Does the God of the Bible like to rape too?

[MCWAY]

Who is to say that the "god" that ordered the murder of the Amalekites is God?  Unless God is hypocrite.  Oh yeah, forget that's what you worship.

That same God, whether you like it not, is the same source of YOUR Christian upbringing and the "nuggets of wisdom" that you like so much from Scripture.

First, I don't kill kids.  Second, I don't condone killing children.  Collateral damage or not.  The difference is you are too much of a COWARD to address is the difference between collateral damage from a Bomb that's unavoidable (involving 1 action) versus killing the Amalekites on the field of battle and then proceeding the village and murdering the women and children (involving 2 actions).

I don't kill kids, either. I answered a hypothethical question, based on a hypothetical situation. And, you've been bleating about it, ever since then, going on a tirade of anti-Biblical cut-and-paste rants.

The coward here is you, as you fail to recognized the simple fact that, bomb or sword, you are STILL TAKING DELIBERATE ACTIONS, with the FULL knowledge that chidren will be killed in the process. It doesn't matter how many actions there are. Those kids are just as DEAD by being blown up and they would be via sword (or as they would be, left to starve to death, as a result of their parents being gone).

But that's what you are, a real coward.  Only a real coward] would try and pass of those two completely different instances as the same.  Only a true coward would kill an innocent child on God's orders. Only a twisted brain washed ignorant coward would try and defend the cold blooded murder of children.

That's what you are McVay.  A coward.

Now, the name-calling starts. I expect this type of infantile behavior from certain posters. But, I guess when your feathers get ruffled, you resort to the same mess as other Bible skeptics I've encounted. The simple fact remains that, by your own standards, YOU would kill innocent children, if the situation presented itself, REGARDLESS OF WHO gave the orders, provided you had the option of hiding behind modern weapons.

You ask a hypothetical question, expecting someone to duck your question. Then, when it gets answered, you start with the criticizing. But, when the tables get turned on you, you cry, whine, bleat, moan, go on an anti-Biblical tirade, and resort to name-calling.

In short, (like far too many Biblical skeptics I've encountered) you can dish it out....BUT YOU CAN'T TAKE IT!

To top it all, you're STILL running from the fact that the same "nuggets of wisdom" that you like from the Bible (as you've admitted), as well as the Christian upbringing you have are all derived from the VERY SAME GOD, about Whom you keep screeching, because of the judgment He declared on the Amalekites.

[OzmO]

That same God, whether you like it not, is the same source of YOUR Christian upbringing and the "nuggets of wisdom" that you like so much from Scripture.

Not the same God.  Unless God IS a hypocrite.  If that's what he is, then that's what he is.  But common sense says otherwise.

I don't kill kids, either. I answered a hypothethical question, based on a hypothetical situation. And, you've been bleating about it, ever since then, going on a tirade of anti-Biblical cut-and-paste rants.

The difference is potential.  You have admitted you'd kill a child on God's orders.  I never would.

The coward here is you, as you fail to recognized the simple fact that, bomb or sword, you are STILL TAKING DELIBERATE ACTIONS, with the FULL knowledge that chidren will be killed in the process. It doesn't matter how many actions there are. Those kids are just as DEAD by being blown up and they would be via sword (or as they would be, left to starve to death, as a result of their parents being gone).

No not at all,  there isn't full knowledge and US soldiers aren't going into villages and killing ALL the innocent women and children AFTER they have killed the terrorists or insurgents. 

This IS a distinction you refuse to acknowledge because you are a coward.

I am NOT a coward because i DO acknowledge we kill children however, it is NOT our INTENT to kill them. 

It was the INTENT of the jews to kill children.

I guess i could find a way to draw a picture for you, but you'd just run from that too.

Now, the name-calling starts. I expect this type of infantile behavior from certain posters. But, I guess when your feathers get ruffled, you resort to the same mess as other Bible skeptics I've encounted. The simple fact remains that, by your own standards, YOU would kill innocent children, if the situation presented itself, REGARDLESS OF WHO gave the orders, provided you had the option of hiding behind modern weapons.

Sorry dude.  I call it as i see it.  Murder is murder and your reasoning is cowardly.

The simple fact remains that, by your own standards, YOU would kill innocent children, if the situation presented itself, REGARDLESS OF WHO gave the orders, provided you had the option of hiding behind modern weapons.

Not at all.  I'm not giving the orders, I'm not carrying the orders out.  I don't support the killing of children in any regard. 

YOU DO.   In fact you worship the one who ordered it.

You ask a hypothetical question, expecting someone to duck your question. Then, when it gets answered, you start with the criticizing. But, when the tables get turned on you, you cry, whine, bleat, moan, go on an anti-Biblical tirade, and resort to name-calling.

What tables?   Your stupid attempt to liken GENOCIDE to the war on terrorism?   

In short, (like far too many Biblical skeptics I've encountered) you can dish it out....BUT YOU CAN'T TAKE IT!

Want i can't take is your brainwashed cult like reasoning.  lol

 

To top it all, you're STILL running from the fact that the same "nuggets of wisdom" that you like from the Bible (as you've admitted), as well as the Christian upbringing you have are all derived from the VERY SAME GOD, about Whom you keep screeching, because of the judgment He declared on the Amalekites.

That's your belief and far from anything factual.

[Ganuvanx]

OzmO getting owned again, I don't even have to read the thread.

Continue...

[MCWAY]

Not the same God.  Unless God IS a hypocrite.  If that's what he is, then that's what he is.  But common sense says otherwise.

Indeed it is the same God; But, your attempts to label Him a “hypocrite” fall flat. As explained multiple times, He has authority to give and take life, as He is the source of such. You DO NOT; and neither do I.

The difference is potential.  You have admitted you'd kill a child on God's orders.  I never would.

You’d kill them for far less, as explained earlier (under certain circumstances)

No not at all,  there isn't full knowledge and US soldiers aren't going into villages and killing ALL the innocent women and children AFTER they have killed the terrorists or insurgents. 

If you drop a warhead (i.e. the A-Bomb) on an enemy, you do so knowing that you will destroy children in the process.

This IS a distinction you refuse to acknowledge because you are a coward.

I am NOT a coward because i DO acknowledge we kill children however, it is NOT our INTENT to kill them. 

It was the INTENT of the jews to kill children.

I guess i could find a way to draw a picture for you, but you'd just run from that too.

If there’s one thing I haven’t done is run from your screwball statements.

It was the INTENT to put down an enemy that had been assaulting them for over three centuries. Assimilation of the children is off the table (by your standards; since you’ll start squealing about “slavery”). So, either they are casualties of war directly, OR they will starve to death with their parents gone, indirectly. Either way, they are dead and their fate is the results of their parents’ and rulers’ continued assaults against Israel and other nations.


