How many are saved?

ChristopherHays

Active Member
Sep 19, 2019
180
86
27
Los Angeles
✟13,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
I think I'm an extremely liberal Christian and I have holy communion every week. I still point out problems I see in the Bible though and I believe much of the Bible never literally happened.

I’m the same minus the communion part lol. I was raised to believe the Bible was inerrant and literally true in everything. Once I recognized all the lies and brainwashing going on in that church I had no interest in keeping the title “Christian”.


Well abortion is called murder by some people too... and some would argue about the use of the term "murder".
The term "genocide" should be used when referring to the Jews, and there is a clear parallel between that genocide and the genocide that God commanded.

I don’t even want to start with abortion lol. I actually think the Bible is pro abortion, but that’s a complicated issue (I’m anti abortion) You’re right about genocide being the appropriate term for those passages. I think genocide is just a specific type of murder though, and there are plenty of verities of murder in the Old Testament to pick from.
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,175
9,960
The Void!
✟1,133,168.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Arguments should rise and fall on their own merit, not their messenger’s. Frankly the state of our affordable universities are embarrassing anyway.
I disagree, but I'll take the backing source list you offered anyway, just so I can see the extent to which your study has been cogent. Besides, maybe I'll learn something by perusing it ...
 
Upvote 0

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,507.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
that’s god more or less commanding slavery, rape, and murder.

What makes you automatically assume Numbers 31:18 means "rape"; or even that it means to have sex with these girls?

There is no indication in the passage that they had sex with these girls. Matter of fact; if you read the rest of the passage, you would know by that fact that they were instructed to purify themselves, their captives and everything that had been taken in the war. They were to put all the utensils and implements through the fire; wash the clothing and wash the people and wait seven days before they came into the camp. According to law; if you have sex, you are unclean again!

These girls eventually became part of the households of Israel.

Now there are other passages in the Old Testament that say not to oppress the stranger within your gates. As well as other passages that instruct a death sentence for rapists.
Exodus 22:21
Exodus 23:9
Deuteronomy 24:14
Deuteronomy 22:25-27

Deuteronomy 21:
10 When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace unto it.

11 And it shall be, if it make thee answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee, and they shall serve thee.

That same Hebrew word is used in 1 Kings 5:13 where Solomon "levies" a labor force to build the temple and (probably) the king's house. Do you think Solomon's captains walked through Israel and "abducted forced labor" for this task from among the people of Israel?

Although I would agree that their "tribute" was likely compulsory upon those able bodied; this wasn't permanent either. That's why it's called a "tribute". This is the "payment" of their "service" to the "state". We would call this a "draft".

They did this with military service too; although there were parameters around who could be drafted. Men who'd just gotten married and men with small children were actually exempt from war.

So the same word "tribute" is used for those who've surrendered. Now go back to the verses quoted about not oppressing the stranger within your gates.

It’s extremely intellectually dishonest to call this anything other than rape and slavery.

No it is extremely intellectually dishonest to say that it is. It is extremely intellectually dishonest to not take the instructions of the entire Bible as a whole. All you've done is picked verses where with to levy accusations against God that are but what reveals the wickedness of your own heart.

Don’t passages like that at least make you uncomfortable?

No they don't; because I know what the entire Bible says.

If they don’t mean what they seem to say, why didn’t god explain it better?

To trip up people like you. "It is the glory of God to conceal and the honor of kings to search a matter out." Proverbs 25:2

I focused more on Greek when I was a Christian, but I’m acquainted with Hebrew. I’m pretty sure it plainly means not to make sculptures and drawings.

The term "graven image" implies worship.

I don’t see where the text allows the context to be restricted to images for worship.

"Thou shall not bow down to them or serve them."

Now do you know why that law existed?

I'll give you a hint. Who was Jesus Christ? If God was to come in time incarnated in human flesh; what would making a graven image back in the OT mean? You are not to make a graven image and call something God because you have no idea who He is.

Now when that image has been made manifest in human flesh; that law becomes redundant because God is manifest; He is no longer an unknown. He is no longer an "image". Man is made in God's image; so if they were to correctly understand not making a graven image; they would not be making statues of animals, angels, or what ever. The "image of God" existed in them. This is why they were not to make representations of God.

But now that God is made manifest in human flesh; this law is done away with. Even if someone has a picture, statue or some other representation of Jesus; If the individual has a proper understanding of God; that is not any different than having a picture of your mother or father. I have lots of photographs of my son. I know those photographs are not my son.

