Herem

[StGerardMajella]

or you are attempting to justify these questions with a doctrine that does not begin to apply. You selectively quoted the CCC out of context in your attempt.

How exactly does the Church’s “Just War Doctrine” not apply to the Amalekites in relation to the ancient Israelites? The Amalekites were the most evil generation of its time, and aggressively attacked the frailest, most vulnerable Israelites when wandering in the wilderness.

Did the young nation of Israel not have the right to defend itself?

Even in today’s modern age, we have child warriors as young as 5 and 6 years old carrying AK-47s and engaged in military warfare. We see this today in numerous parts of Africa, as well as in the Middle East. While this might be alarming to your Western sensibilities, it was as common to have child warriors in past ages as it is now.

Are you stating that if a child carrying a suicide vest or an AK-47 shows up on my doorstep that I don’t have a right to defend myself because this might constitute the taking of “innocent” life?

How about the woman that raised this warrior child, and indoctrinated her children to commit murder against my countrymen? Do I not have the right to defend myself against her and her offspring?

The truth is that you cannot negotiate with evil. Evil exists and must be eliminated. Certainly, there is more than sufficient basis for this both in the New and Old Testament, as well as in the Just War Doctrine of the Church.

You attempted to dispute the question of genocide with just war doctrine and passages from the catechism.

Self-defense is not genocide. We have plenty of biblical examples where the Creator commanded the death of whole nations due to their inherent evil. We see the destruction of the Egyptians, Canaanites, and many more nations that were destroyed wholesale for just cause. The Creator wiped out everyone but Noah and his family for the similar reasons.

To somehow suggest that this is “genocide of innocent life” has no basis in biblical history. Self-defense is quite clearly stated in the Catechism’s concept of the Just War Doctrine.

Are you somehow suggesting that the death of the Egyptian firstborn, for example, was “genocide” and the taking of “innocent life”?

I find it odd that a Catholic attempts to twist genocide and slaughter of innocents into just war.

First, I never advocated genocide of innocent life. I find it highly odd that you would justify aggression by the Amalekites and consider them to be “innocent” when, in fact, they were murderous aggressors.

Quote clem456:
The killing of women and children is never ever, under any circumstance, part of just war. (let along the killing of non-combatant men). Never without exception. Period, end of story.

Even by the Just War Doctrine, you would be obligated to defend yourself proactively and in self-defense, regardless of the age or sex of the enemy.

It all comes down to your definition of “innocence”.

 

[clem456]

How exactly does the Church’s “Just War Doctrine” not apply to the Amalekites in relation to the ancient Israelites? The Amalekites were the most evil generation of its time, and aggressively attacked the frailest, most vulnerable Israelites when wandering in the wilderness.

Did the young nation of Israel not have the right to defend itself?
SNIP

Take a deep breath.
This is the OP and the original question:

ndkos:

Hello,

How is the Bible inerrant if it promotes genocide? See the book of Joshua, and 1 Samuel, especially 1 Samuel 15, where Saul loses his kingship because he refuses to slaughter every last living thing.

1 And Samuel said to Saul, “The Lord sent me to anoint you king over his people Israel; now therefore hearken to the words of the Lord. 2 Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I will punish what Am′alek did to Israel in opposing them on the way, when they came up out of Egypt. 3 Now go and smite Am′alek, and utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ***.’”

I am a Catholic but seriously questioning things. It appears that God may be a sadistic monster.

And before anyone says I should just believe God because God is God and how dare you question God, well I refuse to obey unjust authority, and genocide is as unjust as it gets. Murder is murder.

The question does not dispute just war.
No one through the thread that I can remember disputed the concept of self defense or just war.
Here is the continuous and unedited catechism passage which you attempted to cherry pick to support your red herring:

Avoiding war

2307 The fifth commandment forbids the intentional destruction of human life. Because of the evils and injustices that accompany all war, the Church insistently urges everyone to prayer and to action so that the divine Goodness may free us from the ancient bondage of war.105

2308 All citizens and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war.

However, "as long as the danger of war persists and there is no international authority with the necessary competence and power, governments cannot be denied the right of lawful self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed."106

2309 The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:

• the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;

• all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;

• there must be serious prospects of success;

• the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the “just war” doctrine.

