Settled. Next thread.
Announcement
Collapse
Apologetics 301 Guidelines
If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
About Psalm 137
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by whag View PostTell that to the Midianite boys Moses ordered killed AFTER they'd been seized. I'd argue the kinder thing would've been to raise them, not strangle them (or however they were dispatched).
To summarize, they would not have been able to raise them. They were not a big enough population to effectively raise the boys (you need a lot of manpower to take in a bunch of male war captives right after a costly battle, the expectation is that even male slaves would rebel at the first sign of being able to get away with it. Moses would have had to blind them or break one of their legs or something). Again, quick death now, or slow death out in the desert.
Even taking in the prepubescent girls would have been difficult for the families involved that had to raise them until marrying them off at puberty. At least girls were less likely to slit your throat.O Gladsome Light of the Holy Glory of the Immortal Father, Heavenly, Holy, Blessed Jesus Christ! Now that we have come to the setting of the sun and behold the light of evening, we praise God Father, Son and Holy Spirit. For meet it is at all times to worship Thee with voices of praise. O Son of God and Giver of Life, therefore all the world doth glorify Thee.
A neat video of dead languages!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kelp(p) View PostAt least girls were less likely to slit your throat.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostI had five younger sisters, I had to sleep with one eye open!
In a thread I mentioned before, I am(was) a very pretty lady."Kahahaha! Let's get lunatic!"-Add LP
"And the Devil did grin, for his darling sin is pride that apes humility"-Samuel Taylor Coleridge
Oh ye of little fiber. Do you not know what I've done for you? You will obey. ~Cerealman for Prez.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kelp(p) View PostSame principle. Here's a very good article on that. http://christianthinktank.com/midian.html
Originally posted by Kelp(p) View PostTo summarize, they would not have been able to raise them.
The thing I always found odd about the article is that the author lacks the courage of his conviction at the end, eventually planting the seed in the reader's mind that the little boys were spared. If they weren't, the heck's the point of citing Philo?
7. The remaining people were the non-combat age boys (sub-12?). Philo asserted that the Israelites actually spared the little boys, although the Hebrew text doesn’t provide much support for this (Moses 1.57):
“And they led away a perfectly incalculable number of prisoners, of whom they chose to slay all the full-grown men and women, the men because they had set the example of wicked counsels and actions, and the women because they had beguiled the youth of the Hebrews, becoming the causes to them of incontinence and impiety, and at the last of death; but they pardoned all the young male children and all the virgins, their tender age procuring them forgiveness.
According to the text, though, the number of these boys present at this scene would have been very minimal. According to 31.9, they had already killed “every male (kal zkr—not the normal word for adult male, or ‘man’)”. This would mean that the reference in verse 17 to kill kal zkr (‘every male’) “among the children” would likely be a reference to any boys who had somehow ‘hidden’ or been unnoticed among the group of captive children. Given the general statement of verse 9, this would imply that this would have likely been a very small number of boys left.
Originally posted by Kelp(p) View Postthe expectation is that even male slaves would rebel at the first sign of being able to get away with it. Moses would have had to blind them or break one of their legs or something). Again, quick death now, or slow death out in the desert.
Originally posted by Kelp(p) View PostEven taking in the prepubescent girls would have been difficult for the families involved that had to raise them until marrying them off at puberty. At least girls were less likely to slit your throat.
Comment
-
Originally posted by whag View PostRaising boys without that bent would be a doddle in a culture overseen and provided for by the one true God of infinite mercy.
God doesn't exist because He won't wave His magic fairy wand and make every problem go away right now! And it NEVER rains gumdrops and jellybeans. Such a big meanie can't possibly exist....>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...
Comment
-
Originally posted by MaxVel View PostGod doesn't exist because He won't wave His magic fairy wand and make every problem go away right now! And it NEVER rains gumdrops and jellybeans. Such a big meanie can't possibly exist.
Comment
-
Originally posted by whag View PostAbsorbing a few innocent boys into a culture wouldn't require a constant rain of resources. Some cultures, the Mexicans, for example, crowd whole families into one-bedroom apartments to accommodate kids and infirm parents."I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill
Comment
-
Originally posted by KingsGambit View PostAnd these still exist in much more of an unlimited good society than what existed at that time.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kelp(p) View PostSo you think that in the future, every nation on earth will become a monarchy with a male head...
Originally posted by Kelp(p) View Post...so popular and powerful that the people actually care what his religion is?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostWe're getting WAY off the topic....
Psalm 137 is about Jews in captivity. being mocked by their captors to "play the songs of Zion".
In frustration, they cry out to God for retribution.
They want payback.
It is NOT about God blessing baby killers.
In Psalms 137 there's a theme of being exiled and not wanting to sing, in Revelation exile is over forever and the righteous sing:
Edom is often considered to be Rome in Scripture:
Finally we can see some indications in Isaiah that children of Babylon are dashed against stones in similar conditions described in the Olivet Discourse:
So once again, if dual fulfillments are in play -- we know for sure there are dual "Babylons" according to Revelation -- then it makes sense that the final one has to do in some way with Jesus. As I said with agreement by Jordan, he would be the Stone that either destroys those it falls on, or breaks those who fall on it. Like Paul dashed and broken against the goad/prod that was Jesus:
Comment
-
Originally posted by KingsGambit View PostAnd these still exist in much more of an unlimited good society than what existed at that time.
There's an incident in Numbers, I believe, where God complains about the Jews and entertains the idea of killing the whole tribe but appears to change His mind after Moses explains why it wouldn't be a good idea. There are two interpretations of this: 1. Moses actually changes God's mind. 2. God is testing Moses to "talk Him out of it." I see no reason why this shouldn't be a similar test. Can you imagine God getting angry if Moses objected to the systematic slaughter of war orphans? I can't.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JohnnyP View PostI still wouldn't rule out some dual fulfillments.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostOf course you wouldn't.
Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
Comment
-
Originally posted by JohnnyP View PostGill's Exposition also raises the possibility as I cited...
It's not "correct" simply because you can find other people with a similar belief.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by whag, 04-09-2024, 01:04 PM
|
461 responses
2,054 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Diogenes
Today, 04:17 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 02-04-2024, 05:06 AM
|
254 responses
1,230 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 05-22-2024, 12:21 PM | ||
Started by whag, 01-18-2024, 01:35 PM
|
49 responses
372 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
05-15-2024, 02:53 PM
|
Comment