Lot's Folly - Confronting Genocide 7

Lot has to be one of the more tragic characters in the Bible. At first glance we could be excused for asking why this story was ever included. Perhaps we find the answer to that some hundreds of years later in a way that helps us better understand the Book of Joshua.

Lot was the nephew of Abram, or Abraham as he was later known, and travelled with him. But the time came when the flocks of both had reached the point where they agreed to part ways because of conflicts between their herdsmen over access to available pastures. Abraham allowed Lot the first choice of land and he took what was no doubt the more fertile land near Sodom (Genesis 13).

Eventually Lot moved with his family into Sodom, a city of the depraved. Here, when visited by the angels sent to save him, Lot does something that seems absolutely revolting to our way of thinking. In the Eastern tradition he invites the two strangers into his house. When the men of the city surround the house demanding that Lot send the men out to satisfy their sexual lust, Lot offers his virgin daughters instead. Culturally, Lot understood that his highest priority was to ensure the safety of his guests. By way of contrast, the men of the city were violating the cultural obligation to extend hospitality to the stranger.

Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed. Only Lot and his two daughters escaped with their lives. Lot, it seems, ended up a lonely old man, sharing a cave with his daughters. Without any reasonable prospect of marrying and carrying on the family line the daughters conspire to get their father drunk so they can get pregnant by him. The older gives birth to a son she names Moab, the younger names her son Ben-ammi, the ancestors of the Moabites and Ammonites.(Genesis 18, 19).

Fast forward a few centuries. On their journey to the Promised Land Israel sent ambassadors to ask the permission of the Amorite King, Sihon, to pass through his land. Sihon refused and sent his army to attack Israel. The Amorites were soundly defeated (Numbers 21:21-35). Seeing this, Balak, the Moabite King, enlisted the support of Balaam the prophet to curse Israel. However, God intervened, making sure Balaam blessed the Israelites instead. On top of this some of the Israelite men were seduced by the Moabite women and subsequently joined in the worship of the Moabite gods. The ring leaders of this revolt were put to death (Numbers 22-25).

The actions of the Amorites and Moabites saw them excluded from the congregation of Israel ‘for ten generations’. Commenting on Deuteronomy 23:2-3 the NIV Study Bible suggests this may have meant forever, as the number ‘ten is symbolic of completeness or finality’. This exclusion, recorded in Deuteronomy 23:3-6 concludes ‘As long as you live, you must never promote the welfare and prosperity of the Ammonites or Moabites’. The ban however had nothing to do with the way the Israelite men conducted themselves with the Moabite women or joined with them in the worship of pagan Gods as seen in v.3-6.

3 “No Ammonite or Moabite or any of their descendants for ten generations may be admitted to the assembly of the Lord. 4 These nations did not welcome you with food and water when you came out of Egypt. Instead, they hired Balaam son of Beor from Pethor in distant Aram-naharaim to curse you. 5 But the Lord your God refused to listen to Balaam. He turned the intended curse into a blessing because the Lord your God loves you. 6 As long as you live, you must never promote the welfare and prosperity of the Ammonites or Moabites.

In the harsh desert environment in which these people lived travellers were often dependent upon the hospitality of others for their welfare. It was for a lack of hospitality to the traveller that the Ammonites and Moabites were condemned. Ironically, if it had not been for the hospitality of their ancestor Lot  in offering protection to strangers at the cost of sacrificing his two daughters, there would be no Ammonite or Moabite.

Which brings us to the story of Ruth the Moabite whose story is found in the book that bears her name - only one of the two books in the Old Testament named after a woman. Some online Jewish sources claim Ruth was a Moabite princess, although the Bible doesn’t seem to confirm that. Her story does, however, provide another piece of evidence that the apparently harsh, no mercy rhetoric of the Old Testament should not be taken at face value.

The story takes time during the time of the Judges. At a time of severe famine an Israelite family moves to Moab where the two sons married local women. The father and both sons die, leaving the mother, Naomi and her two daughters-in-law, Ruth and Orpah. Finally Naomi decides to return home. The younger women state their intent to accompany her. Naomi finally convinces Orpah to remain with her own people, but Ruth is determined to stay with her mother-in-law whatever the cost.