The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.

2310 Public authorities, in this case, have the right and duty to impose on citizens the obligations necessary for national defense.

Those who are sworn to serve their country in the armed forces are servants of the security and freedom of nations. If they carry out their duty honorably, they truly contribute to the common good of the nation and the maintenance of peace.107

2311 Public authorities should make equitable provision for those who for reasons of conscience refuse to bear arms; these are nonetheless obliged to serve the human community in some other way.108

2312 The Church and human reason both assert the permanent validity of the moral law during armed conflict. "The mere fact that war has regrettably broken out does not mean that everything becomes licit between the warring parties."109

2313 Non-combatants, wounded soldiers, and prisoners must be respected and treated humanely.

Actions deliberately contrary to the law of nations and to its universal principles are crimes, as are the orders that command such actions. Blind obedience does not suffice to excuse those who carry them out. Thus the extermination of a people, nation, or ethnic minority must be condemned as a mortal sin. One is morally bound to resist orders that command genocide.

2314 “Every act of war directed to the indiscriminate destruction of whole cities or vast areas with their inhabitants is a crime against God and man, which merits firm and unequivocal condemnation.”

You position on the killing of women and children is without merit, and frankly, it’s scandalous to those reading a Catholic forum in an attempt to determine what Catholics believe.

 

[juliamajor]

The past is the past and trying to discover what was really being said or done should really be in the hands of historians and archaeologist . As far as hyperbole goes there are a stele that proclaimed the complete and utter destruction of the Israelites .it’s hyperbole not true.

Genocide of the here and now is what we should be concerned about. We cannot do anything about things that happened thousands of years ago. If andwhy and how of the past eludes us. The sins of the past have to stay there and not be visited upon the children.
There is blood enough now that calls from ground to be answered for. That is where our focus should be.

 

[StGerardMajella]

Take a deep breath.
This is the OP and the original question

You never answered the question which is directly related to the original post: Did the young nation of Israel not have the right to defend itself?

If a young man or woman under the age of 18 murderously attacked Israel as the aggressor, does Israel have the right to defend itself?

At what age exactly does a young man or woman under the age of 18 have the right to commit murder or aggressive warfare without expecting any form of retribution?

Where exactly in the Catechism of the Catholic Church do you find support for the notion that young men or women under the age of 18 have free reign to create murder or mayhem against innocent civilians (i.e., Israel) without consequences?

My argument is very simple: Just because you are a teenager, or a young woman, (or even a child for that matter), you don’t have the inalienable right to take my life, or the life of my family or countrymen. I have the right to defend myself, including the right to take the life of an enemy - regardless of age or sex - if they are going to try to kill me. I also have the right to protect myself proactively, such as shooting the aggressor dead before they shoot at me.

Again, I have never once advocated the taking of innocent life. Self-defense, yes.

Here is the continuous and unedited catechism passage which you attempted to cherry pick to support your red herring:

Nonsense. I quoted the relevant portion of the Catechism. The Catechism is readily available to the public. Any reader can quite easily locate the Catechism online to read further as they so choose.

It’s not a red herring - It’s called brevity.

• the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;

This is the key phrase in the Catechism that supports my position.

You position on the killing of women and children is without merit, and frankly, it’s scandalous to those reading a Catholic forum in an attempt to determine what Catholics believe.

I have never supported the taking of innocent life, in this thread or any other. I have only advocated for the right of self-defense and the Just War Doctrine as clearly outlined in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Personally attacking me with ridiculously false accusations does little to support your argument, let alone show good faith as a fellow Catholic.

 

[clem456]

You never answered the question which is directly related to the original post: Did the young nation of Israel not have the right to defend itself?

This is what now, the 4th time for this clarification?
NO ONE DEBATED ANYTHING RELATING TO SELF DEFENSE OR JUST WAR.

You’re going to have to speak to yourself, as your audience has dwindling here, and I am not interested in pointless exercises.
Unsubscribe.

 

[StGerardMajella]

This is what now, the 4th time for this clarification?

You’ve failed miserably in answering a single question posed. Personal attacks do not constitute logical arguments, neither does shouting in all capital letters.

