What Was God's Rationale In This Instance?

[RaymondG]

Numbers 31:17-18 (underlined area specifically)

'17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.'

As the title suggests, what was God's focus in this particular case? I have struggled to find a logical rationale/conclusion, but thus far, draw a blank - in support of an asserted 'loving Yahweh'...?

Seems as though the author of this narrative 'commands' that the taking of virgins was permissible.

Thus, I now ask, what was God's rationale?

When you come to God, you must come like as a child....whose mind is free of the poisonous ideas of man. Your mind must be free to receive, like a young woman's womb, untouched by the sperm/ideas of man..lest there be a chance an idea got through to start the impregnation of sin...like as the snake in the beginning.

in short, keep the young, untouched, wombs for yourselves, kill everyone else.......this may be easier for you to remember, until you are ready for more to be revealed.

"Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;"

 

[Tinker Grey]

Thomas Jefferson

Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear.

Quote by Thomas Jefferson: “4. Religion. Your reason is now mature enough t...”

Run from any ideology that asks you to check your brain at the door.

 

[RaymondG]

Thomas Jefferson Quote by Thomas Jefferson: “4. Religion. Your reason is now mature enough t...”

Run from any ideology that asks you to check your brain at the door.

agreed..... the brain is useful....if you know how to use it. Yet it should be controlled and used at will....and not be in control of us.

The Bible tells us to guard the heart and mind. We should not be prone to believing, or disbelieving anything we hear based off of thoughts and beliefs rooted in the mind....put there, mostly, by others.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I'm asking you to support your assertion, in this specific case. Can you?

God is Holy and righteous He cannot order men to sin it is contrary to His character.

 

[Tinker Grey]

agreed..... the brain is useful....if you know how to use it. Yet it should be controlled and used at will....and not be in control of us.

The Bible tells us to guard the heart and mind. We should not be prone to believing, or disbelieving anything we hear based off of thoughts and beliefs rooted in the mind....put there, mostly, by others.

Then why should we "come as a child?" What should that mean? A child is naive. A child trusts whatever an authority tells it. If I honestly assess what I am told and yet find it wanting, am I full of the "poisonous ideas of man."

Your admonition certainly seems to reject reasoning.

 

[RaymondG]

Then why should we "come as a child?" What should that mean? A child is naive.

I Child is pure and free of prejudices and fear.

A child trusts whatever an authority tells it.

There are many teachers who would disagree. That being said, they dont trust whatever......but they are less likely to dismiss whatever because it sounds strange....and are less prone to judgment.

If I honestly assess what I am told and yet find it wanting, am I full of the "poisonous ideas of man."

Yes, you would be filled with the fear and doubt, placed there by man. Many accessed the thought that we can make tons of metal fly through the air like birds......and many, rightfully, through reasoning and their past experiences, found the idea crazy and wanting.

But there were a few, child-like in nature, willing to try the impossible......and we are still benefiting from it today.

I tell you, now, that God is in you, and you dont have to die......Are you willing to not dismiss the impossible, or will you dismiss the idea, finding it wanting?

Your admonition certainly seems to reject reasoning.

We must move pass reasoning, into wisdom. No wisdom without experience, and no experience without the removal of the fear and doubt of the mind..

 

[Tinker Grey]

Yes, you would be filled with the fear and doubt, placed there by man.

No. One cannot conclude I am wrong simply because I disagree with you. You have a predetermined conclusion. An honest inquiry into the state of things allows the possiblity that one is wrong. For you to assert that if I disagree with you that I am poisoned is to fail to engage with the topic.

We must move pass reasoning, into wisdom. No wisdom without experience, and no experience without the removal of the fear and doubt of the mind..

This is deepity. There is no "wisdom" without reasoning. There is no "moving past" reasoning.

 

[RaymondG]

No. One cannot conclude I am wrong simply because I disagree with you. You have a predetermined conclusion. An honest inquiry into the state of things allows the possiblity that one is wrong. For you to assert that if I disagree with you that I am poisoned is to fail to engage with the topic.

Who said you were wrong? A child would not.....therefore I'd be a hypocrite if I stated you were wrong simply because your idea disagrees with what man put in my mind over the years.

What is the conclusion that I predetermined? What is it that you believe Im trying to get you to believe?

I want you to believe nothing.....I want you to experience and gain wisdom.

