God of the OT or Jesus in the NT: Do they contradict one another?

[OzmO]

OzmO,  these questions are based on something that you, not me, said.  Now, one more time, and now that you know women were not traveling with the soldiers and now that you know Israel commanded not to take any food from the Amalekites:

Killing all the "adult" Amalekites was "certainly justified"?  Okay.

How do you define "adult"?  What is the cut off age? 4?  Would you have gone around the Amalekite camp asking kids for their age?  What if a kid's birthday was that same day, he/she had just turned 4?  Would you have killed the kid because he/she was no longer 3 years old?

So what would you have done with all the little ones, say 3 years and younger?  Israel's army had to travel days, maybe weeks to find and defeat the Amalekites.  They fought them in stages, fighting, pursuing, then fighting again, before coming back home after all their battles.

1 Samuel 15:7
"Then Saul attacked the Amalekites all the way from Havilah to Shur, to the east of Egypt."

Would you have told Israel's army to strap children to their bodies and carry them along from battle to battle?  Most of them, if not all, were foot soldiers.

1 Samuel 15:4
"So Saul summoned the men and mustered them at Telaim—two hundred thousand foot soldiers and ten thousand men from Judah."

Or would you have told Israel's army to leave the small children to die a slow, painful death, after killing all the adults?

answer my question first, i asked them first.  and i did answer your questions.


And we don't know if women travel with that army.  But it's very likely they did.

[loco]

answer my question first, i asked them first. 

No, you did not.

and i did answer your questions.

No, you did not, and you won't.

And we don't know if women travel with that army.  But it's very likely they did.

Women did not travel with them.

[Necrosis]

Why would all of science be wrong? They're God's scientific laws. He created them and put them in motion. As such, He can circumvent them as He sees fit to suit His purpose.

If an atheist believes in the supernatural, then he ain't an atheist anymore. So, your comment makes no sense. And, you forget that there are many Christians, who were once atheists.

God has laws and principles and there are consequences for violating those. Blaming God for man's flagrant breaking of divine rules is rather ridiculous.

If people want free will to rebel against God, then they'd better be prepared to accept the consequences for doing such, pure and simple. Keep in mind, however, that the worst part about committing sin is that, at some levels, the transgressor isn't the only one who pays the price. There are things that you do that bring pain and suffering on you and your entire family, or your neighbors.

"Why would all of science be wrong? They're God's scientific laws. He created them and put them in motion. As such, He can circumvent them as He sees fit to suit His purpose. "

oh i see, god can do want he wants so you dont have to make a rational argument. the laws cannot be broken that is scientific fact, if they could they wouldn t be called laws. tell me HOW DOES GOD BREAK THE LAWS WITHOUT US KNOWING, HOW DOES HE "CIRCUMVENT THE LAWS"? if you have no mechanism your geussing and making things up out of thin air, also show me proof where laws have been broken.


"If an atheist believes in the supernatural, then he ain't an atheist anymore. So, your comment makes no sense. And, you forget that there are many Christians, who were once atheists. "

see this is where your ignorance is shining through. if a law was broken and it was verifiable it wouldnt matter what religion you where, you couldnt deny it. for example youd have to be an idiot to refute gravity, no matter what religion. youd also be an idiot if you saw god reach done and change a law or physics, thus your "miracles" likie jesus arent beleived by all because there is not sufficient evidence, like gravity, a law.

"God has laws and principles and there are consequences for violating those. Blaming God for man's flagrant breaking of divine rules is rather ridiculous.

If people want free will to rebel against God, then they'd better be prepared to accept the consequences for doing such, pure and simple. Keep in mind, however, that the worst part about committing sin is that, at some levels, the transgressor isn't the only one who pays the price. There are things that you do that bring pain and suffering on you and your entire family, or your neighbors."

this doesnt even touch my question. ANSWER THE QUESTION. did god order the death of people, does he have negative attributes in the old testament? yes he does, anger, jealousy etc are negative traits making your god imperfect and in direct contradiction with the all loving image. he is suppose to be pure love, if he has negative traits he cannot be. its one or the other, its not up for interpretation.

[OzmO]

Just in case you lost your vision again.....

How do you define "adult"?  What is the cut off age? 4?  Would you have gone around the Amalekite camp asking kids for their age?  What if a kid's birthday was that same day, he/she had just turned 4?  Would you have killed the kid because he/she was no longer 3 years old?

So what would you have done with all the little ones, say 3 years and younger?  Israel's army had to travel days, maybe weeks to find and defeat the Amalekites.  They fought them in stages, fighting, pursuing, then fighting again, before coming back home after all their battles.

Here:

Personally, I'd spare  any person who wasn't a soldier.

[loco]

Just in case you lost your vision again.....

