I recently got into a debate about Numbers 31

[Sirami]

It's very difficult for me to understand the viewpoint of the truly faithful. I recently got into a debate with my aunt, who is a strong fundamentalist. Scripture came into the debate, and I brought up numbers 31.

Here's the New International Version for reference:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se ... ersion=NIV

I suggest you read the whole chapter, but here's a paraphrase for those that won't read it:

God told Moses to wipe out Midian as a result of them worshiping other Gods. So Moses people did wipe them out.

After all the fighting men of Midain were killed and the women and children were brought back to camp.

Moses got angry and told his officers that all of the women must be killed, and to kill all of the children as well, except for the children that were female virgins. The female virgins were forced into marriage with the people that destroyed their homes and families.

Now, when reading the bible it's pretty clear that not only did God approve of all of this, God demanded that all of this happen. To me that sounds a lot like the LRA of today.

How could somebody respect God and Moses after reading something like this?

[Hobbes]

Jatkins,

I hope I am not going against the rules of the board, but this give and take on our part has blown up into something so large, I don't have time to do anything here but address your one post before I'm exhausted and ready for bed. So take this however you wish but I'm going to do some serious condensing of material here and try to address the most relevant points. My apologies ahead of time. I'm not here to win a contest, so if this means I "lose" then that's ok.

You might want to reread the book. You may also want to reread my posts for a refresher.

Nonresponsive.

Though I'm new here I'm not new to debating the bible and one thing I have grown weary of over the years, is when someone makes the same point -- sometimes painted in different ways and sometimes not -- no matter what a believer says in response. It was my belief that much of what you said was a rehash already addressed by not only me but other believing participants.

Unless every single Midianite woman participated in the seduction of the Israelite men (which is pretty unlikely, as there were tens of thousands of them--just look at the number of distributed slaves afterward--including, actuarially, probably several thousand elderly) the murder of every woman of childbearing age cannot be justified by the crimes of their sisters.

I doubt you would allow me to get away with arguing a point that hinged on what I deem as "likely" or "unlikely."

In any event I will respond. Verses 15 and 16 provide the context. ALL the women were guilty.

• "15Moses said to them, "Have you let all the women live? 16Behold, these, on Balaams advice, caused the people of Israel to act treacherously against the LORD..."

In verse 15 Moses spoke of all the women, so because verse 16 doesn't explicitly break the context, it should stay the same. "These" means.. all.

Second, you assume that sexual seduction and causing an Israelite to convert is a crime justifiably worthy of death, which I cannot condone.

I'm sorry I even mentioned the seduction. It's not the main point. The point is, the women used their "talents" to lure Israelite men away from God as part of a plan to destroy Israel. I already made the point earlier that God's first and foremost Old Testament commandment was not to worship any other/false gods. It's evidently a very serious matter to Him. Deadly serious. The adultery/sexual temptation thing isn't what it's about but the reason it's worthy of mentioning is because--though you may not understand this--sexual temptation is one of the most difficult things of all possible things, for man to resist. The bible is replete with examples to back this up, and one need not go any further than the story of King David, the apple of God's eye, who fell to the same thing. When you say, casually I might add, that people died "because the Israelite men just couldn't control themselves," you make it sound like it's simple common sense that all men can resist sexual temptation... piece o' cake. I disagree. And the Midianite King wouldn't have sent forth all his women to do this, if he didn't think it had an excellent chance of succeeding.

Now, I recognize that you believe, on faith, that God would only have done this if He believed there was no other option. And I'm not a sand-castle kicking Atheist necessarily--I don't necessarily hold to the narrative that religion is a bad thing. But leaving aside that God is omnipotent and could have done whatever else He wished, can you at least see how difficult it is for someone to see this as moral if they do not already believe that all of God's actions are inherently moral?

I absolutely can see your point. It was my point for over 30 years. And it's not without merit.

2) The punishments dished out to the Midianites were orders of magnitude more severe that those dished out to the Israelites; among the Israelites, only those directly responsible paid. Among the Midianites, the whole civilization did.