Do you think that after Jesus went back to heaven that the disciples and all the people who knew Him in the flesh suddenly forgot what He looked like? Don't you think that if Jesus was walking the earth today in the flesh that people would take photos of Him, or you'd see Him on TV? So why would it not make sense that people would make drawings or statues of Him? I see no violation of any command in people making Jesus the subject of artwork.

To set an impossible standard and keep sheep populations down? I’m familiar with all 613 laws so don’t even start with the ‘perfect standard’ stuff. The laws of the Torah aren’t that hard to follow, they’re just stupid.

So you were "Jewish" or under some "law keeper" type religious system?

LOL - as far as "perfect standard" stuff; I don't even know what that means. I was never in a "law keeper" religious system.

The "letter of the law" is not impossible to keep externally, but they are impossible to keep as a whole; unless of course you have no sin. Of which none of us qualify. This is why "by the law is the knowledge of sin". Yet "the law" is revealed to all humanity both by it being written on the conscience, but also what is witnessed of God in creation.

"The Law" is far broader than you assume.

I do, but I think invading neighboring cities and killing them when they refuse to be slaves qualifies as murder. So does killing someone for picking up sticks, killing people who sleep with foreigners, killing girls who can’t prove virginity etc.

Again, this shows forth your own intellectual dishonesty and ignorance of the Scripture; for apparently you have no idea why those laws mean.

In regards to salvation; if your "sabbath rest" is God, what does it mean to "pick up sticks on the sabbath"? By the law is the knowledge of sin. If you are working for your salvation, you are condemned.

I know what scripture says better than most Christians. I can quote entire chapters from memory in 3 languages... how much more studying should I do before I’m no longer “ignorant”?

LOL

Matthew 23:23
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

Obviously your phariseeism got you to the point of seeing the futility of "law keeper" religious systems. The Scripture has done its job in demonstrating that to you.

The law is spiritual but to be carnally minded is death. And this is why I still say you are ignorant of the Scripture!
 
Upvote 0

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,507.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
I'm saying that "the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" also implies that there are other gods.

Well you are aware that "eloheim" is plural aren't you?

Now to parse out what that means and why it's used that way requires putting together other parts from the Bible.

Scripture does call Satan "the god of this world". There are "lesser spirits" of created entities. I don't think acknowledging there are forces in this world that are greater than our ability to control, yet not beyond God's ability, as Creator and Sustainer of the universe; is a denial of God's supremacy.
 
Upvote 0

ChristopherHays

Active Member
Sep 19, 2019
180
86
27
Los Angeles
✟13,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
What makes you automatically assume Numbers 31:18 means "rape"; or even that it means to have sex with these girls?

There is no indication in the passage that they had sex with these girls. Matter of fact; if you read the rest of the passage, you would know by that fact that they were instructed to purify themselves, their captives and everything that had been taken in the war. They were to put all the utensils and implements through the fire; wash the clothing and wash the people and wait seven days before they came into the camp. According to law; if you have sex, you are unclean again!

These girls eventually became part of the households of Israel.

Now there are other passages in the Old Testament that say not to oppress the stranger within your gates. As well as other passages that instruct a death sentence for rapists.
Exodus 22:21
Exodus 23:9
Deuteronomy 24:14
Deuteronomy 22:25-27

Deuteronomy 21:
10 When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace unto it.

11 And it shall be, if it make thee answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee, and they shall serve thee.

That same Hebrew word is used in 1 Kings 5:13 where Solomon "levies" a labor force to build the temple and (probably) the king's house. Do you think Solomon's captains walked through Israel and "abducted forced labor" for this task from among the people of Israel?

Although I would agree that their "tribute" was likely compulsory upon those able bodied; this wasn't permanent either. That's why it's called a "tribute". This is the "payment" of their "service" to the "state". We would call this a "draft".

They did this with military service too; although there were parameters around who could be drafted. Men who'd just gotten married and men with small children were actually exempt from war.

So the same word "tribute" is used for those who've surrendered. Now go back to the verses quoted about not oppressing the stranger within your gates.



No it is extremely intellectually dishonest to say that it is. It is extremely intellectually dishonest to not take the instructions of the entire Bible as a whole. All you've done is picked verses where with to levy accusations against God that are but what reveals the wickedness of your own heart.



No they don't; because I know what the entire Bible says.



