The Slaughter of Jericho

[Rose]

As I was reading the book of Joshua the other day with “fresh eyes” a number of things jumped out at me that I had never really noticed before. Normally when one thinks of Jericho we remember it as a wonderful Sunday school story proclaiming the glory of God’s power…well, for the people of Jericho it wasn’t quite so wonderful!

Starting in chapter 1 we are told that Joshua is commanded by the Lord to cross over the Jordan and enter into the land that that he will give to them.

Joshua 1:2 Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel.

First Joshua sends two men as spies to search out the land that the Lord had promised to give Hebrews for an inheritance. The spies are hidden in the house of a harlot named Rahab, because the king of the land has heard that there are men who are trying to search out his country. Now the Lord has spoken to Rahab and told her that he is going to give all the land of her people to the Hebrews, so she decides to hide them on the promise that all of her household will be spared when the Lord delivers the land into the hands of the Hebrews. The only reason that this land is being taken is because the Hebrews say that the Lord promised it to them, it makes no difference that this land is already owned by the inhabitants who live there. I guess the Hebrew’s figure it is the Lords prerogative to give whatever he wants to whomever he wants, because everything belongs to the Lord.

Joshua 2:1-2 And Joshua the son of Nun sent out of Shittim two men to spy secretly, saying, Go view the land, even Jericho. And they went, and came into an harlot's house, named Rahab, and lodged there. And it was told the king of Jericho, saying, Behold, there came men in hither to night of the children of Israel to search out the country.

Joshua 2:9 And she said unto the men, I know that the LORD hath given you the land, and that your terror is fallen upon us, and that all the inhabitants of the land faint because of you…24) And they said unto Joshua, Truly the LORD hath delivered into our hands all the land; for even all the inhabitants of the country do faint because of us.

Chapter 5 continues on telling us that the Hebrew’s were left to wander in the wilderness forty years until all the men of war died because they did not obey the Lord. Chapter 6 then says that the Lord calls all the men of war to surround the city of Jericho for six days, so it seems some men of war are okay, as long as they obey the Lord.

Joshua 5:6 For the children of Israel walked forty years in the wilderness, till all the people that were men of war, which came out of Egypt, were consumed, because they obeyed not the voice of the LORD: unto whom the LORD sware that he would not shew them the land, which the LORD sware unto their fathers that he would give us, a land that floweth with milk and honey.

Joshua 6:2-3 And the LORD said unto Joshua, See, I have given into thine hand Jericho, and the king thereof, and the mighty men of valour. And ye shall compass the city, all ye men of war, and go round about the city once. Thus shalt thou do six days.

For six days the Hebrew’s march around the city, when the seventh day comes the Hebrew men of war are to give a shout, for then the Lord will give them the city. When the walls falls down and the men of war enter the city they are to utterly slaughter all the men, women, children at the Lord’s command, even the animals must die with the edge of the sword, but the Lord allows the Hebrews to keep all the silver and gold for his treasury.

Joshua 6:16-21 And it came to pass at the seventh time, when the priests blew with the trumpets, Joshua said unto the people, Shout; for the LORD hath given you the city. And the city shall be accursed, even it, and all that are therein, to the LORD: only Rahab the harlot shall live, she and all that are with her in the house, because she hid the messengers that we sent. And ye, in any wise keep yourselves from the accursed thing, lest ye make yourselves accursed, when ye take of the accursed thing, and make the camp of Israel a curse, and trouble it. But all the silver, and gold, and vessels of brass and iron, are consecrated unto the LORD: they shall come into the treasury of the LORD. So the people shouted when the priests blew with the trumpets: and it came to pass, when the people heard the sound of the trumpet, and the people shouted with a great shout, that the wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city, every man straight before him, and they took the city. And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.

This seemingly innocent Sunday school story of the taking of the city of Jericho suddenly becomes very disturbing when one pays attention to the details of the story. The question that begs to be asked is what kind of morals does this teach our children? From the story we see that according to God it is okay to murder men, women and children in order to take their land and steal there goods. Doesn’t the sixth, eighth, and tenth commandments forbid such actions, or am I missing something?


