Thou shalt not kill.

This is one of the 10 commandments from the Old Testament given to Moses by God on Mt Sinai. But no sooner had he received them than God sent him on an errand to kill tens of thousands of people from his own and neighbouring tribes.

Moses stood at the entrance to the camp and shouted, "All of you who are on the LORD's side, come over here and join me." And all the Levites came. He told them, "This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: Strap on your swords! Go back and forth from one end of the camp to the other, killing even your brothers, friends, and neighbors." The Levites obeyed Moses, and about three thousand people died [/b]that day. Then Moses told the Levites, "Today you have been ordained for the service of the LORD, for you obeyed him even though it meant killing your own sons and brothers. Because of this, he will now give you a great blessing." (Exodus 32:26-29 NLT)

This is what the Lord of hosts has to say: 'I will punish what Amalek did to Israel when he barred his way as he was coming up from Egypt. Go, now, attack Amalek, and deal with him and all that he has under the ban. Do not spare him, b[b]ut kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses.' (1 Samuel 15:2-3 NAB)


When the people heard the sound of the horns, they shouted as loud as they could. Suddenly, the walls of Jericho collapsed, and the Israelites charged straight into the city from every side and captured it. They completely destroyed everything in it – men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep, donkeys – everything. (Joshua 6:20-21 NLT)


So what was the point of this commandment? Was it really meant to be observed?

Is there any sense in which killing is acceptable in the Christian world-view? Is this a prohibition of killing only of sentient human being?

Imagine the day when modern humans (homo sapiens) first encountered the Neandarthals in Europe (some ~30000 years ago). Could this commandment have been invoked to prevent the one killing the other?

Would such barbaric behaviour be acceptable today?

This one was actually funny!

therationa:

Thou shalt not kill.

This is one of the 10 commandments from the Old Testament given to Moses by God on Mt Sinai. But no sooner had he received them than God sent him on an errand to kill tens of thousands of people from neighbouring tribes. So what was the point of this commandment? Was it really meant to be observed?

LMAO!

the commandment was to humans
if God send u message, you better do am!

Thankx for quick responses, guys. Have added more stuff.

Therationalist . . . you miss a vital point. Murder is against the law yes but will you prosecute British troops or the police for killing robbers or Iraqi insurgents?

4Him:

Therationalist . . . you miss a vital point. Murder is against the law yes but will you prosecute British troops or the police for killing robbers or Iraqi insurgents?

4HIM, Thankx: When I wrote the post, I had the "murder" in my mind but did not want to put it down in the.

But is killing in the line of duty for say, a police, the same as killing your friend of a business dispute?

How about a human "killing" a Neandarthal ? Would that have contravened the commandment?

therationalist, which would land you in a murder trial?
A - you shot ur friend in the head for sleeping with your wife.
B - the police shot an escaping fugitive.

4Him:

therationalist, which would land you in a murder trial?
A - you shot your friend in the head for sleeping with your wife.
B - the police shot an escaping fugitive.

A - would certainly get you in court for murder.

B - ordinarily this will not land the cop in court, unless there are other circumstance that reveal the cop was reckless and the victim was harmless, etc

therationa:

A - would certainly get you in court for murder.

B - ordinarily this will not land the cop in court, unless there are other circumstance that reveal the cop was reckless and the victim was harmless, etc

Good. I have another question . . . would you charge the British troops in Iraq with murder?

4Him:

Good. I have another question . . . would you charge the British troops in Iraq with murder?

On the British troops; if the killed in the course of battle or in self-defense - No.

If they killed recklessly, defenseless civilians who pose no dangers to them - Yes.

therationa:

On the British troops; if the killed in the course of battle or in self-defense - No.

If they killed recklessly, defenseless civilians who pose no dangers to them - Yes.

Excellent, now we are on the same page. Did Moses go and kill defenceless civilians who posed NO danger to the Jews?

