The Destruction of the Babies and Children of Amalek - God's Slaughter of the Amalekites

Biblical Slaughter of Amalekite Babies

In the Bible ~ the Old Testament Book of Samuel ~ there is a horrific story of genocide.

Here, God supposedly orders the annihilation of a whole tribe of people ~ the destruction of the Amalekites, or people of Amalek.

Every living being has to be killed by the sword.

Apparently, God particularly mentions the suckling babies. They must be slaughtered, too!

Little children and tiny babies! Unbelievable!

1 Samuel 15

This is the Story;

Samuel said that the Lord has sent him to anoint Saul as king, and to give him orders from God.

Since God remembered that the Amalekites had ambushed the Israelites, on their way out of Egypt, he now wanted Saul to slaughter all of the Amalek people.

The orders according to the King James Version;

"Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare nothing; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling baby, ox and sheep, camel and ass". KJV

The orders according to the New International Version (2010);
"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." NIV


Amalekites? - Info From the Jewish Encyclopedia

'AMALEK, AMALEKITES ~ Name of a nomadic nation south of Palestine.

'That the Amalekites were not Arabs, but of a stock related to the Edomites (consequently also to the Hebrews), can be concluded from the genealogy in Gen. xxxvi. 12 and in I Chron. i. 36. ....

'The Amalekites themselves always appear as hostile to Israel. ....

'.... it seems as though [Amalek] had actually been exterminated by the wars with Saul and David.'


http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=1351&letter=A&search=amalek

Don’t spare them, but kill .. infants and children

CD Cover
CD Cover

So Saul gathered a huge army and they slaughtered the whole of Amalek.
The only person spared was the king, who was taken prisoner.
Everyone else was 'utterly destroyed ... with the edge of the sword'.

The only other lives spared were the best of the calves, lambs, sheep and oxen, which were to be sacrificed to God.
They took 'all that was good and would not utterly destroy them' but everything that disgusted them was completely destroyed.
' ...everything that was good. These they were unwilling to destroy completely, but everything that was despised and weak they totally destroyed'. NIV

Then Samuel heard God's voice saying:
"I am sorry that I made Saul king, because he has turned against me and has not followed my orders."

Saul thought that he had done a good job, but Samuel told him: "The LORD sent you to utterly destroy the sinning Amalekites, but you did not obey him. That is evil in God's sight."

But Saul said that he had obeyed the LORD ~ that he had brought back Agag, the king of Amalek, and had utterly destroyed all of the Amalekites. And they had brought back some animals to sacrifice.

Samuel asked him: "Do you think God prefers your sacrifices or your obedience? ~ To obey is better than sacrifice. Rebellion is as bad a sin as witchcraft and stubbornness is as iniquitous aas idolatry. Because you rejected the word of the LORD, he has rejected you as king."

And Saul said to Samuel: "I have sinned: for I have disobeyed the commands of the LORD, and your own commands. It was because I feared the men ~ I obeyed them".

Suckling Baby

I, Produnis, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publishes it under ... the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. Details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Breastfeeding01.jpg
I, Produnis, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publishes it under ... the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. Details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Breastfeeding01.jpg | Source

New Born Baby

I [Gengiskanhg], the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the ... GNU Free Documentation License. etails: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:HumanNewborn.JPG
I [Gengiskanhg], the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the ... GNU Free Documentation License. etails: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:HumanNewborn.JPG | Source

Verse Three - Could We Have got It Wrong??

Let us just look at verse 3, where God, apparently, orders the slaughter of children, toddlers, and new-born babes. Could we have misunderstood?

The Bible: King James Version ~ 1 Samuel 15

"Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare nothing; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling baby, ox and sheep, camel and ass".
*
The Bible: New International Version. 2010 ~ 1 Samuel 15

"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."

*
New American Standard Bible ~ 1 Samuel 15

3'Now go and strike Amalek and (A)utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him; but put to death both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.'
*
Bible: New Living Translation ~ 1 Samuel 15

3 "Now go and completely destroy the entire Amalekite nation—men, women, children, babies, cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys.”
*
Bible: GOD’S WORD Translation ~ 1 Samuel 15

3"Now go and attack Amalek. Claim everything they have for God by destroying it. Don’t spare them, but kill men and women, infants and children, cows and sheep, camels and donkeys.”

* * * *

After checking a number of versions, it seems that there is no mistake. The Bible states that God ordered the slaughter of all of the babies and children in an entire tribe of people ~ along with their mothers, their unborn siblings, and everyone else

Think About It!

No, Really ~ Think About it!

It's cruel, isn't it, to slaughter animals for no good reason?

Maybe it's all right for food ~ though animal lovers might not even agree with that ~ but to slaughter them because their owners are your enemies? What unnecessary suffering!

But I am not going to concentrate on animals here ~ well, only on human animals, anyway. I want to think about the people.

Who would be found amongst the people of Amalek?

Men. Working men. Food hunting men. Fighting men.

Enemy fighting men! ~ Justifiable opponents, perhaps.

And who else?

Old men and women ~ possibly crippled or sick.

Younger women ~ some caring for the elderly; some caring for their children; some pregnant with unborn life; some actually giving birth; some suckling their new-borns.

Children: older ones, working with their parents; younger ones, running around playing; toddlers, learning to walk and talk; new borns, sleeping or suckling.

Picture them.

Picture the pregnant women having a sword thrust into their bellies.

Picture the mothers, as they see their toddlers cut down by a sword, in the hand of a huge fighting man.

Picture the new-borns, ripped apart, with their mothers, as they suckle.

Picture the children, watching their mothers and baby siblings being ripped apart ~ before the man with the sword comes after them.

Imagine the screams of old and disabled people, who cannot even attempt to run!

Imagine the screams of mothers and grandmothers, as they see their little children sliced apart; the screams of terrified children and toddlers; the cry of a new-born baby ~ suddenly silenced.

