Yeah, you missed the points.

You either didn’t really read the whole case or you still think God is a “violent psychopath” even he command anyone to stop the wrong doings.

"Hitler was inspired to exterminate the Jews because of the Old Testament? There is zero evidence of this."

Really? How can one explain that so many Christian theologians in their writings and leaders in their actions found their justification for slaughtering non-Christian pagans, savages, because of the Old Testament precedent of God ordering the extermination of neighboring wicked and idol-worshiping tribes for the reason of purifying the moral influences upon God's people?

Once Christians became God's chosen people and the Jewish nation was no longer sanctioned by God, as says virtually all of of Christian theology until recent American dispensationalism, the Jews were now in the pagan category, carrying the toxic and demonic elements that could infect Christians believers with increased sinful ways.

Consider what I've written on my blog post called, "Martin Luther's Fierce Anti-Semitism And How The Bible Helped His Cause":

------------------------------------------

I mention this incredibly negative historical information about Martin Luther, the primary thinker and leader of the 16th century's Protestant Reformation, because I believe it's very important for Christians and non-Christians to be aware of some of the reasons why critics question the morality both of the ideas/practices from church history's "great theologians" and the Scriptures. The Bible is said by conservatives to be completely trustworthy and virtuous in what it teaches, yet when Christians put specific sections of it into rigorously consistent application, they create massive problems because many of the texts themselves set a very destructive precedent.

Luther wrote astoundingly hateful things about the Jews. Through his power of ecclesiastical authority, despicable behaviors and vengeful ideas were boldly promoted against God's original "chosen people" who were distinctly outside of Christian community. Within the long tradition of heartily confident "messengers of God" and since he was undergirded by many easily appropriated biblical mandates God gave in the Old Testament, Luther was able to convince generations of Germans (up through at least the mid-20th century) that the Jews, as an entire race and without individual exception, deserved to be regularly humiliated, robbed of their money and property, removed from the country and even killed. The biblical God commanded the Israelites to commit genocide upon the their polytheistic, "heathen" neighbors, and therefore laid the foundation that would allow Christians (the new "chosen people", replacing the Jews) around the world to look at non-Christians with severe disdain, kill other Christian groups because only one of them could be correctly interpreting the Scriptures, stand on God's side against the demonic powers of non-biblical society, invade the Middle East to conquer Jerusalem during the Crusades (even if this meant annihilating an enormous number of "infidels", a term coined by the Pope at that time as he described Muslims and other nonbelievers), enslave/abuse/exterminate millions of Native Americans and African Americans, imprison/torture/execute any suspected doubters or unbelievers during the Spanish Inquisition, and many more deplorable historical results that came from the extreme intolerance and harshness of many parts in the Bible.

"On the Jews and Their Lies", written by Martin Luther in 1543, is the most anti-Semitic writing that I have ever heard about, on the same level with Adolf Hitler's "Mein Kampf". After reading it, I am not surprised that many historians credit him as one of the forefathers of modern anti-Semitism. Hatred and bitterness toward the Jews certainly existed in Germany and elsewhere long before Luther wrote this, but he is considered to be the main force within Protestant European history toward developing these excessively malevolent and dehumanizing views of the Jewish people.

It is very sad and yet strange that the kinds of abuses the Jews experienced throughout Western history by believers in the Judeo-Christian God were much the same as the types that Jews (because of commands from this God) used against the multiple nations they stole land from and mass murdered in the Old Testament. The first genocides against and conquests over the Jews' neighbors were justified, according to God, due to the grand wickedness of the surrounding people groups near them. Later, when particular Christian leaders, such as Martin Luther, appealed to the Bible to support actions that appear quite evil to most everyone now, they needed merely turn to one of many passages in their Bible to reference the blueprint for that order of deed in that sort of situation. The obvious correlation between multiple atrocities committed in the name of the biblical God throughout world history after Christ's earthly life and what numerous readings in the Scriptures actually teach is denied by contemporary orthodox Christians who say that individuals, whether revered and experienced Christian disciples or not, have the choice to carry out horrendous injustice or to trust in God and demonstrate loving action to other people. The logical difficulty with this assertion is that history provides countless examples of people who followed gruesome, often arbitrary, biblical commands with precise religious adherence and therefore embraced the habits of deep cruelty, indifference and severe destruction of human life (and sometimes non-human aspects of nature as well). Although many positive results in the progress of human culture have occurred through Christianity's influence, the despicable aspects of this belief system and religion are just as strong. To its monumental shame, the Bible directly or indirectly endorses or reinforces inhumane conventions such as misogyny, seasonal and colonial warfare, genocide and slavery.

One possible reason as to why traditional Christian leaders today, as official representatives standing by "God's one holy book", do not take considerable responsibility for the toxic effects of these portions of the Bible is that they are viewing it from within the unique position of a modern, democratic, post-Enlightenment and individualistic society that expects each person to critically examine how to apply instructions from religion, philosophy and spirituality in appropriately different ways for each circumstance. However, because separation of church and state is a fairly recent concept historically, whenever Christians of past eras came into political, economic or military power, they often chose the apparently best model to follow in governance: the Old Testament patterns of theocratic authoritarianism and violent defense of national religious purity. Unfortunately, the Bible didn't provide clear enough tools with which to sort out the morally antiquated or irrelevant teachings within itself when Christians encountered complex problems and didn't have the "voice of God" present to tell them exactly how to proceed (assuming that God, if directly engaged in conversation, would have objected to these forms of political power in post-biblical times). Many Christian scholars of the past who are recognized by traditional believers to have had brilliant intelligence and mostly saintly character (especially in regard to the spiritual and theological quality of their writings), used the Bible to advocate for and/or justify abhorrent conduct: Thomas Aquinas (misogyny), Martin Luther (murder of non-believers), John Calvin (murder of non-believers), Jonathan Edwards (slavery), George Whitefield (slavery) and numerous others. Were they ill-informed? Were they radically immature in their spirituality? It seems quite far-fetched to think these men were incapable of figuring out in their hearts or minds the very basic ethical components of "loving one's neighbor". Instead, the evidence reveals substantial (but not total) culpability first with the Scriptures themselves because of the virulent content found in many of its texts.

