The Bible is a history book as well as a religious book. It covers earth history from before creation (eternity past) and continues on into the future beyond the destruction of the earth as we know it today (eternity future). It discusses the what, why's, how’s of life.. you know the questions we like to put in the too hard basket. Why are we here? Where are we going? What is the purpose of it all? If you look at individual stories like you did, of course you begin to wonder if the God who is meant to be behind it all is worth following. He sounds very violent and judgmental God commands Saul to kill all of the Amalekites including their live stock. Why did God destroy them? You need to read Exodus 17:8-15 and Dueteronomy 25:17 to understand these verses. Read what God says in Dueteronomy 25 especially to understand. "Remember what the Amalekites did to you along the way when you came out of Egypt? When you were weary and worn out, they met you on your journey and cut off all who were lagging behind. Because they had no fear of God. When the Lord your God gives you rest from all the enemies around you in the Land he is giving you to possess as an inheritance, you shall blot the memory of the Amaleks from under heaven. Do not forget." There are two things to remember here... 1. Israel was told to destroy the Amalekites, but hadn't the Amalekites already taken Israel when she was at her most vulnerable? 2. Whereas the killing of the Israelites was for no reason, the order by God to the Israelites to kill the Amalekites served two purposes. It destroyed an incredibly evil regime and it led to the enemies of the people of God again knowing the God of Israel, was the one true God who would accomplish His purposes on earth.

Victor the way this one has been explained to me is that Jesus was the formation of the 2nd Covenant, and by not accepting Jesus as the son of God and Messiah(promised in the OT)--Jews broke thier covenant with God and therefore were no longer God's chosen people. I got this from a Christian minister/pastor, when I asked the same question. From what I can gather some denominations believe this--and others do not.

Believer--those points make sense from the historical stand-point and following the lesson of "an eye for an eye." Unfortunately for those of us who are questioning/seeking--it contradicts the later lessons of "turn the other cheek". As I recall (I am obviously not a student of the Bible)--Jesus teaches about a loving benevolent father-like God. This is in such stark contrast to the angry, violent, and just plain mean God of the OT--that it is difficult to reconcile the 2--it almost makes God seem bi-polar.

So the babies and children were fair game. And it was ok anyway because had they comitted no sin they were going to heaven anyway?

Therefore on the same page, american troops kill some arabs - the americans children must die because their parents are part of what may be seen by arabs as an opressive regime.
By the teachings of the bible then, hitting the towers in NY would have perfectly justfied.

The God you speak of in example 2 is a god who appears to be a spoilt teenager who hasnt got its own way.
If you wish to lay your soul bare to a God whose son preached love and forgivness, yet the father kills at will because he/she/it is not being respected - then you're welcome. The god you describe is not all loving, but instead all selfish and petulant, ruling by fear and revenge.

You, along with fish, still have not answered the question posed. It appears that the idea of god endorsing the murder of babies is not something you wish to converse about.
That being the case, I dont think I need to continue trying to cut off the slithering. Quoting the bible instead of forming your own opinions is the prescribed response expected by now, I should have expected no less.

You can relax, I'll persue you no longer on this difficult matter.

Greetings Believer.
Greetings Fish.

Greetings heathens.

I seem to see a lot of contradictions on this board. I see plenty of non-Christians telling the Christians that they want to know why they believe what they believe, how they came to being "saved", etc....yet the second they do, they come under constant attack for their beliefs.

Contrary to popular beliefs, Christians are not running around trying to pound their beliefs in you. We want to live in a tolerant society, yet all I see intolerance.

I notice in these 13+ pages, the problem seems to boil down to one thing, and one thing only. How can a good and loving God allow bad things to happen. I see three problems here:

1. When you try to answer this, you presume to try to understand the ways of God. You are not God, and you will never be God. A child is not meant to understand why parents do what they do.

2. You are mixing your ideas (spoon fed to you by modern society)of a Santa Claus type god (lower case g on purpose)with the real Biblical God.

3. You are trying to self provide answers to questions that scholars have been asking for years. This is why Believer has said you have a child like knowledge of God. Not because he is trying to insult you, but because it's the truth. It's like a 5 year old trying to learn physics or calculus, before learning basic arithmatic.

I can see where alot of people would get that impression. Many Christians have wrestled with the duality of God in the Old and New Testaments. Remember though as a history book the Bible chronicles the Jewish history of the initial promise to Abraham, the fulfillment of that promise through settling the land, and the struggle to both settle and maintain the land.

If God was going to keep his promise to a struggling up and coming Israel, there would have to be battle. Why? Because the land that they once occupied was already settled by the other decendents of Abraham, and other tribes while they were in Egypt.

Unlike today where our belief in God is based on faith, the Israelites walked with God. As long as they trusted in him, and only him to guide them they were successful, when they took their eyes off of him they failed.

By Jesus' time Israel had already been conquered and reconquered several times. God had already warned them, that while he would still honor his covenant with them, and they would continue to be his chosen people, salvation would now come to non Jews as well. So while you're right about Christ being the second covenant, the Jewish people did not loose their status as God's Chosen. If they had God would be a liar, and God always keeps his promises.

God never "endorses" the murder of babies. Once again, you presume to know the ways of God. You won't get answers to this, because we do NOT presume to know his ways.

As harse as it sounds, sometimes, bad things need to happen, in order for the will of God to be fullfilled.

On a side note...we had to drop a bomb on Japan in order for the war to end, which resulted in many babies, elderly, etc to be killed....and yet, we don't endorse killing innocents. How dare us conduct our lives like this, yet question God when he does it?

You want my opinion I'll give it to you. As a father if someone hurts my kids and is in the process of hurting my kids, I would do whatever I had to, to get that to stop.

Israel then was in the same situation as Israel today. Fighting off warring neighbors, and constantly being forced to defend their land. God saw this, and knowing that if left alone the decendants of the Amalekites, Cannanites, Philistines... would come back to haunt Israel.

So having the people, who he made a promise to protect, go to war and finish it once and for all, instead of stretching it out over thousands of years of more bloodshed was the obvious answer.

Is this true? Don't know I'm not God. Is it my opinion based on the historical data, and the fact that Israel is still fighting the decendants of most of these people today? Yes.

Qbert, TWO bombs were dropped. Neither HAD to be dropped. the japanese war was over the moment their fleet was stumbled upon and decimated at Midway. Dropping the bomb was abhorrent and unnecessary. It was merely an example of flexing muscle. Sound familiar?

I did not say that God endorsed the murder of babies. I said, as you have quoted, "It appears the the IDEA of...." Who is presuming what? You presume that I am a heathen (as your first salutation), I presume that by that initial greeting that you are as intolerant as I apparently am.
You do not presume to know the ways of God, yet you say that God never "endorses" the murder of babies. So you DO know the ways of God then.

If you really think the war would have been over if the bombs were not dropped...then I fully understand how you have a child like view of the Bible.