A child is willing to jump in the pool no matter how deep......yet as they get older, the fear of man starts to creep in and, if allowed to persist until later in life, one may never experience swimming with the fish.

I only ask that you kill the young girls with wombs that may still have seeds of men floating in them.......yet leave alive the young fresh untouched wombs....ready to receive new seed.....

And I offered no seeds to be planted......nothing to disagree with.

This is deepity. There is no "wisdom" without reasoning. There is no "moving past" reasoning.

Reasoning is the beginning of wisdom........yet wisdom, the end of reason. For one must stop believing after they know....

 

[Tinker Grey]

Who said you were wrong? A child would not.....therefore I'd be a hypocrite if I stated you were wrong simply because your idea disagrees with what man put in my mind over the years.

Are you suggesting that my views can be poisoned and yet correct?

Reasoning is the beginning of wisdom........yet wisdom, the end of reason. For one must stop believing after they know....

For any given situation, one applies reason to assess what it is that is being observed. For any action one takes, one applies reason to determine whether that action is the most appropriate to one's goals.

Call it wisdom if you like, but it isn't the end of reason.

 

[RaymondG]

Are you suggesting that my views can be poisoned and yet correct?

I am suggesting that I cannot know whether or not your idea is poison if I dismiss it right away because of how is sounds to my mind.

Yet it is also unwise to take it as truth, for the same reason.

For any given situation, one applies reason to assess what it is that is being observed. For any action one takes, one applies reason to determine whether that action is the most appropriate to one's goals.

Call it wisdom if you like, but it isn't the end of reason.

What you mentioned isnt my idea of wisdom.....wisdom is obtained after reaching your goal......the poison causes you to dismiss various actions, thereby hindering your chances to reach any goal. For how can one know that any one action wont lead to the goal if they have never reached the goal in question?

I can reason through logical deduction what your name is, based off your screen name....I can make a few guesses,...dismissing silly guesses to continue my reasoning...

Now after you show me your Drivers license or Birth cert.......Would you say that no more reasoning is needed? Would that not be the end of my need to reason out your name?

 

[Nihilist Virus]

This gender distinction makes me wonder if the motive for sparing women was mercy or male lust.

Did any Christians respond to this? I skimmed through and didn't see anything. I might've missed something. But as far as I can see, this is the entire point of the thread. It seems quite obvious. But let's not look at the elephant in the room!

To add to this obvious and omitted issue, we have the issue of rape. I won't speak for these young girls, but I would think that if my parents and uncles and aunts were slaughtered before my eyes, and then my older sisters and all of my brothers were executed in captivity with me, I'd prefer to not be "taken as a wife" by one of the men who participated. If the "choices" are to submit my life and my body to one of these men, or else face exile, I wouldn't be grateful for having a "choice."

 

[cvanwey]

The Church is the one who wrote Scriptures, so it is up to her to decide the meaning.

Then why did you provide a 'reason', at all, in post #2? I'm simply asking you for your 'justification' in regards to your response. Do you have one/any?

Again, this is a specific event. God appears to issue a command to spare virgins, and slaughter the rest. If this is not a 'rule' issued for all warfare, but just isolated situations, what is God's reasoning as such? Does the Bible mention any? If not, then as I stated prior, I sense possible wishful thinking, rationalization/cognitive dissonance, bias, or other, in direct favor to simply 'justify' your continued beliefs. Because as it currently stands, this is all I see in this thread. Please demonstrate otherwise.

So I again ask, is there a clear and spelled out reason? You appear to think so. And yet, I cannot seem to find or locate the connection, in regards to the response you have provided, via post #2?

 

[cvanwey]

The closest thing to keeping infants alive would be the Ottoman Empire taking Greek children to raise them as Muslim soldiers but that happened when the Empire was already solidified. I don't see another example in History where kids were preserved.

How is this relevant to anything?

Why wouldn't they have any part on it? What would be her choice?

I'm going to re-issue/re-word my questions. It seems they were not addressed?

In post #28, you stated: "The Israelites had problems following God while having foreign wives, even more with male children who grow up."

1. If these Israelites were to have any of these woman, as wives, whom were the spoils of this war, they would also be 'foreign'. Thus, please explain your response in post #28?