To trip up people like you. "It is the glory of God to conceal and the honor of kings to search a matter out." Proverbs 25:2



The term "graven image" implies worship.



"Thou shall not bow down to them or serve them."

Now do you know why that law existed?

I'll give you a hint. Who was Jesus Christ? If God was to come in time incarnated in human flesh; what would making a graven image back in the OT mean? You are not to make a graven image and call something God because you have no idea who He is.

Now when that image has been made manifest in human flesh; that law becomes redundant because God is manifest; He is no longer an unknown. He is no longer an "image". Man is made in God's image; so if they were to correctly understand not making a graven image; they would not be making statues of animals, angels, or what ever. The "image of God" existed in them. This is why they were not to make representations of God.

But now that God is made manifest in human flesh; this law is done away with. Even if someone has a picture, statue or some other representation of Jesus; If the individual has a proper understanding of God; that is not any different than having a picture of your mother or father. I have lots of photographs of my son. I know those photographs are not my son.

Do you think that after Jesus went back to heaven that the disciples and all the people who knew Him in the flesh suddenly forgot what He looked like? Don't you think that if Jesus was walking the earth today in the flesh that people would take photos of Him, or you'd see Him on TV? So why would it not make sense that people would make drawings or statues of Him? I see no violation of any command in people making Jesus the subject of artwork.



So you were "Jewish" or under some "law keeper" type religious system?

LOL - as far as "perfect standard" stuff; I don't even know what that means. I was never in a "law keeper" religious system.

The "letter of the law" is not impossible to keep externally, but they are impossible to keep as a whole; unless of course you have no sin. Of which none of us qualify. This is why "by the law is the knowledge of sin". Yet "the law" is revealed to all humanity both by it being written on the conscience, but also what is witnessed of God in creation.

"The Law" is far broader than you assume.



Again, this shows forth your own intellectual dishonesty and ignorance of the Scripture; for apparently you have no idea why those laws mean.

In regards to salvation; if your "sabbath rest" is God, what does it mean to "pick up sticks on the sabbath"? By the law is the knowledge of sin. If you are working for your salvation, you are condemned.



LOL

Matthew 23:23
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

Obviously your phariseeism got you to the point of seeing the futility of "law keeper" religious systems. The Scripture has done its job in demonstrating that to you.

The law is spiritual but to be carnally minded is death. And this is why I still say you are ignorant of the Scripture!


So if I knock on your door and demand tribute or death, you’ll have no problem with that? What if I wanted to murder your family and hull your daughter away to be my wife? As long as I married her and gave her rights as a wife you’d be fine with that? I’m trying to tell you this is wrong, and you call me wicked for it? It’s absolutely ridiculous to defend these passages. Even if your defense was textually warranted (which it isn’t) it still makes god a moral monster. Women didn’t have a say in who they married or had sex with. If their father wanted them to marry their rapist they had to do it. It’s ridiculous. Where does it say these captive women can refuse to marry their families murderers? It doesn’t! That’s rape disguised as marriage. Where does it say the “drafted work force” got paid or could quit? It doesn’t! That’s slavery! Those slaves weren’t temporary either, they could be passed down as an inheritance.
 
Upvote 0

ChristopherHays

Active Member
Sep 19, 2019
180
86
27
Los Angeles
✟13,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
I disagree, but I'll take the backing source list you offered anyway, just so I can see the extent to which your study has been cogent. Besides, maybe I'll learn something by perusing it ...

You disagree that arguments shouldn’t be accepted or dismissed based off the speaker alone? You know Einstein argued for an infinite universe and was proven wrong?

I don’t have anything to prove to you, but what specifically are you wanting sources for?
 
Upvote 0

ChristopherHays

Active Member
Sep 19, 2019
180
86
27
Los Angeles
✟13,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
What makes you automatically assume Numbers 31:18 means "rape"; or even that it means to have sex with these girls?
Lol seriously? Why does your ‘all loving’ god want recently orphaned virgins to be hauled off as war spoils? Please enlighten me.

As if their intentions aren’t obvious enough, the next chapter actually explains how to go about sleeping with your captive women. NEVER does it give them a say. This is ridiculous.
 
Upvote 0

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,507.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
So if I knock on your door and demand tribute or death, you’ll have no problem with that?

Your government now can haul you off to jail for not showing up if you are drafted.

What if I wanted to murder your family and hull your daughter away to be my wife? As long as I married her and gave her rights as a wife you’d be fine with that?

