If they were killed at their first murder, would not that save many more lives? would you agree?
I would say that I dont really find children accountable for their actions. I know that I personally did things as a child that I would never do now. Nothing terrible like murder or rape or anything but I remember a time when I was in high school and I literally cursed the mother of a boy that I was playing basketball with. The boy was somewhat of a brat, I told him he was going into highschool and I told him he would get his behind kicked at the school he was going to because of the way he was. His mother came out to chastise me for this and in my frustration I cursed at her several times. This is something I sorely regret to this day and I often wonder what possessed me to do such a thing but I realize I was just young and immature at that time. Kids bully other kids all the time for the simple reason that kids simply dont always realize the weight and severity of their actions. My brother once told our Aunt that she was fat in the middle of Thanksgiving dinner in front of the entire family. He was a small child and simply didnt realize why what he said was inappropriate and hurtful. I would say that even for something like murder I would absolutely not condone the killing of a child because children very often lack the capacity to realize the gravity of what it is they do.
I would do the same, I do not think children often realize what they do, but here is something to ponder upon, most of the times adults lack this realization as well. wouldn't you agree. However my asking of this question was just to get your view, nothing else. It is a good excuse sometimes "I didn't realize what I was doing", sometimes this excuse is abused and people intentionally do stuff as well.
Okay now we come to the children's part, it seems very harsh, but I have come at a conclusion that perhaps it was the only way to end the corruption present in that land. Some times children are indoctrinated at a very young age. I mean look at Pakistan, a lot of fundamental Islam is present here. When I was in school, our text books had lines that would make you think what in the world are we coming too. In first grade these lines was actually taught
So its okay to kill children if they were taught bad things from a young age? Im almost at a loss for words here, but I could it was you at the beginning of this discussion talking about how people deserve a chance at redemption and mercy and so forth. Here is a specific quote from you: "
And Should not God use more wisdom than this if he created all life? The fallen humanity deserves a chance. There are those who abuse this grace of God and kill, torture others. If God merely wipes out everyone to get rid of these few, would it be a fair judgement? I do not think so, regardless of what you say. It won't be just. God must be just as he must be loving.
" So how do we go from fallen humanity deserving a chance to the only way to end corruption in that land being to all of the children along with everyone else? I would love to here how you mesh these two widely disparate claims.
I am not saying that its okay to kill children because they have been taught bad things, but I do think it is a good point to consider that militancy broods militancy. I do believe people deserve a chance at redemption even the most militant. My point in mentioning this was that if kids are indoctrinated at a very early age there is a very high chance that they will grow up and follow what they were told. This goes back to what I was saying, the Canaanite and the six others that were ordered by God to be killed, was because God did not want any of those nations and their rituals to be carried forward. Because you will agree with me, that killing and sacrificing humans and throwing and slaughtering your children is also an abomination. I also mentioned, perhaps you failed to realize that this was a necessary step, not a favoured one. God does not rejoice when sinners die. He is in fact grieved because his creation has turned too much corrupt. I know of a mother who killed her son, because he was going to kill his wife. I do not think this is justified either but the alternate is no better, would you agree?
Most likely they will grow up believing what they were taught, but I fail to see how that justifies killing children especially in light of your earlier comments about fallen humanity deserving a chance. How can you claim that fallen humanity deserves a chance on one hand and then on the other claim that children to young to really think or decide for themselves? You have done basically a complete 180 from your arguments from the start of this discussion. But heres a crazy idea, instead of the Israelites killing all of the children, they could have taken them in and shown them that there are other ways to live and brought them to the Lord. What a crazy idea huh? The funny thing is that this probably would have seemed like a crazy idea to the Israelites. It probably made more sense to them to kill the children of their enemies then to allow them to live, provide for them and show them the ways of the Lord.
This is again an appeal to emotion. Yes in 20th century this seems almost the most right way. I am sure it is to some extent as well. But back in the day, it was not the norm. Lets try your view that God only ordered to kill the men and women and not the children, and the isrealites bring the children with them back and try to teach them. What do you think the children would grow up to be? They would have seen what the Israelites did and at heart they may never be one with them so it is very difficult to imagine that would endorse the view their captors.
If you one day found out that the couple you thought as your parents are actually the people who killed your biological parents, would you not hate them and be the exact opposite of what they taught you?
What are your thoughts on this?
This is of course my rationalization of the matter, there could be more to it that we are simply not aware of.
But this all ended when Christ came, I do not know, if you read between my lines or not, but I do think I mentioned that humanity's second chance is Christ alone, nothing else. By second chance I do not mean that you free the next serial rapist, but that people should have a chance before God to redeem themselves. I mean we are all gonna die one day. i do not think any death is something that anywould ever like. But its a reality nonetheless.
