Is genocide ok if God tells you to do it?

[Caladan]

I am not trying to speak for the Jews. I am telling you what the Jewish tradition says.

[certain] traditions, are just that, tradition. many of us dont have a traditional element in our lives.

Amalek is seen as the enemy of the Jewish people and the enemy of morality.

In a way its a literary device, void of realistic content.

The Jewish people in the Tanakh were ordered to completely destroy Amalek.

I am not a literalist on scriptural matters. in academic circles, many of the Biblical stories of conquests and wiping out the enemy are ideological devices and stories, without archaeological evidences to support an actual event, and with the proper historical content to realize we are dealing with ideology rather than actual history.

I realize that most Israelis today and most Jews today would not agree with what I am saying.

Its not just that, any normal thinking person today does not have this mindset. modern militaries in the developed world today need to be conscious of ROE and the Geneva conventions, given that the reality on the ground may create difficulties and grey areas. but that is not a breach into committing genocide or treat the life of non combatants in such arbitrariness.

 

[Autodidact]

I see. My point, though, is that any soldier that were to fire on the civilians in attempt to kill the enemy soldier would not be immoral for doing so.

Which has nothing to do with the Biblical commandments to commit genocide and infanticide.

My point earlier was that the Bible doesn't speak of genocide, but of war.

Define genocide.

What would you call a commandment to kill everyone, man, woman, boy, girl and infant? I'd call it genocide.

Yes, Amalek is the only example where genocide is commanded. I suppose there's no way to explain the logic behind that to someone who doesn't believe in Judaism.

Great quote. I should save it. I'm so glad I'm not a believing Jew anymore, so I don't have to accept genocide. Oh, and it's not the only example. Read the verses.

So what you're saying is that to a believing Jews, the most morally evil acts imaginable are moral?

I love religion, don't you? With religion, evil becomes good, and that's O.K.

 

[Autodidact]

I see. My point, though, is that any soldier that were to fire on the civilians in attempt to kill the enemy soldier would not be immoral for doing so.



My point earlier was that the Bible doesn't speak of genocide, but of war.


Yes, Amalek is the only example where genocide is commanded. I suppose there's no way to explain the logic behind that to someone who doesn't believe in Judaism.



That was only in the case of Amalek. Outside of that, life should have been spared where possible.

1. You're wrong. There are several such commandments and histories; I cited just a few. In fact, it's a major theme of the Tanakh.
2. O.K., let's take the Amalekites as an example. If you were one of those soldiers, would it be moral for you to slice a baby in half with your sword?

 

[Autodidact]

I am not trying to speak for the Jews. I am telling you what the Jewish tradition says. Amalek is seen as the enemy of the Jewish people and the enemy of morality. The Jewish people in the Tanakh were ordered to completely destroy Amalek.

And, according to you, that's moral, right? Killing your enemies' babies is moral. That's a really horrible morality you've got.

I realize that most Israelis today and most Jews today would not agree with what I am saying.

I hope not.

Forget who agrees with you, try to explain to me why killing the newborn baby of your enemy is moral.

How do you tell good people from bad people?

 

[Autodidact]

So, knight, is it only Jews who get to commit genocide against their enemies, or does that morality apply to everyone equally?

 

[Perfect Circle]

My point earlier was that the Bible doesn't speak of genocide, but of war.

Yes, Amalek is the only example where genocide is commanded. I suppose there's no way to explain the logic behind that to someone who doesn't believe in Judaism.

That was only in the case of Amalek. Outside of that, life should have been spared where possible.

Well, obviously it does speak of genocide.... which you admit in your post. And, as far as I understand it, Amalek is not the only exception. I thought it was pretty much the entire region of Canaan...

"So Joshua smote all the country of the hills, and of the south, and of the vale, and of the springs, and all their kings: he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the LORD God of Israel commanded. And Joshua smote them from Kadesh-barnea even unto Gaza, and all the country of Goshen, even unto Gibeon." Joshua 10:40-41

 

[Autodidact]

My point earlier was that the Bible doesn't speak of genocide, but of war.


Yes, Amalek is the only example where genocide is commanded. I suppose there's no way to explain the logic behind that to someone who doesn't believe in Judaism.

1. You do see that these two sentences in the same post contradict each other, right?

That was only in the case of Amalek. Outside of that, life should have been spared where possible.

2. You asked me to cite the verses. I spent my valuable time digging up just a few of them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1 Samuel 15
3'Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him; but put to death both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.'"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Numbers 31
Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man..

