@
Unefilletrescurieuse The OP quoted a passage showing a clear claim by its Hebrew author.
I did NOT deny that is what Amos wrote, at least as far as he was translated and edited down the centuries since; but I questioned
why he wrote it. What he intended by it.
I think it is that question "why?" is what you find uncomfortable.
Even now some Jewish scholars doubt the name "Israel" was ever meant as that of a country. It was a culture, instead.
Of course Amos had nowt to do with the Crusades and the state of Christianity many hundreds of years after his time!
I never claimed he did. How could he have done?
Christianity as a faith did not exist until ratified as such more than 300 years AD. Previously what became Christianity had been a fairly minor Jewish sect, but its major rise later likely came from the conversions of the Greeks and especially, the Romans.
I drew attention to the parallels between the pre-BCE colonialists and later ones..
Beliveing in the Bible unquestioningly merely because it is the Bible, leads nowhere. There's no point following any multi-source faith like Christianity unless you are prepared to read its texts with an open mind and try to think what its authors intended in their own societies and times. Otherwise it is not real belief but blind obedience.
Believing in God is what matters, if you follow one of the many denominations of the three Abrahamic faiths; but the Old Testament is perhaps more the Hebrews' life and times as their leaders and scribes saw them, as a theological guide.
Christianity, with its Jewish origins, does draw on the Hebrew prophesies and parables, and uses them liturgically, but not to justify colonialism whatever latter-day colonists might think.
