If God asked you to kill someone from another group, would you?

[CrystalDragon]

She can take it; she's tough! (She is a dragon, afterall!)

Okay, I admit, that made me laugh. (I'll respond on the other posts later, reading that just made me smile)

 

[aiki]

Now before you say "God would never do that!" keep in mind that in the Old Testament, there were several times where God commanded entire cities to be destroyed and killed and killed, including the infants.

And why did God do this? Was He just being randomly violent and bloodthirsty? No. In every instance where God used His Chosen People to enact divine judgment upon a wicked pagan nation, the Israelites acted in expression of God's holiness, justice and sovereignty.

And disobedient children were sometimes stoned to death due to not following the Fourth Commandment (at least of the group commonly called the Ten Commandments.

Again, such harsh punishment was not instituted by God capriciously. This punishment reflected the attitude of God toward human rebellion and wickedness. Where we are prone to compromise with such things, He does not. This may be jarring to us, but that is a problem on our end, not God's.

So even if you say God wouldn't do that now, it's clear he did at one point (and thus he could again since he's the same through time, right?). So, would you be willing to draw a heavy metal sword down upon the tiny body of an infant newborn if God commanded it?

If I was perfectly - and I mean perfectly - clear this was a genuine command of God, yes. Do you think the Israelites didn't question and wonder at the severity of God's judgment upon the nations He commanded the Israelites to attack and destroy? Now, having said this, I don't believe such an instance as you hypothesize could ever occur now. It only happened in the OT under the dynamic of the theocracy God had established with His Chosen People and the frequent military aggression of the pagan nations surrounding Israel. What's more, we have New Testament commands by God to love all those around us, not kill them. So, while I might theoretically agree to unstinting obedience to God's command whatever it might be, I do so convinced God would never command me to kill anybody, and certainly never for no good reason. And, really, God would have to do something in my head and heart to enable me to carry out such an act. I could never bring myself to ever willfully harm an infant - or anyone else for that matter - whatever I might agree to hypothetically.

Selah.

 

[throughfiierytrial]

(Feel free to move this if it should be in Ethics and Morality instead.)

Now before you say "God would never do that!" keep in mind that in the Old Testament, there were several times where God commanded entire cities to be destroyed and killed, including the infants. And disobedient children were sometimes stoned to death due to not following the Fourth Commandment (at least of the group commonly called the Ten Commandments. So as much as we may try to ignore it, if we go by the Bible there was a time when God commanded those things.

So even if you say God wouldn't do that now, it's clear he did at one point (and thus he could again since he's the same through time, right?). So, would you be willing to draw a heavy metal sword down upon the tiny body of an infant newborn if God commanded it? Even disregarding modern times, say if you lived in that time period and God asked you to do that, or stone disobedient children in your family or group. Would you do it?

What really is your point????
No, I would not do it in these times...who knows about those O.T. times. Jesus said of them that they were hard-hearted. O.T. says they were a stiff-necked and stubborn people. God also said they were to rid themselves of evil in the camp where He walked so presumably God was teaching them righteousness the hard way...later He said I desire mercy and not sacrifice. So Christendom was progressing in faith and righteousness.
Certainly today if we thought we heard some spirit tell or command us to kill we'd know it to be an evil spirit. N.T. says love your enemies.
You are smearing Christianity out of ignorance.

 

[Sola1517]

I just keep thinking about it because the thought honestly worries/disturbs me a lot....

Do you really think that God would command that?

 

[Thedictator]

Incorrect. There is indeed teaching on this in the Bible and your statement shows either your lack of knowledge of Scripture or the heavy cloud of cognitive dissonance fogging your mind. It was the very reason for the flood.

6 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

Genesis 6:1-4

There are many references in the Bible to the Rephaim - the giants - who were the offspring of fallen angels and human women. No, these were not "the sons of Seth", they were the sons of GOD and if you do your research into the Hebrew words here it is clear what was meant.

If you truly wish to know more there is plenty of sound Biblical research on the topic. If you do not wish to know do not insult those of us who have done our homework.

God bless.

The passage you stated is not talking about Angles. The Sons of God are the righteous line of Seth. The daughters of men are Cain's unrighteous line and Cain's line over took Seth line leaving only Noah and his family as the only righteous line left. With no righteous people in the world ( but Noah) God was grieved and began plans for the destruction of the world by water. This passage has nothing to do with Mutant Angel Humans. The idea of Angel-Humans comes from Pagan and Jewish Myths not from the Word of God, later a group of heretic Christians known as Gnostics began to incorporate in there teachings.