Unsubscribe.

Yes, please do so. Thanks!

 

[gmcbroom]

nkdos,
Did you do as I requested and looked at the history of the other faiths? If or when you do you’ll notice that only christianity has God come to our human level stand and die with us and in rising redeem all of mankind. Marcion in the early church also had the same fears you do. He wanted to jettison the entire Old Testament because of the violence. It was discussed at an early church council as well. You should read them you’d find it very fascinating. Then pray and Go to confession. We need to remember that God works in mysterious ways. When you get hung up on the OT remember that was when we were under the law, now we are under grace. Did the law pass away? No. But, those destined to become holy sons and daughters of God through holy baptism are under grace they died with christ and rose to newness of life. No other faith in the history of the world offers this none. Some religions offer forms of repentance and God loves a repentant heart. However, Jesus said he was the way the truth and the life no one comes to the Father except through him. He gave us his church and the church gave us the Holy Bible. The Holy Bible is the inspired word of God, in the words of men. Vatican 1 or Vatican 2 speaks of this. Read the council, pray, and go to confession. This may help you. Also look up the problem of pain by C.S. Lewis. His book is informative. God bless you and guide you on your quest.

 

[juliamajor]

ndkos:

So does anyone have a good explanation for the genocide in the Old Testament? I have read this thread and nothing sounds convincing.

It makes me think that maybe there is a problem with Christianity, if there is no good answer to this. So depressing./QUOTEsre

There is no trouble with Christianity. It is a human problem. Genocide is as old as time. To weigh as a Christian problem is to ignore the this century’s bloody political horrors.Mao manipulating famines,along with Stalin,Pol Pot is not of a religious nature but ideological and political. The 20th century has enough blood on its hands. We have a tendency to kill way more efficiently. The past cannot be altered. It does no good to get hot and bothered about something you can do nothing about. But w e can to something about the here and now.

I

 

[fred_conty]

Genicide is an intrinsic evil…an intrinsic evil…not any evil but … an intrinsic evil.

This debate is not about any thing else but Genicide…an intrinsic evil.

What does it mean to be an intrinsic evil…that it is never justified under any circumstance … that is is pure evil … that noone may do it for any reason at all.

If we say God ordered the Israelites to perform genecide, then we are saying that God is ordering evil, pure evil. That is contrary to God, and would never happen.

This is different than destroying Sodom and Gomorah, even tho it may look like the same thing. Noone else is being ordered to perform an intrinsically evil action in Sodom and Gomorah.

This is different than other wars that the Israelites were in because it was not Genecide.

And the story is not about eliminating a cancerous people, or defending one’s own country, or doing God’s will. The problem remains … genecide…intrinsic evil.

My intention is not to step on anyone’s toes, but every thread on this subject eventually comes down to this very idea … genecide … intrinsic evil. That God could not order another person to do pure evil unless God knew that person would not do it and was simply giving that person a test which is as far fetched as it can get.

So to me, unless someone has an answer for genecide, there is no satisfactory answer. And it isn’t satisfactory to say that this was a one time deal. Intrinsic evil cannot be made an exception.

As far as I could tell, the other threads on this subject had some rather good answers except one … genecide … pure evil.

 

[StGerardMajella]

So does anyone have a good explanation for the genocide in the Old Testament?

I would first question your assumption that there is “genocide” in the Old Testament. When I read the Old Testament, I see self-defense and the Just War Doctrine, which I have thoroughly described earlier.

In the Book of Jasher, there are very detailed descriptions of wholesale destruction of surrounding enemy cities by the sons of Jacob. You might, in error, call even this destruction “genocide”. It was not. It was self-defense. After the wars concluded, the surrounding neighbor cities came to make a peace agreement with Jacob and his family. This is strength through military prowess, and the peace agreement saved more lives from being lost.

If you want to cite specific passages in the Old Testament that you deem “genocide”, that might be a good place to start. Perhaps you can start with what you feel is the most egregious example by your estimation.

 

[fred_conty]

I would first question your assumption that there is “genocide” in the Old Testament. When I read the Old Testament, I see self-defense and the Just War Doctrine, which I have thoroughly described earlier.