After reading the excerpt below from the Wikipedia page for "On the Jews and Their Lies", it should not be difficult to see how the Nazis found common ground with and even much guidance from Luther's plan to brutally remove the Jews from Germany or eliminate them altogether:

-----------------------------------------------------------

In the treatise, Luther writes that the Jews are a "base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth." They are full of the "devil's feces ... which they wallow in like swine," and the synagogue is an "incorrigible whore and an evil slut ..." He argues that their synagogues and schools be set on fire, their prayer books destroyed, rabbis forbidden to preach, homes razed, and property and money confiscated. They should be shown no mercy or kindness, afforded no legal protection, and these "poisonous envenomed worms" should be drafted into forced labor or expelled for all time. He also seems to advocate their murder, writing "[w]e are at fault in not slaying them."

-----------------------------------------------------------

Here is Wikipedia's full description of it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies

These are highlights and excerpts:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/Luther_on_Jews.html

This is the full text:

http://www.resist.com/Instauration/OtherPubs-20120723/TheJewsAndTheirLies-Luther.pdf

----------------------------------------------------------

Blog: disagreementsihavewithchristianity.wordpress.com

Stars explode, predation ends lives of animals and causes them terror and pain, earthquakes shake the planet, disease wears down and often takes life, floods drown sentient beings, meteors crash into planets wiping out living creatures for thousands of miles around, etc. Can we really honestly say that we can't see God making the universe another way, like the New Heavens and New Earth perhaps? Or, if this much suffering was inevitable, why create at all? The benefits don't outweigh the costs, especially when the doctrine of hell is added. Non-human animal suffering for at least 300 million years before humans arrived should be enough to eliminate the tenet of God's perfect goodness, as now he is partially good at best.

If freedom and full human flourishing/fulfillment without sin/pain/death was inherent in the Garden of Eden and will be again in the New Heavens and New Earth, then why is sin/pain/death necessary in this life?

The crux of this inquiry comes from the common assertion I hear from Christians that full human flourishing/fulfillment can only exist in an environment where evil, death and great loss/pain is possible. But, evil will not be possible in the New Heavens and New Earth. And many people will be there that did not have the opportunity to choose to be there (for example, miscarried babies, infants, young children and mentally ill or mentally challenged people), so the claim that the travails of this life are worth it (because of potential character formation) doesn’t apply to them.

I'm an ex-Christian who has been trying to wrestle with issues of apologetics and especially theodicy for all of my adult life. I'm 39. I have a blog/book about it:

disagreementsihavewithchristianity.wordpress.com

What is the Trinity then? The Apostle Paul, Christian creeds and theology of all denominations for almost 2000 years have said in unity that the world was created through Jesus (along with the Father and Spirit) and held together by him. Jesus most definitely was the God (in Trinity) that spoke and commanded throughout the Old Testament.

God in Jesus Christ (“on his own” during his human incarnation, at least apparently, or by means of his interdependent harmony with the Father and Holy Spirit), throughout the Old and New Testaments to varying degrees, commanded or supported these terrible things directly or indirectly (mostly directly): eternal hell based on a short earthly life, genocide, misogyny, slavery, polygamy, seasonal and colonial warfare, theocracy, capital punishments for moderate sins (such as a female lying about her virginity — which modern science has shown to be impossible to prove medically, or cursing one’s parents, or working on the sabbath, or not keeping a known dangerous bull locked up if the bull later kills a person — but if a slave is killed the owner only has to pay a fine, or being the victim of rape if one is an engaged and the rape occurs in a city), animal sacrifice, excessive judgment on the vast majority of humans who did not have biblical revelation until the last few hundred years, and many other things.

These are things that Jesus never challenged because, as the New Testament and history of orthodox theology repeatedly states, he was the God of the Old Testament. Even if a believer takes a more liberal viewpoint and downplays or denies the divinity of Jesus, the same basic argument remains in tact. This teacher from ancient Galilee supports in full the God and writings of the Old Testament. He innovates on the earlier scriptures, but doesn’t contradict them. In fact, he says that he has come to fulfill the law, not abolish it.

These kinds of primitive values must be cast aside or humanity will forever be lost in a method of problem-solving that far too readily chooses violence instead of the harder road of intelligent and compassionate understanding and the construction of better, more effective cultural values and social structures.

—————————————————————————————

For references of these scriptural precedents, see:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Actions_which_demand_the_death_penalty_in_the_Old_Testament

http://www.evilbible.com/

http://atheistfoundation.org.au/article/women-in-the-bible/

Is it permissible for an individual Catholic to read the "dark passages" at face
value? To decide that yes, they do correctly describe God's will??