God of war?
Below is my essay for OT this last semester. It's certainly a tough and dividing topic - what are your thoughts?
"Outline the theological grounds on which the books of Deuteronomy and Joshua call for the destruction of the inhabitants of Canaan by Israel during the occupation of the promised land (1600 words). Write a Christian response to this issue (400 words)."
Reference List:
Brekelmans, C. 1997, ‘hērem’, in Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament,
Vol 2, ed. E. Jenni, C. Westermann, trans. M.E. Biddle, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, Massachusetts, 474-477.
Cowles, C.S. 2003, ‘The Case for Radical Discontinuity’, in Show them no Mercy: 4 Views on God and the Canaanite Genocide, Counterpoints, ed. S.N. Gundry, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 11-44.
Craigie, P. 1976, The Book of Deuteronomy, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament, ed. R.K. Harrison, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, Michigan.
________. 1978, The Problem of War in the Old Testament, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, Michigan.
LaSor, W.S., Hubbard, D.A., Bush, F.W. 1996, Old Testament Survey: the Message, Form, and Background of the Old Testament, 2nd edn, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Lilley, J. 1997, ‘The Judgement of God: The Problem of the Canaanites’, Themelois, vol 22, no. 2, 3-12.
Lind, M. 1980, Yahweh is a Warrior: The Theology of Warfare in Ancient Israel, Herald Press, Scottdale, Pennsylvania.
Longman III, T. 2003, ‘The Case for Spiritual Continuity’, in Show them no Mercy: 4 Views on God and the Canaanite Genocide, Counterpoints, ed. S.N. Gundry, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 159-187.
Longman III, T., Reid, D. 1995, God is a Warrior, Studies in Old Testament Biblical Theology, ed. V.D. Verbrugge, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan.
McConville, J.G. 2002, Deuteronomy, Apollos Old Testament Commentary 5, ed. D.W. Baker, G.J. Wenham, Apollos, Leicester, England.
Merrill, E.H. 2003, ‘The Case for Moderate Discontinuity’, in Show them no Mercy: 4 Views on God and the Canaanite Genocide, Counterpoints, ed. S.N. Gundry, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 63-94.
Sloane, A. 2006, Deuteronomy 7, ‘Chapel Sermon’, 07/03/06, Morling College, Sydney.
Wright, C.J.H. 2004, Old Testament Ethics for the People of God, Inter-Varsity Press, Leicester, England.
[1] While the term “holy war” is not used in Deuteronomy or Joshua, I have made use of it for ease of reference to the war against the Canaanites during the occupation of the promised land.
"Outline the theological grounds on which the books of Deuteronomy and Joshua call for the destruction of the inhabitants of Canaan by Israel during the occupation of the promised land (1600 words). Write a Christian response to this issue (400 words)."
The books of Deuteronomy and Joshua give an account of the conquest of the promised land and also an account of specific laws regarding the way Yahweh called Israel to live. In doing so, the two books convey clear theological grounds which call for the destruction of the inhabitants of Canaan. While a discussion of these theological grounds is beneficial they do not however, answer all of the difficult questions surrounding this issue. Following this discussion then, I will attempt to provide a Christian response to this issue.
Yahweh War
Throughout the book of Deuteronomy commands and rules are given to Israel for the conduct of war (Deut 7:1-5; 20:1-20; 25:17-19). A significant aspect of these commands is that they are not given by humans, but are in fact recorded as commands from Yahweh. The Israelites are told to enter the land of the Canaanites and “utterly destroy them. Make no covenant with them and show them no mercy.” (Deut 7:2b). The strength and severity of this command is striking, however the mandate to take the land and destroy its inhabitants is not an isolated one (Deut 7:1-5, 17-26; 9:1-5; 13:12-18; 20:16-20). Cowles (2003, 36) rejects these commands saying, ‘we must resist all efforts to defend Old Testament genocidal commands as reflective of the will of God.’ It appears however, as Longman III and Reid (1995, 33) suggest, that the conquest of Canaan was in fact commanded and initiated by Yahweh. It becomes increasingly obvious as we look at the involvement of Yahweh in this holy war[1], that this is the theological interpretation of the writers of Deuteronomy and Joshua.
