thought of the day.250

A christian and atheist discuss the bible

One of the most despicable stories in all of literature can be found in that holiest of all books—the Bible. Chapter 31 of the Book of Numbers tells of a “Holy” War fought by God’s people against the people of Midian. It begins with the LORD telling Moses to, "Take vengeance on the Midianites.” So they fought against Midian, as the LORD commanded Moses, and “killed every man.” The Israelites captured the Midianite women and children and took all the Midianite herds, flocks and goods as plunder. They burned all the towns to the ground. Moses was furious that anyone was left alive and commanded the officers of the army to “kill all the boys” and “kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.”

Now to the discussion. The participants are Mike the Christian who is an author, teacher, speaker and Christian apologist. John the Atheist is an ex-Christian.

John the Atheist:
This story alone should lead any ethical person to reject the God of the Bible as morally abhorent. It is evil to kill captured and cowering little boys and mothers; evil to kill a young girl’s mother, father, brother and friends and then give her to the soldier that slaughtered them; and despicable to defend such behavior.

Mike the Christian:
An Israelite was permitted to marry women from the captives of a particular battle. If an Israelite soldier genuinely desired one of the captives he could have her only through marriage. This helped protect the dignity of the women captives and the purity of the Israelite soldiers. Israelites were not to rape, plunder, or otherwise mistreat captives as other armies of the ancient Near East did.

John the Atheist:
I find your choice of words about the soldiers and captives disturbing: “genuinely,” “protect,” “dignity,” “purity.” The reality of this young girl’s situation is that she has just witnessed an attack on her town and watched as her mother and father were hacked to pieces with swords, her older brothers, grandfather and all the males in her town have been likewise slaughtered. Her little brothers along with tens of thousand of other little boys were chased down, rounded up, brought before Moses and then murdered. All of the girl friends of this captive have been taken away by soldiers who must have been dripping with the blood of her family and friends to undoubtedly be raped repeatedly. Can you put yourself in the place of this young girl? Can you imagine your daughters in such a situation? Do you really feel it’s honest to speak of the soldier’s “purity” or the girl’s protection of “dignity”? Again you have used words to paint a noble picture of utter atrocity and shifted the focus to the armies of the Near East, who you say, are the ones who rape and plunder. Yet the Israelites’ plunder from this battle alone included nearly a million animals and 32,000 virgins!

Mike the Christian:
A soldier’s marriage to a foreign captive could not take place immediately. The prospective wife was first prepared psychologically for her new life as an Israelite. She was actually integrated into the Jewish culture as family. This was accomplished by her shaving her head, trimming her nails, having a change of clothes, and mourning for her parents for one month. The full month allowed the captive woman a proper amount of time for mourning, (Jews only mourn for 7 days) and it also gave the prospective husband opportunity to reflect on his initial decision to take her as his wife. For with a shaved head she would be less attractive. The phrase, If you are not pleased with her may refer not to some trivial problem in their relationship, but rather to the new wife’s refusal to accept her husband’s spiritual values. In this case the husband could dissolve the marriage only by giving up all rights over her. Clearly he is forbidden from treating her as a slave if she leaves and he was expected to treat her as a wife if she stayed. This law underscored the value of human life; it contrasted with the terrible treatment of war captives common throughout the ancient Near East.

John the Atheist:
Again, I find your choice of words to be dishonest. “Prepared psychologically,” “integrated into the Jewish culture as family”?These people just covered an entire town with entrails and dismembered limbs. They are barbarians of the worst kind, killing the old men and women, the blind, the crippled, mothers and the babies at their breast, fathers, teenagers—boys just like our sons. Is it truly honest to say that the fiends that did these things to these girls’ families and friends are now concerned about gently preparing them psychologically? That the man is going to reflect on his decision of a wife? You make it sound like these are Harvard educated, contemplative and sensitive men. You speak of the law that underscored the value of human life— PLEASE! And again, you say it is not the Israelites who are barbaric but the people of the Near East!

Mike the Christian:
As for the killing of the children, several things should be noted. (1) Given the immoral state of the society into which they were born, they had no chance to avoid its fatal pollution and subsequent eternal consequences. (2) Children who die before the age of accountability go to heaven. This was an act of God’s mercy to take them into His holy presence from such an unholy environment. (3) God is sovereign over life and can order its end according to His will and in view of the creature’s ultimate good. As for the virgins, they were spared (only by Moses concession) because they obviously had had no role in the Baal of Peor incident nor could they by themselves perpetuate the Midianite peoples. The purpose for utterly destroying the Midianites was to protect the Israelites from further deception and harm by completely removing the Midianite people from the earth.

John the Atheist:
Murdering children is actually an act of God’s mercy? Mike, you scare me-is this how badly you must twist your thinking to reconcile the despicable evil attributed to the God of the Bible? Your argument makes no sense, if it was so merciful to have male children slaughtered so that they could enter His holy presence as you say, why not the female children? Is it conceivable that the truth is that this story reflects ancient soldiers lusting after young virgins rather than a God who demanded the murder of countless people?

Mike the Christian:
It was common practice for women to serve as “staff” in the Temple. (1 Sam 2:22) These women were given to Temple service and would have been under the direct authority and care of the priests. These women were still protected by the law given in Deuteronomy and thus they would not have been raped, summarily killed, or used as “human sacrifices.”

John the Atheist:
The Bible says that 16,000 virgins were given to the soldiers, 320 were given to the Levites, and 15,680 were given to the men of the community leaving 32 girls who were given to Eleazar the priest as a “tax for the LORD.” Everything else that was given as a “tax for the LORD” was sacrificed but you say they became Temple “staff.” You make it sound like a great career move — do they get Christmas bonuses? When you say these girls were under the “care” of the priests, and “protected” by the law you make it sound like they won the lottery and were blessed to be in such a warm environment. It must have been spiritually fulfilling for them to work in the Temple of the God responsible for commanding the murders of their family and friends and sexually fulfilling satisfying the lusts of godly men. If they weren’t sacrificed, they probably wished they were.

The only thing more disturbing than the slaughter of the Midianites is listening to Christians try to defend it.