Old Testament Genocide

[Drew]

Re: Man is Evil

They weren't genocides. They were Godly judgments upon a wicked generation of people, including infants who had no hope of being reconciled with God. God's anger is complete and just---always. Food for thought.

I want to make it clear that Alabaster is most certainly not speaking for all Christians with this statement. I suggest that this is an over-simplistic answer that cannot be reconciled with the concept of a good and loving God.

In order to have any hope of being able to rescue the position that God is indeed loving and not vindictive, we (Christians) need to let go of this idea that God is in the business of needlessly slaughteing people - just to satisfy some bizarre notion of "judgement".

And bizarre it is. We are instructed in the Bible to deal with injustice by forgiveness and love. How can that make any sense at all if we then turn around and talk about a God who uses bloodshed and violence to achieve "justice". That is certainly not what that God asks us to do.

Let me be clear - I believe that God indeed ordered these genocides. My conclusion is that God simply had no choice to do so in order to ultimately redeem and heal His creation. I suggest that we need to abandon naive "Sunday School" assumptions that "God can do anything He wants".

I suggest it is clear that this is actually not the case. When God made a commitment to put mankind in charge of the universe, He (God) has made a commitment He cannot back out from - God cannot simply "snap His fingers" and heal creation, He has to do it through a human being, Jesus Christ. So I think that we need to seriously consider the possibility that these gencocides are somehow sadly necessary - just as a cancer specialist has to inflict great suffering on his patient in order to ultimately save him.

 

[Drew]

"Had no choice"? That's a peculiar statement. God can fine tune the intricacies of an eye [though it really isn't all that perfectly made, but that's another topic], . . . but couldn't come up with something better than millions of dead bodies? I know that sounds harsh, but that is a scriptural fact, right?

The point remains - it is at least possible that God had no choice to order these genocides in service of some greater good.

You could use the same general argument that you use above to question why a cancer specialist needs to kill millions of healthy cells through chemotherapy. One could sugges that "there clearly has to be another way".

Well maybe not.

 

[Deavonreye]

I understand your analogy of the cancer cells. However, it seems cold, especially when some of those "cancer cells" were infants. Here's my point. Yes, I could think of better ways to deal with people back then. Don't be absent from the people. Come to them in the loving capacity that only an awesome god figure could and show it openly, and anyone would fall in line. Their false gods would hold no sway over them. Instead of being silent and telling Hebrews to conquer, . . . . . yeah, there could have been many ways to redeem MANY more.

Just think about this. I am a disgusting human creature, and I can think of many ways far more advanced. I think that is something worth thinking about.

 

[Alabaster]

As for your explaination, . . . it sounds a little nicer than Alabaster's, but an advanced being capable of creation WOULD come up with a better plan than systematically destroying countless multitudes of people. And remember, not everyone WAS killed.

Judging Jehovah again, eh? No human being has a thought higher than His. Anyone who thinks they can surpass God at anything is committing idolatry by the sin of pride, the first sin ever committed by Satan, no less.

 

[Drew]

I understand your analogy of the cancer cells. However, it seems cold, especially when some of those "cancer cells" were infants. Here's my point. Yes, I could think of better ways to deal with people back then.

You are still evading the basis thrust of my position. Clearly, I would agree that if God had any other option than one involving all that bloodshed, then I would be onside with you.

But I think I have been clear about this - I am suggesting that God had no other choice. The way you respond to my posts suggests that you are not taking this seriously. Of course, you are free to argue that God must have had some other choice. But you cannot simply presume that God had an easier way.

I . . . . . yeah, there could have been many ways to redeem MANY more.

In a fair discussion about this matter, you simply cannot assume this - you need to make the relevant case.

Now to be fair, all I have really done to this point is raise the possibility that God had no choice except to order all those genocides. But, equally, you have provided no actual argument to counter this possibility.

Just think about this. I am a disgusting human creature, and I can think of many ways far more advanced. I think that is something worth thinking about.

