Balaam and his talking ass.

[Dunk]

Hello everyone,
first post on this forum for me.

Not sure if its me who didnt read randi's comment correctly. I just want to clarify that in the story of balaam and ass,the ass in question is a donkey not his own posterior.

[Brown]

That the ass in question is a distinct animal, and not a part of Balaam's own anatomy, was clear to me from Mr. Randi's essay.

What I found surprising was this bit of crap in the essay:

Quote:

Truth is not much a part of Iowa curricula, it seems...

Pardon me while I go into "Radar O'Reilly mode":

What is THIS nonsense? Don't confuse Iowa with Red Oak, sir! And don't confuse a minority with the region as a whole!

I would, by the way, stack up Iowa students against Florida students--folks from the state you call home--any day of the week. Iowa students in general are among the brightest and best educated in the world, and test scores over the past several decades bear that out. As a rule, Iowa students are taught science and critical thinking.

Now that the record has been set straight, there is a question whether Bitterman really was fired for the reasons he says. The university says it was for other reasons (those who fire people for the wrong reasons ALWAYS assert legitimate reasons as pretexts), but it is too soon to know the whole story. If he was indeed fired for refusing to teach religious fairy tales as truth in a Western Civ class, then his firing was wrong. But if his personnel file indicates (for example) a series of non-religious reprimands or other disciplinary concerns, then the "I won't teach religious stories as fact" tale might actually be a pretext on Bitterman's part.

Mr. Randi says that Bitterman being in the right is "obvious." It may be true that Bitterman is in the right, but at this stage, it's pretty damn far from being obvious.

[sthomson]

Originally Posted by Brown

That the ass in question is a distinct animal, and not a part of Balaam's own anatomy, was clear to me from Mr. Randi's essay.

It took me a few sentences to figure that out, but eventually I caught on.

[mumchup]

Welcome to the forum Dunk.
Not everyone knows that Randi is also known for his sense of humor, but he can be a really funny guy.

[dogjones]

I was disappointed he didn't conclude that God has a tendency to talk out of His ass.

[DarwinsButterfly]

I do wonder what the Biblical Literalists think of this passage...

[NoZed Avenger]

But was the ass wearing a hat?

That's the real question.

[politas]

That particular pun is always jarring for those of us who spell that portion of anatomy with an "r" and an "e", and only one "s".

[mumchup]

Maybe you should start calling donkeys arses. Just to keep things clear.

[Starthinker]

As a resident of Iowa, I, too, would like to note that we are talking about a single institution. It's not like the government was passing laws or something. One institution does not a state make.

[DevilsAdvocate]

I, too, thought the "Iowa curricula" comment was out of place. The instructor’s comments seemed typical of an Iowan.

Most of Iowa is predominantly Methodist, which generally takes a non-literal interpretation of the Bible and is quite tolerant of other religions. Moving south and west toward Missouri and Kansas, the area becomes predominantly Baptist and Evangelical, which generally take a literal interpretation of the Bible and not much tolerance of other religions. Some of this spreads into southwest Iowa, which is where Red Oak and Southwest Community College are located. So it is certainly not typical of Iowa curricula. It may not even be typical of Red Oak curricula. It probably isn’t even typical of Southwest Community College curricula.

Red Oak is a small town, and Southwest Community College is a small school. According to their website: “The Red Oak Center offers college credit, adult education, GED and Adult Basic Education classes, and customized training for local businesses and industries.” The website for the Red Oak campus lists a full-time staff of a total of 9 people. This includes 3 administrators and 6 instructors (4 for nursing, 1 for GED/ABE, and 1 for building trades). There are some adjunct instructors.

This is not "Iowa curricula"; this is a very, very small rural school that provides mostly adult education instruction and some courses that can count for college credit.

Apparently Bitterman taught a Western Civilization course at Red Oak, which was broadcast to a Southwest Community College campus at Osceola. Some students and parents were upset that Bitterman would not acknowledge Genesis as being literally true. They wanted him gone, and so he was gone.

The school was in a tough spot. The school is there to serve the community and depends on community donations. A handful of people can make or break such an institution.

I applaud Bitterman for standing up for his teaching and challenging the “minority of power” that want to exclude from academics any beliefs but their own on the premise of “freedom of religion”.

[Brown]

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

Most of Iowa is predominantly Methodist, which generally takes a non-literal interpretation of the Bible and is quite tolerant of other religions. Moving south and west toward Missouri and Kansas, the area becomes predominantly Baptist and Evangelical, which generally take a literal interpretation of the Bible and not much tolerance of other religions. Some of this spreads into southwest Iowa, which is where Red Oak and Southwest Community College are located. So it is certainly not typical of Iowa curricula. It may not even be typical of Red Oak curricula. It probably isn’t even typical of Southwest Community College curricula.

