Old Testament God

[Lapell]

You call Genocide as Progress???
Thats much worst than what anyone did at that time.
i read that God allegedly cursed the Israelites for letting some canaanites live.

Not just some Canaanites. Those who meant harm to the Israelites.
Don’t twist my words. Other peoples did attempt genocides on their neighbours!! Look at the WHOLE of the Torah, as compared to the whole of their neighbours’ laws and customs. On the WHOLE, yes it WAS progress! Don’t put words on my mouth that I never said…:tsktsk: :ehh:

 

[AgnosTheist]

Because they are focusing on actions one at a time and not upon the whole story. It is the same way today when people decide that there is no God becuase they have a prayer that they think goes unanswered.

For example, take the fact that the generation that left Egypt was made to wander around the dessert until they died and not allowed to enter the Promised Land. That really seems unfair. In fact, I would say that it is cruel to say “Here you go to the Promised Land” and then none of them make it. But, look at the whole story. They showed themselves to be not deserving. God, still being merciful, did not return them to bondage. True, they were punished, but not to the extent that they deserved.

that is like “the ends justifies the means”.

that means god only cares about the end results. he doesnt care who gets trampled along the way. so who & what does god really love?

 

[AgnosTheist]

Other peoples did attempt genocides on their neighbours!!

can you give one example in history of a genocide that predates the genocide of the amalekites?

Look at the WHOLE of the Torah, as compared to the whole of their neighbours’ laws and customs. On the WHOLE, yes it WAS progress!

can you please name 3 NEW ideas that the torah introduced which you consider as the most progressive?

Don’t put words on my mouth that I never said…:tsktsk: :ehh:

we were discussing genocide.

 

[Lapell]

that is like “the ends justifies the means”.

that means god only cares about the end results. he doesnt care who gets trampled along the way. so who & what does god really love?

Also, there is the possibility that Moses may have mistaken one of Satan’s suggestions for something from God… The Hebrews’ sense of justice has evolved with time anyway! This can you deny?

 

[AgnosTheist]

Also, there is the possibility that Moses may have mistaken one of Satan’s suggestions for something from God… The Hebrews’ sense of justice has evolved with time anyway! This can you deny?

that, i can agree with.

 

[Valke2]

But the Egyptians attempted to do worst than that. Actually, they already did a lot worst…slavery & murder. And the only thing they lost was a portion of their army and first born sons. What happened to ‘violating a zone of holiness’.

That was before Israel became a consecrated people. Besides, don’t you think enough was done to the Egyptians? Also, they got a retribution discount for letting Joseph and his family reside in Egypt.

And remember what you said before, that what fails is the human nature and not the jewish nature. Now put yourself in the shoes of the amalekites. What would make one tribe attack another? More often than not, its because of fear. The jews- an entire nation on the move in the middle of nowhere. What would they eat? where would they settle? The amalekites have very likely feared being attacked and plundered. And struck first. Where they wrong? NO, they were right. The jews did attack peaceful settlements, and stole their lands. And massacred their children.

One thing I may have not made clear. It is not a morality issue when a zone of holiness is violated (necessarily). Take, for example, the story of the two people who decide to knock boots in the Tent of Meeting. Their actions trigger a plauge on all of Israel until someone runs them through with a spear. Despite the fact that all of Israel was not guilty of a crime, they were all in danger of being destroyed because of the actions of a couple of tennagers. Another example is the two men who reached out to steady the ark when it looked as if it would slip from the cart. They were instantly killed. Not a moral issue here either.

There were also examples of nations that did not attack Israel but simply asked them to keep moving (which they did).

 

[Valke2]

Valke, do you have any idea when Israel’s “Zone of Holiness” began and when it ended?

When something has to do with demarcating a space or event in the name of God, it’s a zone of holiness. Thus, if you weren’t a priest and you entered the Tent of Meeting, you were killed. Aaron’s sons, on the day of their inaugration, are destroyed by holy fire because they did something in the Tent of Meeting that they weren’t supposed to do.

 

[AgnosTheist]

When something has to do with demarcating a space or event in the name of God, it’s a zone of holiness. Thus, if you weren’t a priest and you entered the Tent of Meeting, you were killed. Aaron’s sons, on the day of their inaugration, are destroyed by holy fire because they did something in the Tent of Meeting that they weren’t supposed to do.

Im not sure what you are trying to say here, with regards to event. When did the israelites become part of a zone of holiness, and when did it stop?