Imagine those toddlers and babies crawling around in pools of blood ~ their own and that of others ~ as they wait, in agony and fear, to die.

Everyone was 'utterly destroyed ... with the edge of the sword'

Everyone ... 'utterly destroyed ... with the edge of the sword'

To be honest, I don't want to imagine it. It is sickening and horrific.

Who would have done such a thing?

Who would have given such a horrific order?

1 Samuel 15 - Verse 3. King James Version

Death of Agag

Public domain ~ copyright expired. see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gustave_Dor%C3%A9_Morte_Agag.jpg
Public domain ~ copyright expired. see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gustave_Dor%C3%A9_Morte_Agag.jpg | Source

The Order and the Response

As we have seen, Saul gave the order to his men, after being told to do so by Samuel, who had received his commands from the Almighty God ~ apparently.

This is how the latest New International Translation ~ 1 Samuel 15 ~ puts it:

1 Samuel said to Saul ..........

2 This is what the LORD Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites .... 3 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 ....’

4 So Saul summoned the men and mustered them at Telaim—two hundred thousand foot soldiers and ten thousand from Judah. ......

7 Then Saul attacked the Amalekites ......'

First Book of Samuel

Front Cover
Front Cover

Did they Obey God's Orders?

The following quote implies that they did obey God's command ~ almost ~ except for King Agag:

'8[Saul] took Agag king of the Amalekites alive, and all his people he totally destroyed with the sword'.

But this next part makes one wonder:

9 'But Saul and the army spared Agag and the best of the sheep and cattle, the fat calves and lambs—everything that was good. These they were unwilling to destroy completely, but everything that was despised and weak they totally destroyed.'

They kept all that they thought was good ~ just as armies generally tended to take spoils. Did they really intend to sacrifice the best of the animals to God ~ or had they decided to keep some of them for themselves??

When Samuel challenged Saul, 15 Saul answered, “The soldiers brought them from the Amalekites; they spared the best of the sheep and cattle to sacrifice to the LORD your God, but we totally destroyed the rest".

Later:

21 Saul admitted: "The soldiers took sheep and cattle from the plunder, the best of what was devoted to God, in order to sacrifice them to the LORD your God ....”

24 Then Saul said to Samuel, “I have sinned. I violated the LORD’s command and your instructions. I was afraid of the men and so I gave in to them."

It sounds as if the men wanted plunder and Saul was too frightened of them to say 'no'. After all, they numbered thousands!

When thousands of men annihilate a tribe and collect loot, it is unlikely that they would intend to sacrifice all of the animals. It is also unlikely that the women and girls would have been killed until they had been mauled and raped first.

So, as well as the fear, bloodshed, agony, chaos and murder, we have to add little girls, pregnant women and old maids being raped ~ perhaps repeatedly ~ in front of both their families and their enemies. And then pierced with a sword until dead.

Horrific, isn't it!

I find it very, very distressing to read about.

In Rabbinical Writing (Wikipedia)

1 + 2 Samuel - Commentary

Front Cover
Front Cover

Wikipedia on the Rabbinical Literature

Quote:

'When he received the command to smite Amalek (I Sam. xv. 3), Saul said:

"For one found slain the Torah requires a sin offering [Deut. xxi. 1-9]; and here so many shall be slain.

"If the old have sinned, why should the young suffer; and if men have been guilty, why should the cattle be destroyed?"

'It was this mildness that cost him his crown (Yoma 22b; Num. R. i. 10) ~ the fact that he was merciful even to his enemies ...'

[Yoma 22b; Num. R. i. 10]

 * * * * *

1 Samuel 15 - Verse 3. New International Version

Why?

Why Would God Order the Murder Of Babies?

I have asked a number of Christians about this and received a number of answers.

I have been told that it is not 'murder'. God gives life, so he has every right to take it away. That is not the same thing as humans disobeying the 'Do not murder' commandment.

I have been told that the Amalekites were the enemies of Israel and the enemies of God.They fought against the Israelites and they rejected God. Accordingly, they had to be punished.

The children also had to die because:

-> either ~ they were going to grow up evil, so had to be annihilated with their tribe,

-> or ~ with all of their family dead, there would have been no-one to care for them, and killing them was being cruel to kind.

Would God Order the Deaths of Babies and Other Innocents?

The Flood: Genesis 6-8

The deluge, or flood, for which Noah, apparently, built an ark, killed everyone else on the Earth. Apparently this was because of all of the corruption ~ but was everyone corrupt?

Were all of the babies and children who drowned really completely corrupt?

Would God Order the Deaths of Babies and Other Innocents?

Deaths of Egypt's First-Borns - Exodus 11: 1- 6


The Lord told Moses; I will bring one more plague upon Pharaoh and Egypt. Afterwards he will let you go. ....

Then Moses told his people; The Lord has said this: At midnight, I shall go into the midst of Egypt and all of the firstborn in Egypt shall die ~ from the first born of Pharaoh to the firstborn of the maidservant in the mill; and all the firstborn of beasts. ... There shall be such weeping and wailing throughout Egypt, as there has never been before.

*

Some of the first-borns would have been older, but many would have been little children.

King James Bible

Front Cover
Front Cover

Would God Order the Deaths of Babies and Other Innocents?

Death of King David's Baby - 2 Samuel 12: 7~ 18

This story tells of how Nathan reminded David that the Lord had taken him from Saul's house, anointed him king of Israel, given him his master's house and his wives and, in response, David had been disrespectful to the Lord, doing evil ~ killing Uriah the Hittite with the sword, and taking his widow as a wife. Because of this Nathan said that the Lord would cause suffering to come to his household.

He was told: Your wives will be raped, in public, by your neighbour, in broad daylight.

David admitted that he had sinned, but Nathan told him that God had taken away his sin and that he would not die because of it, but that his newborn baby son ~ born to Uriah's widow ~ would die instead.