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deuteronomy 2
And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezekiel 9
Slaughter old men, young men and maidens, women and children, but do not touch anyone who has the mark. Begin at my sanctuary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua 6
"And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ***, with the edge of the sword."

I think that's kind of rude and inconsiderate. Also less than honest. It's not only the Amalekites, as I have taken by good time to show you.

Now that you've been forced to admit the truth, would you please grapple with the actual moral issue? Is it moral to commit genocide when God supposedly commands you to?

 

[Mr Cheese]

Originally Posted by 1 Samuel 15
3'Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him; but put to death both ox and sheep, camel and donkey.'"

Who cares about women and children...

the simple fact God wanted to kill donkeys is reprehensible!

Although killing camels is ok in my book

what about the tool song?
It seems reasonable...maybe God wanted the Jews to eat babies, we all know that Jews eat babies

And the angel of the Lord came unto me,
snatching me up from my
place of slumber,
and took me on high,
and higher still until we
moved in the spaces betwixt the air itself.
and he bore me unto a
vast farmland of our own midwest,
and as we descended cries of
impending doom rose from the soil.
one thousand, nay, a million
voices full of fear.
and terror possessed me then.
and I begged,

"Angel of the Lord, what are these tortured screams?"
And the angel said unto me,
"These are the cries of the carrots,
the cries of the carrots.
You see, reverend Maynard, tomorrow is harvest day
and to them it is the holocaust."
And I sprang from my slumber drenched in sweat
like the tears of one millions terrified brothers
and roared,
"Hear me now,
I have seen the light,
they have a consciousness,
they have a life,
they have a soul.
damn you!
let the rabbits wear glasses,
save our brothers...can I get an amen?
can I get a hallelujah? thank you, Jesus.

life feeds on life feeds on life feeds on life feeds on...
this is necessary

 

[Perfect Circle]

Who cares about women and children...

the simple fact God wanted to kill donkeys is reprehensible!

Although killing camels is ok in my book

what about the tool song?
It seems reasonable...maybe God wanted the Jews to eat babies, we all know that Jews eat babies

And the angel of the Lord came unto me,
snatching me up from my
place of slumber,
and took me on high,
and higher still until we
moved in the spaces betwixt the air itself.
and he bore me unto a
vast farmland of our own midwest,
and as we descended cries of
impending doom rose from the soil.
one thousand, nay, a million
voices full of fear.
and terror possessed me then.
and I begged,

"Angel of the Lord, what are these tortured screams?"
And the angel said unto me,
"These are the cries of the carrots,
the cries of the carrots.
You see, reverend Maynard, tomorrow is harvest day
and to them it is the holocaust."
And I sprang from my slumber drenched in sweat
like the tears of one millions terrified brothers
and roared,
"Hear me now,
I have seen the light,
they have a consciousness,
they have a life,
they have a soul.
damn you!
let the rabbits wear glasses,
save our brothers...can I get an amen?
can I get a hallelujah? thank you, Jesus.

life feeds on life feeds on life feeds on life feeds on...
this is necessary

Disgustipated... good song.

 

[TheKnight]

I am not a literalist on scriptural matters. in academic circles, many of the Biblical stories of conquests and wiping out the enemy are ideological devices and stories, without archaeological evidences to support an actual event, and with the proper historical content to realize we are dealing with ideology rather than actual history.

There is an ideological aspect to it. Amalek is representative of moral evil and many see the command to annihilate Amalek as the command to fight against moral evil when possible.

Which has nothing to do with the Biblical commandments to commit genocide and infanticide.

There is no commandment to commit genocide. There are specific instances where the Israelites were commanded to wipe out certain peoples.

So what you're saying is that to a believing Jews, the most morally evil acts imaginable are moral?

Is it moral to commit genocide when God supposedly commands you to?

Genocide is not moral.

We must realize that there are exceptions to every rule. That means that for almost every single law in the Torah, the formula could be something like "Don't do/Do X unless Y."

In the case of the commandment of not murdering, there are also exceptions.

Do not murder unless...*insert exceptions here*.

What the Torah teaches us here is that there will be times when we will have to fight war. We live in a world of good and evil and if we are trying to make the world entirely good it will mean that we will have to get rid of evil. Unfortunately, evil doesn't just go away peacefully, so that means there will be times when we must fight against evil.

