Conscientious Objector ?

Well I've moved on from being restricted to the literalist reading of God speaking the exact words, but even as a narative, it still promotes, to an extent, the idea of genocide. A non-literal approach still doesn't fix it for me.

DrStupid_Ben said:

Well I've moved on from being restricted to the literalist reading of God speaking the exact words, but even as a narative, it still promotes, to an extent, the idea of genocide. A non-literal approach still doesn't fix it for me.

Click to expand...

so why couldn't it be a case of God did not tell them what they thought he told them? Or that He didn't tell them anything however it is how they chose to write their history?

The Cannanites had 400 years while the Israelites were enslaved to turn to God, but they did not. They knew of God's power but they did not repent so God had to carry out judgment against them or else they would turn the Israelites away from Him.

Mankin said:

The Cannanites had 400 years while the Israelites were enslaved to turn to God, but they did not. They knew of God's power but they did not repent so God had to carry out judgment against them or else they would turn the Israelites away from Him.

Click to expand...

I see... how do you know that?

DrStupid_Ben said:

I'm somewhat of a pacifist. Though I haven't worked through my position on the subject to any great certainty.

I really like the book The Peacemaking Remnant Morgan Douglas, ed (Silver Springs, MD: Adventist Peace Fellowship, 2005) It has some hard hitting articles and it includes a number of historical documents on the Adventist position on war. The basic premise of the book is that the idea of the biblical remnant (that holds a special place in the Adventist identity) is particularly tied to peacemaking. That is, standing for non-violence, being a prohetic witness to your time, and actively nurturing shalom (a wholeness and well-being of life, not just "peace") This is very much in opposition to the idea of the remnant as a specially elected group (with an exclusive ticket for escapeing this world) that only preaches doctrine to the world.
Check out www.adventistpeace.org

Click to expand...

From what I have seen of the Adventist Peace fellowship is that they have not thought it through either. Peace as the saying goes is not merely the absence of war. In most instances where peace has been established it is because there was a side in the conflict that was willing to fight against oppressors. If fighting against the invading forces of Germany in WWII does not indicate there is a just war then I don't think anything would. Usually those who complain about something not being a just war is because they have no stake in the outcome. Or more often they think they have no stake because they don't see the larger picture.

If every side in a conflict was reasonable then there may not ever be a need for war, but that is rarely the case just as with individuals are not all reasonable, there still seem to be people who will break into my house and steal things and asking them not to do it or to return the items will not have any results. Of course maybe I should not have any things to steal, but that won't stop them from stealing from someone who does have what they want. Even in a subsistence environment theft and violence still exist.

As for spiders the Black Widow is considered most venemous but it injects so little poison that it rarely kills anyone. I think I would rather be bit by a black widow then by a brown recluse as they have a very nasty effect upon the area bitten. Though for some people it just leaves some red marks.

Personally I kill both spiders and have no guilt at all about doing so.

RC_NewProtestants said:

From what I have seen of the Adventist Peace fellowship is that they have not thought it through either. Peace as the saying goes is not merely the absence of war. In most instances where peace has been established it is because there was a side in the conflict that was willing to fight against oppressors. If fighting against the invading forces of Germany in WWII does not indicate there is a just war then I don't think anything would. Usually those who complain about something not being a just war is because they have no stake in the outcome. Or more often they think they have no stake because they don't see the larger picture.

If every side in a conflict was reasonable then there may not ever be a need for war, but that is rarely the case just as with individuals are not all reasonable, there still seem to be people who will break into my house and steal things and asking them not to do it or to return the items will not have any results. Of course maybe I should not have any things to steal, but that won't stop them from stealing from someone who does have what they want. Even in a subsistence environment theft and violence still exist.

Click to expand...

Well said.

RC_NewProtestants said:

As for spiders the Black Widow is considered most venemous but it injects so little poison that it rarely kills anyone. I think I would rather be bit by a black widow then by a brown recluse as they have a very nasty effect upon the area bitten. Though for some people it just leaves some red marks.

Personally I kill both spiders and have no guilt at all about doing so.

Click to expand...

I kill all spiders that invade my territory and have no guilt about doing so either. If they want to live, they should stay out of my house.

StormyOne said:

I see... how do you know that?

Click to expand...

I cannot say that it is absolutely correct but why else would God keep the Israelites in slavery for some odd 400 years? God is merciful and slow to anger but judgement must be carried out eventually. God ordered the Israelites to destroy the Cannanites when they refused to repent. They could have repented and joined the Israelites once the invasion of Cannan began but they did not.

Mankin said:

I cannot say that it is absolutely correct but why else would God keep the Israelites in slavery for some odd 400 years? God is merciful and slow to anger but judgement must be carried out eventually. God ordered the Israelites to destroy the Cannanites when they refused to repent. They could have repented and joined the Israelites once the invasion of Cannan began but they did not.

Click to expand...

thanks for the clarification... Israel had periods of captivity because of their straying from God I suppose, though it may not have been that simple... if that was the case, then some lessons are hard to learn...

StormyOne said:

so why couldn't it be a case of God did not tell them what they thought he told them? Or that He didn't tell them anything however it is how they chose to write their history?

Click to expand...

Let's say that God did not speak the words attributed to him in the Pentateuch, and that they are a reflection of the Israelites understanding of God's will. Certainly this solves the problem of God commanding atrocities. It may also solve the problem of God advocating or allowing atrocities to be commited, as humans have free will and have often gone against God's design.
But think what this says about the Israelites understanding and impression of God. They certainly believed that they were acting in God's design and favour. Had God revealed his will to the Israelites? What does it say about God when his chosen people show such a grave misjudgement of what God revealed to them?

The actions that the Israelites took are still in the OT, no matter how we view their literalness or historicity.

What it says about Israel is that just like everyone else they grew in understanding. This has been pretty clear in Jewish tradition and certainly modern scholarship but it seems to be a hard pill to swallow for Traditional Christians. They often try to attribute to Ancient Israel an understanding that they could never have had. If they did have it then they certainly did not record that information in any way. Which is why it is so often hard to communicate with fundamentalists because they have rewritten the Bible into the way they want to see it. Such things as interpreting Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 as about Satan which is something that was not the way any Jewish person interpreted those verses nor the way any New Testament writer viewed them. Yet through tradition their entire context is changed and held to extremely tightly by the fundamentalist. (see Who is Lucifer (Satan Misidentified) )