The baby became very sick and, after a week, it died.

*

Once again, the Bible tells us that God decided to kill a new baby. This time, it was as a punishment for David killing his mother's previous husband. Why would an innocent new baby have to pay for this 'crime'? Why would the sin of his father have to be paid for by this tiny baby?

*

Furthermore, why would the sins of David have to be paid for by his wives?

These women had already been taken from one man and given to another ~ undoubtedly without any say in the matter ~ and now God had arranged for them to be raped in the street, in front of all and sundry, in broad daylight.

What disgusting suffering, pain and distress for them!


Jeremiah 46 - More Blood on the Sword

Jeremiah 46: 10-12 ~ New International Version 2010

"But that day belongs to the Lord, the LORD Almighty ~ a day of vengeance, for vengeance on his foes.
The sword will devour till it is satisfied, till it has quenched its thirst with blood.
For the Lord, the LORD Almighty, will offer sacrifice in the land of the north by the River Euphrates.”

Deuteronomy 32 - Blood on the Sword

There are other examples in the Bible of God's sword being wielded:

Deuteronomy 32:36-42 ~ New International Version 2010

The LORD will vindicate his people ...
He will say: ....
“See now that I myself am he! There is no god besides me.
I put to death and I bring to life, I have wounded and I will heal, and no one can deliver out of my hand. I lift my hand to heaven and solemnly swear: As surely as I live forever, when I sharpen my flashing sword and my hand grasps it in judgment, I will take vengeance on my adversaries and repay those who hate me. I will make my arrows drunk with blood, while my sword devours flesh: the blood of the slain and the captives, the heads of the enemy leaders.

17th Century BC Swords

Dbachmann, copyright holder of these works, hereby publish under GNU Free Documentation License See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nebra_Schwerter.jpg + http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Apa_Schwerter.jpg
Dbachmann, copyright holder of these works, hereby publish under GNU Free Documentation License See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nebra_Schwerter.jpg + http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Apa_Schwerter.jpg | Source

'Drunk With Blood' - Steve Wells

Book Covers - Front + Back
Book Covers - Front + Back

Conclusions

Did God order the deaths of babies and children?

I have to first acknowledge that I am agnostic, so I don't feel that I know whether or not there is a God or, if there is, what he is like, or what he would do,

And I have read that there is no actual proof of the existence of Saul and David ~ though that may have changed in the interim.

However, three things strike me as being obvious.

1. When ancient peoples believed in a God, they thought that this God controlled everything ~ life and death; battle wins and battle losses; thunder and lightning; volcano, earthquake and flood. Even today such events are known as 'Acts of God' ~ though they are really 'acts of nature'.

In such circumstances, it is not surprising that this Hebrew tribe felt that their God ~ Yahweh ~ was responsible for the slaughter of Amalek ~ even that God had ordered it.

2. It is also possible that someone desiring power might claim to hear orders from God, in order to gain some control over a tribe. Or they might actually (think that they) hear voices. That does not mean that they are really receiving orders from God. What is the truth about Samuel, I wonder? (Some people still commit murder, believing that God ordered them to do it.)

3. If something happens, which feels wrong, then it is not unusual for the perpetrator to blame someone else ~ possibly even God. Perhaps that happened here.

Some Christians ~ certainly not all ~ believe that, while God is the 'Creator' and 'Father', he would also slaughter new-born babies. I do not understand this. I think that the God of the Bible was a chosen deity for that tribe, at that time. There were many 'gods' The Israelites chose this one and placed their hopes, beliefs, stories and legends upon him.

The world is an amazing place. We do not need an ancient set of documents to tell us that. We may or may not believe in God, but to believe that 'God' is a being who would create babies, only to destroy them, in an event that, by modern standards, would be termed 'genocide', makes little sense to me.

"A Moral Atrocity"

Farrell Till and Biblical Arguments

Edit: 17th Feb. 2011:

I thought that it might be worth editing this article, in order to add some 'arguments' regarding Biblical atrocities.

I was interested in the thoughts of Farrell Till and in the opinions of those who disagree with him on this subject.

According to Wikipedia, (John) Farrell Till was a Christian missionary and minister in the 'Church of Christ'. However, he left the church in 1963, in his 30th year, and became an atheist. He was editor and publisher of the 'Skeptical Review' and he runs a discussion 'forum' called "Errancy". It concentrates on errors and contradictions to be found in the Bible subject which Till happily debates with believers.

Here are some relevant quotes from Till:

"What happened on that day, if indeed it did happen, must by all standards of decency and morality--except for biblical standards, of course--be considered a moral atrocity. After all, this is a case where an attacking army went beyond the killing of the soldiers they fought against to the butchering of women and children and even infants still nursing their mothers' breasts. Please notice that Yahweh's order was to slay even "infant and suckling" (v:3); noone--nothing--was to be spared. As we will soon note, it was Yahwistic vengeance at its bloodiest.

"My position, which is the position that any humanitarian would take in the matter, is that such an event as this must be considered a moral atrocity."


*

"A favorite justification of the Yahwistic massacres in the Old Testament, one that I even used myself when I was an inerrantist preacher, is that "God" created life, so he has the right to take life. Four problems in this "excuse," which I will simply list here without discussing, are that

(1) it begs the question of "God's" existence with apparently no consideration at all to the possibility that "God" doesn't exist,

(2) it begs the question of whether the Hebrew deity Yahweh was in fact "God," with apparently no consideration at all to the possibility that Yahweh was simply another tribal deity who was no more real than Dagon, Chemosh, Baal, Ishtar, and other regional gods,

(3) it assumes that even if the god Yahweh is a real deity, he did in fact order the massacres in question and ignores completely the possibility that superstitious Hebrews at that time, like their surrounding neighbors, believed incorrectly that "God" was ordering them to massacre other nations, and

(4) it assumes that what is universally recognized as immoral conduct on the part of humans is somehow morally right for gods to do."