The conversation between the three women tells us a little of the culture and perhaps provides further insight to the language of Joshua (from Ruth 1:14-18).

14 And again they wept together, and Orpah kissed her mother-in-law good-bye. But Ruth clung tightly to Naomi. 15 “Look,” Naomi said to her, “your sister-in-law has gone back to her people and to her gods. You should do the same.”

16 But Ruth replied, “Don’t ask me to leave you and turn back. Wherever you go, I will go; wherever you live, I will live. Your people will be my people, and your God will be my God. 17 Wherever you die, I will die, and there I will be buried. May the Lord punish me severely if I allow anything but death to separate us!” 18 When Naomi saw that Ruth was determined to go with her, she said nothing more.

According to Lawrence J. Epstein, the ‘Biblical Israelites had no concept of religious conversion because the notion of a religion as separate from a nationality was incoherent.’ When a pagan woman married a Jewish male she automatically became part of his clan and religion. On this basis, Orpah’s decision to return to ‘her people and her gods’ can be  seen as a return to a way of life she had left on marriage to Naomi’s son.

Ruth, on the other hand, made a decision to stay. She had become, by marriage, a Jew, and it was as part of her mother-in-laws clan that she wished to live out her life.

For her loyalty to her mother-in-law she is eventually rewarded. She returns with Naomi to Bethlehem where her kindness to Naomi is noted by one of the town’s more influential citizens, Boaz, a descendant of Rahab the Canaanite prostitute. Boaz and Ruth marry and become ancestors of King David, and eventually Jesus. Rahab and Ruth are among only four women listed by Matthew as Jesus’ ancestors.

Two women for whom the apparent rules are broken, or two stories show that however harsh the law may seem, grace is always greater? Or was it simply that fact that Rahab, by doing the spies a favour and Ruth by marrying an Israelite man received a ‘get of out goal’ card, something that most could not take advantage of? And what about the men? Was there no hope for them?

Starting from where I have left off in the story of Ruth, in my next post I will explore this topic a little further

SOURCE

Epstein at:     http://www.myjewishlearning.com/author/lawrence-j-epstein/

Bible quoted: New Living Translation

What do we Make of Rahab - Confronting Genocide 6

After crossing the Jordan River Joshua’s first military objective was to take the city of Jericho. This went smoothly. For six consecutive days the army, led by seven priests, walked once around the city. Then, on the seventh day, they marched seven times around the city with the priests blowing their rams’ horns. Then, on cue, the priests blew one long blast, the people gave a large shout, the walls fell and the city was razed to the ground.

Next came Ai. This seemed an easy task. Joshua’s spies reported back that it was a small town and it would only need two or three thousand soldiers, not the entire army. However it all went terribly wrong with Israel fleeing in fear. ‘Why God,’ cried Joshua. ‘Have you brought us this far only to abandon us?’

10 But the Lord said to Joshua, “Get up! Why are you lying on your face like this? 11 Israel has sinned and broken my covenant! They have stolen some of the things that I commanded must be set apart for me. And they have not only stolen them but have lied about it and hidden the things among their own belongings. 12 That is why the Israelites are running from their enemies in defeat. For now Israel itself has been set apart for destruction. I will not remain with you any longer unless you destroy the things among you that were set apart for destruction. (Chapter 7)

This was the failing of one man, Achan. God had given clear instruction before the fall of Jericho that everything was to be destroyed except ‘the things made from silver, gold, bronze, or iron’ which were to be set aside for God (Jos 6:24). By keeping some of the plunder for himself Achan brought sin on the entire nation. One man’s sin led to the defeat of the national army.

Previous posts have pointed out that the nation’s success was dependent on total obedience to all that God commanded. The failure at Ai demonstrates the consequences of disobedience. This being the case, how then do we understand the story of Rahab.

