Is genocide ever right or justifiable...?

[Neogaia777]

Is genocide ever right or justifiable...?

For most of us it unfathomable that genocide would ever be right or correct or the right thing to do, but is it ever...?

I'm a fan of Star Trek TNG, and in one of the episodes, and even in a perfect Star Trek world, or even as advanced as that society was or is, in one episode "I, Borg" they come up with a plan to genocide the Borg, but later decide not to do it, (or Picard doesn't go through with it, in the end)...

But in a later episode, when they (starfleet) are having some further problems later on with the Borg, Picard is pretty severely chastised by and admiral for his decision, and told Him he was not here to wrestle with his conscience, and if he has any further opportunities like this or the one he had in the future, that he was under orders to take full advantage of it, and even said to Picard, "Is that understood?"...

Then Picard talks with Riker about it, and talks about how he had the chance to rid the federation of a mortal threat, but he did not do it... Then Riker said he did the moral thing, and Picard says something very interesting, he says that "It may turn out that the moral thing to do, was not the right thing to do..."

So, is genocide ever justifiable...? And if so, when or under what conditions or circumstances or whatever is it so...?

Even in an advanced Star Trek world/reality, they ran into a circumstance or whatever, where it very well might have been very right, and fully justifiable (genocide of another people or race)...

Comments...?

God Bless!

 

[rockytopva]

Genoside is not showing love to the neighbour....

For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. - Romans 13:9-10

29 But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour?
30 And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead.
31 And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side.
32 And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side.
33 But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him,
34 And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him.
35 And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee.
36 Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves?
37 And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise. - Like 10

 

[Neogaia777]

Genoside is not showing love to the neighbour....

For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. - Romans 13:9-10

29 But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour?
30 And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead.
31 And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side.
32 And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side.
33 But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him,
34 And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him.
35 And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee.
36 Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves?
37 And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise. - Like 10

I am trying to allude to God's decision to commit genocide in the OT here...? Right or wrong, ect...? Justified or not, ect...?

God Bless!

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

I am trying to allude to God's decision to commit genocide in the OT here...? Right or wrong, ect...? Justified or not, ect...?

God Bless!

Before I answer this question, I must first ask you a question. What is the difference between "murder" and "killing"?

 

[Neogaia777]

Before I answer this question, I must first ask you a question. What is the difference between "murder" and "killing"?

Murder implies maliciousness and malicious intent or hatred in the heart, whereas killing does not have to...

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

Maybe we do not fully or adequately understand how it could ever be justified or justifiable, so what were God's "reasons"...?

God Bless!

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Murder implies maliciousness and malicious intent or hatred in the heart, whereas killing does not have to...

God Bless!

I believe your answer is on the right track. However, I believe murder can be better defined as taking life without cause or authority to do so. Biblically speaking, God is the sole creator of all life. Thus, God is the only being with the authority to take life or bestow that authority onto others. In this case, a Judge and executioner are not considered "murderers" when a death penalty is administered. This is because God has authorized capital punishment to be administered by those with certain authority to do so. Killing in self defense and to protect the lives of the innocent are other examples where we are authorized to take human life and is not considered "murder".

So, in regards to the genocides mentioned in the OT, we shouldn't forget who was giving the command which authorized the slaughter. It was God. Ironically, it would have been more sinful for Joshua to disobey God and spare the lives of the Amalekites for example. Also, an example can be found in Saul 1 Samuel 15, when Saul disobeyed God by not carrying out the will of God. So in conclusion, the genocides in the Bible that were carried out as a direct command from God is neither murder or morally wrong. In the StarTrek example, Captain Picard would have not been wrong to destroy the Borg if that destruction was intended to save the lives of the innocent. However, what Picard was struggling with was the fact that he was once a slave to the Borg and was freed from their control. He was wrestling with the thought that the Borg were innocent people who are committing evil acts against their will. He spared the opportunity to destroy the Borg because he hoped that the innocent lives could be spared and rescued. I am a little bit of a nerd too.