There is a very strong emphasis on the work of Yahweh in the conquest. He is the one who brings the Israelites into the promised land, and he is the one who defeats the inhabitants (Deut 7:1-2, 18-20, 9:5; 19:8; 20:4, 14) Joshua 2:8 says ‘…truly the Lord has given all the land into our hands…’. Yahweh reminds Israel of her weakness and need to rely on him; the people in the lands they were to possess were much stronger and bigger than them (Deut 7:1, 7, 17-24; 20:1-4). They are described as ‘nations larger and mightier than you, great cities, fortified to the heavens, a strong and tall people… know then that the LORD your God is the one who crosses over before you as a devouring fire; he will defeat them and subdue them before you…’ (Deut 9:1-2). The book of Joshua demonstrates a clear recognition of the concept of Yahweh’s intervention, attributing to him victories such as the defeat of Jericho (Josh 6:2, 16), Ai (8:18), the Amorite coalition (10:11-14; 42), and the northern coalition (11:8). There is a strong reliance on Yahweh as the one who fights and wins the battles for Israel (Lind 1980, 154), and it is in this light that the theology of holy war in the books of Deuteronomy and Joshua can be understood.
A Chosen People
Merrill (2003, 76) states that ‘Yahweh war is at its base a war against spiritual darkness and wickedness in realms that transcend the human and earthly.’ While in a sense this is true of the conquest of Canaan, there is also a human element involved. It was through Israel that Yahweh carried out this war. Deuteronomy explains the reason for Yahweh carrying out his will through Israel; it was not because Israel was righteous or bigger than other nations, but it was because the Lord loved them and is faithful in keeping his promises (Deut 7:7-8; 9:5). Israel was a holy people chosen by God to be his people, in connection with the promises of land (Gen 13:14-18; 15:7, 18-21; 17:8; Deut 7:6) made to their forefathers (McConville 2002, 156). Merrill states this well:
The vantage point of Deuteronomy is the impending conquest of Canaan in fulfilment of the promises to the patriarchs... Yahweh, as owner of the land, would therefore undertake measures to destroy and/or expel the illegitimate inhabitants, and he would do so largely through his people Israel and by means of Yahweh war. (Merrill 2003, 67)
Devoted to Yahweh
While the book of Joshua describes the physical entrance of the nation of Israel into the promised land, the spiritual nature of the conquest is implicit. True worship of Yahweh is central to this conquest and Israel’s understanding of this is reflected by the spiritual preparation for battle (Longman III 2003, 164). Joshua 5 gives an account of the circumcising of the Israelites and the keeping of the Passover before taking Jericho. In addition, when entering into battle (Josh 6), priests and the ark of the covenant are present.
More than Israel’s preparations however, the very act of killing seemed to be considered a spiritual one. The Hebrew word associated with this act in holy war is hērem (חֵרֶם). The primary meaning of the noun is “ban”. It has implications of something set aside or, as Lilley (1997, 6) describes it, the ‘irrevocable dedication of an object or person’. ‘In holy war, hrm is a religious act which dedicates the enemies…to God.’ (Brekelmans 1997, 475). This command for how Israel is to carry out holy war is translated in Deuteronomy 7:2 as ‘utterly destroy them’. This is literally the wholesale destruction of the inhabitants of the promised land, as Deuteronomy 20:16 affirms; ‘…you must not let anything that breathes remain alive’. This theology of hērem is demonstrated in Joshua such as in the account of the defeat of Jericho. Joshua 6:21 says, ‘then they devoted to destruction by the edge of the sword all in the city…’. This act of killing was one of devotion to Yahweh; ‘This city and all that is in it shall be devoted to the Lord for destruction.’ (Josh 6:17).
