My intention
during Lent is to wander in the wilderness of apparent biblical
self-contradiction—a wasteland that acknowledges that in the biblical story of
Israel’s conquest of the Promised Land God told Joshua to destroy the cities
and to kill “everything that breathes” (Deut 20:16), to slaughter men, women,
children and even flocks, herds and pets. And when a man attempted to keep some
of the livestock for his own herd, God ordered him put to death.
In contrast,
and in direct opposition, are texts such as the 6th Commandment
given to Moses: “You shall not kill” (Ex 20:13) and Jesus’ teaching, “Love your
enemies and pray for those who persecute you…” (Matt 5:44).
Generally, I
have avoided the issue when possible, and when avoidance was not possible I explained
the contradiction as the product of a progressive understanding of God on the
part of humanity (e.g., the command to “kill everything that breathes” can be
seen against the backdrop of previous models of warfare in which the victors
tortured, raped and enslaved their victims and reaped the material spoils of
victory. In some instances, warfare was the way a tribe or kingdom supported
itself financially. The newer command forbids any kind of profiteering from
warfare, and thus, while still horrendous in its outcome, is a step toward a
more humane way of doing what humanity seems hell-bent on doing, anyway.) My
explanation got no support from my seminary professors, nor have I seen or
heard anyone else offer it.
Walter
Brueggemann submits that the Hebrew Scriptures (the Old Testament) are presented
in a testimony/counter-testimony format, much like a courtroom scenario with
multiple competing voices—each claiming to be the correct view, each claiming
authority.
The testimony
is the ancient wisdom that good people are rewarded and evil is punished. The
application (best exemplified by Job’s friends) is used as explanation for bad
things that happen to people: it’s because they’ve sinned. The victim is to
blame.
The counter-testimony
(represented by Job and by the Psalms and later prophets) advocates for the
victim and argues that the traditional wisdom is unjust. In the present
consideration the debate in Job hinges on God’s response to Job’s friends: “I
am angry with you and your two friends, because you have not spoken the truth
about me, as my servant Job has” (Job 42:7). In such passages the voice of the
victim is heard for the first time in a world context “in which it was
exceptional for the voice of the victim to be heard at all. These were the ones
who formerly were scapegoated, condemned and dehumanized, but who Jesus saw and
loved. This is the cry of the least of
these.”[1]
It is
important to note that, even while they advance the cause of the victim, the
Psalms and Job still do not question the ethos in which the just would prosper
and the wicked would suffer. They do not question the justice of this ethic,
but rather complain that it is not enforced. Neither the Psalmist nor Job sees
himself as a sinner in need of forgiveness (as in Paul’s theology); instead,
they see themselves as blameless and righteous.
So, while the
Psalms and Job represent a significantly unique introduction into the world of
religious faith and wisdom, the Scriptures do not at that point reflect an
understanding of God’s image as merciful and forgiving.[2]
Thus, Israel fully
assimilated the ongoing debate into its life, with the majority advancing a
narrative of unquestioning obedience to laws and ritual, and continuing to
blame the victims of misfortune and banishing widows, lepers, the poor and
virtually all who suffered. According to the ancient wisdom of the majority, it
was precisely their suffering that proved that they were evil and deserving of
their suffering.
Meanwhile the
protesting minority advocated faithful questioning.[3]
Perhaps the latest, and therefore the clearest voice for this minority is found
in the theme of the Suffering Servant in Isaiah. Here, as in Job, the servant
is blameless; thus his suffering is a product of oppression and injustice:
He was oppressed, and
he was afflicted,
yet he opened not his mouth;
like a lamb that is led to the slaughter,
and like a sheep that before its shearers is dumb,
so he opened not his mouth.
8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away;
and as for his generation, who considered
that he was cut off out of the land of the living,
stricken for the transgression of my people?” ~Isaiah 53:7-8 (NRSV)
yet he opened not his mouth;
like a lamb that is led to the slaughter,
and like a sheep that before its shearers is dumb,
so he opened not his mouth.
8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away;
and as for his generation, who considered
that he was cut off out of the land of the living,
stricken for the transgression of my people?” ~Isaiah 53:7-8 (NRSV)
It is this
image of the Suffering Servant, and the role of faithful questioning that Jesus
personifies in his understanding of his identity as God’s “chosen one.”
We can see in
the Gospels that Jesus embraced some parts of Scripture as describing his
messianic mission and reflecting God’s kingdom, while other parts he either
ignores, reinterprets, or—as we have seen in his “but I say to you”
statements—even directly contradicts. I’ll be moving into some specific
examples next,
That’s the way
I see it through the flawed glass that is my world view.
Together
in the Walk,
Jim
[Disclaimer: this Lenten series
of blogs is a journal of personal pilgrimage which I’m sharing. It is offered
in the form of a long—40 DAYS LONG—book report. But more than that, it is my way
of assimilating what promises to be a life-changing new way of organizing what I
believe about Jesus and how I live out those beliefs. I am grateful for the
feedback I’ve been given. It helps me to sharpen my own understanding. I hope
you will stay with me through the journey, and I welcome further feedback; but,
to be honest, you’d probably be better advised to get the book and read it
yourself.]
No comments:
Post a Comment