Questions on wholescale obliterations

[Dondi]

I'm having a hard time coming to terms with passages of scripture which deal with G-d's instructions to destroy whole nations in Numbers 31:16-18, I Samuel 15:2-3, and Isaiah 13:15-16. I understand the retribution part since these nations came against Israel, but why are the little children and babies included in the destruction? Why couldn't they've been spared?

[dauer]

Dondi,

The people of the Tanach lived a long time ago, and sometimes their morals do not match up with modern ones, like in this case. I'll leave it to BB or someone else to offer a more conservative and apologetic answer if they so choose because for me, there is really no way to defend such behavior, except to understand it as something in the context of its time in history, which is also to assert that such behavior is barbaric by today's standards. I find that taking this approach makes it much easier to come to terms with passages of scripture that by today's standards might seem immoral.

Dauer

[pohaikawahine]

Like all scriptures words can be read at many levels .... personally I think a literal interpretation is what gives the impression of a wrathful g-d, but the inner interpretations are of another world .... a basic principle of the Zohar is that "there is no word in the Torah that does not contain many secrets, many reasons, many roots, many branches" and one must seek what is "under the garment of Torah" "the search for the wonders, the mystical essence of the Torah" ..... (from the book of the zohar, the book of enlightenment) .... there is no wholescale obliteration that I can see, only the destruction of material worlds to reach one of spirit ....the path to g-d is very beautiful when one peers at the essence of the Torah .... just my thoughts on the question .... he hawai'i au, poh

[inhumility]

Originally Posted by Dondi

I'm having a hard time coming to terms with passages of scripture which deal with G-d's instructions to destroy whole nations in Numbers 31:16-18, I Samuel 15:2-3, and Isaiah 13:15-16. I understand the retribution part since these nations came against Israel, but why are the little children and babies included in the destruction? Why couldn't they've been spared?

I think it is the mistake of the scripture writers,after all they were human beings, can't be words of kind and loving God.
Thanks

[bananabrain]

for me, the question is slightly more complicated than that. i believe the Torah (which includes the book of numbers) was revealed by G!D and therefore cannot be judged by the same criteria as other texts. the passages from isaiah and samuel are traditionally considered to have been written down by the prophets concerned under Divine inspiration. the later passages should be less problematic because they're not the direct words of G!D. you'll also note that the "little children and babies" are not mentioned in numbers. nonetheless, these passages obviously remain problematic from today's standpoint and the same was true of the viewpoint of the sages, who declared that since sennacherib mixed up the nations, it was no longer possible to annihilate them because they could no longer be identified. imho, i believe we are meant to learn that to justify this Divine sanction you had to have done something pretty bad and the sages and great commentators try to work out what sort of things these were; from our perspective this is pretty hard to do, because we'd never be able to justify such a sanction ourselves, so obviously it does make it hard to deal with.

b'shalom

bananabrain

[Dondi]

The only legitimate reason I can see in wiping out all the people of a particular nation is for purity's sake, that is to prevent anything related to idolatry or pagan religious influences from infiltrating into the Israelite culture. I don't see how destroying babies would justify this. UNLESS, it can be demonstrated that some time later this child growing up among the Jews would find out who he really is and turn from the true God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and return to the gods of his heritage. Thus his influence would affect the rest of Israel and turn the hearts of the people away from God.

The only precedence of this sort of thing happening is in the case of Moses. Here, Moses as a baby was hidden in the bulrushes and retrieved by the daughter of the Pharaoh and raised to live in Pharoah's house and raised to prominance. Only after he found out who he really was did he forsake the life he was living and became God's prophet for Israel. Sort of the reverse type of influence.

[wil]

So far I've delved into the question regarding Numbers 31:16-18

As I've indicated before, I have issues with the vengeful G-d as well, and when I can't replace the word G-d with Love, then I see if I can make sense out of it on different terms...I went to my metaphysical dictionary...and backed up to 31:1 to see who G-d told Moses to war against.