It has been suggested that aiding Israel’s perception that there was nothing wrong with this kind of religious devotion would have been the fact that it was not uncommon in Ancient Near Eastern Cultures (LaSor, Hubbard & Bush 1996, 148). While to an extent this may have been true, Israel’s theology justifying hērem surly went far deeper. Lind observes:
The element of the hērem illustrates…that while the individual elements of the institution of holy war were common to Israel and her neighbors, the institution as a whole was reoriented in Israel toward a different concept of political power–the unilateral rule of Yahweh. (Lind 1980, Pg82)
Israel’s actions and existence were centred solely on Yahweh. Israel was a theocracy governed by God, called to abandon the way of the nations (Lind 1980, 149; Deut 7:2-6).
Israel’s call to be a holy people set apart offers, in part, an eye into the purpose of the command to utterly destroy the Canaanites. To remain holy necessitated Israel’s severance of any mingling with corrupt cultures that worshiped other gods (McConville 2002, 153). Deuteronomy goes to great lengths to emphasise the importance of holiness and the need to protect Israel from corruption (Deut 4:15-16, 23-28; 7:4, 25-26; 8:11-20; 20:16-18; 28:15-19) Deuteronomy 20:18 explains that the reason for the annihilation is ‘so that they may not teach you to do all the abhorrent things that they do for their gods, and you thus sin against the LORD your God.’. It is this protection of true worship of Yahweh that forms part of Israel’s theology calling for the destruction of the Canaanites (Lilley 1997, 8).
Judgement of Sin
Yahweh’s desire for holiness and abhorrence of sin was not only something that was limited to the Israelites. The destruction of the Canaanites is in fact described as Yahweh’s judgement on the evil they had committed (Craigie 1978, 95). Deuteronomy 9:4 says that it is ‘because of the wickedness of these nations that the LORD is dispossessing them before you’. Cowles (2003, 30) strongly refutes this concept saying, ‘God does not engage in punitive, redemptive or sacred violence… God does not proactively use death as an instrument of judgement’. To accept this statement however, would require one to reject huge sections of the Bible as divinely inspired, even sections beyond this period of Israel’s history. Chapter 13 of Deuteronomy clearly describes worshiping other gods as an act deserving death, even for an Israelite. The Canaanites wickedness included sexual promiscuity, child sacrifice, and worshiping other gods (Deut 7:5; 12:29-31) and it was in judgement of this that Deuteronomy calls for the annihilation of the Canaanites (Craigie 1976, 276).
In summary, one can see from the vantage point of the books of Deuteronomy and Joshua that the holy war against the Canaanites was a profoundly spiritual act, carried out under the direction and involvement of Yahweh. According to these books, the theological basis for the destruction of the Canaanites was that it was Yahweh’s action in judgement of their sin. In addition it was the protection of true worship of Yahweh, and was the means by which his promise of land to Israel was fulfilled.
A Christian Response
Regarding the event of genocide one can never provide an entirely happy or appeasing response. The destruction of life, particularly brutal, wholesale destruction, appears to be an inherently evil act. To address then what appears to be a genocide endorsed by the creator of the universe is a venture fraught with peril, and not an issue to be discussed lightly. While one can never pretend to hold all the answers, there a few considerations which are beneficial to mention in an attempt to come to terms with the genocide of the inhabitants of Canaan.
To begin with it is essential that one puts the events of the genocide in perspective with nature and sovereignty of God. The genocide was God’s prerogative. While it seems to be an incredibly severe and unjust act, it is perhaps better to consider it from God’s perspective. The Canaanites were a sinful people and no judgement they received was unjust. In reality, the fact that God had allowed them to exist until that time was a sheer act of grace. Sin is inherently destructive and opposed to God’s nature, and the idea that God should act in judgement against this should not confound us. God, in addition, was working out his plan of bringing people back into correct relationship with him, through the Israelites. This act of genocide was part of the road on the way towards his plan of salvation for all humanity, including the Canaanites. As Wright (2004, 473) has noted however, ‘God’s ultimate purpose of blessing all nations does not eliminate his prerogative to act in judgement on particular nations within history’.
I do not intend to sound callous in my response to this issue, however it is imperative that correct perspective, in light of God, is maintained. One cannot claim to be less deserving of judgement than the Canaanites, and bringing things into correct perspective should lead, not so much to anger and revulsion at God’s judgement on the Canaanites, as it should to a pursuit of humility and holiness upon recognising the graciousness of God.
