Appreciated as usual Karl. Just one issue. In amongst the Crooke piece there is the paragraph, "The ‘tribe of Amalek’ today is quoted widely. (King Saul, in the first Book of Samuel, commands Samuel to kill every person of the Amalekites: "Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and d…
Appreciated as usual Karl. Just one issue. In amongst the Crooke piece there is the paragraph, "The ‘tribe of Amalek’ today is quoted widely. (King Saul, in the first Book of Samuel, commands Samuel to kill every person of the Amalekites: "Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys")."
Not sure if that was in Crooke's article but it did remind me of sentences in Hudson's piece that had it the other way around.
"Samuel telling Saul, the general whom he hopes to make king: “Now go and smite Amalek [an enemy of Israel], and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys” (1 Samuel 15:3).
These were not the Lord’s own words, and Samuel was no Moses. And there was no blanket promise to back the Jews regardless of their behavior. " (He later condemned Saul for similar behaviour!)
The final sentence contained the indictment of both Netanpsycho and Samuel with regard to YHWH's advice to the Hebrew refugees (from Egypt) if they wanted to stay on the correct path. Michael's synopsis of YHWH philosophy-of-life is a significant clue as to the relationship that ancient belief systems have to what we now think of as political theory IMO.
Hudson has done much historical excavation in the ancient world over the last 20 years and has far more expertise than Crooke. Also, Crooke is constrained by the size of his column and thus doesn't put the entire Old Testament into the sort of context Hudson does.
Appreciated as usual Karl. Just one issue. In amongst the Crooke piece there is the paragraph, "The ‘tribe of Amalek’ today is quoted widely. (King Saul, in the first Book of Samuel, commands Samuel to kill every person of the Amalekites: "Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys")."
Not sure if that was in Crooke's article but it did remind me of sentences in Hudson's piece that had it the other way around.
"Samuel telling Saul, the general whom he hopes to make king: “Now go and smite Amalek [an enemy of Israel], and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys” (1 Samuel 15:3).
These were not the Lord’s own words, and Samuel was no Moses. And there was no blanket promise to back the Jews regardless of their behavior. " (He later condemned Saul for similar behaviour!)
The final sentence contained the indictment of both Netanpsycho and Samuel with regard to YHWH's advice to the Hebrew refugees (from Egypt) if they wanted to stay on the correct path. Michael's synopsis of YHWH philosophy-of-life is a significant clue as to the relationship that ancient belief systems have to what we now think of as political theory IMO.
Hudson has done much historical excavation in the ancient world over the last 20 years and has far more expertise than Crooke. Also, Crooke is constrained by the size of his column and thus doesn't put the entire Old Testament into the sort of context Hudson does.