This is a very different tone from your earlier claims of God not destroying evil people because fallen humanity deserves a chance. You have gone from that to now basically claiming that it was better to kill children rather than take them in and at least attempt to show them another way.
See the above for the answer to this. Also my tone has nothing to do with the argument. If you wanna attack, attack the argument, not me, that would be a waste of time. I can very well blame the ancients for not having safety belts on their camels too, you know and knowing our latest standards I would be right to blame them. The context of ancient warfare is vital to be understood. I mean ancient tribal warfare is very very different from the warfare, you have grown up to see. Back then, its a matter of family, no outsiders allowed. You are simply ignoring a lot of factors which might have prompted the Israelites to not take away the children as their own. But again, apart from these problems, I think the answer is simple, God did not want those rituals to carried forward, so therefore he ordered such a harsh commandment.
For example, lets assume that if by sparing the children, all of them turned good but only one remained which actually turned back to his tribal rituals, and he marries and settles an area and after 10 generations, he has a small tribe, and they are continuing their blood bathing rituals, would that not be a severe loss of life as well? More innocent children would die.
Again this is a lack of knowledge perhaps but, you do understand that the old testament is different from the new testament. Please tell me what is your understanding of it? cuz I do not think you are fully aware of the difference. Do you understand the difference between law and grace. Th old testament is law, if you sin you die. Hell, God didn't even forgive Israelites on their mistakes, he was still just. Not unfair. There is no grace in that period, grace came through Christ. So I really do not know what you intend to prove here. If you know the difference you would know why the in the new testament, Christ saved the women from stoning and why it is grace, Christ atoned for us so that we can are free from the law.
Thats not how it reads at all. I said I would kill all those who sought to harm other humans and you said that God should use more wisdom than that because fallen humanity deserves a chance. You specifically said it would not be just if God wiped out everyone to get rid of a few:
Don't quote me out of context. Actually it was because you said that God should wipe out all humanity just to get rid of evil, that was actually a very dramatic statement of yours. That is why I said that wiping out evil does by just bulldozing everyone is simply wrong by God. He is just and fair. And he did not wipe out everyone, only the guilty parties and that so also in the old testament alone. influential as well. Because wiping out everyone doesn't get them to chance to be fixed only terminated. God loves his creation. And that chance is Christ only, before Christ God is using the law and after Christ we have grace.
Infact I am beginning to doubt as if you have read your bible and understood it (whenever you were Christian), else you would have seen the difference.
So earlier you argued that it wasnt right to eliminate everyone to get rid of a problem but now that Ive shown that this is exactly what God often required of the Israelites, you have been forced to readjust your position to the point of finding justification for killing children. Defending God and the bible is a tricky thing isnt it?
I only argued that wiping all humanity is wrong. God did not required Israel to eliminate all humanity, just six tribal nations, who were too far corrupt and had gone evil. I am not readjusting my position at all. If you would only not mis-match my quotes, you would save us both, time. You could very well keep on insisting that what was done was right for men but not for children. But where do you draw the line, when do you think a child is a child, what age, 10, 9, 8, 12. Can you tell me what exactly in your opinion a child is, by age?
Do you know that in many tribes 10 years children are wed, 12 years old have kids. This is however not my argument, I am only pointing out that under "what about the children" you can go into too far emotionalism and miss important factors that might have genuine cause (ALSO SEE THIS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_The_Ch ... (politics)).
I told the cause, I told you the reason. You may not agree its the best solution, I never said it was the best, only it was a necessary one, one that was not given out of pride but in sadness. That is the long and short of it, you may disagree but I do think you should have a fair assessment, rather than looking through the secular shoes cuz you have been enlightened by this view.
Also did you happen to read the two papers Jac mentioned to you on the "Is God good" thread, on goodness? What is your take of it?
You have alternate standards today. Though I pretty much doubt, 3000 years ago you would have been any different.
P.S: Just a bottom line to sum things up, as I don't want the main point to be lost in various spin-offs. Regardless of everything please do remember one thing in all of this, God is just and loving at the same time. He gave those people ample time to change their ways but they didn't and in the end God while loving and being just as well, gave out his judgement. Just so that we are clear on this.
I would also like you to tell me, the following, as I think this would make talking to each other much easier.
1. Do you understand the doctrine of sin, according to the biblical perspective?
2. Do you know the punishment of sin, in its entirety (being a former Christian I dont think this should be any trouble for you)
3. The question you should have asked cuz that would have made things easier for you to understand, is "What is physical death through Godly perspective?" Paulsacromento actually pointed this out in one of his recent posts. I think it is an important point.
Do let me know what do you know of these (not what you think of these) but what you know of these? as these are doctrines in Christianity which are vital to understand the issue you are trying to understand.