What are you talking about? You are the one that brought up assimilation laws.
They don't have to make them slaves. They can change the way they do things.
Again what are you talking about? What's your point? That becuase of their laws and my refusal to justify slavery it's immpossible?
that's stupid. They only need to change the way they do things.
So, Israel is supposed to completely change their government and their social structure to accomodate the children of a bunch of people, that have been attacking and assaulting them for over three centuries. That is utterly ridiculous!!!!
You're the one that kept complaining that the Israelites should have assimilated the Amalekite children. As I've stated, were that to have occured, it would have been under the same rules as it was with the remnants of Israel's other enemies. And, it was those rules that you kept howling about "slavery".
Therefore, since you don't like Israel's "slavery" rules, the lone option left is DEATH for the Amalekite children.
They are primitive people. I'm not surprised.
They're no more primitive than you or me.
We are you talking about? After the threat is eliminated and all that's left is innocent children.
How do you think that the Amalekites continued to attack Israel over the centuries? Those "innocent children" grew up and followed right in the footsteps of the ancestors.
Beach Bum made the point, regarding his friend who was stationed in the Middle East, that their children are taught the ways of warfare and to continue the fight against their enemies, should their fathers fall. If that happens TODAY (in the 21st century A.D.), don't you think that such would be the case in 9th/10th century B.C.?
No not at all. In fact I'm willing to bet that a primitive peoples who still bought and sold slaves and killed children never did much to change the cycle. Even then, every time they commit their adult genocide, the slate is wiped clean with the children.
Wrong!! And the reason is as mentioned beforehand.
How could they have any intention of changing a cycle when the adults are dead?
I'm not suggesting they don't do anything about it. I'm only saying murdering children and committing genocide isn't the answer.
Aside from that, the order came from God, who, as we established had the power to completely take care of it without murdering children.
That is predicated on the Amalekites' repentance, which they did not do. And the Amalekites were fully aware that, if they did not change their ways, they and their children would be destroyed as a result.
They chose to continue assaulting Israel and they paid the price for it, period.
The adults had opportunities to change the cycle and failed. The children were not involved so killing them was murder.
Once again, confusing innocent children with guilty adults
I'm confusing nothing of the sort. The children are part of the "collateral damage".
Not at all. Killing children for what they might do is wrong. It is MURDER. Your morals as we had also established put you on the potentially dangerous list.
They do nothing of the sort, not any more so that yours do. Your morals endanger your own people, because you would put their well-being (and their very lives) as risk, being ridiculously concerned about the welfare of the enemy's offspring, especially given the history of that enemy's children growing up and following in their forefathers' footsteps.
Personally i think the whole 300 years is more revisionist history to justify their act of genocide. But whatever, even then, it doesn't justify murder.
If this were an act of "genocide", the Israelites would have destroyed the Amalekites from the get-go, after that initial attack during the transit from Egypt. That didn't happen. They defeated the Amalekites and went on their way. Of course, the Amalekites came right back and attacked them again.
As Loco indicated, from the time of Moses and Joshua, to the time of Saul and David, and even to the time of Esther and Hezekiah, we see the Amalekites persecuting the Israelites, in one form or another.
In other words (though that wasn't the plan after Saul), the Israelites tried your wacky idea. They spared a relative handful of the Amalekites and gave them opportunities to "change the cycle". The end result was that, at certain points, they were nearly driven into starvation.
Again, at some point, you have to make the call that enough is enough. Exposing your people to the repeated attacks of an unrepentant enemy is downright foolish.
And to think, with the power of God, that's the best he could come up with? Commit genocide? lol
The best He could "come up with" was sparing the Amalekites....UPON THEIR REPENTANCE and making peace with Israel. But once agian, the Amalekites did not cease. And per the 2nd commandment, they were cursed for generations to come. The sins of the Amalekites brought consequences which they and their descendants suffered.