04 Jun 15
Originally posted by sonshipI'd say this story is a drastic illustration of the grotesque and arbitrary ~ and morally incoherent ~ notion of "justice" that lies at the very heart of ancient Hebrew mythology and Christian superstition.
The story is a drastic illustration of man's estimation falling far below the estimation of God.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
04 Jun 15
I. AMALEK—THE FLESH
FULL OF ENMITY AGAINST GOD
In the Old Testament no enemy is dealt with more thoroughly than Amalek, because Amalek is a type of the flesh, which is the last enemy against God’s kingdom. The flesh is what keeps the church from being built up adequately. As long as the flesh remains a problem, the kingdom cannot come. The kingdom comes in only after the flesh has been dealt with. For the sake of the church life, we need to deal with our flesh. If the flesh is not dealt with, there can be no kingdom of God. Then without the kingship of Christ, His headship, there is no way for the Body to be built up. This is the reason that, during the past nineteen hundred years, there has been very little building of the church. The confusions and divisions among Christians today are primarily due to the flesh, to Amalek. Among Christians Amalek is prevailing. Because of this, we do not have the kingdom of God in a practical way. Without the kingdom, it is impossible to have the building. Among the vast majority of Christians, it is not possible even to speak about the building of the church.
From The Life Study of Exodus by Witness Lee, msg 47, pg. 42,43
http://www.ministrybooks.org/books.cfm?cid=12E8
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
In his writings Paul thoroughly deals with the flesh. He uses certain expressions to show that the flesh is enmity against God.
" Because the mind set on the flesh is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, for neither can it be." (Romans 8:7)
The mind set on the low and obviously wicked fallen man is at enmity with God. But the mind set on the high, educated and cultured aspects of the fallen man is also at enmity with God.
The flesh (the fallen Satan poisoned nature) is ugly for the simple reason that it is not subject to the law of God. It is ugly to God in its low aspects and in its higher aspects. But most of us agree with the low and ugly. But without revelation cannot see that the higher fallen man is also ugly before God.
The high and cultured often do not see that they too need redemption of Christ's death for them. Many think that only the low and grossly wicked need to turn to Jesus. The "best" of human society they do not realize is also under the curse of rebellion against the authority of God.
God said He would have perpetual war against Amalek. Amalek represents the flesh or the totality of the fallen man poisoned by his union with Satan from the garden of Eden.
In 8:8 Paul goes on to say, “And those who are in the flesh cannot please God.” The flesh is not subject to the law of God, it cannot be subject to the law of God, and it cannot please God. Therefore, in the eyes of God there is no place for the flesh. It must be terminated.
The flesh denotes the totality of the fallen old man. Hence, the flesh does not refer simply to part of our being, but to our entire fallen being. According to Romans 6:6, the old man has been crucified with Christ. Because the old man is hopeless, God put it on the cross and crucified it with Christ. As we shall see, we need to cooperate with God in what He has done by crucifying the flesh (Gal. 5:24). The destiny of the flesh is to be put to death. No matter how the flesh may appear to us, in God’s eyes it is rebellious and despicable. For this reason, God has decided to blot out the name of Amalek.
From The Life Study of Exodus by Witness Lee , Living Stream Ministry - pg 543
http://www.ministrybooks.org/books.cfm?cid=12E8
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
04 Jun 15
Originally posted by FMFI don't know right now.
sonship, what steps did your God figure take to reveal Himself to the Amlek before ordering the genocide?
However, with Sodom we see some prior history of God's mercy upon them before the terrible destruction. We see before the destruction of Genesis 19 how God used Abraham to rescue Sodom from total captivity and plunder in Genesis 14.
Everything is not always repeated the same way in the Bible. In principle I believe that there was some period in which God's forebearance was extended to the Amalekites also.
The Gentiles did have prophets from God apparently - ie. Balaam.
Though their words were not recorded in the Bible, it should be that peoples were warned by prophets prior to severe judgment.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
God determined to have war with Amalek from generation to generation. The warfare between God and the Amalekites appears in Judges 3:13-15; 5:14; 6:3; 7:12-14; 1 Samuel 15:2-9; 32-33; 27:8; 30:1-17; 2 Samuel 8:12; 1 Chronicles 4:42-43.
Haman, the arch enemy of the Jews who sought to have a holocaust against them in the book of Esther was an Agagite. That means he was a descendent of king Agag. His hatred for the Jewish people drove him to scheme a genocidal plot against them.