In the Book of Jasher, there are very detailed descriptions of wholesale destruction of surrounding enemy cities by the sons of Jacob. You might, in error, call even this destruction “genocide”. It was not. It was self-defense. After the wars concluded, the surrounding neighbor cities came to make a peace agreement with Jacob and his family. This is strength through military prowess, and the peace agreement saved more lives from being lost.

If you want to cite specific passages in the Old Testament that you deem “genocide”, that might be a good place to start. Perhaps you can start with what you feel is the most egregious example by your estimation.

It was genocide… eliminating all the nation. A war does not eliminate all the people and therefore is not genocide. Catholic doctrine enumerates genocide as intrinsic evil.

When it will be solved is a good question. It has been simmering all these centuries. The Apostles should have been aware of this as well as the fathers and doctors of the church. All the great saints probably knew about it. Well, it seems it didn’t bother anyone that much. But today is a new world which is not going to let us forget about it.

But if it had been a huge problem, it didn’t seem to bother Jesus much since he was quite familiar with the Old Testament. So there is an answer.

 

[StGerardMajella]

It was genocide… eliminating all the nation.

What, specifically, are you labeling as “genocide”?

If a nation is attacked, as Israel was repeatedly in the Old Testament, it had a right to defend itself. That’s not genocide, it’s self-defense.

In the case of the Book of Jasher, if that is to what you are referring as “genocide”, this, too was self-defense when the sons of Jacob conquered the enemy nations surrounding it.

There seems to be some major confusion in this thread about what constitutes “genocide”, and what constitutes self-defense. If one nation attacks another, the attacked nation has every right to defend itself and to eliminate and annihilate its enemy. This is also true in the case of the Amalekites, which started this thread. The Catechism of the Catholic Church also defends the cause of self-defense.

If a nation goes on the offensive and attacks another nation mercilessly and without justifiable cause, killing man, woman, and child, then this would constitute genocide.

As I noted earlier, it would be helpful to quote a specific passage from the Old Testament that you would label as “genocide”.

 

[Darryl1958]

The value of life takes precedence over all else. Every order given by God was necessary in order that the nation of Israel be born, and through Israel, Jesus.

It is a modern perversion of the idea of war that one side is bound to fight more honorably that the enemies that are being faced. The objective of war is to win. Over the years, under the guidance of Catholic culture, there have been some common rules agreed to by the different sides in order to cut the loses though common sense measures. When both side recognize that genocide is not in their common interests, both sides can come to an agreement to refrain from such actions in their war against each other.
If only one side agrees, the advantage goes to the other side that is not bound by the rule, and the side that choses honor over life is destroyed.

Fighting honorably therefore is to place honor as a higher value than life, for refraining from horrible acts that the enemy is taking to wipe you out, means that you will be wiped out instead, in all probability.

The Bible itself starts from an age of genocidal war, and that is the nature of the kind of war that God and his Chosen people fight. This simply was the state of the world in the times that God chose to intervene, lest the whole world be consumed by evil.

Over the centuries, in a give and take, the chosen people are led to an understanding of
respect for one’s enemies, and begin trying to introduce more honorable and more humane practices in the fight against the enemy. Over and over, the enemy becomes humanized, all with the objective of being a light on the hill for the enemy to notice the more honorable way of interacting and co-existing.

The reason we can now criticize God and the Bible is the Bible has led some of us to a place where we can see a better way is possible, in a way that it just was not at the beginning of the Bible.

There is a terribleness to God that is fierce and fearsome. There is no aspect of God however that is unnecessary. God uses evil to fight evil, for as he tells us, a house divided against itself cannot stand.

The irony is that the society that abhors genocide more than any other than ever existed, the society that rejects God and the Bible because of this terribleness of God, is the society that is now engaged in a genocide against itself that is greater in scope and viciousness and horribleness than anything that has ever been recorded in the Bible.
Ours is the only society that is in the process of aborting itself to death, and that is the greatest genocide of all.

The Bible is a mirror, and the monster we see reflected in its stories is actually not God, but merely a reflection of who we are, even now.

 

[fred_conty]

What, specifically, are you labeling as “genocide”?

