Jim Meyer
Personal Research
03 November 2013
Jehovah’s Witnesses, God, Ethics and Biblical (Infanticide) Genocide and “The destruction was to be complete: every man, woman, and child was to be killed… the death of these children was actually their salvation…God does these children no wrong in taking their lives… So who is wronged? Ironically, I think the most difficult part of this whole debate is the apparent wrong done to the Israeli soldiers themselves.” [William L. Craig, Christian apologist]. John Allister author of The Amalekite Genocide takes a position similar by saying, “… what of terrorized mothers trying to protect their innocent children… if innocent civilians might be killed-an unfortunate ‘collateral damage’ (this wasn’t collateral damage, I don’t even like that term, these were people with feelings, emotions and desires and their deaths were deliberate and calculated)…the infants and children who were killed…would, in the afterlife, come to recognize God's just purposes, despite the horrors and terrors of war. They would side with God in the rightness of his purposes-even if it had meant temporary terror.” It is comforting to note that the Rational Christianity website 1 observed “It's worth noting that being killed with a sword (perhaps beheaded) was at the time one of the quickest ways for the children to die…” This type of reasoning is abhorrent and disgusting.
In this paper, I want to argue that the idea of killing (genocide) innocent children is unethical, immoral and depraved. I want to establish the inconsistency of the Bible, Religion and Jehovah God (YHWH) and the total lack of responsible reasoning by both the ungodly or godly theologians in supporting a ‘malignant disease’ that seems to be at peace with and accept as perfectly fitting and ethical to kill (murder) infants of a different culture and ethnicity in the Hebrew Scriptures.
Certainly, Jehovah’s Witnesses would not condone such a fundamental approach to mankind by walking hand in hand with the above mentioned Christian apologist. After all, their God Jehovah is the most benevolent and merciful God amidst all other gods. ‘Not only is Jehovah God love but he is also the embodiment or personification of love.’ “Jehovah [is] a God of moral standards, not as a capricious, erratic person.” it-2 p. 16. Jehovah’ Witnesses can’t help but notice “the extreme contrast between Jehovah’s morality in every respect and the present-day civilization’s immorality in every respect.” 5/15/54 p. 306 par. 7. “Jehovah does not predestine his intelligent creatures; he gives each one freedom and opportunities to choose between good and bad, right and wrong and Jehovah is never the source of wickedness…” 5/15/07 p. 23 par. 8. If Jehovah were to stand out as different, benevolent and merciful, from all these others gods surely it would be evident here in how he would view infanticide or genocide. So as we venture on this journey let’s see the evolution of morality and ethics as regards God (Jehovah), the Bible, Religion and Jehovah’s Witnesses. It must manifest itself here, if anywhere. Let’s take a good look at religion to see if a different attitude exists.
Religion is calculated on the notion that God can do no harm and whatever is good emanates from him and through revelation. (Devine Command Theory) Ethics, conversely, is a humanistic perspective, based on reason, to affect good and minimize harm. I would contend that the ethics, to good and no harm, are superior to the ethical revelations at Deuteronomy: 7, Joshua: 10 and 1 Samuel: 15. I find it problematic even to call these Biblical accounts ethical. What would Craig say as about these accounts? I believe he would undoubtedly respond, “…they are God’s ethics who can do no harm.” However, it’s not the source or point of origin of a normative system that matters, but its virtue, morality, value and effect on others. So, what is the right thing to do? What is the ethical way to act? Alexander Solzhenitsyn