Here:

Yeah, OzmO, continue with the insults, I can't read, I can't see, I know nothing about history, I justify the murder of children.  Well, you justify leaving children alone to die a slow, painful death.  And you continuously make appeals to emotion to make people feel sympathy for the murderous Amalekites.  And all for what?  To prove to yourself that the Bible is not 100% the word of God, only because it doesn't suit you 100%.

How is the above an answer to my question when the question itself is based on your own statement that killing the adults was certainly justified?  You make no sense and you are flip flopping. 

[OzmO]

Yeah, OzmO, continue with the insults, I can't read, I can't see, I know nothing about history, I justify the murder of children.  Well, you justify leaving children alone to die a slow, painful death.  And you continuously make appeals to emotion to make people feel sympathy for the murderous Amalekites.  And all for what?  To prove to yourself that the Bible is not 100% the word of God, only because it doesn't suit you 100%.

How is the above an answer to my question when the question itself is based on your own statement that killing the adults was certainly justified?  You make no sense and you are flip flopping. 

It's sad, you have to go through these links to discredit my argument to justify killing children.

I justify the murder of children.

Yes you do.

Well, you justify leaving children alone to die a slow, painful death.

I never said they should have left them there,  you think that's an answer.  but I'm not surprised because you support killing them.

They should have took them back and assimilated them into their nation.

And you continuously make appeals to emotion to make people feel sympathy for the murderous Amalekites.

More loco induced bullshit of putting words into my mouth.  No sympathy for the evil adults.

Sympathy for the innocent children who were murdered on God's order!

get it now?  Or are you gonna put words in my mouth?

To prove to yourself that the Bible is not 100% the word of God, only because it doesn't suit you 100%.

At this point what does it matter?   Only those with an absence of god given common sense would still think the bible is the 100% WOG.

[loco]

If you didn;t comprehend what i just wrote i'll say it again:

If I'm right or wrong about my assumptions of how armies were composed back then it still doesn't take away form the fact

GOD ORDERED THE DEATH OF innocent children


BTW,

first google hit:

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/gabrmetz/gabr000a.htm

First google hit?  What?  You don't get it, do you?  You make bold statements that you say are fact and you can back them up, but it is not until after you make the statement that you go and start googling stuff to see if you guessed right?  You are just making stuff up as you go, hoping that you guessed right.

I did look at your link above.  Did you even read it?  Please do tell me where it says that women traveled with soldiers in those days.

[OzmO]

First google hit?  What?  You don't get it, do you?  You make bold statements that you say are fact and you can back them up, but it is not until after you make the statement that you go and start googling stuff to see if you guessed right?  You are just making stuff up as you go, hoping that you guessed right.

I did look at your link above.  Did you even read it?  Please do tell me where it says that women traveled with soldiers in those days.

OK  loco,  you are right, i was wrong.  Women did not travel with armies back then.


What does that have to do with GOD ordering the killing of children?


What exactly?

BTW, I'll find it later.  And i didn't make the guess that women travel with armies, i assumed it because they did in medieval times.  I read some books on it years ago.

[loco]

It's sad, you have to go through these links to discredit my argument to justify killing children.

Yes you do.

I never said they should have left them there,  you think that's an answer.  but I'm not surprised because you support killing them.

They should have took them back and assimilated them into their nation.

More loco induced bullshit of putting words into my mouth.  No sympathy for the evil adults.

Sympathy for the innocent children who were murdered on God's order!

get it now?  Or are you gonna put words in my mouth?

At this point what does it matter?   Only those with an absence of god given common sense would still think the bible is the 100% WOG.

Insults, appeals to emotion and typing in big letters only show that you are out of arguments and you continue to avoid the questions after your statement.

You do justify killing all the adults and leaving the children to die a slow painful death.  And asking the soldiers to strap children to their bodies and drag them into the rest of their battles before returning home is ridiculous.

[OzmO]

Insults, appeals to emotion and typing in big letters only show that you are out of arguments and you continue to avoid the questions after your statement.

What ever dude,  you accused me of something i did not say. and you knew you did.  Yeah, i take that a bit personally.

You do justify killing all the adults and leaving the children to die a slow painful death.  And asking the soldiers to strap children to their bodies and drag them into the rest of their battles before returning home is ridiculous.

What ever they have to do to keep the children safe they HAVE TO DO.   That is not a justification to kill them.

[loco]

What ever dude,  you accused me of something i did not say. and you knew you did.  Yeah, i take that a bit personally.
What ever they have to do to keep the children safe they HAVE TO DO.   That is not a justification to kill them.

OzmO, what did I accuse of saying that you did not say?  That wasn't my intention.