Rahab the prostitute was an inhabitant of Jericho. When Joshua sent spies out to reconnoitre Jericho  Rahab hid them from the king’s men until, with her help, they could escape to safety. Before they fled Jericho Rahab and the two spies made an agreement. In return for her kindness Rahab and her extended family members, if gathered in her house, would be spared when the invasion took place. This was conditional on her leaving a red rope hanging from her window on the external wall of the city.

This pledge was honoured. The Book of Joshua records that as the priests gave a long blast on their rams’ horns ‘Joshua commanded the people, “Shout! For the Lord has given you the town! 17 Jericho and everything in it must be completely destroyed as an offering to the Lord. Only Rahab the prostitute and the others in her house will be spared, for she protected our spies’ (Josh 6:16-17).

We saw above that Israel was soundly defeated when one man out of the entire nation disobeyed God. In that context we must consider the following two statements. First, Deuteronomy 20:16-17 seems perfectly clear that no one living in the Promised Land is to be spared:

In those towns that the Lord your God is giving you as a special possession, destroy every living thing. 17 You must completely destroy the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, just as the Lord your God has commanded you.

Then, just before the people crossed the Jordan River Joshua was instructed to meditate on all that God had instructed day and night so as to follow all that God had commanded.

Be strong and very courageous. Be careful to obey all the instructions Moses gave you. Do not deviate from them, turning either to the right or to the left. Then you will be successful in everything you do.8 Study this Book of Instruction continually. Meditate on it day and night so you will be sure to obey everything written in it. Only then will you prosper and succeed in all you do (Josh 1:7,8).

If we take this as read, there was no authority to spare Rahab or her family. Clearly they were part of the the all that was to be ‘completely destroyed’. There is no censure from Joshua. Rather, not only did he go along with the arrangement but took special care to make sure Rahab and her family were spared. More importantly, there is no censure from God who gave the victory He promised on the condition of obedience. Why?

That Rahab acted out of a concern to preserve her life and that of her family is noted, but that is not an excuse for the spies to act contrary to the command of God. Neither is the fact that in hiding the spies she was betraying her own people. God had no need of spies and there is no evidence that He instructed Joshua to send them out. If He wanted to protect them He could have done so without any help from Rahab.

Perhaps part of the answer is found in Rahab’s request of the spies in Joshua 2:9-12:

“I know the Lord has given you this land,” she told them. “We are all afraid of you. Everyone in the land is living in terror.10 For we have heard how the Lord made a dry path for you through the Red Sea when you left Egypt. And we know what you did to Sihon and Og, the two Amorite kings east of the Jordan River, whose people you completely destroyed. 11 No wonder our hearts have melted in fear! No one has the courage to fight after hearing such things. For the Lord your God is the supreme God of the heavens above and the earth below.

12 “Now swear to me by the Lord that you will be kind to me and my family since I have helped you. Give me some guarantee that 13 when Jericho is conquered, you will let me live, along with my father and mother, my brothers and sisters, and all their families.”

Rahab moved from fear to action. She not only recognised that the Hebrew God was ‘the supreme God of the heavens above and the earth below’, but she dared to reach out to Him to protect her and her family. In doing so she rejected the Canaanite Gods. In the culture of her day this meant she was probably no  longer considered a Canaanite.

In a June 10, 2003 article found on the website ‘My Jewish Learning’, ‘Conversion History: Early Period,’ Lawrence J. Epstein claims that at the time of the Exodus and for some time after Israelites had no concept of religion as separate to national identity. God was theirs exclusively, concerned solely with their welfare and offering no protection to other nationalities. This understanding however did not exclude others being assimilated into the Israelite community. It therefore follows that Rahab’s desire to seek protection from God was seen by the Israelites at the time as a renunciation of her identity as a Canaanite and a desire to assimilate with Judaism.

This post has looked at two stories, both associated with the conquest of Jericho. One shows that God takes disobedience seriously. The other demonstrates God’s willingness to provide salvation for the condemned, remembering that without God’s mercy Rahab was condemned.

