges were destroyed for. We destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki for using war to destroy life, to stop a war costing more lives, and to prevent them from spreading their evil rule to other parts of the globe. Likewise if God was stopping a horribly evil regime from destroying lives, He too could be justified by destroying a murderous civilization to give mankind a chance at a better future. One cannot ask why God doesn't stop evil in the world, then criticize Him for acting to stop it in the past. Concerning David's wives, in the case of Bathsheba most clearly, she appears to have seduced David into committing adultery in the first place from 2 Samuel 11:1-5, so God in doing so would just be rendering to those who do evil the consequences of their decisions. In closing, I argue a holistic reading of the Bible provides reasonable evidence showing that God can be justified in these cases, and that God is not definitely and demonstratively immoral but can be justified as my original post asserted He could. I claim my original assertion justified. Thanks for reading.