Instigator / Con

Dynasty

1411

rating

debates

13.64%

won

Topic

#2369

Does Numbers 31 mention sex slavery?

Status

Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics

Better arguments

Better sources

Better legibility

Better conduct

After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...

Ibn_HAM

Tags

Religion

Parameters

Publication date: 09.17.2020 04:00AM
Last updated date: 07.07.2024 01:22AM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 3
Time for argument: Three days
Max argument characters: 10,000
Voting period: Two weeks
Point system: Multiple criterions
Voting system: Open

Contender / Pro

Ibn_HAM

1513

rating

debates

100.0%

won

Description

Does Numbers 31 mention sex slavery? Let's see if the evidence points to that idea.

The 5 rules of this debate are.

1. Don't insult your opponent.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Provide evidence.
4. Don't commit logical fallacies.
5. Don't declare victory when you haven't won.

Round 1

Dynasty

09.20.2020 10:14AM

Con

Can you argue on why Numbers 31 is about sex slavery?

Ibn_HAM

09.20.2020 10:27AM

Pro

yes the numbers 31 is about sex with little girls

first, let's take this step by step

you tall me where did I get that the virgin girls where children, will the answer are here

The Hebrew word “taf (taphi) according to Lexicons.
An English and Hebrew Lexicon – Professor Selig Newman:

“CHILD , an INFANT … טַף… an offspring,… get with-……” (An English and Hebrew lexicon composed after Johnson’s directory, containing fifteen thousand English words, rendered into Biblical, or rabbinical Hebrew, or into Chaldee. To which is annexed a list of English and Hebrew words the expressions and meanings of which appear to be the same in both languages (1832), by Professor Selig Newman page 61)

A complete Hebrew-English pocket-dictionary to the Old Testament (1905) – Karl Feyerabend:

“טַף (TAF) ., i.p. .., w.s…. coll. CHILDREN, LITTLE ONES. (A complete Hebrew-English pocket-dictionary to the Old Testament (1905]) By Karl Feyerabend page 118)

A Compendious Hebrew-Lexicon – Samuel Pike:

“טַף LITTLE ONES or CHILDREN… mincing in a childish manner, Isai. Iii. 16. –… to drop, or distil… to prophecy, or distil instruction, Micah ii. 6, 11.” (A Compendious Hebrew Lexicon, Adapted to the English Language, and Composed upon A New and Commodious Plan [Second Edition (1811)] by Samuel Pike page 59)

and you ask where does it talk about sex here

“R. ELIEZER B. JACOB SAID: A PROSELYTE [etc.}. It was taught: R. Simeon b. Yohai said: A female proselyte less than three years and a day is ELIBLE to the priesthood, as it is said: But all the women children … keep alive for yourselves; now, was not Phineas among them? But the Rabbis [interpret] ‘KEEP THEM ALIVE FOR YOUR SELVES’ AS bondwomen AND BONDWOMEN. (Talmud – Mas. Kiddushin 78a:45 – page 261 – 262, online source)

Round 2

Dynasty

09.20.2020 10:29AM

Con

Introduction
Does Numbers 31 mention sex slavery? Well, the short answer no, and long answer no. Let me explain why.

My argument
There is no evidence for sex slavery to be in Numbers 31, in fact, that must be read into the text. Basing on Bible commentary.
Reformation Study Bible – “31:13–18 Moses’ command that all the women who were not virgins must be killed was due to the immorality at Peor. All males were killed, including children, probably to prevent any resurgence of the Midianite clans (cf. v. 7).”

And these videos as well.
Michael Heiser - The Historical Context of Numbers 31 (Naked Bible Podcast) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxcxQJYYsD4
Answering Muslims: Numbers 31:18 and Islamic Paradise
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXbAhy3rKU4

Refutations
“What about the non-virgins!”
As the commentary I cited, the reason why they were killed, is because of sexual immorality.

“What about the men and boys!”
Again, As the commentary I cited says, to avoid an uprising of the Midianites.

“Jesus was mention in Number 31:40!”
No, it does not. In fact, if you read the passage, it does not mention him anywhere.

Conclusion
Numbers 31 does not mention sex slavery. And that must be read into the text. So, hope my opponent response to those arguments that I made.

