So tell me again why I should love & worship a God who orders genocide???

"Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’”----1 Samuel 15:3

 

The reason for eradicating whole societies is that they are "selling" social behaviors that will destroy other societies that must attack them, or suffer the second death of extinction as a species.

Neanderthal extinction in the great Flood-out-of-Africa, 40 thousand years of "days and nights ago," was a perfect illustration what the bible is saying here.


Gen. 6:5 And GOD, (the Reality of Universal Power) saw that the wickedness of man, (specifically, Neanderthal), was great in the earth, and that every imagination of (his abstraction of Reality), the thoughts of his heart (or his psyche) was only evil (and unrealistic) continually (as regards the process of adaption).

Gen. 6:7 And the LORD, (the force behind the ever unfolding Reality of the Universe) said, I will destroy man (of these types and species) whom I have created (for the purpose to mentally model my image of Reality), destroy them, (of these types and species), from the face of the earth, (deeming them extinct); both (this species and kind of) man, and (his present abstract idea of) the beast (of the earth), and (his idea of) the creeping thing (of the earth), and (his idea of) the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them (in this process of evolution).

Gen. 6:8 But Noah, (the predecessor of the Modern Homo sapiens which were to emerge), found grace (i.e. Truth, the grace from God which makes Reality rational and understandable), in the eyes of the LORD, (in that this species was adapting to the environment as God's Law requires).

 

I could write the apologetics but let me just say that if this were the totality of how the ancient Israelites conceptualized God I would agree. Maybe you should read more of the book and we can talk.

 

Ignore the details, focus on the Big Picture? Sorry...can't do that.

Seems pretty clear when it came to Amalekites, the Israelites "conceptulized" God as a guy who supported even ordered genocide.

 

Yes, the Nazis gave good (in their minds) scientific as well as political excuses for their genocide too.

- - - Updated - - -

Titus 3:2

 

You know this isn't true.. Its all part of those epic exaggerations to create an identity for the Israelites.

 

Read these two articles. It may help to answer your question about the violence in the Old Testament.

http://www.gotquestions.org/Canaanites-extermination.html

http://www.gotquestions.org/Old-Testament-violence.html

 

You MUST be joking, or else totally unrealistic.

God IS a guy who kills us all, sooner or later.
God is a guy who will drive species into extinction if they will not adapt to his ways.

 

Well, those verses don't count.

Unless it applies to murdering children overseas, then those verses do count.

 

The Bible is about he violence between Patriarchs and Matriarchs.

The sexually prudent patriarchs of Islam are trying right now to do to the sexually promiscuous West what the Hebrews did to the Middle East in 1360BC.

 

It depends how literal you want to interpret the bible. There are few Christians today that take it literally and those that do often find themselves with ethical dilemmas such as this. In short, you have to either disregard it, decide that it won't ever happen again because Jesus supposedly died for our sins or accept that the Lord is petty and shouldn't be worshiped. Or you could decide that the story is probably the result of propaganda of over 2000 years ago.

 

Why don't you give me YOUR opinion, Sam???

- - - Updated - - -

So it's not literally true...i.e. it didn't happen? Or God didn't "literally" order it to happen?

 

So by those statements and your apologia above....you'd ENDORSE the Islamists committing genocide against us?!?!?!?

 

Okay. Since God created all life in the world, he has the right to punish people for their evil actions. The Amalekites were not innocent.

 

Is that how Christians have always viewed it? Just a tool for the Israelites to create an identity?

There is something that is being missed in this conversation and though I can understand why given what some would consider a narrow approach to the question it shouldn’t go unchecked.

What we have here are various narratives clashing with each other. The question strikes directly at those who would base their faith on the text of the bible in order to define their God not those who see it differently from a historical point-of-view.

Even if for most the meaning of the text has changed it doesn't change the morality behind what is being said. Either God would condone such behavior or he wouldn't. Without using the bible, who are we to say?

How many times do we see a theist reject outright something God has said or done in the bible rather than attempt to justify it in one way or another?

 

A true god wouldn't NEED people to apologize for him.

Killing entire towns and innocent babies clearly does NOT bother religious people, or they'd stop trying to defend it and try to change the texts. As a modern Secular Humanist I can say unequivocally that I have a more moral belief system than the Abrahamic faiths do.

- - - Updated - - -

Just like the people on 9/11 were not "innocent", right Osama?

Oh, no! They had a different invisible friend than the Israelites....guess we can slaughter their innocent babies, then. At least god advocated that a few times in the Bible. "God" is a barbarian....and unproven....and immoral...and not worth praying to.

 

The ones that don't take it literally have to fool themselves into thinking that the "best book of all time" doesn't mean what it says.

 

You mean you could do your best to justify cold-blooded murder of innocent babies.

 

Depends who you ask.

To be fair, most great literary works feature a considerable amount of metaphorical language and passages (not saying the bible is a great literary work, but the presence of non-literal stories wouldn't detract from it)

 

I think the words in bold pretty much say it all about the bible and christians' reading of it.

No wonder its popular, it says whatever you want it to say, justifies whatever you want, condems or praises whatever you want. AND promises eternal bliss.

 

Just disguard your logic, reason, and common sense at the door, and everything will be fine.

- - - Updated - - -

I'll prove that the steaming reminder that my dog just left on my lawn is real, and you prove that "god" is real, and let's see who is more successful at that, shall we?

 

There we have approval for genocide, right here on our forum. I would have thought that approval of genocide would have stopped after the Nazis were defeated, but I am apparently wrong. If you've ever doubted the insanity that religions wreak on our society, then doubt no more.

Christians, which is more true (A or B)?
A. Genocide is acceptable, and the bible is right, OR
B. Genocide is not acceptable, and the bible is wrong.

Which is it?

 

Incredible. I'm debating religious people as to whether genocide is acceptable or not.


Religions.
Must.
Go.

 

Yeah, that's a gruesome one. I don't want spoil the ending for anyone who hasn't read it yet, but "oops, my bad" doesn't quite cut it.

 

If you look at the actual and modern story they are telling just very recently you can get the single interpretation I have found that doesn't sound like the best example of mealy mouthed equivocation I've ever seen.

Mainly, that the Israelites WERE the Amalekites. The modern evidence now points to this being the true story as there is very little archeological evidence of any great invasion of Israel at the time we think Exodus was written nor any real record of any great migration of slave populations migrating in Egyptian records (That the Egyptians didn't keep uncomplimentary records is not a good excuse. The Egyptians did record the Battle of Kadesh. They just say they won) The Israelites didn't come from captivity in Egypt, they were in Palestine already, the original inhabitants. When God talks about killing all the Amalekites then he means the Israelites should wipe out ALL characteristics of such, FROM THEMSELVES. The Exodus story is propaganda, like Margot et al are saying. It's meant to give THE ISRAELITES a sounder idea of THEIR identity. The Old Testament was pretty strictly meant for consumption by Israelites only, not anyone else, and when we take these particular passages into a proselytizing religion like Christianity we see why sometimes the holy books of one religion are not a good fit into another, even when they are derivatives.

The metaphor of the believer as warrior is not unique, as anyone who has studied Islam or even Zen should realize. Mercy, to a warrior, is generally good, but must not take precedence over victory. (Particularly when you are fighting yourself.)

The problem I have with this is that so many Abrahamites are actually alright with it as it stands. The natural response to the idea that God gives everyone life and God can therefore take it away is; "Fine, let God do it then" not "Yes, Almighty, right away. Anyone else you want us to kill?"