*

"There are biblical claims that the Amalekites attacked the Israelites on their way out of Egypt (Ex. 17:8-16) and then later after they had entered Canaan (Judges 3:13-14; Judges 7:12), but these encounters had happened some 400 years before Yahweh commanded Saul to destroy totally the Amalekites. ......

"... I will say that even if the Amalekites were "predatory" and "raiding," that would have made them no different from the Israelites. ... on their way toward Canaan, the Israelites ravaged Midian and brought back "all of their cattle, all of their flocks, and all of their goods" and then killed all of the male children and non-virgin females but kept the virgin girls alive for themselves .." (Num. 31:9-18)

Sources / References / Further reading:

http://www.theskepticalreview.com/

William J. Kesatie on the Subject

An Opposing View to Till

Here is an example of an opposing view ~ from Jerry McDonald:

"God is a divine being and is the creator of all life on earth. As such he has the right to decide who will live upon earth and who will die. Since God decided that these babies should die, could he not give them eternal life in the hereafter? Of course, he could and did! He, being the all-knowing God that he is, knew that these babies would grow up and rebel and then they would not have eternal life. However, if they died as babies he could give them eternal life. Now, if Mr. Till was [sic] a divine being, he would have the right to challenge God on his actions here, but since he is not, he has no such right.

"It was more merciful to kill them outright rather than to allow them to die of starvation, thirst, and exposure. The parents had died in battle. What was God supposed to do, Mr. Till, allow the babies to die a slow, painful death? I guess that would be more merciful in Till's mind. No! If God had done this, Mr. Till would be complaining about that way as well. You know, it sure is funny that Mr. Till (who does not even believe in objective morality) will classify this as a moral atrocity."

http://www.theskepticalreview.com/JFTMcDonaldTillInerrancyAffirm2.htmlhttp:

Just Commandments???

Comments 49 comments

Lady Guinevere profile image

Lady Guinevere 5 years ago from West Virginia

To read further in the Bible the god we are also to pay homage too and listen too was/is a merciful and loving god. Now you take the god that you are describing from these verses and then compare it to the god of the all merciful and loving it appears that there are two different gods or the one god is schizophrenic or has multiple personalities. I think the men used god as an excuse to kill those who didn't like what they were doing. Usually when one attacks or ambushes anothr there is a reason and it really isn't about nothing like the bible verses you brought about tend to say. Much has been taken away that we do not see.

Thanks for this hub and yu keep bringing the light unto the darkness. I have several religious hubs you may take a look at. There are others that censor me and also have told others to not even read my stuff....and they continue to do so as I type these words. They tell me that I a preventing people from knowing Jesus Christ. They lie through their teeth and keyboards.

Voted up, useful and awesome!


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands Author

Hi Lady Guinevere

Thanks for your comments :)


Rod Marsden profile image

Rod Marsden 5 years ago from Wollongong, NSW, Australia

Yes, Trish-M it seems we can go to the bible for horror if we wish to do so.

I would say the God of the Old Testament is a lot more brutal than the God of the New Testament.

Mind you it has been said that Jesus may have formed a death cult in that he may have believed that life on earth was coming to a close very soon and people had to swiftly prepare for the coming of the end of times. If this is so well that's pretty grim in itself.

Where witches and witchcraft are mentioned I tend to be a little suspicious of the translator or translators.


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands Author

Hi Rod!

Yes, lots of horror in the Bible :)


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands Author

A friend made this comment:

"Interesting thesis Trish.

"I'm afraid the reality is quite simply that God(s) and religion, and fear of God(s), was used to manipulate simple people, usually finding the murderous and bloodthirsty among them to lead and carry out orders, to further the lust of men for power, revenge, and war who often themselves became sated in extreme religious righteousness the more they succeeded.

"It's carried on and goes on to this day .... it's endless. No God orders or demands these things, it's all man's work."


diogenes profile image

diogenes 5 years ago from UK and Mexico

Hi Trish. A well researched article which left me about half way through. It seems most religions allow mayhem somewhere in their texts...look at some of Corinthians and, of course, excerpts from the Khoran used by radical Moslems.

Religion. For me, we'd be better without it. Bob


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands Author

Yes, Diogenes, I know that some religions can do some good works, but ~ so many bad things have been done because of, or in the name of, or as result of, religion.

Sad. It can't be right. :(


John 5 years ago

I believe the Amalakites where Nephelim and therefore God had to wipe them out as they were a corrupt hybrid race. I also think they will return in the near future and we are to be aware of these things being watchful as in the Days of Noah.


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands Author

Interesting theory, John :)


nicolerkilpatrick profile image

nicolerkilpatrick 5 years ago

Amazing hub.


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands Author

Hello nicolerkilpatrick ~ thanks :)


MartieCoetser profile image

MartieCoetser 5 years ago from South Africa

This hub of yours reminded me of the time I was constantly studying these kind of anomalies in the Bible in an effort to understand my own unfortunate circumstances. Then I started to study mythology, specifically of Sumer (where Abraham grew up), Babilon and Egypt, and, at last, everything became crystal clear to me.

Let’s face it, the people of those days were barbarians who knew nothing about makro (stars, planets, etc.) and micro (atoms, viruses, etc.) cosmoses. What they were not able to understand, were demanding, manipulative and mysterious gods. I’ve noticed that even today every individual’s comprehension of God depends on their comprehension of the macro & micro cosmoses.

Thumbs UP for this great, informative and extremely comprehensive article about ancient believes and practices.


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands Author

Hi Marie :)

Thank you for your positive response :)

I enjoy looking at mythology and I would like to study more of the mythology of that region. I imagine that it would be quite an eye-opener.


Scott harrison 5 years ago

Do we know anything about the religious beliefs of the Amalekites? What sort of deity they worshipped, and their religious practice? And how close in fact were their beliefs to that of the Israelites?

peardesign@vodamail.co.za


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands Author

Hi Scott :)

Thanks for your interest!

