Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
20 “You are welcome at my house,” the old man said. “Let me supply whatever you need. Only don’t spend the night in the square.” 21 So he took him into his house and fed his donkeys. After they had washed their feet, they had something to eat and drink. 22 While they were enjoying themselves, some of the wicked men of the city surrounded the house. Pounding on the door, they shouted to the old man who owned the house, “Bring out the man who came to your house so we can have sex with him.”
23 The owner of the house went outside and said to them, “No, my friends, don’t be so vile. Since this man is my guest, don’t do this outrageous thing. 24 Look, here is my virgin daughter, and his concubine. I will bring them out to you now, and you can use them and do to them whatever you wish. But as for this man, don’t do such an outrageous thing.”
25 But the men would not listen to him. So the man took his concubine and sent her outside to them, and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go. 26 At daybreak the woman went back to the house where her master was staying, fell down at the door and lay there until daylight.
27 When her master got up in the morning and opened the door of the house and stepped out to continue on his way, there lay his concubine, fallen in the doorway of the house, with her hands on the threshold. 28 He said to her, “Get up; let’s go.” But there was no answer. Then the man put her on his donkey and set out for home.
29 When he reached home, he took a knife and cut up his concubine, limb by limb, into twelve parts and sent them into all the areas of Israel. 30 Everyone who saw it was saying to one another, “Such a thing has never been seen or done, not since the day the Israelites came up out of Egypt. Just imagine! We must do something! So speak up!”
This passage of the Bible sounds like a cheap violent porn movie which glorifies rape, violence, murder, concubines, and lastly little disregard for all women.
This passage of the Bible sounds like a cheap violent porn movie which glorifies rape, violence, murder, concubines, and lastly little disregard for all women.
How could God direct men to write this?
To show how evil men can be. God is even more outraged and will judge in a way that we can not. Eternaly, because it is so outrageous.
WHAT the...? How did I ever miss this? I mean I've read the Bible. Maybe I blocked this out via PTSD?
This is terrible. What evil of men is it supposed to show? Is the rape supposed to be an outrage (I hope so)...IOW, "the old man" did the wrong thing? Or is it good that the man gave over his daughter to be raped and then he killed her because he was sacrificing her in honor of the man who visited the house? Or are the daughter and the concubine different people...or...I'm confused.
Oh, okay, I see (I think)...the daughter of the house was the concubine of the son in law who came to get her because she had left him...she had been unfaithful and left him, is that right?
And this household took in a wandering old man nobody else would take in, a man who was going to "the Lord's house," and bad dudes came to the door demanding to rape the stranger man but the father/father-in-law offered up his daughter instead...and then after he allowed the daughter to be raped like a gajillion times, in the morning he cut her to pieces?
I HOPE the allegorical "evil" here is not only that the men raped this woman but that the father offered her to be raped and then cut her to pieces. Is that right? (crossing fingers)
Because if the father offering up his daughter is supposed to be some holy and just thing...I'm gonna be pizzed. Just sayin'.
The point in context is the same point made in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. Ancient Near Eastern practices consisted of Hospitality to Strangers as one of it's highest values. The breach of this conduct (for the opposite action, see the chapter preceeding the Sodom story, in which Abram exemplifies what one should do, and also Job's defense of his actions in never letting his servants be hostile to strangers) resulted in virtual destruction for both Sodom in Genesis and the Benjamites in Judges 19.
The problem (and irony) is that the Levite COULD have stopped at a Canaanite city, and probably been perfectly fine, but he chose to go to a closer kin: a Benjamite city. Bad decision. A full-scale war ensues, in which the other tribes attack the Benjamites and almost drive them to extinction. It is this violence and lack of hospitality that drives the author of Judges to set up the need for a King with the refrain "in those days every man did what was right in his own eyes".
The Benjamites were the butts of many insults and jokes (they were left-handed, they were unkind to strangers, etc.), for some reason. Surprisingly, the first King IS a Benjamite.
I reccomend one reads the story, and then to the end of the book to get the full sense. An interesting question is: which came first? The folk-tale lying behind the Judges story, or the folk-tale explanation for why Sodom was a ruined city? Answering the question by a chronological explanation does not work, for Genesis did not reach it's final form until long after the period of the Judges.
I admit - it's a horrible story, one of the worst in the Bible. Since I don't believe God "wrote" the Bible, I have no problem with that complaint, personally. Men will be men, and violent men. Their actions and lawlessness are even more horrible because they were Israelites, and not the so-called "evil" Canaanites.
Oh, okay, I see (I think)...the daughter of the house was the concubine of the son in law who came to get her because she had left him...she had been unfaithful and left him, is that right?
And this household took in a wandering old man nobody else would take in, a man who was going to "the Lord's house," and bad dudes came to the door demanding to rape the stranger man but the father/father-in-law offered up his daughter instead...and then after he allowed the daughter to be raped like a gajillion times, in the morning he cut her to pieces?
I HOPE the allegorical "evil" here is not only that the men raped this woman but that the father offered her to be raped and then cut her to pieces. Is that right? (crossing fingers)
Because if the father offering up his daughter is supposed to be some holy and just thing...I'm gonna be pizzed. Just sayin'.