Haman was incensed and seething with hatred because Esther's uncle Mordecai refused to bow to him.
God must have foreknown the danger to Israel of leaving the Amalekites unjudged. And God sees that the fallen nature of man is at perpetual enmity against God.
We can be crucified with Christ in our old nature.
"I am crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I that live, but it is Christ who lives in me ..." (Gal. 2:20a)
"For he who has died is justified from sin. Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with Him." (Rom. 6:8)
"Knowing this, that our old man has been crucified with Him in order that the body of sin might be annulled, that we should not longer serve sin as slaves. " (v.6)
" Or are you ignorant that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? We have been buried therefore with Him through baptism into death, in order that just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so also we might walk in the newness of life." (v.3,4)
04 Jun 15
Originally posted by sonshipWhat "forbearance"? Isn't it true that there is only the literature of the Hebrews ~ the people who carried out the genocide and who wrote stuff in their folklore claiming that their God had told them to do it ~ to tell us about the Amalekites? How can you possibly justify or accept the "justice" of a genocide based on such blatantly partisan and self-serving "evidence"?
In principle I believe that there was some period in which God's forebearance was extended to the Amalekites also.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Saul being disobedient and sparing king Agag and the best of the cattle to offer to God makes an monument for himself
... And it was told Samuel, saying, Saul went to Carmel and has now set up a monument for himself, ... (1 Sam. 15:12)
Behind the offering to God that which God had devoted to destruction was human self interest and making a name for one's self.
Saul then, self deceived, lies to the prophet about carrying out the instructions of God.
And Samuel came to Saul, and Saul said to him, Blessed are you of Jehovah! I have fulfilled the word of Jehovah.
And Samuel said, What then is this bleating of sheep in my ears and the lowing of oxen that I hear?
What God had commanded was - "Go now and strike the Amalekites and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, infant and suckling, oxen and sheep, camel and donkey." (v.3)
And Saul said, They have been brought from the Amalekites; for the people spared the best of the sheep and oxen to sacrifice to Jehovah your God, and the rest we have utterly destroyed.
Then Samuel said to Saul, Stop, and I will tell you what Jehovah spoke to me last night. And he said to him, Speak.
... And Jehovah sent you on a journey and said, Go and utterly destroy the sinners, the Amalekites, and fight against them until they are consumed. Why then did you not obey the voice of Jehovah, but flew upon the spoil and did that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah?
The self deceived king excuses his disobedience further -
And Saul said to Samuel, I surely did obey the voice of Jehovah, and I went on the journey that Jehovah sent me on. And I have brought Agag the king of the Amalekites and have utterly destroyed the Amalekites.
But of the spoil the people took sheep and oxen, the chief of those things devoted to destruction, to sacrifice to Jehovah your God in Gilgal.
The lack of absoluteness in terminating what God had devoted to termination costs Saul the kingdom. Obedience, the prophet says, is better than sacrifice. And Saul's sparing the best of what God had condemned is as evil as witchcraft in God's sight.
Latter we see how king Saul was opened to the attack of evil spirits - demons. His disobedience brought him into contact with demons.
And Samuel said, Does Jehovah delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as much as in obeying the voice of Jehovah? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, And to heed, than the fat of rams.
For rebellion is like the sin of divination, And insubordination is like idolatry and teraphim. Because you have rejected the word of Jehovah, He has also rejected you from being king. (vs.22-23)
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
To my opinion no one is more pitiful in the Bible than king Saul.
I wonder how many people can read the story of Saul all the way through and not feel sorry for him.
The reason Saul evokes such pity, I came to realize was that there is so much of Saul in me. I am not absolute to apply the cross of Christ to that which I have pity for. The gross sins I see God does not want well enough. But the refined and cultured "best" of the fallen man prompts me to disobey the Lord and even offer such to God for worship.
Such rebellion brought Saul into contact with demons. And he got so pitiful that even a witch of Endor put her arms around him and tried to comfort him with her sympathy.
Saul repented with tears weeping for his uncontrollable jealousy of his replacement David. He had an uncontrollable envy. When he came to his senses with weeping and repentance it didn't last. The next thing you know he is back at it again.
Saul is driven obsessively with destroying the man whom God chose to replace him, David. He is so annoyed at David that he tries to pin him to the wall with a spear. He is obsessed with contempt while David is just playing music on his harp.
