The idea that we as Christians have allowed something besides the word of God to direct our political opinions and worldview is truly alarming. The justness of a particular war or violence should not be based on an accepted culture in the church or a political party affiliation, but purely on the word of God. For years I unconsciously allowed my culture’s worldview to so permeate my thoughts regarding our role as Christians in American society that I allowed some of my personal opinion to overshadow Biblical truth. Thankfully, over this last year God has clarified some previous assumptions I had regarding topics such as violence and politics. Though my understanding is far from whole, I would say I have a clearer picture of our role today as Christians in America. And the reason for this is a renewed focus on what the Bible teaches, and a divorce from any reason or previous loyalty besides a pledge to my Savior Jesus Christ.
In the process of finding how God wants his people to respond to war, injustice, and evil we must start with a clear Old Testament perspective. We must understand the purpose of the war and killing seen in the Old Testament before we come to a Biblical conclusion regarding war and defense. Our understanding of the introduction of sin, the law, sacrifice, and mainly Israel’s role as God’s chosen nation will not only help us understand God’s view of killing in the Old Testament, but what parts of this view pertain to us today and which do not.
After creation and the fall of man in Genesis 3 we know sin was chosen by Adam and Eve, and ushered in death and killing. In Genesis 17 we see the beginning of the established nation of Israel when God established his everlasting covenant with Abraham and his descendants, and Abraham became the father of the Jewish people. The covenant was clarified after God rescued his people from Egypt and made a covenant with Moses and the nation of Israel, and introduced the Ten Commandments in Deuteronomy 5, and the specification of the Old Testament law which included the directions pertaining to offering sacrifices for the forgiveness of sin. It is by this established nation of Israel, God’s chosen people, that we see God using killing (Deuteronomy 5-6, Leviticus 4:35, 5:10). The question is why did God allow and command his nation to kill and war?
After creation and the fall of man in Genesis 3 we know sin was chosen by Adam and Eve, and ushered in death and killing. In Genesis 17 we see the beginning of the established nation of Israel when God established his everlasting covenant with Abraham and his descendants, and Abraham became the father of the Jewish people. The covenant was clarified after God rescued his people from Egypt and made a covenant with Moses and the nation of Israel, and introduced the Ten Commandments in Deuteronomy 5, and the specification of the Old Testament law which included the directions pertaining to offering sacrifices for the forgiveness of sin. It is by this established nation of Israel, God’s chosen people, that we see God using killing (Deuteronomy 5-6, Leviticus 4:35, 5:10). The question is why did God allow and command his nation to kill and war?
One of the first commands or restrictions for killing that God gives is seen when God speaks to Noah after the flood. Genesis 9:6 says: "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.” God states that his reason for holding murders accountable is because man is made in the image of God, so from the first mention of wrongful killing God makes the sanctity of human life very clear. Yet we also see throughout the Old Testament God commanding His people to war, and even specifying who to kill (Deut 20:13-18, Joshua 8:22-24, Joshua 10:28, 10:35, Judges 21:10). For example, in I Samuel 15 Saul is dethroned for not completely annihilating all of the Amalekites, and not obeying I Samuel 15:3 when God says, “Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.”
How then do we balance these numerous accounts of God commanded killing with God’s clear command to the Israelites to love their neighbor as themselves, to not seek revenge as seen in Leviticus 19: 15-18, and the fact that Ezekiel 18:32 and Ezekiel 33:11 make it clear that God has no pleasure in the death of anyone? To answer this question we must understand the purpose of God allowing his people to war and kill, and the presence of direct revelation from God to his nation that uniquely justified what they did.
In the Old Testament God’s ultimate goal was to make Israel a great nation in order to glorify his name (Exodus 32:10, 2 Samuel 7:23, Isaiah 63:12-14), and he used war in order to achieve his promised plan for Israel (Deuteronomy 20:16-17, Numbers 21:34). Under this ultimate goal, there are three specific reasons for Israeli killing and war in the Old Testament that stand out above the rest; (1) to attain and defend the Promised Land (2) to punish evil nations (3) and to maintain purity. I will address these three specific reasons first, and close with the clarification of God’s ultimate goal of glory.
In the Old Testament, God's promises revolved around Israel occupying the land of Palestine, making war a necessity. The nations that stood in the way of the fulfillment of God’s plan and promise were annihilated. In Numbers 21 God commands the Israelites to wipe out the nations of Sihon and Og for not allowing them passage through their territory and for marching towards them in battle. Then in Deuteronomy 20:16-17 the Lord commands the Israelites to demolish “the cities of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes.”
The second reason war was justified was to punish those who perpetrated evil against God and the Israelites. A couple examples of this are seen first in Numbers 31:1-3 when God makes it clear that his reason for commanding the Israelites to go to war against the Midianites was to carry out his vengeance on them. And second, in I Samuel 15:2 when God declares his reason for commanding war against the Amalekites was to punish them for what they did to Israel.