If you have been reading my posts, you should know that this is not the point. What you and I can "imagine" is not the issue - you have not really made any kind of a case against the possibility that God had no choice but to order these genocides in order to achieve some greater good.

 

[Alabaster]

Re: Man is Evil

I want to make it clear that Alabaster is most certainly not speaking for all Christians with this statement. I suggest that this is an over-simplistic answer that cannot be reconciled with the concept of a good and loving God.

Over-simplistic? Hardly. A good and loving God is capable of right and just judgment. He did it then and He will do it again.

In order to have any hope of being able to rescue the position that God is indeed loving and not vindictive, we (Christians) need to let go of this idea that God is in the business of needlessly slaughteing people - just to satisfy some bizarre notion of "judgement".

Judgment is a bizarre notion? Have you even read the Old Testament, and the record of wicked acts of men? Do you think God was overly harsh with Sodom and Gemorrah and the other cities of the plain?

And bizarre it is. We are instructed in the Bible to deal with injustice by forgiveness and love. How can that make any sense at all if we then turn around and talk about a God who uses bloodshed and violence to achieve "justice". That is certainly not what that God asks us to do.

Since Jesus has entered the picture, we are to exercise what God does now---mercy.

Let me be clear - I believe that God indeed ordered these genocides. My conclusion is that God simply had no choice to do so in order to ultimately redeem and heal His creation. I suggest that we need to abandon naive "Sunday School" assumptions that "God can do anything He wants".

I suggest it is clear that this is actually not the case. When God made a commitment to put mankind in charge of the universe, He (God) has made a commitment He cannot back out from - God cannot simply "snap His fingers" and heal creation, He has to do it through a human being, Jesus Christ. So I think that we need to seriously consider the possibility that these gencocides are somehow sadly necessary - just as a cancer specialist has to inflict great suffering on his patient in order to ultimately save him.

They were God's perfect and swift judgments. That is hard to take for those who cannot understand that God is indeed a God of wrath as well as love, but He has chosen to put His wrath in abeyance for the sake of His Son.

 

[Deavonreye]

Judging Jehovah again, eh? No human being has a thought higher than His. Anyone who thinks they can surpass God at anything is committing idolatry by the sin of pride, the first sin ever committed by Satan, no less.

As you will see, a few posts before, I personally believe that the ancient Hebrews claimed that their actions were a result of their god commanding it.

If we look at what it means for these human creatures to die, it goes deeper than just "a plan for mankind". These were people who lived their lives, grew crops, attended cattle, sat down to eat dinner, play with their kids, . . . until another culture, who disagreed with them, came in and killed them all. It goes deeper than just "people in a book", IF you say that these events were literal.

 

[Alabaster]

As you will see, a few posts before, I personally believe that the ancient Hebrews claimed that their actions were a result of their god commanding it.

If we look at what it means for these human creatures to die, it goes deeper than just "a plan for mankind". These were people who lived their lives, grew crops, attended cattle, sat down to eat dinner, play with their kids, . . . until another culture, who disagreed with them, came in and killed them all. It goes deeper than just "people in a book", IF you say that these events were literal.

Yes, these were people with names and personhood--literally. But they were wicked and God did judge them, as was His wont to do way back then. The example is for us to take note and realize that God is a jealous God, and will not stand for idolatry and wickedness. He just won't. He is a God to be feared, and that is something that mankind tends to neglect because we have lived now under longer than 2000 years of mercy.

It wasn't a cultural war. It was God judging---it is His right, and He will judge all unbelievers one day very soon, and it won't be pretty.

 

[Deavonreye]

And this is the crux of the matter, Alabaster. This has nothing to do with "sin". It has everything to do with a person's "thought crime". Not being able to "believe" is the only real "sin" to this god you speak of. And being "jealous" . . . killing those who don't believe correctly, . . . thus creating a fear base, . . . this is not loving. A "god to be feared" doesn't make his actions good just because he can squash us like a bug. I know that you must feel that it is because of the fear of making him angry with you. I get that. However, this topic is one of the main reasons why people choose to reject it.