That is a very good question and, off the top of my head, I don't know.

I did watch a very interesting documentary, about the comparisons between Israelite beliefs and the beliefs of some of their neighbours, but I am not sure whether or not this included the Amalekites.


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 3 years ago from The English Midlands Author

I have 'denied' a comment that was simply a copy and paste of an article.

Here:

Why did God order genocide? ~ Bible Answers with Pastor Doug.

http://www.amazingfacts.org/news-and-features/news...

Many people have tried to explain ~ or explain away ~ God's supposed genocide. Nothing has convinced me, as yet, that ~ if it were true ~ it is in any way acceptable.


Oztinato profile image

Oztinato 2 years ago from Australia

People will always use their desire for power and ego to slay others in the name of God or in the name of science: current attempts by odd international groups of atheists to legalize infanticide will make Biblical slaughter look like a picnic as it threatens to destroy millions if not billions of lives in the current millennium. Why? desire for power and ego; maybe they can sell a few books about it and make money

PS does this hub's title qualify it for "care troll" status?


Oztinato profile image

Oztinato 2 years ago from Australia

If we take the projected numbers of legalized infanticide victims into account, the worst Biblical depiction starts to look like a boy scout picnic.


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 2 years ago from The English Midlands Author

Oztinato, infanticide, legalized or otherwise, is nothing to do with religion or atheism


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 2 years ago from The English Midlands Author

I have no idea what this means:

"care troll" status


Oztinato profile image

Oztinato 2 years ago from Australia

Infanticide is the new far left atheist agenda right around the world. The reason I talk about it so much is to make atheists and theists aware of this fashionable "new black" of cutting edged atheism.

A care troll is somebody who makes a point/hub that alleges not to be there own philosophy but someone elses (to create controversy and argument; or to attract Bible scholars). It is an ethical failing. For example, a person might start a thread about a Bible study but not be a believer.


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 2 years ago from The English Midlands Author

It is very much my own opinion that the story of the slaughter of the Amalekites babies is absolutely disgusting and has no place in anyone's belief system; least of all those who suggest that this God, who supposedly ordered the murder of these babies, is a loving God.


Oztinato profile image

Oztinato 2 years ago from Australia

This is where we should turn to serious Bible scholars who identify where man (and certainly not God) has deliberately intervened in the writing of the Bible.

If we read the Bible or any book with the eyes of enlightened love it is easy to see what man has written to justify his own selfish political deeds.

The whole point of the NT is to show that a new fresh philosophy of Love intervened at a certain time in Western culture to change the course of history.

The only real enigma is the suffering of humanity; and I find that Eastern philosophy answers this question.


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 2 years ago from The English Midlands Author

All of the Bible was written by men. Clearly those men thought that God wanted babies to be slaughtered.


Deborah Sexton 2 years ago

One thing I forgot to mention is that the Amalekites were of the Giants. The giants began when the Sons of God (angels) went into the daughters of man and they had children. God wanted to wipe out all of those who were interbred


Deborah Sexton 2 years ago

The Amalekites were related to both the Edomites and the Hebrews (Esau’s grandson). They were a large amount of people and very evil. They attacked Israel every chance they got, even right after they came out of their bondage in Egypt.

The Amalekites were cannibals and were known to the Hebrews as the people who licked blood. They were murderers and killed the feeble first.

They were first of the nations and at first God blessed them, In the chant of Balaam at Numbers, 24:20, Amalek was called the 'first of the nations', showing they were of high antiquity.

God gave them every chance, but they were a warlike people, did not worship God and were known to Him as the sinners. Josephus calls Amalek a 'bastard' (νόθος), though in a derogative sense.

God only did to the Amalekites what they were always doing to other people. So they got back what they gave. If you have a relationship with God He will avenge and protect you.

Deuteronomy 25:17

Remember what Amalek did unto thee by the way, when ye were come forth out of Egypt;

Judges 10:12

The Zidonians also, and the Amalekites, and the Maonites, did oppress you; and ye cried to me, and I delivered you out of their hand.

All they had to do was be kind to God’s people and God would not have destroyed them.

1 Samuel 15:6

And Saul said unto the Kenites, Go, depart, get you down from among the Amalekites, lest I destroy you with them: for ye shewed kindness to all the children of Israel, when they came up out of Egypt. So the Kenites departed from among the Amalekites.

1 Samuel 15:18

And the Lord sent thee on a journey, and said, Go and utterly destroy the sinners the Amalekites, and fight against them until they be consumed.


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 2 years ago from The English Midlands Author

Hello Deborah. :)

Thank you for contributing.

All opinions are worth reading but, no, I'm sorry. There is absolutely no excuse for slicing up suckling babies. Nothing could convince me that there is.


Oztinato profile image

Oztinato 2 years ago from Australia

The why are many atheists wanting a piece of the baby with their new invention of trying to legalize infanticide? That will make the scale of any Biblical reports pale in comparison.

Are you equally upset about the atheist push for legal infanticide?

Do you see the hypocrisy in avoiding this contradiction?

OK atheist infanticide might be quieter and less psychopathic but it is instead very sociopathic.


Deborah Sexton 2 years ago

Even if part fallen angel (demon) ?

I see you are not allowing my large post. Is it because I see God's point ?


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 2 years ago from The English Midlands Author

Hi Deborah. You posted your large post twice so I deleted one of them; that's all. If there was another big post, then I haven't seen it. Please post it again, if you have a copy, because there seems to have been an error.


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 2 years ago from The English Midlands Author

Oztinato, I do not approve of infanticide at all, (though I think that euthanasia is a different matter).

Regardless of what some people think, be they atheist or believer, infanticide is not an 'atheist belief' or part of an 'atheist agenda', as it were, but it does seem to have been - and still be - acceptable to some people who believe that God did it.