Methodists have a strong presence in Iowa, although calling Iowa "predominantly Methodist" is a bit strong.

Iowa has a very broad diversity of religious groups. Most Iowans can name a city that is predominantly Catholic, a city that is predominantly Lutheran, as well as areas that have Mennonite and Amish communities. There are even Jewish communities (a fact that takes many by surprise). And there's also the Fairfield area, but let's not get started on that.

[Brown]

Enough about Iowa. Let's talk about the "talking ass" story.

This story gets its fame from the character of a talking beast, from the ridiculous plot point that the rider is unfazed by a beast talking and from the general absurdity of the tale.

What often gets overlooked is that the story is pointless.

Actually, I'm being charitable. One of the nicest things to say about the story is that it is pointless. One could quite easily make the case that the story is an insult to the Almighty. Balaam takes a journey, which is exactly what the Lord told him to do, then the Lord deliberately tries to prevent Balaam from completing the journey by placing an angel--which Balaam cannot see--in Balaam's path. For some reason that is completely obscure in the story, Balaam feels compelled to repent, when every indication in the story is that he was blameless. Balaam offers to give up his journey and return home. In response, the Lord repeats His command for Balaam to make the journey, which is what Balaam was already doing.

As the late Steve Allen put it, "So what was the point of the entire talking-ass story?"

In this story, the Almighty is depicted as: (1) not ominicient, (2) capricious, (3) unjust, (4) deliberately deceptive, and (5) vague in what He wants. Is the point of the story to show that the Almighty has many un-godlike qualities? Or is it better to say that the story is pointless fiction, and very bad fiction at that?

What happens next in the story should shock the conscience of any moral person.

Balaam, despite helping out Moses's gang, is subsequently slaughtered by that same gang (Numbers 31:8). Moses's army massacres the Midianites, burning their cities and taking as captive the Midianite women and children as well as livestock and other substantial wealth. When the army returns to Moses with their grand haul, Moses responds as follows:

Quote:

Num. 31:14 And Moses was wroth with the officers of the host, with the captains over thousands, and captains over hundreds, which came from the battle.

Num. 31:15 And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive?

Num. 31:16 Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD.

Num. 31:17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.

Num. 31:18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. (emphasis mine)

Lest it be unclear, Moses specifically orders the cold-blooded murder of children and unarmed women. Moses makes an exception for female virgins, however, and specifically authorizes the officers to keep the virgin girls alive for their own personal use.

[tracer]

Originally Posted by Brown

Iowa has a very broad diversity of religious groups. Most Iowans can name a city that is predominantly Catholic,

Believers in the Old and New Testaments ...

Quote:

a city that is predominantly Lutheran,

Believers in the Old and New Testaments ...

Quote:

as well as areas that have Mennonite

Believers in the Old and New Testaments ...

Quote:

and Amish

Believers in the Old and New Testaments ...

Quote:

communities. There are even Jewish

Believers in the Old Testament ...



Ain't it grand what passes for "religious diversity" here in America?

[sthomson]

Originally Posted by Brown

...In this story, the Almighty is depicted as: (1) not ominicient, (2) capricious, (3) unjust, (4) deliberately deceptive, and (5) vague in what He wants.

Just what some of us are looking for in an Old-Testament Vengeful God.

[Brown]

Originally Posted by tracer

Ain't it grand what passes for "religious diversity" here in America?

One might also mention that a Vietnamese religious group has dedicated the site for its new temple on the north side of Des Moines just this year (complete with fruit trees) or that several cities support various Eastern and Muslim communities. And I mentioned the Fairfield area, which is the world center for Maharishi operations in the USA. The city of Iowa City receives students from all over the world, making it a cosmopolitan community of many religious views (but with little or no religious conflict).

That said, the majority of churches in Iowa are Christian, mostly protestant.

Little known fact: Iowa was the very first place in the USA west of the Mississippi River that a pope visited.

[Brown]

Florence Nightingale had this to say about the Balaam story:

Quote:

The story of Achilles and his horses is far more suitable for children than that of Balaam and his ass, which is only fit to be told to asses.

[Brown]

More on Balaam:

The New Testament brands Balaam as a false prophet, despite the fact that the tale in Numbers has Balaam relate messages given to him in person (as it were) by the Lord Himself. The author of Revelation (Rev. 2:14) criticized Balaam as teaching wrongly, but does not mention any talking beast (at least not in regard to Balaam; talking beasts get mentioned later, when the author starts "tripping" [e.g., Rev. 4:8]).

Jude 1:11 refers to the "error of Balaam," which allegedly was his greed. Balaam apparently made quite a handsome living doling out blessings and curses, and the tale had been interpreted to mean that Balaam was not really obeying the Lord because it was the right thing to do, but because he expected a big reward. In other words, his actions were right, but his motives were wrong. He was, therefore, guilty of "thoughtcrime."

