Then I take it that the order to massacre civilians including women, children and animals is completely legitimate and in accordance with that the Bible and Christianity teaches?
the very area you quote says quite clearly the God does not change, regret or repent. 1 Samuel 15:29
Now I'm confused, the order was issued by god to Samuel pbuh to appoint Saul, i.e the appointment of Saul has nothing to d with Samuel pbuh in the first place, right? i.e if he didn't appoint Saul it would him(samuel) that is the disobedience one right? How do you explain that?
If you want the actions of the Old Testament to be defended, please ask someone from Judaism who is left to defend these texts. In Christianity they are but a historical reference, as the New Testament replaces and overturns many of the rules, covenants, and guidelines. Personally, I don't see why Christians get so upset about this.
In fact, I don't see why a Christian would be so inclined to defend the actions stated above, since they happened before the abolishment of the blood rite. And as Christianity began by this action, its existence suggests that they can not do so.
If you want the actions of the Old Testament to be defended, please ask someone from Judaism who is left to defend these texts. In Christianity they are but a historical reference, as the New Testament replaces and overturns many of the rules, covenants, and guidelines. Personally, I don't see why Christians get so upset about this.
In fact, I don't see why a Christian would be so inclined to defend the actions stated above, since they happened before the abolishment of the blood rite. And as Christianity began by this action, its existence suggests that they can not do so. See by the Light of Truth
Interesting, I guess the reason could be that Jesus pbuh made it clear that he did not come to replace or abolish the laws of previous prophets pbut. It is clear that he said something along the line that every single letter or dot (from previous scripture i.e from Moses pnuh etc) is to be obeyed.
Then I take it that the order to massacre civilians including women, children and animals is completely legitimate and in accordance with that the Bible and Christianity teaches?
In obedience to God? Certainly. Saul earned the displeasure of God by not sufficiently destroying the philistines. Just as Abraham was justified in sacrificing his son if God demanded it.
Now I'm confused, the order was issued by god to Samuel pbuh to appoint Saul, i.e the appointment of Saul has nothing to d with Samuel pbuh in the first place, right? i.e if he didn't appoint Saul it would him(samuel) that is the disobedience one right? How do you explain that?
Would you be disheartened if you knew your leader set himself up against God?
In obedience to God? Certainly. Saul earned the displeasure of God by not sufficiently destroying the philistines.
So I take it that, your understanding is, god did order Saul to commit genocide by killing men, women, children and animals?
Just as Abraham was justified in sacrificing his son if God demanded it.
And which son would that be, is it Isaac pbuh?
Would you be disheartened if you knew your leader set himself up against God?
Of course, but I would also keep in mind that God is Faultless and All Knowing therefore He would not contradict Himself by saying one thing here and another thing there in the same scripture..
So I take it that, your understanding is, god did order Saul to commit genocide by killing men, women, children and animals?
As I said, yes. That saul did not completely annhiliate the Amalekites is what earned God's disfavor. His sparing of the king and the best of the sheeps and cattle was disobedience.
As I said, yes. That saul did not completely annhiliate the Amalekites is what earned God's disfavor. His sparing of the king and the best of the sheeps and cattle was disobedience.
So according to you & the Bible, Saul did kill the women and children as he spared only the king and the best of sheep and cattle? And what abouth the other questions? Who was it that Abraham pbuh tried to sacrifice?
Yes. Did not God also drown the world except for Noah and his ark; what is wiping out a tribe in comparison?
Ahh, I geddit. The Jews, being the chosen people, can do whatever they want. SO I take this would mean that the present day Jews are doing god's work by killing, oppressing and chasing the Palestenians out of their homes and land?
Isaac
How could this be when the Bible says 'your first born'?. Ishmael pbuh is Abraham's pbuh first born son not Isaac pbuh..
"And, more importantly, how can something be "truly God" and "truly man," when "truly God" trumps "truly man" and what does that mean in terms of a redemptive sacrifice of one's own self, even if that self is just a lesser part? I cut off my arm as a sacrifice to myself in order to save you from my wrath? Is that the thrust here? Because I require a sacrifice in order to save you (a blood sacrifice, no less) and that sacrifice has to be "pure" in order for it to work in my mind, I therefore cut off my own arm (a "pure" arm) in order to satisfy my own requirments, therefore making the requirement larger than myself?"
Har har! The Romans really botched the whole Jesus mythology didn't they?
I respect Ahmed Deedat, he knows how to quote from the Bible but he lacks the understanding of how to interpret what he quotes…
The Bible is a spiritual Book (with several layers of understanding). To understand the Bible (especially the NT) requires spiritual revelation. The first spiritual revelation often results in a person being born again (from above). When this happens, God's Spirit is placed inside the person. He does the following for the person: guides, sanctifies, reveals spiritual (and other) truths. He also imparts spiritual gifts. Really powerful ones are imparted to those having the baptism with the Holy Spirit.
