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?

[mitty]

History and wisdom is important. A lot of the wisdom comes from the history. I do see. Quick question: Book of exodus. Did it happen in history?

Well did Exodus happen? As far I know the biblical accounts haven't been substantiated in any way in the Egyptian records. Anyway, I understand that Egypt included most of present day Israel back then.

[Question Everything]

History and wisdom is important. A lot of the wisdom comes from the history. I do see. Quick question: Book of exodus. Did it happen in history?

Well did Exodus happen? As far I know the biblical accounts haven't been substantiated in any way in the Egyptian records. Anyway, I understand that Egypt included most of present day Israel back then.

There is no archeological evidence to suggest that it did. I'm sure that if thousands of people and animals lived in the Sinai peninsula for decades there would be water wells, latrines, graves, charred wood, broken pottery, etc. that would be discovered.

[Hobbes]

So even the male babies, the very youngest, those that had not yet learned the craft of war or the ways of their fathers...they had to die?

This was to prevent them from growing up as slaves under Israelite rule and eventually seeking revenge.

But the women, however old, who had not yet touched men--they could be allowed to live as the unwilling brides of Israelite husbands, even though some of them could presumably bring up their children to loathe God and hate the people who destroyed their civilization?

The vast majority of "women" that were spared were young, preteen girls. In that day it was customary to marry--and lose virginity--at a very young age. The reason the women were ordered to be killed is because ostensibly through the use of sexual temptation, they intentionally lured the men of Israel away from God and into the worship of Pagan idols.

I recognize that you believe that God's actions are inherently good, and that therefore they require no explanation.

That's a little misleading. I never said God's actions don't require explanation. I only said I personally wouldn't concern myself with the events surrounding Numbers 31 if given the opportunity to speak with God.

Can you at least understand why this particular problem vexes those of us who are not convinced?

I do understand that it vexes you; however I'm doubting that the plight of the Midianites causes you--or anyone else--to lose any sleep.

1) I say to a thoughtful Christian apologist that his God is not good.
2) He asks me why I believe this.
3) I say that his God is not good because not all His alleged actions are good.
4) He assures me that all God's actions are good.
5) I relate the story of the genocide and mass rape against the Midianites as an example.
6) He assures me that this action was good.
7) I ask him how this could possibly be.
8) He argued that the action was good because God did it, and God is good.

"Mass rape." You'll have to explain that one. Allowing a virgin to dwell among your people and marry doesn't constitute rape. Can you cite where in Numbers 31 that God instructed the Israelites to hold the enemy females down and force themselves upon them?

In short, the apologist begs the question. The thing I asked the apologist to demonstrate was that his God is good. In the above, he could only do so by assuming the conclusion (God is good) as one of his premises. This may be satisfying for those who believe God is good a priori, but it cannot satisfy anyone who does not, and cannot be taken as any kind of evidence of God's goodness.

Well I know this doesn't please you or satisfy you; but since none of us will EVER know in our lifetimes, all the circumstances surrounding every action that God undertook in the bible; it unfortunately boils down to a matter of (a) knowing God's character using a reasonable understanding of the Scriptures, and (b) faith.

Since you took the opportunity to present a mock conversation with your imaginary apologist, I will follow your lead and describe what comes to my mind when I hear a skeptic put up such a fuss about the plight of the Midianites and other tribes smote by the Israelites during the conquest of Canaan.

I wonder... if these ill-fated ancient tribes and the so-called abuse thereof bothers you so much, how you can possibly go on for even a second while--for example--the people of Darfur are treated in likewise fashion, at this very moment. Or, perhaps you really are as concerned for innocents as you contend, and you're typing your posts from your laptop, using a gas-powered generator parked alongside your tent on the front lines in Darfur? Are you typing a couple of words, reloading your magazine, firing at the rapists and murderers, then typing a couple more words, and reloading?

And that's a huge exaggaration and not meant to insult. But the point obviously is... if you are truly as concerned for the ancient tribes defeated and destroyed by Israel, then you by all means should be a hundred times more preoccupied with the real life genocide, rape, murder, and pillage that is going on just an airline ticket away. Either that or, you simply have an axe to grind against the Israelites; therefore rendering today's non-Israel-related events a lot less meaningful if not completely inconsequential to you.

