I Samual 15 is interpreted by many who study the Bible for more than just its recounting of history.
Well certainly I accept 1 Sam 15 as more than a simple recounting of history. Indeed I actually said lessons can be taken from it regarding God’s wrath, might and His expectations of obedience. Please try to argue with integrity. The issue here concerns whether one can with reason easily take 1 Samuel as a command to be both judge and executor of the lives of other humans. That simply cannot be maintained. Yet judging and executing the lives of others can certainly be and is in fact is maintained with commands given muslims in the quran.
main.faithfreedom.org
Whether you interpret it as history or as a lesson is irrelevant; the fact is that many study this passage to arrive at a message from God.
I think you are being dishonest and/or dense and I am terminating this discussion as a result. I myself have shown the reasoned lesson I have taken from 1 Samuel.
“The lesson I might reasonably take from this recounting of history is that God is Wrathful, will utterly punish sin and that complete obedience to Him is in order even if disobedience looks promising.”
siliconinvestor.com
So your claiming I take the book as only a history lesson is patently ridiculous. I maintain the verses to which you refer are mere recountings of history and not commands to us. But I have always maintained they are given to us to teach us lessons about God. You have simply and repeatedly tried to avoid the thrust with fallacy. I weary of it. You ought to be honest here, and if you are trying to be honest, then you ought to be smarter.
Many interpret this message as: obedience to God is paramount. Therefore, given the example, if God commanded them to slaughter the infidels, they would be obliged to do so.
Well of course. If God commands me to slaughter you, then you are dead pal. That is not the issue. The issue concerns whether by reading the history in 1 Samuel I can reasonably declare that God wishes me to slaughter you. I cannot. No one can . They cannot do this because the text clearly was not written as a command to anyone today. That is most clear, and it is why Christians are not relying upon it to fashion a worldwide phenomenon of murder as we are seeing with muslims who reasonably conclude they can murder under the quran.
Am I incorrect here? That the good was destroyed along with the bad, because God said so?
If God Himself wishes me to destroy the entire universe and he enables me to do it, I will do it. If you wish to debate this point, go right ahead, but it is completely irrelevant to this “discussion.” (sheesh!) What is relevant is whether by reading the history in 1 Samuel I can reasonably take it upon myself to declare someone an “infidel” and then slaughter them as muslims are doing based upon reasonable readings of the words in the quran.
My point here is that some cretins interpret this 'absolute obedience even to slaughter innocents' as a justification for genocide.
If you have issue with absolute obedience to God, then you must deal with that separately. The issue at hand concerns whether by reading the history in 1 Samuel ANYONE can reasonably take it upon themselves to declare someone in “infidel” and then slaughter them as muslims are doing based upon reasonable readings of the quran.
In their twisted minds, they find some reason to hate a particular group (homosexuals, abortion doctors, infidels, etc), and then apply this 'lesson' as justification for murder.
And that is just not something that is going on in the Christian churches. Even when Fred Phelps carries signs that say “God hates Fags” he is only revealing what he thinks God hates. He is not using the Scriptures to murder anyone. He is not doing this because he knows he has no basis for it whatever. Muslims are indeed murdering people all over the world, and they have a basis for it. It is called the quran.
Yes, I think we have a different view of God, but that's ok. The issue really is: could the Bible be used as justification for evil? It has in the past, by selective use of certain pieces.
That is only because people calling themselves “Christians” have done precisely what you have done here. The text is clear and no reasoned reading of it can support murder. That is precisely why in every single instance of flawed behavior by alleged Christians, other Christians have come out in force to end it. The words and life of Christ (from Whom Christians get their name) clearly forbid it.
If so, could the same happen with the Koran? Most certainly so.
And that is because a reasoned reading of the quran can allow for murder.
You too often miscast my position and use this fallacy to create additional fallacy. I am done with this. if you wish to debate this issue, you must be honest, directly engaging the thrust or yielding to it. You do not do this.
But thanks for sharing! |
