Human Sacrifice

[Guest curvette]

Human Sacrifice has always been a fascinating but repulsive topic to me. I've felt grateful that I don't worship a God who requires it. Or does He? The Old Testament contains several instances where the Israelites are commanded (supposedly by God) to forcibly take cities and destroy all of their inhabitants including innocent children and babies. I don't believe believe this for several reasons, but to those on the board who literally believe the Old Testament stories: How do you reconcile this in your minds? Think of your own babies first. If the prophet were to say to us that the Lord has commanded us to take a sword and kill all of the people (including the babies) of, say, Prescott Arizona, would you be able to do it? Yes, the world was different back then and I can imagine scenarios where I may be able to kill another adult for one reason or another, but never, ever, an innocent child.

[HalleysComet]

Originally posted by curvette@Jan 21 2004, 01:44 PM

Human Sacrifice has always been a fascinating but repulsive topic to me. I've felt grateful that I don't worship a God who requires it. Or does He? The Old Testament contains several instances where the Israelites are commanded (supposedly by God) to forcibly take cities and destroy all of their inhabitants including innocent children and babies. I don't believe believe this for several reasons, but to those on the board who literally believe the Old Testament stories: How do you reconcile this in your minds? Think of your own babies first. If the prophet were to say to us that the Lord has commanded us to take a sword and kill all of the people (including the babies) of, say, Prescott Arizona, would you be able to do it? Yes, the world was different back then and I can imagine scenarios where I may be able to kill another adult for one reason or another, but never, ever, an innocent child.

Now if it was a relative not a problem but a child,no way...

The Board Blonde

Halley

[Tr2]

In all honesty, if God ever commanded me to kill by son I would refuse. I don't think God wants me to sin so I don't expect him to ask any time soon.

In theory I think I can understand the sacrifices of the OT. I also understand that the traditional sacrifices have no place in Christianity today.

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Tr2@Jan 21 2004, 03:40 PM

In all honesty, if God ever commanded me to kill by son I would refuse. I don't think God wants me to sin so I don't expect him to ask any time soon.

In theory I think I can understand the sacrifices of the OT. I also understand that the traditional sacrifices have no place in Christianity today.

Thanks for your reply. Do you believe that God really commanded Joshua and the post Egypt Israelites to kill all the people of those cities or do you think this was added by the writers? I agree that animal sacrifice has no place in modern Christianity, but did God ever demand human sacrifice in the way the OT describes?

[Traveler]

Concerning children - you might want to read my post on Sodom and Gomorrah in reference to children. Just as a side note this also relates to the state of children being froced to pass through "the fire".

The Traveler

[Behunin]

Originally posted by curvette@Jan 21 2004, 01:44 PM

Human Sacrifice has always been a fascinating but repulsive topic to me. I've felt grateful that I don't worship a God who requires it. Or does He? The Old Testament contains several instances where the Israelites are commanded (supposedly by God) to forcibly take cities and destroy all of their inhabitants including innocent children and babies. I don't believe believe this for several reasons, but to those on the board who literally believe the Old Testament stories: How do you reconcile this in your minds? Think of your own babies first. If the prophet were to say to us that the Lord has commanded us to take a sword and kill all of the people (including the babies) of, say, Prescott Arizona, would you be able to do it? Yes, the world was different back then and I can imagine scenarios where I may be able to kill another adult for one reason or another, but never, ever, an innocent child.

It is possible that the command to destroy cities and people is purely symbolic and not literal. I, like you, do not believe that God commanded to kill innocent lives.

[Maureen]

Abraham offering up Isaac is a good example, I think.

The only thing that for me that makes this a little less awful is the idea that Abraham and God's relationship was unique. Abraham had such complete trust in God that when God asked for a human sacrifice he possibly thought it was out of character but went ahead trusting God would still keep his promise in the end. God had promised Abraham that he would be the father of nations.

A few things could have been going through Abraham's mind. He could have thought that God would bring his son back to life or give him a different alternative at some point. He said to Isaac that God would provide the sacrifice, so he wasn't totally hopeless that he was loosing his son completely.

Genesis says that this was a test for Abraham. Who did he love more, God or Isaac.

OT stories are so far removed from our time and culture that it's sometimes easy to just read them and not see the terrible circumstances or almost unbelievable situations that are portrayed in them. Today we would see Abraham actions as coming from a mentally deranged person. I can't imagine "the God of my understanding" testing me like Genesis says Abraham was tested.

M.

[Behunin]

Originally posted by Maureen@Jan 21 2004, 11:02 PM

Abraham offering up Isaac is a good example, I think.

The only thing that for me that makes this a little less awful is the idea that Abraham and God's relationship was unique. Abraham had such complete trust in God that when God asked for a human sacrifice he possibly thought it was out of character but went ahead trusting God would still keep his promise in the end. God had promised Abraham that he would be the father of nations.

