19 November 2009

The Massacre of the Peaceful, Unsuspecting People

OK, enough messing around. I've got to get back to God's killings in Judges.

What do you think about this one? Should it be included on God's list?

The story begins with the tribe of Dan (one of the 12 tribes of Israel) looking for a nice place to live. So they sent out five men to find some land.

On their way, they stopped at a Micah's house and asked his priest to ask God where they should go to find some land. The priest told them to just go looking for it, and that God would be with them wherever they went.

So they left there and came to a place called Laish, where the people lived peaceful, secure, carefree lives.

The five men ... came to Laish, and saw the people that were therein, how they dwelt careless, ... quiet and secure; and there was no magistrate in the land, that might put them to shame in any thing. Judges 18:7

Then the five men returned and told the other Danites to attack Laish, saying that God had given it into their hands.

When ye go, ye shall come unto a people secure, and to a large land: for God hath given it into your hands; a place where there is no want of any thing that is in the earth. Judges 18:10

So they round up 600 soldiers and march off toward Laish.

(On the way, they stop off at Micah's place, steal his idols and priest, and then proceed toward Laish.)

When they get to Laish, they kill all of the peaceful, unsuspecting people, burn their city, and take their land.

The children of Dan ... came unto Laish, unto a people that were at quiet and secure: and they smote them with the edge of the sword, and burnt the city with fire. Judges 18:26-27

It was just another bible massacre. But was God responsible for it?

I think there's enough evidence to show that God approved of the massacre, but did he help the Danites do it or just sit back and enjoy the show?


Tim Atheist said...

I think it works. :P

Lol at the name "Dan" what first came to mind was this asshole: http://www.blogger.com/profile/11745259115723860852

Matthew Blanchette said...

You know what this reminds me of? Columbus's conquering and exploitation of the peaceful Arawak natives of Jamaica, including the part where he kills the lot of them, all the while believing that "God hath given such land into his hands"; bloody awful, to have such a terrible book and verse inspire such a horrific deed.

Belle said...

You are right to think it probably shouldn't be included based on what is in there. The Israelites (or at least those who admitted this into their canon) were assuming (and we know assume makes an ass out of u and me) that, because God didn't punish them for the massacre, that it was OK with it. As we know, God is really responsible for all deaths anyway but you should probably include this only if you are going to attribute every other death to him as well because it's on that level of responsibility only, I think. It IS rather borderline, though, as you've suggested but there is no obvious supernatural power used. It's up to you, of course.

twillight said...

This is no different from the others, only in one aspect:
This time He just gave a little independence for his aria race to choose the target. Otherwise the killing is made by Him as always.

(I don't know why exactly, but I got that fed-up with the Bible at the last chapter of Revelations as you seem to have been (judged from the SAB-margins) Steve.)

Anonymous said...

I agree with Twilight. The priest said that god would be there wherever they decided to go.

busterggi said...

Yes, the priest said that and the Israelites were nice enough to raid his home & rob him as a thank-you present.

What good Pre-Christian boys!

Unknown said...

Hey, wait a minute? Wasn't this place already called Dan in Genesis 14:14? (Thank you, Thomas Paine)


Steve Wells said...

Darn! Another contradiction.

Thanks, Brandon. I've added it.

Brucker said...

I don't see why this is necessarily a contradiction. "Dan" is a simple name, and there's little indication I can see that this has to be the same city. Now, if you wanted to make the claim against Joshua 19:47, there seems to be something more likely there, as "Leshem" might be a variant of "Laish", and the story is similar.