Numbers 31 recounts one of the most disturbing episodes in the Hebrew Bible. After a military campaign against Midian, Moses becomes angry that the Israelite soldiers have kept the women alive and orders the execution of all male children and all women who have had sexual relations with men.1 The virgin girls—32,000 in total—are spared and distributed as spoils of war.1 Most remarkably, the text describes a system of tribute in which human beings, including these girls, are counted alongside livestock and given as offerings to the Lord. From the soldiers' share, 32 virgin girls are given to Eleazar the priest as "the LORD's tribute."2 This passage raises profound questions about the nature of the God depicted in the Hebrew Bible, the treatment of women and children in biblical warfare, and what modern readers should make of texts that treat human beings as property to be divided and offered to deity.
What the text actually says
The war against Midian begins with a divine command.
"The LORD said to Moses, 'Take vengeance on the Midianites for the Israelites. After that, you will be gathered to your people.'" Numbers 31:1-2 (New International Version)1
Moses assembles an army of 12,000 men—1,000 from each tribe—under the command of Phinehas, who had distinguished himself by killing an Israelite man and his Midianite companion in Numbers 25.1 The Israelites kill all the Midianite men, including five kings and Balaam son of Beor, and burn their settlements.1
The soldiers return with captives and plunder.
"The Israelites captured the Midianite women and children and took all the Midianite herds, flocks and goods as plunder. They burned all the towns where the Midianites had settled, as well as all their camps." Numbers 31:9-10 (New International Version)1
When the army returns to the Israelite camp, Moses is not pleased. He meets them with anger rather than praise.
Moses's command is explicit and brutal.
"Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man." Numbers 31:17-18 (New International Version)1
The Hebrew phrase translated "save for yourselves" (הַחֲיוּ לָכֶם, haḥayu lakhem) has been the subject of considerable scholarly debate, as it determines the ultimate fate of these captive girls.3 The text does not specify a method for determining which women were virgins, though later rabbinic sources suggested various physical examinations or simply using age as a proxy.3
The tribute of human beings to the Lord
After the killing is complete, God instructs Moses and Eleazar the priest on how to divide the spoils.
"The LORD said to Moses, 'You and Eleazar the priest and the family heads of the community are to count all the people and animals that were captured. Divide the spoils equally between the soldiers who took part in the battle and the rest of the community.'" Numbers 31:25-27 (New International Version)2
The plunder is divided in a 1:1 ratio between the 12,000 soldiers who fought and the entire Israelite community.
From each half, a tribute is set aside for the Lord.
"From the soldiers who fought in the battle, set apart as tribute for the LORD one out of every five hundred, whether people, cattle, donkeys or sheep. Take this tribute from their half share and give it to Eleazar the priest as the LORD's part." Numbers 31:28-29 (New International Version)2
From the community's half, a smaller tribute of one out of every fifty is given to the Levites who maintain the tabernacle (Numbers 31:30).2
The text then provides precise figures. The plunder captured includes 675,000 sheep, 72,000 cattle, 61,000 donkeys, and "32,000 women who had never slept with a man" (Numbers 31:32-35).1 These numbers are divided according to the prescribed formula, and the text meticulously records the tribute given to the Lord from the soldiers' share:
Tribute given to the LORD from the soldiers' share2
| Category | Soldiers' half | Tribute rate | LORD's tribute |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sheep | 337,500 | 1 in 500 | 675 |
| Cattle | 36,000 | 1 in 500 | 72 |
| Donkeys | 30,500 | 1 in 500 | 61 |
| Virgin girls | 16,000 | 1 in 500 | 32 |
Numbers 31:40-41 confirms: "And the persons were sixteen thousand; of which the LORD's tribute was thirty and two persons. And Moses gave the tribute, which was the LORD's heave offering, unto Eleazar the priest, as the LORD commanded Moses."2 Human beings are listed in the same category as livestock, subjected to the same mathematical formula, and given as tribute to the Lord through his priest. The text treats this without comment or apparent discomfort.