A few things could have been going through Abraham's mind. He could have thought that God would bring his son back to life or give him a different alternative at some point. He said to Isaac that God would provide the sacrifice, so he wasn't totally hopeless that he was loosing his son completely.

Genesis says that this was a test for Abraham. Who did he love more, God or Isaac.

OT stories or so far removed from our time and culture that it's sometimes easy to just read them and not see the terrible circumstances or almost unbelievable situations that are portrayed in them. Today we would see Abraham actions as coming from a mentally deranged person. I can't imagine "the God of my understanding" testing me like Genesis says Abraham was tested.

M.

I think you are accurate in your view. Good insight!

[Tr2]

Thanks for your reply. Do you believe that God really commanded Joshua and the post Egypt Israelites to kill all the people of those cities or do you think this was added by the writers? I agree that animal sacrifice has no place in modern Christianity, but did God ever demand human sacrifice in the way the OT describes?

Yes I believe God did order the slaughters in the OT that we know of so well. I don't think it was added by the writers because they are too significant. The wars of that time were as pivotal, if not more, than out Pearl Harbor, 9/11, Hiroshima, D-Day, etc. It may seem unbelievable but I believe they are true. There are also writings that are independent of the bible that can at least somewhat confirm those stories. The bible just adds God to the picture. It's like taking the D-Day invasion and saying God sent his men into battle and they were victorious because they had not lost faith.

the only time God ever required human sacrifice was when he tested Abraham with Isaac. And even there he never required anyone to be sacrificed. The only human sacrifice in the bible is Jesus.

[Maureen]

Originally posted by Tr2@Jan 22 2004, 11:30 AM

the only time God ever required human sacrifice was when he tested Abraham with Isaac. And even there he never required anyone to be sacrificed. The only human sacrifice in the bible is Jesus.

We can also see Abraham offering up Isaac as a foreshadowing of Christ's sacrifice. God is offering up his son for the sins of the world.

M.

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Tr2@Jan 22 2004, 11:30 AM

the only time God ever required human sacrifice was when he tested Abraham with Isaac. And even there he never required anyone to be sacrificed. The only human sacrifice in the bible is Jesus.

If I understand you, you feel that the Israelites were victorious because God helped them, but not that he literally commanded them to "keep none alive"? (Including the babes) The Bible states that God specifically commanded the slaughter of children and babies as well as adults. I find this unbelievable. Killing the evil adults could be interpreted as God's vengeance, but with innocent babies--this is a form of human sacrifice. I don't see how it could be thought of in any other way.

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Maureen+Jan 22 2004, 12:01 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Maureen @ Jan 22 2004, 12:01 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Tr2@Jan 22 2004, 11:30 AM

the only time God ever required human sacrifice was when he tested Abraham with Isaac. And even there he never required anyone to be sacrificed. The only human sacrifice in the bible is Jesus.

We can also see Abraham offering up Isaac as a foreshadowing of Christ's sacrifice. God is offering up is son for the sins of the world.

M.

This is a teaching that I can accept and sort of understand. God commanding Israel to slaughter the babies of the heathen I cannot understand. This puts them on the same level as Herod when he ordered the massacre of Jewish babies when the Savior was born.

[Guest Starsky]

I believe that a child or baby being killed when in a wicked city or country...is actually a blessing. When a child or babe dies before it is accountable it automatically allows that child to go to the celestial kingdom.

We forget this life isn't for this life and the purposes are all fulfilled for our best good.

[Tr2]

If I understand you, you feel that the Israelites were victorious because God helped them, but not that he literally commanded them to "keep none alive"? (Including the babes) The Bible states that God specifically commanded the slaughter of children and babies as well as adults. I find this unbelievable. Killing the evil adults could be interpreted as God's vengeance, but with innocent babies--this is a form of human sacrifice. I don't see how it could be thought of in any other way.

It does seem extremely brutal but I have to constantly remind myself that I am not God and I didn't have the intel He had. Maybe God ordered the destruction of the babies because He knew that they would only grow up to be Israel's enemies. They lived in a time when grace wasn't as prevalent as today. In 2004 we would try to convert the children through the message of Jesus. In those days God's enemies were godless people. Maybe God knew they couldn't be saved. I don't know. I do know that throughout the bible God has done some really smart things to benefit His people. You and I can only assume about stories like those. I believe He did it out of love for Israel.

This is the same God who became sin out of love for his people. I seem to always equate God's love to the relationship I have to my son. Here is the scenario, put yourself in my place. I created my son. I was there when he was born and have nurtured and spent time with him every day of his life without exception. I protected him when he couldn't protect himself. I will continue to raise him in this manner, teaching him, playing with him, and being his primary role model. I do this until he can take care of himself in his early 20's. Then he decides to torture and crucify me in public. He mocks me for everything i can and what I stand for. He forgets what i did for him. After he has tortured me, hung me on a cross where I am slowly dying from suffocation I mutter the words "God forgive him", thinking only about his own well being. I continue to think only of him as I die the most horrible death known to man. I go to my grave without a single negative thought towards hum. This love was demonstrated by the same God who slaughtered thousands.

