Yes, Cofty, we're talking about the same passages. You see it as rape; I see it as a protection in wartime as the law of war is "to the victor go the spoils." Is it reasonable to conclude rape and sex slaves if God required a month before marrying the person? A month is a long time to hold off on rape. And not only that, after marrying the person couldn't get rid of them on a whim or even make a profit off of them. The next verse, Deuteronomy 21:14 reads: "It shall be, if you are not pleased with her, then you shall let her go wherever she wishes; but you shall certainly not sell her for money, you shall not mistreat her, because you have humbled her." This is decidedly not the concubine being used up by those men in Benjamin.
As for the Midianite virgins, you have read that into those passages because it doesn't say they became sex slaves. Those women were given to Eleazar as a tribute to God (Numbers 31:40-41). So perhaps it means they would never get married like Jephthah's daughter (Judges 11:34-40). Furthermore, the high priest was holy to God--he couldn't marry non-Israelites or even widows or divorced women (Leviticus 21:10-15; Ezekiel 44:22). But all of a sudden God allows him to have 32 foreign sex slaves? Hmmm.
God recognized the existence of slavery, but Israelites were not mandated to keep slaves. And again, it was more of a free market principle--people could sell themselves into slavery or service to pay debts (Leviticus 24:47-48; Deuteronomy 15:12-17). Crazy, I know. But it wasn't an entirely one-sided transaction like chattel slavery in the Americas.
I know we don't agree nor is that my intention, but the fact is we all inject our bias onto the page. As a world, we've come a long way and I'm so very glad for that, but it's hard to judge a global culture of Attila the Huns when the biggest issue of the day is "what does Brexit mean for my freedom of travel?" This is why I initially told Believer that the OT is so far removed from modern life that we just don't get it nor do we have to. We learn what we can from it and move on. Mainly, the unifying theme of the Bible: love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength and love your neighbor as yourself.
Hi there, Mark of Cane. My point in saying that was actually something different, namely, that a belief in the supernatural is necessarily beyond the limits of human understanding. So for me to say that there are things I don't understand or that the supernatural exists is always beyond the realm of "reason."
To address your points, though, I haven't shied away from the OT; it still is profitable for something. We can learn from what ancient Israel did and didn't do, from their missteps, the ease with which it's possible to slip into idol worship (not just statues but things that take the place of God). I think we can learn from anyone, even if it's just learning what not to do. But those conditions don't exist anymore; it is history, background. That was then, this is now. For instance, there are long, repeated descriptions of the system of animal sacrifice. We don't do that anymore. We don't need it, but the entire book of Hebrews wouldn't make sense without it. There are dietary restrictions that might still be the best for health reasons, but their main purpose was to set apart the Israelites from surrounding nations. The account of Peter going to Cornelius's house for dinner says kosher rules no longer apply (Acts 10). And boy, I am glad because I love bacon. And shrimp! God gave the law to create order and a standard. Then He gave us Jesus. As I said before, the law was a guide for how to live in a fallen world and they were infused with humanity for the times. People turned them into ways to oppress other people.
I would agree that it's harder to defend a pick-and-choose faith. I used to do it but now I'm all in. And that doesn't mean that I'm happy when bad things happen or that I'm reverting to OT tactics when we're called to something else under Christ. I'm not, in JW style, looking forward to Armageddon because I know I've done some things and judgment will start at the house of God (1 Peter 4:17). We will all be called to account. It just means that the Old Testament is there and I don't ignore it.
Lastly, a general comment about the concept of God's love being at odds with judgment. I don't understand. Part of righteousness is justice. The judge in California has been nearly run off the bench for giving a six-month sentence to the swimmer who raped a young woman on Stanford's campus. Yet we conclude that God is wrong or maniacal because He has His standard of justice. We may not agree with the standard, but it doesn't mean it is a contradiction in terms to be love and require justice. I believe in the goodness of God; I also believe He is a consuming fire. He is not to be played with. Says so even in the NT (Hebrews 12:29). That's where being omnipotent comes into play. Revelation 20 says the dead will be judged according to their works, good or evil. So as a Christian, I believe that we're still responsible for what we do (including how we treat people), but our salvation comes through Jesus and we can't earn that salvation; we just receive it.
