Moving Right Along
This is the last posting of questions for the book of Judges in the Old Testament of the Holy Bible. If you get a hankering to answer any of the questions noted please do so by clicking on the comment link at the end of the post. If you use Bible verses as references please note the location so that I may look up the verses.
1. Judges 18:1
1 In those days there was no king in Israel. And in those days the tribe of the people of Dan was seeking for itself an inheritance to dwell in, for until then no inheritance among the tribes of Israel had fallen to them.
1) Now hold on a minute here! Are you saying that this whole time the Bible has made it sound like the people of Israel as a whole at least have some of the promised land when the truth is that some of the tribes have nothing in regards to their 'inheritance' that was promised them?
2) Why has the Bible made it sound like each tribe has at least something when this is not the truth?
3) Why would the Bible mislead readers in this manner?
2. Judges 18:9-10
9 They said, “Arise, and let us go up against them, for we have seen the land, and behold, it is very good. And will you do nothing? Do not be slow to go, to enter in and possess the land.
10 As soon as you go, you will come to an unsuspecting people. The land is spacious, for God has given it into your hands, a place where there is no lack of anything that is in the earth.”
1) Oh, this is just peachy, isn't it? Is THIS how the LORD provides land for His people? Does the LORD lead His people to spy on other people just to assess their weaknesses in order to exploit such people and take whatever they have in order to 'turn' it into their own?
2) Is this God's/the LORD's version of giving inheritance...taking from an unsuspecting people and giving to His own?
3. Judges 18:11, 21
11 So 600 men of the tribe of Dan, armed with weapons of war, set out from Zorah and Eshtaol,
21 So they turned and departed, putting the little ones and the livestock and the goods in front of them.
1) Is the reason the women and children were put in the front so that if there was a frontal attack they would be killed first and not the soldiers?
2) Whose idea was this? The LORD's?
4. Judges 18:27-28
27 But the people of Dan took what Micah had made, and the priest who belonged to him, and they came to Laish, to a people quiet and unsuspecting, and struck them with the edge of the sword and burned the city with fire.
28 And there was no deliverer because it was far from Sidon, and they had no dealings with anyone. It was in the valley that belongs to Beth-rehob. Then they rebuilt the city and lived in it.
1) What kind of a fucked up God allows a quiet, unsuspecting people to be completely destroyed, their belongings taken and their city burned to the ground?
5. Judges 19:22-24
22 As they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, worthless fellows, surrounded the house, beating on the door. And they said to the old man, the master of the house, “Bring out the man who came into your house, that we may know him.”
23 And the man, the master of the house, went out to them and said to them, “No, my brothers, do not act so wickedly; since this man has come into my house, do not do this vile thing.
24 Behold, here are my virgin daughter and his concubine. Let me bring them out now. Violate them and do with them what seems good to you, but against this man do not do this outrageous thing.”
1) Okay, do you think whoever wrote this portion of the Bible thought people would not notice this story is almost word for word the same as the story of Lot and the two angels who visited him and the people/men of the town were demanding that Lot send out the men so that they could 'know' the men?
2) In the story version with Lot didn't Lot offer his own virgin daughters to the men outside of his house, something extremely similar to what is done here?
6. Judges 19:25-29
25 But the men would not listen to him. So the man seized his concubine and made her go out to them. And they knew her and abused her all night until the morning. And as the dawn began to break, they let her go.
26 And as morning appeared, the woman came and fell down at the door of the man’s house where her master was, until it was light.
27 And her master rose up in the morning, and when he opened the doors of the house and went out to go on his way, behold, there was his concubine lying at the door of the house, with her hands on the threshold.
28 He said to her, “Get up, let us be going.” But there was no answer. Then he put her on the donkey, and the man rose up and went away to his home.
29 And when he entered his house, he took a knife, and taking hold of his concubine he divided her, limb by limb, into twelve pieces, and sent her throughout all the territory of Israel.
1) Why did this man even allow the woman to be given to the crowd of men who assaulted her? Doesn't this make him an accessory?
2) When this man sees the woman lying at the threshold to the door why doesn't he respond in a helpful, concerned manner? Why is his tone cold and uncaring?
3) There is nothing in these verses to allow for the assumption that the woman was dead before the man took her home, is there?
4) Are we to believe that this man put a dead woman on his donkey and took her all the way home without knowing she was dead?
5) Did HE kill her because she was assaulted by other men and thus found her to be unworthy and of no value to him?
7. Judges 20:4-6
4 And the Levite, the husband of the woman who was murdered, answered and said, “I came to Gibeah that belongs to Benjamin, I and my concubine, to spend the night.
5 And the leaders of Gibeah rose against me and surrounded the house against me by night. They meant to kill me, and they violated my concubine, and she is dead.
6 So I took hold of my concubine and cut her in pieces and sent her throughout all the country of the inheritance of Israel, for they have committed abomination and outrage in Israel.
1) Oooohhh no. No, no, no. This mother fucker cannot try to push this shit all on the assholes of the town, because he LET his concubine be given to the crowd of men who assaulted her, DIDN'T HE?
