God, Carnage, And Rape

[Miles]

.


In Numbers 31 we have god speaking to Moses:

"Numbers 31 . . .
1 "The Lord said to Moses, 2 “Get even with the Midianites for what they did to the Israelites. After that you will join your ancestors in death” 3 So Moses spoke to the people."

and sent 12,000 off to war. (The carnage takes place between verses 7 and 12.) After killing the Midianite solders the Israelite army took the Midianite women and children as prisoners, which was against Moses's instructions. When Moses found out about this he was. . .

14. . .very angry with the officers of the army, the commanders of the companies and battalions, who were returning from battle. 15 “Why did you let all the women live?” he asked them. 16 “Remember, they were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and caused the Israelites to be unfaithful to the Lord in the incident that took place at Peor. The Lord’s community experienced a plague at that time. 17 So kill all the Midianite boys and every Midianite woman who has gone to bed with a man. 18 But save for yourselves every girl who has never gone to bed with a man. 19 “Everyone who killed a person or touched a dead body must stay outside the camp seven days. You and your prisoners of war must use the ritual water on the third and seventh days in order to take away your sin. 20 Do the same for all the clothes and everything made of leather, goats’ hair, or wood.”

That god found the foregoing acceptable is borne out by his lack of any comment about it, and by pressing on to further issues, such as how the spoils of the war were to be divvied up.

25 The Lord said to Moses, 26 “You, the priest Eleazar, and the heads of the families of the community need to count all the loot, including the people and animals you captured. 27 Divide the loot between the soldiers who served in the war and the rest of the community. 28 Collect a tax for the Lord. From the soldiers who served in the war collect one out of every 500 things. This includes people, cattle, donkeys, sheep, and goats.

My concern here is verse 18 where Moses tells the conquering soldiers "18 But save for yourselves every girl who has never gone to bed with a man."

In effect, god is saying:"You have my permission to rape them." I say this because there is no mention or even implication that the soldiers need first marry the girls, or even marry them at all. Plus a women's consent is never mentioned. Like it or not, a soldier could take what ever virgin girl he desired, to which the girl is never given the option to decline. Pretty much a matter of rape as I see it.


The verse from other translations.

VOICE
As for the virgins, you can take them, as you desire.

MEV
But keep alive for yourselves all the young girls who have not known a man by lying with him.

GW
But save for yourselves every girl who has never gone to bed with a man.

CJB
But the young girls who have never slept with a man, keep alive for yourselves.

GNV
But all the women-children that have not known carnal copulation, keep alive for yourselves.

NKJV
But keep alive for yourselves all the young girls who have not known a man intimately.

ISV
You are to allow the young women who haven’t yet had sexual relations with a man to live for yourselves.”

So, hasn't god aided and perhaps even abetted rape? If not, hasn't he at least condoned it? I say, he most certainly has.


.

[The Nice Centurion]

So, hasn't god aided and perhaps even abetted rape? If not, hasn't he at least condoned it?

Rape is a violation of rights. The problem isn't the physical act here, but who it is done to and what that counts as. If you do it to a rock obviously no harm done. And if you do it to an animal, no harm done, or at least, no rights violated.

https://mises.org/library/rights-animals
But the fundamental flaw in the theory of animal rights is more basic and far-reaching.1 For the assertion of human rights is not properly a simple emotive one; individuals possess rights not because we "feel" that they should, but because of a rational inquiry into the nature of man and the universe. In short, man has rights because they are natural rights. They are grounded in the nature of man
...
Thus, while natural rights, as we have been emphasizing, are absolute, there is one sense in which they are relative: they are relative to the species man. A rights-ethic for mankind is precisely that: for all men, regardless of race, creed, color, or sex, but for the species man alone. The Biblical story was insightful to the effect that man was "given" — or, in natural law, we may say "has" — dominion over all the species of the earth. Natural law is necessarily species-bound.

Does this imply you can rape an animal? You bet. No rights = no rights violated. Some would find this value system abhorrent but I am forced to admit it is a consistent one.

The disagreement here, in this topic, isn't with the concept of rape, but the extent of rights: Does the concept of rights extend to the object of the forced sex act? Well the Old Testament is pretty clear (and I would argue the NT doesn't contradict it). Full rights are for Jews.

(JW has made a case that the Hebrew law protects slaves and captives against rape and I have read it but this post proceeds as if there are at least some permissions to hurt others that would not exist in modern society. And I do think the position a female captive is in, to be beaten even just within the limits of Hebrew law if the master wishes, is essentially permissive of rape. The master may have had to marry her first, but if he wants sex he's just going to beat her senseless otherwise until she "consents" to marry him.)

This is not an abhorrent position, especially for a People who have been under near-constant attack for all of history. The Past was pretty brutal and extending rights to other tribes was definitely not the way to go. It's also not an abhorrent position because once you attach rights to lofty and nebulous things such as, "rational inquiry into the nature of Man and the universe" (which we do, or animals would probably have full rights) where you draw the line exactly becomes arbitrary.

I challenge anyone to tell me a good moral reason a Jew should not kill/rape an Amalekite or any enemy, where such a reason does not extend to why a modern day person shouldn't kill an animal.

In other words, it's not about rape. This topic is not about rape. It's about the line you draw - who has rights, who doesn't - and where you place it. Make a case for yours.

That must be the sickest post ever !!!