Printable version
 Email to a friend

arrow_left_short all forums
topic list

Bible Questions and Spiritual Discussion

Replies: (page   1   2)
Ted C 04/15/2013 15:13
I think a better question is what do we do with Jesus? In the Old Testament there was a physical war for a physical seed. Jesus was going to come in the flesh, of the line of Abraham and through David. The nations in the land that Israel would conquer were into practices which were as cruel and oppressive as any in the history of the earth, even to themselves and even to the point of burning young infants alive (which is literally still happening today, by the way, using saline solution instead of kilns). These cultures would have infiltrated and subverted Israel and caused it to cease to exist. Why? Why did God want Israel to exist at the cost of destroying other nations? Why did He promise and then carry through the promise to reckon salvation through the Woman's Seed, the foretold Messiah: Jesus Christ? And why did it have to be through Jesus's literal sacrifice and blood, without which there is no forgiveness of sin? This is why 1 Corinthians describes the message of the cross as a stumbling block to the Jews, and foolishness to the Gentiles, yet for those who believe the power of God unto salvation. Why a bloody sacrificial death? What do we do with Jesus?
Lanny Carlson 04/15/2013 18:34
Ted, that may be a better question, but it doesn't address my question, or help with my frustration and depression when we read the book of Joshua. What other cultures may have been doing in no way justifies the same behavior from Joshua and the Israelites. Nor does it help to see it as somehow divinely inspired - that only makes it worse, as that's also what other cultures say of their own actions. We rightly criticize terrorism and genocide today, especially when carried out in the name of God. And yet our own Holy Book portrays the same thing in the lives of our spiritual ancestors. I find that appalling, and listening to these things every morning, far from edifying me, leaves me wondering why I'm subjecting myself once again to such horrible words and actions. So, again, what do with Joshua?
Catholica 04/17/2013 15:56
Perhaps, Lanny, your perspective on God is skewed. But perhaps not. When we read the tale of Joshua there are several ways to read it, and all are valid and all have meaning.

Honestly I haven't listened to the book of Joshua in some time so I am just going by memory but I just will consider the acts of war which God ordered.

We have to believe that God ordered war if the Bible says so. These are historical events and they take place within the human experience, but they were also ordered by God so they have a spiritual AND a temporal meaning.

So God ordered Joshua to destroy the city of Jericho. Temporally we know that God had to keep his promise to the Israelites. We also know that the Lord giveth life, and the Lord taketh life away. Death itself is not an evil. All life is created by God, all life is sustained by God, and all life belongs to God. So for God to take life away via war is not an evil. And you have to believe that God judged justly those whose lives he commanded to be taken via war, because we worship a just God.

Now why didn't God just clear out Jericho in some other way? For this we have to look to the spiritual meaning of the text in light of the New Testament and in light of Jesus. Jericho, it is believed traditionally, is a symbol of the life of sin. So when the Israelites cross the Jordan river (the living waters of Jesus' baptism) they assault the city of sin. Together the two show the power of God through baptism to destroy that sin.

Now on to the city of Ai. Here we have this small town and an army that just did the impossible through God and conquer this huge city (Jericho). But now one among them decides to disobey God's commands and they suffer loss. Together this battle on Ai stands for the human inability to conquer sin when in opposition to God. We see also the result of repentance and return to God: battle is won with the help of God.

Then the next city. I can't remember the name off the top of my head. But in this city God grants the spoil, even when in Ai he said no spoil. In Ai the spoil was taken as by a robber, whereas God had plans to give spoil and much more as a gift in the next town. Thus the two stories show the providence of being obedient to God.

The Bible is loaded with imagery of battle and war and we have to consider that we are in a war against the principalities and powers of this world. We are also in a war against our flesh and selfish desires. These old testament stories really happened and had an immediate temporal purpose, but they also had another purpose demonstrating something spiritual and with regard to Jesus. When we obey Jesus, then Jesus overcomes the obstacles to union of God through us. When we disobey, then we fail.

