A Deep Theological Question

[Agit8r]

In 1 Samuel 15:2-3 when it says:

"This is what the LORD of Heaven's Armies has declared: I have decided to settle accounts with the nation of Amalek for opposing Israel when they came from Egypt. Now go and completely destroy the entire Amalekite nation--men, women, children, babies, cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys."

...did any of the women who were slaughtered have fetuses growing inside of them?

 

[The Professor]

In 1 Samuel 15:2-3 when it says:

"This is what the LORD of Heaven's Armies has declared: I have decided to settle accounts with the nation of Amalek for opposing Israel when they came from Egypt. Now go and completely destroy the entire Amalekite nation--men, women, children, babies, cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys."

...did any of the women who were slaughtered have fetuses growing inside of them?

I've studied the bible for over 60 years and don't recall a Biblical reference which would specifically answer your question; however, it is almost statistically certain that at least some women were pregnant. In the overall scheme of things, I suppose it didn't matter a tinker's damn. The order was to kill the mothers and “infant and suckling” (KJV). Since infants and suckling were disposable, and killing the mother kills the fetus as well, the death of each fetus was an insignificant part of the murderous plot. The rational for such brutality is best explained by Josephus:

"He betook himself to slay the women and the children, and thought he did not act therein either barbarously or inhumanly; first, because they were enemies whom he thus treated, and, in the next place, because it was done by the command of God, whom it was dangerous not to obey" (Flavius Josephus, Antiquites Judicae, Book VI, Chapter 7).

I'm not sure where you're going with this. I cannot relate it to the present status of abortion in the USA, nor can I relate it to Christians who, for the most part, have abandoned much of the Old Testament in favor of the “new and better” New Testament. The Old testament called for the killing of all those who worshiped other Gods (Deuteronomy 13:6-10), but I have not encountered a single Christian who believes that nonsense is applicable today.

 

[t_polkow]

But you christers roll out the Hebrew bible when it suits you on homosexuality and the ten commandments

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

He's a mocker, Polkow! What's wrong with you? That is the Torah and G-d he is mocking. Tell him to hush it up!

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

But you christers roll out the Hebrew bible when it suits you on homosexuality and the ten commandments

He's a Mocker. Stop making excuses for him just because he belongs to your political party, Polkow.

 

[MHunterB]

One wonders WHY this particular passage is of such overweening importance to this poster......?

 

[BreezeWood]

Now go and completely destroy the entire Amalekite nation--men, women, children, babies, cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys."

Now go and completely destroy .... cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys.


and more worrisome than what is mans destiny is why would they be allowed to slaughter the Fauna ?


Jews / Christians / Muslims ... ? - the obstacles to reaching the Everlasting.

 

[Capstone]

One wonders WHY this particular passage is of such overweening importance to this poster......?

...and simultaneously so neglected or simply ignored by certain others, most notably those who normally base their beliefs on the scriptures.

 

[The Professor]

In 1 Samuel 15:2-3 when it says:

"This is what the LORD of Heaven's Armies has declared: I have decided to settle accounts with the nation of Amalek for opposing Israel when they came from Egypt. Now go and completely destroy the entire Amalekite nation--men, women, children, babies, cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys."

...did any of the women who were slaughtered have fetuses growing inside of them?

I've studied the bible for over 60 years and don't recall a Biblical reference which would specifically answer your question; however, it is almost statistically certain that at least some women were pregnant. In the overall scheme of things, I suppose it didn't matter a tinker's damn. The order was to kill the mothers and “infant and suckling” (KJV). Since infants and suckling were disposable, and killing the mother kills the fetus as well, the death of each fetus was an insignificant part of the murderous plot. The rational for such brutality is best explained by Josephus:

"He betook himself to slay the women and the children, and thought he did not act therein either barbarously or inhumanly; first, because they were enemies whom he thus treated, and, in the next place, because it was done by the command of God, whom it was dangerous not to obey" (Flavius Josephus, Antiquites Judicae, Book VI, Chapter 7).

I'm not sure where you're going with this. I cannot relate it to the present status of abortion in the USA, nor can I relate it to Christians who, for the most part, have abandoned much of the Old Testament in favor of the “new and better” New Testament. The Old testament called for the killing of all those who worshiped other Gods (Deuteronomy 13:6-10), but I have not encountered a single Christian who believes that nonsense is applicable today.

Some ignorant asshole named MHunterB negged me for this. In fact, he negged me once when I just quoted the Old Testament. Is this guy retarded or something? Is he an Old Testament fanatic? I am not going to waste a lot of my time researching his posts, but if anyone can enlighten me as to who the fuck he/she is, I would appreciate it.

