Ethic Destruction vs Ethnic Destruction

[Bob]

In 1 Samuel 15:3, God commands King Saul to completely destroy the Amalekites. Some detractors believe this is an example of God demanding genocide (Richard Dawkins Quotes (Author of The God Delusion)), but Pastor Alister Begg states that it was Ethic destruction, and not Ethnic destruction (www.truthforlife.org, sermon on 1 Samuel 15).

In WWII, the allies bombed Germany, killing civilians as well as soldiers. Ethnic destruction of the German people was never intended, but rather Ethic destruction of the Nazis.

Today, some are still deliberately blurring the distinction.

 

[Jericho]

When God commanded certain groups of people to be destroyed, it was either as a form of judgment or it was to protect Israel. In that day, if you don't completely wipe out your enemy, they would come back to wipe you out. But I think what is missed is that there were giants among the Amalekites. I think God was trying to wipe out this hybridized (invasive) species that was never part of God's creation.

 

[RedFan]

Define "Ethic destruction," please.

 

[marks]

There was also the fact that the children were all being raised under a religious system of human sacrifice and endless perversions. The entire societies were tainted and corrupted.

This is an interesting thread considering an interview I just read some of, from a woman released by Hamas. She testifies that all the people there are Hamas, all are terrorists. She was held captive by one of the Gazan families, with children in the house. They are all being raised to hate and kill and destroy.

Much love!

 

[Bob]

Define "Ethic destruction," please.

Thank you for your question.

Here, the phrase is intended to distinguish the actions from “Ethnic Destruction” (aka genocide). In other words, the destruction is aimed at those whose ethics are abhorrent, e.g., the Nazis.

Hope this helps.

Peace and blessings.

 

[RedFan]

So, the distinction is between annihilating a group based on its genetic affinity, and annihilating a group that may or may not be genetically linked based on its immoral actions or beliefs. Got it.

I'll take your word for it that there are folks out there who are "blurring the distinction" between these two. Perhaps it is because there is often overlap between them (birds of a feather act similarly and believe similarly). Perhaps it is a matter of the nationalization of philosophies. But the distinction seems pretty obvious. It would take a fairly inattentive person to confuse them, wouldn't it?

 

[Bob]

Thanks for your reply.

On the other hand, Jesus told us we should love our enemies, and that must mean even those that are trying to kill us.
Note, However, that Jesus’ response to death threats was flight (Matthew 12: 14,15); ditto the Apostle Paul (Acts 9: 23-25).

Indeed, historically to avoid enemies, many indigenous tribes fled to isolated environments (e.g., the Kalahari Desert and the Aleutian Islands). And of course early Protestants fled from Europe to the U.S., as did many Jewish groups in the late 19th and 20th centuries.

And yet, the Cimmerians tried to escape the Scythians, but they were wiped out all the same (save, ha, ha, for Conan).

So, what should good Christians do when there are no more places to hide?