2) Considering the above question, isn't this man, the husband of the wife who was murdered JUST AS RESPONSIBLE for the woman's death as the men who raped her?
3) Why is the murdered woman referred to as both a wife and a concubine?
8. Judges 20:17-18
17 And the men of Israel, apart from Benjamin, mustered 400,000 men who drew the sword; all these were men of war.
18 The people of Israel arose and went up to Bethel and inquired of God, “Who shall go up first for us to fight against the people of Benjamin?” And the LORD said, “Judah shall go up first.”
1) Can you imagine what kind of SNAFU the military would be if, say, during the Gulf Wars General Schwarzkopf assembled all the troops together and then decided to pray and consult God/the LORD where he should place the troops and what should be done with the troops? And I mean that the General has no idea whatsoever what he should do with the troops he has assembled and consults God/the LORD to find out troop placement and assignment. What would you think about that?
9. Judges 20:23-25
23 And the people of Israel went up and wept before the LORD until the evening. And they inquired of the LORD, “Shall we again draw near to fight against our brothers, the people of Benjamin?” And the LORD said, “Go up against them.”
24 So the people of Israel came near against the people of Benjamin the second day.
25 And Benjamin went against them out of Gibeah the second day, and destroyed 18,000 men of the people of Israel. All these were men who drew the sword.
1) Is this God's/the LORD's own special version of culling His people? Why would He do such a thing?
2) Does God/the LORD use these situations to cull His own people when He realizes He cannot come through with His many promises and cannot provide for all of His people, so He does what He can to turn things in His favor as much as possible?
10. Judges 20:28, 35
28 and Phinehas the son of Eleazar, son of Aaron, ministered before it in those days), saying, “Shall we go out once more to battle against our brothers, the people of Benjamin, or shall we cease?” And the LORD said, “Go up, for tomorrow I will give them into your hand.”
35 And the LORD defeated Benjamin before Israel, and the people of Israel destroyed 25,100 men of Benjamin that day. All these were men who drew the sword.
1) And here is a very good example of why you do NOT want religion in politics, right? Dear God, should I fight and kill people (my own people) or not? Dear Believer, yes, you should kill your brethren. Do you see a problem with this idiocy?
11. Judges 20:48
48 And the men of Israel turned back against the people of Benjamin and struck them with the edge of the sword, the city, men and beasts and all that they found. And all the towns that they found they set on fire.
1) Sooo...if the people of the tribe of Benjamin were struck so hard, to include all men and beasts and setting all towns on fire, how in the hell are there surviving Benjamites later on? How are there Benjamite men left to kidnap women so they can be forced to bare the men children for the continuation of the Benjamites?
12. Judges 21:2-3
2 And the people came to Bethel and sat there till evening before God, and they lifted up their voices and wept bitterly.
3 And they said, “O LORD, the God of Israel, why has this happened in Israel, that today there should be one tribe lacking in Israel?”
1) Sooo...these idiots kill their own brethren and then have the gall to ask the LORD why there is one tribe lacking in Israel?
2) Don't these verses show both the stupidity of the people of Israel at this time as well as the idiocy and lack of control of God/the LORD, a divine being Who is supposed to be in total control of everything (but obviously is not)?
13. Judges 21:10-11
10 So the congregation sent 12,000 of their bravest men there and commanded them, “Go and strike the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead with the edge of the sword; also the women and the little ones.
11 This is what you shall do: every male and every woman that has lain with a male you shall devote to destruction.”
1) Is this more of God's/the LORD's generosity of suffering the little children unto Him?
2) Is God/the LORD ordering the killing of the children as well since He is already ordering the killing of the women and does not want the children to be motherless as well as fatherless? Is THIS how the LORD shows His love for the children?
3) Sooo...it says to kill the women who have lain with a male. Does this mean a woman's value, something already fairly low with the LORD as well as with men, falls even lower once she has lain with a man?
4) Would you agree that 'devote' is a positive word, or should be a positive word? Would you agree that 'destruction' is a negative word? Why would you use the words 'devote' and 'destruction' together?
14. Judges 21:20-22
20 And they commanded the people of Benjamin, saying, “Go and lie in ambush in the vineyards
21 and watch. If the daughters of Shiloh come out to dance in the dances, then come out of the vineyards and snatch each man his wife from the daughters of Shiloh, and go to the land of Benjamin.
22 And when their fathers or their brothers come to complain to us, we will say to them, ‘Grant them graciously to us, because we did not take for each man of them his wife in battle, neither did you give them to them, else you would now be guilty.’”
1) What the hell is this treachery? Kidnap the women so that they can have wives and reproduce?
2) God allows this crap to happen, eh? Should you be surprised considering all of the incest God has already allowed up to this point in the Bible?
3) Again, what does this say for the character of God/the LORD and what He thinks of women and their value?
4) If God/the LORD is the same now as He ever was...doesn't this mean He would also approve of this disgusting, debasing behavior nowadays?
5) If this is something God/the LORD would NOT do or allow nowadays, then wouldn't that mean the WORD of the LORD does not stand forever without fading as the Bible claims and that the LORD is not the same now as He always was?