Lastly, war was used as a tool to maintain purity of the Israelite nation. In Deuteronomy 20 God commands Israel to destroy six nations, and says in verse 18 “Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the LORD your God." Preventing his people from falling into sin and worshipping other gods was a priority in the justifications the Lord gives for war. After returning from overtaking the Midianites, Moses said in Num 31:15-17, "Have you allowed all the women to live?" he asked them. "They were the ones who followed Balaam's advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the LORD in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the Lord’s people. 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.”
God is clearly focused on maintaining the purity of his people, in an effort to not bring shame but holiness to his nation and therefore glory to his name. Which is why the three reasons listed for Old Testament warring can fall under this one theme: the glorification of God’s name. God’s desire to glorify his name is evident throughout the Old Testament as God is constantly recognized as the reason for Israelite victory in battle (Joshua 10:30). We also see God expressing his desire for the glorification of his name in Exodus 7:3, 9:16, 10:2 and 11:9; when the suffering and killing seen in the plagues was used to show his power. Then in II Kings 19 the angel of the Lord defeated the Assyrian army by putting to death 185,000 men. In verse 34 God states his reason; “I will defend this city and save it, for my sake and for the sake of David my servant."
The justified killing the Israelites did in the Old Testament was not done for human glory, but for God’s. This is evident not only in the verses listed above, but in the account of David seeking to kill to avenge his name, not the name of the Lord. In I Samuel 25:21 we see David being mistreated by Nabal and being paid back “evil for good”, because Nabal refused to answer his request to feed him and his men. This unfair treatment prompted David to march toward Nabal’s home with 400 to kill those who mistreated him. The Lord sent Abigail, Nabal’s wife to stop him from fighting and having “on his conscience the staggering burden of needless bloodshed or of having avenged himself,” 1 Sam 25:31. As a man of God David responded in praise. “David said to Abigail, "Praise be to the LORD, the God of Israel, who has sent you today to meet me. May you be blessed for your good judgment and for keeping me from bloodshed this day and from avenging myself with my own hands,” I Samuel 25:32-33.
As we bridge into the New Testament perspective and the shift in purpose, it is important to remember all of these purposes for Old Testament warfare. And also to understand that the warring commanded by God in the Old Covenant required an enormous amount of faith from the soldiers and kings who answered the call. They were trusting that God would protect them as they obeyed his prompting, and that through his power they would claim victory for the glory of his name, because they fought for him. In Deuteronomy 20:1 the Lord says: “When you go to war against your enemies and see horses and chariots and an army greater than yours, do not be afraid of them, because the LORD your God, who brought you up out of Egypt, will be with you.”
Posts
2 Comments:
I really like the way you are stepping back here and working to remove your presuppositions so that you can see your blind spots. Excellent approach to examining a difficult subject. I have a few thoughts on both Shannon's and Josh's posts.
1) Shannon claims that enlightenment thinking has never worked and never will. As proof you point out the current problems in the world. This logic leads me to the thought "What would the world look like if we had never had 'enlightenment thinking'". I would not be surprised if the west, in that case, looked more like Saudi Arabia or Taliban lead Afghanistan. Modernism is not perfect but that alternative is rather terrifying. Remember correlation does not imply causation.
2) Josh rightly points out that our perceptions are shaped by the times we live in. He also states that the way around this is to rely on the scriptures as the authority. I think we should be aware that even our understanding of the scripture is shaped by our time and culture. Also each book in the scriptures was written within a particular time, culture and political environment so we should attempt to understand it as literature as well as spiritual truth. For example the idea of purification of God's people through killing makes a certain sense within the context of Israel's role in the spiritual narrative but in a modern pluralistic society it appears xenophobic, destructive and oppressive. Overtaking a nation and killing all men, women and all their male children, while saving the virgins, who have followed Balaam's advice is a far more hateful thing then the 2001 imprisonment of proselytizing Christian Aid workers by the Taliban. Both felt their scriptures and laws validated these actions.
Thanks for the response. It is nice to meet you here on the blog sphere and I had some thoughts off of what you said. Both of your thoughts are in response to one of my posts. I agree that we are far better off with the enlightenment than without it, all I was pointing out was that if all we do is try to “think” our way into truth (whether philosophically/scientifically or otherwise) we will ultimately fail. That is one of the lies of the enlightenment. Maybe I didn’t qualify my point enough, but I was getting at something specific and not denying that the enlightenment was a good thing. In so many ways it was! We must look for something outside of our own understanding if we want truth and direction as humans.
As for your second point, I totally agree and that is why we hold onto God’s Spirit as the only objective truth. And as a believer that trusts that the Spirit of God guided the writing of the Bible itself—the Bible also becomes an objective source. We muddy the objectivity with our depravity (give or take the degree to which we actually are) and as you said, being products of our own time. That is something I mention as well.
You also bring up the time, culture, and political environment as things to take into consideration. Those very things have brought me to some of the convictions I have today. I am jumping ahead but in short; the Roman Empire during and after the time of Jesus is very comparable to modern America. The ethical applications that the early church took from the apostles, the written and spoken word, and Jesus should have greater bearing on our own search for the right Christian ethic in our time. It is not a simple task by any stretch of the imagination, but one we wrestle with. I am glad you brought that up.
Post a Comment