Responding to "The Skeptics Annotated Bible"- Was Haman an Agagite

I came across the website, "The Skeptics Annotated Bible" today. At first, I was thinking, "Oh great, another pathetic attempt by some ignorant atheist trying to discredit the Bible." While I do think many of the claims of "The Skeptics Annotated Bible" are weak or ignorant, it does make some good points to think about from a Christian perspective.

As I searched through the sight, I began to see that the creator of this site studies the Bible more than most Christians do. Sad, but true. Most Christians have a limited knowledge of the Bible due to a lack of effort and or a lack of guidance of God's Holy Spirit. This website actually inspires me to examine the claims against the Bible.

Now, I don't believe that any of the claims will cause me to reject the word of God. But I do think it's good to hear an opposing perspective to strengthen my own.
"Iron sharpens iron, So one man sharpens another."- Proverbs 27:17

Christians are so ready to tell atheists off, but they need to be prepared when doing so.
"but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect,"- 1 Peter 3:15

Now, regarding the question regarding Haman being an Agagite

Esther 3:1 tells that Haman was an Agagite:
"After these things did king Ahasuerus promote Haman the son of Hammedatha the Agagite, and advanced him, and set his seat above all the princes that were with him."

In 1 Samuel 15:2-3, God (through Samuel) tells Saul to wipe out the Amalekites:
Thus saith the LORD of hosts ... Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

I Samuel 15:7-8 says Saul all the Amalekites..Except Agag, king of the Amalekites.
And Saul smote the Amalekites ... And he took Agag the king of the Amalekites alive, and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword.

1 Samuel 15:32-33 mentions Samuel killing Agag.
Then said Samuel, Bring ye hither to me Agag the king of the Amalekites. And Agag came unto him delicately. And Agag said, Surely the bitterness of death is past. And Samuel said, As the sword hath made women childless, so shall thy mother be childless among women. And Samuel hewed Agag in pieces before the LORD in Gilgal.

The Skeptics Annotated Bible implies there is a contradiction. How could Haman be an Agagite, if his people (the Amalekites) were destroyed? A good question.

A couple things to consider?
- Why was Samuel so upset that Saul left Agag and some cattle alive?
- In the book of Esther, why did Haman have such a hatred for the Jews? Why did he want to wipe out the Jews? Did he want to avenge what Saul did to his ancestors?

In 1 Samuel 15: 32-33, Agag mentions that "surely the bitterness of death has past" when being taken to Samuel. This reveals that there has been quite some time between Agag's capture and being taken before Samuel. Would Agag really think that the bitterness of death had past in a matter of a short time?

After some research, I came across an article regarding this topic by By Robert D. Mock MD. Dr. Mock says:
"In the oral traditions of the Jews, the rabbis claim that the Amalekites king, Agag, was treated with royal courtesy and was given the choicest of the concubines of King Saul in a manner befitting a king. Not only was King Agag living in the land of Israel, which that alone was an abomination to the Lord, but the progeny that were conceived by this union of Israelite maidens to the Amalekites king in the Land of Israel became the ancestry of Haman the Agagite and future ‘Amalekites’, all who will genetically retain a hatred toward the chosen people of God. The strongholds of these ‘Amalekite-Israeli’ descendants were raised in the region of Shechem."
(http://www.biblesearchers.com/hebrews/festivals/purimamalekites.shtml)

Samuel was very angry at Saul for letting King Agag live. If Agag really had been captured from the scene of the battle and then directly taken to Samuel, would Samuel really condemn Saul this harshly? There were repercussions for Saul's poor judgement that led to the near genocide of God's chosen people, the Jews.

Free Alim

Across the continent (from America) people are persecuted for what they believe in. Christians are targeted for spreading the gospel.
Even if you're not a Christian, you should feel compelled to sign the petition for Alim. It's a basic human rights issue.

Please take a look at the video.

www.freealim.com

Tortured for Christ

The story of Richard Wurmbrand is nothing short of miraculous. Even if you're an atheist, you can appreciate the heart and courage of this man. Question to Christians and atheists: Could you withstand 14 years of torture and not deny what you believe in?