1 And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying: 2 “Take vengeance on the Midianites (stife, contention) for the children of Israel. Afterward you shall be gathered to your people.”
3 So Moses spoke to the people, saying, “Arm some of yourselves for war, and let them go against the Midianites (strife, contention) to take vengeance for the LORD on Midian. 4 A thousand from each tribe of all the tribes of Israel you shall send to the war.”
5 So there were recruited from the divisions of Israel one thousand from each tribe, twelve thousand armed for war. (interesting how the this text from bible gateway KJV emphasizes each as each tribe represents a different spiritual trait)6 Then Moses sent them to the war, one thousand from each tribe; he sent them to the war with Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, with the holy articles and the signal trumpets in his hand. 7 And they warred against the Midianites, just as the LORD commanded Moses, and they killed all the males. 8 They killed the kings of Midian with the rest of those who were killed—Evi (unjust desire), Rekem(defective truth), Zur(hard, agressive, besieging), Hur(error, limitation, darkness), and Reba(contentious judgement), the five kings of Midian. Balaam(deception, undermining) the son of Beor(unwise, destructive) they also killed with the sword.
9 And the children of Israel took the women of Midian captive, with their little ones, and took as spoil all their cattle, all their flocks, and all their goods. 10 They also burned with fire all the cities where they dwelt, and all their forts. 11 And they took all the spoil and all the booty—of man and beast.Return from the War


12 Then they brought the captives, the booty, and the spoil to Moses, to Eleazar the priest, and to the congregation of the children of Israel, to the camp in the plains of Moab by the Jordan, across from Jericho. 13 And Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the congregation, went to meet them outside the camp. 14 But Moses was angry with the officers of the army, with the captains over thousands and captains over hundreds, who had come from the battle. (I should have looked up all of these people and place names, every section takes on a new light when the name is exchanged with the nature)
15 And Moses said to them: “Have you kept all the women alive? 16 Look, these women caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to trespass against the LORD in the incident of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD. 17 Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man intimately. 18 But keep alive for yourselves all the young girls who have not known a man intimately. (children are the creations, the manifestations of the thought, the intellectual thinking nature(male children) is already ruined by the thought, the feeling loving nature (female) which has not been tainted by the intellect (not 'known' a man) has not been tainted and in this case is spared)

Now is this the 'right' way to interpret these texts? I don't know, but does it make sense that G-d instructed Moses to destroy these traits?

This is like dream interpretation, every entity is in me, every person in my dream represents a trait, an emotion, fighting for superiority in my psyche.

In this case the G-d of my being is instructing my Moses nature to not only eliminate contention, but all of its Kings, defective truth, unjust desire, error and limitation...and all of the manifestations of same. Often the instruction is to also eliminate not only the city, but the spoils, and the cattle (material manifestations) of the traits as well, as they are tainted.

[Dondi]

Interesting spin on this, wil. I do know that there are hidden pearls of wisdom contained in the OT, particularly the Torah, that sheds light of spiritual truths. Many a time I would hear a preacher touch on such truths using OT examples as a basis.

I'm curious, though. What are the twelve spiritual traits representing the twelve tribes that you alluded to?

[wil]

Originally Posted by Dondi

I'm curious, though. What are the twelve spiritual traits representing the twelve tribes that you alluded to?

I don't have them all in my head...connected with the correct person, but so much of this comes right out of the texts, they give the definitions..I've got them charted on another computer, I'll pull it out and post them. This is actually something I am playing with right now...looking at the traits of the 10 lost tribes and bringing them back into my conscioiusness and then hopefully our collective consciousness....as a direction towards wholeness, peace and understanding.

[Saltmeister]

Mass murder or "divine honour killing"?

I said, "You are 'gods';
you are all sons of the Most High."

But you will die like mere men;
you will fall like every other ruler.
Psalms 82:6-7

"God" ordering the killing of thousands of people, including little children has been seen as so unlike a God-figure. It's one of those hard-to-justify issues. Would God do such a thing?

Much of the disbelief in such a God is that the people being killed are rendered subhuman, like mere animals -- the blatant disregard for intelligent life. In addition, Animals Rights activists believe that other animals, as well as humans, have just as much of a right to live as human beings. It revolves around the idea that all intelligent life forms are entitled to life, that no species, race or group of animals should have more privileges than others.

However, Psalms 82:6 says something different, that we are not mere animals. We're higher beings. To the creatures of this world, we are like gods, sons of the Most High. We rule and dominate the earth. This is what Psalms 82:7 suggests, that we will die like "mere men" and that we will "fall like every other ruler."