Rose

[luke1978]

As I was reading the book of Joshua the other day with “fresh eyes” a number of things jumped out at me that I had never really noticed before. Normally when one thinks of Jericho we remember it as a wonderful Sunday school story proclaiming the glory of God’s power…well, for the people of Jericho it wasn’t quite so wonderful!

Starting in chapter 1 we are told that Joshua is commanded by the Lord to cross over the Jordan and enter into the land that that he will give to them.

Joshua 1:2 Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel.

First Joshua sends two men as spies to search out the land that the Lord had promised to give Hebrews for an inheritance. The spies are hidden in the house of a harlot named Rahab, because the king of the land has heard that there are men who are trying to search out his country. Now the Lord has spoken to Rahab and told her that he is going to give all the land of her people to the Hebrews, so she decides to hide them on the promise that all of her household will be spared when the Lord delivers the land into the hands of the Hebrews. The only reason that this land is being taken is because the Hebrews say that the Lord promised it to them, it makes no difference that this land is already owned by the inhabitants who live there. I guess the Hebrew’s figure it is the Lords prerogative to give whatever he wants to whomever he wants, because everything belongs to the Lord.

Joshua 2:1-2 And Joshua the son of Nun sent out of Shittim two men to spy secretly, saying, Go view the land, even Jericho. And they went, and came into an harlot's house, named Rahab, and lodged there. And it was told the king of Jericho, saying, Behold, there came men in hither to night of the children of Israel to search out the country.

Joshua 2:9 And she said unto the men, I know that the LORD hath given you the land, and that your terror is fallen upon us, and that all the inhabitants of the land faint because of you…24) And they said unto Joshua, Truly the LORD hath delivered into our hands all the land; for even all the inhabitants of the country do faint because of us.

Chapter 5 continues on telling us that the Hebrew’s were left to wander in the wilderness forty years until all the men of war died because they did not obey the Lord. Chapter 6 then says that the Lord calls all the men of war to surround the city of Jericho for six days, so it seems some men of war are okay, as long as they obey the Lord.

Joshua 5:6 For the children of Israel walked forty years in the wilderness, till all the people that were men of war, which came out of Egypt, were consumed, because they obeyed not the voice of the LORD: unto whom the LORD sware that he would not shew them the land, which the LORD sware unto their fathers that he would give us, a land that floweth with milk and honey.

Joshua 6:2-3 And the LORD said unto Joshua, See, I have given into thine hand Jericho, and the king thereof, and the mighty men of valour. And ye shall compass the city, all ye men of war, and go round about the city once. Thus shalt thou do six days.

For six days the Hebrew’s march around the city, when the seventh day comes the Hebrew men of war are to give a shout, for then the Lord will give them the city. When the walls falls down and the men of war enter the city they are to utterly slaughter all the men, women, children at the Lord’s command, even the animals must die with the edge of the sword, but the Lord allows the Hebrews to keep all the silver and gold for his treasury.

Joshua 6:16-21 And it came to pass at the seventh time, when the priests blew with the trumpets, Joshua said unto the people, Shout; for the LORD hath given you the city. And the city shall be accursed, even it, and all that are therein, to the LORD: only Rahab the harlot shall live, she and all that are with her in the house, because she hid the messengers that we sent. And ye, in any wise keep yourselves from the accursed thing, lest ye make yourselves accursed, when ye take of the accursed thing, and make the camp of Israel a curse, and trouble it. But all the silver, and gold, and vessels of brass and iron, are consecrated unto the LORD: they shall come into the treasury of the LORD. So the people shouted when the priests blew with the trumpets: and it came to pass, when the people heard the sound of the trumpet, and the people shouted with a great shout, that the wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city, every man straight before him, and they took the city. And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.

This seemingly innocent Sunday school story of the taking of the city of Jericho suddenly becomes very disturbing when one pays attention to the details of the story. The question that begs to be asked is what kind of morals does this teach our children? From the story we see that according to God it is okay to murder men, women and children in order to take their land and steal there goods. Doesn’t the sixth, eighth, and tenth commandments forbid such actions, or am I missing something?


