cksalmon wrote:Yes. I can be an informant who attempts to tip you off about the wrath to come
What wrath? Is your God going to punish me for not believing in him? Is he going to have his vengeance because I condemned the genocide of the Amalekites? Is he going to allow for me to be tortured in hell? Is he going to make me eat the flesh of my own sons and daughters?
Do you really think that is a just punishment for unbelief?
Hoops wrote:In the moral code to which you are appealing which is worse? Disobeying or killing?
If God asks you to commit genocide and you say no. That's disobeying God. So when I ask you, "If God commanded you to kill every man, woman, child, and infant of a people or culture, would you be willing to do it?" You can't say no, because that would mean you are willing to disobey God. That's the only point I was making.
Hoops wrote:
Stormy Waters wrote:Your God has previously ordered his people to kill every man, woman, child, and infant of a group of people. "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass." 1 Samuel 15:3. Since you worship this same God who's to say he won't ask you to do the same? So if he did, what would your answer be?
I'll assume from your question that there is a God. And your indignation is based on a moral code that is apart from yourself. Therefore, God is not bound by that moral code.
I'll just assume you're willing to kill every man, woman, and child at God's command.
Stormy Waters wrote:I'll just assume you're willing to kill every man, woman, and child at God's command.
So now that you have finally arrived at the place you intended from the beginning now what? What great truth are you now going to reveal? Let me ask you something, do you know of anyone who has ever killed another person to do the act for no reason what so ever? If killing is all over the place then why zero in on this killing and not look at all of the others? What is in man that he can be pushed into this moral abyss so easy? Where is the great truth you wish to expose? I would like to hear it.
cksalmon wrote:Yes. I can be an informant who attempts to tip you off about the wrath to come
What wrath? Is your God going to punish me for not believing in him?
It appears so.
Is he going to have his vengeance because I condemned the genocide of the Amalekites?
Talk of "genocide" is woefully ill-informed, here, and, again, fails to read the ANE war language, and, specifically, the Yahweh war language, in its context--but I don't expect you're other than a dilettante at this point; you've read stuff. But, are you referring to the same Amalekites who religiously practiced infant sacrifice? May be different folks.
Franktalk wrote:If life is but a moment and the big dirt nap is forever then why do atheist have children? Why would anyone participate in a practice of creating a being who will suffer and die for no reason? I find this practice of the nonbeliever to be worse than killing for God. So in the case of the nonbeliever I think their beliefs and their actions don't match.
I find this awful comment to be be a suprise ugly in a thread not lacking in ugly comments. Does religion so drain the value of life that there are believers who do not understand an atheists love of life and love of children. Are there people whose faith replaces their love of children?
perhaps Franktalk you just have zero empathy for nonbelievers.
Stormy Waters wrote:If God asks you to commit genocide and you say no. That's disobeying God. So when I ask you, "If God commanded you to kill every man, woman, child, and infant of a people or culture, would you be willing to do it?" You can't say no, because that would mean you are willing to disobey God. That's the only point I was making.
I'll just assume you're willing to kill every man, woman, and child at God's command.
I am curious about Celestial Kingdom salmons more recent information about Old Testament rules of holy warfare. There are a number of old and standard considerations about the infants . God owns the life of all people whom he created. God sees children and parents as not as seperate as modern law and modern habits of thought do. I think those observations may be interesting but do not address Stormy Waters stated concerns .
For me another response has priority. I would not do anything God says that I do not see as actually morally right or necessary. I do not believe in blind obedience. period. I do not believe that there is any possiblity of knowing a command is from God that falls outside of what I understand as morally correct. Obeying a command I understand as immoral is tantamount to obeying the devil.
I am not going to judge the Amalikite situation. I see no evidence that the Isrealite army thought it was a moral problem. For whatever reasons they saw the killing as militarily appropriate. The point I am making is that the instruction were not a test of obedience requireng them to do something they saw as evil.Right or wrong they saw what they understood as a command as a right and necessary action for the peace and security of the nation.
In this observation I am not proposing to show they are correct in that military assessment. I have no information on what threat the Amalikites presented. Obviously it was something Isreael understood as far more serious than not believing in the correct god. The world is full of people making that misstep.
