dear AndDontCallMeShirley...
you said: "Michelle makes that claim, Comatose, but did you notice how many qualifiers, such as, 'could have', 'maybe' and "I think" that both she and tec/Tammy included in their replies? What it comes down to, especially with Michelle, is the Bible accounts as written make her so uncomfortable she's forced to make all kinds of assumptions, speculations, excuses and outright fantasizing in order to accept them. Taken as written, the accounts offend anyone with even a moderately developed sense of morals and are impossible to defend as-is."...
could have, maybe and I think are words one would use in trying to analyse something. The bible accounts don't make me uncomfortable. the accounts of the ancient hebrews were not unusual for their time. the bible makes it clear that the groups of people that moses and the hebrews encountered were not sweet and hospitable to them as they tried to make their way to the promised land.
moses was responsible for taking a rag tag complaining bunch out of egypt and within the span of forty years all that had left egypt were dead. the group that were poised to enter the promised land didn't resemble the group that left egypt. moses had built up a disciplined and cohesive army a diciplined and cohesive religious system and they likely respected the sometimes harsh hand of moses that had brought them this far. moses was harsh. he loved God and he was hurt when the hebrews did turn from the way of pure worship that God required...because he felt responsible for them and their behaviour. at one time he felt so overwhelmed with the responsibility that he asked God to kill him right then.
yes God required a pure worship and He wanted discipline too...because He wasn't just babysitting, He was building a nation for HIS name. any nation that thrives has laws and something that brings them together. that something for the hebrews was their "set apart" religion. in order to keep the participants set apart leaders did have to rout out and destroy from their midst those who would induce them to practice forms of false worship. there is nothing wrong with making the decision to protect the majority. that is why only the virgins were spared in the war with midian...the virgins hadn't participated in the worship practices that were thought to be religious sex rituals. these virgins were set apart and likely became the wives of the hebrew men as the hebrews were "very fruitful". why did moses make the decision to kill the little boys?...I don't know but he knew and he had his good reason. I don't plan to excuse his decision or deny it or defend it it just is that way. I trust that God had a plan for them that I am not aware of and I'll leave it in His hands. I can speculate that they may be being resurrected to be given the chance to turn to the living God because God does show mercy on whoever He wants to. the most merciful thing He can do is give a person a second chance to turn to Him.
I'm neither uncomfortable nor offended by the measures taken by moses and his loyalists in their effort to built a strong nation serving their God. neither am I uncomfortable or offended by efforts of the church today to take an uncompromising stand against the false worship that has crept into the congregations...it's the same type of situation that was faced by moses and his congregation...the situation is also similar to the problem in the apostle pauls day...he didn't have any problem keeping the majority from being "defiled" by false worship either. God still wants a people for HIS name. No paul didn't want to kill people that were a threat to the purity of the congregation anymore than the church today wants to kill its members that depart from the way. in pauls day the threat wasn't about the preservation of the nation that God was building but the life and continuation of the purity of the religious worship afforded God from the begining of the nation, in that the nation of israel grew and thrived. http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionaries/bakers-evangelical-dictionary/holy-holiness.html
I believe the entire bible IS useful for doctrine, rebuke and teaching in righteousness. these OT scriptures though by todays "standards" are brutal, they are relative to a completely different time in the history of the world. I wouldn't remove any of it to suit my "theology", if anything I would move to adopt the books that were included in the ethiopian bible as they serve to give a more detailed picture than what we have now as to THE FAITH.
How do any of the episodes of war while nation building point to the idea of a God of love?...to me, a God who is dedicated to building and preserving a people who are free from subjection to the thinking that comes along with no just dicipline is a God of love. but God is not just "love"...scripture says that He also hates and He does and has poured out His wrath on that which He hates and He does and has removed His protection from those who "stray"...because it is HIS perogative to do what He says He's going to do, then I simply can't dismiss the fact that He is also a holy God who , from the beginning of the nation of israel, requires much from those who have received much. ezekiel 16:1-63
love michelle