Don't get me wrong; I am not calling you a hypocrite; but I have to admit. A passionate argument in favor of the so-called "innocent" ancient tribes of Canaan from the comfort of ones home is akin to someone screaming from a soapbox in the public square about the abuse and torture of cows in slaughterhouses; while eating a big juicy hamburger. There is just a hint of disingenuousness in the argument, IMHO.

[Board]

This was to prevent them from growing up as slaves under Israelite rule and eventually seeking revenge.

And this was moral and just?

The vast majority of "women" that were spared were young, preteen girls. In that day it was customary to marry--and lose virginity--at a very young age. The reason the women were ordered to be killed is because ostensibly through the use of sexual temptation, they intentionally lured the men of Israel away from God and into the worship of Pagan idols.

Again... this is moral and just? We are not talking about killing in self defense. This is cold blooded murder of defenseless people because they might one day seek revenge or they might tempt you sexually.

That's a little misleading. I never said God's actions don't require explanation. I only said I personally wouldn't concern myself with the events surrounding Numbers 31 if given the opportunity to speak with God.

I would... if the Bible is true and these events took place AND were commanded by him then he has a lot of explaining to do. These actions would land him in military court and likely be executed. Even our Geneva Conventions are more moral than this...

I do understand that it vexes you; however I'm doubting that the plight of the Midianites causes you--or anyone else--to lose any sleep.

That is not the point. I am certainly not losing sleep over what happened over 2,000 years ago. However, your statement does not support your position and leads you down the path to our next section...

Well I know this doesn't please you or satisfy you; but since none of us will EVER know in our lifetimes, all the circumstances surrounding every action that God undertook in the bible; it unfortunately boils down to a matter of (a) knowing God's character using a reasonable understanding of the Scriptures, and (b) faith.

Since you took the opportunity to present a mock conversation with your imaginary apologist, I will follow your lead and describe what comes to my mind when I hear a skeptic put up such a fuss about the plight of the Midianites and other tribes smote by the Israelites during the conquest of Canaan.

I wonder... if these ill-fated ancient tribes and the so-called abuse thereof bothers you so much, how you can possibly go on for even a second while--for example--the people of Darfur are treated in likewise fashion, at this very moment. Or, perhaps you really are as concerned for innocents as you contend, and you're typing your posts from your laptop, using a gas-powered generator parked alongside your tent on the front lines in Darfur? Are you typing a couple of words, reloading your magazine, firing at the rapists and murderers, then typing a couple more words, and reloading?

And that's a huge exaggaration and not meant to insult. But the point obviously is... if you are truly as concerned for the ancient tribes defeated and destroyed by Israel, then you by all means should be a hundred times more preoccupied with the real life genocide, rape, murder, and pillage that is going on just an airline ticket away. Either that or, you simply have an axe to grind against the Israelites; therefore rendering today's non-Israel-related events a lot less meaningful if not completely inconsequential to you.

Don't get me wrong; I am not calling you a hypocrite; but I have to admit. A passionate argument in favor of the so-called "innocent" ancient tribes of Canaan from the comfort of ones home is akin to someone screaming from a soapbox in the public square about the abuse and torture of cows in slaughterhouses; while eating a big juicy hamburger. There is just a hint of disingenuousness in the argument, IMHO.

One big old Red Herring.

It is not that we are concerned with what happened to tribes in the past. We are concerned that people can follow a God who commanded those actions. We know humans do these types of atrocities and yes we are appalled. How can a God who is considered good and just command these actions?

[Goat]

History and wisdom is important. A lot of the wisdom comes from the history. I do see. Quick question: Book of exodus. Did it happen in history?

Well did Exodus happen? As far I know the biblical accounts haven't been substantiated in any way in the Egyptian records. Anyway, I understand that Egypt included most of present day Israel back then.

There is no archeological evidence to suggest that it did. I'm sure that if thousands of people and animals lived in the Sinai peninsula for decades there would be water wells, latrines, graves, charred wood, broken pottery, etc. that would be discovered.