 

[Elijah674]

What good were the pre/flood ones when they passed the 120 years of the Holy Spirits striving? There was No turning back! And Abe in Gen. 18 asking God for these ones of Sodom if there were even 50?? Gen. 18:22-26 on! (+) God would have spared Sodom for even tens sake! Chapter 18:32. A Christian could go on & on how God gave time for one to repent before it was a 'full cup' of rebellion! (even the one in heaven)

But hear is another perhaps forgotten thought? God gave mankind FREE/WILL! And by doing that, it is God who takes the Heat of even the saved when they made serious mistakes. (Because He allowed or pernitted it)
Case in point is seen in 1 Sam. 8:6-7. Now, who made free/will shipwreck over & over again by this free choice. And who took the heat for allowing freewill to do so? Even the kings haram has some ones teaching that that was God's will.

1Sam.8
[1] And it came to pass, when Samuel was old, that he made his sons judges over Israel.
[2] Now the name of his firstborn was Joel; and the name of his second, Abiah: they were judges in Beer-sheba.
[3] And his sons walked not in his ways, but turned aside after lucre, and took bribes, and perverted judgment.

[4] Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah,
[5] And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.
[6] But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the LORD.

[7] And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.

[8] According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee.
[9] Now therefore hearken unto their voice: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and shew them the manner of the king that shall reign over them.

[10] And Samuel told all the words of the LORD unto the people that asked of him a king.
[11] And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.
[12] And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.
[13] And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.
[14] And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.
[15] And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.
[16] And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.
[17] He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.
[18] And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day.
[19] Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us;
[20] That we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles. (there was some thought about genocide?)

[21] And Samuel heard all the words of the people, and he rehearsed them in the ears of the LORD.
[22] And the LORD said to Samuel, Hearken unto their voice, and make them a king. And Samuel said unto the men of Israel, Go ye every man unto his city.

Elijah here again: Yes [Elijah} it is very hard to get the bottom/line point across to 'most'. (1 John 4:6)
See if it is possible for one to understand that the whole earth was forfieted by Adam's sin, over to satan (Matt. 4:8-9) until Christ won it back and sent the Holy Ghost to present [CHRIST HIMSELF] omnipresent? Did they get that??

Well, if so, then perhaps they will know that in the OT Christ was His [OWN] theocracy, (as dis/played in the Sanctuary Ex. 40:33-38)and satan was his own oneness false government. Even in the Gen. pre/flood ones of Noah's preaching + the Holy Spirits STRIVING, it was [ALL] seen located at the Ark.

And in the N.T.? Rom. 13 finds Caesar was permitted with the Governments Second Table of the Covenant rule, as long as he held to Religous Liberty of [[WORSHIP]]. The First COMMANDMENT of Worship's First four were 'ETERNALLY' taboo! (satan as an example!)

And the execution of the wicked?? Surely the ones who hung the earth on nothing as Job penned, and David's documentation of 'God Spake, and it stood fast.' .. will only, & did do away with the Obad. 1:16 ones who They knew would follow their [LEADER] as in Their for/knowledge! (Matt. 6:24's just two groups!)

--Elijah

 

[Deavonreye]

Elijah, . . . . dude. . . . . . . . what are you talking about???

 

[Alabaster]

And this is the crux of the matter, Alabaster. This has nothing to do with "sin". It has everything to do with a person's "thought crime". Not being able to "believe" is the only real "sin" to this god you speak of. And being "jealous" . . . killing those who don't believe correctly, . . . thus creating a fear base, . . . this is not loving. A "god to be feared" doesn't make his actions good just because he can squash us like a bug. I know that you must feel that it is because of the fear of making him angry with you. I get that. However, this topic is one of the main reasons why people choose to reject it.

The jealousy of God is not like the petty jealousy of man. The fear we have of God when we love Him is not the fear of something horrible...it is of someone who is totally awesome and all-powerful and majestic all in one!

Unbelievers are right to fear God, for they know that there is a choice that needs to be made and so far they have chosen hellfire. God's justice is to be feared, for He will judge all sin harshly as deserved, for He alone is pure and holy.

