Solomon and the Harlots: I don't get it.

Okay, so there's these two harlots, living in a house together, and alone with each other. That alone sounds kind of strange to me, but I don't know the customs of ancient Israel, so I'll let it lie. Anyway, they both have children; according to the bible, one was smothered in the night, according to other traditions, a wolf ran off with one. Whatever. One of the babies is dead, and both women claim the living child as their own. So they go to Solomon to resolve this. Now, Solomon calls for a sword, to split the baby between the women. This strikes me as odd in itself, because what if neither woman backed down? Would he have actually killed the baby? Granted, it wasn't yet circumcised, but still. Anyway, the part I really don't get is that, while one says, let her have it, as long as it's alive, the other one says, Nope, neither of us will have it.

Now, maybe I'm missing something, but real mother or not, how many women are there who would just stand there and let him cut the baby in twain? It doesn't make sense to me. . .

Anybody clear this up for me?

 

what is a harlot?

 

A harlot is a mystical elf-like creature that is michevious in nature.

 

That's the point, Mastadge. The baby's real mother would never have stood by and let it be killed. She would rather have had the other woman take the child than see it killed. Pretty darn smart of Solomon to understand a mother's true nature.

 

I think Mastadge's point is that why would Solomon assume that the other woman would want the kid chopped in half? What if both women had the same reaction (to let the other woman have the kid)?

 

Exactly. I have trouble believing the non-mother would just go along with the splitting of the child.

 

What if the wolf stole both babies and what the women were arguing over was just oddly shaped wolf poop that kind of resembled a child?

It blows my mind too.

 

Meh. I don't get Mormonism, but you don't see me complaining



...anymore.

 

Well, I'm not sure where you got the wolf part from, but here's the story:

I Kings 3

Then two women who were harlots came to the king and stood before him.
17 The one woman said, "Oh, my lord, this woman and I live in the same house; and I gave birth to a child while she was in the house.
18 "It happened on the third day after I gave birth, that this woman also gave birth to a child, and we were together. There was no stranger with us in the house, only the two of us in the house.
19 "This woman's son died in the night, because she lay on it.
20 "So she arose in the middle of the night and took my son from beside me while your maidservant slept, and laid him in her bosom, and laid her dead son in my bosom.
21 "When I rose in the morning to nurse my son, behold, he was dead; but when I looked at him carefully in the morning, behold, he was not my son, whom I had borne."
22 Then the other woman said, "No! For the living one is my son, and the dead one is your son." But the first woman said, "No! For the dead one is your son, and the living one is my son." Thus they spoke before the king.
23 Then the king said, "The one says, 'This is my son who is living, and your son is the dead one'; and the other says, 'No! For your son is the dead one, and my son is the living one.'"
24 The king said, "Get me a sword." So they brought a sword before the king.
25 The king said, "Divide the living child in two, and give half to the one and half to the other."
26 Then the woman whose child was the living one spoke to the king, for (33) she was deeply stirred over her son and said, "Oh, my lord, give her the living child, and by no means kill him." But the other said, "He shall be neither mine nor yours; divide him!"
27 Then the king said, "Give the first woman the living child, and by no means kill him. She is his mother."
28 When all Israel heard of the judgment which the king had handed down, they feared the king, for (34) they saw that the wisdom of God was in him to administer justice.

This version shows that the woman who was not the child's mother was selfish and deceitful enough to lie about the child in the first place. So, it wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility that she would rather see the child killed than let his real mother have him.

 

The tale itself seems Approchraphal (?sp?). An example of wisdom that probably did not happen.