Finally, one must ask, how does this case of genocide relate to how we interact with the world today? To this question it must be said that the Canaanite genocide can never be used to justify any kind of killing today. This command was to a nation, Israel; however there is no such thing as a Christian nation today. It was part of God’s plan of bringing people into right relationship with him however; the fulfilment of God’s plan of salvation has come in Christ. It was for a time and place in history which is no longer; As Andrew Sloan (2006) has pointed out ‘the very things that justify the violence in this text [Deut 7], invalidate it for us’.
Yahweh War
Throughout the book of Deuteronomy commands and rules are given to Israel for the conduct of war (Deut 7:1-5; 20:1-20; 25:17-19). A significant aspect of these commands is that they are not given by humans, but are in fact recorded as commands from Yahweh. The Israelites are told to enter the land of the Canaanites and “utterly destroy them. Make no covenant with them and show them no mercy.” (Deut 7:2b). The strength and severity of this command is striking, however the mandate to take the land and destroy its inhabitants is not an isolated one (Deut 7:1-5, 17-26; 9:1-5; 13:12-18; 20:16-20). Cowles (2003, 36) rejects these commands saying, ‘we must resist all efforts to defend Old Testament genocidal commands as reflective of the will of God.’ It appears however, as Longman III and Reid (1995, 33) suggest, that the conquest of Canaan was in fact commanded and initiated by Yahweh. It becomes increasingly obvious as we look at the involvement of Yahweh in this holy war[1], that this is the theological interpretation of the writers of Deuteronomy and Joshua.
There is a very strong emphasis on the work of Yahweh in the conquest. He is the one who brings the Israelites into the promised land, and he is the one who defeats the inhabitants (Deut 7:1-2, 18-20, 9:5; 19:8; 20:4, 14) Joshua 2:8 says ‘…truly the Lord has given all the land into our hands…’. Yahweh reminds Israel of her weakness and need to rely on him; the people in the lands they were to possess were much stronger and bigger than them (Deut 7:1, 7, 17-24; 20:1-4). They are described as ‘nations larger and mightier than you, great cities, fortified to the heavens, a strong and tall people… know then that the LORD your God is the one who crosses over before you as a devouring fire; he will defeat them and subdue them before you…’ (Deut 9:1-2). The book of Joshua demonstrates a clear recognition of the concept of Yahweh’s intervention, attributing to him victories such as the defeat of Jericho (Josh 6:2, 16), Ai (8:18), the Amorite coalition (10:11-14; 42), and the northern coalition (11:8). There is a strong reliance on Yahweh as the one who fights and wins the battles for Israel (Lind 1980, 154), and it is in this light that the theology of holy war in the books of Deuteronomy and Joshua can be understood.
A Chosen People
Merrill (2003, 76) states that ‘Yahweh war is at its base a war against spiritual darkness and wickedness in realms that transcend the human and earthly.’ While in a sense this is true of the conquest of Canaan, there is also a human element involved. It was through Israel that Yahweh carried out this war. Deuteronomy explains the reason for Yahweh carrying out his will through Israel; it was not because Israel was righteous or bigger than other nations, but it was because the Lord loved them and is faithful in keeping his promises (Deut 7:7-8; 9:5). Israel was a holy people chosen by God to be his people, in connection with the promises of land (Gen 13:14-18; 15:7, 18-21; 17:8; Deut 7:6) made to their forefathers (McConville 2002, 156). Merrill states this well:
The vantage point of Deuteronomy is the impending conquest of Canaan in fulfilment of the promises to the patriarchs... Yahweh, as owner of the land, would therefore undertake measures to destroy and/or expel the illegitimate inhabitants, and he would do so largely through his people Israel and by means of Yahweh war. (Merrill 2003, 67)
Devoted to Yahweh
While the book of Joshua describes the physical entrance of the nation of Israel into the promised land, the spiritual nature of the conquest is implicit. True worship of Yahweh is central to this conquest and Israel’s understanding of this is reflected by the spiritual preparation for battle (Longman III 2003, 164). Joshua 5 gives an account of the circumcising of the Israelites and the keeping of the Passover before taking Jericho. In addition, when entering into battle (Josh 6), priests and the ark of the covenant are present.
