We are talking about the needless wrongful evil murder of children here MCWAY something that you are obviously indifferent to as you try and support this kind of thing becuase to do otherwise would negate the integrity and credibility of the WOG being 100% in the bible.
I'm not indifferent to anything. I simply realize the widespread reprecussions of certain sinful behaviors.
So God responds to a sin by ordering people to commit another even more horrible sin?
Makes no sense and is appalling to even think someone would compare it.
My exact point, that's why the bible is a load of crap in some areas.
How many people have suffered becuase those in power thought they were on orders from God?
What's that got to do with the Amalekites, their continued unprovoked attacks on Israel, and the punishment that befell them?
the Jews had a moral obligation to take care of the women and children. do you even believe that? Would follow that same example McWAY in this day in age? Would kill children if god told you?
Their orders weren't to take care of them. Otherwise they would have, as they did when they dealt with other enemies.
Would I follow that same example? My people aren't being relentlessly attacked without provocation by an enemy for hundreds of years. So, no I wouldn't.
I wouldn't. He can stick that order in his ass. And if he sends me to hell he's a hypocrite and cannot possibly be god. And if he really is GOD, then to hell i go, becuase i'd rather burn in hell than kill a child, becuase if that's what i'm supposed to do to go to heaven then forget it. i will not lose my soul becuase GOD couldn't in all "his wisdom and power" find a better answer.
As I said earlier, if you ended up separated from God, you've already lost your soul. And, nowhere is there a prerequisite to entering the pearly gates by killing children. Your implication that God can only be God, if and when He acts the way you think you He should, is rather juvenile.
They paid price for it? The offspring? and this is your all loving God? 
this god is hypocrite murderous butcher. But if you would open your eyes to even one sliver of common sense you'll see that this is NOT god, but some murderous Hews looking to lie about their justification of murder.
They're going to LIE about this issue, with the end result being their king being DETHRONED, despite the outcome being (by earthly standards) a success? They beat the Amalekites, took the gold and silver and livestock, and have their king of their oppressors groveling before them. Yet, their king gets the heave-ho, and his lineage doesn't follow him on the throne. And the Jews lied about all this because.......
Oh goody! More stupid excuses to try and justify killing children.
Try that again! The point was/is that you (and several others) have a problem with God's judgment, no matter what that judgment is.
We did assimilate children into our society but becuase our men would use them as sex slaves it was better off to just KILL them. Instead of addressing the fact that slavery is wrong which another can of worms with God and the bible, they use that to justify killing them?
You complain about the death of the children; another skeptic complains about their being assimilated. My point stands, no matter what judgment hits the Amalekites (who could have avoided all of this by leaving Israel alone), non-believers will have a problem with it.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Leave them there with all there food and belongings, In a few years it will be many old women and children that grew up to be men and women or assimilate them into their culture. Either way, far more morally accountable than killing tham. Also, i don't believe every amailikite was evil. That's just stupid propaganda by the victors.
Those men and women would pick up, where their ancestors left off (as was documeted in Scripture). Your claim of "stupid propoganda by the victors" makes no sense. For starters, no one states that all the Amalekites were evil. And, as you clearly missed, the "victors" were happy with the outcome. By and large, they were happy that Saul kept the booty of war and had King Agag (of the Amalekites) as a captive.
God, however, was not (nor was the prophet, Samuel). Agag would later pay for his actions. As Samuel put it, the sword of Agag made women childless; he and his people would suffer the same fate.
But now we are saying no matter what they did there would still be skeptics so they might have well just killed them anyway? that's really dumb.
What do you think the opinion of the world would be if anything like that happened today?
That's why in some ways the Bible holds back the progression of our civilization when people actually try and finds ways to justify killing children.
The Bible hasn't held up the progression of our society.
McWay i respect you and i hope you do not take anything i said personally. but at some point, These attempts to justify killing children anger me.
Be as angry as you wish. The simple fact is that this is about the reprecussions of sin. And, whether you like or not or how much it angers you, those reprecussions aren't limited to the transgressors. Why aren't you angry about the Amalekites and their behavior or the fact that, despite centuries of being able to repent, they kept up their unprovoked attacks on Israel?
God's chosen people got harrassed repeatedly; the harrassers paid dearly for it.
