Amalek

[GeratTzedek]

Isn't the instruction pretty much "slaughter them and keep the women for yourselves"?

Absolutely not. We were to keep NOTHING of the Amelakites, certainly not their women.

There is a very famous portion of scripture in which King Saul does battle with the Amelakites, and doesn't kill their livestock. Samuel says to Saul, "What is this bleating I hear?????" Saul had brought back the best livestock back for temple offerings, and the King ALIVE for humiliation. For THIS, G-d removed his holy spirit from king Saul and his right to be king over Israel. "To obey is better than sacrifice."

1 Samuel Chapter 15

1 Samuel said to Saul: "It was I the LORD sent to anoint you king over his people Israel. Now, therefore, listen to the message of the LORD. 2 This is what the LORD of hosts has to say: 'I will punish what Amalek did to Israel when he barred his way as he was coming up from Egypt. 3 1 Go, now, attack Amalek, and deal with him and all that he has under the ban. Do not spare him, but kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses.'"

4 2 Saul alerted the soldiers, and at Telaim reviewed two hundred thousand foot soldiers and ten thousand men of Judah. 5 Saul went to the city of Amalek, and after setting an ambush in the wadi, 6 warned the Kenites: "Come! Leave Amalek and withdraw, that I may not have to destroy you with them, for you were kind to the Israelites when they came up from Egypt."

After the Kenites left, 7 Saul routed Amalek from Havilah to the approaches of Shur, on the frontier of Egypt. 8 He took Agag, king of Amalek, alive, but on the rest of the people he put into effect the ban of destruction by the sword. 9 He and his troops spared Agag and the best of the fat sheep and oxen, and the lambs. They refused to carry out the doom on anything that was worthwhile, dooming only what was worthless and of no account.

10 Then the LORD spoke to Samuel: 11 3 "I regret having made Saul king, for he has turned from me and has not kept my command." At this Samuel grew angry and cried out to the LORD all night. 12 Early in the morning he went to meet Saul, but was informed that Saul had gone to Carmel, where he erected a trophy in his own honor, and that on his return he had passed on and gone down to Gilgal.

13 When Samuel came to him, Saul greeted him: "The LORD bless you! I have kept the command of the LORD." 14 But Samuel asked, "What, then, is the meaning of this bleating of sheep that comes to my ears, and the lowing of oxen that I hear?" 15 Saul replied: "They were brought from Amalek. The men spared the best sheep and oxen to sacrifice to the LORD, your God; but we have carried out the ban on the rest."

16 Samuel said to Saul: "Stop! Let me tell you what the LORD said to me last night." "Speak!" he replied. 17 Samuel then said: "Though little in your own esteem, are you not leader of the tribes of Israel? The LORD anointed you king of Israel 18 and sent you on a mission, saying, 'Go and put the sinful Amalekites under a ban of destruction. Fight against them until you have exterminated them.' 19 Why then have you disobeyed the LORD? You have pounced on the spoil, thus displeasing the LORD."

20 Saul answered Samuel: "I did indeed obey the LORD and fulfill the mission on which the LORD sent me. I have brought back Agag, and I have destroyed Amalek under the ban. 21 But from the spoil the men took sheep and oxen, the best of what had been banned, to sacrifice to the LORD their God in Gilgal." 22 4 But Samuel said: "Does the LORD so delight in holocausts and sacrifices as in obedience to the command of the LORD? Obedience is better than sacrifice, and submission than the fat of rams. 23 For a sin like divination is rebellion, and presumption is the crime of idolatry. Because you have rejected the command of the LORD, he, too, has rejected you as ruler."

24 Saul replied to Samuel: "I have sinned, for I have disobeyed the command of the LORD and your instructions. In my fear of the people, I did what they said. 25 Now forgive my sin, and return with me, that I may worship the LORD."

26 But Samuel said to Saul, "I will not return with you, because you rejected the command of the LORD and the LORD rejects you as king of Israel." 27 As Samuel turned to go, Saul seized a loose end of his mantle, and it tore off. 28 So Samuel said to him: "The LORD has torn the kingdom of Israel from you this day, and has given it to a neighbor of yours, who is better than you.

 

[CaDan]

Either that, or you don't know how to think in metaphorical terms. Today, Amelakites doesn't simply refer to that historical people. It refers to anyone embracing the culture of that people in two major ways:

1. looking for the extermination of the Jews
2. targeting the weak, innocent, sick, old, etc.

It is a lot easier to advocate killing people when you call them names first.

 

[CaDan]

The last mention of the Amalekites is in Chronicles, where the loot taken from them is used to build the first temple.