One thing I may have not made clear. It is not a morality issue when a zone of holiness is violated (necessarily). Take, for example, the story of the two people who decide to knock boots in the Tent of Meeting. Their actions trigger a plauge on all of Israel until someone runs them through with a spear. Despite the fact that all of Israel was not guilty of a crime, they were all in danger of being destroyed because of the actions of a couple of tennagers. Another example is the two men who reached out to steady the ark when it looked as if it would slip from the cart. They were instantly killed. Not a moral issue here either.

The Philistines reportedly stole the Ark, and the only thing they got was a statue that kept falling flat on its face.

On every other instance, the offenders & their brethren themselves suffered. but the fate of the amalekites was met several generations after the offense was made.

And didnt david and his men ate the food in the temple?

There doesnt seem to a standard on who gets punished & why. But everything depends on a whim and a current mood in the story. Because of this, the “not a moral issue” explanation appears to be more of an excuse rather than a rational explanation.

 

[ralphinal]

Im not sure what you are trying to say here, with regards to event. When did the israelites become part of a zone of holiness, and when did it stop?

The Philistines reportedly stole the Ark, and the only thing they got was a statue that kept falling flat on its face.

True, unless you ask yourself where are they now…

On every other instance, the offenders & their brethren themselves suffered. but the fate of the amalekites was met several generations after the offense was made.

True, but can we know that the attitude was not still in them generations later?

And didnt david and his men ate the food in the temple?

Yes they did, but there were extreme measures in that story. There was no transgression made, if you read the whole thing

There doesnt seem to a standard on who gets punished & why. But everything depends on a whim and a current mood in the story. Because of this, the “not a moral issue” explanation appears to be more of an excuse rather than a rational explanation.

I do not see an issue with who gets punished and why. It seems pretty clear that to those that much is given, much is expected and that those who repent and make amends lessen the punishment. That said, it does seem to me like the severity of punishment is at times inconsistant, but that is just me.

 

[ralphinal]

that is like “the ends justifies the means”.

that means god only cares about the end results. he doesnt care who gets trampled along the way. so who & what does god really love?

See, I do not see it that way at all. I fully understand where you are coming from, however. How can we say that God did not give all them chances to be His people? Remember that the Books in question were not written by an impartial third party, but by the Jews themselves. How can I say that God did not give others the chance to be Abraham, or Isaac, or David? Is it not possible that only the Patriarchs in the Bible responded to God in the way that He desired, thus making the Children of Isreal God’s Chosen?

Who does God truly love? All of us.

I will say this. As a CHristian, I do think that God thinks that the end justified the means. That is why He was willing to offer His only begotten Son that whoever should beleive in Him should have eternal life. TO God, Salvation was worth the Suffering, Death, and Resurection of Jesus. This has nothing to do with this thread.

 

[Valke2]

The Amalakites fought Israel on several occassions. Not just upon leaving Egypt. They later team up with the Midanites against Israel.

ANd let’s not forget that the Jews did not obey this commandment. And did not exterminate them.

In fact, RamBam states that the command to kill was conditioned upon first asking them to obey the Noahide laws and then, if they refused, to kill them.

But all this doesn’t change what I had originally said. The command to blot out the Amalakites – to utterly destory them-- ensured that such a war would yeild no profit to Israel. That the cattle and all the belongings would be given to God. The fact that there may be instances when such zones were violated without such dire consequences does not change what is being taught in the Torah.

 

[AgnosTheist]

True, unless you ask yourself where are they now…

likely intermarried with the israelites

True, but can we know that the attitude was not still in them generations later?

what matters is who committed the crime.

Yes they did, but there were extreme measures in that story. There was no transgression made, if you read the whole thing

the same can be said about the guy who acted on impulse and caught the ark from tumbling down the road. for that his reward is death.

 

[Valke2]

1Sm 5:1,2,8,11
1 Now the Philistines had taken the ark of God, and they brought it from Ebenezer to Ashdod.
2 The Philistines took the ark of God, and brought it into the house of Dagon, and set it by Dagon.
8 They sent therefore and gathered all the lords of the Philistines to them, and said, “What shall we do with the ark of the God of Israel?” They answered, “Let the ark of the God of Israel be carried over to Gath.” They carried the ark of the God of Israel there.
11 They sent therefore and gathered together all the lords of the Philistines, and they said, “Send away the ark of the God of Israel, and let it go again to its own place, that it not kill us and our people.” For there was a deadly confusion throughout all the city; the hand of God was very heavy there.

 

[ralphinal]

likely intermarried with the israelites

what matters is who committed the crime.

the same can be said about the guy who acted on impulse and caught the ark from tumbling down the road. for that his reward is death.

read this about the ark. It may help a little. Then read this one.
Follow that with this one

Basically, God had provided means to handle the Ark (poles) and it had no business on the cart anyway.