 

Sorry dude.  I call it as i see it.  Murder is murder and your reasoning is cowardly.

My reason is anything but that, for reason explained earlier.

Not at all.  I'm not giving the orders, I'm not carrying the orders out.  I don't support the killing of children in any regard. 

I’m not giving or carrying the orders out, either. However, I understand why it happened.

What tables?   Your stupid attempt to liken GENOCIDE to the war on terrorism?   

That would my exposing the fact that, put in a similar situation, your actions would be no different, with the lone exception of your preference for use of modern weapons vs. ancient ones.

Lost in all of this is that your claims of “genocide” are quite hollow for, among other reasons:

-   The Amalekites were warned and had plenty of opportunity to repent and be spared.

-   Even though Saul didn’t get the job done (and was subsequently phased out as king of Israel), David was NEVER ordered to finish what Saul started. And, to top it all off, there were some Amalekites living in Israel (this is where you start yelling about “slavery”).


-   Of course, we know what happened later (and why Saul was punished for not following instructions). When the Amalekites’ numbers grew again, guess what they did….THEY WENT RIGHT BACK TO THEIR ASSAULTING WAYS.

That's your belief and far from anything factual.

Then what is the “factual” stuff, with regards to what I asked earlier?

Either the God who sent Jesus Christ (the source of your Christian upbringing) is the same as the God who rendered judgment on the Amalekites; or is He is not.

Which is it?

[OzmO]

OzmO getting owned again, I don't even have to read the thread.

Continue...

Spoken like a typical Christian in the United States   

[OzmO]

Indeed it is the same God; But, your attempts to label Him a “hypocrite” fall flat. As explained multiple times, He has authority to give and take life, as He is the source of such. You DO NOT; and neither do I.

when God Says: "I am an all loving and merciful god", or says, "thou shall not murder", and then proceeds to murder innnocnet children on many occasions, he is a hypocrite.

You’d kill them for far less, as explained earlier (under certain circumstances)

Your explanation doesn't hold.

If you drop a warhead (i.e. the A-Bomb) on an enemy, you do so knowing that you will destroy children in the process.

Are we dropping nukes on Terrorists?  yes or no?

I've explained my view on the 2 nukes we dropped in WW2.   I understand the reasoning to drop them.  I don't agree with dropping them.  Still yet, what we did with Japan is a FAR CRY from committing GENOCIDE. 

Did the jews just wipe out 2 Amalekite villages or cities forcing surrender and then rebuild their country like we did with the Japanese?  yes or no?

Did the Americans have the full power of God then or today?  yes or no?

Like i said you explanation doesn't hold. 

It was the INTENT to put down an enemy that had been assaulting them for over three centuries. Assimilation of the children is off the table (by your standards; since you’ll start squealing about “slavery”).

Did we have to enslave the Japanese or the Germans  yes or no?

Do you believe a race of people or a tribe/clan/nation of people are inherently evil generation after generation?  yes or no?

So, either they are casualties of war directly, OR they will starve to death with their parents gone, indirectly. Either way, they are dead and their fate is the results of their parents’ and rulers’ continued assaults against Israel and other nations.

If they left the children all the cattle and crops, they would not have starved to death. Additionally assimilating them into their society wouldn't require slavery.

Did we do this with the warlike Japanese and the Genociding Germans?  yes or no?

Did the Jews have the power of God?  yes or no?

Is God all powerful?  yes or no?

We've already found solutions with the power of God you refuse yet to acknowledge. 

My reason is anything but that, for reason explained earlier.

You reasoning doesn't hold.  Murder is murder.

I’m not giving or carrying the orders out, either. However, I understand why it happened.

Exactly.  We are men, not God.  We are men who do not have the power of God.  God, has the power.  Yet he ordered men to murder innocent children.  Our justification as men, to drop those to nukes on Japan ais far more legitimate because we don't have the power of God.  Had we the power of God there would have been many other things we could have done to prevent having to drop 2 nukes on them to get them to surrender.

This is why, if God is "all loving and merciful, all forgiving etc..."  The God, in many of the instances in the OT is NOT God.

That would my exposing the fact that, put in a similar situation, your actions would be no different, with the lone exception of your preference for use of modern weapons vs. ancient ones.

Still not addressing the difference between GENOCIDE and the war on terrorism 

You are trying to compare the two to lessen the issue of murdering children in cold blood vs. children dying from collateral damage.  This is why you get accused of intellectual dishonesty by others.  Because you very well know how stupid your position is. 

Lost in all of this is that your claims of “genocide” are quite hollow for, among other reasons:

-   The Amalekites were warned and had plenty of opportunity to repent and be spared.

-   Even though Saul didn’t get the job done (and was subsequently phased out as king of Israel), David was NEVER ordered to finish what Saul started. And, to top it all off, there were some Amalekites living in Israel (this is where you start yelling about “slavery”).


-   Of course, we know what happened later (and why Saul was punished for not following instructions). When the Amalekites’ numbers grew again, guess what they did….THEY WENT RIGHT BACK TO THEIR ASSAULTING WAYS.

All you listed is the reasons for what they did.  Hitler had his reasons too.     In both cases GENOCIDE was committed.

If you want to turn this thread into slavery too that's fine.  You where exposed on another thread regarding it.  Slavery, also, is something the God you worship loves.

Then what is the “factual” stuff, with regards to what I asked earlier?

Either the God who sent Jesus Christ (the source of your Christian upbringing) is the same as the God who rendered judgment on the Amalekites; or is He is not.

Which is it?

Obviously not.   

[MCWAY]

when God Says: "I am an all loving and merciful god", or says, "thou shall not murder", and then proceeds to murder innnocnet children on many occasions, he is a hypocrite.

Hardly!! As mentioned earlier, only the One who gives life has take it away. We are not to do so, UNLESS authorized by Him, under certain circumstances.

And, He is a merciful God. Ironically enough, on another thread, you indirectly mentioned Jonah, the prophet who actually got ANGRY with God for sparing the Ninevites, instead of destroying them. You're beginning to sound like him, in a sense.

Your explanation doesn't hold.

Are we dropping nukes on Terrorists?  yes or no?

NOPE!!! It hasn't reached that point, yet. And hopefully it won't

I've explained my view on the 2 nukes we dropped in WW2.   I understand the reasoning to drop them.  I don't agree with dropping them.  Still yet, what we did with Japan is a FAR CRY from committing GENOCIDE. 

What happened with the Amalekites wasn't "committing GENOCIDE", either, for the reasons explained earlier. The Amalekites weren't targeted simply for being Amalekites. They had multiple opportunities to REPENT and make peace with Israel (including one last chance, when Saul warned the Kenites to leave the area). Had they done that, no more beef, no judgment, no NOTHING!!!

