Christianity is vexed with logic problems. I’ve been addressing them, calling them out and watching these christians vanish from the conversation. One such christian apologist goes by the name Ovi. He defends an evangelical hypocrite from criticism.
When a christian brings up the bible to judge someone, then a secularist judges the christian with their own bible (showing that people in glass houses shouldn’t cast stones), people like Ovi rise to create a feeble argument as to why it’s ok to apply some of the bible against some people, but not the whole of the bible.
Several times he’s posted the same sentiment about the Old Testament. When the old testament is brought up, showing the other face of “god” – the villain, the killer, the hater, the mass murderer, he rolls out this argument time and time again. Rather than defeat it each time, I’m going to address it in one place and reference it to each of his posts.
“You have to understand the Bible and the sequence of events. Old Testament deals with Israel being under “The Law”. They were far from perfect people, but they were chosen by God. For them, God issued 10 commandments and 600+ laws because they were so corrupted in their hearts that no one would survive if every sin was punishable by death. Those laws were made for Israel and they are not to be taken out of context. Those laws don’t reflect the personality of God, they just reflect the corruption of Israel. Jesus on the other hand reflects the personality of God, He gave the 2 commandments that overwrite all 600 of them. Matthew 22:37-40 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself. 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments. People try too hard to depict God anything else but love. You have to study the Bible and see for yourself.”Ovi commenting his argument on a video.
Let’s examine this logic closely.
Ovi’s argument is that these laws of god (instructing the killing of women, of men, of children) are not representing god as the “villain,” but instead it’s a result of evil people that needed harsh punishment to stop “sinning.”
Every statement, should logically extend to similar circumstance. Let’s simplify Ovi’s argument to this:
OVI’s ARGUMENT: If a leader creates laws that are harsh, it is not a reflection on the leader but on the people who need such laws to control their behavior.
Logic Response #1: Apply this logic to today. This could be used to defend Hitler, Stalin, ISIS and many other evil tyrants.
The above Logic Response quickly breaks this down. Apologists will often say, “well this is god, he gets to do what he wants.” That’s the villain defense of god… that god is a villain, so deal with it. However, not all these actions were done by god. Many times these killings were done by people, under god’s instruction. So this directly applies. It’s no different than Hitler demanding people turn over Jewish people, or Stalin ordering the round up of christians.
Logic Response #2: In what way does killing a non-virgin woman, fix evil behavior? Or how about killing infants and children, how does that fix “evil” behavior?
By the way, what sin did the child commit? Why did god need to kill them? Why did god’s people need to kill them?
If their parents committed a crime, why kill the child? Those children were as innocent as the savior you worship… in this way, they became children sacrifices… your bible speaks to their blood spilled for crimes they never committed.
This isn’t as simple as what Ovi portrays. This isn’t about killing villains. Men were killed for working on the Sabbath. How’s that a problem? That’s an issue that needs to be fixed with murder? Come on Ovi, you can think better than that.
Logic Response #3: If the Old Testament was specific to the Israelites and not to us, then why is it in your bible?
The OT isn’t used as a “life lesson,” but a “rigid law” of god. People go back to it because Jesus never condemned the gay. So they reference Paul. But Paul has a lot of cultural baggage, so they flip to the OT to attempt to show how “god feels about it.”
Then the secular comes along and says, “ok if you want to go there, lets go there…” we bring up the passages on things also deserving death.
That’s when the zealots throw a defense, “well that doesn’t apply as we aren’t those people, and the OT law was written only for them.”
Either it applies or it doesn’t. You can’t play leap frog with logic.