Anyway, that in short is how a Catholic interprets scripture. Our eyes are open now that Jesus has made clear to us so much. And we can understand why these things happened in light of that final revelation. These events had temporal purpose and eternal spiritual significance.

I have been accused of bloviating before so I will conclude now. :)
Lanny Carlson 04/17/2013 19:21
Andre,
I don't mind your "bloviating," as I often do thay myself, and I appreciate your taking time to share your thoughts. I guess if I'm going to find any value in reading Joshua, it will have to be through spiritualizing it. I can't agree that I have to believe God ordered the wars because the Bible says so. If I have to believe that, I may as well stop listening to DAB, and stop reading the Bible, because I will never believe that. I don't doubt the Biblical writers believed that,but this isn't the God I see revealed in Jesus or in the New Testament. As for Jericho, many archaeologists suggest that that conquest never even happened, as evidence suggests that city didn't even exist by the time the Israelites entered the land. Be that as it may, I suspect that the accounts were as much bravado as anything, but that's part of the problem for me. If this is truly the image of God we want to cling to, then how can we possibly have anything tu share with the world? We criticize - and rightly so -the radicals who use the Koran to justify terrorism in the name of God. But this exactly what Joshua did, and if we hold that up as something to affirm, we have no leg to stand on. At least as much violence has been carried out through vhe centuries by Christians relying on the Bible as has been carried by Muslims and others in the name of God.And it just leaves me feeling very frustrated when we have things like this in our Scriptural tradition, and seem compelled to justify it. It's almost enough to make me want to give up on the faith altogether, if that's what it requires.
Well, enough of my blobigating. And excuse all the typos. My computer is out ad I'm typing this painstakingly on a seven inch tablet!
Catholica 04/17/2013 22:34
Hi Lanny, it may be that to obey your conscience you need to do some deep soul-searching for awhile. I can understand that. That may be a critical point for you and if God ordains it so then that is the way you should go. I would urge you to not abandon things altogether but rather talk to God from your soul and ask him how these things can be true.

There is a difference between the Bible and the Koran. Whereas the Bible doesn't hold punches when it comes to fallen human nature and sin, and realities among me no matter how brutal, as things were in the days of Joshua, it is unlike the Koran which actually teaches people in the here and now hat they should deceive when it is expedient, that they should kill certain types of people and subjugate all others, that people in the here and now should behead blasphemers. While in the bible God worked in the framework of society He had bigger plans. There was a reason that he brutalities occurred and those realities point to Jesus. Allah as written in te Koran seems quite arbitrary and changes his mind. The God of the bible is a god of Fathership and love who loves the world. The Allah of the Koran is distant and supreme and rules by sheer power.

God has chosen to work through fallen people to being about his plan, his great plan of salvation in Jesus. He works through his creation and because of that we have great dignity. So we see God doing things that today we see as harsh but in that time were necessary to bring that plan about. Just remember that truth that all life is God's and it belongs to him, and death is not an evil in itself. It is only an evil when people take it by their own will in opposition to God's will. So it is altogether possible that God did ordain the conquering of these lands. Just try to place close attention to the differences between what God says to do and what people actually do. Because God does allow people to sin and the Bible as you know gives witness to those sins.

Anyway, it sounds like you have a lot of talking to do with God. I pray that he gives light OT your heart in these matters.
Catholica 04/18/2013 21:28
Btw autocorrect on an iPhone can be brutal at times. This forum does need an edit button. ??
Ray 04/19/2013 07:39
This might go into the category of tl;dr (teal dear - too long, didn't read), but I like the topic and I love both Lanny's and Andre's expressions. They are so true and honest and I think that is what we are doing here. Walking with God and listening to our most loving father so he brings us to where we can be closer to himself.

Anyway, sometime back I saw that I would have to lead a OT study and I knew this topic would come my way and that I was without clue. So, I started asking around about it. I had been tracking these two teachers, so I emailed them asking them to express some thoughts on the topic. I hope someone finds something here that is helpful.

