First, I don't buy the argument that vast portions of the Bible are simply recounting history.
That you don’t buy it is no argument. The fact is right before you. God Himself even tells Moses to write the history down so that Israel will have a record of it to remember how He once led them. The fact that the command was given specifically to Saul, for example, is directly in the text. You can now accept what you’ve read plainly, or persist in willful ignorance.
The Bible is filled with historical references that are typically interpreted both literally and figuratively.
But no reasoned reading of those sections can possibly justify a murderous Christian campaign against nonbelievers when every single passage was written not to Christians, but to Hebrews, Hebrews who were directly commanded of God on specific tasks, Hebrews whose theocracy no longer exists. It is clearly history, designed to show the wrath and might of God. No reasoned reading of it can lead to our claims that the specific judgments you’ve mentioned are commands to us.
Clearly, the Bible is not meant to be simply a recounting of Middle Eastern history, but an object lesson to emphasis how to live and what God expects of His followers.
You ought not be so prone to employ fallacy to make your case. I never said the Bible was meant to be simply a recounting of Mid East history, and you cannot support such a dishonorable claim. I said that the particular commands to which you have referred are obviously a recounting of history and not direct commands to Christians. I said this because it is flatly evident in the text. When God commands Saul to judge the Amalekites, there is just no way I can reasonably take it upon myself to go out and destroy Amalekites, especially since Amalekites no longer exist. When God Himself judges Samarians, it is impossible to reasonably conclude that I am commanded to destroy Samarians. That sort of distinction is simply not as evident in islamic holy works, especially when we see Mohammed himself, and not their “god,” slaughtering people, approving the murder of women and marrying 9 year-old girls.
The passages that I cited were meant to show that the Bible also contains portions that can be interpreted as advocating crimes against 'non-believers'.
But you have not shown this because those passages each, every single one of them, were given by God Himself specifically to individuals and not generally to any believer. That is most evident in the text.
For example, I Samual 15 can be legitimately interpreted as an example of how obedience to God is more important than humanity and mercy. Saul was condemned not for failing to kill all the women and children, but for taking booty and allowing the king of the Amalek's to live.
Please. You really ought not be so utterly ignorant. Read the text. It is directly before you and yet you insist upon being ignorant. The text plainly says
“Saul spared Agag and the best of the sheep, the oxen, the fatlings, the lambs, and all that was good, and were unwilling to utterly destroy them. But everything despised and worthless, that they utterly destroyed.”
It is simply impossible to reasonably come to your conclusion when the text is as it is.
Why? Because God had commanded that everyone be slaughtered. This passage can easily be interpreted as justification for murder, even the murder of innocents, in the name of God, if God wills it.
It cannot. And obviously cannot. Your perspective is completely wrong here because the text is quite clear that Saul simply disobeyed God, not for mercy, but to pick up a few sheep on the side. But there are more complex, theological reasons your perspective is wrong (and this would be evident to you were you to give a more reasoned study of the Biblical texts). God, as presented in the Scriptures, is the Author and Owner of Life. He gives and He takes away as He wishes. He is the very definition of Good and therefore cannot command murder of innocents. What He Himself does is obviously not left for me to do.
When God commanded the death of women and children, He did not command me to do it and no reasonable reading of the text can possibly lead me or any person to that conclusion. He commanded Saul to do it, especially since the Amalekites no longer exist.
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. You only see a command to murder people because that is what you wish to see. But my name is not in the text, and neither is yours. I am not even referenced generally, through context or through any command given to Christ. The text is clear that God Himself took the action.
So, if God were to announce that the Muslims were infidels, and should be wiped out, you would be *obligated* to start a "holy war" against Muslims, and not spare man, women, nor child.
Absolutely not, and the text supports nothing of the kind. No reasoned reading of it could possibly lead us to this conclusion. You only come to that conclusion because you refuse to see the obvious truth right under your nose.
I'd have to say that's pretty ghastly, wouldn't you?
Well, you see, my perspective on God is quite different from yours. It is clear to me that the God of Scripture is no cuddly grandfather that accepts our sin. He is out to destroy us all. The Scriptures are wondrously clear that He detests any flaw at all and that His very “natural” character is to destroy anything that has any stain at all. I see it is very clear that I can by no means stand before such a God, that He would “naturally” destroy me because I am naturally flawed. I see that all men, women and even children are flawed just as I am, and that therefore they will be destroyed, just as I would be. But I see this same Wrathful God has made a way for me to gain protection from Himself by fitting me for a relationship with Him. He sent His only Son, God incarnate, to receive the Wrath that I should receive so that I may appropriate that suffering for myself. Through this work I gain the protection of Christ which will allow me to stand before God in safety. Indeed, because of Christ, I will be pure enough to find peace and harmony with God, going before Him as a blameless man.
So it is not ghastly to me at all that God Himself should decide to kill a bunch of sin-infected kids. After all, the entire world will one day be destroyed because it is infected. God Himself will do it. He is going to clean house and is now engaged in a process wherein He is slowly preparing a relative few people for salvation out of the coming Wrath.
What I find ghastly is that individual muslims have received a written command, and not one directly from God, that can be reasonably taken as license for them to be both judge and executioner of people who are just as innocent as they are.
(tbc...) |