Sources:

Michael Heiser - The Historical Context of Numbers 31 (Naked Bible Podcast) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxcxQJYYsD4
Answering Muslims: Numbers 31:18 and Islamic Paradise
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXbAhy3rKU4

Ibn_HAM

09.20.2020 11:00AM

Pro

introduction:

yes of course numbers31 talks about sex with little girls as I have statued before from Jewish and christens scholars that Jesus according to trinity logic is the one orders the girls to be alive as bondwoman (Talmud – Mas. Kiddushin 78a:45 – page 261 – 262, online source)

my argument:

my point still stands there is little evidence from the other side about the fate of the girls at the hands of Jesus man

“I do not know why the new Jewish version omits ‘for yourselves’; the Hebrew LAKHEM IS UNAMBIGUOUS. That the intent of ‘FOR YOURSELVES’ IS SEXUAL OR MATRIMONIAL IS OBVIOUS; the passage is correctly understood by Rabbi Simeon Yohai in the Sifrei ad loc (177 212H).” (The Beginnings of Jewishness: Boundaries, Varieties, Uncertainties [University of California Press, Berkeley / Los Angeles / London, The Regents of the University of California, 1999] by Shaye J. D. Cohen [chapter 8] page 255 – 256 – [Footnote 52])

Refutation:

as for the baby males being killed because they could do uprising of the Midianites this is, not a good argument to defend children being killed because children can not do that, and why cant Jesus take them in and make them into good people like he did ith paul every one deserve a chance

Conclusion:

yes numbers 31 is talking about sex with little children

Sources:

A Detailed Historical Examination Of Numbers 31:18 (https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/08/07/a-detailed-historical-examination-of-numbers-3118/ )

Round 3

Dynasty

09.20.2020 11:23AM

Con

Refutation of Master.NO's arguments.

yes of course numbers31 talks about sex with little girls

No, Numbers 31 doesn't talk about sex with little girls, since I have provided evidence for why isn't doesn't talk about that. And, isn't the Tulmad written way after Numbers was written? Also, don't rabbis (Like they did with Rebecca's age) add stuff into the text? Just thought of pointing that out to you.

my point still stands there is little evidence from the other side about the fate of the girls at the hands of Jesus man

Actually it doesn't, since I have cited a commentary which disagrees with you. Should I cite it again?

Reformation Study Bible – “31:13–18 Moses’ command that all the women who were not virgins must be killed was due to the immorality at Peor. All males were killed, including children, probably to prevent any resurgence of the Midianite clans (cf. v. 7).”

not a good argument to defend children being killed because children can not do that

But, what if they grew up and look at their tribe's past? They would most likely bring an uprising. So, your argument is stupid.

yes numbers 31 is talking about sex with little children

No, Numbers 31 isn't talking about sex with little children. And, discover the truth? Again, I have cited two videos which explain Numbers 31. In fact, read Numbers 25 for the backstory of Numbers 31.

Ibn_HAM

09.20.2020 12:01PM

Pro

Refutation:

No, Numbers 31 doesn't talk about sex with little girls, since I have provided evidence for why isn't doesn't talk about that. And, isn't the Tulmad written way after Numbers was written? Also, don't rabbis (Like they did with Rebecca's age) add stuff into the text? Just thought of pointing that out to you. , But, what if they grew up and look at their tribe's past? They would most likely bring an uprising. So, your argument is stupid.

stop denying it I had bright multiple evidence from Jewish scholars because they know there text better than the christens and also that's how they dealt with the female slaves in Deuteronomy 21:10-14

Good News Translation (GNT) – “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like and want to marry. 12 TAKE HER to your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, you may marry her. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. Since YOU FORCED HER TO HAVE INTERCOURSE WITH YOU, you cannot treat her as a slave and sell her.”

and stop saying "kill it before it growes " to the male child because they are children they can't attack you or hurt you also why can't Jesus take them in and make them good as he did with Paul, your argument in defending child-killing doesn't make easier

Conclusion:

yes numbers 31 is talking about sex with little children stop putting your christen mindset on the Jewish book

Sources:

A Detailed Historical Examination Of Numbers 31:18 (https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/08/07/a-detailed-historical-examination-of-numbers-3118/ )

Dynasty

07.07.2024 01:22AM

#25

"The Muslim comment you've presented makes several assertions regarding Numbers 31 and its interpretation, particularly concerning the fate of young girls and its alleged connection to Jesus. Here’s why these assertions are incorrect or misleading:

Misinterpretation of Numbers 31: Numbers 31 primarily describes the military campaign of the Israelites against the Midianites, where they are commanded to kill the adult men and take the women and children captive. It does mention sparing virgin females, but this is within the context of capturing them as part of spoils of war, not for sexual exploitation.

Misuse of Talmudic Text: The comment references the Talmud (Kiddushin 78a) to suggest that Jesus (according to the Trinitarian concept) orders girls to be kept alive as bondwomen for sexual or matrimonial purposes. However, this interpretation misrepresents the Talmudic discussion, which deals with legal interpretations of Jewish law regarding proselytes and priesthood eligibility, not sexual exploitation.

Distorted Interpretation of Scholarly Sources: The citation from Shaye J. D. Cohen’s book "The Beginnings of Jewishness" is taken out of context and misapplied. The book does not support the assertion that Numbers 31 advocates or describes sexual relations with children. It discusses ancient Jewish legal texts and boundaries of Jewish identity, not the sexual implications of Biblical passages.