I would like to say I would, but I couldn't do it; not of my own strength. No person could. The strength Richard Wurmbrand had was supernatural. No person could withstand this abuse for this long by himself. Perhaps this is why God allowed it to happen to him. To be a witness of the mighty power of God. To show that the power of God is stronger than the strength of men. Stronger the communism, Nazism, are any other -ism.

I am not yet strong in my faith. I still care too much about what people think about me and I care too much about myself. To be as Richard Wurmbrand was, he had to completely let go of himself and Christ reigned in him. Very few people have attained this. I don't believe that this state is unattainable or too difficult; it's just that not too many people are that willing.

I hope that someday I will be that willing.

Responding of Facebook

I don't know why, but I enjoy getting into discussions on Facebook. Whether it's sports or the evolution/creation debate, I seem to get caught up in these discussions with strangers. Below is just part of a transcription. It didn't start out too well (my fault). I was pretty harsh and was picking a fight. After apologizing and admitting my fault, the discussion made a turn for the good...

From "Dan": My Response: Dan's response:

No more discussion about evolution. We are obviously going no where.

One question though...

Would it weaken your faith in God if by some token evolution was the absolute truth? It shouldn't. Millions of people don't take the scripture literally, and still have a relationship with God.

In my opinion, you are setting yourself up for some major problems if you continue to take the literal meaning of the bible as the absolute truth.

I am assuming this is why you stand against evolution (religious reasons). Surely you couldn't be an unbiased, and open-minded on the subject or you wouldn't deny something that the vast, vast, vast majority of the scientific community considers truth.

My Response:

Valid question, Daniel.

IF evolution were undoubtedly the absolute truth, I would have no faith in God. I would have no solid ground; no solid foundation to believe in. That is why I believe macro-evolution is false. The reason why there is so much variance in evolution theory is because the foundation is unstable.

That would mean the ultimate standard of which I believe (the Bible) is wrong. The Bible very clearly and literally tells of God's creation. How can a person cherry pick from the Bible and not accept it in its entirety? Either God is completely correct or He's completely wrong. There is no in-between. How would I know what to believe or not to believe. There is no standard.

What if what I told you that something in the Bible is true and then a year later, I tell you I was previously mistaken and I have new proof to confirm something else is now true? I would have no merit.

I fully understand that the vast majority of the scientific community does not believe in God the creator. I also believe that vast majority of the world is on the wrong side of God's favor and will be judged. Majority doesn't determine what is truth. Our country has this principle built into our government.

I also know that many scientists have been in the minority only to be proven that the majority was wrong. The majority doesn't bother me in the slightest bit.

You are right that I stand against evolution because of my belief in God. Everyone has pre-suppositions. Nobody can come to believe on the Lord, God on their own convictions. To a person it is foolishness. God must reveal Himself to a person.

I often make the mistake of thinking that I can convince people by trying to win arguments. My pride sometimes gets the best of me. However, what I try and do is tell people to consider that there is a God. I sincerely believe there is strong scientific evidence along with evidence from the Bible that God is in fact alive.

With that in mind, if God is creator of the universe, we are compelled to honor where we came from. I believe that God is Holy and Just and nothing impure can stand in His presence. That is why the Christ, the Messiah, serves as a propitiation of sin for the world.

Hope this helps you understand were us "Jesus freaks" are coming from. I know you don't agree, but hopefully this sheds some understanding and I pray that you'll understand.

Dan's response:

Neil Jr.-

Very eloquently put. I respect all your beliefs and what you said, and have no right, or basis to try to argue. You are a good man, and I'm sure your morals are up with the best up them, as you are Neil's son.

Good conversation. I enjoy good conversation because it make me think and question my beliefs. I hope I never offended you in anything I said, as that was most definitely not my intention.

Hopefully we can discuss other issues in the future. It's been a pleasure.

Take Care-
Dan