God doesn't squash anyone like a bug---that is simply rhetoric. He isn't angry with His own, either. I do not fear God's wrath because He has promised me that I will never suffer it. He loves you and wants to bless your life, and give you great things that you cannot even conceive of. That isn't fear-based. It is love-based.

 

[Deavonreye]

The jealousy of God is not like the petty jealousy of man. The fear we have of God when we love Him is not the fear of something horrible...it is of someone who is totally awesome and all-powerful and majestic all in one!

No, . . . "fear" isn't the word used to describe the feelings of someone who is "awesome, all-powerful, and magestic". Fear is in the belief that going against it will result in punishment.

Unbelievers are right to fear God, for they know that there is a choice that needs to be made and so far they have chosen hellfire. God's justice is to be feared, for He will judge all sin harshly as deserved, for He alone is pure and holy.

Uh, there is no "know" when it comes to this "choice". Your complete belief doesn't factor in, . . . in turn, someone's DISbelief by NO means says that they "are choosing the ONLY other option". In "belief", there are thousands of other "belief structures", regardless of whether or not ONE of them claim absolute authoriy.

Tell me how pure a being is when people are pawns, worthless in the big scheme of things.

God doesn't squash anyone like a bug---that is simply rhetoric. He isn't angry with His own, either. I do not fear God's wrath because He has promised me that I will never suffer it. He loves you and wants to bless your life, and give you great things that you cannot even conceive of. That isn't fear-based. It is love-based.

I've been on this receiving end of "things I couldn't even conceive of". It was far too human and natural . . . and I detected no one working for me, and especially felt no love. In my situation, the person in the wrong was the one who received great things.

 

[Alabaster]

No, . . . "fear" isn't the word used to describe the feelings of someone who is "awesome, all-powerful, and magestic". Fear is in the belief that going against it will result in punishment.

Yes, fear is what we who are in good standing with God feel toward Almighty God---it is reverential fear and the appropriate response. He is awesome and I fear Him! Hallelujah!

Uh, there is no "know" when it comes to this "choice". Your complete belief doesn't factor in, . . . in turn, someone's DISbelief by NO means says that they "are choosing the ONLY other option". In "belief", there are thousands of other "belief structures", regardless of whether or not ONE of them claim absolute authoriy.

Thousands of other belief structures? Only ONE leads to eternal life, and that one enables one to know God intimately.

Tell me how pure a being is when people are pawns, worthless in the big scheme of things.

People are only pawns to you and other people who have a poor and untrue image of who God is. To God, we are precious and valuable---enough to die for so that we won't have to.

I've been on this receiving end of "things I couldn't even conceive of". It was far too human and natural . . . and I detected no one working for me, and especially felt no love. In my situation, the person in the wrong was the one who received great things.

When you accept Jesus as your own personal Saviour and let His blood cleanse you of all sin and let God make you His very own child, you will receive a great thing---LIFE---for starters!

A wonderful promise:

John 10:10
The thief comes only in order to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have and enjoy life, and have it in abundance (to the full, till it overflows).

 

[Deavonreye]

Yes, fear is what we who are in good standing with God feel toward Almighty God---it is reverential fear and the appropriate response. He is awesome and I fear Him! Hallelujah!

There should be no fear in love. Fear only comes when the OTHER person CAN hurt you by their actions. I'm not talking about just physical pain but emotional. Without the possibility of this happening to you, you should never have a "fear", just because of the potential power of the being. .. . . .IF that being is GOOD.

Thousands of other belief structures? Only ONE leads to eternal life, and that one enables one to know God intimately.

But Alabaster, you say this because you were born in a culture of christianity. Had you been born in Saudi Arabia, you would have been stating the same about Islam and Allah. Fervant belief still isn't enough. And after 30 years of trying to "know god", I saw/felt/knew nothing other than myself. No where near an "intimate" level. I won't say anything against those who say that they DO have this level of relationship, but I see it as inadequate. Trying to pull out things from my mind, or read by chance in a book [often times what I read had nothing to do with a situation I was in], I could not conclude my christianity as being real to me.