Did the jews just wipe out 2 Amalekite villages or cities forcing surrender and then rebuild their country like we did with the Japanese?  yes or no?

NOPE!! One, the Amalekites didn't surrender; two; Israel was under no obligation to rebuild Amalek; three, (again) had the Amalekites ceased with their assaults and made peace, they'd have never tasted the sword of Saul.

Did the Americans have the full power of God then or today?  yes or no?

Like i said you explanation doesn't hold. 

NOPE!!! Regardless, they made a deliberate decisions, with the full ramifications of such being known.

Did we have to enslave the Japanese or the Germans  yes or no?

NOPE!! They, unlike the Amalekites, were smart enough to surrender and cease with the scrapping.

Do you believe a race of people or a tribe/clan/nation of people are inherently evil generation after generation?  yes or no?

NOPE!! But, the evil actions of their leaders can bring dire consequences on ALL THE PEOPLE of that tribe/clan/nation. That's again the worse part about sinful behavior in certain areas: The transgressor IS NOT THE ONLY ONE who pays the price.

Just as crooked CEOs can bring financial ruin to their ENTIRE COMPANY (from their executives to the janitors), wicked kings can bring DEATH upon their ENTIRE KINGDOM (from the princes to the peasants, and everyone in between them).

If they left the children all the cattle and crops, they would not have starved to death. Additionally assimilating them into their society wouldn't require slavery.

First, there wouldn't be enough children to tend to, much less harvest and care for, all the cattle and crops (notwithstanding the fact that the crops and livestock were to be destroyed, anyway).

Second, how long do you REALLY THINK a land full of crops and cattle are going to last, in the ancient world, with NOBODY to defend it, except a bunch of little kids? If the Israelites don't get them, the next set of Amalek foes (and, based on the Amalekites' actions, they had plenty of those) would have.

Assimilation required, among other things, a rejection of the Amalekite deity, as well as a system quelling of their desire to relatiate when they grow up. OOOPS!!! That's exactly what Israel's laws were designed to do. But, as shown with the Amalekites, who were ALREADY PART OF ISRAEL'S SOCIETY, when they got the muscle and the nerve, they picked right up where their ancestors left off.

Did we do this with the warlike Japanese and the Genociding Germans?  yes or no?

NOPE!!! Reason (once again): THEY QUIT and they didn't attack us ever again. I don't recall our being assaulted by Japan for over 300 years.

Did the Jews have the power of God?  yes or no?

Is God all powerful?  yes or no?

Yes, indeed, on both counts!!!

We've already found solutions with the power of God you refuse yet to acknowledge. 

I don't recall the Lord asking YOU (or me) for a solution to anything. He gave them the opportunity to repent and be spared (on several occasions); they did not take it. He rendered judgment as He saw fit, which He has the power to do. Whether it matches your "solution" or not is quite irrevelant.

You reasoning doesn't hold.  Murder is murder.

Your reasoning doesn't hold. Murder is intentionally taking life without authorization from the proper governing body. God is THE ultimate authority; there is none higher than Him, least of all you (or me).

Exactly.  We are men, not God.  We are men who do not have the power of God.  God, has the power.  Yet he ordered men to murder innocent children.  Our justification as men, to drop those to nukes on Japan ais far more legitimate because we don't have the power of God.  Had we the power of God there would have been many other things we could have done to prevent having to drop 2 nukes on them to get them to surrender.

Congratulations!!!! You've just contradicted yourself. As long as there's "justification" (in your case, you don't have the power of God and you can use modern weapons, you WOULD, in fact, take actions to destroy an enemy....WITH THE FULL KNOWLEDGE that innocent children will die as a result.

This is why, if God is "all loving and merciful, all forgiving etc..."  The God, in many of the instances in the OT is NOT God.

Mercy and forgiveness require one thing.......REPENTANCE!!! For all your screeching, you've completley ignored the responsibility of the Amalekites to repent of their action (if, for no other reason, to spare their own hides).

Once again, if they repent and make amends, they get spared. But, they did not.....proceed with judgment as planned!!!!

Still not addressing the difference between GENOCIDE and the war on terrorism 

Wrong again!! What happened to the Amalekites was not genocide. The war on terrorism (as we know it today) has NOT been ongoing for over 300 years. And, if the terrorists cease and desist, this war on terror is OVER.

You are trying to compare the two to lessen the issue of murdering children in cold blood vs. children dying from collateral damage.  This is why you get accused of intellectual dishonesty by others.  Because you very well know how stupid your position is. 

Look who's talking!!! What you can't seem to grasp is that simple concept that, in the ancient world, children starving to death in the desert/being left to get picked off by other enemies is, in the ancient world is "collateral damage".

All you listed is the reasons for what they did.  Hitler had his reasons too.     In both cases GENOCIDE was committed.

I don't think so. When exactly did Hitler offer the Jews the chance to repent (of course, that would require listing what supposed offense they committed that warranted such, in the first place)?

If you want to turn this thread into slavery too that's fine.  You where exposed on another thread regarding it.  Slavery, also, is something the God you worship loves.

Obviously not.   

So, now you're basically stating that the words of JESUS CHRIST Himself, stating that God sent Him to redeem mankind (not to mention a very popular Bible verse by the disciple) John is false.

So, who supposedly sent Jesus Christ to die for man's sins (and give the "nuggets of wisdom" that you like and the Christian upbringing that your parents gave to you)?



[/quote]

[OzmO]

McWay,

Your quote formatting is over the edge and is sloppy beyond reason.  Have your children do extra chores tomorrow.     j/j

[OzmO]

Wow McWay,  your cult like thinking is really showing on that last post as i took some time to partially decode it from your sloppiness. 

genocide |ˈjenəˌsīd|
noun
the deliberate killing of a large group of people, esp. those of a particular ethnic group or nation.

How is what the jews did to the Amalekites not genocide?

hypocrisy |hiˈpäkrisē|
noun ( pl. -sies)
the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

How is claiming to be a "all loving, forgiving, merciful god, who says not to murder and then murders a nation of innocent children no a hypocrite?

Is that what they teach you in that cult of yours?  Rewriting definitions?   Or ignoring the definition of some words?  Is that how they make people into brain washed cult bots?

Also on couple points you made it seems like you didn't even comprehend the words.

And the children starving to death in the ancient world is collateral damage?

You are seriously fucked up in the head, leg workouts not with standing.

[OzmO]

I don't think so. When exactly did Hitler offer the Jews the chance to repent (of course, that would require listing what supposed offense they committed that warranted such, in the first place)?

Mercy and forgiveness require one thing.......REPENTANCE!!! For all your screeching, you've completley ignored the responsibility of the Amalekites to repent of their action (if, for no other reason, to spare their own hides).

Once again, if they repent and make amends, they get spared. But, they did not.....proceed with judgment as planned!!!!

