Moses was a terrorist

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Either you have no grip on history, reality or (most likely) neither.

Terrorism is a violent means to a political end.
The direction from Moses to the pharoah was to let the children of Israel go, not to abdicate rule of Egypt to him or them.

The release of the Children of Israel was a political end. I don't think your objection is valid. I just don't think there's much point in attempting to apply modern standards to the ancient world.

Originally posted by DeepThought

The release of the Children of Israel was a political end. I don't think your objection is valid. I just don't think there's much point in attempting to apply modern standards to the ancient world.

Why did God want to free the Hebrews from Egyptian slavery?

1.) To keep His promise to Abraham to bring them out of bondage to bring them into Canaan to give it to them.

Genesis 15:13-16 including these words - "But I will judge that nation, whom they will serve, and afterwards they will come out with great possessions ... And in the fourth generation they will come here again, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete."

2.) To secure for Himself a peculiar people through whom He will bring a blessing to the all the families of the earth.

"And I will make you a great nation, And I will bless those who bless you [Abraham] And he who curses you I will curse; And in you all the families of the earth will be blessed." (Genesis 12:2-3)

3.) God wanted His the liberate Israel and bring them into a land in His process of recovering the entire earth back from Satan. He started with a plot of land upon which the most wicked of societies were living.

"And I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians and to bring them up out of that land to a good and spacious land, to the land flowing with milk and honey, to the place of the Canaanites and the Hittites and the Amorites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites ... So come now, and I will send you to Pharaoh, that you may bring the children of Israel out of Egypt." (Exodus 3:8,10)

4.) He brought them out to bring them to the mountain of God (3:1) - Mt. Horeb, to enjoy a feast unto their God and to serve God.

"And He said, Surely I will be with you, and this shall be the sign for you that I have sent you: When you have brought the people out of Egypt, you will serve God upon this mountain." (Exodus 3:12)

"And afterwards Moses and Aaron came and said to Pharaoh, Thus says Jehovah the God of Israel, Let My people go that they may hold a feast to Me in the wilderness." (5:1)

5a.) He delivered them to obtain a chosen people as a personal treasure to Himself.

" For you are a holy people to Jehovah your God; it is you whom Jehovah your God has chosen from among all the people which are upon the face of the earth to be a people for His personal treasure." (Deut. 7:6)

5b.) To set His affection upon a people above all others on the earth.

"Behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens belong to Jehovah your God, the earth and all that is in it. But on your fathers Jehovah set His affection to love them and to choose their seed after them, that is, you above all the peoples, as it is this day." (Deut. 10:14,15)

5c.) To gain a consectated and holy people chosen above all other peoples on earth.

"For you are a holy people to Jehovah your God, and Jehovah has chosen you to be a people for His personal treasure, from among all the peoples which are upon the face of the earth." (Deut. 14:1,2)

6.) He delivered them to let all the earth would admire the wisdom of their genuine and unique theocracy.

"See, I have taught you statues and judgments, as Jehovah my God commanded me, so that you would do them within the land which you are going in to possess. Keep and do them therefore; for this will be your wisdom and prudence in the sight of the peoples who hear all these statutes and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and prudent people.

For what great nation is there that has a god so near to is as Jehovah our God is whenever we call upon Him? And what great nation is there that has statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law which I am setting before you today?" (Deut. 4:5-8)

7.) He brought them out to give them the revelation of His tabernacle in which God would dwell in a tent on the earth in the midst of a genuine and unique theocratic nation.

I think almost half of the book of Exodus involves the instructions God gave Moses about the priesthood, the furnishings and matters pertaining to the tabernacle (chapters 25- 40).

Originally posted by twhitehead
Correctly used, a "Terrorist" is anyone whose actions are intended primarily to cause terror (fear). Many Muslim suicide bombers do fit this description because their aim is not primarily to kill 'the enemy' but rather to strike fear into those who hear about the event.
Some freedom fighters may also fit this description.

I think the real question is ...[text shortened]... f your own nationality/religion/race/culture worth more than a member of some other nationality?

"Correctly used", haha. TW, you crack me up. 🙂

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Either you have no grip on history, reality or (most likely) neither.

Terrorism is a violent means to a political end.
The direction from Moses to the pharoah was to let the children of Israel go, not to abdicate rule of Egypt to him or them.

"Terrorism is a violent means to a political end."
that would render any soldier, anywhere, a terrorist.

is a soldier using artillery to bomb military targets a terrorist? he is working towards a political end through violence so by your definition he is a terrorist.


"The direction from Moses to the pharoah was to let the children of Israel go, not to abdicate rule of Egypt to him or them"
and then he proceeded to attack egyptian civilian infrastructure, to harm civilians indiscriminately. that's terrorism.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi

erased.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
"Terrorism is a violent means to a political end."
that would render any soldier, anywhere, a terrorist.

is a soldier using artillery to bomb military targets a terrorist? he is working towards a political end through violence so by your definition he is a terrorist.


"The direction from Moses to the pharoah was to [i]let the children of Israel go[ ...[text shortened]... o attack egyptian civilian infrastructure, to harm civilians indiscriminately. that's terrorism.

OK, since no one seems to want to take your initial questions on, I'll do it.

Moses was different than a terrorist in the sense that he announced his attacks before they happened, knowing that they could not be stopped.

Moses was different than a terrorist in the sense that he had access to a superior source of power. Terrorism tends to be the resort of a group that cannot win a straight up battle of pure brawn.

I find Bale's comparison to be strained [to put it mildly] and a typical example of an actor thinking his opinion is more important than it actually is, just because he has played a role in a movie about the subject.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
OK, since no one seems to want to take your initial questions on, I'll do it.