You have the option to fight to your own death. You kill your opponent or they kill you. There is always the danger of being mistreated if you become a POW. Just because other men are sinners; does not mean God is responsible for the evil in their hearts.

I’m trying to tell you this is wrong, and you call me wicked for it?

You display the wickedness of your own heart in your assumptions of what God says or does not say about "rules of war". Have you not any idea that our current "rules of engagement" are actually developed out of Scriptural principles.

Even if your defense was textually warranted (which it isn’t) it still makes god a moral monster.

Only because you wish to accuse God of wickedness; wanting to believe yourself to be more righteous than God. Your accusations only show forth your ignorance of Scripture.

Women didn’t have a say in who they married or had sex with.

Exodus 22:16 states that if two non-espoused people have sex; they are to get married.

A father could refuse to give his daughter to someone who's had sex with her.
Exodus 22:17

If their father wanted them to marry their rapist they had to do it.

If you were found guilty of rape; you were to be executed.
Deuteronomy 22:25-27

Where does it say these captive women can refuse to marry their families murderers?

Where does it say they did marry their family's murders? You imply that. The passage never says that.

Matter of fact; they were to be divided up among the entire nation; (some 30 plus thousand of them). Compare this to what's said in Exodus about not oppressing the stranger within your gates.

It doesn’t! That’s rape disguised as marriage.

Only in your evil mind.

Where does it say the “drafted work force” got paid or could quit?

Deuteronomy 24:15 - pay workers wages for labor performed.

That’s slavery! Those slaves weren’t temporary either, they could be passed down as an inheritance.

That is not true. Slaves served for 6 years and were freed on the 7th. Then on jubilee years; everyone was freed regardless of whether or not they'd served their entire years or not.

Again; you show your ignorance of Scripture!

Here is an article that addresses this issue with many references to multiple passages: Now this article doesn't go into all the ins and outs of the passages quoted; but I'd venture to bet that if you dug through the actual Hebrew words; you'd gain a more in-depth understanding of the subject.

Which is it clear that you have not dug very far!
Slavery in the Bible | My Jewish Learning

Lol seriously? Why does your ‘all loving’ god want recently orphaned virgins to be hauled off as war spoils? Please enlighten me.

Why kill them with their rebellious parents? If parents / families willfully surrendered; they were to be kept together and brought into the nation.

As if their intentions aren’t obvious enough, the next chapter actually explains how to go about sleeping with your captive women. NEVER does it give them a say. This is ridiculous.

LOL - Numbers 32 speaks of logistics of how the land was to be divided up.
Numbers 33 gives a record of where Israel traveled to once leaving Egypt.
Numbers 34 gives a record of tribal genealogies.

So where is this alleged passage you speak of?

Again, you so aptly display your ignorance of Scripture.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
22,611
7,374
Dallas
✟888,356.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Matthew 7:13-14

Apparently there are 2.4 billion Christians in the world. Based on those verses I get the impression that maybe 5% (of 7 billion) are saved... which is 400 million...

Though most Christians might be assuming that they're saved...

How can we possibly calculate the difference between many and few? Few could be as much as just less than half I would say.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ChristopherHays

Active Member
Sep 19, 2019
180
86
27
Los Angeles
✟13,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Your government now can haul you off to jail for not showing up if you are drafted.....

This doesn’t even warrant a response. You’re being outrageous if you don’t see that killing men, women, and little boys so you can steal their land and take their virgins is wrong. You’re outrageous to assume the little boys are wicked and the little girls are not. You’re outrageous to assume little girls gladly married their captors.

You’re also completely wrong about the 7 years and the year of jubilee. That only applied to Hebrews (likely only Hebrew men) and there were loop holes to keep Hebrew slaves forever anyway. Foreigners did not have equal rights and were absolutely kept for life
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,175
9,960
The Void!
✟1,133,168.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
This doesn’t even warrant a response. You’re being outrageous if you don’t see that killing men, women, and little boys so you can steal their land and take their virgins is wrong. You’re outrageous to assume the little boys are wicked and the little girls are not. You’re outrageous to assume little girls gladly married their captors.