 

[AgnosTheist]

also, how can people argue that this is “not a moral issue” when …wasnt it the entire business of spirituality all about teaching morality to man? How can a god teach right & wrong, when he himself served as a prime example of injustice, hate & anger? & look at the indirect results of this example: crusades, inquisitions & jihad.

moslem apologists are quite content justifying terrorism as “they did it too!” “its in the torah!”

 

[ralphinal]

also, how can people argue that this is “not a moral issue” when …wasnt it the entire business of spirituality all about teaching morality to man? How can a god teach right & wrong, when he himself served as a prime example of injustice, hate & anger? & look at the indirect results of this example: crusades, inquisitions & jihad.

moslem apologists are quite content justifying terrorism as “they did it too!” “its in the torah!”

Agnos,
I would agree with you if I saw God exhibiting those traits. What I do see is a bunch of children mad becuase dad punished them. Now, people can read into it whatever they want, and they do. They also wrongly use it to justify everything under the sun. It does not mean that they are right.

Since when have you cared what the Muslims use as a denfense of their stuff?

 

[Valke2]

also, how can people argue that this is “not a moral issue” when …wasnt it the entire business of spirituality all about teaching morality to man? How can a god teach right & wrong, when he himself served as a prime example of injustice, hate & anger? & look at the indirect results of this example: crusades, inquisitions & jihad.

moslem apologists are quite content justifying terrorism as “they did it too!” “its in the torah!”

I haven’t seen an example of God promoting injustice, hate or anger.

It is difficult for us today to imagine divine retribution for certain actions, such as making a ritual mistake when entering the holy of holies. These zones that I have been referring to don’t really exist anymore, because God becomes more and more distant (from talking directly with Moses, to bestowing visions on prophets, to taking Himself out of the picture with Esther).

 

[AgnosTheist]

I haven’t seen an example of God promoting injustice, hate or anger.

maybe because you refuse to see them as such.

For many people, the slaughter of children for the crimes of their ancestors…these constitute as the highest form of injustice. If you have a young child, look at her/his face and imagine them being slaughtered as payment for your own personal mistakes.

 

[Righteousone]

Most of the Catholics killed by the Nazis were not killed for being Catholic, they were killed for being Polish (and like most ‘subhuman’ Slavs, ie the ones who were not considered Aryan enough or who were going to be providing slave labor in the Lebensraum of the new Große Reich, they were to be ‘next on the list’ for elimination). The executioners were, of course, their fellow Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox - Germans, Lithuanians, Latvians, Ukrainians etc - they may have been very, very naughty Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox but, nevertheless, that is what they were.

As to the rest of the “endless Catholic Christians who were ‘attacked’ mercilessly” through the ages, you’d have to provide chapter and verse - as to Catholics being killed everywhere, currently, I’ve not noticed any around where I live.

Then I gather you don’t study history as well.
By the late 1940’s, over 200,000 Christians were prisoners in Nazi death camps. Some estimate as high as 800,000.
You must remmber the Holocaust was also anti-Christian. After Hitler revealed his true intentions, the Catholic church opposed him. Even the famous Albert Einstein testified to that.
Two books I’ve read that are great are one by an Israeli Consul, Pinchas E. Lapide. Entitled “Three popes and the Jews”. Here he critically examines, and, according to his research, the Cathiolic church saved 860,000 Jews from Nazi death camps.
The Jewish historian Jenoe Levai’s book entitled “The Church Did Not Keep Silent” is also excellent. They will tell you how many were killed.
There were 6 million Jews and 3 million Christians killed.

 

[Kaninchen]

Then I gather you don’t study history as well.
By the late 1940’s, over 200,000 Christians were prisoners in Nazi death camps.

I know enough about history to tell you that, by the late 1940’s, the war was well and truly over.

You must remmber the Holocaust was also anti-Christian. After Hitler revealed his true intentions, the Catholic church opposed him. Even the famous Albert Einstein testified to that.

The ‘Holocaust’ was nothing of the sort - in fact the first victims of the Nazis were members of the Social Democratic and Communist Parties but that wasn’t the ‘Holocaust’ either.

Two books I’ve read that are great are one by an Israeli Consul, Pinchas E. Lapide. Entitled “Three popes and the Jews”. Here he critically examines, and, according to his research, the Cathiolic church saved 860,000 Jews from Nazi death camps.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the topic of your supposed ‘Catholic Holocaust’.

The Jewish historian Jenoe Levai’s book entitled “The Church Did Not Keep Silent” is also excellent. They will tell you how many were killed.
There were 6 million Jews and 3 million Christians killed.

Most of whom were Poles, killed because they were Poles.

I look forward to more of your expertise in European History.