The context of the Midianite war
Numbers 31 is presented as retaliation for events described in Numbers 25. In that earlier chapter, Israelite men began having sexual relations with Moabite and Midianite women and participating in the worship of Baal of Peor.4 The text states that "the LORD's anger burned against Israel" and he sent a plague that killed 24,000 people (Numbers 25:9).4 The plague was stopped when Phinehas killed an Israelite man named Zimri and a Midianite woman named Cozbi with a single spear thrust through both of them (Numbers 25:7-8).4
God then commands Moses:
"Treat the Midianites as enemies and kill them. They treated you as enemies when they deceived you in the Peor incident." Numbers 25:17-18 (New International Version)4
This provides the stated justification for the war in Numbers 31: the Midianite women had led Israelite men astray into idolatry and sexual immorality, causing the plague that killed thousands.5
The rationale explains Moses's particular anger at the soldiers for sparing the women.
"Have you allowed all the women to live? ... They were the ones who followed Balaam's advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the LORD in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck the LORD's people." Numbers 31:15-16 (New International Version)1
The women who had engaged in sexual relations were considered guilty of leading Israel into apostasy. But this justification does not extend to male children or to virgin girls too young to have participated in the Baal Peor incident—yet they too were subject to killing or captivity.5
The fate of the virgin girls
The text is explicit that the 32,000 virgin girls were kept alive but says remarkably little about what happened to them afterward. Scholars have offered sharply divergent interpretations of the phrase "save for yourselves" (Numbers 31:18).
Rabbi and scholar Shaye J. D. Cohen argued in 1999 that "the implications of Numbers 31:17-18 are unambiguous ... we may be sure that 'for yourselves' means that the warriors may 'use' their virgin captives sexually."3 Cohen noted that the Hebrew lakhem ("for yourselves") is clear in its meaning, and that later rabbinic attempts to interpret the passage as referring only to servitude represent apologetic efforts to soften the text.3 On this reading, the virgin girls were distributed among the Israelite soldiers as sexual spoils of war.
Other scholars and religious commentators offer less disturbing interpretations. The 19th-century commentators Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch argued that the 32 girls given to the priests were enslaved for the maintenance of the sanctuary.6 Some Christian apologists suggest that the law in Deuteronomy 21:10-14, which regulates the taking of captive women as wives, would have applied to these girls—meaning they would eventually become wives rather than concubines or sex slaves.7
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 prescribes a specific process: if an Israelite soldier desires a captive woman, he must bring her to his home, have her shave her head and trim her nails, give her a month to mourn her family, and only then may he marry her.8 If he later finds her "displeasing," he must let her go free; he may not sell her or treat her as a slave "since you have dishonored her" (Deuteronomy 21:14).8 Some scholars argue this law, whatever its limitations, was more humane than typical ancient Near Eastern treatment of war captives.9
However, the applicability of Deuteronomy 21 to Numbers 31 is questionable. The law describes a process for individual soldiers who desire specific captives, not the mass distribution of 32,000 girls as spoils.8 Moreover, the 32 girls given to Eleazar the priest as "the LORD's tribute" present a particular puzzle: priests were already married, and the passage says nothing about these girls becoming wives.6 The text simply records that they were given to Eleazar and says no more about their fate.
Scholarly interpretations
Biblical scholars have approached Numbers 31 with varying degrees of discomfort. The scholarly consensus holds that the war as narrated did not actually take place—the scale of the numbers (675,000 sheep, 32,000 virgins, yet only 12,000 Israelite soldiers with zero casualties) suggests theological composition rather than historical reportage.6 Most scholars view Numbers 31 as a late priestly text, reflecting the theological concerns of its authors rather than memories of actual events.6
Scholars have noted internal tensions within the Pentateuch. According to Exodus, Moses spent forty years in exile among the Midianites, married a Midianite woman named Zipporah, and was guided by his Midianite father-in-law Jethro, who is portrayed positively as recognizing the God of Israel (Exodus 18).6 It is difficult to reconcile this friendly relationship with the total war against Midian described in Numbers 31. Some scholars suggest these represent different literary traditions that were later combined, while others see Numbers 31 as a later composition that overrides earlier traditions.6