Rose

Hi Rose,

Check out my "Decoding the old testament" thread"

The wall is in your mind and the enemies are spiritual enemies. You should also kill the descendants of any spiritual enemy. Greed may be the father of lies to get what you want as an example. It is well known by the Jewish these are all narratives meant to be understood on a spiritual level. This is why Jesus spoke in parables. Remember he said:

Extract:


Mark 4

New International Version (NIV)


The Parable of the Sower

4 Again Jesus began to teach by the lake. The crowd that gathered around him was so large that he got into a boat and sat in it out on the lake, while all the people were along the shore at the water’s edge. 2 He taught them many things by parables, and in his teaching said: 3 “Listen! A farmer went out to sow his seed. 4 As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. 5 Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. 6 But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. 7 Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants, so that they did not bear grain. 8 Still other seed fell on good soil. It came up, grew and produced a crop, some multiplying thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times.”

9 Then Jesus said, “Whoever has ears to hear, let them hear.”

10 When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11 He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12 so that,


“‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving,
and ever hearing but never understanding;
otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!’[a]”

13 Then Jesus said to them, “Don’t you understand this parable? How then will you understand any parable? 14 The farmer sows the word. 15 Some people are like seed along the path, where the word is sown. As soon as they hear it, Satan comes and takes away the word that was sown in them. 16 Others, like seed sown on rocky places, hear the word and at once receive it with joy. 17 But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. 18 Still others, like seed sown among thorns, hear the word; 19 but the worries of this life, the deceitfulness of wealth and the desires for other things come in and choke the word, making it unfruitful. 20 Others, like seed sown on good soil, hear the word, accept it, and produce a crop—some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown

End Extract:

I agree it should not be taught at Sunday school. Neither should the flood as that is also spiritual.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hi Rose,

Check out my "Decoding the old testament" thread"

The wall is in your mind and the enemies are spiritual enemies. You should also kill the descendants of any spiritual enemy. Greed may be the father of lies to get what you want as an example. It is well known by the Jewish these are all narratives meant to be understood on a spiritual level. This is why Jesus spoke in parables. Remember he said:

Hey there Luke,

Would you agree that your interpretation of the Bible is on the "fringe" in the sense that is not how most people interpret it? Rose's post was not addressing possible interpretations like yours, but rather the interpretation that says the Old Testament is reporting real history. If your interpretation is correct, then yes, you can find a "solution" to all the problems in the Bible. But then you introduce a new set of problems in the process. Namely, Christ is no longer an historical figure and so all traditional Christianity is seen to be false. Why then believe any of it?

All the best,

Richard

[Richard Amiel McGough]

This seemingly innocent Sunday school story of the taking of the city of Jericho suddenly becomes very disturbing when one pays attention to the details of the story. The question that begs to be asked is what kind of morals does this teach our children? From the story we see that according to God it is okay to murder men, women and children in order to take their land and steal there goods. Doesn’t the sixth, eighth, and tenth commandments forbid such actions, or am I missing something?

Yep, that's the problem. The morals taught in the Bible are not good.

I've been thinking of taking one of those cute little Sunday school pics of Noah's ark with a rainbow and adding rotting corpses floating in the water all around. That's truth in advertising. Some old Bibles give realistic representations that bring forth the humanity of it all. Like this one which shows parents trying to save their children from God's wrath:

[luke1978]

Hey there Luke,

Would you agree that your interpretation of the Bible is on the "fringe" in the sense that is not how most people interpret it? Rose's post was not addressing possible interpretations like yours, but rather the interpretation that says the Old Testament is reporting real history. If your interpretation is correct, then yes, you can find a "solution" to all the problems in the Bible. But then you introduce a new set of problems in the process. Namely, Christ is no longer an historical figure and so all traditional Christianity is seen to be false. Why then believe any of it?