People are only pawns to you and other people who have a poor and untrue image of who God is. To God, we are precious and valuable---enough to die for so that we won't have to.

I'm probably going to start a thread on the whole notion of "dying for us". I'm sure it will be controversial and could get me banned. So I hesitate.

 

[Drew]

I'm probably going to start a thread on the whole notion of "dying for us". I'm sure it will be controversial and could get me banned. So I hesitate.

I think that is a great idea, and I do not see how this could get you banned. However, if you do start such a thread, please consider engaging all the arguments that are presented to you, not just the ones that are demonstrably invalid. I say this because, and forgive me for speculating, it seems that you focus on the incoherent arguments you get from Christians, but often evade the ones that make some sense and yet challenge your position (that Christianity is essentially full of contradictions and errors).

One example of this - you effectively dismissed (although not rudely) my argument about the Old Testament genocides, and seemed much more interested in engaging Alabaster's position which, I think we agree, is deeply problematic.

Same thing with the "vessels of destruction" issue - you seem intent on exposing the incoherence of the "God pre-destined some to eternal torment" interpretation of the "vessels of destruction" text and seemed disinterested in an explanation for that text which did not place God in the position of fore-ordaining that some of his creatures will spend an eternity in hell.

You are, of course, free to discuss whatever you like, but I would ask you to at least consider this possibility: while many of the "doctrines" you may have been exposed to earlier in your in your life, and indeed here on this board, are indeed a bit silly, this does not mean that other voices from the Christian world are unable to mount a serious, intellectually robust, defence of the faith.

In any event, I would be more than happy to offer an "explanation" of why Jesus had to "die for us" that will probably not be the standard one you have been exposed to over the years.

 

[mondar]

There is a retributive principle in the genocide of the OT commands of God. This principle began in Genesis 12 when God said "I will bless them that bless thee and curse them that curse thee." Much of the genocide relates to Amelek.

The Amelikites attacked Israel in the desert during their desert wanderings. They mainly killed off stragglers. When Israel was in the land, God commanded Saul to wipe them out. Saul did not obey but saved Agag, their king.

It is interesting that later, during the Persian times, an Agagite plotted the destruction of Israel. He built a gallows for Mordacai, but then was hanged on his own gallows.

 

[Deavonreye]

Drew, I only choose to go after those [perhaps more] fringe type of christian ideologies that I find immoral/unethical. I need to refresh what you stated on this topic.....[brb]

Drew Explanation: These genocides were the only choice God had in order to heal the world. In other words, in the interests of the ultimate greater good of all mankind, God ordered these genocides (exactly as a cancer doctor will intentionally kill millions of good cells in order to the kill the bad ones).

I think I DID respond to this. But I will re-respond. In my opinion, this isn't any better than "god judging them". It equates people as that which shouldn't have been there, or something that has no value [such as cancer] and the only option would be irradication.

In my opinion, IF god was the ultimate creator of this extremely complicated universe, what happened in this world would have been a colossal blunder on god's part. If foreknowledge was an actual characteristic, then millions of deaths of people would have been forseen and a better plan put in place. On the other hand, IF this was god's plan, then it could ONLY be the case that god required millions. . . even billions of unnecessary deaths and souls suffering for all eternity, just for the extreme few that he happened to see "believing the right way".

To sum up, there should have been no reason FOR god to "heal the world".

 

[Deavonreye]

There is a retributive principle in the genocide of the OT commands of God. This principle began in Genesis 12 when God said "I will bless them that bless thee and curse them that curse thee." Much of the genocide relates to Amelek.

So, should the christian curse people that curse christians, . . . . or love their enemies and pray for those who persecute them?

 

[farouk]

Umm...the 20th century, as led by aetheist dictators, was the most bloodthirsty period in human history.

In the light of this, for me to feel obliged somehow to defend the God of the Old Testament (who ordained promise amidst human failure) would be an exercise in irony.