Not only that, but if there were Hebrew culture people living in Egypt in anywhere near the numbers mentioned, there would be villages that showed signs of Hebrew culture. This is missing.

Finding some villages with Hebrew writing, or other signs of Hebrew culture of the proper age would lend some support to the Exodus story. I think that would be rather exciting to find myself.

[jatkins]

The vast majority of "women" that were spared were young, preteen girls. In that day it was customary to marry--and lose virginity--at a very young age. The reason the women were ordered to be killed is because ostensibly through the use of sexual temptation, they intentionally lured the men of Israel away from God and into the worship of Pagan idols.

I recognize this. It feeds the mass rape argument below.

I do understand that it vexes you; however I'm doubting that the plight of the Midianites causes you--or anyone else--to lose any sleep.

I never said I lost sleep. You have to remember, these people are fictional to me. The argument is whether the atrocities listed can be consistent with a God described as good.

"Mass rape." You'll have to explain that one. Allowing a virgin to dwell among your people and marry doesn't constitute rape. Can you cite where in Numbers 31 that God instructed the Israelites to hold the enemy females down and force themselves upon them?

They weren't "allowed" to live anywhere. They were to be taken by the Israelites "for yourselves." Now, the general connotation seems to be sexual, but let's pretend it isn't. They're still slaves.

Well I know this doesn't please you or satisfy you; but since none of us will EVER know in our lifetimes, all the circumstances surrounding every action that God undertook in the bible; it unfortunately boils down to a matter of (a) knowing God's character using a reasonable understanding of the Scriptures, and (b) faith.

Appeals to faith end debate. If you need faith, you can't explain it.

I wonder... if these ill-fated ancient tribes and the so-called abuse thereof bothers you so much, how you can possibly go on for even a second while--for example--the people of Darfur are treated in likewise fashion, at this very moment. Or, perhaps you really are as concerned for innocents as you contend, and you're typing your posts from your laptop, using a gas-powered generator parked alongside your tent on the front lines in Darfur? Are you typing a couple of words, reloading your magazine, firing at the rapists and murderers, then typing a couple more words, and reloading?

And that's a huge exaggaration and not meant to insult. But the point obviously is... if you are truly as concerned for the ancient tribes defeated and destroyed by Israel, then you by all means should be a hundred times more preoccupied with the real life genocide, rape, murder, and pillage that is going on just an airline ticket away. Either that or, you simply have an axe to grind against the Israelites; therefore rendering today's non-Israel-related events a lot less meaningful if not completely inconsequential to you.

Don't get me wrong; I am not calling you a hypocrite; but I have to admit. A passionate argument in favor of the so-called "innocent" ancient tribes of Canaan from the comfort of ones home is akin to someone screaming from a soapbox in the public square about the abuse and torture of cows in slaughterhouses; while eating a big juicy hamburger. There is just a hint of disingenuousness in the argument, IMHO.

1) You are calling me a hypocrite, which is a red herring and an ad hominem attack.
2) Your metaphor equating arguing against the suffering of innocent people if you're not currently suffering yourself with being the world's worst PETA advocate is confusing, but I'm not going to ask you to explain it because I don't care and it has nothing to do with the topic of the thread.
3) You also make a bunch of hasty assumptions about my level of involvement in advocating for social justice, and how much I care about actual suffering versus the suffering of the Midianites, apparently based on the fact that I've made a couple of posts on this website (since you don't actually know me at all). I would enlighten you, but this thread IS NOT ABOUT ME.
4) And apparently you think there's a chance that this is all because I hate Israel. Newsflash, lifelong Israel supporter here.

If you reply again, it may be a while before I get back to you. I have to go protest with the Libyans for a while before I'm qualified to make an argument opposing oppression ever again.

[Hobbes]

And this was moral and just?

Since it's a yes-no question. Yes.

Again... this is moral and just? We are not talking about killing in self defense. This is cold blooded murder of defenseless people because they might one day seek revenge or they might tempt you sexually.

