Questions about the God of the Old Testament

[_Morley]

So what lesson is there to be learned from the murder of children? What lesson can we glean from this?

And when exactly were these children murdered?

Here.

[_Stormy Waters]

And when exactly were these children murdered?

The firstborn of the Egyptians, the children of the Amalekites, the child of David and Bathsheba, and the children killed in the Flood.

[_Stormy Waters]

But are those emotions based on a correct view of existence or based on a perceived view? If indeed those emotions are based on a perceived view they are valid in their own right but those emotions should not be used to judge God or even ourselves because they are born of a false perception of reality. Part of our test in this world is to see past this world and see the power of God. If we fall short of that goal we will see everything around us through the world and it will deceive us.

Wait, so I object to the murder of children, and I'm the one who is deceived?

[_Stormy Waters]

So why did the Amalekites get killed? Those of you who do not actually believe in God should be clear enough to not use any God told the Isrealites to kill them sort of reason. (actually it appears that a wider variety of people than just Isrealites decided it was a good idea). Unbelievers do not have a god to lead or mislead these people. There must have been some other reason for Amalekite unpopularity.

Obviously I'm making making this argument based on the premise that the Old Testament is non-fiction. So tell me, what had they done to deserve annihilation? What could they have done to deserve such wholesale slaughter? What could they have done to justify the slaughter of every man, woman, and child?

[_huckelberry]

Stormy waters, I have no idea about deserves. I was wondering why it happened. Do you have a viewpoint about that? I agree with your point that the destruction of the Amalakites, at least some of them anyway, actually happened. Why did it happen?

I cannot imagine any way that would have happened except that the group had been sufficiently violent that the people living in the region thought saftey required their removal. If that was not the case nobody would have done it. It should be noted that Saul was trying to turn an area of seriously disunified people into a unified political group. People were willing to unite in common cause against this enemy, Amalikites. I do not think that would have worked unless the enemy was seen by all of those people as a serious threat.

[_Franktalk]

What may appear as a heartless act can be used as a teaching moment for the spirit children.

So what lesson is there to be learned from the murder of children? What lesson can we glean from this?

I think everyone will form their own ideas about what happened in the past. I have my views and others have a different view. This world would not be a learning ground if we all thought alike and were not exposed to evil and good. The balance has been maintained for quite some time. This will all change in the future. At some point the restrainer will step away and evil will run rampant on the earth. Satan's powers will be unloosed and will manifest on the earth in the sight of men. At that point man will see truly heartless acts. So all of this talk about the evils of God will pale as man sees first hand evil up close. But most will not see what I am talking about. They will instead see opportunities for their walk in the flesh and will kill those who say they love God. There are many today who would love to kill all religious people on the planet. This number will grow as the restrainer steps away.

But what I say will mean nothing. For over five years I have stated that radioactive decay was different in the past. I assumed this because the time lines of decay does not match the Bible. I have always assumed the Bible was correct. I of course have been laughed at as some kind of nut. I accept that what I say does not agree with current scientific thinking. So when this article came out I was not surprised:

http://news.discovery.com/space/is-the- ... ticle.html

This of course will be explained away and all of the experts will make sure that the public can rest assured that these new observations do not mean that we have to reassess the past projections of science. And of course many will line up and state for the record that the Bible is still false just like it has always been false. I expect this as well. I am sure that when Christ stands on the Mount of Olives and people are examining His scars that some will still say Christ is a myth. I expect this as well.

[_Stormy Waters]

I'd like to add an additional question to the list:
Is there any circumstances in which the slaughter of children is morally acceptable?

If the answer is yes, repeat that to yourself. I believe in certain circumstances the slaughter of children is morally acceptable. Do you understand why some people might take exception to that? Do understand why someone might be offended by that? Do you understand why some people might refuse to believe that?

'I don't understand how anyone can believe anything as hideously, wickedly immoral as that or even imply it.'

[_Stormy Waters]

Satan's powers will be unloosed and will manifest on the earth in the sight of men. At that point man will see truly heartless acts.

And your just and loving God will just stand by and let all of it happen right?

There are many today who would love to kill all religious people on the planet.

BS. I don't think you should be murdered, and I don't think you should be punished for all eternity. Why? Because I'm not cruel and vindictive like your God.

[_Morley]

So what lesson is there to be learned from the murder of children? What lesson can we glean from this?

I think everyone will form their own ideas about what happened in the past. I have my views and others have a different view. This world would not be a learning ground if we all thought alike and were not exposed to evil and good. The balance has been maintained for quite some time. This will all change in the future. At some point the restrainer will step away and evil will run rampant on the earth. Satan's powers will be unloosed and will manifest on the earth in the sight of men. At that point man will see truly heartless acts. So all of this talk about the evils of God will pale as man sees first hand evil up close. But most will not see what I am talking about. They will instead see opportunities for their walk in the flesh and will kill those who say they love God. There are many today who would love to kill all religious people on the planet. This number will grow as the restrainer steps away.

But what I say will mean nothing. For over five years I have stated that radioactive decay was different in the past. I assumed this because the time lines of decay does not match the Bible. I have always assumed the Bible was correct. I of course have been laughed at as some kind of nut. I accept that what I say does not agree with current scientific thinking. So when this article came out I was not surprised:

http://news.discovery.com/space/is-the- ... ticle.html

This of course will be explained away and all of the experts will make sure that the public can rest assured that these new observations do not mean that we have to reassess the past projections of science. And of course many will line up and state for the record that the Bible is still false just like it has always been false. I expect this as well. I am sure that when Christ stands on the Mount of Olives and people are examining His scars that some will still say Christ is a myth. I expect this as well.

1) I read the article. It doesn't support your hypothesis, Frank. It speaks nothing about the decay rates being different in the past. You're clutching at straws.

2) You didn't answer Stormy, who asked, regarding God killing children:

So what lesson is there to be learned from the murder of children? What lesson can we glean from this?

Instead, you posted a wall of text that had nothing to do with the question. Unless I missed it, somewhere.

[_Stormy Waters]

I cannot imagine any way that would have happened except that the group had been sufficiently violent that the people living in the region thought saftey required their removal. If that was not the case nobody would have done it. It should be noted that Saul was trying to turn an area of seriously disunified people into a unified political group. People were willing to unite in common cause against this enemy, Amalikites. I do not think that would have worked unless the enemy was seen by all of those people as a serious threat.

So the only way to neutralize this threat was genocide?