When did offering someone a chance to repent and then killing their innocent children become ok?   

I think based on your tone you are aspiring to be a fire and brimstone preacher.    lol   Would you feel better about yourself if you were?

[OzmO]

So, now you're basically stating that the words of JESUS CHRIST Himself, stating that God sent Him to redeem mankind (not to mention a very popular Bible verse by the disciple) John is false.

So, who supposedly sent Jesus Christ to die for man's sins (and give the "nuggets of wisdom" that you like and the Christian upbringing that your parents gave to you)?

No I'm not, seems you have another reading comprehension problem.

[Deicide]

OzmO getting owned again, I don't even have to read the thread.

Continue...

The statement of a fucking idiot.

[OzmO]

The statement of a fucking idiot.

I'm sure its a gimmick.

[MCWAY]

No I'm not, seems you have another reading comprehension problem.

Not really!!!

I said that either the God who judged the Amalekites is the same One that sent Jesus Christ or He is not. You said “Obviously Not”. Since Jesus Christ Himself declared that it was the Father who sent Him, as did His disciples (particularly John, in perhaps the most popular Bible verse of them all), your “Obviously not” answer claims that God did NOT send Jesus Christ to redeem man from sin.

So, once again, who is this mystery God of the OT that judged the Amalekites who supposedly is different than the One who sent Jesus Christ (the One who teachings and deeds are the source of your Christian upbringing)?

Wow McWay,  your cult like thinking is really showing on that last post as i took some time to partially decode it from your sloppiness. 

I simply missed a "[/quote]" in one spot, nothing more than that.

genocide |ˈjenəˌsīd|
noun
the deliberate killing of a large group of people, esp. those of a particular ethnic group or nation.

How is what the jews did to the Amalekites not genocide?

I believe I explained that some time ago. But, to recap:

- The Amalekites were judged for their actions, not the mere fact that they were Amalekites.

- Those actions had been continuing for over three centuries

-  Had they repented and made amends, the fighting would have ended (they were warned yet one last time, before Saul's armies hit them).

Furthermore, are you sure you want to use that definition? Because, if that’s the case, my point stands, regarding the whole A-bomb thing on Hiroshima (a lot of Japanese people died from that one).

If all it takes is “the deliberate killing of a large group of people, esp. those of a particular ethnic group or nation”, the hit on Hiroshima (which you condoned, due to lack of any other choice) is “genocide”. So, too, would be our current war on terror.

hypocrisy |hiˈpäkrisē|
noun ( pl. -sies)
the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

How is claiming to be a "all loving, forgiving, merciful god, who says not to murder and then murders a nation of innocent children no a hypocrite?

The “hypocrisy” thing, despite your best attempts, doesn’t fly, either. As has been explained multiple times, it is God who sets the moral standards. As the Creator of Life, He has the authority to end life as He sees fit. Once again, He makes the rules and makes the calls, not you and not me.

As for the mercy part, mercy requires REPENTANCE. And, we have no instance of the Amalekites repenting for their actions, whatsoever. We don't even have someone interceding on their behalf (ala Moses, asking the Lord to forgive the Israelites, even as they are knee-deep in idolatry and sexual perversion, less than a few months after being delivered from Egypt).

Again, a simple change of hearts (and perhaps some reparations), and the Amalekites would have been spared, conflict over. But....NNOOOOOOOOO!!! Even when spared, despite not repenting, when their numbers grew again, they went right back on the warpath.

Is that what they teach you in that cult of yours?  Rewriting definitions?   Or ignoring the definition of some words?  Is that how they make people into brain washed cult bots?

As for your charges that I’m in a cult, that’s another silly statement on your part. I’m no more in a cult than are YOUR PARENTS (the ones responsible for your Christian upbringing). But, I seriously doubt you informed about the status of their respective heads.

Your parents served the same God that I do. But, I’m sure you aren’t lobbing the same insults at them that you are at me……I hope. And, based on your tendency to enjoy the “nuggets of wisdom” from Scripture, it can be inferred that, to some degree, YOU do, too.

Also on couple points you made it seems like you didn't even comprehend the words.

And the children starving to death in the ancient world is collateral damage?

In the ancient world, it is. That's what happens when their parents are killed in warfare. If they don't get assimilated (which by your standards, they can't; else you start wailing about "slavery"), they will unfortunately die, either by sword or starvation.

You are seriously fucked up in the head, leg workouts not with standing.

Again, no more so than your parents, the ones responsible for your Christian upbringing.

[ToxicAvenger]

Ozmo do you spend much time on "evilbible.com"?  http://www.evilbible.com/Rape.htm

funny how you never complained as such when NordicSuper man was spending time on similar sites but about islam..

you even joined in with glee

...sad

[OzmO]

Not really!!!

I said that either the God who judged the Amalekites is the same One that sent Jesus Christ or He is not. You said “Obviously Not”. Since Jesus Christ Himself declared that it was the Father who sent Him, as did His disciples (particularly John, in perhaps the most popular Bible verse of them all), your “Obviously not” answer claims that God did NOT send Jesus Christ to redeem man from sin.

So, once again, who is this mystery God of the OT that judged the Amalekites who supposedly is different than the One who sent Jesus Christ (the One who teachings and deeds are the source of your Christian upbringing)?

No, because the God who sent Jesus, is the God who sent Jesus.  God was not telling the jews to commit genocide. The Jews made that part up or the prophet made it up in his revel of righteousness.

I simply missed a "

" in one spot, nothing more than that.[/quote][/quote]

Use the preview button.   

I believe I explained that some time ago. But, to recap:

- The Amalekites were judged for their actions, not the mere fact that they were Amalekites.

- Those actions had been continuing for over three centuries

-  Had they repented and made amends, the fighting would have ended (they were warned yet one last time, before Saul's armies hit them).

Furthermore, are you sure you want to use that definition? Because, if that’s the case, my point stands, regarding the whole A-bomb thing on Hiroshima (a lot of Japanese people died from that one).

If all it takes is “the deliberate killing of a large group of people, esp. those of a particular ethnic group or nation”, the hit on Hiroshima (which you condoned, due to lack of any other choice) is “genocide”. So, too, would be our current war on terror.

That definition?  The definition is the definition.  The definition of a large group is what's in question here.

That definition came from my Apple computer.

these comes from dictionary.com:

- the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.

- The systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group.

-  The deliberate destruction of an entire race or nation. The Holocaust conducted by the Nazis in Germany and the Rwandan genocide are examples of attempts at genocide.

- systematic killing of a racial or cultural group

Now I'm gonna ask you again.  How is what the jews did, on god's orders, to the Amalikites NOT genocide?

I'm not asking you haw events in American history compare to genocide.  I'm asking you:  How is what the jews did, on god's orders, to the Amalikites NOT genocide?

