Lost Faith after reading the Old Testament

  • Thread starter Thread starter ConfusedOne
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I was intrigued, so I read about the poor woman who was gang raped and then cut in 12 pieces. Judges 19. Just for fun, let’s spend a couple minutes to analyze it.

First, go back and look at the catechism, p. 33:
“One can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual….”

Literal–it seems to me that’s the level the OP is operating on, but getting involved in all the details. Ignore the details. What is this saying on the literal level? “There is no king, so everyone’s out for himself. It’s chaos. We need a king to keep order!” That’s probably the message the author is trying to send to his readers. (But see below–he could also have a more allegorical message.)

Now the spiritual level, which is broken down into three types:
Code: 
1 ) Allegorical—significance/relationship to Christ
So who is Christ in this story? Not the husband, the main character–if he were representing Christ he would have sacrificed himself for his concubine. Instead he threw her to the mob. I would say the father of the woman: she returns to him for protection, he gives it, and he tries to get the husband to stay with him to keep everyone safe. (Christ = refuge) The husband is the average person. He’s willing to forgive his concubine and take her back, but he’s not willing to sacrifice himself for her. That’s asking too much. The poor concubine is dependent on others to protect her–just as we all are. Her father’s willing, but her sense of duty or honor requires her to go back to her husband, even though she knows there is a risk involved. (= We must go through life, despite the risks.) So at dawn the husband finds her body, chops her into 12 pieces, and distributes them. (= Each of the 12 tribes of Israel is guilty because they haven’t chosen a king and have allowed this sort of violence to take place. More broadly, we are all responsible for evil in the world because we allow it to happen.) So what’s the overall moral? Christ will save you. Do not leave him.
Code: 
2) Moral—leads us to act justly
Who is the only one who comes out of this blamelessly? The father. The husband has done something to drive his concubine off, and when he gets her back he’s willing to see her gang raped rather than sacrifice himself for her. The concubine has left her husband over something we’re not told about; it could be her fault or his fault. The guy who lets them stay overnight is willing to give the mob his own daughter rather than suffer himself. Everyone except the father does something wrong. So what’s the moral of the story? Be like the father: offer safety and refuge to those less powerful than yourself. Encourage others not to yield to temptation (= leaving your house).

On an allegorical, but more literal level, you could say that the concubine is like the Israelites. They refuse to get along with God’s (the husband’s) rules. They rebel and go back to a time before the Covenant with God (her father’s house). They repent and return to the Law (husband). But they are punished (gang rape, death). This is a common theme in the OT, and this seems to be a variation of it.
Code: 
3) Anagogical—what is the eternal significance?
This seems pretty clear: You are only safe in the house of your father (God). Turn to God for protection. If your turn away from God (leave his house), you expose yourself to temptation and death.

To go back to the OP and his question: Was there a real woman that all this happened to? No. It’s just a story. Why make it so graphic and horrible? To get your attention c. 700 BC. it would have to be pretty extreme!

The point I am trying to make is that although you could take all these stories as literal truth, generally the literal meaning has nothing to do with Vatican II’s advice to look for the message that is for “the sake of salvation.” And yes, you could go line by line and examine conditions in Israel at the time, the custom of having concubines, who a Levite was, etc. etc. While all that has some value, I think that if you stop there you lose the point of the story.
 
Gorgias said:
If you’re simply saying that immoral acts are described in the OT, though, that’s reasonable.
Click to expand...
Yup. We agree.

And while I agree with you–to some extent–that we need to understand the passage in its original context, I would go beyond that. I think that every story in the Bible has some eternal truth. As I said, it’s generally something very simple like “You should obey God.” But ultimately, that’s what you need to take away from these stories–the eternal truth.

I’m intentionally stressing that because I think very few people do it (our OP is an example). They get all wound up in the details. Sort of “You can’t see the forest for the trees” sort of thing–people are so concerned about what types of trees there are, how tall they are, how many, etc. etc. (and all their observations are true…) that they fail to see there is a forest!
 
Last edited:
I recognize the story being described. The historical setting involves a question of hospitality. Sacrificing the concubine (slave) is considered a lesser crime than breaching hospitality, or the protection of the host to the guest.
The Old Testament shows people as they are, with all their flaws. It is not always a pretty picture.
Others have mentioned the historical use of dung as fuel. Even in the twentieth century, it continued to be used as fertilizer for crops in Asia.
Our understanding of what God wants does develop over time. We read the New Testament in light of the Old Testament, not necessarily picking out one passage here and there but reading the Bible as a whole.
We often hear about searching the scriptures to find the answers. During College Freshman orientation to the Theology class I never took, we were told instead of reading the Bible for the answers, look for the questions. What is God saying? What is He asking of me? Amazing that in looking for the questions, I sometimes actually find the answers.
 
pray for Holy Spirit to give you understanding so that whenever you may read OT you may understand what is right and think in right way…and then you see you will understand because it is not easy to understand everything what is in bible
 
This was a replay of Gen 19:1. Women again were offered to allay the passions of homosexual men towards guests in the home. The response to the people of Sodom was clear. Complete destruction.

The hard fact is that was the Bronze age. People were still barbaric or semi barbaric in nature (looked at through modern eyes.)Women were chattel. The Levite was retrieving his property that ran away from him. His property was destroyed by the Benjaminites. His request for justice was dramatic by today’s standards (so were the acts of certain people during WW2. I have read of stories of babies of the enemy tossed into the air and bayoneted). But the effect is similar to Sodom. The tribe of Benjamin was almost exterminated because of its refusal to punish the wrong. The message is clear: if you side with the wrong even if you personally are not involved in the deed itself, you are not excused.

The cost of justice was high compared to the loss of a single chattel. Many died in enforcing that justice. Is cutting up into 12 pieces necessary? Who knows what was the norm then. The concubine was already dead. The corpse serve its purpose of obtaining justice. This is a recurring theme in history. Corpses are often used to make a point. Crucifixion for example. Corpses used in wars are almost normal for most part of history. Diseased corpses are often flung into enemies territories to spread sickness. Corpses of important leaders are often bandied around to humiliate/demoralise the opposition.
 
Last edited:
I have always understood the importance of the OT as showing the progression of God’s involvement in the affairs of men, his fidelity to his chosen people of the Covenant (Israel), and how eventually, God draws good out of evil. It’s like the precursor to the crucifix hanging over that altar at my church. It is a depiction of a great evil perpetrated by man, and yet in the end, the greatest of good is drawn out of it by the love and the power of God.

Shalom
 
I love the OT for the same reason you hate it.

I love knowing that God is not the milquetoast “boyfriend Jesus” character of Mainline Protestant imagining. I love that God dealt with historical people and was involved in real events. I love that war and violence and sin are not sugar-coated and conveniently ignored in our Sacred Scripture. I love how I can trust the historicity of these events precisely because they are brutally honest about them. And I love that God doesn’t see our lives as petty, insignificant things. Our human, daily toils matter to him. He is not some super-distant, unfeeling thing that won’t condescend to meeting us on our level.

Humans are dirty and ugly, and we live in a dirty, ugly world and God wasn’t afraid to get right down in the muck with us.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top