This is the fallen man of the flesh. This is the result of refusing to allow the cross of Christ to terminate all that God has said He doesn't want and cannot use - the entire contaminated old man of the fall.
Originally posted by sonshipI would think that is an important question in a discussion about pity. Doesn't the reader feel some pity for the slaughtered animals? Doesn't he at least try to figure out why the order was given to kill all of them? If the reader doesn't do due diligence on this, then how is he supposed to assess whether or not King Saul should have been moved by pity?
I don't know.
Maybe because of bestiality.
But I don't know.
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemIf the inexplicable "justice" of torturing one's own created beings for eternity for a thoughtcrime is "perfect justice", maybe not feeling some pity for the slaughtered animals is "perfect pity"?
I would think that is an important question in a discussion about pity. Doesn't the reader feel some pity for the slaughtered animals?
05 Jun 15
Originally posted by FMFYeah, I suppose I could take it there and have that same old argument yet again. I'd rather instead see if there is some insight to be gleaned from the story by itself. I'd also like to know what the believer gets out of a story like this, if anything.
If the inexplicable "justice" of torturing one's own created beings for eternity for a thoughtcrime is "perfect justice", maybe not feeling some pity for the slaughtered animals is "perfect pity"?
So far it sounds like the real rub is not pity at all, but simply questioning/disobeying God. I hope I'm wrong about that, actually. I hope there is a bit more to it.
05 Jun 15
Originally posted by sonship
In God's infinite wisdom He has included examples of when the sentiment of pity can be a sin and cause of man's downfall.
I think the main example I propose will be how king Saul lost his divinely ordained authority.
[b] "And Samuel said to Saul, Jehovah sent me to anoint you king over His people Israel. Now therefore listen to the voice of ...[text shortened]... uckling, oxen and sheep, camel and donkey." (1 Samuel 15:1-3)
What happened?[/b]some horrible people didn't want to create an inclusive society so they horribly killed men,women and children in order to exterminate their entire culture (this is called genocide) and then lied that god told them to.
thousands of years later, we invented the internet so that horrible people can make a "pity can be downfall" thread where they praise said genocide.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
05 Jun 15
Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
I would think that is an important question in a discussion about pity. Doesn't the reader feel some pity for the slaughtered animals?
It reminds me of the scene in Old Yeller when the beloved dog, a animal hero throughout the movie, has to be put down by the boy because the dog has rabbies.
Was there a dry eye in the movie? But the beloved dog has turned vicious, barring its teeth at his friend and master. Bang! The struggling boy, only after a tearful hesitation does what has to be done.
It may escape us that at some time termination of something infected may become this bad.
I realize that mighty complaints are raised about slaughter in a few places in the Bible. These are exceptional cases which God deems HAVE to be conveyed. Things can actually get that bad.
Our reaction as is "No. No. It could never get THAT bad." Included in the Bible's thousands of occurrences of God's mercy are a few instances when He seems to say "Yes. Unfortunately sometimes it CAN get that bad."
These few occasions are told us in faithfulness by God who knows infinitely. - You shall not pity.
IE.
You shall do to him as he intended to do to his brother. Thus you shall utterly remove the evil from your midst. And those who remain will never again do anything like t his evil thing in your midst.
And your eye shall not pity: a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand, a foot for a foot. (Deut. 19:19-21)
I know this is off the matter of animals. But what I draw attention to is that the discipline here in which God instructed "your eye shall not pity" is EXACTING consequences and not excessive - "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" that is what is meted out is proportional, precise.
And you shall devour all the peoples which Jehovah your God is giving you; your eye shall not pity them, nor shall you serve their gods, for that would be a snare to you. (Deut. 7:16)
The sober reader of the Bible will realize that every single case of Israel's Old Testament warring was not this drastic. But there are included instances where the instructions of God were that drastic.
Opportunists often read nothing else but these drastic occurences in order to rationalize discarding the entire Bible. I don't.
The drastic treatment in the New Testament is turned towards the fallen nature that the new covenant says is crucified with Christ. We are to exercise our faith to terminate by the power of the Holy Spirit many sneaky, infesting enemies hiding out in our fallen nature. These are hindrances of God's plan that through the Holy Spirit we be conformed to the image of Christ.