Many thanks.

Edited to add: Perhaps MHunterB would like to debate me on this rather than merely neg me. I would love it MHunterB, but something tells me you are too cowardly. I'll be waiting. You neg and walk away and the only logical assumption is that you do not like what I say (even though it is true) and you have no way to defend your position, whatever in hell it is.

 

[Capstone]

I like the New International Version's rendering of Numbers 5:22, a verse concerning the proper way to find out whether your wife had ever screwed around on you or not:

22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.”

“‘Then the woman is to say, “Amen. So be it.”

The "water" referred to in the passage above would have been mixed with a handful of filth from the tabernacle floor. They really knew how to treat their women back then.

 

[The Professor]

But you christers roll out the Hebrew bible when it suits you on homosexuality and the ten commandments

Well, for your information, I am not a Christer. I am a student of both the Bible and the Qur'an however.

Edited to add: During the last 50 years of my life, I have been a Bible critic. I try not judge anyone by their faith; however, I do not accept that ANY book is the complete, inerrant and inspired word of God.

Final edit to add: The Old Testament is literally full of brutality; however, the New Testament is not. Anyone who is not aware of this has never turned the pages of the Bible. It is obvious to me that some of you have never read either the Bible or the Qur'an. I suggest to you that you should, if for no other reason than there are over 1 billion Muslims and 1 billion Christians in the world and it might be to your benefit to know what they believe.

 

[The Professor]

I like the New International Version's rendering of Numbers 5:22, a verse concerning the proper way to find out whether your wife had ever screwed around on you or not:

22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.”

“‘Then the woman is to say, “Amen. So be it.”

The "water" referred to in the passage above would have been mixed with a handful of filth from the tabernacle floor. They really knew how to treat their women back then.

Not bad, but you missed my favorite example of "God's" ignorance of His own creation. God, speaking as He does through his divine spokesmen, decreed that a woman who was not a virgin on her wedding night would be stoned to death, and that the proof of the woman's virginity was the presence of blood on the marital bed sheet. That's right, the omniscient God, the creator of all life, thought that ALL virgins bleed upon engaging in sex for the first time. The all-knowing Old Testament God did not know what every 10th-grade biology student should know: it is the tearing of the hymen that produces blood; however, not every woman is born with a perfect hymen, and a hymen my be torn by injury or excessive physical activity. When I was 12 years old, I knew that not every virgin bled on her wedding night, but the alleged creator of the Woman did not. Here is what the Bible says:

“If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her, And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid: Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate:

"And the damsel's father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her; And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech against her, saying, I found not thy daughter a maid; and yet these are the tokens of my daughter's virginity. And they shall spread the cloth [the marital bed sheet] before the elders of the city. And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him; And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days. But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you” (Deuteronomy 22:13-21, KJV, explanatory insertion my own).

I wonder how many innocent woman were stoned to death whose only “sin” was being born with an imperfect hymen, or whose hymen was torn through non-sexual activities. There are parts of the Old Testament which could not possibly have been inspired, and this is one of them. I don't mean to disparage Christians because many have acknowledged that the Old Testament was flawed, and hence the need for a New Testament. Even the New Testament Scriptures say that the OT had problems (all verses from KJV):

“But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises” (2 Corinthians 3:14).

“For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second” Hebrew 8:6, 7).

“In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away” (Hebrews 8:13).

OK, I am done with the lot of you.

MHunterB: Read the Bible for half a century or so, and then perhaps you will be able to discuss it intelligently. Right now, your ignorance is showing.

 

[Agit8r]

In 1 Samuel 15:2-3 when it says:

"This is what the LORD of Heaven's Armies has declared: I have decided to settle accounts with the nation of Amalek for opposing Israel when they came from Egypt. Now go and completely destroy the entire Amalekite nation--men, women, children, babies, cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys."

...did any of the women who were slaughtered have fetuses growing inside of them?

I've studied the bible for over 60 years and don't recall a Biblical reference which would specifically answer your question; however, it is almost statistically certain that at least some women were pregnant. In the overall scheme of things, I suppose it didn't matter a tinker's damn. The order was to kill the mothers and “infant and suckling” (KJV). Since infants and suckling were disposable, and killing the mother kills the fetus as well, the death of each fetus was an insignificant part of the murderous plot. The rational for such brutality is best explained by Josephus:

"He betook himself to slay the women and the children, and thought he did not act therein either barbarously or inhumanly; first, because they were enemies whom he thus treated, and, in the next place, because it was done by the command of God, whom it was dangerous not to obey" (Flavius Josephus, Antiquites Judicae, Book VI, Chapter 7).

