David, Goliath, and the Sixth Commandment - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-03-2005, 02:52 PM   #1
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 07:23 AM
David, Goliath, and the Sixth Commandment

I thought I'd take a jab at this story for the sake of discussion.

Anyways, "Thou Shall Not Kill," a commandment carved in stone, is for the most part, universally accepted. Yet, there are a few exceptions given by society.

So what was God's exception?
__________________

__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 04-03-2005, 02:56 PM   #2
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 03:23 AM
God instructed the Israelites to wipe out most of the peoples in the land He was giving to them.

The express purpose was to prevent the Israelites from mixing with these other peoples and corrupting their faith and practices.

The Israelites did not fully follow this command.
__________________

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 04-03-2005, 03:18 PM   #3
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 07:23 AM
Some skeptical scholars actually argue that the god of the OT was genocidal for this.
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 04-03-2005, 04:10 PM   #4
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 03:23 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
God instructed the Israelites to wipe out most of the peoples in the land He was giving to them.

The express purpose was to prevent the Israelites from mixing with these other peoples and corrupting their faith and practices.


.
Is one to believe God instructs genocide?

Or is it more believable that people write books or edit them to present arguments for their advantage.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 04-03-2005, 05:15 PM   #5
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 06:23 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Some skeptical scholars actually argue that the god of the OT was genocidal for this.
The "God" of the OT is homicidal, genocidal, and all around petty. This is in keeping with how all cultures depicted their gods prior to c. 500-600 B.C.

The "loving God" emanated from Zoroastrianism, which is mostly forgotten today, but was the world's most powerful religion of around 600 B.C. to A.D. 700, when it collapsed after the rise of Islam in Persia (present-day Iran).

In short: the "warrior God" of the early OT was a result of having to please a vengeful God. With "evil," though, shifting to another deity in the "loving God" model (Satan), you now just had to avoid Satan and trust that God is good.

There's nothing skeptical about it.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 04-03-2005, 08:44 PM   #6
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: all around in the dark - everywhere
Posts: 3,531
Local Time: 06:23 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


The "God" of the OT is homicidal, genocidal, and all around petty. This is in keeping with how all cultures depicted their gods prior to c. 500-600 B.C.

The "loving God" emanated from Zoroastrianism, which is mostly forgotten today, but was the world's most powerful religion of around 600 B.C. to A.D. 700, when it collapsed after the rise of Islam in Persia (present-day Iran).

In short: the "warrior God" of the early OT was a result of having to please a vengeful God. With "evil," though, shifting to another deity in the "loving God" model (Satan), you now just had to avoid Satan and trust that God is good.

There's nothing skeptical about it.

Melon
an excellent scholarly analysis. however, to those with the "inerrant word of god" viewpoint, it does not fly.
__________________
Se7en is offline  
Old 04-03-2005, 10:03 PM   #7
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 12:23 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Anyways, "Thou Shall Not Kill," a commandment carved in stone, is for the most part, universally accepted. Yet, there are a few exceptions given by society.

So what was God's exception?
I'm not sure what you mean by 'God's exception,' but I just wanted to mention that tirtzakh--the Hebrew word usually translated 'kill' in Christian texts of the Commandments--actually had a narrower meaning than that. Whether there's an exact English equivalent is debatable, but Jewish Bibles, at any rate, have traditionally translated tirtzakh as 'murder.' So, for most Jews, this commandment has never been taken as a blanket ban on killing.

Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
God instructed the Israelites to wipe out most of the peoples in the land He was giving to them.

The express purpose was to prevent the Israelites from mixing with these other peoples and corrupting their faith and practices.
( ^ Deuteronomy 20: 17-18)
This is generally considered the most problematic command in the entire Torah. Especially compared to the forgiveness mandated towards the (one would think) far more threatening Egyptians: 'You shall not abhor an Egyptian, for you were a stranger in his land' (Deuteronomy 23:8). The usual explanations for this discrepancy emphasize the holiness of the land of Israel, and the Torah's repeated warnings that this land will 'vomit up' its corruption (meaning idolatry and, in particular, certain sexual and sacrificial 'abominations' associated with it).

Quote:
The Israelites did not fully follow this command.
Or even close to it, apparently. Archaeological findings have consistently contradicted the Biblical portrait of the Israelites swooping in and ruthlessly crushing the Canaanites in one triumphant, glorious campaign. Instead, the bulk of the evidence suggests they straggled in over the course of decades (or longer), sometimes engaging in skirmishes, sometimes not.

Quote:
Originally posted by melon
The "God" of the OT is homicidal, genocidal, and all around petty. This is in keeping with how all cultures depicted their gods prior to c. 500-600 B.C.

The "loving God" emanated from Zoroastrianism, which is mostly forgotten today, but was the world's most powerful religion of around 600 B.C. to A.D. 700, when it collapsed after the rise of Islam in Persia (present-day Iran).
So that's why Darius and Xerxes were such sweet guys!

'...to find the spirit of the religion of the Old Testament in Joshua is like finding the distinctive genius of America in the men who slaughtered the Indians.'--Walter Kaufmann
__________________
yolland is offline  
Old 04-04-2005, 08:30 AM   #8
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 06:23 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland
So that's why Darius and Xerxes were such sweet guys!

'...to find the spirit of the religion of the Old Testament in Joshua is like finding the distinctive genius of America in the men who slaughtered the Indians.'--Walter Kaufmann
Zoroastrianism has its other quirks, mind you. It is the likely reason why Christianity became obsessed with the idea of "good vs. evil," because Zoroastrianism categorizes everything as either "good," meaning it emanated from the "light god"/"loving god," Ahura Mazda, or "bad," meaning it emanated from the "dark god"/"evil god," Ahriman (a.k.a., "Shaitan"--the root name of "Satan"). There was no such thing as "nuance."

Nonetheless, I find it to be an interesting religion to study, if only to realize how much a "pagan religion" (although I really hate that term) has influenced Judeo-Christianity. It is even the theological origin of "the Messiah" and "Judgment Day." Our OT canon is taken from the Pharisees' texts ("Pharisee" likely comes from "Parsi," meaning "Persian," a reference to Zoroastrians; for reference, the "Sadducees" resented "Parsi" beliefs in Judaism and hated the Pharisees. They rejected Jesus, because they did not believe any Messiah was coming at all.), and they were the "Messianic Jews," although they did not believe that Jesus was their Messiah. This, of course, is likely because Jesus lived up to none of the Zoroastrian expectations of a Messiah, who was to vanquish evil once and for all. Interestingly enough, however, those beliefs didn't die in Christianity. They just shifted to the Book of Revelation and, instead of "Judgment Day" happening on the first coming of the Messiah, it was now supposed to happen on the Second Coming.

Needless to say, this is very often why I compare many modern Christians to the Pharisees, because I sense much of their same self-righteousness and disdain for outsiders, in addition to both groups believing in essentially the same concept of what "a Messiah" should be: a warrior who kills their enemies ("evil") and exults themselves into paradise ("good"). Of course, there's no nuance. What will modern Christians think if the Second Coming of Jesus is as peaceful as the first? I'll expect another schism, at that point.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 04-04-2005, 08:43 AM   #9
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 06:23 AM
Oh and as for "Satan," who is very much modeled on the "dark god," Ahriman ("Shaitan"), that probably explains why "Satan," for an angel, has so many powers that no other angels have. Since Judeo-Christianity is monotheistic, Satan was demoted to an angel, rather than a god, while still keeping all of Ahriman's godly powers. It, however, then opened the question as to why God would have created an evil deity, while Zoroastrianism's gods were independent of each other.

Interesting theology to think about...

Melon
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com