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 2 years ago from The English Midlands Author

Hi Deborah, :)

You are not the first person to try to explain why God should order babies to be split apart with the sharp edge of a sword, but just think what you are saying.

If anyone else should ever do such a thing it would be condemned absolutely - and rightly so.


Deborah Sexton 2 years ago

Sure, God wasn't telling one person, He was instructing a nation

If I post the comment twice and you deleted one, where is the one you didn't delete ? It had to be unapproved. And in my activity it says it was an unapproved comment


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 2 years ago from The English Midlands Author

I don't know, Deborah. You made two posts that I deleted. On the one, you wrote 'please delete this' and the other was identical to the one that is still here. I double-checked the whole thing before removing it. It begins: 'The Amalekites were related to both the Edomites and the Hebrews ...'


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 2 years ago from The English Midlands Author

Anyway, Deborah, if God exists, then I do not believe that he ordered the killing of babies. I'm guessing that the men who wrote the story simply recorded it that way. If, though, God actually did order such a slaughter, then ... well, words fail me. It is horrific and would now be classed as genocide. Immoral and illegal.


Oztinato profile image

Oztinato 2 years ago from Australia

So why do many atheists plan to get a piece of the baby pie by trying to lebalize infanticide?


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 2 years ago from The English Midlands Author

I have no idea, Oztinato.

You imply that it is most atheists, which I doubt - unless, perhaps, they are actually referring to euthanasia.


GreyFoXX4 profile image

GreyFoXX4 2 years ago from Richlands, North Carolina

Genesis 3

14 And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: 15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Genesis 6

1 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 a 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.

5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

Genesis 36

1 Now these are the generations of Esau, who is Edom.

2 Esau took his wives of the daughters of Canaan; Adah the daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Aholibamah the daughter of Anah the daughter of Zibeon the Hivite;

3 And Bashemath Ishmael's daughter, sister of Nebajoth.

4 And Adah bare to Esau Eliphaz; and Bashemath bare Reuel;

5 And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these are the sons of Esau, which were born unto him in the land of Canaan.

12 And Timna was concubine to Eliphaz Esau's son; and she bare to Eliphaz Amalek: these were the sons of Adah Esau's wife.

To God Esau had already made his heart known by giving away his birth right to Jacob for a bowl of soup. Then to go on and marry into the women of the canaanites. The canaanites worshipped other gods and idols and were a cruel people. Amalek was named after Adah's family side lineage from Cain, for there was already Amalekites prior to his birth and they also worshipped other gods and idols.

Exodus 17

8 Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel in Rephidim.

9 And Moses said unto Joshua, Choose us out men, and go out, fight with Amalek: to morrow I will stand on the top of the hill with the rod of God in mine hand.

Numbers 24

20 And when he looked on Amalek, he took up his parable, and said, Amalek was the first of the nations; but his latter end shall be that he perish for ever.

Deuteronomy 25

16 For all that do such things, and all that do unrighteously, are an abomination unto the Lord thy God.

17 Remember what Amalek did unto thee by the way, when ye were come forth out of Egypt;

18 How he met thee by the way, and smote the hindmost of thee, even all that were feeble behind thee, when thou wast faint and weary; and he feared not God.

19 Therefore it shall be, when the Lord thy God hath given thee rest from all thine enemies round about, in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance to possess it, that thou shalt blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; thou shalt not forget it.

The edomites which was from Esau also were cruel people.

Malachi 1

1 The burden of the word of the Lord to Israel by Malachi.

2 I have loved you, saith the Lord . Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the Lord : yet I loved Jacob, 3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.

4 Whereas Edom saith, We are impoverished, but we will return and build the desolate places; thus saith the Lord of hosts, They shall build, but I will throw down; and they shall call them, The border of wickedness, and, The people against whom the Lord hath indignation for ever.

Obadiah

6 How are the things of Esau searched out! how are his hidden things sought up!

7 All the men of thy confederacy have brought thee even to the border: the men that were at peace with thee have deceived thee, and prevailed against thee; they that eat thy bread have laid a wound under thee: there is none understanding in him.

8 Shall I not in that day, saith the Lord , even destroy the wise men out of Edom, and understanding out of the mount of Esau?

9 And thy mighty men, O Teman, shall be dismayed, to the end that every one of the mount of Esau may be cut off by slaughter. and for their wrongs

10 For thy violence against thy brother Jacob shame shall cover thee, and thou shalt be cut off for ever.

11 In the day that thou stoodest on the other side, in the day that the strangers carried away captive his forces, and foreigners entered into his gates, and cast lots upon Jerusalem, even thou wast as one of them. 12 But thou shouldest not have looked on the day of thy brother in the day that he became a stranger; neither shouldest thou have rejoiced over the children of Judah in the day of their destruction; neither shouldest thou have spoken proudly in the day of distress.

13 Thou shouldest not have entered into the gate of my people in the day of their calamity; yea, thou shouldest not have looked on their affliction in the day of their calamity, nor have laid hands on their substance in the day of their calamity;

14 Neither shouldest thou have stood in the crossway, to cut off those of his that did escape; neither shouldest thou have delivered up those of his that did remain in the day of distress.

15 For the day of the Lord is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head.

16 For as ye have drunk upon my holy mountain, so shall all the heathen drink continually, yea, they shall drink, and they shall swallow down, and they shall be as though they had not been.

Even though Edom became a desolation, there was still a king yet to come from the edomites. And that was king Herod and though the Lord let Herod become king, what does he do with the throne. He sends soldiers out to kill every new born boy in the hopes of killing Jesus.

Sorry to be barrier of bad news. But with a biblical world view and striving to learn rightousness from the Lord. The Lord opens your eyes to what is truly right and wrong. Though we are not perfect there was only one that was, Jesus. But we should be striving for that rightousness found only in God. The canaanites and amaleks sought after Israels destruction from the beginning and not after the Lord's Grace and forgiveness. And he fulfilled what he had promised if they didn't straighten their heart to him like 400 years later.