All the best,

Richard

Of course it is on the fringe. I'm actually going to be talking to my wife and going through my kids bedrooms(2 and 3) and throwing out any books to do with the flood. One of the reasons I'm studying all this is I need to know what to teach my kids. As for Jesus he did physically come to fulfil old testament prophecy. There are historic writings that show this(Josephus etc). I think Jesus came to show us how to defeat the last enemy(death). The fact Jesus came in peace and he was the father tells me mainstream christianity is not interpreting the old testament properly. I have some problems with the NT as well but it is too overwhelming to try and understand it all at once.

Maybe at the end of my life I will stand on the horizon of eternity and will just say "I am that I am" and "I will be what I will be" and if it is going back to the dust for eternity then its all been a sick joke. However I am fairly convinced conciousness proceeds matter and is the ground of all being. I'm just trying to marry that belief up to my Christian belief. Jesus said the truth will set you free and by accepting him in my heart the holy spirit seems to be teaching me daily. I dreamt about a number 8 being in the wrong spot the night before the post where Culi??? makes a mistake with the number 8. I have these dreams happening a few times a week. They have shown in quantum experiments that the future can change the past.

http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/...en-beforehand/

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Of course it is on the fringe. I'm actually going to be talking to my wife and going through my kids bedrooms(2 and 3) and throwing out any books to do with the flood. One of the reasons I'm studying all this is I need to know what to teach my kids. As for Jesus he did physically come to fulfil old testament prophecy. There are historic writings that show this(Josephus etc). I think Jesus came to show us how to defeat the last enemy(death). The fact Jesus came in peace and he was the father tells me mainstream christianity is not interpreting the old testament properly. I have some problems with the NT as well but it is too overwhelming to try and understand it all at once.

I think it is great to review your beliefs so you can teach your kids well. Kudos!

The best thing would probably be to teach them how to think rather than what to think.

So you accept Jesus as literal not because the Bible says so, but because of evidence from Josephus?

Your assertion that "Jesus was the Father" directly contradicts what most Christians have always believed. If they were wrong about that, why believe the book they produced?

It sounds like you are weaving your own religion from the rags left over from traditional Christianity.

Maybe at the end of my life I will stand on the horizon of eternity and will just say "I am that I am" and "I will be what I will be" and if it is going back to the dust for eternity then its all been a sick joke.

How would not going back to dust not make it a sick joke? The joke has already been told. Folks are already laughing. The future won't change the past ... or ... wait a sec ...

However I am fairly convinced conciousness proceeds matter and is the ground of all being.

I'm inclined in that direction too. And it is consistent with Theism, though it doesn't imply it.

I'm just trying to marry that belief up to my Christian belief. Jesus said the truth will set you free and by accepting him in my heart the holy spirit seems to be teaching me daily. I dreamt about a number 8 being in the wrong spot the night before the post where Culi??? makes a mistake with the number 8. I have these dreams happening a few times a week. They have shown in quantum experiments that the future can change the past.

http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/...en-beforehand/

I've had precognitive dreams. They could have been coincidence, it's difficult to objectively prove such things. But it left a strong conviction on my soul.

As for quantum physics. That was the topic of my PhD which unfortunately I never finished. Maybe if I could just make the right kind of measurement I could change the past.

[David M]

Yep, that's the problem. The morals taught in the Bible are not good.

I've been thinking of taking one of those cute little Sunday school pics of Noah's ark with a rainbow and adding rotting corpses floating in the water all around. That's truth in advertising. Some old Bibles give realistic representations that bring forth the humanity of it all. Like this one which shows parents trying to save their children from God's wrath:

I suggest you put up your pictures Richard to teach children that it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. As long as you go on teaching your morals, you will be letting child killers and murders off the sentences they deserve. Under your legistlative system murderers can escape prison and do exactly the same thing and still not receive the punishment they deserve. Under your system, there is no deterrent to stop criminals receiving a punishemen to fit the crime. Rehabilitation of criminals and getting criminals to repent is a good way if it can be achieved, but this is wishful thinking in the main. Reprobates will never change and that is why God could give then up and in his sight they were worthless. Killing repbrobates is doing a service to the rest of society who are not.