The "bloodthirsty" God of the Old Testament is one of the major stumbling blocks for believers and non-believers alike. To understand and appreciate what's going on there, we need to have an "eschatological" outlook; we need to see and think like God, not man. ("For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways saith the Lord." Isaiah 55: 8-9.)
First: has anyone ever really died in that they have ceased to exist in any form whatsoever? No. Those killed in the Old Testament resumed their spirit form which we know to be a living, intelligent entity given agency and growth and development opportunity. None of this, besides the mortal experience was lost.
Next: we know the innocent children killed are taken to Heaven without need of baptism or other ordinances as they were extremely righteous spirits in the pre-existence and all they needed was a quick shot at mortality so they'd have a legitimate claim to a body in the resurrection with which to continue their development and growth. I don't want to be cavalier here; the loss of a child is a heart- rending ordeal for parents and family, and is to be wept and mourned, but, again, that child is not gone forever into non-existence.
Next: we know that those who were accountable are given another chance. (See 1 Pet 3: 18-20 and 4: 6.) Again, it's not like they have ceased to exist, or are burning forever in a flaming hell as other religions may believe.
Last: a metaphor. Suppose you had a kid just out of high school who did well enough to be accepted at Harvard. "Great!" you think. 4-6 more years of education and this child will be set for life. You mortgage your home to pay for his first semester, $30,000 please, and send him off. After a few weeks, you begin to get notices from the school that he's not attending classes and is flunking. Friends write to say he's drinking, taking drugs, and partying night and day. You get ahold of him; he promises to straighten up. As the semester wears on, he drops out of rehab several times, and is doing no schoolwork at all. When the semester is over, he asks for another $30,000 to continue his "education". Do you send him the cash, or do you go back to Boston, grab him by the shirt collar, march him home, install him in a Mac Donald's so he can begin to pay back the money he squandered, and enroll him in Community College so he can at least resume his schooling? If you chose the latter over the former, congratulations! You're thinking like God, only on a much smaller scale. This mortal life is a school. Some abuse and waste this privilege; God has no choice with them but to bring them back home to straighten them out.
As a shameless plug, may I recommend my book, "Becoming Human in the Cosmos: The Purpose and Ultimate Destiny of Human Life" available on Amazon Kindle. Yours, Lee Hazelle
logjamislds wrote:First: has anyone ever really died in that they have ceased to exist in any form whatsoever? No. Those killed in the Old Testament resumed their spirit form which we know to be a living, intelligent entity given agency and growth and development opportunity. None of this, besides the mortal experience was lost.
Actually, if I remember correctly, that would have been the belief of the Hebrews at that time - no afterlife. All blessings from Yahweh are physical blessings given in life.
And while the Biblical genocides are very troubling for believers, they can take comfort in the fact that they're mostly likely fictional, like the Exodus itself.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
logjamislds wrote:Next: we know the innocent children killed are taken to Heaven without need of baptism or other ordinances as they were extremely righteous spirits in the pre-existence and all they needed was a quick shot at mortality so they'd have a legitimate claim to a body in the resurrection with which to continue their development and growth. I don't want to be cavalier here; the loss of a child is a heart- rending ordeal for parents and family, and is to be wept and mourned, but, again, that child is not gone forever into non-existence.
So let's say that God told you there is a child that needed to sent back to heaven before the age of accountability to guarantee his salvation. Would you be willing to do it?
Stormy Waters wrote:What wrath? Is your God going to punish me for not believing in him?
It appears so.
That's incredibly petty and vindictive for an all powerful being. Is he going to make me eat the flesh of my sons and daughters? Is that what keeps you in line, cksalmon? Are you afraid God will make you eat your own children? (Leviticus 26:28-29).
cksalmon wrote:
Stormy Waters wrote:Is he going to have his vengeance because I condemned the genocide of the Amalekites?
Talk of "genocide" is woefully ill-informed, here, and, again, fails to read the ANE war language, and, specifically, the Yahweh war language, in its context--but I don't expect you're other than a dilettante at this point; you've read stuff.
What's commanded is genocide. You can rationalize it all you like, but call it what it is, genocide.