"However, if one cares to examine the circumstances and assess the rationale, the Bible consistently exonerates itself by offering legitimate clarification and explanation to satisfy the honest searcher of truth."
Bbbullshit! "Examine the circumstances and 'assess the rationale'"?? REALLY? For a P.h.D, Dr. Miller is quite credulous (to no surprise). Is there ANY circumstance (EVER) when it is morally OK to tear babies from their mother's womb's, torture children with fire (for eternity), or commit genocide/infanticide? As with most religionists, Miller's article demonstrates that he has completely missed what morality is all about (human well being).
"God’s vengeance is not like the impulsive, irrational, emotional outbursts of pagan deities or human beings."
WRONG. Yes it is, just read the bible "in context" (without the bias toward confirmation) and you'll see that quite easily. This statement stems from the basic false presupposition that the bible ought to be interpreted favorably in all cases - and that
idea stems from the a priori assumption that the bible is the inspired "word of God". Intellectual hypocrisy, it seems, has no bounds with religious people.
"The atheist and agnostic have absolutely no platform on which to stand to make moral or ethical distinctions—except as the result of purely personal taste."
100% wrong again.
Morality is about human well being, period. Thus, we have plenty to "stand on" and SAY about that because human well being is quantifiable (at the very least in a general sense and in practical application). The minute a Christian (or other religionist) starts talking about anything other than
human well being, they are no longer talking about morality. Thus, this statement is not only false, it is just plain uninformed and silly.
"The facts of the matter are that the Canaanites, whom God’s people were to destroy, were destroyed for their wickedness..."
Really? So humans (at the command of "the Lord") didn't do the killing, this killing machine called "wickedness" did it? Yet again, another silly rationalization in an attempt to rescue an absurd and immoral bronze age belief system.
"There simply was no viable solution to their condition except destruction. Their moral depravity was “full” (Genesis 15:16). They had slumped to such an immoral, depraved state, with no hope of recovery, that their existence on this Earth had to be terminated—just like in Noah’s day..."
So where is this destruction now? Why isn't Yahweh killing babies today? The population has grown substantially since then and there is obviously far greater amounts of "immorality". If your deity isn't doing what he supposedly did in the OT (commanding genocide of "evil" people) then he must want
this immorality to be taking place.
Or what about the better interpretation that it's just superstition altogether? You Christians believe all of the other religions are superstition (or false), except yours. Interesting isn't it, that you just so happen
to have been born into the right religion (while billions were born into the wrong one). That you can't see the problem with that is itself
"Such people [atheists/"liberals"/etc] simply cannot see the rightness of evildoers being punished by execution or physical pain."
Oh the double standard! So, it is somehow "righteous" to smash little babies heads against rocks (Psalm 137:9), kill homosexuals (Leviticus 20), stone unruly children (Deuteronomy 21), or kill your own child (Judges 11) but if a woman claims God told her to do it today it's not OK??
Christians inherently know these things are immoral, detestable, and vile. Yet they rationalize it out of fear - again b/c they have assumed the bible is the word of God in advance (which of course is no different from superstition).
"The Bible provides the only logical, sensible, meaningful, consistent explanation regarding the principles of retribution, punishment, and the conditions under which physical life may be extinguished."
100% FALSE again.
The bible (specifically the first 5 books) provides sick, disgusting, vile, and immoral standards by which to live. Only a moral monster (like John Wayne Gacie, Pol Pot, or Joseph Stalin) would make up such nonsense. There is nothing "sensible" about stoning little children (regardless of the deeds of their parents), homosexuals, or disobedient kids.
This article is yet another example of how Christians invent their own version of Christianity BEFORE reading the bible, and then read into
the text what they want it to say (because discovering it's false is unacceptable).