It appears as if the Torah had commanded the Israelites to commit genocide. It's a horrendous and terrible thing to read. It bothers us and we simply cannot accept it as OK. And we shouldn't. Yes, there are times where we may have to take lives, does that mean that we should feel good about it? Should we ever be happy that a human life, a life created in the image of God, was taken? No. I would hope that we would always feel bad and always be sickened by the idea of taking human life.

That doesn't mean, however, that we should be afraid to do it.

Is it moral to commit genocide? Moral, as I see it, means positive. Genocide is not positive. Is it immoral to commit genocide then? Yes.

If God tells us that we must irradicate something, and therefore commit genocide should we do it? Yes. Does that mean that we should feel good about it and morally OK? No.

 

[Autodidact]

There is an ideological aspect to it. Amalek is representative of moral evil and many see the command to annihilate Amalek as the command to fight against moral evil when possible.

So the way to fight evil is to do evil?

There is no commandment to commit genocide. There are specific instances where the Israelites were commanded to wipe out certain peoples.

Right. Specific commandments to commit specific genocides against specific peoples. Lots of them.

Genocide is not moral.

Interesting. So God gives immoral commandments?

We must realize that there are exceptions to every rule. That means that for almost every single law in the Torah, the formula could be something like "Don't do/Do X unless Y."

But these were not exceptions to rules. They were commandments. In fact, God got quite angry at the Jews for failing to accomplish a total genocide, and sent them back to finish the job. (They forgot the babies.)

In the case of the commandment of not murdering, there are also exceptions.

Do not murder unless...*insert exceptions here*.

Right. Do not murder unless I tell you to. Then it's good.

What the Torah teaches us here is that there will be times when we will have to fight war. We live in a world of good and evil and if we are trying to make the world entirely good it will mean that we will have to get rid of evil. Unfortunately, evil doesn't just go away peacefully, so that means there will be times when we must fight against evil.

We're not talking about war. We're talking about genocide.

It appears as if the Torah had commanded the Israelites to commit genocide.

Yup, it sure does. How do you justify that?

It's a horrendous and terrible thing to read. It bothers us and we simply cannot accept it as OK.

NOt if we're decent human beings. Hitler was probably fine with it.

And we shouldn't. Yes, there are times where we may have to take lives, does that mean that we should feel good about it? Should we ever be happy that a human life, a life created in the image of God, was taken? No. I would hope that we would always feel bad and always be sickened by the idea of taking human life.

We should follow God's commandment, but feel guilty for doing it? It's wrong to follow God's commandments? Or right? I'm confused. Why would God command us to do evil? Aren't genocide and infanticide evil?

That doesn't mean, however, that we should be afraid to do it.

We shouldn't be afraid to do evil? Like say, Osama Bin Laden?

Is it moral to commit genocide? Moral, as I see it, means positive. Genocide is not positive. Is it immoral to commit genocide then? Yes.

So God commands us to be immoral? Doesn't that make God immoral, and following His commandments also immoral?

If God tells us that we must irradicate something, and therefore commit genocide should we do it? Yes. Does that mean that we should feel good about it and morally OK? No.

Right. We have to do evil, if God commands it. Did I mention that your religion is evil?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

There is no commandment to commit genocide. There are specific instances where the Israelites were commanded to wipe out certain peoples.

Wiping out a people is genocide.

We must realize that there are exceptions to every rule. That means that for almost every single law in the Torah, the formula could be something like "Don't do/Do X unless Y."

In the case of the commandment of not murdering, there are also exceptions.

Do not murder unless...*insert exceptions here*.

No, there aren't. Murder isn't just any killing; it's unlawful killing. The idea that the law might permit unlawful killing is self-contradictory. It's either lawful or it's not.

If God tells us that we must irradicate something, and therefore commit genocide should we do it? Yes. Does that mean that we should feel good about it and morally OK? No.

Why should you feel bad about following the will and commandments of God?

 

[TheKnight]

So the way to fight evil is to do evil?

It's not evil to irradicate. Tell me, if a cop sees a man molesting a child and then shoots the man in order to save the child, has the cop done evil?

Interesting. So God gives immoral commandments?

No. The morality of an action depends on the situation in which it is preformed. For instance, if I take a knife and cut my sister, then I have done something wrong. However, if a doctor takes a knife and cuts a person open in an act of surgery, then he has done something good.

Genocide, for no reason other then disdain for the people being murdered is wrong, always. However, war to irradicate evil from the planet is not immoral. It's not comfortable, but it's necessary.