Frankly, I wouldn't expect anything different from a God who adopted and loved the Israelites. God's plan was for His children to establish themselves in the promised land. The Midianites were walled in on that land and had to be removed. The Midianites also preempted the battle with an attack on the Israelites (not a physical one but a "destroy from within" ploy to lure them away from God). The Midianites introduced a plague to the Israelites. Yada yada yada, God wanted them wiped out to protect His children. In your eyes it would only be fair if He also wiped out His own children but God saw it differently. Maybe God did show a little favoritism for His family as opposed to a disease-ridden, hostile, wicked tribe of people who stood in the way of His grand plan. I'll concede that possibility.

There is much more but I've run out of time and energy, friend. You put a lot into your post and I'll eventually be back to check in. I hope you understand and thanks for being understanding in your post and civil.

[jatkins]

I hope I am not going against the rules of the board, but this give and take on our part has blown up into something so large, I don't have time to do anything here but address your one post before I'm exhausted and ready for bed. So take this however you wish but I'm going to do some serious condensing of material here and try to address the most relevant points. My apologies ahead of time. I'm not here to win a contest, so if this means I "lose" then that's ok.

Dude, no problem. We're just having a discussion for the sake of intellectual stimulation and to share opinions. If at any point it's becoming a chore, it kind of loses its value.

I doubt you would allow me to get away with arguing a point that hinged on what I deem as "likely" or "unlikely."

Like anything, that depends on how you justify the assertion. In this case, my justification for the assertion that not all Midianite women were engaged in the active seduction and conversion of Israelite men is simply mathematical. I cannot fathom every adult woman of an entire civilization of possibly over a hundred thousand people (remember the numbers of living girls they distribute as spoils) being engaged in this. Remember that this would then include the elderly and infirm, the sick, the poorest beggars and the wealthiest court ladies. Such a remarkable and systematized conspiracy of social subversion is not described or even alleged in Numbers (where the number of seduced men appears to be comparatively few) and strains credibility on an intellectual level.

• "15Moses said to them, "Have you let all the women live? 16Behold, these, on Balaams advice, caused the people of Israel to act treacherously against the LORD..."

I have never heard this quote interpreted to mean that all the women were directly involved, even by an apologist, and I dispute that interpretation here. He asked if they let all the women live, and then made a general statement that Midianite women led to the downfall of the people of Israel. This interpretation is more consistent with the scale of subversion the Israelites seem to have been experiencing, and still gives effect to the words used. Moreover, it gives effect to several alternative translations whose word choice and punctuation make this more clear. I'm not schooled in either Greek or Hebrew, though: I'd be very interested to learn what the word(s) used in place of "these/they" is/are in the Torah--I think that would be illuminating.

I'm sorry I even mentioned the seduction. It's not the main point. The point is, the women used their "talents" to lure Israelite men away from God as part of a plan to destroy Israel. I already made the point earlier that God's first and foremost Old Testament commandment was not to worship any other/false gods. It's evidently a very serious matter to Him. Deadly serious. The adultery/sexual temptation thing isn't what it's about but the reason it's worthy of mentioning is because--though you may not understand this--sexual temptation is one of the most difficult things of all possible things, for man to resist. The bible is replete with examples to back this up, and one need not go any further than the story of King David, the apple of God's eye, who fell to the same thing. When you say, casually I might add, that people died "because the Israelite men just couldn't control themselves," you make it sound like it's simple common sense that all men can resist sexual temptation... piece o' cake. I disagree.

All men can resist. Some will and some won't as a matter of statistical probability. There is always a very low chance that all of them will successfully resist temptation (or, conversely, that none of them will). Our fundamental disagreement, though, is on how okay it is for somebody to kill another person for worshiping another God and trying to get others to do so. Well, actually, I don't think we disagree on that in the modern sense, but you understand what I mean.

And the Midianite King wouldn't have sent forth all his women to do this, if he didn't think it had an excellent chance of succeeding.

The only passage indicating that anyone suggested that some women seduce some Israelite dudes says it was Balaam who counseled it. Balaam doesn't seem to be a Midianite (some scholars identify him as an Ammonite).

Frankly, I wouldn't expect anything different from a God who adopted and loved the Israelites.

That a universal, omnipotent, all-creating God could be this provincial and narrow is a problem for another thread.

There is much more but I've run out of time and energy, friend. You put a lot into your post and I'll eventually be back to check in. I hope you understand and thanks for being understanding in your post and civil.

No need for apology, I totally get it. Debate is not, and should not be about outlasting the other guy. Have a good night.