 

[gordonhooker]

Silly question - God is a God of love and would not ask you to kill anyone anyway.

 

[RDKirk]

Like I said in the OP, back in the Old Testament, God DID ask people to do that. Saying that God wouldn't seems like just trying to avoid the uncomfortable thought that God would and has done that, at least according to the Old Testament.

Not to mention I've seen "murder" in relation to that commandment defined as "killing without a cause". Killing and claiming that it was God telling you to do so is "a cause", and therefore it could be argued it's not breaking the commandment.

Well I did give a mention to the disobeying children in your own groups as well, I mainly focused on other groups because most of the time when God asked people to kill in the Old Testament, it was killing those in another group.

Considering the Old Testament, God could conceivably ask that.

It can also be very well argued that those were desperate wars of national and cultural survival.

As has been mentioned, the Bronze Age was not a time of enlightenment, it was a brutish period when as even the bible states, the people were hard-hearted, violent, and stiff-necked...and the Israelites were not different from the surrounding nations...we have extra-biblical sources that tell us about the Babylonians, Assyrians, Persians, et al.

Not necessarily, but people have claimed that they killed because God told them to, which is in the Old Testament as well, so someone could claim that and find themselves biblically justified in doing so.

Saying that though seems to completely brush away or ignore the Old Testament, saying "Oh it's not valid, we have the New Testament now!", which is why I also mentioned if God asked you to do that and you lived in the Old Testament time period.

If I lived in the OT, I'd be involved in a brutal world surrounded by brutal people under a constant threat of invasion (as the various Assyrian, Egyptian, and Babylonian invasions demonstrate).

This isn't then, their situation is not ours and their covenant is not ours. The "what ifs" are unreasonable.

 

[redleghunter]

(Feel free to move this if it should be in Ethics and Morality instead.)

Now before you say "God would never do that!" keep in mind that in the Old Testament, there were several times where God commanded entire cities to be destroyed and killed, including the infants. And disobedient children were sometimes stoned to death due to not following the Fourth Commandment (at least of the group commonly called the Ten Commandments. So as much as we may try to ignore it, if we go by the Bible there was a time when God commanded those things.

So even if you say God wouldn't do that now, it's clear he did at one point (and thus he could again since he's the same through time, right?). So, would you be willing to draw a heavy metal sword down upon the tiny body of an infant newborn if God commanded it? Even disregarding modern times, say if you lived in that time period and God asked you to do that, or stone disobedient children in your family or group. Would you do it?

St Augustine spoke of dispensations in which God deals with humankind in covenants.
The Covenant with Israel known as Mosaic law, was a theocratic dispensation.
Added to the theocratic dispensation was the Covenant of the Davidic blood line for kings.

Christians are not under the above Covenants. We are under the New Covenant which was bought with the Blood of Christ. Christ did not command the church to be a theocracy, nor nation state or to shed blood to further the Gospel.

Your OP parameters are absent in the teachings of Christ and His apostles who taught and established the New Covenant.

So if some voice or apparition or vision or dream commanded me to kill for him, I would respond as Michael Archangel did to Satan "The Lord rebuke you."

 

[Big Drew]

Please explain to me how this is "common sense?" This is what I asked Big Drew to provide evidence for.

"I think we can look at many of the Vietnam War veterans for that answer...so many didn't understand why they were there, they saw it as a pointless war...and years later many still suffer from the effects..."​

Dude, you're not going to bait me. If you want to discuss this, start a thread and send me the link...I'm happy to discuss it, but not here.

 

[Dawnhammer]

So the "God told me to" defense is perfectly acceptable in your eyes, then?

Not at all. I would go to get medical help and would recommend it for people hearing voices in general.

However if you truly believed that God almighty your creator and steward of your eternal afterlife commanded you to do something I find it pretty naive to believe you would or indeed could disobey God's command simply because of your own reasoning or personal morals.

 

[JoeP222w]

(Feel free to move this if it should be in Ethics and Morality instead.)

Now before you say "God would never do that!" keep in mind that in the Old Testament, there were several times where God commanded entire cities to be destroyed and killed, including the infants. And disobedient children were sometimes stoned to death due to not following the Fourth Commandment (at least of the group commonly called the Ten Commandments. So as much as we may try to ignore it, if we go by the Bible there was a time when God commanded those things.

So even if you say God wouldn't do that now, it's clear he did at one point (and thus he could again since he's the same through time, right?). So, would you be willing to draw a heavy metal sword down upon the tiny body of an infant newborn if God commanded it? Even disregarding modern times, say if you lived in that time period and God asked you to do that, or stone disobedient children in your family or group. Would you do it?