The treatment of the Midianite women and children has been characterized by several scholars as genocide. The Wikipedia article on "Genocide in the Hebrew Bible" lists Numbers 31 among the passages in which "several scholars have characterized certain biblical passages as divine commands to commit genocide."10 The command to kill all male children and all non-virgin women, keeping only virgin girls, fits the pattern of what modern international law defines as genocide: the deliberate destruction of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.10
Some scholars have pushed back against this characterization. Paul Copan has argued that ḥerem (the Hebrew concept of total war and destruction) commands in the Hebrew Bible were hyperbolic, reflecting ancient Near Eastern rhetorical conventions of "bravado and exaggeration" in reporting warfare.11 On this view, the texts should not be read as literal descriptions of what happened or even as literal commands of what should happen. However, Gili Kugler challenges such interpretations as apologetic strategies that risk "normalizing extreme violence" by presenting it as morally acceptable.10
Ancient Near Eastern warfare
The treatment of women in Numbers 31 reflects broader patterns in ancient Near Eastern warfare, though this context provides explanation rather than justification. In the ancient world, human beings captured in war—especially women and children—were routinely considered plunder alongside material goods and livestock.12 Mesopotamian texts use vocabulary that treats captives as objects of economic value rather than persons with inherent dignity.12
Sexual violence against women was a standard feature of ancient warfare. Evidence from the eighth century BCE indicates that what modern observers would call "martial rape" was an integral, top-down part of military orders, not merely an incidental byproduct of combat.13 The taking of women as concubines and sex slaves served multiple purposes beyond sexual gratification: it represented subjugation, revenge, and the permanent degradation of defeated peoples.13
Against this background, some apologists argue that the regulations in texts like Deuteronomy 21:10-14 represent a moral advance—restricting what soldiers could do with captive women rather than permitting unlimited abuse.9 Philosopher and theologian Paul Copan argues that although rape was common in ancient Near Eastern warfare, Israelite soldiers were prohibited from raping captive women; sex was permitted only within marital commitment.7 Whether this amounts to moral progress or merely regulated exploitation remains contested among scholars.9
The Mari texts from ancient Mesopotamia instructed that clothing and jobs be provided to captive women, while Assyrian laws required married former captives to dress like ordinary Assyrian women of their social class.12 These regulations suggest concern for integrating captives into society, though they also confirm that captivity and the loss of freedom were normal expectations for women whose communities were conquered.
The problem of human tribute
The most theologically troubling aspect of Numbers 31 may not be the warfare itself but the system of tribute that follows. When God commands that one out of every five hundred persons be given to the priest as "the LORD's tribute," human beings are explicitly treated as property equivalent to livestock.2 The 32 virgin girls given to Eleazar are described in the same accounting system as the 675 sheep, 72 cattle, and 61 donkeys.2
Some readers have wondered whether this passage implies human sacrifice. The text uses the term terumah (תְּרוּמָה), meaning "heave offering" or "contribution," which elsewhere in the Pentateuch refers to portions of sacrifices set apart for God and given to the priests.14 However, the consensus among scholars is that these girls were not sacrificed but became slaves or servants associated with the sanctuary.6 The Levites, who received a larger portion of human tribute from the community's share (one in fifty), were responsible for maintaining the tabernacle, and captives may have been put to work in this capacity.6
Yet this interpretation raises its own problems. If the 32 girls became temple slaves, the text describes God as the owner of human slaves—young girls taken from conquered peoples and given to his priests. The divine command treats their enslavement as appropriate and desirable, a portion owed to God just as portions of grain and animal sacrifices were owed. Whether these girls spent their lives in hard labor, as servants to priestly families, or in some other capacity, the text never questions the fundamental premise that they were property to be distributed.6
Common apologetic responses
Christian and Jewish apologists have developed several responses to the ethical challenges posed by Numbers 31. These deserve examination, though each faces significant difficulties.