What if the killing of thousands of people, including children, was the exact opposite: the killing not of subhuman animals, but supernatural beings, gods, that are divine or have an affiliation with the divine? In that sense, because the children are also supernatural beings, there's no problem killing them as they're divine, not mere animals that just perish and cease to exist forever.

In other words, it wouldn't be barbaric slaughter, but honourable recognition of our identity here on earth. It's where God says, "Ok, I've let you play around here long enough, but I'm afraid I'm going to have to kick you out. You've had your fun. You can't play in this playground anymore. Out."

Could we think of it as like a video game? Break the rules and you're disqualified? Game over? Out of the game?

[wil]

Originally Posted by Saltmeister

Could we think of it as like a video game? Break the rules and you're disqualified? Game over? Out of the game?

This is exactly where I am considered to be cold. Years ago I developed a peace surrounding life and death, the cycle. Now I can't claim to know whether we are reincarnated in this plane, head to another dimension, have a spirit/soul that heads to a staging area waiting for the bus to heaven, or back to dust and fertilizer.. but I have developed a peace that it is not 'game over' in any way shape or form...that in all there exists good, so I lost father and sister in a short period of time, and then less than a year later my mother and father in law less than six months apart. Thru it all, sure I grieved at their loss as I was connected to them 'my sister, my father, my father in law, my mother in law...mine, mine...and when we lose what is ours we feel loss. But overall, I appreciated the cycle, as I know it... and do think it is not simply game over...that like a video game, somehow, we get another character and we are back at the controls again, in a new game...

[flowperson]

I would agree with you wil. Having recently lost my Dad, the process was more oriented towards warmth and love along with the grief; rather than just feeling sad for a while, flipping a switch, and then getting on with another part of my life game.

There is a reason, I believe, that G-d willed that a book, the Bible, be written to describe the reality of living human lives with love. It was to forever remind us that life is always about heartfelt stories, and not the mindlessly boring rehashing of game strategies, which is essentially heartless and cold.

flow....

[Saltmeister]

Originally Posted by flowperson

I would agree with you wil. Having recently lost my Dad, the process was more oriented towards warmth and love along with the grief; rather than just feeling sad for a while, flipping a switch, and then getting on with another part of my life game.

There is a reason, I believe, that G-d willed that a book, the Bible, be written to describe the reality of living human lives with love. It was to forever remind us that life is always about heartfelt stories, and not the mindlessly boring rehashing of game strategies, which is essentially heartless and cold.

flow....

I guess there is a point at which the game analogy falls apart. What I meant was a temporary reality, where the relationships are real, but where life and death could be either temporal or permanent depending on what God wanted. Because life and death could be either temporal or permanent, there is a chance that those who die will never come back again, but at the same time, a chance we will meet again.

The pain of loss is accompanied by a hope that we will have another chance of seeing them again. What I'm thinking is that while God makes decisions on whose existence continues, persists or discontinues, he doesn't make rules on that stuff. Some will die to us forever, some will die to us only for a while. It's not the same for everyone.

When it comes to religion, we often demand solid answers. But maybe the answers aren't the same for everyone. It's personal. We all have a common God, but although we may have equal value, God will perhaps treat us differently because we are indeed different.

[wil]

Originally Posted by Saltmeister

...The pain of loss is accompanied by a hope that we will have another chance of seeing them again...

You know this is the one thing that I've never been able to buy. The concept that I am going to 'see' my grandmother, my lover, my father, my sister again. I see them in my memories, I see them in my dreams I can accept that I may see aparitions (created by my mind...as real as if they are there). I can envision the possibility of their spirit/soul inhabiting another and encountering them in this life or the next (knowingly or unkowingly) as a possibility. I'm not saying I'm certain there exists reincarnation...but I can accept it as a possibility.

But for some reason, I can't fathom a heaven where we are all walking around in similiar recognizable skins, talking, hearing, seeing in a fashion that we know as such today. I can imagine a space where we are essence or sparks of light, or spirit on the wind...and recognize each other through a knowing that we know not now... am I alone in these ponderings? Completely rejecting even the potential of what is conventionally thought of or wished for?