The barely canonical book of 2 Peter (which seems to have plagiarized Jude and which therefore could not have been written by the real Peter) follows this line, saying that Balaam loved the "wages of unrighteousness" (2 Pet. 2:15) and it was for this sin that his own beast of burden sassed him.

The actual Old Testament story, however, does not really provide much support for this interpretation. Balaam is specifically quoted as saying that he must follow the will of the Lord even if "Balak would give me his house full of silver and gold" (Num. 22:18). Moreover, the story is packed with non sequiturs, with greed NOT being given as an explanation for the inconsistencies. Indeed, there is no explanation for the chain of absurdities at all.

Balaam is told by the Lord to go with the servants of Balak (Num. 22:20). But when Balaam does so, God is angry (Num. 22:22), not because of improper motives, but because Balaam "went," i.e., Balaam was doing what he had been told. After the talking ass business, Balaam apologizes to the Lord for having gone with the men (Num. 22:34), while mentioning in passing that he had no way of knowing that an agent of the Lord was standing in his way. Balaam, quite reasonbly under the circumstances, concludes that the Lord did NOT want him to go with the servants of Balak. Perhaps Balaam thought he misunderstood the original command, or perhaps he thought that Lord had simply changed his mind. After all, the Lord seemed to change his mind quite a bit:

Quote:

Num. 22:12 And God said unto Balaam, Thou shalt not go with them....

Num. 22:13 And Balaam rose up in the morning, and said unto the princes of Balak, Get you into your land: for the LORD refuseth to give me leave to go with you.

Num. 22:20 And God came unto Balaam at night, and said unto him, If the men come to call thee, rise up, and go with them....

Thus, the Lord was giving "mixed signals" here, saying "don't go," and then saying "go." When the Lord said "don't go," Balaam stayed, but when the Lord said "go," Balaam went, and the Lord got mad. Balaam then concluded that the operative command had reverted to "don't go," but he was in for a shock:

Quote:

Num. 22:34 And Balaam said unto the angel of the LORD, I have sinned; for I knew not that thou stoodest in the way against me: now therefore, if it displease thee, I will get me back again.

Num. 22:35 And the angel of the LORD said unto Balaam, Go with the men....

In light of this tale of self-contradictory nonsense and ridiculous immorality, the humorous element of a talking ass doesn't seem all that out of place. Can you believe that there are some people in the Twenty-First Century who actually think this story is (1) literally true, (2) theologically important and (3) morally instructive??

[Pyrts]

Quote:

Balaam, despite helping out Moses's gang, is subsequently slaughtered by that same gang (Numbers 31:8). Moses's army massacres the Midianites, burning their cities and taking as captive the Midianite women and children as well as livestock and other substantial wealth. When the army returns to Moses with their grand haul, Moses responds as follows:Lest it be unclear, Moses specifically orders the cold-blooded murder of children and unarmed women. Moses makes an exception for female virgins, however, and specifically authorizes the officers to keep the virgin girls alive for their own personal use.

Oh, but read a little FURTHER! Some of these underage girls are killed and their body parts waved aloft (Heave offering) as a sacrifice to Yahweh... by Yahweh's command:

Quote:

31:25 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
31:26 Take the sum of the prey that was taken, both of man and of beast, thou, and Eleazar the priest, and the chief fathers of the congregation:
31:27 And divide the prey into two parts; between them that took the war upon them, who went out to battle, and between all the congregation:

31:28 And levy a tribute unto the Lord of the men of war which went out to battle: one soul of five hundred, both of the persons, and of the beeves, and of the asses, and of the sheep:
31:29 Take it of their half, and give it unto Eleazar the priest, for an heave offering of the LORD. (King James Version)

Several of the new translations change this to "offering", but the original says "heave offering."

Exodus 29:20 begins the description of how it's done, including the burning of the victims on the altar.

Charming deity.

[Pyrts]

Originally Posted by Brown

Thus, the Lord was giving "mixed signals" here, saying "don't go," and then saying "go." When the Lord said "don't go," Balaam stayed, but when the Lord said "go," Balaam went, and the Lord got mad.

Go back and reread the Moses and Pharaoh confrontation. Three times, the Pharaoh says "okay... let them go." And Yahweh "hardens his heart" so that he changes his mind. Apparently this is just so Yahweh can inflict misery on Egypt...which he could have done without the whole back and forth gameplaying.

[Brown]

Pyrts is right to suggest that the Balaam story and associated events are not the only stories in the Old Testament that are nonsensical, nor are they the only stories that are unflattering (if not downright insulting) to the Almighty.