The bible says that in God there is no darkness, therefore there is no room for the presence of evil. If God thought that these people had to die, that is good enough for me.

[Traveler]

Not all cities were destroyed including the children. I attemempted to indicate why in another thread. The problem seems to stem around children that had been so abused there seems to be little hope.

On another note it is interesting the number of children sacrificed at the birth of Jesus. It appears that their innocient sacrifice allowed the Christ child to survive.

The Traveler

[Guest Taoist_Saint]

I removed this post, since no one responded to it. I opened a new topic.

[Guest TheProudDuck]

I've always tended just to think that the accounts in the Bible of God commanding the Israelites to kill their enemies, man, woman, and child, was simply the Israelites claiming a divine sanction for their participation in the ordinary practice of ancient warfare, which wasn't finicky about the combatant-noncombatant distinction. I'm disinclined to think that God couldn't think of a better way of arranging things than killing a bunch of kids.

On the other hand, assuming that God's omnipotence may be limited by his own plan for bringing to pass human immortality and eternal life (i.e. God could theoretically do anything, but his choosing to do certain things would be inconsistent with his master plan), should a reasonable person, religious or not, really think that God should be considered evil for commanding or condoning the slaughters of the Old Testament? The Bible declares that God has no pleasure in the deaths of the wicked; presumably he doesn't take pleasure in the collateral deaths of the innocent, either.

All of us are willing to tolerate "collateral damage," even if it involves the deaths of children, in pursuit of our aims. Accidental civilian deaths during wartime (from stray bombs, unexploded ordnance, mistaken identity, etc.) are simply the most obvious. We're willing to tolerate the deaths of hundreds of thousands of children from malaria, because we don't like the effect DDT has on the environment. We allow thousands of children to die in car accidents, because we calculate that to lower the speed limit to 10 mph and ban left turns would inconvenience us too much. We allow children to go to the beach, knowing that a couple of them will drown each summer despite the best efforts of the best possible lifeguard protection, because we believe that their freedom is worth an occasional tragedy.

So if it were really true that there were no other way to bring about the immortality and eternal life of man than to give a few thousand ancient kids a free pass to glory courtesy of Israelite spears, clubs, axes, etc., then I suppose we don't have any room to criticize.

I still think the Israelites invented the divine sanction after the fact, though.

[Tr2]

On another note it is interesting the number of children sacrificed at the birth of Jesus. It appears that their innocient sacrifice allowed the Christ child to survive.

Those children were murdered in cold blood because a fearful man decided it would be done.

I've always tended just to think that the accounts in the Bible of God commanding the Israelites to kill their enemies, man, woman, and child, was simply the Israelites claiming a divine sanction for their participation in the ordinary practice of ancient warfare, which wasn't finicky about the combatant-noncombatant distinction. I'm disinclined to think that God couldn't think of a better way of arranging things than killing a bunch of kids.

Do you have any reasons to think that? Or is it because you don't want to believe it. If you choose not to believe that portion of the bible why believe any other portion? How does one accept on thing and yet reject another?

[Snow]

Originally posted by Tr2@Jan 22 2004, 07:38 PM

I've always tended just to think that the accounts in the Bible of God commanding the Israelites to kill their enemies, man, woman, and child, was simply the Israelites claiming a divine sanction for their participation in the ordinary practice of ancient warfare, which wasn't finicky about the combatant-noncombatant distinction. I'm disinclined to think that God couldn't think of a better way of arranging things than killing a bunch of kids.

Do you have any reasons to think that?

Scratching my head wondering if the questioner understands the question.

...maybe because we believe in a god that is all-kind and all-just and a god who orders the death of innocent children seems just a teensy bit less that just and not so nice?

I dunno, I'm just throwing it out there. Hello.

[Tr2]

Scratching my head wondering if the questioner understands the question.

...maybe because we believe in a god that is all-kind and all-just and a god who orders the death of innocent children seems just a teensy bit less that just and not so nice?

I dunno, I'm just throwing it out there. Hello.

So you just don't want to believe it? You have no reason whatsoever other than you are picking and choosing what you want God to be like? I don't blame you for having a belief system where your God conforms to what you want him to be.

What is your opinion of a SWAT team that shoots somebody to save the life of an innocent person?

[Guest TheProudDuck]

Originally posted by Tr2@Jan 22 2004, 07:38 PM

I've always tended just to think that the accounts in the Bible of God commanding the Israelites to kill their enemies, man, woman, and child, was simply the Israelites claiming a divine sanction for their participation in the ordinary practice of ancient warfare, which wasn't finicky about the combatant-noncombatant distinction. I'm disinclined to think that God couldn't think of a better way of arranging things than killing a bunch of kids.