I'm not asking for justification or the reason for the genocide I'm asking, based on your brainwashed cult claim:

 

What happened with the Amalekites wasn't "committing GENOCIDE"

How is what the jews did, on god's orders, to the Amalikites NOT genocide?

Because based on the the definition and given examples.  IT WAS GENOCIDE.

GOD COMMITTED GENOCIDE.

I would expect no less from man, but God?   

The “hypocrisy” thing, despite your best attempts, doesn’t fly, either. As has been explained multiple times, it is God who sets the moral standards. As the Creator of Life, He has the authority to end life as He sees fit. Once again, He makes the rules and makes the calls, not you and not me.

He set moral standards.
He claimed he had moral standards
Then he murdered children in cold blood

HYPOCRITE 

As for the mercy part, mercy requires REPENTANCE. And, we have no instance of the Amalekites repenting for their actions, whatsoever. We don't even have someone interceding on their behalf (ala Moses, asking the Lord to forgive the Israelites, even as they are knee-deep in idolatry and sexual perversion, less than a few months after being delivered from Egypt).

Where the children asked if they wanted to repent?   Did the 2 year old say:  "No i wanna to kill you and eat your bains."   

Again, a simple change of hearts (and perhaps some reparations), and the Amalekites would have been spared, conflict over. But....NNOOOOOOOOO!!! Even when spared, despite not repenting, when their numbers grew again, they went right back on the warpath.

Did the children go on the war path at age 27 months?  Was this the diaper conflict?  War of the binkies? The formula wars?  Did they turn their jungle gyms into feces launching catapults?   

As for your charges that I’m in a cult, that’s another silly statement on your part. I’m no more in a cult than are YOUR PARENTS (the ones responsible for your Christian upbringing). But, I seriously doubt you informed about the status of their respective heads.Your parents served the same God that I do. But, I’m sure you aren’t lobbing the same insults at them that you are at me……I hope. And, based on your tendency to enjoy the “nuggets of wisdom” from Scripture, it can be inferred that, to some degree, YOU do, too.

No, (wrong again!  ) because my parents know that killing innocent children is evil.  They don't worship a cold blooded child murderer.  They realize the OT in many parts is simply Jewish history.  They are not cult like, in that way 

In the ancient world, it is. That's what happens when their parents are killed in warfare.

In the ancient world it is?   HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA AHAHAH   You culter!

If they don't get assimilated (which by your standards, they can't; else you start wailing about "slavery"), they will unfortunately die, either by sword or starvation.

What did we do with the children orphan in Germany and Japan after ww2?  Did we make slaves out of them?  Why do you keep insisting that if the children were spared they would become slaves?

Are you really this dim witted?

Again, no more so than your parents, the ones responsible for your Christian upbringing.

That's pretty much been dispelled.   My parents didn't worship a child murderer.  You do.

[Deicide]

No, because the God who sent Jesus, is the God who sent Jesus.  God was not telling the jews to commit genocide. The Jews made that part up or the prophet made it up in his revel of righteousness.
" in one spot, nothing more than that.

Use the preview button.   

That definition?  The definition is the definition.  The definition of a large group is what's in question here.

That definition came from my Apple computer.

these comes from dictionary.com:

- the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.

- The systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group.

-  The deliberate destruction of an entire race or nation. The Holocaust conducted by the Nazis in Germany and the Rwandan genocide are examples of attempts at genocide.

- systematic killing of a racial or cultural group

Now I'm gonna ask you again.  How is what the jews did, on god's orders, to the Amalikites NOT genocide?

I'm not asking you haw events in American history compare to genocide.  I'm asking you:  How is what the jews did, on god's orders, to the Amalikites NOT genocide?

I'm not asking for justification or the reason for the genocide I'm asking, based on your brainwashed cult claim:

 
How is what the jews did, on god's orders, to the Amalikites NOT genocide?

Because based on the the definition and given examples.  IT WAS GENOCIDE.

GOD COMMITTED GENOCIDE.

I would expect no less from man, but God?   

He set moral standards.
He claimed he had moral standards
Then he murdered children in cold blood

HYPOCRITE 

Where the children asked if they wanted to repent?   Did the 2 year old say:  "No i wanna to kill you and eat your bains."   

Did the children go on the war path at age 27 months?  Was this the diaper conflict?  War of the binkies? The formula wars?  Did they turn their jungle gyms into feces launching catapults?   

No, (wrong again!  ) because my parents know that killing innocent children is evil.  They don't worship a cold blooded child murderer.  They realize the OT in many parts is simply Jewish history Jewish myth. They are not cult like, in that way 

In the ancient world it is?   HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA AHAHAH   You culter!

What did we do with the children orphan in Germany and Japan after ww2?  Did we make slaves out of them?  Why do you keep insisting that if the children were spared they would become slaves?

Are you really this dim witted?

That's pretty much been dispelled.   My parents didn't worship a child murderer.  You do.

Fixed.

[OzmO]

Fixed.

huh?  I can't read it.   

[Dos Equis]

funny how you never complained as such when NordicSuper man was spending time on similar sites but about islam..

you even joined in with glee

...sad

lol.  O Rly?  News to me.  Link? 

[MCWAY]

No, because the God who sent Jesus, is the God who sent Jesus.  God was not telling the jews to commit genocide. The Jews made that part up or the prophet made it up in his revel of righteousness.

Hardly!!! They have no motive to do such a thing (who were they trying to fool? what punishment were they supposedly going to face from their alleged punisher?).

According to the text, the Israelites were HAPPY with Saul's actions. They defeated their enemies, walked away with their choice livestock and loot, and had their enemies' kings groveling for his very life. Why on earth would they punish Saul by stripping him of his throne?

As for your claim of the prophet making it up (Samuel, in this case), that's even more ridiculous. Though Samuel was upset with Saul's failure to complete his mission, he STILL wanted Saul to be king. It was the Lord who told him that Saul would be deposed (along with his family) and instructed Samuel to quit crying about the situation and find a NEW KING for Israel.

And, if that weren't enough, God's pick was far different from that of Samuel. Samuel, notwithstanding the fact that he still preferred Saul to be ruler, went with David's older brother, to be the new king.

That definition?  The definition is the definition.  The definition of a large group is what's in question here.

That definition came from my Apple computer.

these comes from dictionary.com:

- the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.

- The systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group.

-  The deliberate destruction of an entire race or nation. The Holocaust conducted by the Nazis in Germany and the Rwandan genocide are examples of attempts at genocide.

- systematic killing of a racial or cultural group

Now I'm gonna ask you again.  How is what the jews did, on god's orders, to the Amalikites NOT genocide?

I'm not asking you haw events in American history compare to genocide.  I'm asking you:  How is what the jews did, on god's orders, to the Amalikites NOT genocide?