[OzmO]

OzmO, what did I accuse of saying that you did not say?  That wasn't my intention.

here:

And you continuously make appeals to emotion to make people feel sympathy for the murderous Amalekites.

And here's what i'm getting at:

Sympathy for the innocent children who were murdered on God's order!

And that NOT  god, but murderous soldiers or a General who deiced not to accept the moral responsibly of taking of the innocnet children left over from killing all the Adult amelekites

[loco]

OK  loco,  you are right, i was wrong.  Women did not travel with armies back then.


What does that have to do with GOD ordering the killing of children?


What exactly?

BTW, I'll find it later.  And i didn't make the guess that women travel with armies, i assumed it because they did in medieval times.  I read some books on it years ago.

Thanks, OzmO!

And to answer "what exactly", you brought it up when I asked you some questions.

[OzmO]

Thanks, OzmO!

And to answer "what exactly", you brought it up when I asked you some questions.

And how is killing children Godly?

[loco]

And how is killing children Godly?

Who said killing children is Godly?

How is leaving the Amalekite children alone to die a slow painful death Godly?

[OzmO]

Who said killing children is Godly?

How is leaving the Amalekite children alone to die a slow painful death Godly?

You think the only option was to leave.   I say absolutely not.  They had food and they likely had a logistics train.   They didn't need to leave them.  And even if some of them died form hunger on the journey back because there wasn't enough food at least they made an effort and could have assimilated the survivors into the rest of the population.  That is the right thing to do, the godly thing to do.  Not to kill them.

But murderous soldiers or a General who deiced not to accept the moral responsibly of taking of the innocent children left over from killing all the Adult amelekites

[loco]

You think the only option was to leave.   I say absolutely not.  They had food and they likely had a logistics train.   They didn't need to leave them.  And even if some of them died form hunger on the journey back because there wasn't enough food at least they made an effort and could have assimilated the survivors into the rest of the population.  That is the right thing to do, the godly thing to do.  Not to kill them.

But murderous soldiers or a General who deiced not to accept the moral responsibly of taking of the innocent children left over from killing all the Adult amelekites

Would you have left the mothers and the children alive?  What if you had done that, and a generation later they come back to kill and destroy your nation?  And say you go back and kill them again, but again leaving the mothers and children alive.  What if again and again they keep coming back, for many generations.  As a leader of a nation, Israel in this case, what would you do?  Would you just keep the cycle going for ever?

[OzmO]

Would you have left the mothers and the children alive?  What if you had done that, and a generation later they come back to kill and destroy your nation?  And say you go back and kill them again, but again leaving the mothers and children alive.  What if again and again they keep coming back, for many generations.  As a leader of a nation, Israel in this case, what would you do?  Would you just keep the cycle going for ever?

I think you are assuming a lot there loco.

What if you had done that, and a generation later they come back to kill and destroy your nation?   

Killing innocent people based on what their off spring might do a generation later is no justification.

By that same logic, when we kill a terrorist should we then kill their kids to?  Incidentally some of their kids end up being suicide bombers, but does killing innocent children becuase of what they might become make that right?

That's very fear based.   I don't think God wants you to kill innocent children or live your life in fear, although some people might interpret the bible that way.

"What ifs" don;t justify the killing of children.

 

And say you go back and kill them again, but again leaving the mothers and children alive.  What if again and again they keep coming back, for many generations.

You remember i said the best thing to do would be to assimilate them into your population?  That would prevent that as some would carry the grudge all their lives while others would accept their lives and be touched by the grace of God and realize their evil ways.

and what if you left them and they kept coming back?   Well that's their choice and each time they would die.   chances are the entire culture would be shattered any way and the survivors would realize, that being Evil or not, messing with Israel means death.

and in the end, it is not right ot kill innocent children for something there decedents might do.

As a leader of a nation, Israel in this case, what would you do?  Would you just keep the cycle going for ever?

If the Bible description of the Amilallikites is accurate, (which i doubt, but probably reasonably close)  I would, kill the soldiers and help rebuild their nation.....kind of like we did with Germany and Japan.  As time goes on, the hatred dies down and as you've seen us do, we have instilled many or our values in their culture just as the Israleites would have done with them.

[loco]

I think you are assuming a lot there loco.

Killing innocent people based on what their off spring might do a generation later is no justification.

By that same logic, when we kill a terrorist should we then kill their kids to?  Incidentally some of their kids end up being suicide bombers, but does killing innocent children becuase of what they might become make that right?

That's very fear based.   I don't think God wants you to kill innocent children or live your life in fear, although some people might interpret the bible that way.

"What ifs" don;t justify the killing of children.