If we ignore the actual method of punishment that was accepted in those days, was God right to punish man for disobeying His laws in the first place? God has created man and while God has given man freedom of choice, he is not free to do whatever he wants without punishment if he disobeys God commands. God gave his instructions and he also has told men what the punishment is for disobedience. God is therefore just if He administers punishment in accordance with the warning He has given man; man disobeys at his own peril.

God's commands such as the Ten Commandments have been given man for man's own good. The world would be a far better place if we all kept the commandments. Why don't you blame the people who do not keep those commancments? God created man and God has the right to lay down the rules. As I say, the rules are for man's own good.

We shall never agree on this, but God was right to punish in whatever way he did and God can take life in extreme cases. Just as God did not enjoy the sacrifice of animals for the covering of sins, God does not like man being rebellious. God would prefer man to be obedient to his instruction and then we could all live in peace. Somtimes as the saying goes; "spare the rod and spoil the child". Now if God sits back and does nothing to stop the wars and killings that are taking place in the world, you consider God is immoral for not intervening. You want to blame God any way you can.

I am not up for debating this with you, as we have done this before, I just want to show in this thread that the statements you make are inaccurate and do not tell both sides. The Bible teaches very good morals, but you overlook this and concentrate on anything to say that God's morals are bad. God has set the rules and man cannot set the rules for God.

God used men's ways which were accepted at that time. We might have moved on in someways from that bygone age, but the killing by men in wars taking place around the world is still going on. This is just as horrific as any of the killings recorded in the OT. But you don't say that man is wrong. God used people as his instruments of punishment and used their own methods at times. You should be campaigning to stop men fighting instead of saying the Biblel does not teach good morals. The fact is, much of the moral teaching of society which is acceptable has come from the teaching in the Bible. Where is the moral teaching in the nations around the world in which all manner of attrocities are taking place?


Just consider for a moment that God saved all the just and righteous people and only killed the wicked. Does man do that?

All the best,

David

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I suggest you put up your pictures Richard to teach children that it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

The only thing the flood taught those children who were killed by their creator was that it is a horror to be created by a being like him.

As long as you go on teaching your morals, you will be letting child killers and murders off the sentences they deserve. Under your legistlative system murderers can escape prison and do exactly the same thing and still not receive the punishment they deserve. Under your system, there is no deterrent to stop criminals receiving a punishemen to fit the crime. Rehabilitation of criminals and getting criminals to repent is a good way if it can be achieved, but this is wishful thinking in the main. Reprobates will never change and that is why God could give then up and in his sight they were worthless. Killing repbrobates is doing a service to the rest of society who are not.

It's not "my" legislative system." I didn't invent it. But it is much better than the primitive systems set up by the Bible and the Taliban.

It sounds like you want a universal capital punishment for everyone convicted of murder because they could possibly escape from prison. What about all the people wrongly convicted? Kill them anyway? You don't care about them?

And how are we supposed to discern between the "reprobates" that deserve death and the people that would repent?

And God did not follow his own law. He let the murderer David keep his job and the woman stole after he murdered her husband. Your call for "justice" rings hollow.

You think that all the women and children that God commanded to be murdered were "reprobates" who deserved it? I would never want my heart hardened to where I could say such things as you.

If we ignore the actual method of punishment that was accepted in those days, was God right to punish man for disobeying His laws in the first place? God has created man and while God has given man freedom of choice, he is not free to do whatever he wants without punishment if he disobeys God commands. God gave his instructions and he also has told men what the punishment is for disobedience. God is therefore just if He administers punishment in accordance with the warning He has given man; man disobeys at his own peril.

God did not reveal his laws to those people. And many of them were just little kids! You know, the kind that you bounce on your knees and make giggle. God commanded them to be butchered. How you could call that good is beyond all comprehension.