I don't think you understand the sheer depth of immorality of these tribes and the real danger they represented. And the sexual temptation wasn't a "might happen," it happened and that, according to the Scriptures, was the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. Hence God's vengeance.

I would... if the Bible is true and these events took place AND were commanded by him then he has a lot of explaining to do. These actions would land him in military court and likely be executed. Even our Geneva Conventions are more moral than this...

Vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord. Remember? God, and only God, can justly exact revenge. And that's because God knows all the facts.

This all goes so deep. It really doesn't need that much explaining from the Christian or Jewish point of view since God tells us from the get-go, our entire race deserves not to even exist. Justice for mankind is wrath and death. Mercy for mankind is to give everyone an opportunity to be pardoned.

I do understand that it vexes you; however I'm doubting that the plight of the Midianites causes you--or anyone else--to lose any sleep.

That is not the point. I am certainly not losing sleep over what happened over 2,000 years ago. However, your statement does not support your position and leads you down the path to our next section...

I don't usually double-inlay quotes but that one was necessary. In my view, yes it is the point. The skeptic who argues against God's actions vs. the Midianites, by deafult is arguing in defense of the Midinanites and declaring their innocence at least on some level.

Again, (1) I don't think the skeptic understands the depth and magnitude of the immorality and corruption of these people, and (2) it seems disingenuous to me that the skeptic is arguing on behalf of people they never knew, aren't related to, and probably doesn't even believe existed in the first place.

For the skeptic to argue that if God orders the killing of anyone, He is evil and immoral; I disagree. Moral absolutism is surprising coming from the typical self-professed "open minded" skeptic but that aside, it is not a moral absolute that if someone kills someone they are immoral. People in this thread have made examples. War time for one. Or how about if you are walking down an alley and you see a thug assaulting a woman at knife point. If you defend her and in the ruckus end up killing him. Are you immoral?

So getting back to the case at hand. God... owner of this playbox and rulemaker... decided for His own Holy purpose, that He would adopt a group of people to be His family. He instructed them on how to live good, peaceful, moral lives. But then there was evil all around them, corruption. To a level that even today we could hardly imagine how bad it was. And the tribes outside God's chosen were "eaten up with it" from the great grandparents all the way down to the young ones. It was so bad and these people were so corrupt and sick that they threatened the very existence of God's family. Even intermingling with them created untold dangers. Imagine an entire community of psychopathic serial killers who rape and kill anything that crosses their path. And they have leprosy. And e-bola. That might come close to describing the level of danger.

Evidently the Midianites et al were a cancer to humanity and a threat. They had to be eliminated. At least that's God's story and so there is your explanation. I know you don't appreciate it or like it; in fact you probably hate it. But that's what God has revealed in Scripture and it was recorded to be passed down through the generations.

Your quote after that was also covered in the above.


I know you'll have much to say in return and I look forward to it. Well met, board!

[Hobbes]

The vast majority of "women" that were spared were young, preteen girls. In that day it was customary to marry--and lose virginity--at a very young age. The reason the women were ordered to be killed is because ostensibly through the use of sexual temptation, they intentionally lured the men of Israel away from God and into the worship of Pagan idols.

I recognize this. It feeds the mass rape argument below.

I do understand that it vexes you; however I'm doubting that the plight of the Midianites causes you--or anyone else--to lose any sleep.

I never said I lost sleep. You have to remember, these people are fictional to me. The argument is whether the atrocities listed can be consistent with a God described as good.

"Mass rape." You'll have to explain that one. Allowing a virgin to dwell among your people and marry doesn't constitute rape. Can you cite where in Numbers 31 that God instructed the Israelites to hold the enemy females down and force themselves upon them?

They weren't "allowed" to live anywhere. They were to be taken by the Israelites "for yourselves." Now, the general connotation seems to be sexual, but let's pretend it isn't. They're still slaves.

Well I know this doesn't please you or satisfy you; but since none of us will EVER know in our lifetimes, all the circumstances surrounding every action that God undertook in the bible; it unfortunately boils down to a matter of (a) knowing God's character using a reasonable understanding of the Scriptures, and (b) faith.

Appeals to faith end debate. If you need faith, you can't explain it.