If a nation is attacked, as Israel was repeatedly in the Old Testament, it had a right to defend itself. That’s not genocide, it’s self-defense.

In the case of the Book of Jasher, if that is to what you are referring as “genocide”, this, too was self-defense when the sons of Jacob conquered the enemy nations surrounding it.

There seems to be some major confusion in this thread about what constitutes “genocide”, and what constitutes self-defense. If one nation attacks another, the attacked nation has every right to defend itself and to eliminate and annihilate its enemy. This is also true in the case of the Amalekites, which started this thread. The Catechism of the Catholic Church also defends the cause of self-defense.

If a nation goes on the offensive and attacks another nation mercilessly and without justifiable cause, killing man, woman, and child, then this would constitute genocide.

As I noted earlier, it would be helpful to quote a specific passage from the Old Testament that you would label as “genocide”.

As mentioned earlier, genocide is the killing of all the people in one nation, omitting noone in that nation.

God orders MEN to do genocide…wipe out all those people of that one nation, omitting noone.

Genocide is an act that may never be performed for any reason by men…it is evil in itself.

Something is very wrong if we say that God orders MEN to do this which is evil. It is important to notice the word “MEN”. Men may not do genocide for any reason. There are no extenuating circumstances to justify this act by MEN. God is ordering MEN to do this. Something is obviously wrong with this.

I am not saying that there is some factor missing about this scene that we are not aware of. But as it stands, something is wrong.

As I said before, as far as I personally am concerned, Jesus was aware of this because he was a Rabbi and knew scripture very well. If he accepted it, then so can I. The Apostles must have also be aware of it, as well as all the great doctors,teachers, and saints, down thru the centuries. They didn’t throw away their faith and neither will I. But as it stands of now, I know of no explanation except one, which would say it was not one of fact.

But the church hasn’t said the final word on this yet or closed any doors.

May God be kind to you and give you peace.

 

[StGerardMajella]

I am not saying that there is some factor missing about this scene that we are not aware of. But as it stands, something is wrong.

I have asked repeatedly now (this is the third time) for a specific biblical citation that would accuse either Israel or the Creator of immoral warfare.

By utilizing the term “genocide”, you are implying that the warfare in the Old Testament was not justified. In every instance where Israel attacks enemy states during biblical times, it is justified. In every instance where the Creator attacks, such as in Sodom and Gomorrah, or in the times of Noah, or in the land of Egypt, it is wholly justified.

War isn’t in a vacuum. You would be very hard pressed to morally or even logically defend against the wiping out of Sodom and Gomorrah, or the enemy states that fought against Israel.

How would you defend the Egyptians that enslaved the Israelites, or the evil Amalekites that attacked Israel?

Would you dare defy the Creator in his decision to wipe out Sodom and Gomorrah?

War - whether you call it “genocide” or any other term - is wholly justified in cases of self-defense and according to the Church’s teaching on the Just War Doctrine. It is also the Creator’s inherent right to decide to destroy whole nations based on their intrinsic evil nature.

 

[gmcbroom]

NKdos,
Have you read the early church councils yet? They should put you at ease. This isn’t a new topic as it was discussed debated and settled by the councils a long time ago. Marcion wanted the Old Testament removed completely because of passages like those. Thankfully the council thought better of it. We need our history even if it’s uncomfortable to read.

 

[Darryl1958]

NKdos,
Have you read the early church councils yet? They should put you at ease. This isn’t a new topic as it was discussed debated and settled by the councils a long time ago. Marcion wanted the Old Testament removed completely because of passages like those. Thankfully the council thought better of it. We need our history even if it’s uncomfortable to read.

The Bible is not anything, if not deliberately provocative.
If someone can read about Abraham raising the knife to sacrifice his only son without feeling uncomfortable and filled with indignant rage at God for ordering such a thing, the reader has not really even entered into the true horror, and the fullest possible meaning, of the story.

 

[Cathoholic]

Ndkos.

You said:

How can I confess my sins to a God who might be a sadistic monster? Maybe God is the Devil?

You have not provided any proof for any of your statements.

Nobody wants to reduce God down to a “Stromboli in the sky” (see Stromboli here).

I asked you WHY you thought genocide was a bad thing.