No more Amalekites. All dead.

 

[GeratTzedek]

No, actually what it says is that Amalek first attacked the tribes of Israel without provocation. From this time forward, the Amalekites continued to attack Israel.

Several hundred years later, under King Saul, they were ordered to exterminate the Amalekites and everything they owned, not to keep the women.

Amalek didn't want peace. They wanted war. The problem was solved.

exactly, secundulus.

But remember, it wasn't just that Amalek made war against the Jews. Many peoples did that. Amalek has a SPECIAL place in the annuls of evil because of the WAY they fought Israel: the TARGETING OF INNOCENTS.

This is why of the other peoples who attacked Israel it is said they are no more, but that Amalek will be with us in every age.

"You shall not hate an Edomite, for he is your brother" - good or bad, he is your brother. "You shall not abhor an Egyptian, for you were a sojourner in his land " - good or bad, for among them you lived many years. But as for Amalek - "Remember what Amalek did to you" - they were and remain the persecutor of the weak. (Pesikta Rabbati 47b)

One of the greatest difficulties we have, myself included, is with G-d ordering the killing of even the women and children among the Amelakites. But we need to look at WHY. It is not to create terror, not to win some political victory, or gain spoils of war, but basically to exterminate a terrorist CULTURE. Even if the men are the ones doing the terrorist acts, women are embracing that culture, AND TRANSMITTING IT TO THEIR CHILDREN FROM THE TIME THEY ARE BORN. If the entire culture is evil, the ONLY way to stop it is to irradicate the entire culture, including those who transmit it, including those too young to kill but who have already been encorporated. That's harsh. So harsh I can't stand it. But it's also true.

I am certainly NOT ready to advocate anything even close to the killing of every man, woman, and child that embraces the culture of the Palestinians. I cannot bring myself to that point. But in the back of my mind, I also am CERTAIN -- the enculturation of Palestinian children to anti-semitism and acceptance to terrorism begins when they are born. They are already infected. Take out any Palestinian geography text, and Israel isn't on the map. Tales of the blood libel of the Jews (the myth that Jews make Matzah with the blood of children) and other lies are still actually passed on to the young! We could kill every terrorist in Palestine, and in 5 years we would have a new crop, because they are being RAISED in this type of culture.

I am ALL FOR the death of every person involved in terrorism, either by military means or capital punishment. I don't morally know what to do about the problem the culture of a large part of the Islamic world which is so infected with the terrorism of the Amelakites. But I can say that so long as the CULTURE continues to exist, there will continue to be little children targeted in day care centers, innocent women on buses, families in pizza parlors.

 

[Vene]

What makes people think that the solution to violence is more violence?

 

[Ramona]

I met you before the fall of Rome
And I met you to let me take you home
You were wrong
I was right
You said "goodbye,"
I said "goodnight!"

Woo-hoo-hoo, it's all been done!
Woo-hoo-hoo, it's all been done!
Woo-hoo-hoo, it's all been donnnnnnnnnnne before!

~The Barenaked Ladies, <20%

 

[GeratTzedek]

Ah thanks, I can't keep track of all these different tribes. Whose women was it they were ordered to keep?

Amalek was the ONLY people Israel was commanded to destroy utterly. With every other enemy, they were to be fought, but not anhilated.

 

[CaDan]

exactly, secundulus.

But remember, it wasn't just that Amalek made war against the Jews. Many peoples did that. Amalek has a SPECIAL place in the annuls of evil because of the WAY they fought Israel: the TARGETING OF INNOCENTS.

This is why of the other peoples who attacked Israel it is said they are no more, but that Amalek will be with us in every age.


One of the greatest difficulties we have, myself included, is with G-d ordering the killing of even the women and children among the Amelakites. But we need to look at WHY. It is not to create terror, not to win some political victory, or gain spoils of war, but basically to exterminate a terrorist CULTURE. Even if the men are the ones doing the terrorist acts, women are embracing that culture, AND TRANSMITTING IT TO THEIR CHILDREN FROM THE TIME THEY ARE BORN. If the entire culture is evil, the ONLY way to stop it is to irradicate the entire culture, including those who transmit it, including those too young to kill but who have already been encorporated. That's harsh. So harsh I can't stand it. But it's also true.