 

[Neogaia777]

I believe your answer is on the right track. However, I believe murder can be better defined as taking life without cause or authority to do so. Biblically speaking, God is the sole creator of all life. Thus, God is the only being with the authority to take life or bestow that authority onto others. In this case, a Judge and executioner are not considered "murderers" when a death penalty is administered. This is because God has authorized capital punishment to be administered by those with certain authority to do so. Killing in self defense and to protect the lives of the innocent are other examples where we are authorized to take human life and is not considered "murder".

So, in regards to the genocides mentioned in the OT, we shouldn't forget who was giving the command which authorized the slaughter. It was God. Ironically, it would have been more sinful for Joshua to disobey God and spare the lives of the Amalekites for example. Also, an example can be found in Saul 1 Samuel 15, when Saul disobeyed God by not carrying out the will of God. So in conclusion, the genocides in the Bible that were carried out as a direct command from God is neither murder or morally wrong. In the StarTrek example, Captain Picard would have not been wrong to destroy the Borg if that destruction was intended to save the lives of the innocent. However, what Picard was struggling with was the fact that he was once a slave to the Borg and was freed from their control. He was wrestling with the thought that the Borg were innocent people who are committing evil acts against their will. He spared the opportunity to destroy the Borg because he hoped that the innocent lives could be spared and rescued. I am a little bit of a nerd too.

People still would like to know what makes or made it justifiable, and, beyond that, 100% completely the right thing, and perhaps the only thing, to do...? (God in the OT)... And just because God has, or is the only solely justified to do or command so, that's still just not good enough for many people...

And Picard's decision was based on the Borg they had captured, once separated from the collective, seemed to become a whole new, completely self aware and fully self-realized "individual", and that is what made him (Picard) and much of the crew, change his or their minds ultimately...

They want to know why he did it specifically, and what make him or it (the act itself) justified or God himself fully justified in doing so, specifically...? Other than just the reason, "Because he can and is fully authorized to do so, or can do whatever He wants, (with his own things) "us", or whatever, ect...?

But was that the right decision...? I mean what if the Borg would have wiped out the federation in the future, or fairly shortly after that at some point in time in the future... If Picard had gone through with it, that would no longer be or have been a problem anymore, which is why the admiral spoke to and with him the way she did, I believe...

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

People still would like to know what makes or made it justifiable, and, beyond that, 100% completely the right thing, and perhaps the only thing, to do...? (God in the OT)... And just because God has, or is the only solely justified to do or command so, that's still just not good enough for many people...

And Picard's decision was based on the Borg they had captured, once separated from the collective, seemed to become a whole new, completely self aware and fully self-realized "individual", and that is what made him (Picard) and much of the crew, change his or their minds ultimately...

They want to know why he did it specifically, and what make him or it (the act itself) justified or God himself fully justified in doing so, specifically...? Other than just the reason, "Because he can and is fully authorized to do so, or can do whatever He wants, (with his own things) "us", or whatever, ect...?

But was that the right decision...? I mean what if the Borg would have wiped out the federation in the future, or fairly shortly after that at some point in time in the future... If Picard had gone through with it, that would no longer be or have been a problem anymore, which is why the admiral spoke to and with him the way she did, I believe...

God Bless!

What was the basis for it being, or God considering it just, or whatever...? Specifically...

God Bless!

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

People still would like to know what makes or made it justifiable, and, beyond that, 100% completely the right thing, and perhaps the only thing, to do...? (God in the OT)... And just because God has, or is the only solely justified to do or command so, that's still just not good enough for many people...

Does there need to be more explanation? The bigger issue would be that if the command of a sovereign, omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God is "not good enough for many people", they have a personal problem with God.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

What was the basis for it being, or God considering it just, or whatever...? Specifically...

God Bless!

Biblically, the basis was to protect and preserve the nation of Israel from Idolatry so that the prophesy of the Messiah and the promises made though the covenant of David and Abraham would be fulfilled.