How does this relate to the charge of genocide? It certainly does not provide all the answers. However, it is part of the evidence that must be considered and must raise some doubt over the charge - see my last post, Joshua's Marching Orders - Confronting Genocide 5

It must be remembered that Jericho was the first city to fall to Israel. That may give the story greater significance that we realise. With one exception, that of the submission of the Gibeonites in chapters 9 and 10, the rest of the story is hardly more than a summary of what was taken.

So, is Rahab the exception? Or is this story included at the beginning of the invasion history as evidence that God extended the hand of mercy to all the inhabitants of Canaan?

Next post I will look at another story from a little later on the historic timeline that may throw more light on the subject.

Bible Quotes from the New Living Translation

Joshua's Marching Orders - Confronting Genocide 5

As I said in the first post in this series, there is a real sense in which God puts Himself on trial in the Book of Joshua. The charge is genocide. Is God a vengeful, blood thirsty tyrant? Is it possible that He is best represented on this planet by the likes of Islamic State?

If we are to judge God, what standard of proof do we require? Australian civil courts work to a balance of probabilities. Is that standard suitable? Based on the evidence before us, is it more likely than unlikely that God is a genocidal maniac? Or do we apply the higher criminal standard of beyond reasonable doubt?

That is an individual decision. The point is courts do not require absolute proof because most of the time, if not always, there always remains room for doubt. This is just as true when it comes to God. Faith is only possible in the absence of absolutes.

This understanding allows us to make judgements about Joshua and other places in Scripture that challenge our ideas of God’s inherent goodness. We must, as does a court, weigh up the evidence before us. We must consider the instructions God gave about the conquest of Canaan, the way these were carried out, and how God reacted to the final outcome. If we understand the Bible as a progressive revelation of God we must also consider these events within the full revelation of Scripture.

As has been stated in earlier posts, God’s covenant promises require human obedience. We see this for example in Exodus 19:5,6 where God is speaking to Moses: ‘Now if you will obey me and keep my covenant, you will be my own special treasure from among all the peoples on earth; for all the earth belongs to me. 6 And you will be my kingdom of priests, my holy nation.’ This is the message you must give to the people of Israel’. Generally speaking, whatever things God promises are conditional on our obedience.

As we see in Exodus 23:20-23, this same condition applied to the conquest of Canaan. The land will be theirs if they ‘are careful to obey’.

“See, I am sending an angel before you to protect you on your journey and lead you safely to the place I have prepared for you. 21 Pay close attention to him, and obey his instructions. Do not rebel against him, for he is my representative, and he will not forgive your rebellion. 22 But if you are careful to obey him, following all my instructions, then I will be an enemy to your enemies, and I will oppose those who oppose you. 23 For my angel will go before you and bring you into the land of the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Canaanites, Hivites, and Jebusites, so you may live there. And I will destroy them completely.

In verses 29 and 30 we see this would not happen overnight: ‘ But I will not drive them out in a single year, because the land would become desolate and the wild animals would multiply and threaten you. 30 I will drive them out a little at a time until your population has increased enough to take possession of the land.’

In verse 32 we find another condition. Israel was forbidden to make any treaty with the inhabitants of the land. Later, in Deuteronomy we find this instruction repeated. Here, however, we find the ‘no treaty’ rule applies only to those living in ‘the land you will enter’. This is expanded on in Exodus 34:12-17:

“Be very careful never to make a treaty with the people who live in the land where you are going. If you do, you will follow their evil ways and be trapped. 13 Instead, you must break down their pagan altars, smash their sacred pillars, and cut down their Asherah poles. 14 You must worship no other gods, for the Lord, whose very name is Jealous, is a God who is jealous about his relationship with you.

15 “You must not make a treaty of any kind with the people living in the land. They lust after their gods, offering sacrifices to them. They will invite you to join them in their sacrificial meals, and you will go with them. 16 Then you will accept their daughters, who sacrifice to other gods, as wives for your sons. And they will seduce your sons to commit adultery against me by worshiping other gods. 17 You must not make any gods of molten metal for yourselves.