You’re also completely wrong about the 7 years and the year of jubilee. That only applied to Hebrews (likely only Hebrew men) and there were loop holes to keep Hebrew slaves forever anyway. Foreigners did not have equal rights and were absolutely kept for life

Are you implying that human rights are actually grounded in some kind of metaphysics that gives your morality force? I have to ask, because for the life of me, I can't think of what any kind of really substantive backing for human rights would be that would make us all fully culpable for our actions.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,507.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
This doesn’t even warrant a response. You’re being outrageous if you don’t see that killing men, women, and little boys so you can steal their land and take their virgins is wrong. You’re outrageous to assume the little boys are wicked and the little girls are not. You’re outrageous to assume little girls gladly married their captors.

You’re also completely wrong about the 7 years and the year of jubilee. That only applied to Hebrews (likely only Hebrew men) and there were loop holes to keep Hebrew slaves forever anyway. Foreigners did not have equal rights and were absolutely kept for life

Well, I can’t help it if you refuse to study the Scriptures. And what the Scripture says is not what you claim it says. I have already proved that!

And by the way; if you looked up the Hebrew word for “little girls” in Numbers 31. It’s literally “one who walks with little tripping feet”. It’s not a gendered term; it’s an age related term.

So, I’d have to look this up, but I would be willing to bet that those kept also included little boys under a certain age too.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ChristopherHays

Active Member
Sep 19, 2019
180
86
27
Los Angeles
✟13,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Are you implying that human rights are actually grounded in some kind of metaphysics that gives your morality force? I have to ask, because for the life of me, I can't think of what any kind of really substantive backing for human rights would exist that would make us all fully culpable for our actions.

It’s a difficult subject, but that doesn’t mean you can credit divine powers without evidence. We have no divine rights, only the evolutionary compulsion to seek survival for our clans. This alone accounts for most of morality.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,567
New Jersey
✟1,148,608.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Matthew 7:13-14.
I'm responding to the title. Mat 7:13-14 is part of an encounter. Someone asks Jesus how many are going to be saved. He says "enter the narrow gate." As far as I can tell he has refused to answer, but told the person to make sure *he* is saved.

I think too many people miss the point of this exchange and come up with answers that may well be wrong.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Andrewn
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ChristopherHays

Active Member
Sep 19, 2019
180
86
27
Los Angeles
✟13,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Well, I can’t help it if you refuse to study the Scriptures. And what the Scripture says is not what you claim it says. I have already proved that!

And by the way; if you looked up the Hebrew word for “little girls” in Numbers 31. It’s literally “one who walks with little tripping feet”. It’s not a gendered term; it’s an age related term.

So, I’d have to look this up, but I would be willing to bet that those kept also included little boys under a certain age too.

I understand scripture better than you apparently. Research the 7 and 50 year rules. You will see they don’t apply to everyone. Research the numbers 31 passage too. It clearly distinguishes boys from girls twice. The leading Hebrew scholars will agree (although this passage is so poorly preserved, honest scholars will admit the original words cannot be reconstructed)


“kill all the boys and all the women who have had intercourse with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves. “


If you’re still unconvinced that god would order the killing of children, he leaves no doubt in 1 Samuel 15.

(god speaking) “Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.”
 
Upvote 0

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,507.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Research the numbers 31 passage too. It clearly distinguishes boys from girls twice.

Verse 9 "And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods."

"little ones" - "ones who walk with little tripping feet". The word (Strong's # 2945 - 3rd person masculine plural). Apparently this included children of both genders. (Like I specified; it is not a gender specific term.)

Verse 15 "And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive?" Strong's # 5347 "females". This word does not specify only human females. It's also used to describe female animals.

Verse 16 "Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the Lord."

Note this verse: it's important. Here is the reason given as to put those to death who've "known men". There was a plague that apparently was sexually transmitted. (Ever wonder if there was AIDS in the ancient world? I don't know the answer to that question.)

Verse 17 "Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him."

"... male among the little ones...." First off; is not specific to human males. (Just as verse 15 "women" was specific to human women.) So the command to kill the "males" applied to animals. And we know by the following verse that it was only applied to animals!

Verse 18 "But all the young, women that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."

Now a closer look at this verse makes it clear that the male children were not killed. There is a distinction in the language "young" (ones who walk with little tripping feet) from "women who have not known...." The word "women" denotes those of child bearing age; where as "young" is in the "masculine plural" which again is not a gender specific term.

So not only were "females of child bearing age who'd not known men" kept alive; but also were the children (ones who walk with little tripping feet) of both genders kept alive.

Which shows again that your bias of wanting to accuse God of evil is what drives your interpretation of this passage.