1. Love is the most central view of God's being, 1 John says that
God IS love. The OT story has lots of examples of God's wrath and
judgement of man. If we believe scripture is inspired then we don't
just tally up the number to times something is mentioned over another.
Love is not mentioned as a quality of God like holy or graceful, rather
as WHAT he is, which is a different qualitative sort of statement than
the quantitative statements about his anger/wrath/grace. Scripturally
'God is love' carries weight as it agrees with what Jesus is doing
on earth. Philosophically it makes sense with regard to the trinity,
that God has always been in essence about relationship, the three have
always existed and love is what binds them together. It also makes
sense that God is love as opposed to being holy. Holiness means "set
apart" from creation. He's not angry or graceful about sin if there are
no sinners.

If we know God IS love, then we can know by deduction that anything God
does is an expression of who he is, which is love. Then the question
becomes, HOW is this or that instance an expression of his love.
The answer to the "how" is not spelled out in Scripture, so we're left to
theorize based on the limited information we have. So the first thing
to help others is to admit that we are creating theories at this point,
which is a fun mental exercise, but not something we can always be sure
of in the end. There are times when we can see the answer and sometimes
we can't see it. Being honest, we don't always have all the answers.

We might understand all of God's violence in the OT in light
of eternity. That God would kill or harm anyone (usually indirectly,
through nations) in this life can only make sense to me when I put this
life in perspective - that it is a blip in eternity, and his grace
will be poured out to us forever after this life. So, for instance,
if God orders the killing of children, from an earthly perspective
he has robbed them of the one shot at life that they had. But from a
heavenly perspective, he has taken them directly into a better life -
a MUCH better life in the cases where they would have been raised in
abusive, violence-ridden pagan societies.

This perspective takes full faith - faith in the fullness of Scripture. It
takes faith that God would not act against a nation unless they were deeply,
terribly wicked - making the men horrible and the women and children victims
(see Genesis 15:16). And it takes faith that eternity is just as real as
life on earth. With this view we must begin by agreeing, if we're going
to take these stories of God's violence as accurately representing God,
then we also need to take all of Scripture as accurately representing
reality - including the brevity of this life and the eternal glorious
nature of the life after this one. For women and children especially,
in rape-ridden, child-molesting pagan societies, death was not the worst
that God could bring into their lives. It was, is some sense,
more of a rescue mission.

This answer is not emotionally satisfying. It is biblically aligned
and philosophically sensible, but not emotionally soothing. There is
still something about it that doesn't sit well and we need to feel free
to vent that. Is there any answer, any perspective, any new piece of
information that would make you feel good about the killing of children?
Hopefully not. - Bruxy Cavey, The Meeting House

2. Col 2:16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or
drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration
or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come;
the reality, however, is found in Christ.

John defines love as Christ giving his life for us. That's what love
does, that's what love is. God IS that. Love looks like the cross,
self sacrificial love. Some people give as much authority to the OT
shadow as they do to the cross, so you get this mixed up view of God.

Why would God give the shadow before the reality? Maybe because he meets
us where we are. He treats us like persons and he slowly transforms them
over time. It's like a missionary that enters into a native culture
and earns trust. The ancient world is barbaric and maybe God works
with within to transform it. Perhaps he can't reveil who he really is
because of OUR nature.

Imagine if a missionary's behavior over the years in the field was
recorded while they are working with a tribe in Africa that practices
female mutilation (a real example). In the beginning it would appear like
the missionary condones the behavior, a barbaric practice, when really
what they are doing is developing trust. The record would demonstrate
a shadow of who they really are. It was out of love for the tribe that
the missionary let themselves appear to support barbaric behavior and
let the tribe impose THEIR false view on the missionary. They bear
the sin of the barbaric and sacrifice themselves for love. - Greg Boyd,
Woodland Hills Church
Ted C 05/06/2013 12:46
Lanny, what do you think the definition of "sin" is? And do you believe that the wages of sin is death - a very real, spiritual, and ultimate death?
John T 05/20/2013 07:47
Something interesting about Joshua. A group I'm apart of has been studying Exodus, specifically the part where Moses goes up the mountain for the commandments. It's interesting to note that God wanted the people to come closer to hear him, but only Joshua and Moses were close (Joshua at the bottom, Moses up in the mountain) while the people were farther out building their golden calf. Joshua, I have no doubt, knew the Lord.