NONE of the picture of the Old Testament are meant to be modern day guidelines for military behavior of a nation. The thoroughness of executing with no pity is about realizing how extensively our need is to be filled with the living Spirit of Jesus Christ.
I am crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh live in faith, the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me. (Gal. 2:20)
You know it is very ironic. On one hand skeptic complain that Christians are so much NOT like Jesus. But when we try to show how insistent the pictures are to instruct the Christian to thoroughly turn over his whole being to Christ, they complain about the cruelty of God.
Doesn't he at least try to figure out why the order was given to kill all of them? If the reader doesn't do due diligence on this, then how is he supposed to assess whether or not King Saul should have been moved by pity?
Its a good question. The same God has it told in the book of Proverbs about kindness to one's beasts.
A righteous man regards the life of his beast, But the inward parts of the wicked are cruel. (Proverbs 12:10)
In the full scope of the entire revelation of God there is a TIME for this and a TIME for the opposite. And in this story it was a time to terminate everything.
When I read through the Bible I do not stop at this story, close the book for the rest of my life and become an atheist or an anti-theist. Yes, I do have some issues and questions. But the heavenly Father has engendered my trust.
These things were written for the admonition and instruction of the believers in Christ in the new covenant times. Beware that you do not bring to God and offer in worship that which God has pronounced has to go to the cross and be terminated with Christ when He carried up our sins in His body to be put to death with Him.
"For the love of Christ constrains us because we have judged this, that One died for all, therefore all died.
And He died for all that those who live may no longer live to themselves but to Him who died for them and has been raised." (2 Cor. 4:14,15)
The New Testament believer's needed vision is to see that Christ has terminated the whole thing of the fallen nature. It all had to go. We have to stand upon this is ever deepening and ever widening realization. Jesus Christ lives in me and has terminated the entire old fallen self that I may be transformed to His image.
The final result of His salvation will be a new heaven and new earth in which righteousness dwells for eternity. It is likened to being grafted into Him. The entire element of the sick branch, when grafted into the healthy tree, will have all of its defects swallowed up and healed by the new life.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by ZahlanziMost of your comments attempting to teach the Bible are rough, course and shallow. It is something like giving a gorilla a violin to play.
some horrible people didn't want to create an inclusive society so they horribly killed men,women and children in order to exterminate their entire culture (this is called genocide) and then lied that god told them to.
thousands of years later, we invented the internet so that horrible people can make a "pity can be downfall" thread where they praise said genocide.
He just is too shallow and rough to know what to do with a violin except maybe to pound it to pieces on the ground.
The self serving national propaganda theory falls woefully short.
The discipline from thier God that is recorded in the Old Testament is hard to believe would serve as self aggrandizing national propaganda for any nation.
As the young Jewish boy was said to his rabbi. "So we are God's chosen people? Why doesn't He go and pick on somebody else?"
Reading through books like Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel is enough to convince one that the accompanying responsibilities for being a peculiar treasure unto God acutely balanced the privileges.
In the story that I referenced it should be noted that Saul mercifully warned the Kenites to leave the midst of the Amalekites so that they would not be destroyed with the in God's judgment.
"And Saul said to the Kenites, Go, depart; go down from among tje Amalekites; otherwise, I will destroy you with them; for you showed kindness to all the children of Israel when they came up out of Egypt. And the Kenites departed from among the Amalekites." ( 1 Sam. 15:6)
Unless you come up with some other unlikely conspiracy theory this blows a whole in your generalization that the extermination of all non-Isaelites was there only motive.
And at this point I think we should recall what it was that God was angry with the Amalekites about. When the children of Israel was journeying from Egypt, the Amalekites came from behind and slaughtered the stragglers, the weak, the older or sick ones who were marching slower in the rears.
The Amalekites attacked the Israelites without apparent provocation as they were traveling during the Exodus (Ex 17:8). "When you were weary and worn out, they met you on your journey and cut off all who were lagging behind" (Dt 25:17-18).
http://www.rationalchristianity.net/amalekites.html
Deuteronomy 25:17-19
"Remember what Amalek did to you on the way when you came out of Egypt, That he met you on the way and struck you at the rear, struck all those who were worn out at your rear, when you were faint and weary; and he did not fear God.
Therefore when Jehovah your God gives you rest from all your enemies surrounding you, in the land which Jehovah your God is giving you as an inheritance to possess, you shall blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven, you shall not forget."