The leading Hebrew scholars will agree (although this passage is so poorly preserved, honest scholars will admit the original words cannot be reconstructed)

According to those whom you want to believe because again; you don't want to be accountable to God for the wickedness in your own heart.

Now were there people like you in ancient Israel who purposefully misinterpreted this in order to justify their own wickedness? Of course there were. But just because men twist God's word; does not make God responsible for their evil!

f you’re still unconvinced that god would order the killing of children, he leaves no doubt in 1 Samuel 15.

(god speaking) “Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.”

Now I looked up this language also and yes they were commanded to kill everyone and every thing.

Question is now - why?

The answer is given in verse 2: "Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt."

Now what happened when Israel came up from Egypt.

First off who was Amalek? Genesis 36:12 says that Amalek were sons of Esau's wife.

Now who was Esau? Esau was Jacob's brother. The brother Jacob deceived out of his birth right; yet keep in mind that the two became reconciled. (Genesis 33).

So if Esau and Jacob had been reconciled; why are Esau's descendants attacking Jacob's descendants when they leave Egypt?

And what had they done to these people?

The answer to that is in Exodus 17. Amalek decides to attacking Israel when they are in the wilderness and are about to die of lack of water. (This attack is mounted and takes place right after Moses and the water from the rock incident.) The battle is a demonstration of God's power; for when Moses holds his arms up; Israel prevails and when he doesn't Amalek prevails. So to aide Moses; Arron and Hur held his hands up; and subsequently Joshua defeated Amalek's army.

Exodus 17:
14 And the Lord said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua: for I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven.

15 And Moses built an altar, and called the name of it Jehovahnissi:

16 For he said, Because the Lord hath sworn that the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation.

Now what does "Jehovahnissi" mean? (God is my ensign / banner / flag.) This was a demonstration of trusting in God when they had no strength to defend themselves.

So in essence God says He is taking vengeance on Amalek for attacking a defenseless nation.

May this be a warning to any nation who attacks the defenseless!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ChristopherHays

Active Member
Sep 19, 2019
180
86
27
Los Angeles
✟13,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Now what does "Jehovahnissi" mean? (God is my ensign / banner / flag.) This was a demonstration of trusting in God when they had no strength to defend themselves.


”Jehovahnissi” means nothing, it isn’t even a Hebrew word! LOL! “Jehovah” is a mispronunciation of the German spelling for YHWH (Yahweh) from the 16th century! And you accuse me of not knowing my history?




Verse 9 "And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods."

"little ones" - "ones who walk with little tripping feet". The word (Strong's # 2945 - 3rd person masculine plural). Apparently this included children of both genders. (Like I specified; it is not a gender specific term.)

Verse 15 "And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive?" Strong's # 5347 "females". This word does not specify only human females. It's also used to describe female animals.

Verse 16 "Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the Lord."

Note this verse: it's important. Here is the reason given as to put those to death who've "known men". There was a plague that apparently was sexually transmitted. (Ever wonder if there was AIDS in the ancient world? I don't know the answer to that question.)

Verse 17 "Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him."

"... male among the little ones...." First off; is not specific to human males. (Just as verse 15 "women" was specific to human women.) So the command to kill the "males" applied to animals. And we know by the following verse that it was only applied to animals!

Verse 18 "But all the young, women that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."

Now a closer look at this verse makes it clear that the male children were not killed. There is a distinction in the language "young" (ones who walk with little tripping feet) from "women who have not known...." The word "women" denotes those of child bearing age; where as "young" is in the "masculine plural" which again is not a gender specific term.

So not only were "females of child bearing age who'd not known men" kept alive; but also were the children (ones who walk with little tripping feet) of both genders kept alive.

Which shows again that your bias of wanting to accuse God of evil is what drives your interpretation of this passage.



According to those whom you want to believe because again; you don't want to be accountable to God for the wickedness in your own heart.

Now were there people like you in ancient Israel who purposefully misinterpreted this in order to justify their own wickedness? Of course there were. But just because men twist God's word; does not make God responsible for their evil!



Now I looked up this language also and yes they were commanded to kill everyone and every thing.

Question is now - why?

The answer is given in verse 2: "Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt."

Now what happened when Israel came up from Egypt.

First off who was Amalek? Genesis 36:12 says that Amalek were sons of Esau's wife.

Now who was Esau? Esau was Jacob's brother. The brother Jacob deceived out of his birth right; yet keep in mind that the two became reconciled. (Genesis 33).