God used the nation of Israel to execute His divine justice against a wicked and idolatrous people. I know of nowhere in the Bible where God command just a single individual to kill others. You are also appear to be pre-supposing that infants are innocent of sin, not even Rome takes that position. And contextually, disobedient children was referring to adult children primarily and these were children who violated the Law. Being disobedient to parents, as understood by the ancient Israelites, was not an innocent act. It was willful law breaking. Or do you feel that law breaking should not have consequences?

Moreover, the USA is not a theocracy. However, if I was in the Army, I understand that I signed up to obey the lawful orders of those appointed above me. There are just wars, such as going to war against ISIS and God does give the State the authority to wage war against evil and wicked men. However, if while serving in the Army, if they asked me to do something that is morally wrong, I would, by the grace of God, respectfully say no, I will not do that.

 

[Norbert L]

(Feel free to move this if it should be in Ethics and Morality instead.)

Now before you say "God would never do that!" keep in mind that in the Old Testament, there were several times where God commanded entire cities to be destroyed and killed, including the infants. And disobedient children were sometimes stoned to death due to not following the Fourth Commandment (at least of the group commonly called the Ten Commandments. So as much as we may try to ignore it, if we go by the Bible there was a time when God commanded those things.

So even if you say God wouldn't do that now, it's clear he did at one point (and thus he could again since he's the same through time, right?). So, would you be willing to draw a heavy metal sword down upon the tiny body of an infant newborn if God commanded it? Even disregarding modern times, say if you lived in that time period and God asked you to do that, or stone disobedient children in your family or group. Would you do it?

I did not see any modern nation being led by a pillar of cloud by day and fire by night whereby God visibly made a covenant with them to reside as their King overseeing their democratic government. To those that He did in the past, He instructed Jeremiah to tell them Jeremiah 29:7. You are right, God does not change in His purpose Luke 9:56. The real problem is figuring out why He commanded those cities to be destroyed but to give the hypothetical you suggest will obfuscate that dilemma. Like apples and oranges, they both are fruit but at the same time different fruit.

 

[nomadictheist]

(Feel free to move this if it should be in Ethics and Morality instead.)

Now before you say "God would never do that!" keep in mind that in the Old Testament, there were several times where God commanded entire cities to be destroyed and killed, including the infants. And disobedient children were sometimes stoned to death due to not following the Fourth Commandment (at least of the group commonly called the Ten Commandments. So as much as we may try to ignore it, if we go by the Bible there was a time when God commanded those things.

So even if you say God wouldn't do that now, it's clear he did at one point (and thus he could again since he's the same through time, right?). So, would you be willing to draw a heavy metal sword down upon the tiny body of an infant newborn if God commanded it? Even disregarding modern times, say if you lived in that time period and God asked you to do that, or stone disobedient children in your family or group. Would you do it?

Yes.

God demands complete and absolute obedience, and deserves nothing less.

That said, God commands His people in this age that they are not to take up the sword (figuratively, in other words, not to make war against) against others as Christians. This does not, of course, speak to those who have been sworn into the armed forces because they are not waging war on behalf of God's kingdom.

If 'God' were to give me such instructions in this day, I would first wonder what 'god' it was coming from. We must remember that there is more than one spirit, but there is only one Spirit of Truth.

 

[IMNW]

The question for me would not be "Would God do this?" But rather "Can I be sure that this command is actually from God." To elaborate, I probably wouldn't be sure if it was indeed him or whether it was my mind leading me astray. The circumstances should certainly guide your judgment, in my opinion.

 

[Dr Bruce Atkinson]

(Feel free to move this if it should be in Ethics and Morality instead.)

Now before you say "God would never do that!" keep in mind that in the Old Testament, there were several times where God commanded entire cities to be destroyed and killed, including the infants. And disobedient children were sometimes stoned to death due to not following the Fourth Commandment (at least of the group commonly called the Ten Commandments. So as much as we may try to ignore it, if we go by the Bible there was a time when God commanded those things.

So even if you say God wouldn't do that now, it's clear he did at one point (and thus he could again since he's the same through time, right?). So, would you be willing to draw a heavy metal sword down upon the tiny body of an infant newborn if God commanded it? Even disregarding modern times, say if you lived in that time period and God asked you to do that, or stone disobedient children in your family or group. Would you do it?

What I know of God is that He is far more loving, good, righteous, moral, merciful, knowledgeable, and wise than all human beings put together. Note Isaiah 55:8-9 --
"For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord.
For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts."