But these were not exceptions to rules. They were commandments. In fact, God got quite angry at the Jews for failing to accomplish a total genocide, and sent them back to finish the job. (They forgot the babies.)

They were exceptions to the rule of not murdering. We are commanded to eliminate evil, they eliminated evil.

We're not talking about war. We're talking about genocide.

You call it genocide, I call it war. Fact is, people die in war. It's never OK. You simply draw the line in one place, I draw it in another.

Yup, it sure does. How do you justify that?

Um, God told them to eliminate evil and they did. Was it a good thing? Is the death of a human being ever a good thing?

We should follow God's commandment, but feel guilty for doing it? It's wrong to follow God's commandments? Or right? I'm confused. Why would God command us to do evil? Aren't genocide and infanticide evil?

Evil is a relative term. God, as the definer of good (and therefore the definer of evil) determines when something is evil and when something is not.

Is it evil to eliminate evil? No. Should you feel good about doing it when it means the loss of human life? Definitely not.

We shouldn't be afraid to do evil? Like say, Osama Bin Laden?

We shouldn't be afraid to take action when that action is necessary. We may not like having to kill someone, but if it is necessary that we do, then we should do so.

So God commands us to be immoral? Doesn't that make God immoral, and following His commandments also immoral?

Moral is defined by God. An action is only moral or immoral in certain context in which the action is preformed. You are seeing genocide, I am seeing war. So long as we disagree on what moral and immoral are, there will be no resolution to this argument.

Right. We have to do evil, if God commands it. Did I mention that your religion is evil?

We have to take whatever measures are necessary to eliminate evil. We should always attempt to take the peaceful route, but that's not always an option.

 

[TheKnight]

Wiping out a people is genocide.

Or it's war depending on the context in which it is done.

No, there aren't. Murder isn't just any killing; it's unlawful killing. The idea that the law might permit unlawful killing is self-contradictory. It's either lawful or it's not.

OK. If you wish to differentiate between murder and killing, fine. I see it more as "Do not take life, unless life needs to be taken."

Why should you feel bad about following the will and commandments of God?

We should feel bad about the loss of human life, not about following the will of God. If the will of God means the loss of human life, then that means we should mourn the loss and yet obey what God tells us to do. The two, the loss of life and the will of God are two separate things.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Or it's war depending on the context in which it is done.

You shame Judaism. It's despicable.

 

[Autodidact]

It's not evil to irradicate. Tell me, if a cop sees a man molesting a child and then shoots the man in order to save the child, has the cop done evil?

I don't know, now can we get back to the topic of genocide and infanticide? In the Torah, the cop is shooting the child. More specifically, God commands the cop to shoot the child. Is it moral for him to do so?

No. The morality of an action depends on the situation in which it is preformed. For instance, if I take a knife and cut my sister, then I have done something wrong. However, if a doctor takes a knife and cuts a person open in an act of surgery, then he has done something good.

O.K., so in certain situations genocide is moral? What might those be?

Genocide, for no reason other then disdain for the people being murdered is wrong, always. However, war to irradicate evil from the planet is not immoral. It's not comfortable, but it's necessary.

So it's moral to stab babies to death with swords as a way to eradicate evil?

They were exceptions to the rule of not murdering. We are commanded to eliminate evil, they eliminated evil.

Some babies are evil?

You call it genocide, I call it war. Fact is, people die in war. It's never OK. You simply draw the line in one place, I draw it in another.

You called it genocide. Back-pedaling now?

Um, God told them to eliminate evil and they did. Was it a good thing? Is the death of a human being ever a good thing?

I don't know, now can we talk about genocide and infanticide, the topic of this thread?

Evil is a relative term. God, as the definer of good (and therefore the definer of evil) determines when something is evil and when something is not.

I see. So genocide is evil, except when God commands it, then it's good? So in your moral system sometimes genocide is good? Did I mention how evil your moral system is?

Is it evil to eliminate evil? No. Should you feel good about doing it when it means the loss of human life? Definitely not.

We're not talking about feelings here, we're talking about a pile of babies bleeding to death. Was it moral or immoral for the Israelite soldiers to stab them and leave them to die?

We shouldn't be afraid to take action when that action is necessary. We may not like having to kill someone, but if it is necessary that we do, then we should do so.

Including babies, right?

Moral is defined by God. An action is only moral or immoral in certain context in which the action is preformed. You are seeing genocide, I am seeing war. So long as we disagree on what moral and immoral are, there will be no resolution to this argument.