God's commands such as the Ten Commandments have been given man for man's own good. The world would be a far better place if we all kept the commandments. Why don't you blame the people who do not keep those commancments? God created man and God has the right to lay down the rules. As I say, the rules are for man's own good.

The Ten Commandments were not given to "man." They were given specifically to the tribes of Israel and Israel alone. The Bible is explicit on this point.

Deuteronomy 4:8 And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day?

Exodus 31:13 Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you. 14 Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.

The Fourth Commandment was given as a sign that God was the God of Israel. It was not given to any other nation. It is part of the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments were not given to any other nation.

We shall never agree on this, but God was right to punish in whatever way he did and God can take life in extreme cases. Just as God did not enjoy the sacrifice of animals for the covering of sins, God does not like man being rebellious. God would prefer man to be obedient to his instruction and then we could all live in peace. Somtimes as the saying goes; "spare the rod and spoil the child". Now if God sits back and does nothing to stop the wars and killings that are taking place in the world, you consider God is immoral for not intervening. You want to blame God any way you can.

To say that the biblegod was right when biblegod was wrong is to destroy the meaning of words.

I have never said nor implied that God was immoral for not intervening in wars. But now that you mention it ...

I am not up for debating this with you, as we have done this before, I just want to show in this thread that the statements you make are inaccurate and do not tell both sides. The Bible teaches very good morals, but you overlook this and concentrate on anything to say that God's morals are bad. God has set the rules and man cannot set the rules for God.

You didn't address any statements I made, so I have no idea what you think you are talking about when you say you wanted to "show in this thread that the statements you make are inaccurate and do not tell both sides."

God used men's ways which were accepted at that time.

Oh goody. The eternal God used the ways of sinful men, and even instituted them in his eternal law. You might want to reflect on that a bit.

We might have moved on in someways from that bygone age,

That's exactly right! And that's why the laws taught in the Bible are now recognized as barbaric and immoral.

but the killing by men in wars taking place around the world is still going on. This is just as horrific as any of the killings recorded in the OT. But you don't say that man is wrong.

OF COURSE I SAY THAT MAN IS WRONG! Where in the world did you get that false notion? You really need to be more careful when "quoting" me. You constantly make false assertions about what I have said and believe.

God used people as his instruments of punishment and used their own methods at times. You should be campaigning to stop men fighting instead of saying the Biblel does not teach good morals. The fact is, much of the moral teaching of society which is acceptable has come from the teaching in the Bible. Where is the moral teaching in the nations around the world in which all manner of attrocities are taking place?

I am campaigning for people to stop wars. A big part of that campaign is to help free them think for themselves and to get free from false religious dogmas like Christianity and Islam which are the primary source of suffering in the world (along with greed and the lust for power, etc.).

Just consider for a moment that God saved all the just and righteous people and only killed the wicked. Does man do that?

The children were not wicked. That's the flaw in your argument.

[David M]

The only thing the flood taught those children who were killed by their creator was that it is a horror to be created by a being like him.

It did not teach anything to the people who died; they were dead. The lessons apply to those who are alive and reading about this, but in your case I appreciate you do not see things the same way as I do

It's not "my" legislative system." I didn't invent it. But it is much better than the primitive systems set up by the Bible and the Taliban.

You can say what you like because you can never prove it one way or another.

It sounds like you want a universal capital punishment for everyone convicted of murder because they could possibly escape from prison. What about all the people wrongly convicted? Kill them anyway? You don't care about them?

I could say that I wish none to perish as God says, but God knows that many will and knows the reason why , which you do not want to accept so just make unreasonable statements.

And how are we supposed to discern between the "reprobates" that deserve death and the people that would repent?

God has already given us examples of reprobates such as the Canaanite. I should not have to tell you this.

And God did not follow his own law. He let the murderer David keep his job and the woman stole after he murdered her husband. Your call for "justice" rings hollow.

It is pathetic you keep spouting the same lines. I have discussed this and if it were not for the fact that you paint the completely opposite picture all the time , I would not bother to reply. As stated in anoher post, I shalll just add NOT TRUE to your statements and leave it at that, Others must examine what you say and make up their own mind.