Do you have any reasons to think that? Or is it because you don't want to believe it. If you choose not to believe that portion of the bible why believe any other portion? How does one accept on thing and yet reject another?

How do I accept one thing and reject another? By using my head and listening for inspiration, I suppose. Same way I sort through all other kinds of information in this world. I do my best to judge, knowing that I'm accountable for my choices, yet trusting in a redeeming God for forgiveness for my inevitable mistakes.

What is your opinion of a SWAT team that shoots somebody to save the life of an innocent person?

You're making the same argument I just did -- that maybe God had no choice but to order the slaughter of assorted unlucky -ites. That, of course, opens a whole 'nother kettle of worms (not just a can) about what God's omnipotence entails, which we can save for another time, but on which I'd like to hear your thoughts as an evangelical. Of course, that assumes that whether God had any choice in the matter makes a difference. It sure does in the case of a SWAT team. If there are effective means available, short of deadly force, by which a SWAT officer can save an innocent person's life, the officer is supposed to use those means first.

Snow -- Good to have you back, bro. Or have I just missed your posts?

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by Traveler@Jan 22 2004, 05:22 PM

Not all cities were destroyed including the children.  I attemempted to indicate why in another thread.  The problem seems to stem around children that had been so abused there seems to be little hope.

On another note it is interesting the number of children sacrificed at the birth of Jesus.  It appears that their innocient sacrifice allowed the Christ child to survive.

The Traveler

Right on. The purposes of the life is totally different than most think. The big picture is what we need to look at to put things in their right perspectives.

If we only focus on one small child killed when Moses was born, and the torture that was for that one family, you might miss the great work being done to free all of the people...including the children who lived, from horrific slavery.

[Snow]

Originally posted by Tr2@Jan 22 2004, 09:18 PM

So you just don't want to believe it? You have no reason whatsoever other than you are picking and choosing what you want God to be like? I don't blame you for having a belief system where your God conforms to what you want him to be.

What is your opinion of a SWAT team that shoots somebody to save the life of an innocent person?

No Trident. I do have a reason and the reason is that I believe in a God that is ALL-GOOD and ALL-KIND, and ALL-JUST. I do do not believe that such a God orders that children be innocently butchered; that would make him un-kind and un-just, and unmerciful.

Your bit about believing in a God that conforms to my image of Him is correct though, I believe that God is this or God is that... according to how I beliefs. That is exactly what you do. You believe that God is according to your beliefs. Thats the definition of belief isn't it?

You don't believe in a God that is different than the way you believe him to be, do you? That makes no sense.

(btw - thank heaven for law enforcement, but that's a different deal than sheding innocent blood on purpose.)

[Snow]

Originally posted by TheProudDuck@Jan 22 2004, 09:35 PM

Snow -- Good to have you back, bro. Or have I just missed your posts?

I haven't posted, except for a popover recipe, since a half dozen posts of mine got deleted; not because there were in poor taste or contra las reglas but because there were geographically proximate to some that were. It bugs me that someone other than the ultimate reader decides which of my post deserve to be read and which don't, (I have precious little readership without the middleman as it is). Not that I am mad, just unmotivated to post.

[Tr2]

No Trident. I do have a reason and the reason is that I believe in a God that is ALL-GOOD and ALL-KIND, and ALL-JUST. I do do not believe that such a God orders that children be innocently butchered; that would make him un-kind and un-just, and unmerciful.

Your bit about believing in a God that conforms to my image of Him is correct though, I believe that God is this or God is that... according to how I beliefs. That is exactly what you do. You believe that God is according to your beliefs. Thats the definition of belief isn't it?

You don't believe in a God that is different than the way you believe him to be, do you? That makes no sense.

(btw - thank heaven for law enforcement, but that's a different deal than sheding innocent blood on purpose.

So there is no reason other than you just refuse to believe it.

but that's a different deal than sheding innocent blood on purpose

Do you think it is an accident whenever a police officer shoots somebody? "Oops, my hand mistakenly took my weapon out and woops I seemed to have pointed it at another person and by golly I just happened to depress the trigger."

If there are effective means available, short of deadly force, by which a SWAT officer can save an innocent person's life, the officer is supposed to use those means first.

You are 100% correct. That reasoning and logic came from trial and error over time. If man cane come up with that logic, what do you think God is capable of? If a human being is smart enough to realize that is the best method of operation do you think God just might be clever enough to think of that too? Based on what I know of God, my only thought in this is, there must have been no other choice. I am not as smart as God and just because I might think it's wrong that doesn't make it so. Anyone out there who is as smart as God, feel free to give your opinion.

I do wonder if anyone is willing to say "I do not know".