I am certainly NOT ready to advocate anything even close to the killing of every man, woman, and child that embraces the culture of the Palestinians. I cannot bring myself to that point. But in the back of my mind, I also am CERTAIN -- the enculturation of Palestinian children to anti-semitism and acceptance to terrorism begins when they are born. They are already infected. Take out any Palestinian geography text, and Israel isn't on the map. Tales of the blood libel of the Jews (the myth that Jews make Matzah with the blood of children) and other lies are still actually passed on to the young! We could kill every terrorist in Palestine, and in 5 years we would have a new crop, because they are being RAISED in this type of culture.

I am ALL FOR the death of every person involved in terrorism, either by military means or capital punishment. I don't morally know what to do about the problem the culture of a large part of the Islamic world which is so infected with the terrorism of the Amelakites. But I can say that so long as the CULTURE continues to exist, there will continue to be little children targeted in day care centers, innocent women on buses, families in pizza parlors.

We regret to inform you tomorrow we will be killed with our families.

 

[GeratTzedek]

Rest assured that it is the former, my dear.



I didn't get the second option from the OP, which seemed pretty Judeocentric to me. For the second example I could provide dozens...for the first, not so much.

Cheers!

It is not a "choice" between two definitions. Both items must be true in order for the metaphor of "Amalek" to fit. Modern day "Amalekites" must BOTH seek the destruction of Israel AND target the weak.

 

[Ramona]

War is peace.

Ignorance is strength.

Freedom is slavery.

Murdering women and children is an okay thing to do sometimes.

 

[Ramona]

It is not a "choice" between two definitions. Both items must be true in order for the metaphor of "Amalek" to fit. Modern day "Amalekites" must BOTH seek the destruction of Israel AND target the weak.

Oh, well then in that case, I still can't think of anything.

 

[Vene]

It is not a "choice" between two definitions. Both items must be true in order for the metaphor of "Amalek" to fit. Modern day "Amalekites" must BOTH seek the destruction of Israel AND target the weak.

It's so easy to kill people when you strip away their humanity. If you're so concerned about this, why don't you move to Israel and fight?

 

[Ramona]

Ger, if I may ask, what made you convert? I promise I'm not baiting you, but I've been curious for a long time.

 

[GeratTzedek]

What makes people think that the solution to violence is more violence?

The solution to violence is not simply more violence. You consider all violence innately wrong. I do not. Violence is a tool. WHY is it being used? And what are its boundaries, aka HOW is it being used? To be violent for the wrong reason is sin. To be violent in a wrong way is sin. But violence itself is not wrong per se.

So... what makes YOU think that all violence can be stopped without violent force used?

 

[GeratTzedek]

War is peace.

Ignorance is strength.

Freedom is slavery.

Murdering women and children is an okay thing to do sometimes.

What useless cliches. We have all read 1984. Or at least we should have. Doesn't mean it applies.

 

[GeratTzedek]

It's so easy to kill people when you strip away their humanity. If you're so concerned about this, why don't you move to Israel and fight?

Strip away their humanity? Not at all. I hold them morally responsible for their acts. That's a LOT more than how I treat animals.

I DO hope to move to Israel some day. It is my understanding that in Israel, EVERY citizen spends some years of their life in defense of their land and people.

 

[CaDan]

It is not a "choice" between two definitions. Both items must be true in order for the metaphor of "Amalek" to fit. Modern day "Amalekites" must BOTH seek the destruction of Israel AND target the weak.

"Israel" is gone--destroyed by the Babylonians and the Greeks and the Romans. There is a modern state now bearing that name, but it has no temple, no king, no prophets, no judges. No sacrifices, no jubilees, no high priest, no ark. It is not "Israel".

 

[Vene]

The solution to violence is not simply more violence. You consider all violence innately wrong. I do not. Violence is a tool. WHY is it being used? And what are its boundaries, aka HOW is it being used? To be violent for the wrong reason is sin. To be violent in a wrong way is sin. But violence itself is not wrong per se.

So... what makes YOU think that all violence can be stopped without violent force used?

I want to know why you just jump to violence. I refer you back to your Carter thread. Wouldn't trying to negotiate for peace be a better solution? Or would that not satisfy your blood lust? Kill the Amalek in the name of Yahweh!

 

[Ramona]

I happen to think that my "useless cliches" are pretty pertinent. If God commanded me to murder anyone, I still wouldn't.

I'd refuse simply because it's the humane thing to do, to hell with obedience and "love." Violence might be necessary at times, but murder is not loving. And I should hope than any potential omnipotent, omnibenevolent deity would understand that I'm only trying to further human potential by taking my chosen route, and understand.

 

[GeratTzedek]

It is a lot easier to advocate killing people when you call them names first.

Fascinating that you write this in response to a paragraph that describes BEHAVIOR.