 
You remember i said the best thing to do would be to assimilate them into your population?  That would prevent that as some would carry the grudge all their lives while others would accept their lives and be touched by the grace of God and realize their evil ways.

and what if you left them and they kept coming back?   Well that's their choice and each time they would die.   chances are the entire culture would be shattered any way and the survivors would realize, that being Evil or not, messing with Israel means death.

and in the end, it is not right ot kill innocent children for something there decedents might do.

If the Bible description of the Amilallikites is accurate, (which i doubt, but probably reasonably close)  I would, kill the soldiers and help rebuild their nation.....kind of like we did with Germany and Japan.  As time goes on, the hatred dies down and as you've seen us do, we have instilled many or our values in their culture just as the Israleites would have done with them.

But the Amalekites kept coming back to attack Israel, killing, destroying, kidnapping, stealing, etc., for 300+ years, even after King Saul had destroyed "almost" all of them.

In the case of terrorists, that is different because there is no such thing as an entire nation of men who are terrorists.  Even in Palestine, with their suicide bombers and all, there are many Palestinians who want peace with Israel.  The suicide bombers do not represent the entire population.  In the case of the Amalekites, they were nomads who supported themselves through pillaging and plundering other nations.

[OzmO]

But the Amalekites kept coming back to attack Israel, killing, destroying, kidnapping, stealing, etc., for 300+ years, even after King Saul had destroyed "almost" all of them.

In the case of terrorists, that is different because there is no such thing as an entire nation of men who are terrorists.  Even in Palestine, with their suicide bombers and all, there are many Palestinians who want peace with Israel.  The suicide bombers do not represent the entire population.  In the case of the Amalekites, they were nomads who supported themselves through pillaging and plundering other nations.

Then you assimilate them (the non-soldiers) into your population.   Or if god really desired the Amalikites to stop attacking Israel he could have just made them stop by changing their hearts, erecting an invisible wall, or scatter them like he's done before in other situations.   Either way the innocent children are spared.   Or he could have made a spectacle of his power and made the murderous adults disappear before the eyes of the women and children so they know the punishment that awaits them becuase of their evil ways if they don't change.

[nzhardgain]

Then you assimilate them (the non-soldiers) into your population.   Or if god really desired the Amalikites to stop attacking Israel he could have just made them stop by changing their hearts, erecting an invisible wall, or scatter them like he's done before in other situations.   Either way the innocent children are spared.   Or he could have made a spectacle of his power and made the murderous adults disappear before the eyes of the women and children so they know the punishment that awaits them becuase of their evil ways if they don't change.

I guess from this line of reasoning that the Nephilim were just victims of circumstance,the people that passed away in the flood were hard done by.The egyptians only needed cheap labour.The assyrians even though they liked to flay their victim and wear his skin were only making a fashion statement.
Bad is bad is bad .
God was fully justified in wiping this race off the face of the planet.
Ozmo  where were you at the foundation of the world?

[OzmO]

I guess from this line of reasoning that the Nephilim were just victims of circumstance,the people that passed away in the flood were hard done by.The egyptians only needed cheap labour.The assyrians even though they liked to flay their victim and wear his skin were only making a fashion statement.
Bad is bad is bad .
God was fully justified in wiping this race off the face of the planet.

All of which makes total sense except when it comes to killing innocent children.

Ozmo  where were you at the foundation of the world?

 

[nzhardgain]

Ozmo they werent innocent.Im not going into detail as its too sick to even describe what these pagan assholes used to inflict on their kids.
Blame the parents ,not the judgement.

Gods smarter than you.

Where were you at the foundation of the world?

[OzmO]

Ozmo they werent innocent.Im not going into detail as its too sick to even describe what these pagan assholes used to inflict on their kids.
Blame the parents ,not the judgement.

Gods smarter than you.

A 4 year girl is not innocent?   Sorry don't buy that BS.  It doesn't matter what the parents were doing to the children.   

And if you go into detail, show me in the Bible where it says or describes how evil these children were.   Otherwise you are just making statements and backing them up with the assumption that God is justified to kill children because God is smarter than me.  Which is really stupid because first off you'd have to prove he did exactly that.

What did likely happen?   If you know anything about history, you know that history is written by the victors.   the victors in this case justified their slaughter of children by blaming it on orders from God.   Not exactly a new idea in history isn't?  A leader of some army or nation saying he's been given orders to do something that otherwise would be considered a war crime.

Where were you at the foundation of the world?

What do you mean?  What are you trying to get at?  You aren't making much sense.


Also, I'm starting to think English isn't your first language.  Am i right?

[Necrosis]

ARE THE CHRISTIANS AWARE THAT WHEN THEY SAY GOD KILLED PEOPLE, OR WAS JUSTIFIED IT FULLY CONTRADICTS AN ALL LOVING GOD, AND FREE WILL?