 

[Neogaia777]

Does there need to be more explanation? The bigger issue would be that if the command of a sovereign, omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God is "not good enough for many people", they have a personal problem with God.

I don't think they have a personal problem with God, (well maybe some few do) but just a problem in their conscience that does not ever consider genocide ever fully justifiable ever... It's in almost all of our consciences to think that/this most, or if not all of the time also...

So, some of us feel we must reconcile that somehow...

So, I was wondering if we could explore this issue, or discuss it or whatever...? Logically and without too much emotion also...

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

Biblically, the basis was to protect and preserve the nation of Israel from Idolatry so that the prophesy of the Messiah and the promises made though the covenant of David and Abraham would be fulfilled.

I think God in the OT was trying to set up His Kingdom of earth way back then, but it didn't happen, like in Saul's case, due to disobedience and not fully carrying God's orders out, and in almost all other cases, due to our disobeying and disobedience...

And, in light of that maybe, (setting up, or trying to set up the Kingdom then) it was or may have been 100% fully justifiable maybe...?

God Bless!

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

And, in light of that maybe, (setting up, or trying to set up the Kingdom then) it was or may have been 100% fully justifiable maybe...?

God Bless!

I guess what it boils down to is having an understanding of the Omni-benevolence and omniscience of God. There are a lot of things that don't make sense and appear to have been wrong. However, just because our finite minds may not be able to fathom or reconcile or justify why things were done for what reasons, it proves only our ignorance and nothing more. To even suggest that the genocides mentioned in the OT that were commanded by God "may have been 100% justifiable" would be to question the very attributes that makes God GOD. There is no "maybe" about it. If God is omniscient and omnibenevolent, the genocides MUST have been 100% fully justifiable regardless if we understand what the justification is.

 

[Neogaia777]

I guess what it boils down to is having an understanding of the Omni-benevolence and omniscience of God. There are a lot of things that don't make sense and appear to have been wrong. However, just because our finite minds may not be able to fathom or reconcile or justify why things were done for what reasons, it proves only our ignorance and nothing more. To even suggest that the genocides mentioned in the OT that were commanded by God "may have been 100% justifiable" would be to question the very attributes that makes God GOD. There is no "maybe" about it. If God is omniscient and omnibenevolent, the genocides MUST have been 100% fully justifiable regardless if we understand what the justification is.

Yes, I do get that, (but many people don't), but I wish to use this thread to try and seek out just what that justification is, if we can, or at least explore the issue... And some thing other than "He is God has the power and authority to do so", and "might makes right", ect...? For many people that kind of reason or justification and/or excuse, just makes God look worse (to them) and not better...

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

I guess what it boils down to is having an understanding of the Omni-benevolence and omniscience of God. There are a lot of things that don't make sense and appear to have been wrong. However, just because our finite minds may not be able to fathom or reconcile or justify why things were done for what reasons, it proves only our ignorance and nothing more. To even suggest that the genocides mentioned in the OT that were commanded by God "may have been 100% justifiable" would be to question the very attributes that makes God GOD. There is no "maybe" about it. If God is omniscient and omnibenevolent, the genocides MUST have been 100% fully justifiable regardless if we understand what the justification is.

I "know" they are justifiable, but seek to understand it or that... And I only said "may" because of the theory I proposed prior to that, which could be right, but might not be, that's why I "may" and "maybe"...

God Bless!

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Yes, I do get that, (but many people don't), but I wish to use this thread to try and seek out just what that justification is, if we can, or at least explore the issue... And some thing other than "He is God has the power and authority to do so", and "might makes right", ect...? For many people that kind of reason or justification and/or excuse, just makes God look worse (to them) and not better...

God Bless!