(Moses) stood at the entrance to the camp and shouted, "All of you who are on the LORD's side, come over here and join me." And all the Levites came. He told them, "This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: Strap on your swords! Go back and forth from one end of the camp to the other, killing even your brothers, friends, and neighbors." The Levites obeyed Moses, and about three thousand people died that day. Then Moses told the Levites, "Today you have been ordained for the service of the LORD, for you obeyed him even though it meant killing your own sons and brothers. Because of this, he will now give you a great blessing." (Exodus 32:26-29 NLT)

therationa:

(Moses) stood at the entrance to the camp and shouted, "All of you who are on the LORD's side, come over here and join me." And all the Levites came. He told them, "This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: Strap on your swords! Go back and forth from one end of the camp to the other, killing even your brothers, friends, and neighbors." The Levites obeyed Moses, and about three thousand people died that day. Then Moses told the Levites, "Today you have been ordained for the service of the LORD, for you obeyed him even though it meant killing your own sons and brothers. Because of this, he will now give you a great blessing." (Exodus 32:26-29 NLT)

And this was against his own people, not in a battle.

therationa:

And this was against his own people, not in a battle.

Two things i notice:

1. It took you so long to come up with that example.
2. You quoted ONLY the portion that you think suits your own preconcieved notions forgetting that Verses 1-25 are the most important clues to understanding why Moses took that action.

In the bible days, about 4000yrs ago, the punishment for disobedience (breaking the law) and sin was death. Read through from verse 1 to thoroughly understand Moses action.
If Moses simply woke up one morning and decided to slaughter his brothers then you would have had justification.

4Him:


1. It took you so long to come up with that example.

Was distracted by my son who want to go to bed. Sorry about the delay. BTW, also notice it took you a while to respond

4Him:


2. You quoted ONLY the portion that you think suits your own preconcieved notions forgetting that Verses 1-25 are the most important clues to understanding why Moses took that action.

In the bible days, about 4000yrs ago, the punishment for disobedience (breaking the law) and sin was death. Read through from verse 1 to thoroughly understand Moses action.
If Moses simply woke up one morning and decided to slaughter his brothers then you would have had justification.

So what abrogates that law now? What about small innocent children and animals that Moses and Joshua killed?

This is what the Lord of hosts has to say: 'I will punish what Amalek did to Israel when he barred his way as he was coming up from Egypt. Go, now, attack Amalek, and deal with him and all that he has under the ban. Do not spare him, but kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses.' (1 Samuel 15:2-3 NAB)

therationa:

Was distracted by my son who want to go to bed. Sorry about the delay. BTW, also notice it took you a while to respond

i was also busy here for a while so we're even.  

therationa:

So what abrogates that law now? What about small innocent children and animals that Moses and Joshua killed?

the law was and has never been abrogated. thou shalt not kill is one of the 10 commandments but death was certainly one of the punishments for sin in the old testament.
Ezekiel 18: 20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die.

That was also part of the laws of the old testament. Moses was simply fulfilling that law when he ordered those who worshiped the golden calf to be killed in Exodus 32.

Can you pls not argue from silence? If you talk about "innocent children that moses and Joshua killed" i expect that you provide me with biblical instances where they willfully went about slaying innocent civilians who posed no danger to them.

When you mention "innocent animals" you make me wonder . . . did any part of that commandment say "thou shalt not kill any animals"?

This is what the Lord of hosts has to say: 'I will punish what Amalek did to Israel when he barred his way as he was coming up from Egypt. Go, now, attack Amalek, and deal with him and all that he has under the ban. Do not spare him, b[b]ut kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses[/b].' (1 Samuel 15:2-3 NAB)


When the people heard the sound of the horns, they shouted as loud as they could. Suddenly, the walls of Jericho collapsed, and the Israelites charged straight into the city from every side and captured it. They completely destroyed everything in it – men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep, donkeys – everything. (Joshua 6:20-21 NLT)


The above two passages make reference to children and infants (young) and animal. What possibly could the animals have done to warrant such cruel treatment?

therationa:

This is what the Lord of hosts has to say: 'I will punish what Amalek did to Israel when he barred his way as he was coming up from Egypt. Go, now, attack Amalek, and deal with him and all that he has under the ban. Do not spare him, but kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses.' (1 Samuel 15:2-3 NAB)

Again you're arguing from a position of silence. Look at the operative word in highlights . . . punish. This was no wilful and wicked decision to suddenly wake up and slay the innocent amalekites.

The question is WHAT did the amalekites do to deserve this? - Deuteronomy 25: 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.

For no reason at all the amalekites came upon the weary and faint Isrealite nation as they came out of Egypt and smote the feeble, the small, the weak and all those who lagged behind. The same amalekites you seem to be crying for did not spare old and young, male or female.

Judges 3:13 And he gathered unto him the children of Ammon and Amalek, and went and smote Israel, and possessed the city of palm trees.

