We need to remind our "God hates abortion" friends of something...again-

Do I correctly understand your position here? Are you saying God (YHWH) instructed the Israelites not to protect the innocent lives of the young and the unborn of the Amalekites because their fathers were guilty of attacking the Israelites?

What is your position on abortion for rape victims?

 

Yes...

- - - Updated - - -

Not were they the only giants either. Sorry I'm late. This thread fell out of my instant notification for some reason.

 

Well if you want you can read this PDF.

http://www.contendingfortruth.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/ET-Disclosure-Agenda-Exposed-9-5-16.pdf

 

The enemy always is. Makes it easier to feel okay about killing them. You don't really believe that, do you? The voice in the bible is not the voice of a god or even a human interpretation of a god, it's just a bunch of (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s who were a product of their primitive times. No moral god would exhibit the attitudes expressed in the bible.

 

As posted:
As a consequence, YHWH decreed ultimate extinction for the Amalekites

Thus, the OP deliberately and misleadingly took the biblical clause out of context - and we all know it.

 

Better late than never !

You have not provided back-up for your claim that the Amalekites were a race of Giants (or that they were the product of some interbreeding with Giants).

2) Even if this were the case this is not justification for Genocide/baby killing (Giants .. and midgets ... are people too)

3) There is no evidence to suggests that the people in the towns under King Sihon (who were not Amalekites) were in any way related to Giants.

4) The religious ideology of the Israelite's was rooted in xenophobia. A person did not need to be a giant to be "sub-human" he just needed to be "not one of us".

 

I understand, YHWH told them to wipe out the Amalekites without sparing young children or unborn. Was YHWH punishing the fathers by killing the unborn, or punishing the unborn for the actions of their fathers?

I ask again. What is your position on abortion for rape victims?

 

So, you understand the passage was deliberately and misleadingly taken out of context, to support something it clearly has nothing to do with.
Why do you not understand that this is the point?

 

If you claim it is murder to kill the unborn (under any circumstances) and the passage describes the "approved" killing of the unborn, then it certainly has to do with this topic. If your authority (for claiming it would be a sin to kill the unborn) is the Bible, then you must have some logic to support the fact that God instructed the Israelites to kill the unborn in the Bible. God (as I understand Him) would never direct me to do something that is a sin, so either the Bible is wrong (and God did not tell them to do this) or you are wrong in assuming that it is always a sin to kill the unborn.

I could search the forum to find out your position, or I could ask you (in case your position has changed over time):
Is it acceptable to kill the unborn if you are doing it to punish the father?
Is it acceptable to kill the unborn if you are doing it to punish the unborn for something the father did?
What is your position on abortion in the case of rape?

 

I "claimed" - that is, proved - the OP's citation of the passage in question was deliberately and misleadingly taken out of context, to support
something it clearly has nothing to do with.
Since all you have done so far is respond with red herrings, you must agree.

 

You did not prove anything, as any reader can see by following the links... and you are running from an actual discussion of the issue.

 

I did.
The OP deliberately took the passage out of context - which is clear by reading the passage and the using Google (cited in my response) to research the specific - to make a point that had nothing to do with the passage as used.
You refuse to discuss this issue.

 

Are you claiming no unborn were killed when YHWH decreed ultimate extinction for the Amalekites ?

If any unborn were killed, then most people would agree this is relevant to a discussion of abortion where there are those (maybe not you) who claim it is always wrong (or a sin) to kill the unborn

I do not know if it applied to the specific conversational thread because (1) there is a break in the chain linking back to prior quotes, and (2) you have been less than useless in providing details here.

 

When you discover the wherewithal to discuses the issue I bought up - the issue that destroys the premise of this thread in toto - do let me know; for reference, the links in this chain go back to my very first post in this topic, to which you responded.

 

Here is the first link in the conversation (Gorn Captain did not link back to a prior quote so I do not know the context for his statement):

Here is your first response to Gorn Captain:

And here is your most recent response to me:

Reminder: The context of this forum topic is the belief (by some) that God hates abortion.

When God decreed the extinction of the Amalekites, did He instruct them to spare the young children or the pregnant women? If not, then we can assume that the Israelites, acting on direct orders from YHWH, aborted the unborn Amalekites.

You added the context that the Amalekites attacked first, so I ask you (again):
Was God punishing the unborn for the actions of their fathers?
Was God punishing the Amalakites by killing their unborn?
What is your opinion regarding abortion for a woman who has been raped?

If you do not want to answer, I understand... These are difficult questions.

 

Yes. And the OP used an action by God that has nothing to do with abortion to argue that God does not hate abortion.
That is, the passage is used out of context.
The OP used his quoted passage out of context to create an intentionally misleading topic.
Nothing you have said or done here changes any of that.

 

But by your silence on the issue you allow the readers to assume that God was punishing the unborn (in that situation) for the actions of their fathers. You have no defense for that (or I assume you would have offered it). That has a bearing on the abortion debate.

 

Actually the OP author did no such thing, he merely pointed out that God commanded the death of ALL which would include the killing of the unborn, would it not?

- - - Updated - - -

Actually the OP author did no such thing, he merely pointed out that God commanded the death of ALL which would include the killing of the unborn, would it not?

 

It's not an excuse its what actually happened according to the Bible. Not only that but there's extra biblical and physical evidence for their existence.

 

Yes I did with that link listing all of the giants in the Bible. Not only that but in the last page I gave a link that gives evidence for the existence of giants. As to an excuse for killing every living being, its justified as being demons they'll grow up and harass Israel again.

 

There are definitely instances of the writers of the bible stating that god commanded his chosen people/patriarch to commit atrocities. It's not just a recount of what happened.

 

You did not provide me with any link.

Either way there is no mention of King Sihon's townspeople being from a race of Giants

Further your claim that these giants were "demons" is made up nonsense.

 

No it isn't. In Genesus 6 it talks about the fallen angels taking women and producing giants and when either Moses' spies or Joshua's spies saw the giants in the land they said they were the descendants of the giants mentioned in Genesis 6.

 

Why don't you actually prove it with the verses and/or links. Instead of putting 2 and 2 together to get 22.
It seems to be the normal here, provide a link, give no clue what to look for in the link and don't bother tell show from your link what it is you're talking about.
I guess it's because you can't actually prove your points from your links.

 

I have been very vocal on the issue:

The OP used his quoted passage out of context to create an intentionally misleading topic.

Neither you nor anyone else have said or done anything to address this; your continued red herrings indicate you have no sound response to the charge.

- - - Updated - - -

Context.
Killing in wartime is not the same as killing for personal convenience.
Thus, the passage, referring to killing in wartime, has no bearing on killing for personal convenience.