So what?That was O.T.
Doing something "in the name of God" doesn't mean God told them to do it or approved of it.
That doesn't matter. How can you tell the difference? How could they prove that he did? How would you prove that he didn't (hint: we have examples in the Bible of God commanding genocide, human sacrifice etc. so it's plausible for believers)?
I'm sorry for you if are able to come up with good reasons to justify genocide and human sacrifice. I really find your morality repulsive.
and done for a reason (to ensure God's people survived).
It still doesn't matter. They believed they were right without evidence. That's what Christianity teaches you, that faith is a virtue. Just like you do not question the what god supposedly did in the Old Testament.
You can tell the difference by seeing if said people follow the example of Christ. For the record - neither the people responsible for the Crusades, nor Hitler nor David Koresh, nor ... followed this example.
So you have some evidence that is so weak that any reasonable person will reject it?There is evidence (note: I didn't say proof), but you just don't accept it.I agree. Since there's no evidence for god, all believer are misguided or deceived.
That just makes them misguided or deceived.