2. Children, both boys and girls, can be taught the wanted culture. Rebellion might happen, regardless of any specific race. Thus, I ask again, why kill all male infants/toddlers?

3. This Bible chapter states to 'keep the virgins alive for yourselves'. Thus, I ask, what if the virgins don't want to stay with their captors? Are they free to leave?

 

[cvanwey]

God is Holy and righteous He cannot order men to sin it is contrary to His character.

May I ask what your definition of 'sin' may be?

In my estimation, it might be anything contrary to God's wishes or commands? In such a case, you have not answered the question...

What was God's rationale for this event?

 

[cvanwey]

When you come to God, you must come like as a child....whose mind is free of the poisonous ideas of man. Your mind must be free to receive, like a young woman's womb, untouched by the sperm/ideas of man..lest there be a chance an idea got through to start the impregnation of sin...like as the snake in the beginning.

in short, keep the young, untouched, wombs for yourselves, kill everyone else.......this may be easier for you to remember, until you are ready for more to be revealed.

"Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;"

Thank you for the sermon. But this does not address the fundamental question in the slightest...

What was God's rationale for commanding soldiers to 'keep alive the virgins for themselves?'

 

[Not David]

Then why did you provide a 'reason', at all, in post #2? I'm simply asking you for your 'justification' in regards to your response. Do you have one/any?

Again, this is a specific event. God appears to issue a command to spare virgins, and slaughter the rest. If this is not a 'rule' issued for all warfare, but just isolated situations, what is God's reasoning as such? Does the Bible mention any? If not, then as I stated prior, I sense possible wishful thinking, rationalization/cognitive dissonance, bias, or other, in direct favor to simply 'justify' your continued beliefs. Because as it currently stands, this is all I see in this thread. Please demonstrate otherwise.

So I again ask, is there a clear and spelled out reason? You appear to think so. And yet, I cannot seem to find or locate the connection, in regards to the response you have provided, via post #2?

*Asking for justification
*I give one.
*Where is the verse?
* I explain the justification
*Where is the verse?
*I say that I don't believe in Sola Scriptura
* Something about rationalising/bias.
*I say that Church has the authority.
*Complains that I gave a justification in the first place.

 

[Not David]

How is this relevant to anything?



I'm going to re-issue/re-word my questions. It seems they were not addressed?

In post #28, you stated: "The Israelites had problems following God while having foreign wives, even more with male children who grow up."

1. If these Israelites were to have any of these woman, as wives, whom were the spoils of this war, they would also be 'foreign'. Thus, please explain your response in post #28?

2. Children, both boys and girls, can be taught the wanted culture. Rebellion might happen, regardless of any specific race. Thus, I ask again, why kill all male infants/toddlers?

3. This Bible chapter states to 'keep the virgins alive for yourselves'. Thus, I ask, what if the virgins don't want to stay with their captors? Are they free to leave?

*I give a reasoning about the "fate of children and young women"
*Ignores the answer and ask the same questions again.

 

[gaara4158]

You wouldn't apply that concept with Nazi Germany, would you?

Funny you should bring that up, since Stalinist Russia was in many ways just as bad if not worse, yet is rarely brought up as an example of evil. Could it be because they were allied with the victors? If the Allied Powers included Germany instead of the USSR, would Stalin hold the place of Hitler as "worst person in the world?"

 

[Not David]

Funny you should bring that up, since Stalinist Russia was in many ways just as bad if not worse, yet is rarely brought up as an example of evil. Could it be because they were allied with the victors? If the Allied Powers included Germany instead of the USSR, would Stalin hold the place of Hitler as "worst person in the world?"

I actually agree with you.

 

[Not David]

Did any Christians respond to this? I skimmed through and didn't see anything. I might've missed something. But as far as I can see, this is the entire point of the thread. It seems quite obvious. But let's not look at the elephant in the room!

To add to this obvious and omitted issue, we have the issue of rape. I won't speak for these young girls, but I would think that if my parents and uncles and aunts were slaughtered before my eyes, and then my older sisters and all of my brothers were executed in captivity with me, I'd prefer to not be "taken as a wife" by one of the men who participated. If the "choices" are to submit my life and my body to one of these men, or else face exile, I wouldn't be grateful for having a "choice."

Are you a male? I would say marrying someone and getting support would be better than trying to get work in order to survive especially in those times.