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 2 years ago from The English Midlands Author

Hello GreyFoXX4 :)

Thank you for your interest in my article but I do not see how one tribe defending its land from an incoming tribe, several decades before, constitutes good reason for wholesale slaughters - and with regard to what is truly right and truly wrong, well, slaughtering new-borns is self-evidently truly wrong in the opinion of most people - and is considered a heinous crime by most societies.


GreyFoXX4 profile image

GreyFoXX4 2 years ago from Richlands, North Carolina

So then there will continue to be wars. What part of their heart is filled with wickedness that is hard to understand? The people your defending sought to kill the Jews all of them. They had already killed the weak of them which also would have been the elderly, women and childeren of the Israelites. So to bring true peace there must be a winner.

I guess its more humane to kill millions over 1000s of years in wars that are stopped in the name of being humane.

Look at what's going on now in Israel. Hammas has in its decree to wipe Israel off the planet. But people are hoping for a cease fire which Israel will be the only compliant side. And for what? To save a people that teaches its childeren that Jews are bad and must be killed and slaughterd. Which by the way ensures there will never be peace. How do you make a deal with people that plainly states they want your people and belief system totally wiped out?

Its amazing that history isn't a better teacher than what it is.

Please look up the videos of ISIS executing the christians and men of Iraq. Making them lay face down in a hole and one after another shooting them in the back of the head. Or walking them up to the side of a dock and shooting them in the back of their head one by one they fall into the river. With the dock soaked in blood. Look it up sometimes the truth is needed to be seen. Look into those guys eyes and see the fear and helplessness. Thats what they want to do to every last Jew and Christian in the world and they teach it generation after generation.


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 2 years ago from The English Midlands Author

My article is about the horrific Bible story of the Amalekite massacre.


GreyFoXX4 profile image

GreyFoXX4 2 years ago from Richlands, North Carolina

But the present is showing the past. And the past forms the present. So you dont think the things thats happening now over there is from those early times?

What i was showing is how God is the only one that is righteous. And he made a promise to preserve his people for them to be a testimony for him. And even to this day there is those that are called by different nam


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 2 years ago from The English Midlands Author

Hi Grey Foxx,

First of all let me clarify, I do not think that God was responsible for the deaths of the Amaleks; I think that this was a reason given in the old tribal stories. It is the fact that people believe that God was responsible that worries me - especially when they then choose to worship such a god.

And yes, of course long-held beliefs have a huge effect on people. This worries me, too.

I read, recently, that some researchers now believe that those Jews who did not leave 'the holy land' after the first-century troubles may have evolved into the people now known as the Palestinians. Thus the Jews of the diaspora and the Jews of the homeland might now be in this very sad and unfortunate conflict.

I understand the emotional hold that 'the promised land' has on Jewish culture. However, I also understand that the people who were living there when a new Israel was created have suffered greatly. It's time for understanding and peace.


GreyFoXX4 profile image

GreyFoXX4 2 years ago from Richlands, North Carolina

Understanding? I guess if we can understand that one side has in its creed/ constitution that a group of people to be exterminated. While the other side has given land and adhered to cease fires, has given infrastructure for electricity and water for the people that wants them dead. So really the talk of peace are saying it to the wrong people.

Think think this is the last comment for this subject for me. Its easy to get off subject persay on this subject with current events.

But God directed his people for his will to be done. And that is for the Jewish people to be a testimony of him and his power and might. Not that they or any christian is perfect but that God can change lives and use the small to accomplish huge things. He takes the least likely to do this. Same as paul and how its said he confounds the wise by the foolish.

May Jesus be with you and walk with you. God Bless.


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 2 years ago from The English Midlands Author

Thank you Grey Foxx.

Yes, I think that it is probably time to agree to disagree on certain matters :)


GreyFoXX4 profile image

GreyFoXX4 2 years ago from Richlands, North Carolina

Enjoyed the debate Trish. Always welcomed to message me if needed.


Joseph O Polanco profile image

Joseph O Polanco 19 months ago

Would a sadistic warmongering god ever extend mercy? Yet, when the people of one particular Canaanite city , Gibeon , sought mercy , Jehovah extended it . ( Joshua 9 :3-27 ) Could a bloodthirsty war god have done so ? Of course no , yet a God who delights in peace and justice would certainly .—Psalm 33 :5 ; 37 :28 .

Over and over again , the Bible connects God’s blessing with tranquility because Jehovah is a lover of peace , not war . ( Numbers 6 :24-26 ; Psalm 29 :11 ; 147 :12-14 ) Due to this fact , when King David hoped to erect a holy space of worship to Jehovah , God explained to him : “You will not build a house for my name, for you have shed a great deal of blood on the earth before me .”—1 Chronicles 22 :8 ; Acts 13 :22 .

While on earth , the Greater David , Jesus Christ , referred to an era when God’s love of justice would cease to permit him to stomach the modern-day ungodliness we observe the world over . ( Matthew 24 :3 , 36-39 ) As he did with the Flood of Noah’s time as well as in the devastation of Sodom and Gomorrah , Jehovah God Almighty will very soon take judicial measures to scour the world of narcissistic , ungodly individuals , thereby paving the path for tranquil conditions to exist under his heavenly Kingdom rule .—Psalm 37 :10 , 11 , 29 ; Daniel 2 :44 .

Now, even though the Bible recounts Jehovah God’s past adverse judgments frankly, you need to keep in mind that such were invariably against ungodly individuals and in defense of the innocent . After all, “Minatur innocentibus qui parcit nocentibus.”