Judges 6:2-5
2 And the hand of Midian prevailed against Israel: and because of the Midianites the children of Israel made them the dens which are in the mountains, and caves, and strong holds.
3 And so it was, when Israel had sown, that the Midianites came up, and the Amalekites, and the children of the east, even they came up against them;
4 And they encamped against them, and destroyed the increase of the earth, till thou come unto Gaza, and left no sustenance for Israel, neither sheep, nor ox, nor ass.
5 For they came up with their cattle and their tents, and they came as grasshoppers for multitude; for both they and their camels were without number: and they entered into the land to destroy it.

Ah therationalist, are you still crying on behalf of these oh so defenceless Amalekites? What possibly could the Isrealite camels, sheep, ox or ass have done to warrant such destruction?

How about my question about Neandarthal?

therationa:

How about my question about Neandarthal?

Did Moses and Joshua kill a neanderthal? I'm not aware of that.

4Him:

Did Moses and Joshua kill a neanderthal? I'm not aware of that.

that's not what i meant. I meant, when homo sapiens first met the neandarthal, would it have been murder if one killed the other?

therationa:

that's not what i meant. I meant, when homo sapiens first met the neandarthal, would it have been murder if one killed the other?

did the neanderthals have the 10 commandments? What has their killing got to do with the bible?

4Him:

did the neanderthals have the 10 commandments? What has their killing got to do with the bible?

No. Neither did the humans at the time.

therationa:

No. Neither did the humans at the time.

Even the bible acknowledges the fact that where there is no law there is no sin.
Moses had the 10 commandments and that was what the jews followed to the letter. Whether the other humans that came before them were busy killing their neighbours has nothing to do with moses, the commandments or the bible.

Are you saying that the was no sins until the laws were given. What were these laws? the 10 commandments and the laws of Moses.

BTW, Lets not get bogged down with Moses. I am trying to make a general moral point. And that is - if we had neardarthals or other forms of humans (humanoids) around today, how how we treat them? This happen once in the past, when man met neandarthal.

therationa:

Are you saying that the was no sins until the laws were given. What were these laws? the 10 commandments and the laws of Moses.

If there were no law then i could kill my next door neighbour and not go to jail for it. The 10 commandments and the other more general laws found in Deuteronomy, Leveticus, Numbers e.t.c were more like the constitution that guided ancient Isreal during the old testament days.

therationa:

BTW, Lets not get bogged down with Moses. I am trying to make a general moral point. And that is - if we had neardarthals or other forms of humans (humanoids) around today, how how we treat them? This happen once in the past, when man met neandarthal.

Why suddenly trying to shift away from moses? Your very first line on this thread was to accuse him of breaking the very laws he brought down from the sinai.
You cant make a general moral point and then judge them from the standpoint of the 10 commandments. The Iranians dont live by those commandments neither did the neanderthals.

If we had humanoids today we'd treat them exactly as we treat other humans or animals depending on the laws of the land.

God the almighty creator does not kill. It is his commandment that we shall not kill. Have we developed in the sense of Gods laws, then wars, murders, and the mindless killlings that are prevalent in the world will cease to be. The earth would be like paradise where only joy and love vibrates. The will of God provides for life, love and harmony. Where hate and strife predominates, then it is not the will of God that is responsible but the will of Men. In genuine defence, it is not the aim of the one defending himself to kill but killing was a consequence of self defence. Self defence should also be interpreted in the sense of laws of God and not according to the selfishness of an individual.

therationa:

Are you saying that the was no sins until the laws were given?

  Permit me to answer that question before Thera twists it into something else. Sin entered the world through Adam, since then sin has existed.
   Rom5:12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned— 13for before the law was given, sin was in the world.

  plus everyone that has ever existed in the history of the world had and has a law to follow, it's a moral code inscribed into every human being, inherent in every one of us.
  Rom 2:14(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.)

God the almighty creator does not kill

so what was it that this God did to the people of sodom and gommorah.

bawomolo:

so what was it that this God did to the people of sodom and gommorah.

Your father is not a wicked man, but he will not spare to whip you when you disobey his warnings.
Such is the same with God.
The soul that sinneth it shall die.

Your father is not a wicked man, but he will not spare to whip you when you disobey his warnings.
Such is the same with God.
The soul that sinneth it shall die.

death seems like a harsh punishment i doubt any father would want to give to their child. what's left if the soul perishes?? seems like a cruel god to me.