Posted on 10/02/2014 7:54:42 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
Some people - and quite a few atheists - have made hay over Obama's comments, primary among them being Obama's comment that "No religion condones the killing of innocents."
Inherent within Obama's statement is that no TRUE Muslim would ever kill innocent people, be they men, women or children. As such, this would fall within the parameters of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.
The only problem with this is that it leaves Christians open to the charge that true Christians have (for example) bombed abortion clinics, takes away from Christians the ability to say that "No true Christian would ever bomb an abortion clinic" and thus shows why atheists are taking aim at Obama's comments: this ens up cutting with a double edge and leaves BOTH Christians and Muslims open to attack: True Muslims and True Christians would then in the eys of atheists be able to do wrong and still be Muslims and Christians while doing it.
I have taken Islam to task many times, but here I am concerned for Christianity and Christians in this and not Islam and Muslims...
'Fraid not, pardner. The Amalekites were descendants of Esau, Israel's twin brother.
Yes. A little leaven leaveneth the whole loaf. And no I don't expect you to understand that.
Therein lies the problem. The west lives in the land of unicorns and skittles, and it would hurt their feelings if we said something than mean as a convention.
In the near future this will be our demise, as our enemy realizes the stakes. We don't.
No argument from me. I’ve found reasoning with Muslims is like nailing Jello to the wall
My point exactly. It is undeniable that Samuel was the Lord’s prophet.
I’ve forgotten more than you’ll ever learn
bombing an abortion clinic is not murder... one cannot kill a building.
killing someone who kills innocents is not murder, as it is protecting those that need protecting.
Num 13:28-33: “Nevertheless the people be strong that dwell in the land, and the cities are walled, and very great: and moreover we saw the children of Anak there. The Amalekites dwell in the land of the south: and the Hittites, and the Jebusites, and the Amorites, dwell in the mountains: and the Canaanites dwell by the sea, and by the coast of Jordan.
And Caleb stilled the people before Moses, and said, “Let us go up at once, and possess it; for we are well able to overcome it”. But the men that went up with him said, “We be not able to go up against the people; for they are stronger than we”.
And they brought up an evil report of the land which they had searched unto the children of Israel, saying, “The land, through which we have gone to search it, is a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof; and all the people that we saw in it are men of a great stature. And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight”.
This passage does not say that Nephilim were there, only that the spies thought they saw the Nephilim. It is more likely that the spies saw strange and very large, aggressive people in Canaan, larger and more warlike than any they had seen before and in their fear believed them to be the Nephilim.
Jude 6 says, “The angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day”. If these were the “sons of God” who mated with the “daughters of men” producing “giants”, the “giants” were destroyed in the flood and the “sons of God” were locked in prison awaiting judgment.
Unlike your comment I meant no pajoritive in mine. Very few people understand why God told the Israelites to totally destroy those who they conquered.
1 Samuel 15:18 and the LORD sent you on a mission, and said, 'Go and utterly destroy the sinners, the Amalekites, and fight against them until they are exterminated.'
Evidently not all killing is murder. Just saying.
E. The day after he was elected.
Hmmmmm.
Goliath and his brothers being an example of such.
Given it was God who commanded them to kill them all one would think so.
Now there's a memorable example of Christian humility.;-)
Gen 7:20-23, “Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered. And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.
And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.”
All and every means all and every. Only Noah and his family lived through the flood. If a "good theologian" wants to argue with the scriptures, I guess that is his or her prerogative but not biblical.
1Sa 22:10, "....and gave him the sword of Goliath the Philistine". Goliath was a Philistine, a warlike people who migrated from Crete and the Aegean region.
You may judge me if you feel you’re entitled but the Bible commands “Answer a fool according to his folly.”
I’m not judging you...just laughing at you.
No, but it doesn't prove it either. The only reasons given in scripture for wiping out Amalek is for their hatred and treachery, not their DNA; anything else is adding to the Word which is resoundingly condemned so, I'll see you in hell.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.