By way of example , it was not until the entire world of Noah’s time finally became “filled with violence” that Jehovah declared : “As for me, I am going to bring floodwaters upon the earth to destroy from under the heavens all flesh that has the breath of life .” ( Genesis 6 :11 , 17 ) Surrounding another judgment , it absolutely was only as a result of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah had “abandoned themselves to sexual immorality and were bent on perverted sensuality” that God caused it to “rain sulfur and fire .”—Jude 7 , The New Berkeley Version ; Genesis 19 :24 .

Did God relish bringing all flesh to ruin in Noah’s day ? Or did he derive some fiendish pleasure from destroying the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah ? For an answer , let us look at the events surrounding the Flood of Noah’s day . The Holy Scriptures inform us that it devastated God that “every inclination of the thoughts of [man’s] heart was only bad all the time .” Their maleficence ' saddened his heart. ' Nonetheless , God dispatched Noah , “a preacher of righteousness ,” to sound a monition as well as to construct an ark for the preservation of the godly .—Genesis 6 :3-18 ; 2 Peter 2 :5 . ( Bracket mine ) So you see, undesirable judgments from God Almighty have at all times resulted only because evil men and/or women adamantly refuse to forbear their depravity and evildoing , not because Jehovah delights in doing away with individuals . Now you might ask yourself , ‘Did not Jehovah spur the Israelites to battle with various other nations and obliterate these ?’

The Amalekites , just to illustrate , were “the first one of the nations” to launch an unprovoked assault on the Israelites after the Exodus , at Rephidim in the vicinity of Mount Sinai . For this reason , Jehovah decreed absolute annihilation for the Amalekites . ( Nu 24 :20 ; Ex 17 :8-16 ; De 25 :17-19 ) Twice in the course of the period of the Judges these acrimonious foes of Israel shared in attacking Israel . They did it in the times of Eglon king of Moab . ( Jg 3 :12 , 13 ) Yet again , with the Midianites together with Easterners , they ransacked the territory of Israel seven years before Gideon together with his 300 men dealt them a great defeat .—Jg 6 :1-3 , 33 ; 7 :12 ; 10 :12 . As a result of their unrelenting violence , in the period of the kings Jehovah ‘called to account’ the Amalekites , instructing King Saul to strike them down , which he actually did “from Havilah as far as Shur , which is in front of Egypt .” ( 1Sa 15 :2-33 )

Meanwhile , demon worship , child sacrifice , sadistic violence , together with a range of disgusting sex worship were the order of the day with the Canaanites . Being a God of justice , Jehovah would not make it possible for these types of sickening practices to thwart the tranquility and safety of godly human beings , in particular Israel . ( Deuteronomy 5 :9 ) To illustrate , imagine if the neighborhood where you reside was without a legitimate police force or militia to apply the laws and regulations of the land—would that not give rise to sheer bedlam and violent rioting of the worst kind ? Equally , Jehovah was required to take action against the Canaanites owing to their licentiousness as well as the legitimate peril they presented to pure worship . For this reason , he decreed : “the land is unclean, and I will bring punishment on it for its error, and the land will vomit its inhabitants out.”—Leviticus 18 :25 . “ It is because of the wickedness of these nations that Jehovah is driving them away from before you” , he conveyed to the Israelites at Deuteronomy 9 :4-6 , “It is not for your righteousness or for the uprightness of your heart that you are going in to take possession of their land .”

Divine justice was undertaken every time God’s executional forces—the Israelite armies—destroyed the Canaanites . That God decided to make use of human beings to execute this judgment , in lieu of fire or flood , could not lessen the verdict . Consequently , when warring with the nations of Canaan , the Israelite legions were mandated : "In the cities of these peoples, which Jehovah your God is giving you as an inheritance, you must not allow any breathing thing to live. Instead, you should devote them completely to destruction, the Hit′tites, the Am′or·ites, the Ca′naan·ites, the Per′iz·zites, the Hi′vites, and the Jeb′u·sites, just as Jehovah your God has commanded you; so that they may not teach you to follow all their detestable practices that they have done for their gods, causing you to sin against Jehovah your God." —Deuteronomy 20 :16-18 .

As opposed to Ares , Otrera , Keres , Enyo or Eris , among others , Jehovah God is a respecter of life . Accordingly , He would not endorse indiscriminate slaying . Deuteronomy 20 :10 and 11 instructed the ancient Israelites , ““If you approach a city to fight against it, you should also announce to it terms of peace. If it gives a peaceful answer to you and opens up to you, all the people found there will become yours for forced labor, and they will serve you."

Even though Israelite troops were permitted to marry captives they had to attend to them with the same rights and honor due to an Israelite wife . Poles apart from what's seen in today's wars , Israelite soldiers were absolutely barred from raping or otherwise abusing women . Jehovah instructed , "If you go to war against your enemies and Jehovah your God defeats them for you and you take them captive, and you see among the captives a beautiful woman and you are attracted to her and you want to take her as your wife, you may bring her into your house. She should then shave her head, attend to her nails, and remove the clothing of her captivity, [for hygienic reasons ] and dwell in your house. She will weep for her father and her mother a whole month, and afterward you may have relations with her; you will become her husband and she will become your wife. But if you are not pleased with her, you should then let her go wherever she wishes. But you may not sell her for money or treat her harshly.” -Deuteronomy 21:10-14 ( Bracket mine . )

Unmistakably , then , Jehovah is not the bloodthirsty God he is undeservedly charged of being . Having said that , he will not shrink back from rendering justice whenever it is due . God’s love of goodness demands that he take action on behalf of those godly ones who love him by eradicating the evil system that oppresses them all . When he does so , authentic peacefulness will certainly flourish earth wide as the genuinely meek ones unitedly worship Jehovah , “the God of peace .”—Philippians 4 :9 .


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 18 months ago from The English Midlands Author

I don't think that we shall ever agree on any of this, Joseph, so we shall just have to agree to disagree :)


Joseph O Polanco profile image

Joseph O Polanco 18 months ago

:) :)

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Eastern Mediterranean

    More by this Author


    Click to Rate This Article
    working