(I am trying to help you get the answer to your question for yourself).

Again. I want to ask you WHY you think genocide is wrong.

(And again genocide is wrong, but I want to know WHY you think it is wrong).

 

[TheHolyTrinity]

ndkos:

So does anyone have a good explanation for the genocide in the Old Testament? I have read this thread and nothing sounds convincing.

It makes me think that maybe there is a problem with Christianity, if there is no good answer to this. So depressing.

The temptation that Adam and Eve faced was the challenge of the serpent in denying God the Father and the true religion of worshipping Him and Him alone, and to exalt self, worship self, magnify self as one’s own ‘god’ much as Satan did. For Adam and Eve - Satan brought upon mankind the curse of death.

The spiritual warfare we are engaged in revolves around the issue of the “religion of self” as established in the Garden of Eden , and the true religion of God the Father via Our Lord Jesus Christ and His blood atonement for our sins, himself. The spiritual world is legalistic. There are rules just like there are laws in our earthly world. God the Father wrote the laws and God the Father enforces them.

The Old Testament orders the killing of people as God the Father wants to safeguard the future messianic line against satanic interferences to thwart the coming of the messiah. As in the Garden of Eden, Satan endeavoured to corrupt the world, resulted in Noah’s Flood. Satan attempted to use violent armies to destroy Israel. Satan also attempted to introduce idolatry by introducing intermarrying of women between different cultures.

Pagan and licentious practices of the pagan women, was also a ploy of Satan in seducing the people of God the Father. Interbreeding and idolatry would produce failure of prophecies that foretold of the coming of a messiah, that he would die for the sins of the world – without his death there would be no atonement. Without the atonement, all souls would be lost in death. God the Father was safeguarding the arrival of Jesus via the annihilation of the ungodly.

If we don’t know what God the Father has said, we won’t recognize Satan’s lies. If we don’t know what God the Father has said, we won’t be able to believe what He has said or do what He said. It is good to keep in mind that God the Father does not desire to make our lives miserable as this is Satan’s desire.

For some of us, the hardest battles are fought within ourselves. We can accept the truth of how the world lures and tempts us. We can understand to some degree that the battle in the spiritual realm is ongoing and real, even though we cannot see it. But, to get a grasp on what is going on within our own hearts and minds can be the hardest, most exhausting, battle of them all.

God bless
THT

 

[fred_conty]

I have asked repeatedly now (this is the third time) for a specific biblical citation that would accuse either Israel or the Creator of immoral warfare.
By utilizing the term “genocide”, you are implying that the warfare in the Old Testament was not justified. In every instance where Israel attacks enemy states during biblical times, it is justified. In every instance where the Creator attacks, such as in Sodom and Gomorrah, or in the times of Noah, or in the land of Egypt, it is wholly justified.

War isn’t in a vacuum. You would be very hard pressed to morally or even logically defend against the wiping out of Sodom and Gomorrah, or the enemy states that fought against Israel.

How would you defend the Egyptians that enslaved the Israelites, or the evil Amalekites that attacked Israel?

Would you dare defy the Creator in his decision to wipe out Sodom and Gomorrah?

War - whether you call it “genocide” or any other term - is wholly justified in cases of self-defense and according to the Church’s teaching on the Just War Doctrine. It is also the Creator’s inherent right to decide to destroy whole nations based on their intrinsic evil nature.

Sodom and Gomorrah were not intrinsically evil because God did not employ men to destroy all of them but rather used other means. And what is the difference? God has the right to do it being the giver of all life, he can take all life as well. But men have no right to destroy a whole nation including the innocents, because they, the men, are committing genocide. God would never ask men to commit an act which cannot be anything else but evil for men to do. To put it plainly, it is a sin for men, but not for God.

It is important to understand the difference in the rights of God as creator, and the limited rights we have as creatures. Genocide is different from other war events since they do not completely wipe out every living human being in that nation. Wars limit their killing whereas genocide does not.

This can be a difficult concept to distinguish, but it makes all the difference in the world.
And this difficulty is similar to understanding why birth control is wrong. If this subtle concept is not understood, then there is no completion or ending to understanding how it is wrong.

May God’s face shine on you.