Ethical and Scholarly Standards: Interpreting ancient texts must be done carefully within their historical and cultural contexts. Numbers 31 reflects ancient practices of war and societal norms that are drastically different from modern ethical standards. Any interpretation suggesting sexual exploitation of children from this passage is not supported by scholarly consensus or ethical standards.

Christian Theological Misrepresentation: The comment also implies a theological assertion about Jesus’ actions, which is not supported by Christian theology or Biblical teachings. Jesus’ teachings and actions, as understood by mainstream Christian beliefs, emphasize compassion, justice, and the protection of the vulnerable, including children.

In conclusion, the assertion that Numbers 31 supports or condones sexual relations with children is not supported by the text itself, scholarly interpretations, or ethical standards. Misinterpretations and misrepresentations of ancient texts, including the Bible and the Talmud, can lead to erroneous conclusions that distort their original meanings and contexts."

Dynasty

09.22.2020 08:22PM

#24

-->

@Sum1hugme

What now?

Sum1hugme

09.22.2020 03:50PM

#23

-->

@Dynasty

It would be interesting to see you try this one again

Dynasty

09.20.2020 09:04PM

#22

-->

@seldiora

"that con failed to tackle head on."
Are you sure? And, that's sounds like wishful thinking. Also, pro's sources are the best exmple of gish gallop. Plus, you're still adding something into the text.

Dynasty

09.20.2020 08:56PM

#21

-->

@seldiora

What makes you think that people who side with me are wrong?

seldiora

09.20.2020 08:23PM

#20

pro's source is either the best gish gallop I've ever seen, or people who side with con are wrong.

Dynasty

09.20.2020 12:20PM

#19

-->

@Ibn_HAM

The Christian cited evidence for his claims. While, Muslims cherry-picked and poison the well. And, killing of children?

Ibn_HAM

09.20.2020 12:14PM

#18

wait you used a youtube video from the Christines and expact me to not do the same from Muslims ? and stop defending killing of childern

Dynasty

09.20.2020 12:14PM

#17

-->

@Ibn_HAM

Plus, have you cited those Jewish scholars because they agree with you?

Dynasty

09.20.2020 12:06PM

#16

-->

@Ibn_HAM

You mean cherry-picking Jewish scholars? I was the one who brorught multiple evidence, not you. And, you're saying Michael Heiser isn't good? For Deut 21, dishonor =/= rape.
Those children will grow, and will see their tribe's past. Do you understand what I'm saying? Doesn't make it eaiser? Plus, aren't the Midianites mentioned in Jugdes 6?

And, citing a Muslim site? I can do that as well. http://www.christian-thinktank.com/midian.html

Dynasty

09.20.2020 11:26AM

#15

-->

@Jarrett_Ludolph

I should note that Ibn_HAM (Master.NO) will repeat the same comment about Numbers 31 over and over again.

Dynasty

09.20.2020 10:26AM

#14

-->

@Ibn_HAM

If you see the "Publish argument" button, click on it. And, you can lay out your arguments.

Ibn_HAM

09.20.2020 10:19AM

#13

i dont know where to begin yes i am master no

Dynasty

09.19.2020 10:44PM

#12

-->

@Jarrett_Ludolph

I thought of letting a Muslim by the name of "Master.NO" in, since he thinks Jesus somehow mentioned in there. But, I think he won't come in.

Jarrett_Ludolph

09.19.2020 10:37PM

#11

I'm very interested to see who will accept this debate

Sum1hugme

09.17.2020 10:40PM

#10

-->

@Dynasty

I figured

Dynasty

09.17.2020 10:36PM

-->

@Sum1hugme

I will address that in the debate.

Sum1hugme

09.17.2020 10:29PM

-->

@Dynasty

Biblical interpretation isn't really my cup of tea. But reading the passage, it seems to imply that the girls will be sex slaves since they have to have never slept with a man. But it's vague enought that they could just be virgin sacrifices or maidservants for all we know. I'm interested to see how you debate this if someone accepts

Dynasty

09.17.2020 08:38PM

-->

@Sum1hugme

Then, provide evidence.

Sum1hugme

09.17.2020 02:41PM

yeah, im pretty sure it does

Intelligence_06

09.17.2020 02:00PM

Sounds fun, huh?

Dynasty

09.17.2020 04:33AM

-->

@seldiora

Sorry.

seldiora

09.17.2020 04:32AM

7 rules? LOL

Dynasty

09.17.2020 04:20AM

-->

@seldiora

I know this topic quite well. So, I will most luckly will win this one.

seldiora

09.17.2020 04:05AM

even considering con's debate record, I can't see pro winning this.

seldiora

09.20.2020 08:16PM

Criterion

Con

Tie

Pro

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

pro wins this seemingly impossible debate by using a source that analyzes the exact meaning of the Hebrew connotation "intent of ‘FOR YOURSELVES’ IS SEXUAL OR MATRIMONIAL IS OBVIOUS" that con failed to tackle head on. As a result I have no choice but to vote pro.