Three days before Israel was to cross the Jordan River to the Promised Land God gave this instruction to Joshua:

‘Be strong and very courageous. Be careful to obey all the instructions Moses gave you. Do not deviate from them, turning either to the right or to the left. Then you will be successful in everything you do.8 Study this Book of Instruction continually. Meditate on it day and night so you will be sure to obey everything written in it. Only then will you prosper and succeed in all you do’ (Joshua 1:7,8).

As leader, Joshua was expected to thoroughly understand his ‘marching orders’  and to follow them fully. Success depended on this. So how did they go?

The next post in this series will discuss the story of Rahab the prostitute. Her story will be assessed against the specific instructions given by God and in the context of the full revelation of the Bible.

Bible Quotes from the New Living Translation

The Impossible Dream - Confronting Genocide 4

One more post before dealing specifically with Joshua and the charge of genocide. The exodus from Egypt provides the immediate context for the conquest of Canaan. In this story we may find clues to help us better understand the book of Joshua.

God sent Moses on a mission. It sounds simple. I, God, will deliver my people from their misery in Egypt. You, Moses, will go down to Egypt and lead them to ‘a land flowing with milk and honey.’ There is no mention at this point how God, or for that fact Moses, will deal with the people already living there.

‘Then the Lord told him, “I have certainly seen the oppression of my people in Egypt. I have heard their cries of distress because of their harsh slave drivers. Yes, I am aware of their suffering. 8 So I have come down to rescue them from the power of the Egyptians and lead them out of Egypt into their own fertile and spacious land. It is a land flowing with milk and honey—the land where the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites now live. 9 Look! The cry of the people of Israel has reached me, and I have seen how harshly the Egyptians abuse them. 10 Now go, for I am sending you to Pharaoh. You must lead my people Israel out of Egypt.” (Exodus 3:7-10)

Could the Hebrews be excused for doubting this promise of a rich and fertile land, one that flowed with ‘milk and honey’? Their history gave them reason to do so. In Genesis 12:10 we see that Abram and Sarai are forced to leave Canaan  for Egypt because of a ‘severe famine.’ Again, in Isaac’s time the land experiences a famine like that experienced by Abraham Genesis 26:1). Later, when Jacob was an old man the family moved to Egypt because there was no food in Canaan (Genesis 42). If God had been unable to provide for them in the past, why should he be trusted now, especially when the move to Egypt had caused them so much misery?

On top of this God commanded that when they were settled in the Land all men were to appear before Him three times each year. To enable this He would drive out the nations already there so that none would covet or conquer their land while they did this. This would mean leaving their borders and families unprotected (Gen. 34: 23,24). Then there was the requirement that the land had a complete rest every seventh year. This meant no sowing or pruning. They could eat what the land produced but not store it. Although it is a traditional farming practice to let fields lie fallow for a year to allow them to rejuvenate that was clearly not the intent here. In the sixth year, the year when the soil would be at its most depleted, God promised them a harvest that would see them through to the end of the harvest three years later (Leviticus 25: 1-22).

Remember, all this was a promise. Could God be trusted to deliver, to guarantee the prosperity of a land with a history of severe famine, to provide for them over the period when the fields were not planted, and to protect their borders and families from their enemies on those three annual occasions? Where was the evidence? The fulfillment of these promises would require supernatural intervention.

Another relevant question is ‘how well did the people know God?’ Take a little time to read through the story from the call of Abram (Abraham) in Genesis 12 to the end of the book. Joshua 24:2 states ‘ "This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: Long ago your ancestors, including Terah, the father of Abraham and Nahor, lived beyond the Euphrates River, and they worshiped other gods.’ Rebekah, who married Abraham’s son Isaac, was the granddaughter of Abraham’s brother Nahor. Later, Jacob, the son of Isaac and Rebekah, married two daughters of Rebekah’s brother Laban. Each of his wives later also gave them one of their servants as wives. When Jacob left the employ of his father-in-law after 20 years Rachel stole her father’s gods (Gen.31).

