![\"\"](\"https:\/\/2.bp.blogspot.com\/-U4Bn5vIQPUM\/Tb3ZEkZ_fXI\/AAAAAAAABZA\/Ulsdckbv5N8\/s1600\/amalekites.jpg\")
<\/a><\/div>\nP.Z. Myers has a post up lambasting Christian apologist William Lane Craig<\/a> for his defense of genocides in the Old Testament. \u00a0Here\u2019s the damning paragraph:<\/p>\n Moreover, if we believe, as I do, that God\u2019s grace is extended to those who die in infancy or as small children, the death of these children was actually their salvation. We are so wedded to an earthly, naturalistic perspective that we forget that those who die are happy to quit this earth for heaven\u2019s incomparable joy. Therefore, God does these children no wrong in taking their lives.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Don\u2019t worry, this isn\u2019t the part I agree with. \u00a0This is just more of the same bizarre situational ethics that I only hear Christians fall back on when it\u2019s time to explain away the Old Testament. \u00a0By this logic, Christians should consider killing any children I have, to spare them my heathen upbringing, and I\u2019d be doing a kindness if I waited outside a church to shoot anyone who had just\u00a0received\u00a0a plenary indulgence on Divine Mercy Sunday \u00a0today<\/a>. \u00a0Christians can reasonably view death as not too tragic, because they believe in an afterlife administered by a merciful God, but I rarely hear them speak this way in any other context.<\/p>\n But Craig went on to say something I do find compelling (though P.Z. Myers did not.)<\/p>\n WLC:<\/strong> So whom does God wrong in commanding the destruction of the Canaanites? Not the Canaanite adults, for they were corrupt and deserving of judgement. Not the children, for they inherit eternal life. 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. Can you imagine what it would be like to have to break into some house and kill a terrified woman and her children? The brutalizing effect on these Israeli soldiers is disturbing.<\/p>\n Myers: <\/strong>No. No, I can\u2019t imagine that. I can imagine parts of it: I can imagine a long, heavy piece of sharp metal in my hands. I can imagine a frightened, unarmed woman in front of me, trying to shelter her children. The part I can\u2019t imagine, the stuff I\u2019m having real trouble with, is imagining voluntarily raising my hand and hacking them to death. I have a choice in that situation, and I know myself well enough that if have to choose between killing people and letting them live, I\u2019d let them live, not that it would be a difficult decision at all. I also have no illusion that, in this imaginary situation where I have all the power and my \u2018enemies\u2019 are weak and helpless, I am the one who is being wronged.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The idea that a good God would order his chosen people to commit inhuman brutalities seems unsupportable. \u00a0It\u2019s one of the theodicy problems that bothered me when I posted about the slaughter of the Amalekites<\/a>, and I\u2019m glad Craig can admit that this<\/em> at least is disturbing. \u00a0So this is where I back Craig against Myers.<\/p>\n I think Myers\u2019s response is produced by the kind of cushy,\u00a0privileged, upper-middle class background we share. \u00a0Neither Myers not I have any expectation of facing a situation where we would face the choice to take someone else\u2019s life, so the idea of steeling oneself to kill is abstract. \u00a0Maybe Myers will change his tune if he takes a look at the cover story of the New York Times Magazine<\/em> this week: \u201cA Beast in the Heart of Every Fighting Man<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n