The contextual justification argues that the Midianites had committed a grievous offense by leading Israel into idolatry and sexual immorality at Baal Peor, causing a plague that killed 24,000 Israelites.7 On this view, the war against Midian was divine punishment for a serious crime. The women who had participated in the Baal Peor incident were guilty, and the virgin girls who were spared were precisely those too young to have participated.7
This defense fails to account for the male children, who were all killed regardless of age or involvement. An infant boy could not possibly have participated in the events of Numbers 25, yet he was sentenced to death while an infant girl was spared—not because of innocence but because of potential utility to the Israelites.5 The logic of the passage is not about guilt and innocence but about eliminating threats (males who might grow up to seek revenge) while preserving value (virgin females who could be absorbed into Israelite households).5
The cultural context defense argues that ancient standards were different and that the regulations in the Torah, while harsh by modern standards, represented improvements over typical ancient Near Eastern practice.9 Taking captive women as wives with legal protections was better than killing them or subjecting them to unregulated rape.7
This argument faces the problem of divine command. If these actions were merely tolerated by God as concessions to human hardness of heart (as some interpreters suggest regarding divorce in Matthew 19:8), that is one thing. But Numbers 31 presents the war, the killings, and the tribute system as directly commanded by God.1, 2 The tribute formula is given as divine instruction, not human improvisation. If God commanded the treatment of human beings as livestock, the question is not whether ancient people found this acceptable but whether an all-good God would issue such commands.15
The divine sovereignty defense holds that God, as creator and judge of all, has the right to command the taking of human life and the disposal of human captives as he sees fit.15 What would be murder or enslavement if done by humans on their own authority becomes just when commanded by God. This argument, however, faces the Euthyphro dilemma: is an action good because God commands it, or does God command it because it is good?16 If the former, "good" becomes an empty term meaning only "whatever God does," making moral praise of God meaningless.16
The theological problem
Numbers 31 presents a vision of God that many modern readers find irreconcilable with the concept of a loving, just deity. The passage describes God commanding mass killing of children, the execution of women based on sexual history, and the distribution of young girls as property—with God himself claiming a portion of this human tribute.1, 2
The problem is not merely that violence occurred in ancient warfare—that is historically unremarkable. The problem is that this violence is presented as divinely commanded and divinely approved. Moses is angry that the soldiers did not kill enough people (Numbers 31:14-15).1 God specifies the mathematical formula by which human beings should be divided and tributed.2 The text presents no hint of divine reluctance, regret, or qualification. This is what God wanted.
For those who hold that God is omnibenevolent—all-good in a sense recognizable to human moral understanding—Numbers 31 poses a severe challenge.15 Either the passage does not accurately represent God's commands, or our understanding of "good" must be revised to accommodate genocide and human trafficking as potentially good actions when divinely sanctioned. Neither option leaves traditional theism comfortable.15
Some interpreters resolve the tension by denying the historical nature of the account. If the war never happened as described—if Numbers 31 is theological literature rather than historical reportage—then no actual children were killed and no actual girls were enslaved.6 This approach, common among critical scholars, avoids the immediate moral horror but does not fully resolve the theological problem. Even as literature, the passage presents God as the kind of being who would command such actions and expect to receive tribute in human beings. The character of God as depicted remains troubling regardless of historicity.17
Division of virgin captives according to Numbers 311, 2
Moral implications
The moral questions raised by Numbers 31 extend beyond the specific events narrated to fundamental issues about biblical authority and divine character. If the Bible is divinely inspired Scripture, readers must grapple with what it means for inspired Scripture to include commands for mass killing and the treatment of human beings as property equivalent to sheep and cattle.17
Some traditions resolve this by distinguishing between descriptive and prescriptive texts—the Bible records what happened without necessarily endorsing it. But in Numbers 31, God is the one issuing commands. The text is explicitly prescriptive, not merely descriptive.1, 2 God tells Moses to wage war, Moses commands the killing of children and non-virgins, and God prescribes the formula for distributing the spoils including human beings.
Other traditions appeal to progressive revelation—the idea that God revealed himself and his moral requirements gradually, accommodating human limitations and cultural contexts. On this view, the commands in Numbers 31 represent an earlier, less developed stage of moral understanding that was superseded by later revelation, ultimately fulfilled in Jesus's teachings of love and nonviolence.18 This approach preserves biblical authority while acknowledging that not all biblical commands are binding today.
Critics note, however, that progressive revelation still requires explaining why a perfectly good God would command the killing of children and enslavement of girls at any stage of history.17 If these actions were wrong, why did God command them? If they were not wrong in their original context, what made them wrong, and how can we trust that our current moral understanding represents progress rather than decline?
For readers who approach the Bible as human literature rather than divine revelation, Numbers 31 presents a different kind of problem: it reveals what ancient Israelite authors believed about their God and found acceptable to attribute to him.17 The passage opens a window into ancient attitudes toward warfare, women, and divine sanction of violence—attitudes that modern readers rightly find disturbing but that were apparently uncontroversial to the text's original authors and audiences.
Numbers 31 remains in the Bible, read in synagogues and churches, studied in seminaries and universities. The 32 virgin girls given to Eleazar as "the LORD's tribute" stand as a permanent reminder of what the biblical text claims God commanded—and of the moral questions that such claims inevitably raise for thoughtful readers who take the text seriously enough to read what it actually says.2