The Biblical God cannot be shown immoral

The Biblical God Cannot be shown immoral. My initial impression is that this resolution is true. God can’t be shown immoral because God doesn’t exist, and what doesn’t exist can hardly be immoral. Furthermore, God is defined as being morally perfect. As such, it’s simply a contradiction in terms to say a morally perfect being isn’t morally perfect. Thus, at first pass, it seems whether God exists or not, he cannot be shown immoral. Clearly then, to have a meaningful debate about whether the Biblical God can be shown immoral we must (i) suppose for the sake of argument that God exists, and (ii) do not suppose that God is morally perfect. Otherwise, this resolution is not debatable. So, supposing that YHWH exists but reserving judgment on his moral character, how might we learn what sort of individual YHWH is? What source could inform us of whether he is moral or immoral? In the philosophy of religion, we’d typically look to our experiences and observations. If we observe or experience something we’d expect from a good YHWH, we have reason to think he’s good. If we observe or experience something we’d expect from an immoral YHWH, we’d have reason to think he’s immoral. But, pro seems to have restricted the source that could inform us of YHWH’s moral character to the Old and New Testaments (presumably, that canon containing only 66 books). In order for these Biblical texts to inform us of YHWH’s moral character, they must be reliable sources. I don’t think we need to suppose they’re inspired and inerrant in order for them to relay authentic historical information and thus will simply suppose that they’re authoritative in their descriptions of YHWH. However, these authoritative texts tell us that God is perfectly moral [Ps. 18:30; Matt. 5:48; 1 Jn. 4:8, etc. ]. How can we assume that texts which tell us God is perfectly moral are reliable when we aren’t supposing that God is perfectly moral? Well, we simply need to bracket the texts which directly or indirectly describe YHWH’s moral character. Otherwise, the resolution is not debatable, for then the resolution would be trivially true: of course God cannot be shown immoral, we know he’s morally perfect. This has the interesting consequence that while sin exists, we cannot suppose it deserves punishment. Committed or contracted sin would only deserve punishment if it was wrong to disobey God. But, that supposes that God (or his commands) are moral. For the purposes of this debate, we cannot suppose beforehand that disobeying God is any worse than disobeying Hitler. Thus, we can’t agree that sin provides God with any morally sufficient reason for punishing human beings. But, this raises innumerable questions about God’s moral integrity. Reading over Genesis 3 and how God curses humanity and the earth for Adam and Eve’s sin, Gen. 7 and how God drowned nearly every living thing, Rom. 5 and how death and condemnation befell all of humanity because of Adam and Eve’s sin, the only question left in my mind is how isn’t YHWH immoral? But, let’s narrow our focus and think of those texts which tell us YHWH commanded or convinced people to kill children and infants. I’ve found at least 13 such places in the Old Testament, but let’s look at just one for now: 2 Samuel 11-12. These texts relate how David lusted after a married woman, sent her husband off to war to be killed, and then took her for his own. She gave birth to a son. In punishment for this terrible action of David’s, YHWH not only gives David’s wives to other men so he can ‘do in broad daylight what David did in secret’, but inflicts his newborn child with a fatal illness which kills him after 7 days of struggle. What reason could YHWH have for murdering an innocent newborn? Why would YHWH cause David’s wives to commit adultery? Well, 2 Sam. 12:14 tells us the reason YHWH has done these things is because David showed contempt for the Lord. That’s it. Because David disobeyed God, his wives and child were punished. Even if a person deserves punishment for showing God contempt (something we can't as of yet suppose and which I'd struggle to buy after reading stories like these), why does that person's family thereby deserve punishment? They didn't show God contempt. Recall however that we’re not allowed to assume sin deserves punishment, lest the resolution be trivially true. So, here’s my problem. YHWH’s action violates the following plausible moral principle:1. If anyone intentionally kills an innocent child, unless we have overriding reason to think they were justified in doing so, we should regard them as immoral. Given that YHWH intentionally killed David’s child for something David did (by striking it ill for a week no less! ), we have no overriding reason to think YHWH was justified in killing this poor infant. To win this debate, my opponent must show that this innocent child and David's wives deserved to be punished for something they had nothing to do with, from Biblical texts which say nothing of the sort. I shall take it that therefore that YHWH should be regarded as immoral and consequently that the Biblical God can be shown immoral. Thank you for reading.