More than Israel’s preparations however, the very act of killing seemed to be considered a spiritual one. The Hebrew word associated with this act in holy war is hērem (חֵרֶם). The primary meaning of the noun is “ban”. It has implications of something set aside or, as Lilley (1997, 6) describes it, the ‘irrevocable dedication of an object or person’. ‘In holy war, hrm is a religious act which dedicates the enemies…to God.’ (Brekelmans 1997, 475). This command for how Israel is to carry out holy war is translated in Deuteronomy 7:2 as ‘utterly destroy them’. This is literally the wholesale destruction of the inhabitants of the promised land, as Deuteronomy 20:16 affirms; ‘…you must not let anything that breathes remain alive’. This theology of hērem is demonstrated in Joshua such as in the account of the defeat of Jericho. Joshua 6:21 says, ‘then they devoted to destruction by the edge of the sword all in the city…’. This act of killing was one of devotion to Yahweh; ‘This city and all that is in it shall be devoted to the Lord for destruction.’ (Josh 6:17).
It has been suggested that aiding Israel’s perception that there was nothing wrong with this kind of religious devotion would have been the fact that it was not uncommon in Ancient Near Eastern Cultures (LaSor, Hubbard & Bush 1996, 148). While to an extent this may have been true, Israel’s theology justifying hērem surly went far deeper. Lind observes:
The element of the hērem illustrates…that while the individual elements of the institution of holy war were common to Israel and her neighbors, the institution as a whole was reoriented in Israel toward a different concept of political power–the unilateral rule of Yahweh. (Lind 1980, Pg82)
Israel’s actions and existence were centred solely on Yahweh. Israel was a theocracy governed by God, called to abandon the way of the nations (Lind 1980, 149; Deut 7:2-6).
Israel’s call to be a holy people set apart offers, in part, an eye into the purpose of the command to utterly destroy the Canaanites. To remain holy necessitated Israel’s severance of any mingling with corrupt cultures that worshiped other gods (McConville 2002, 153). Deuteronomy goes to great lengths to emphasise the importance of holiness and the need to protect Israel from corruption (Deut 4:15-16, 23-28; 7:4, 25-26; 8:11-20; 20:16-18; 28:15-19) Deuteronomy 20:18 explains that the reason for the annihilation is ‘so that they may not teach you to do all the abhorrent things that they do for their gods, and you thus sin against the LORD your God.’. It is this protection of true worship of Yahweh that forms part of Israel’s theology calling for the destruction of the Canaanites (Lilley 1997, 8).
Judgement of Sin
Yahweh’s desire for holiness and abhorrence of sin was not only something that was limited to the Israelites. The destruction of the Canaanites is in fact described as Yahweh’s judgement on the evil they had committed (Craigie 1978, 95). Deuteronomy 9:4 says that it is ‘because of the wickedness of these nations that the LORD is dispossessing them before you’. Cowles (2003, 30) strongly refutes this concept saying, ‘God does not engage in punitive, redemptive or sacred violence… God does not proactively use death as an instrument of judgement’. To accept this statement however, would require one to reject huge sections of the Bible as divinely inspired, even sections beyond this period of Israel’s history. Chapter 13 of Deuteronomy clearly describes worshiping other gods as an act deserving death, even for an Israelite. The Canaanites wickedness included sexual promiscuity, child sacrifice, and worshiping other gods (Deut 7:5; 12:29-31) and it was in judgement of this that Deuteronomy calls for the annihilation of the Canaanites (Craigie 1976, 276).
In summary, one can see from the vantage point of the books of Deuteronomy and Joshua that the holy war against the Canaanites was a profoundly spiritual act, carried out under the direction and involvement of Yahweh. According to these books, the theological basis for the destruction of the Canaanites was that it was Yahweh’s action in judgement of their sin. In addition it was the protection of true worship of Yahweh, and was the means by which his promise of land to Israel was fulfilled.