I'm not asking for justification or the reason for the genocide I'm asking, based on your brainwashed cult claim:

 
How is what the jews did, on god's orders, to the Amalikites NOT genocide?

Because based on the the definition and given examples.  IT WAS GENOCIDE.

GOD COMMITTED GENOCIDE.

I would expect no less from man, but God?   

Since you insist on asking the same question, you will get the SAME answers.

- The Amalekites were judged for their actions, not the mere fact that they were Amalekites.

- Those actions had been continuing for over three centuries

-  Had they repented and made amends, the fighting would have ended (they were warned yet one last time, before Saul's armies hit them).

The aforementioned attempts at genocide you referenced (Holocaust; Rwandian conflict) were due to mere ethnicity, not for any grievances committed by those people. Amalekites lived among the Israelites, DESPITE the centuries-long feud between the two people. If the goal were mere extermination, the Israelites could have done that long before the days of Saul.

And, as stated elsewhere, when David assumed the throne; he is NOT instructed to finish what Saul started. That means that the Amalekites were given YET ANOTHER CHANCE to repent. Instead, upon their resurgence in numbers, they went back to their old ways.

He set moral standards.
He claimed he had moral standards
Then he murdered children in cold blood

HYPOCRITE 

Wrong again. The standard He sets is spelled out in, among other things, the Ten Commandments, ONE OF WHICH clearly states that He punishes to the 3rd and 4th generation (He also blesses to that extent as well).

Where the children asked if they wanted to repent?   Did the 2 year old say:  "No i wanna to kill you and eat your bains."   

Did the children go on the war path at age 27 months?  Was this the diaper conflict?  War of the binkies? The formula wars?  Did they turn their jungle gyms into feces launching catapults?   

Their parents and rulers (people in authority) are the ones responsible for making amends. If they don't, the punishment levied on them WILL NOT JUST AFFECT THEM. It will affect EVERYONE under their umbrella of responsibility.

As been shown time and time again (a simple concept that repeatedly ZIPS clean over your head), sin doesn't just affect the transgressor.

That's true to this day. Bosses who are corrupt can bring financial ruin to ALL of their employees. Parents who do vile things can bring disaster and dysfunction to their children. And kings who commit great sin can bring death upon their subjects.

No, (wrong again!  ) because my parents know that killing innocent children is evil.  They don't worship a cold blooded child murderer.  They realize the OT in many parts is simply Jewish history.  They are not cult like, in that way 

They serve the same God that I do, the same one that sent Jesus Christ to die for their sins and mine. The same one who judged the Amalekites, for their transgressions. Try as you might to make some silly case that there's a God who sent Jesus and another who judged the Amalekites, that proverbial dog don't hunt. Jesus Christ taught His disciples the passage we've come to know as "the Lord's Prayer", which begins with "Our FATHER, which art in heaven.....". Matt. 6:9-15.

Take a wild guess as to whom Jesus is referring. All of Jesus' references to the Father point SQUARELY at the God of the Old Testament, period. And every time, you accuse me of being in a cult, of being brainwashed, etc., you hurl those same insults to YOUR PARENTS; for they serve the same God.

John even starts his gospel with the statements, “In the beginning was the Word; and the Word was with God; and the word was God......And the Word became flesh (take a wild guess as to whom that is) and dwelled among us and we beheld His glory, the glory of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” - John 1:1,14.

In the ancient world it is?   HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA AHAHAH   You culter!

See above!!

What did we do with the children orphan in Germany and Japan after ww2?  Did we make slaves out of them?  Why do you keep insisting that if the children were spared they would become slaves?

That's YOUR insistence, as you were the one, whining about "slavery" when referencing account in which the children of Israel's other enemies were assimilated into the Jewish country.

Are you really this dim witted?

That's a question, you should ask yourself, Ozmo!

That's pretty much been dispelled.   My parents didn't worship a child murderer.  You do.

Again, they serve the same God that I do, the One who sent Jesus Christ. Without His doing that, there is no "Christian upbringing" in which they can raise you.

[Hedgehog]

I'd prefer the electric chair, but that wasn't available at the time.

Why should people who commit adultery be sentenced to death at all?

[OzmO]

Hardly!!! They have no motive to do such a thing (who were they trying to fool? what punishment were they supposedly going to face from their alleged punisher?)

Themselves.  Their people and history.  People were pretty stupid back then, just like the stupid people who can't see that now, but worship it.

This is obviously too far over your head.

As for your claim of the prophet making it up (Samuel, in this case), that's even more ridiculous. Though Samuel was upset with Saul's failure to complete his mission, he STILL wanted Saul to be king. It was the Lord who told him that Saul would be deposed (along with his family) and instructed Samuel to quit crying about the situation and find a NEW KING for Israel.

And, if that weren't enough, God's pick was far different from that of Samuel. Samuel, notwithstanding the fact that he still preferred Saul to be ruler, went with David's older brother, to be the new king.

So those conditions prove he didn't make up the orders to murder children in cold blood?   

Since you insist on asking the same question, you will get the SAME answers.

- The Amalekites were judged for their actions, not the mere fact that they were Amalekites.

- Those actions had been continuing for over three centuries

-  Had they repented and made amends, the fighting would have ended (they were warned yet one last time, before Saul's armies hit them).

The aforementioned attempts at genocide you referenced (Holocaust; Rwandian conflict) were due to mere ethnicity, not for any grievances committed by those people. Amalekites lived among the Israelites, DESPITE the centuries-long feud between the two people. If the goal were mere extermination, the Israelites could have done that long before the days of Saul.

And, as stated elsewhere, when David assumed the throne; he is NOT instructed to finish what Saul started. That means that the Amalekites were given YET ANOTHER CHANCE to repent. Instead, upon their resurgence in numbers, they went back to their old ways.

Again, that's because you have nothing to say that holds water.  It fits the definition and you worship a genocider.

It's pathetic the lengths of cowardice and dishonesty.  I suppose the bible has something in to that redefines english definitions too?   

Wrong again. The standard He sets is spelled out in, among other things, the Ten Commandments, ONE OF WHICH clearly states that He punishes to the 3rd and 4th generation (He also blesses to that extent as well).

RIGHT.  You worship a contradiction.

3rd and forth generation....    that's as stupid as ancient collateral damage.

Their parents and rulers (people in authority) are the ones responsible for making amends. If they don't, the punishment levied on them WILL NOT JUST AFFECT THEM. It will affect EVERYONE under their umbrella of responsibility.

As been shown time and time again (a simple concept that repeatedly ZIPS clean over your head), sin doesn't just affect the transgressor.

That's true to this day. Bosses who are corrupt can bring financial ruin to ALL of their employees. Parents who do vile things can bring disaster and dysfunction to their children. And kings who commit great sin can bring death upon their subjects.