Do you want me to quote your post admitting that it's genocide? Do we have to go through it again? Do I have to cite the verses again? What do you call killing every human being of another tribe, man, woman, boy and girl? It's tedious when we establish something, hoping to move on, then you backtrack and we have to do it all over again. It's also dishonest. But then, to someone who thinks stabbing babies to death is moral, a little lie isn't a problem.

We have to take whatever measures are necessary to eliminate evil. We should always attempt to take the peaceful route, but that's not always an option.

So you're saying the Israelites had no other option but to kill those babies? Remember, they had already won the war.

 

[Autodidact]

Or it's war depending on the context in which it is done.

What context makes killing an entire people, including their little babies, war as opposed to genocide? Is it genocide when the other side does it to you, but war when we do it to them? If the Amalekites had killed the Israelite babies, would that have been genocide? What about if their God commanded it?

OK. If you wish to differentiate between murder and killing, fine. I see it more as "Do not take life, unless life needs to be taken."

Well the Tanakh does, so you might want to. The commandment is not to murder. Obviously, as you maintain, killing is permissible, as long as God authorizes it. For example, killing a Jew who picks up sticks on Saturday is permissible, no, commanded.

We should feel bad about the loss of human life, not about following the will of God. If the will of God means the loss of human life, then that means we should mourn the loss and yet obey what God tells us to do. The two, the loss of life and the will of God are two separate things.

so when God commands infanticide, is it moral or immoral to follow His commandment?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

What context makes killing an entire people, including their little babies, war as opposed to genocide? ...

Do you have a point ... beyond vitriol that is?

 

[TheKnight]

I don't know, now can we get back to the topic of genocide and infanticide? In the Torah, the cop is shooting the child. More specifically, God commands the cop to shoot the child. Is it moral for him to do so?

If God tells him to, yes.

O.K., so in certain situations genocide is moral? What might those be?

When a person is commanded to do so by God Himself? As I said, morality is dependent on how God defines it.

You called it genocide. Back-pedaling now?

I never called it genocide. I said it appears as if it is genocide. That doesn't mean it is. You see it as genocide, I see it as war. Essentially, we are discussing a war situation.

In this situation people are going to die. That's how war works. You believe that a line should be drawn in war at women and children. I believe that one should not allow the presence of women and children to stop a person from doing what needs to be done.

You call my belief genocide, I call it war.

I don't know, now can we talk about genocide and infanticide, the topic of this thread?

We are talking about genocide/infanticide. My question had to do with whether or not the death of a human being is ever a good thing. Genocide, Infanticide, Homicide all have one common thread, the death of human beings. Therefore I ask my question again, is the death of a human being ever a good thing?

I see. So genocide is evil, except when God commands it, then it's good? So in your moral system sometimes genocide is good? Did I mention how evil your moral system is?

Again, you call it genocide, I call it war. This debate cannot reach a resolution so long as we disagree on what is moral. We can't discuss whether or not something is moral if we don't agree on what moral means.

We're not talking about feelings here, we're talking about a pile of babies bleeding to death. Was it moral or immoral for the Israelite soldiers to stab them and leave them to die?

That depends on the context of the situation in which the Israelite soldiers stabbed them and left them to die.

Including babies, right?

A human being is a human being. Whether it be an elderly person, a middle-aged adult, a teenager, a child, a baby, a fetus. The death of a human being is always an unfortunate thing. It's something that should never happen. Unfortunately, things don't always work like they should.

What do you call killing every human being of another tribe, man, woman, boy and girl?

War.

So you're saying the Israelites had no other option but to kill those babies?

I did not say that they had no other option but to kill those babies, I said We have to take whatever measures are necessary to eliminate evil. We should always attempt to take the peaceful route, but that's not always an option.

We could keep going around and around all day, but as I said above. Unless we agree on what morality is, we cannot have a discussion concerning the moral nature of any actions.

 

[TheKnight]

What context makes killing an entire people, including their little babies, war as opposed to genocide? Is it genocide when the other side does it to you, but war when we do it to them? If the Amalekites had killed the Israelite babies, would that have been genocide? What about if their God commanded it?

There's this thing called war in which two nations fight one another. One nation may choose to let the presence of women and children stop their actions. Or, one nation may choose to do whatever needs to be done to accomplish victory in that war.

You try to beautify war by creating terms in which you can feel that a war is OK. I see war for what it is, a disgusting loss of human life. Do I think we should fight war? We should avoid it at all costs. If it's necessary, should we be afraid of doing it? Not at all.