A Christian Response
Regarding the event of genocide one can never provide an entirely happy or appeasing response. The destruction of life, particularly brutal, wholesale destruction, appears to be an inherently evil act. To address then what appears to be a genocide endorsed by the creator of the universe is a venture fraught with peril, and not an issue to be discussed lightly. While one can never pretend to hold all the answers, there a few considerations which are beneficial to mention in an attempt to come to terms with the genocide of the inhabitants of Canaan.
To begin with it is essential that one puts the events of the genocide in perspective with nature and sovereignty of God. The genocide was God’s prerogative. While it seems to be an incredibly severe and unjust act, it is perhaps better to consider it from God’s perspective. The Canaanites were a sinful people and no judgement they received was unjust. In reality, the fact that God had allowed them to exist until that time was a sheer act of grace. Sin is inherently destructive and opposed to God’s nature, and the idea that God should act in judgement against this should not confound us. God, in addition, was working out his plan of bringing people back into correct relationship with him, through the Israelites. This act of genocide was part of the road on the way towards his plan of salvation for all humanity, including the Canaanites. As Wright (2004, 473) has noted however, ‘God’s ultimate purpose of blessing all nations does not eliminate his prerogative to act in judgement on particular nations within history’.
I do not intend to sound callous in my response to this issue, however it is imperative that correct perspective, in light of God, is maintained. One cannot claim to be less deserving of judgement than the Canaanites, and bringing things into correct perspective should lead, not so much to anger and revulsion at God’s judgement on the Canaanites, as it should to a pursuit of humility and holiness upon recognising the graciousness of God.
Finally, one must ask, how does this case of genocide relate to how we interact with the world today? To this question it must be said that the Canaanite genocide can never be used to justify any kind of killing today. This command was to a nation, Israel; however there is no such thing as a Christian nation today. It was part of God’s plan of bringing people into right relationship with him however; the fulfilment of God’s plan of salvation has come in Christ. It was for a time and place in history which is no longer; As Andrew Sloan (2006) has pointed out ‘the very things that justify the violence in this text [Deut 7], invalidate it for us’.
Reference List:
Brekelmans, C. 1997, ‘hērem’, in Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament,
Vol 2, ed. E. Jenni, C. Westermann, trans. M.E. Biddle, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, Massachusetts, 474-477.
Cowles, C.S. 2003, ‘The Case for Radical Discontinuity’, in Show them no Mercy: 4 Views on God and the Canaanite Genocide, Counterpoints, ed. S.N. Gundry, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 11-44.
Craigie, P. 1976, The Book of Deuteronomy, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament, ed. R.K. Harrison, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, Michigan.
________. 1978, The Problem of War in the Old Testament, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, Michigan.
LaSor, W.S., Hubbard, D.A., Bush, F.W. 1996, Old Testament Survey: the Message, Form, and Background of the Old Testament, 2nd edn, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Lilley, J. 1997, ‘The Judgement of God: The Problem of the Canaanites’, Themelois, vol 22, no. 2, 3-12.
Lind, M. 1980, Yahweh is a Warrior: The Theology of Warfare in Ancient Israel, Herald Press, Scottdale, Pennsylvania.
Longman III, T. 2003, ‘The Case for Spiritual Continuity’, in Show them no Mercy: 4 Views on God and the Canaanite Genocide, Counterpoints, ed. S.N. Gundry, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 159-187.
Longman III, T., Reid, D. 1995, God is a Warrior, Studies in Old Testament Biblical Theology, ed. V.D. Verbrugge, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan.
McConville, J.G. 2002, Deuteronomy, Apollos Old Testament Commentary 5, ed. D.W. Baker, G.J. Wenham, Apollos, Leicester, England.
Merrill, E.H. 2003, ‘The Case for Moderate Discontinuity’, in Show them no Mercy: 4 Views on God and the Canaanite Genocide, Counterpoints, ed. S.N. Gundry, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 63-94.