You'll stop at no nothing to justify the cold blooded murder of children won't you?

They serve the same God that I do, the same one that sent Jesus Christ to die for their sins and mine. The same one who judged the Amalekites, for their transgressions. Try as you might to make some silly case that there's a God who sent Jesus and another who judged the Amalekites, that proverbial dog don't hunt. Jesus Christ taught His disciples the passage we've come to know as "the Lord's Prayer", which begins with "Our FATHER, which art in heaven.....". Matt. 6:9-15.

Take a wild guess as to whom Jesus is referring. All of Jesus' references to the Father point SQUARELY at the God of the Old Testament, period. And every time, you accuse me of being in a cult, of being brainwashed, etc., you hurl those same insults to YOUR PARENTS; for they serve the same God.

John even starts his gospel with the statements, “In the beginning was the Word; and the Word was with God; and the word was God......And the Word became flesh (take a wild guess as to whom that is) and dwelled among us and we beheld His glory, the glory of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” - John 1:1,14.

No they are not the same God.  God does not murder children.  The one you worship does.

They are not modern day primitive people who think the mystic writings of other primitive people are the 100% WOG.

That's YOUR insistence, as you were the one, whining about "slavery" when referencing account in which the children of Israel's other enemies were assimilated into the Jewish country

Did we enslave the Germans or Japaneese?  Answer the question if you are not a coward.

My point is, they didn't need to ensalve or kill the Amalikite children either much less anyone else who wasn't a soldier.

Imagine, the United States of America has more wisdom than the God of the OT in this instance.

But you have to have the courage to think on your own not like some primitive ancient brainwashed culter to see that.

You really are dim witted.





 

[Deicide]

Themselves.  Their people and history.  People were pretty stupid back then, just like the stupid people who can't see that now, but worship it.

This is obviously too far over your head.

So those conditions prove he didn't make up the orders to murder children in cold blood?   

Again, that's because you have nothing to say that holds water.  It fits the definition and you worship a genocider.

It's pathetic the lengths of cowardice and dishonesty.  I suppose the bible has something in to that redefines english definitions too?   
RIGHT.  You worship a contradiction.

3rd and forth generation....    that's as stupid as ancient collateral damage.

You'll stop at no nothing to justify the cold blooded murder of children won't you?

No they are not the same God.  God does not murder children.  The one you worship does.

They are not modern day primitive people who think the mystic writings of other primitive people are the 100% WOG.
Did we enslave the Germans or Japaneese?  Answer the question if you are not a coward.

My point is, they didn't need to ensalve or kill the Amalikite children either much less anyone else who wasn't a soldier.

Imagine, the United States of America has more wisdom than the God of the OT in this instance.

But you have to have the courage to think on your own not like some primitive ancient brainwashed culter to see that.

You really are dim witted.





 

We did lock Japanese living in America up in pens...

[MCWAY]

Themselves.  Their people and history.  People were pretty stupid back then, just like the stupid people who can't see that now, but worship it.

This is obviously too far over your head.

Judging from some of your more recent posts, you’re hardly in a position to be calling anyone else “stupid”, right about now.

So those conditions prove he didn't make up the orders to murder children in cold blood?   

Again, what would be Samuel's motivation to fabricate any of this? That's a question that you can't seem to answer, in your pitiful attempts to wail about the judgment on the Amalekites.

BTW, the Jewish people have already judged Samuel as one of the most loved and revered prophets in their history. So, even that cracked take of yours doesn't fly.

Again, that's because you have nothing to say that holds water.  It fits the definition and you worship a genocider.

It's pathetic the lengths of cowardice and dishonesty.  I suppose the bible has something in to that redefines english definitions too?   
RIGHT.  You worship a contradiction.

Please!!! The authors of the OT books were hardly concerned about what Webster (or any other dictionary writer) would call the judgment on the Amalekites some thousands of years later. They told it as it was.

You foolishly posted the definition of genocide. Then, when it dawned on you that, by using such, it would apply to what went down in WW2 with Japan, you feverishly decided to post the "rest" of them.

Of course the guy who coined the term qualified his statement,

"Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups." - Raphael Lemkin

In other words, (as I said earlier), it's the destruction of a people, based on ethnicity, race, or religion. It is NOT merely the deliberate destruction of a ethnicity, race, or religion. Otherwise, every single race of people that has ever gone to war against a foe (and been victorious) can be charged with "genocide" (per Wikipedia's definition, genocide is "the deliberate destruction, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group").

Hitler targeted Jews, JUST BECAUSE THEY WERE JEWS; The Rwandan conflict was based on something similar, one race/tribe killing the other, just for belonging to that tribe/race. That was NOT the case with the Amalekites. They were judged on their ACTIONS, namely assaulting the Israelites for over 300 years, without repentance or reparations.

There was no edict to kill every Amalekite, just because they were Amalekites, even those who lived outside of Amalek. And, lost in all of this is the fact that, had the Amalekites STOPPED their assaults, repented, and made amends with Israel, they would have been forgiven and the conflict ceased.

3rd and forth generation....    that's as stupid as ancient collateral damage.

You'll stop at no nothing to justify the cold blooded murder of children won't you?

Weren't the words of Jesus Christ, to His disciples, "If you love me, keep MY COMMANDMENTS"? To what commandments could He be referring? OOOOHHH!!!! Those would be the Ten Commandments, the second of which indicates that He judges his enemies to the 3rd and 4th generation.

The commandments of Christ.........the same Christ, sent by God, who is the source of that "Chrstian upbringing" of yours that you got from your parents.

No they are not the same God.  God does not murder children.  The one you worship does.

Yes, they are. But don't take my word for it:

This is the beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God - Mark 1:1

Let us alone, what have we to do with You, Jesus of Nazareth? Did you come to destroy us? I know who you are--the Holy One of God - Mark 1:24

The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, "Behold the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world - John 1:29

Any way you slice it, Ozmo, God (yes, the One who judged the Amalekites) sent Jesus Christ to die for man's sins.

They are not modern day primitive people who think the mystic writings of other primitive people are the 100% WOG.

If you're referring to your folks, like it or not, they are referencing the same Christ, sent by the same God. There's no getting around that.

Did we enslave the Germans or Japaneese?  Answer the question if you are not a coward.

Is the Alzheimer's disease kicking into gear or something? I already answered that. Recap:

NOPE!! They, unlike the Amalekites, were smart enough to surrender and cease with the scrapping.

Let's see YOU answer the question I put to you (if YOU are not a coward). Who is this supposed mystery God that's different than the One who sent Jesus Christ (the source of the Christian values that YOUR parents have, in which you were raised)?

It's time to put up or shut up, as for all of your ranting and calling me a coward, you've ducked this question time and time again.