I'm not sure where you're going with this. I cannot relate it to the present status of abortion in the USA, nor can I relate it to Christians who, for the most part, have abandoned much of the Old Testament in favor of the “new and better” New Testament. The Old testament called for the killing of all those who worshiped other Gods (Deuteronomy 13:6-10), but I have not encountered a single Christian who believes that nonsense is applicable today.

It is good that there are some that view the New Testament God as being evolved beyond the corrupt nature ascribed in the Old Testament--in spite of the widely held belief that they are one unchangeable being.

 

[Capstone]

Not bad, but you missed my favorite example of "God's" ignorance of His own creation. [...]

Most likely because I wasn't shooting for a scriptural argument against omniscience per se; my intention in pointing out the potential for God-sanctioned abortions in Numbers 5 was to shore up the notion that Christians have scant reason to claim that abortion was explicitly condemned in the scriptures.

Sorry, if I misinterpreted the topic at hand.

 

[The Professor]

In 1 Samuel 15:2-3 when it says:

"This is what the LORD of Heaven's Armies has declared: I have decided to settle accounts with the nation of Amalek for opposing Israel when they came from Egypt. Now go and completely destroy the entire Amalekite nation--men, women, children, babies, cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys."

...did any of the women who were slaughtered have fetuses growing inside of them?

I've studied the bible for over 60 years and don't recall a Biblical reference which would specifically answer your question; however, it is almost statistically certain that at least some women were pregnant. In the overall scheme of things, I suppose it didn't matter a tinker's damn. The order was to kill the mothers and “infant and suckling” (KJV). Since infants and suckling were disposable, and killing the mother kills the fetus as well, the death of each fetus was an insignificant part of the murderous plot. The rational for such brutality is best explained by Josephus:

"He betook himself to slay the women and the children, and thought he did not act therein either barbarously or inhumanly; first, because they were enemies whom he thus treated, and, in the next place, because it was done by the command of God, whom it was dangerous not to obey" (Flavius Josephus, Antiquites Judicae, Book VI, Chapter 7).

I'm not sure where you're going with this. I cannot relate it to the present status of abortion in the USA, nor can I relate it to Christians who, for the most part, have abandoned much of the Old Testament in favor of the “new and better” New Testament. The Old testament called for the killing of all those who worshiped other Gods (Deuteronomy 13:6-10), but I have not encountered a single Christian who believes that nonsense is applicable today.

It is good that there are some that view the New Testament God as being evolved beyond the corrupt nature ascribed in the Old Testament--in spite of the widely held belief that they are one unchangeable being.

You noticed that, too. I've made the same argument in the past. But, then not everyone thinks like you and me.

 

[The Professor]

Well, Mr Agit8r, I have done my best to answer your question and I have enjoyed chatting with you. However, I've said all I have to say on this subject, so it's time for me to go and leave this thread to others. Thanks for the provocative thread.

To MHunterB: Sorry I couldn't get you to debate me. It would have been so much fun.... for me.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

[MENTION][/MENTION]

One wonders WHY this particular passage is of such overweening importance to this poster......?

...and simultaneously so neglected or simply ignored by certain others, most notably those who normally base their beliefs on the scriptures.

Some questions are statements in disguise. This is an example.

If the statement is intended to promote liars and murderers like Planned Parenthood while mocking the G-d of Israel, why would a follower of G-d give him a serious response?

Agitster He is a fool obviously and the best reply to him would be either silence or something silly to match his incredibly ignorant question / statement. Which is why I didn't bother with him.

 

[LittleNipper]

But you christers roll out the Hebrew bible when it suits you on homosexuality and the ten commandments

The issue here is that God will now forgive sin through faith in Christ Jesus, but one must recognize sin and repent of it. Homosexual marriage is ultimately the celebration of a sinful act. One might as well pee in the face of God.
This is why Christians should be abhorant to the very notion of "gay" marriage. Love the sinner but hate the sin --- not embrace it and take it to bed!

 

[Bezukhov]

And on a related note here is the latest body count:

ETA. According to the Bible, that is.

Number of people killed by Yahweh: Countless

Number of people killed by Lucifer: Zero

Kinda makes you wonder who really is evil, don't it?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

But you christers roll out the Hebrew bible when it suits you on homosexuality and the ten commandments

I could be mistaken, but I don't recall the US trying to stop Israel after they left Egypt for the promised land. Care to point out when we did that? If not, there the only conceivable reason to try to use this verse in a modern context is gross willful ignorance and hypocrisy