The family record from the call of Abram to the end of Genesis is one of doubt, deceit, favouritism, family rivalry, jealousy and more. This was a family that sold one of their brothers as a slave and then lied to their father to cover it up. While the Bible does not say the family worshipped idols, it is clear there is a strong family connection with those who did. It follows that this practice would have helped shaped the values and practices of the family. So we can ask did they understand God as the only true God, as one God among many?

Throughout the Old Testament we see the people continually attracted to other gods. While it is true that at times idols are said to be nothing other than objects made by human hands, God is often presented as one god, albeit above all others, among the gods of the different nations. For example:

• Exodus 12:12. ‘ On that night I will pass through the land of Egypt and strike down every firstborn son and firstborn male animal in the land of Egypt. I will execute judgment against all the gods of Egypt, for I am the Lord!’

• Exodus 15:11. ‘Who is like You among the gods, O Lord?’

• Exodus 20:3. ‘You must not have any other god but me.’

• Deuteronomy 10:17. ‘For the Lord your God is the God of gods and the Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God who does not show partiality nor take a bribe.’

• Psalm 95:3. ‘For the Lord is a great God, a great King above all gods’

It seems to me that the language of Scripture reflects the understanding of the people at the time and God communicating with them in a way they readily understood. Rather than give Bible studies on monotheism He chose to demonstrate in a real way His power and the impotency of the other Gods.

Hence the language of the blessings and curses associated with the covenant. Remember the Canaanites worshipped fertility gods. ‘If you are unfaithful to me by worshipping these other gods, we’ll see who really controls the weather and the womb’. This is probably best demonstrated by the clash of Elijah and the prophets of Baal. In 1 Kings 17: 1 Elijah, the prophet of God,  appeared to Ahab, king of Israel and worshipper of Baal, and announces there will be no more rain for the next few years unless God says otherwise. This leads some three and a half years later to a showdown between Elijah and the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel. Here Baal is shown to be totally powerless while God’s power is shown by the way of fire coming down from heaven and consuming a water logged sacrifice, followed by the breaking of the drought (1 Kings 18).

We begin to understand God's purpose for Israel in Exodus 15. This nation of slaves had been rescued by God so that they could live with Him. ‘You will bring them in and plant them on your own mountain -- the place you have made as your home, O LORD, the sanctuary, O Lord, that your hands have made.’ (Ex. 15:17). This is the first use of the word ‘sanctuary’ in Scripture, the home, or dwelling place of God. Just as God met with Adam and Eve in Eden, He would once again dwell among His people.There is a difference however. In Eden Adam and Eve were sinless. God described the Israelites as ‘stubborn and rebellious’ (Exodus 32:9). The Exodus was a practical outworking of God’s willingness to give people who do not deserve it a new start.

God’s main objective is perhaps seen in Deuteronomy 4:5-8.

5 “Look, I now teach you these decrees and regulations just as the Lord my God commanded me, so that you may obey them in the land you are about to enter and occupy. 6 Obey them completely, and you will display your wisdom and intelligence among the surrounding nations. When they hear all these decrees, they will exclaim, ‘How wise and prudent are the people of this great nation!’ 7 For what great nation has a god as near to them as the Lord our God is near to us whenever we call on him? 8 And what great nation has decrees and regulations as righteous and fair as this body of instructions that I am giving you today?

If the nation remained faithful to God by living out His laws and decrees they would be a shining example to the surrounding nations of His goodness and the blessings that would come from serving Him in place of their other gods. This was to be the fulfillment of the promise made to Abraham more than 400 years earlier; ‘ I will make you into a great nation. I will bless you and make you famous, and you will be a blessing to others. I will bless those who bless you and curse those who treat you with contempt. All the families on earth will be blessed through you.’ (Genesis 12:2-3). Did this promised blessing include the Canaanite nations, or were they not included in the ‘all’?

My next post on this subject will begin looking more closely at the conquest of Palestine to see if there is any evidence that the Canaanites were meant to be included or excluded from the promised blessings.

Bible quotes from the New Living Translation