This is not necessarily an issue of "might makes right." rather, it is more of an issue of "God knows best". We can look at the metanarrative to see where these genocides fit in God's great redemptive plan, however, it is impossible to know what would have taken place had the genocides never occurred. Only God would know and we are not God. The only way anyone can fully grasp the justification of these events is to first understand and grasp what God's omniscience and omni-benevolence truly means. God's omniscience doesn't merely mean that His knowledge is great, it means that His knowledge is infinitely greater. There is absolutely nothing beyond his knowledge and understanding. God's Omni-benevolence doesn't merely mean that God is good, it means that God is absolutely good and is the source of all goodness and that nothing but goodness can be created by Him or emanated from Him. As a result of these two critical attributes, we have to believe that God would have not only known that the genocides were to take place, He planned for it to happen. Furthermore, He would have known every possible alternative and the results of those alternative actions. Because of His goodness, we also have to conclude that His decision and justification for that decision was the absolute best and entirely good.

In conclusion, until one is able to understand and fully grasp the attributes of God, they will never understand why or how those genocides could ever be justifiable or rationalized. So to even attempt to provide such an answer is futile until those concepts are understood. Even then, the answer will always be, because God is God and we are not. This is because only God can answer these questions because only God can explain what the outcome would have been if they had not occurred. We can only speculate.

 

[Neogaia777]

This is not necessarily an issue of "might makes right." rather, it is more of an issue of "God knows best". We can look at the metanarrative to see where these genocides fit in God's great redemptive plan, however, it is impossible to know what would have taken place had the genocides never occurred. Only God would know and we are not God. The only way anyone can fully grasp the justification of these events is to first understand and grasp what God's omniscience and omni-benevolence truly means. God's omniscience doesn't merely mean that His knowledge is great, it means that His knowledge is infinitely greater. There is absolutely nothing beyond his knowledge and understanding. God's Omni-benevolence doesn't merely mean that God is good, it means that God is absolutely good and is the source of all goodness and that nothing but goodness can be created by Him or emanated from Him. As a result of these two critical attributes, we have to believe that God would have not only known that the genocides were to take place, He planned for it to happen. Furthermore, He would have known every possible alternative and the results of those alternative actions. Because of His goodness, we also have to conclude that His decision and justification for that decision was the absolute best and entirely good.

In conclusion, until one is able to understand and fully grasp the attributes of God, they will never understand why or how those genocides could ever be justifiable or rationalized. So to even attempt to provide such an answer is futile until those concepts are understood. Even then, the answer will always be, because God is God and we are not. This is because only God can answer these questions because only God can explain what the outcome would have been if they had not occurred. We can only speculate.

So, let's speculate then...?

And Did God know whether or not say, Saul was not going to carry out His orders or fully obey Him at the time, or did He not know and not expect that...? And/Or many, many other things in the OT like this where God should have known already, but just did not seem to know sometimes...?

Why did God in the OT, seem to not know about some things when they happened, or did not expect, or seemed to expect, certain things to happen how or when or like they happened, ect...? God (in the OT) reacted many many times in such a way sometimes that it seems as if he did not know (about) some things...?

How do we explain this...?

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

I want the world to know and accept Him as their God, don't you...? But they are like children and just do not know or understand, and things like "this" (that we are discussing here) stumble them greatly when they first hear of them, and turn many people off and away from God and I just don't like to see that happening, so...

So, let's "discuss" please, K...?

Find some things to offer these ones about these kinds of things maybe...?

God Bless!

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

So, let's speculate then...?

And Did God know whether or not say, Saul was not going to carry out His orders or fully obey Him at the time, or did He not know and not expect that...? And/Or many, many other things in the OT like this where God should have known already, but just did not seem to know sometimes...?

How do we explain this...?

God Bless!

LOL. Speculate we shall.
The short answer to the question is Yes. God absolutely knew that Saul was not going to carry out His orders or fully obey Him at the time. This passage demonstrates how foolish it was for the Israelites to demand a king like the other nations (1 Samuel 8). The purpose of allowing the Israelites to settle for imperfect people as their king was to show how the nation of Israel and the world how much they need God as their King. In a way, God was dealing with the nation of Israel in a similar way you would deal with a stubborn teenager. You open up the "school of hard knox". If they weren't going to learn the easy way by trusting in the Lord and observing the wickedness of the other kings, they will learn the hard way from their own mistakes.