God is fully trustworthy. Therefore, WHATEVER God commands (if I am certain it IS God) I should do, and I would hope that I would obey Him in all things. I trust that He would never ask me to do what is evil or what is against His previous commands unless it were a temporary test of my faith -- and He would stop me (like the Abraham and Isaac sacrifice episode).

 

[Pilgrim Heir]

(Feel free to move this if it should be in Ethics and Morality instead.)

Now before you say "God would never do that!" keep in mind that in the Old Testament, there were several times where God commanded entire cities to be destroyed and killed, including the infants. And disobedient children were sometimes stoned to death due to not following the Fourth Commandment (at least of the group commonly called the Ten Commandments. So as much as we may try to ignore it, if we go by the Bible there was a time when God commanded those things.

So even if you say God wouldn't do that now, it's clear he did at one point (and thus he could again since he's the same through time, right?). So, would you be willing to draw a heavy metal sword down upon the tiny body of an infant newborn if God commanded it? Even disregarding modern times, say if you lived in that time period and God asked you to do that, or stone disobedient children in your family or group. Would you do it?

God speaks today through His word. He no longer speaks through prophets. Jesus no longer walks the earth. The only revelation for believers today is the word. The question is based on a false premise. Even though God is immutable He works in different ways in different times.

The last sentence is more closely related to present day choices. If a king (or president) declares war upon another country that has first attacked, are Christians free to go to war and obey the king? Yes, God has granted the king this authority and the citizens must obey God´s representative.

 

[AlexDTX]

(Feel free to move this if it should be in Ethics and Morality instead.)

Now before you say "God would never do that!" keep in mind that in the Old Testament, there were several times where God commanded entire cities to be destroyed and killed, including the infants. And disobedient children were sometimes stoned to death due to not following the Fourth Commandment (at least of the group commonly called the Ten Commandments. So as much as we may try to ignore it, if we go by the Bible there was a time when God commanded those things.

So even if you say God wouldn't do that now, it's clear he did at one point (and thus he could again since he's the same through time, right?). So, would you be willing to draw a heavy metal sword down upon the tiny body of an infant newborn if God commanded it? Even disregarding modern times, say if you lived in that time period and God asked you to do that, or stone disobedient children in your family or group. Would you do it?

I think God telling Abraham to sacrifice Isaac on the altar is a better illustration. The OT bloodshed was strictly for that dispensation of the Mosaic Law which is no longer in effect. But Abraham was before that dispensation and the question is Could God test our faith like Abraham's in sacrificing someone else? In Abraham's case, according to the book of Hebrews, he believed that God would still fulfill his promise of multitudes coming from Isaac, the son of promise, by raising him from the dead.

Heb 11:17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,
Heb 11:18 Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called:
Heb 11:19 Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure.​

So to answer your question, No, God would not do what to us what He did with Abraham. But He may call us to sacrifice other things.

 

[Der Alte]

Dude, you're not going to bait me. If you want to discuss this, start a thread and send me the link...I'm happy to discuss it, but not here.

How can I be baiting you when I was not even talking to you. The post you quoted was addressed to another poster, @TheoryofForms. I did not introduce the unsupported allegations into the thread. Since I have now asked twice for evidence for the allegations you made. I must conclude you have no such evidence.

 

[Dave-W]

My immediate response is no, I couldn't bring myself to kill an innocent because God told me to. But how many soldiers have gone and fought a war because their government told them to? So then the question would be do we trust in the government more than God?

OK - you can't put the government ahead of God; but your own sense of morality you DO put ahead of God?

 

[PropheticTimes]

The passage you stated is not talking about Angles. The Sons of God are the righteous line of Seth. The daughters of men are Cain's unrighteous line and Cain's line over took Seth line leaving only Noah and his family as the only righteous line left. With no righteous people in the world ( but Noah) God was grieved and began plans for the destruction of the world by water. This passage has nothing to do with Mutant Angel Humans. The idea of Angel-Humans comes from Pagan and Jewish Myths not from the Word of God, later a group of heretic Christians known as Gnostics began to incorporate in there teachings.

I disagree with you on every point. If you can show me Scripture that supports that, I would consider it, but Seth is not mentioned in this Scripture nor is Cain. The term "sons of God", in the OT, always referred to angels.

This passage had everything to do with hybrid beings. The Book of Enoch (not in our canon today but still a part of the Ethiopian Christian canon and referenced by a few NT writers) explains it very well. Enoch was the 7th from Adam and had a ring-side seat to what was happening.

If you choose to believe the "sons of Seth" myth you are more than welcome, but I choose to follow truth. I will not continue this argument here, there is enough information available through Bible study materials available on the internet to do your own study on this matter.

God bless.