There is a word, in english, known as equivocation. It means to give something a new name in hopes to hide what it means. I could tell you dirty means clean, justice means theft, or that love means hate; none of these are true, however. The only antidote is to equivocation is authority- for words it is dictionaries, for science it is scholars, and for the Bible it is the Church.
In Islam, there is no central authority, however? Perhaps that is why it has had never-ending civil war and factionalism since the death of Muhammed.
There is a word, in english, known as equivocation. It means to give something a new name in hopes to hide what it means. I could tell you dirty means clean, justice means theft, or that love means hate; none of these are true, however. The only antidote is to equivocation is authority- for words it is dictionaries, for science it is scholars, and for the Bible it is the Church. In Islam, there is no central authority, however? Perhaps that is why it has had never-ending civil war and factionalism since the death of Muhammed.
In Islam the central authority is the Quran which is free from human interference
"And, more importantly, how can something be "truly God" and "truly man," when "truly God" trumps "truly man" and what does that mean in terms of a redemptive sacrifice of one's own self, even if that self is just a lesser part? I cut off my arm as a sacrifice to myself in order to save you from my wrath? Is that the thrust here? Because I require a sacrifice in order to save you (a blood sacrifice, no less) and that sacrifice has to be "pure" in order for it to work in my mind, I therefore cut off my own arm (a "pure" arm) in order to satisfy my own requirments, therefore making the requirement larger than myself?"
How can God be 'ONE' - what does that mean, is he sitting somewhere and we would recognise him as one person or is he everywhere and if he is what can that mean? How can this ONE person hear in the case of Islam the SAME prayers offered several times by millions of Muslims does he hear each prayer or does he pick one as a representative since the prayers are always the same?
The trouble with your arguments is that you are making your tiny mind the measure of all things and satisfying your need to find the Christian God unsatisfactory but without looking at your own faith with any kind of scepticism.
How can God be 'ONE' - what does that mean, is he sitting somewhere and we would recognise him as one person or is he everywhere and if he is what can that mean? How can this ONE person hear in the case of Islam the SAME prayers offered several times by millions of Muslims does he hear each prayer or does he pick one as a representative since the prayers are always the same?
God is One it doesn't mean God is small by just being One but rather God is a great One, The One that created everything. Mankind is a creation of God and God is not a person. God is greater than human beings and has the capacity to do all things. God can hear all prayers because God is the knower of all things and can see everything we do and hide. You are a Christian so you believe that God created the earth and everything else but you can't seem to comprehend how God can listen to prayers of all people?
When we say God is one we are saying there is no other God we worship or no human being we worship - we only worship God alone. God is not belittled or made small because He is One. God is the creator of all things and we worship our One creator.
How can God be 'ONE' - what does that mean, is he sitting somewhere and we would recognise him as one person or is he everywhere and if he is what can that mean? How can this ONE person hear in the case of Islam the SAME prayers offered several times by millions of Muslims does he hear each prayer or does he pick one as a representative since the prayers are always the same?
The trouble with your arguments is that you are making your tiny mind the measure of all things and satisfying your need to find the Christian God unsatisfactory but without looking at your own faith with any kind of scepticism.
"Say, "He is Allah , [who is] One, Allah , the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is born, Nor is there to Him any equivalent." (Qur'an, 112:1-4)
"And when Allah is mentioned alone, the hearts of those who do not believe in the Hereafter shrink with aversion, but when those [worshipped] other than Him are mentioned, immediately they rejoice." (Qur'an, 39:45)
"Say, "Look at all the signs in the Heavens and the Earth." All the proofs and all the warnings can never help people who decided to disbelieve." (Qur'an, 10:101)
"Say, [O Muhammad], "If there had been with Him [other] gods, as they say, then they [each] would have sought to the Owner of the Throne a way. Exalted is He and high above what they say by great sublimity. The seven heavens and the earth and whatever is in them exalt Him. And there is not a thing except that it exalts [ Allah ] by His praise, but you do not understand their [way of] exalting. Indeed, He is ever Forbearing and Forgiving."(Qur'an, 17:42-44)
"God has never begotten a son. Nor was there any other god beside Him. Otherwise, each god would have declared independence with his creations, and they would have competed with each other for dominance. GOD be glorified; far above their claims." (Qur'an, 23:91)
So, we can't imagine Him. He is not around us but upon His throne and the throne is upon Heaven. Please, take a look:
In Islam the central authority is the Quran which is free from human interference
A book cannot be self authoritative; it’s the representative of God that makes it the pillar of faith. In this case it's Mohammed who deems the Quran to be the word of God. So in order to determine the truth the origin of Mohammed’s inspiration should be examined.
Edited by CarlosTheJackal, 05 May 2011 - 05:16 AM.