My point is, they didn't need to ensalve or kill the Amalikite children either much less anyone else who wasn't a soldier.

In other words, let them starve and die....or get picked off by another of the Amalekites' foes.

My point is, no matter how you slice it, the Amalekite children suffered for the actions of their parents, as unfortunately happens in life. Other people can pay the price for your mistakes.

Imagine, the United States of America has more wisdom than the God of the OT in this instance.

But you have to have the courage to think on your own not like some primitive ancient brainwashed culter to see that.

You really are dim witted.

I've always thought on my own, contrary to your ridiculous (and utterly inaccurate) claim to the contrary. Once again, you lack the spine to acknowledge that the same God that I worship is the same one that your parents do, because it stems from the same Jesus Christ, sent to die for mankind's sins by the same God.

Despite all of your bone-headed attempts to claim that a different God sent Christ than He who judged the Amalekites, the fact remains that they are one and the same, as validated by Christians over the ages and by the very words of Jesus Christ Himself.







 

[OzmO]

Judging from some of your more recent posts, you’re hardly in a position to be calling anyone else “stupid”, right about now.

Oh mean like the part where i cite definitions and you create your own custom ones to cover up for you murderous God?   

Or the part where you see propaganda as the absolute truth?   

Again, what would be Samuel's motivation to fabricate any of this? That's a question that you can't seem to answer, in your pitiful attempts to wail about the judgment on the Amalekites.

BTW, the Jewish people have already judged Samuel as one of the most loved and revered prophets in their history. So, even that cracked take of yours doesn't fly.

Well good for the jews and Samuel.  Doesn't change anything, doesn't change Genocide.  Any justification or absolution from the guilt of Genocide in this is a fabrication.

Please!!! The authors of the OT books were hardly concerned about what Webster (or any other dictionary writer) would call the judgment on the Amalekites some thousands of years later. They told it as it was.

You foolishly posted the definition of genocide. Then, when it dawned on you that, by using such, it would apply to what went down in WW2 with Japan, you feverishly decided to post the "rest" of them.

Of course the guy who coined the term qualified his statement,

"Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups." - Raphael Lemkin

In other words, (as I said earlier), it's the destruction of a people, based on ethnicity, race, or religion. It is NOT merely the deliberate destruction of a ethnicity, race, or religion. Otherwise, every single race of people that has ever gone to war against a foe (and been victorious) can be charged with "genocide" (per Wikipedia's definition, genocide is "the deliberate destruction, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group").

Hitler targeted Jews, JUST BECAUSE THEY WERE JEWS; The Rwandan conflict was based on something similar, one race/tribe killing the other, just for belonging to that tribe/race. That was NOT the case with the Amalekites. They were judged on their ACTIONS, namely assaulting the Israelites for over 300 years, without repentance or reparations.

There was no edict to kill every Amalekite, just because they were Amalekites, even those who lived outside of Amalek. And, lost in all of this is the fact that, had the Amalekites STOPPED their assaults, repented, and made amends with Israel, they would have been forgiven and the conflict ceased.

I'm just going from the definition.  You mean what the jew did wasn't deliberate  they just accidentally killed every man women and child?     You seem to be making yours up as you see fit to justify your genocide.  They Targeted the Amalikites.  And Killed them all, men women and children.

Weren't the words of Jesus Christ, to His disciples, "If you love me, keep MY COMMANDMENTS"? To what commandments could He be referring? OOOOHHH!!!! Those would be the Ten Commandments, the second of which indicates that He judges his enemies to the 3rd and 4th generation.

The commandments of Christ.........the same Christ, sent by God, who is the source of that "Chrstian upbringing" of yours that you got from your parents.

Again, that's stupid to think that 3rd and generations of children are to be murdered when it isn't neccesary.  Unless of course you are a person who'd kill on god's orders then it makes perfect sense.

Yes, they are. But don't take my word for it:

This is the beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God - Mark 1:1

Let us alone, what have we to do with You, Jesus of Nazareth? Did you come to destroy us? I know who you are--the Holy One of God - Mark 1:24

The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, "Behold the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world - John 1:29

Any way you slice it, Ozmo, God (yes, the One who judged the Amalekites) sent Jesus Christ to die for man's sins.

You mean the Gospels that were written many years after his death and the ones we don't have the originals of. 

You mean the ones that were written to reinforce the prophecies of the selected books of the OT?

Yeah, ok.   

Is the Alzheimer's disease kicking into gear or something? I already answered that. Recap:

NOPE!! They, unlike the Amalekites, were smart enough to surrender and cease with the scrapping.

Let's see YOU answer the question I put to you (if YOU are not a coward). Who is this supposed mystery God that's different than the One who sent Jesus Christ (the source of the Christian values that YOUR parents have, in which you were raised)?

It's time to put up or shut up, as for all of your ranting and calling me a coward, you've ducked this question time and time again.

Who do you suppose is the Muslim god?  The Hindue God?  The 800 zillion Christian versions of what's the true way? (Baptist, Pentecostal, Lutheren, etc..)

I was raised by people who believe God was what ever they believed God to be.  God is god, regardless of what you or I believe.  You believe in a book of stories written by primitive men.  I see it for what it is and see God in it.  I see god in other writings too.  And "if" God is good and just, and merciful and loving, he doesn't order other men to kill innocent children.  Otherwise he's a murderer.  I know that not to be true.

It is only your arrogance that fuels your belief that the Bible is the 100% WOG, that you are the "chosen" whom God has "found".  So you must defend, twist, and even skew definitions, to maintain the integrity of a book of stories. 

In other words, let them starve and die....or get picked off by another of the Amalekites' foes.

My point is, no matter how you slice it, the Amalekite children suffered for the actions of their parents, as unfortunately happens in life. Other people can pay the price for your mistakes.

NO.  Once again you run hiding behind you BS, claiming the only alternative is to leave them to starve.  What did we do with Japan and Germany?

If you're referring to your folks, like it or not, they are referencing the same Christ, sent by the same God. There's no getting around that.

  They worship who they believe God to be as you worship who you believe god to be.  They are 2 different beliefs.  In end God is God.  GOD is not a murderer. 

I've always thought on my own, contrary to your ridiculous (and utterly inaccurate) claim to the contrary. Once again, you lack the spine to acknowledge that the same God that I worship is the same one that your parents do, because it stems from the same Jesus Christ, sent to die for mankind's sins by the same God.

Despite all of your bone-headed attempts to claim that a different God sent Christ than He who judged the Amalekites, the fact remains that they are one and the same, as validated by Christians over the ages and by the very words of Jesus Christ Himself.

The fact that remains is GOD ordered Genocide.   You worship one that commit genocide.






Only an evil entity could kill innocent infants and children no matter what their parents may have done.