So if Esau and Jacob had been reconciled; why are Esau's descendants attacking Jacob's descendants when they leave Egypt?

And what had they done to these people?

The answer to that is in Exodus 17. Amalek decides to attacking Israel when they are in the wilderness and are about to die of lack of water. (This attack is mounted and takes place right after Moses and the water from the rock incident.) The battle is a demonstration of God's power; for when Moses holds his arms up; Israel prevails and when he doesn't Amalek prevails. So to aide Moses; Arron and Hur held his hands up; and subsequently Joshua defeated Amalek's army.

Exodus 17:
14 And the Lord said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua: for I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven.

15 And Moses built an altar, and called the name of it Jehovahnissi:

16 For he said, Because the Lord hath sworn that the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation.

Now what does "Jehovahnissi" mean? (God is my ensign / banner / flag.) This was a demonstration of trusting in God when they had no strength to defend themselves.

So in essence God says He is taking vengeance on Amalek for attacking a defenseless nation.

May this be a warning to any nation who attacks the defenseless!

you’re assuming “kill the women” means kill the human and animal women, but “kill the boys” only applies to male cattle? There is absolutely nothing in the text that would imply that. They were actually told to take the cattle as war spoils before this. Why would they want to kill non virgin and juvenile male cattle? This apologetic is entirely based off nonsensical and baseless assumptions.

Now I looked up this language also and yes they were commanded to kill everyone and every thing. Question is now why?


So the all loving and forgiving god instructed the Israelites to kill Amalekite babies because they were the same ethnicity as some people who fought Israel 400 years earlier? That is the definition of genocide! If god tells you to wipe out every Lakota baby on the planet because they killed your forefathers at little big horn, would you do it? We should all recognize this as immoral. You can’t punish babies for the crimes of their great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandfathers. (Yes that’s an appropriate amount of “great”s)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

JohnClay

Married Mouth-Breather
Site Supporter
Oct 27, 2006
1,129
186
Australia
Visit site
✟447,819.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
....You can’t punish babies for the crimes of their great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandfathers. (Yes that’s an appropriate amount of “great”s)
BTW in case anyone was interested, here is what seems to be the reason for the genocide:

Genesis 9:20-25
20 Noah, a man of the soil, proceeded to plant a vineyard. 21 When he drank some of its wine, he became drunk and lay uncovered inside his tent. 22 Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father naked and told his two brothers outside. 23 But Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it across their shoulders; then they walked in backward and covered their father’s naked body. Their faces were turned the other way so that they would not see their father naked.

24 When Noah awoke from his wine and found out what his youngest son had done to him, 25 he said,

“Cursed be Canaan!
The lowest of slaves
will he be to his brothers.”​

I get the impression that Ham's son, Canaan, was either an infant or he wasn't born yet.

On second thoughts that says they should be slaves, not to be wiped out...
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,507.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
”Jehovahnissi” isn’t even a Hebrew word! “Jehovah” is a mispronunciation of the German spelling for YHWH (Yahweh) from the 16th century! And you accuse me of not knowing my history?

What it's translated as is immaterial. What does the Hebrew word mean?

you’re assuming “kill the women” means kill the human and animal women, but “kill the boys” only applies to male cattle? There is absolutely nothing in the text that would imply that.

Yes there is; I already explained that to you. Your refusal to see it does not make my explanation invalid.

They were actually told to take the cattle as war spoils before this. Why would they want to kill non virgin and juvenile male cattle? This apologetic is entirely based off nonsensical and baseless assumptions.

Go look at the text in Hebrew.

So the all loving and forgiving god instructed the Israelites to kill Amalekite babies because they were the same ethnicity as some people who fought Israel 400 years earlier? That is the definition of genocide! If god tells you to wipe out every Lakota baby on the planet because they killed your ancestors at little big horn, would you do it? We should all recognize this as immoral. You can’t punish babies for the crimes of their great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandfathers. (Yes that’s an appropriate amount of “great”s)

So if the Lakota killed all of my ancestors including the little babies - and God says "Let vengeance be Mine" and uses human agents to execute that vengeance?

No - I don't have a problem with that!

Matter of fact; it happens all the time. God uses nations to wipe out other nations. We are all guilty of sin. If I die in such a genocide; "To be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord!"

I don't understand half of why things happen in this world the way they do; but God is still just and He is still good. And only being woke by the Holy Ghost would ever make you acknowledge that!

May He have mercy on your soul!
 
Upvote 0