The bible suggests that god was quite capable of taking out people he didn't like without human help. Why didn't he do it himself instead of getting humans to break his commandments? There seems general agreement that it is not god's usual MO to use humans to commit genocide, see my previous question on the Holocaust
1Sam.15
[1] Samuel also said unto Saul, The LORD sent me to anoint thee to be king over his people, over Israel: now therefore hearken thou unto the voice of the words of the LORD.
[2] Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.
[3] Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ***.
2006-08-11 13:08:11 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
That's clasic dehumanisation, malek, you would have made a very good stormtrooper. The Amelakites only sin was to defend themselves against the invading Jews. Sound familiar?
2006-08-11 14:34:17 · update #1
You need to seek out a biblical scholar for better answers than you will ever recieve here!
2006-08-11 13:14:29 · answer #1 · answered by Wounded duckmate 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Don't know how true it is, but I've head the theory that the Amelekites were a nephilim group, which was supose to have been wiped out by the flood but somehow managed to survive. Nephilim were the children of angels and human women, called "giants, men of great renown" in the bible. They not only were bloodthirsty, which is why they needed to be destroyed in the first place, but they also taught weaponry & sorcery that their angelic fathers had taught them, to humans not mentally able to deal with it yet. Kinda like on Star Trek, the not interferring with the natural progression of a planet thing.
I think the point of having the Israelites to it was to show the Israelites that they could fight, they'd been slaves for so long, they'd lost any confidence they every had. Just a theory though.
2006-08-11 13:29:39 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Amalekites hated the Israelites. They knew it to for they, more than once endured unprovoked attacks from the Amalekites.
It was not a genocide but a show of support for the Israelites to go before the Amalekites, and destroy them.
When they fell short of God's favor, they couldn't win a fight against the Amalekites.
This action in particular you have posted was to show God's people that he favored Saul.
2006-08-11 13:25:46 · answer #3 · answered by rangedog 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Honestly, this seems to be a pretty lame question. Why should we think that G-d wouldn't ask the jews to do something? The fact that G-d often does things Himself doesn't indicate that He never relegates tasks to others. Besides which, your point certainly isn't strong enough to convince anyone who believes in the bible.
at best, you can argue that you think it was wrong to kill them -- but then again, that won't help in an argument where the opponent believes in the bible either (since G-d's opinion obviously trumps your own).
cheerio
2006-08-12 17:34:41 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree that using one people-group to take out another is not God's usualy MO... Those were unusual times.
Cordially,
John
2006-08-11 13:12:38 · answer #5 · answered by John 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
remember that when the jews had sinned, He used their enemies to smite them too......the destruction of evil is not a sin... God defines sin, not man..
2006-08-11 13:20:47 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
we have to prove they existed before we come to any conclusions.
2006-08-11 13:15:12 · answer #7 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