Thanks again for the response, Joshua. Let's assume for the sake of argument that theism is true and then consider the implications. Does God take an interest in history? Does He want one thing to happen rather than another? Did God want the Allies to win the Second World War, for example. The Allies could not have won if the United Kingdom had not existed, and the United Kingdom would not exist if it had not been for the Norman Conquest. Does this mean that God supported the Norman Conquest? Most people don't lose any sleep over that question. Those who believe in God probably think that He supported the Allies but don't worry about the implications, such as the historical processes that led to the existence of the Allies in the first place.
If God has an interest in *anything* that happens in history then He must prefer all kinds of things to happen that would make us feel very uneasy. Even the more limited military action described in Numbers 21:23-31 makes me feel uneasy. That doesn't mean that God was not right to want this to happen. If military action which occurred more than 3000 years ago was a necessary part of God's long-term plans then who are we to say that it should not have happened?
I think you are wrong to reject the idea that some ancient texts are divinely inspired. How do we know that the Bible is divinely inspired but Assyrian and Babylonian texts are not? That question can be answered by considering the case for the Judeo-Christian tradition as a whole. I consider that case to be a powerful one. This, of course, does not obviate the need for great care in reading the Bible today.
Thanks again for the response, Joshua. Let's assume for the sake of argument that theism is true and then consider the implications. Does God take an interest in history? Does He want one thing to happen rather than another? Did God want the Allies to win the Second World War, for example. The Allies could not have won if the United Kingdom had not existed, and the United Kingdom would not exist if it had not been for the Norman Conquest. Does this mean that God supported the Norman Conquest? Most people don't lose any sleep over that question. Those who believe in God probably think that He supported the Allies but don't worry about the implications, such as the historical processes that led to the existence of the Allies in the first place.
If God has an interest in *anything* that happens in history then He must prefer all kinds of things to happen that would make us feel very uneasy. Even the more limited military action described in Numbers 21:23-31 makes me feel uneasy. That doesn't mean that God was not right to want this to happen. If military action which occurred more than 3000 years ago was a necessary part of God's long-term plans then who are we to say that it should not have happened?
I think you are wrong to reject the idea that some ancient texts are divinely inspired. How do we know that the Bible is divinely inspired but Assyrian and Babylonian texts are not? That question can be answered by considering the case for the Judeo-Christian tradition as a whole. I consider that case to be a powerful one. This, of course, does not obviate the need for great care in reading the Bible today.