Moses was different than a terrorist in the sense that he announced his attacks before they happened, knowing that they could not be stopped.

Moses was different than a terrorist in the sense that he had access to a superior source of power. Terrorism tends to be the r ...[text shortened]... e important than it actually is, just because he has played a role in a movie about the subject.

just because he announced his targets doesn't mean he was less of a terrorist.

he still attacked civilian infrastructure targets, he still caused harm to civilians and his warnings did not give enough time to civilians to protect themselves against it.

he only gave warning so that everybody know he is causing them.

"Terrorism tends to be the resort of a group that cannot win a straight up battle of pure brawn."
hardly. terrorism is the act of instilling fear in the enemy. of breaking their will to fight. the bombing of hiroshima was an act of terrorism. bombings of civilian targets in WWII were acts of terrorism. one doesn't have to be a guerrilla group to do acts of terrorism. this is a common misunderstanding because terrorist organisations can ONLY do acts of terrorism so it is believe terrorism is exclusive to them.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
this is a common misunderstanding because terrorist organisations can ONLY do acts of terrorism so it is believe terrorism is exclusive to them.

Now we have to ask: what is a 'terrorist organisation'? Do any such organisations exist that can ONLY do acts of terrorism?
The organizations typically labelled 'terrorist organisations' today often have many other strategies that they use other than acts of terrorism to achieve their goals.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Now we have to ask: what is a 'terrorist organisation'? Do any such organisations exist that can ONLY do acts of terrorism?
The organizations typically labelled 'terrorist organisations' today often have many other strategies that they use other than acts of terrorism to achieve their goals.

true, many do have recruitment actions, propaganda, disinformation, fund raising, etc.


i was talking about the bellicose aspect of such an organization. a terrorist organisation can hardly conduct an invasion/air strike/etc. was attempting to find a reason behind his idea that regular armies cannot conduct terrorist actions (i claim that they totally can).

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
just because he announced his targets doesn't mean he was less of a terrorist.

he still attacked civilian infrastructure targets, he still caused harm to civilians and his warnings did not give enough time to civilians to protect themselves against it.

he only gave warning so that everybody know he is causing them.

"Terrorism tends to be the res ...[text shortened]... ist organisations can ONLY do acts of terrorism so it is believe terrorism is exclusive to them.

In your mind, are all military organizations 'terrorist'?

Was the US was in Iraq an act of terrorism?

If 'no', then what differentiates these organizations and their actions from terrorist ones?

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
OK, since no one seems to want to take your initial questions on, I'll do it.

Moses was different than a terrorist in the sense that he announced his attacks before they happened, knowing that they could not be stopped.

Moses was different than a terrorist in the sense that he had access to a superior source of power. Terrorism tends to be the r ...[text shortened]... e important than it actually is, just because he has played a role in a movie about the subject.

It belongs on the Political Forum if there is one, I think.

Aside from Zahlanzi's sensational announcement from the house tops "Moses was a terrorist" most other discussion is morphing into military talk and politics.

Any "Spirituality" of the matter of the Exodus book is irrelevant apparently to the thread's purpose.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
In your mind, are all military organizations 'terrorist'?

Was the US was in Iraq an act of terrorism?

If 'no', then what differentiates these organizations and their actions from terrorist ones?

"In your mind, are all military organizations 'terrorist'?"
no. they can however engage in terrorist activities.

"Was the US was in Iraq an act of terrorism?"
in its entirety? no. it was just an unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation. that's not in itself terrorism. if they attacked military targets, if they used conventional weapons, if they treated prisoners of war according to the geneva convention, it wasn't terrorism.


guantanamo bay however is, in its existence, an act of terrorism. drone strikes that constantly hit civilian targets and nations with which the US is not at warr are acts of terrorism. assasinations, coup d'etats, those are acts of terrorism.

Originally posted by sonship
It belongs on the Political Forum if there is one, I think.

Aside from Zahlanzi's sensational announcement from the house tops [b]"Moses was a terrorist" most other discussion is morphing into military talk and politics.

Any "Spirituality" of the matter of the Exodus book is irrelevant apparently to the thread's purpose.[/b]

It's a myth that such issues are solely 'political', or 'spiritual'. They are both of those things, and more.

Failure to recognize this has prevented progress in resolving conflicts of this sort.

The West tends to forget what it has done to agitate Middle Eastern peoples by constantly intervening in their affairs.

Originally posted by sonship
It belongs on the Political Forum if there is one, I think.

Aside from Zahlanzi's sensational announcement from the house tops [b]"Moses was a terrorist" most other discussion is morphing into military talk and politics.

Any "Spirituality" of the matter of the Exodus book is irrelevant apparently to the thread's purpose.[/b]

i actually agree. it is not a spiritual topic and it should have been posted in debates.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
"In your mind, are all military organizations 'terrorist'?"
no. they can however engage in terrorist activities.

"Was the US was in Iraq an act of terrorism?"
in its entirety? no. it was just an unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation. that's not in itself terrorism. if they attacked military targets, if they used conventional weapons, if they treat ...[text shortened]... is not at warr are acts of terrorism. assasinations, coup d'etats, those are acts of terrorism.

I think terrorism is an integral component of a successful war. Even if a nation attacks only 'military targets' and treats prisoners according to the Geneva Convention, it still strikes terror into the heart of the citizens of that area.

That's why wars are won. The fear wins out over the ego and the desire to keep fighting. The horrors mount until one side cries 'Uncle'.

It seems to me that 'terrorism', as most people define it, is nothing more than a less-effective means of warfare done by a group of people who do not have a more effective means of warfare at their disposal.

Moses was certainly not in that category. He had a deity at his disposal, and his opponents had none.