As for the question of killing. Yes, I suppose it is interesting. But God has used nations to punish nations throughout time. He had the Israelites conquered and in exile for a period too. And, it all fits in the big picture. It was likely from this time that the wise men of the new testament learned of the scriptures about the Messiah. God is completely within his purview to destroy us. After all, we're sinners, and it would be a just punishment. For him to send men to do it is sometimes the odd part, but he seems to do that there.

As noted above, the nations Joshua and the Israelites destroyed were certainly not worshiping the true God, and God was blessing the Israelites and punishing the pagan nations. I don't see that as a conflict in his story.

Speaking of judgement. I read a lot, and just finished the Harbinger. Interesting read. Presented as fiction, but it had some ring of truth to it. We have abandoned much of what God has called us to be. Could he be warning us and/or judging us? It certainly isn't out of the realm of possibility. There may be a modern story there of God using nations to judge nations.

One last interesting note, Joshua is the same name as Jesus. I believe there might be a type of Christ in there somewhere, although I haven't studied it. Jesus brings us to salvation, our promised land, and Joshua brought the Israelites out of the desert into their promised land. Perhaps all part of the larger story?

Blessings!
John
James Griffey 05/20/2013 10:38
Progressive revelation. That's part of what I see in Joshua. God is choosing to move through an unsaved people, trying to instill faith in many ways through the desert wanderings and all the miracles over the 40 years of freedom they have enjoyed from earthly slavery. God authorized a holy war in this case, but it is never written that holy wars will ever be waged by people ever again.
If that seems like a cop - out answer, please remember that Abraham was a warlord (Genesis 14:13 - 16).
also remember that Jesus utilized a whip to clear out the Temple in Jerusalem.(John 2:13 - 16)
Furthermore, note what is written concerning Jesus in Revelation (one example would be Revelation 19:11 - 21, but there are plenty more!)
And how about Moses? What about those poor Midianites? (Number 31:1 - 24)
and why don't we wrap up with Abraham again? I wonder how his son felt for the rest of his life knowing that his father tied him up and was going to sink a dagger into his heart as a human sacrifice! (Genesis 22:1 - 10)

Why is Joshua always singled out here? I suppose because it is the only book in the Bible wholly devoted to the discussion of a holy war. However, I can see from a human perspective how the actions of the book of Joshua are a little bit extreme. Having said that, I bring everything back to progressive revelation.
"progressive revelation" kind of sums up the attitude of scripture, according to Paul of Tarsus (the apostle) (this revealed mystery is repeatedly mentioned, for example: 1 Corinthians 2:7)
The ancient people didn't fully understand God's will (hence the animal sacrifice! note Psalm 51:16 - 17) and that is exactly what God was working with. A show of force, scripture seems to indicate, is exactly what the people would be most in awe of. Consequently, God used force to demonstrate. How could he do it? with warfare. The key here is that after the conquest of Canaan, no war was ever again sanctioned by God that was to be waged by human hands (with the exception of the spreading of the Gospel by peaceful means, which was authorized by Jesus - Matthew 28:18 - 20).
I suspect that God wasn't smiling as part of his creation was butchered, although regrettably the sin of the people seemed to be the determinant in the events happening. (Genesis 15:13 - 16, emphasis on verse 16)
I would present that as my take on the events of Joshua, and for many people it is an important issue and potential crisis of faith.
However, my focus on Joshua, having answered for myself the justice of the events from a historical perspective, is actually on the spiritual representation of sin. We tend to treat people with respect and don't want to bring about their destruction: however, that is exactly what was commanded by God. In the same way, we don't mind our sinful tendencies; however, all of them must go for us to benefit fully.
As far as historicity, I see widely diverging views on the subject. Attempting to date the surrounding lands with the events and destruction of the cities mentioned runs into confusion in the academic field.
(page   1   2)
arrow_up_short start of topic