You think that all the women and children that God commanded to be murdered were "reprobates" who deserved it? I would never want my heart hardened to where I could say such things as you.

They belonged to a repbrobate society that would not change. The punishment was on that society. Blame the parents who would have corrupted the children to believe in the same false gods and committ the same evil acts.

God did not reveal his laws to those people. And many of them were just little kids! You know, the kind that you bounce on your knees and make giggle. God commanded them to be butchered. How you could call that good is beyond all comprehension.

Those people knew about the God of the Israelites and turned their backs to him, in much the same way as you have done.

The Ten Commandments were not given to "man." They were given specifically to the tribes of Israel and Israel alone. The Bible is explicit on this point.

Deuteronomy 4:8 And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day?

Exodus 31:13 Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you. 14 Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.

The Fourth Commandment was given as a sign that God was the God of Israel. It was not given to any other nation. It is part of the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments were not given to any other nation.

Now you are being pernickety. God's instruction are for man's general good. The Ten commandments or now the two great commandments have come to us in the form of our Bible. It does not matter how they came; we have them. Israel were custodians and should have been good examples, but they also showed their human weakness. Moses was still a man and he was given the two tablets on which the commandments were written.

To say that the biblegod was right when biblegod was wrong is to destroy the meaning of words.

Rhetoric

I have never said nor implied that God was immoral for not intervening in wars. But now that you mention it ...

You would have sooner or later, I just made it sooner for you.

You didn't address any statements I made, so I have no idea what you think you are talking about when you say you wanted to "show in this thread that the statements you make are inaccurate and do not tell both sides."

This is your approach; you make statements about things you don't believe in the Bible, and you never give an alternative. It is the same old story, you claim this is what the Bible says even after you have been given an alternative explanation. You are still sticking to what you believed. Deny it all you want, it is what others are telling you as well.

Oh goody. The eternal God used the ways of sinful men, and even instituted them in his eternal law. You might want to reflect on that a bit.

God used the Israelites to be the instrument of punishment. It was no different to what the other nations would have done to Israel. It just goes to show the culture of that day. Tanks and missiles had not been invented otherwise God could have instructed the Israelites to use those weapons. The end result would have been the same.

That's exactly right! And that's why the laws taught in the Bible are now recognized as barbaric and immoral.

Not all the laws which is why I have to disagree with sweeping statements such as this. Your generalizations when making these assertions are getting tedious once again.

OF COURSE I SAY THAT MAN IS WRONG! Where in the world did you get that false notion? You really need to be more careful when "quoting" me. You constantly make false assertions about what I have said and believe.

You seem to be on the side of the Canaanites than admitting God was just in punishing the Canaaites even if you don't agree with the method. You do not see that God is just when he applies his law and you will argue that God is not just when He shows mercy as in the case of King David. I have already dealt with this and so I am not going there again.

I am campaigning for people to stop wars. A big part of that campaign is to help free them think for themselves and to get free from false religious dogmas like Christianity and Islam which are the primary source of suffering in the world (along with greed and the lust for power, etc.).

I don't see this as direct campaigning to stop wars. It is true a lot of bad things have been done in the name of the religion and including the Christian religion, but these were people by definition of what a Christian is, were never true Christians.

The children were not wicked. That's the flaw in your argument.

Yes but given a few years and they would have done exactly what the parents did, so the children would have become wicked and and if the parents were killed and not their offspring, that creates another human problem of babies without mothers to feed them. We have been here before. You did not agree that God save the righteous which just goes to show by not saying you agree on that point, you are deliberately painting God out to be worse than you are already doing. I have not heard you or Rose say one good thing about God and there is an abundance of
scriptures that show the goodness of God. All you want to do it pick out the negatives that help you jusitfy you reason for bashing God or the god of the Bible; we know we are talking about the same God, not an invented god by man.

I cannot say that this has been good chatting. I hate having to respond in ways that you force me to.

Anyhow, all the best. I shall continue in the other threads and hope the tone of the conversation is less adversarial.

David