The Old Man - knowing what would have happened, were the strangers to stay the night in "the gate" - invited them in. Once they were under his door, he was their responsibility. Given the importance of "Oriental Hospitality" - he was obliged to do anything in his power to protect his guests. Lot, in Genesis, does the same thing - he offers his daughters to the crowd. UNLIKE Lot though (who later tradition unforunately labels as "righteous Lot"), the Levite does not let the Old Man go through with it, and instead thrusts out only his concubine. None of this was spiritual or holy or had anything at all to do with religion - it was simply a cultural norm to be kind to strangers. Thrusting out the concubine, though - A cowardly thing to do.....
Personally, I don't find much sympathy with the Levite, who saved his own skin at the cost of his concubines'. Horrible.
Oh - by the way. The Concubine was NOT sleeping around on the Levite. SHE became angry with HIM and went back to her father's house (women had to be under the keeping of men in those days). Since she went to he father's house, and not a lover's, and the biblical text simply says "But his concubine became angry with him and ran away to her Father's house" - I think it's safe to not assume she was some kind of *****. Concubines were not whores - they were... concubines.
How is taking a few passages of the Bible and holding them up to cursory scrutiny without any exegesis "proof"?
Proof of what?
First, we can conclude that this "tale" never really happened. It stands as either negative commentary or political slandering against both the tribe of Benjamin and the apostate Levites.
Secondly, we know from Biblical "history," such as it is, that the other ten tribes sought to erradicate the tribes of Dan and Benjamin. We can pick out the slander against these peoples throughout Kings and Chronicles.
Dan tribe members were idolators and Benjamin tribe members were immoral. Really? All of the Danites and Benjaminites? Are all Democrats the same? Are all Republicans the same?
Now that one American soldier has slain 16 Afghans, all Americans are now branded as villains and should have their heads cut off. We view that kind of reasoning as really, really strange. But not to an Afghan and certainly not to second or third century b.c. readers.
Thirdly, let us look at the meaning hidden from plain sight, as much of scripture is lesson-oriented.
The Levite is likened unto the Hebrew God. He has taken a wife (Israel) who is called a concubine because there was no dowry involved. If we were to translate that into something we modern people could understand it would be something like this: a billionaire marries a woman from the lowest poverty-stricken neighborhood without a pre-nuptail agreement, takes her home, gives her everything she could ever ask for, and then she ups and leaves.
The Levite then--and this is interesting because within his rights under Jewish / Torah law, he could just write her off as a bad investment--goes to find her again and court her affections to return home.
From other writings, namely in Isaiah and the minor prophets, we see this motif being played out: God courts the human race, blesses and showers the humans with everything they want, and then has to go chase after the wayward humans who lust after different gods. Time and time again. There is no final condemnation or judgment of divorce and death.
But now we get to the negative political statement. When this Levite and his wife are on their way home, they stay for the night in Benjamin territory, and it is these same "bad" Benjaminites who do nasty things to both the Levite and his wife.
We see this today. When I was growing up, the hatred between Blacks and Whites were often blown out of proportion. Today, it is the Muslims in America who are all "bad."
But if we look deeper into this story, we find the same theme that the Christ used in his parables of the fields: the workers find any excuse to slaughter representatives of the true land owner as an act of defiance against law and order.
And, we must also take into account the differing sects of Judaism at the time. To think that Jerusalem was the center of Judaism is to ignore the history. Samuel did not establish the Tabernacle of the Lord in Jerusalem but at Bethel, smack in Samaritan territory. Thus, this little tale has another interesting tack: the contentious rivalry between differing Judaic sects, each vying for having the "right" religion and the "right" God.
The cutting up of the wife's body has virtually no meaning for we moderns today. But it can be explained in this way:
There is no king, no high court to hear the Levites complaint and request for justice. Instead, he sends twelve messengers to the tribes of Israel. Along with each messenger, he provides proof of the heinous treatment of his wife by the Benjaminites. The body part proclaims that a blood tithe is required. These Benjamites must bleed as well, lest any God-fearing person in all of Palestine be accosted and treated the same by these Benjaminite monsters.
And do we not see the same thing occurring today?
How long ago was it that Christians were calling for the heads of the Christ-killers?
Why do we not understand the blood-feuds that arise from the Middle East, the heart of Islam and Judaism (but not Christianity, for that religion received its formation from France -- Charlamagne)? Why do we scratch our heads and wonder why Arabic and Persian nations want to erradicate entire nations for the "sins" of just one person?
Because we fail to understand an entire culture that existed 2,000 years ago and still exists today. Arabic and Persian culture is as alien to Western culture as when Western theological neophytes try to interpret Eastern scriptures in modern terms.
Yes, at the onset of Judges 19, we Westerners are turned off by the barbarity. But that is as far as we want to proceed. And then, we ourselves, turn into barbarians and want to run off to war with an "off with their heads" mentality without understanding any of the motivations, hidden meanings (to us, not to the original reades of this writing), and hidden agendas by certain individuals to psychological turn us into a pack of ravenous, mindless carnivores.
You are correct in seeing the political biases that were behind this story. Nice post!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