I wonder... if these ill-fated ancient tribes and the so-called abuse thereof bothers you so much, how you can possibly go on for even a second while--for example--the people of Darfur are treated in likewise fashion, at this very moment. Or, perhaps you really are as concerned for innocents as you contend, and you're typing your posts from your laptop, using a gas-powered generator parked alongside your tent on the front lines in Darfur? Are you typing a couple of words, reloading your magazine, firing at the rapists and murderers, then typing a couple more words, and reloading?

And that's a huge exaggaration and not meant to insult. But the point obviously is... if you are truly as concerned for the ancient tribes defeated and destroyed by Israel, then you by all means should be a hundred times more preoccupied with the real life genocide, rape, murder, and pillage that is going on just an airline ticket away. Either that or, you simply have an axe to grind against the Israelites; therefore rendering today's non-Israel-related events a lot less meaningful if not completely inconsequential to you.

Don't get me wrong; I am not calling you a hypocrite; but I have to admit. A passionate argument in favor of the so-called "innocent" ancient tribes of Canaan from the comfort of ones home is akin to someone screaming from a soapbox in the public square about the abuse and torture of cows in slaughterhouses; while eating a big juicy hamburger. There is just a hint of disingenuousness in the argument, IMHO.

1) You are calling me a hypocrite, which is a red herring and an ad hominem attack.
2) Your metaphor equating arguing against the suffering of innocent people if you're not currently suffering yourself with being the world's worst PETA advocate is confusing, but I'm not going to ask you to explain it because I don't care and it has nothing to do with the topic of the thread.
3) You also make a bunch of hasty assumptions about my level of involvement in advocating for social justice, and how much I care about actual suffering versus the suffering of the Midianites, apparently based on the fact that I've made a couple of posts on this website (since you don't actually know me at all). I would enlighten you, but this thread IS NOT ABOUT ME.
4) And apparently you think there's a chance that this is all because I hate Israel. Newsflash, lifelong Israel supporter here.

If you reply again, it may be a while before I get back to you. I have to go protest with the Libyans for a while before I'm qualified to make an argument opposing oppression ever again.

I'll try to be more delicate in my next reply to you. Sorry for the ad hominem assault. I didn't realize I was assaulting you and offending you at the time, but you've enlightened me, so all I can ask is your forgiveness. I hope my reply to board helps a little but I fear it might make things even worse?

Oh well, see you when you come back and nice to meet you.

[Hobbes]

I responded to board's reply before I looked at jatkins response. I guess I should sum up my position in bullet fashion.

Johnny says God is bad and immoral because God ordered the Midianites killed.
It is presumed that Johnny isn't arguing moral absolutism --that killing someone is bad and immoral in ALL cases.
Therefore it becomes clear that Johnny believes the Midianites did not deserve what they got
By presuming their innocence, Johnny is arguing on behalf of the Midianites

Now, if any of the items above are irrational or incorrect, please enlighten me... but that is the basis that formed my "ad hominem assault" upon jatkins which really was just a colorful, complete exaggaration to make a point -- and I freely admitted it when I said it.

Jatkins is claiming that he not only is not arguing on behalf of the Midianites, but, hardly believes they existed in the first place. I'm trying to figure out--assuming jatkins is not a moral absolutist--where I went wrong with the deductions I made above.

Now please excuse me while I go look up "ad hominem" so I can better understand the charges against me.

[johnmarc]

The vast majority of "women" that were spared were young, preteen girls. In that day it was customary to marry--and lose virginity--at a very young age. The reason the women were ordered to be killed is because ostensibly through the use of sexual temptation, they intentionally lured the men of Israel away from God and into the worship of Pagan idols.

The reason that virgins were kept is that in the ancient world was a misunderstanding of procreation. The ancient world held that a woman was a field that the man planted a seed in. No different than corn, I guess. There was no way to determine if a seed had been previously planted in a non-virgin and the offspring could conceivably be not be Jewish. (weak pun but an effort nevertheless) But a Jewish male could plant a seed in a previously unplanted field and a Jewish child would be born. That's why David could have black girls in his harem, the Jewish line ran only through the males.