Sloane, A. 2006, Deuteronomy 7, ‘Chapel Sermon’, 07/03/06, Morling College, Sydney.
Wright, C.J.H. 2004, Old Testament Ethics for the People of God, Inter-Varsity Press, Leicester, England.
[1] While the term “holy war” is not used in Deuteronomy or Joshua, I have made use of it for ease of reference to the war against the Canaanites during the occupation of the promised land.
7 Comments:
Well written David... I agree with you... 'A Christian Repsonse' was well written too. I think it is easy to confuse ourselves when we try to "understand" God's ways. For His ways are not our ways, nor His thoughts our thoughts... You answered the question well. Good Job Bro... PJC
It's a confusing and complicated topic but I like your point of looking from God's point of view--Him being Sovereign and such. It's wise to remember that He is God and therefore we don't have the right to understand or expect Him to do what we think is fair. And I like the point that He was gracious enough to let them live as long as He did. Even since Jesus took sin's penalty, sin is still allowed to exist within the realm of free choice. Yet in the end, just as the Canaanites had their day of doom, so will sin and only those under the cover of grace offered by Jesus will escape.
War is a horrid act. I cannot understand how anyone can kill for a cause--except in defence. It seems right that the only one to have any justifiable say in death is the One who created life.
God is Supreme; He is GOD! Therefore really He can do whatever He wants and we don't have the right to say otherwise. It's really good that He is such a gracious and merciful God.
Good stuff to think over.
Kelly, given ur opinon "War is a horrid act. I cannot understand how anyone can kill for a cause--except in defence." How do you justify the fact that your two brothers are in our Army reserves, with an obvious taste for shooting and the like?
Do you truely believe that our involvement in some of the efforts to enforce 'democracy', such as Iraq and Afganastan are "self defense" or are they the result of western nations, such as ourselves and the "coalition of the willing" believing ouselves to be superior and "christian nations"?
Thomas Merton - a Monk in the 20th century wrote this:
"I am against war, against violence, against violent revolution, for peaceful settlement of differences, for nonviolent but nevertheless radical changes. Change is needed, and violence will not really change anything: at most it will only transfer power from one set of bull-headed authorities to another."
To your question for Kel, Tab: I think that the decision is the guys decision, but also as I understand it the reserves only have to fight if Australia is being invaded - hense self defence?
It does raise an interesting (and perhaps impossible) question of where do we draw the line. To be a complete pacifist would mean going to the extent of never paying taxes - which in part go towards law enforcement, army etc - (which I don't think is the right thing to do). But is there any place for the raising of a first or a gun, post-Christ?
I'm not saying its Kelly's problem, but just wondering what her thought were, given what she said.
I think the second question is one which people have been trying to answer for the whole time since Christ. It seems that Ghandi though he didin't accept jesus as Lord, was one of the closest in puttign his teaching into action. He never believed in raising arms against injustic, but rather fightign in other ways. I wish I had a particular book here that explains it well. Thomas Merton who I quoted earlier has thought about this issue, and I think he says it comes down to us behaving as Christ, our whole world veiw - and including whether we fight or not being truely changed by th living Christ within us. That does not mean we let injustice continue, rather we can fight by non violent means. I do want to study this futhur, b/c thats as far as I've gotten.
In regards to your comments on my opinion, Tab, it is just that: my opinion. I'm not saying war is wrong or right. I do see that is helpful in circumstances. But it doesn't change my opinion. I still think war is horrid. It always hurts people. It always causes pain for years to come. And I still don't understand how anyone can bring themselves to kill another. But more coz I can't comprehend doing it myself. If I had my wish, there'd be no fighting of any kind ever but that's not reality. There are definitly times when we should fight but like you said, there is the non-violent kind of fighting.
As for my brothers, I don't justify it. It's their choice. I choose to support them. And if it came to them getting involved in war, I'm not sure how I'd feel then. I know our armed forces serve us well and I'm glad they do.
Well written...
None of us can understand or even begin to comprehend God's wisdom, His plans and all His ways...
Post a Comment
<< Home