Category Archives: Old Testament

The Bible & War: The Divided Kingdom

Leave a reply

Where united Israel had been able to hold its own against the surrounding nations, the divided kingdom of Israel and Judah had little chance of survival. Even the kings that came to have some military success could only boast of reclaiming the territory which David had previously conquered.

While God often acted on behalf of his people, neither righteousness nor faithfulness related directly to military success. Some evil kings were successful warriors. Some good kings lived through very difficult times. It is true, however, that when a king truly sought God, God would bring deliverance (though, interestingly enough, that deliverance rarely involved Israelite or Jewish fighting forces).

The regional powers were Assyria and Egypt, with Babylonia waiting in the wings. Even under David, Israel had only been a power in its own neighborhood. Whereas God used foreign powers to punish Israel, He rarely used Israel and Judah in the same way. God’s prophets could denounce foreign powers, but God’s people were not sent as agents of punishment against them. Violent punishment was carried out, at times, against the unfaithful within the borders of the Promised Land.

This period is a bloody period, principally because of the unfaithfulness of God’s people. Because they were untrue to the Covenant, they lost the protection that Covenant promised and received the foretold punishment.

The time of the divided kingdom provides the historical context for the prophets, that we’ll look at later.

The formation of the canon: Old Testament

5 Replies

Well, I tried to sneak it past him, but Adam Gonnerman called my hand. I read an excellent article that he posted on his web site and that article got me to thinking about the canon. I’d been wanting to discuss that a bit, and now seems like a good time. His presentation is better written and much more scholarly, so I hope you’ll take a few minutes to look over it.

But let’s talk canon. For a long time, God’s people didn’t spend a lot of time identifying which books were inspired and which were not. The Jews honored the Torah (Genesis-Deuteronomy) above all other writings, including those that we typically accept as being of equal weight. They would not place Job, for example, alongside Leviticus. Both were seen as helpful, but one was The Law.

The concern with identifying the canon arose after the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Much of what the Jews considered to be their identity was lost, and they struggled to define themselves in the light of what had occurred. Part of that struggle was to identify the writings that were truly “God breathed.”

It was a given that they would reject the Christian writings. They also rejected the “Second Canon,” the Deuterocanonical books like the books of Maccabees. There were two stated reasons for rejecting these books:

  1. The Pharisees taught that divine revelation ceased with Ezra; the Talmud identifies Malachi as the last prophet. Either of these dates (which basically coincide) would exclude the books known as the Apocrypha.
  2. It was also determined that the holy language of Scripture was Hebrew. Books that were not written principally in Hebrew were not accepted. (Daniel, Ezra and Jeremiah have sections in Aramaic, but were considered “Hebrew enough”).

There was another important reason, which tended to go unstated: these books were seen as teaching certain ideas which were used by Christians, like teachings about life after death.

Some scholars believe that there was a council of Jamnia at the end of the first century which established the Jewish canon. However, no concrete historical evidence has been found for the existence of such a council.

It’s worth noting that there was no uniformity among the Jews on the subject of the canon until well after the time of Christ. With Jews scattered across the known world, different groups would accept different books as being canonical.

I know some of you have studied this more than I. What other light would you shed on the formation of the Old Testament canon?

So when did God become a Christian?

19 Replies

Richard Dawkins (thanks Rex), in his attack on Christianity called The God Delusion, famously wrote:

The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.

That’s not a surprising quote from an atheist. The fact is, however, I think a lot of Christians would offer an “Amen” to that statement, whether they whisper it or openly proclaim it. Reminds me of the old joke about the Sunday School teacher who was similarly describing God in those terms when one of her students popped up and said, “But then He became a Christian.”

In the churches of Christ, there are a lot of Marcionists. I’ve described what I consider to be one of the low points of my ministry, when I failed to defend a young man who was attacked by a preacher. The young man had dared to quote the Psalms during a discussion, and this longtime preacher cut him off, saying, “My Bible says it’s been nailed to the cross.”

I know it seems antiquated, unintellectual, and naive, but I take a high view of Scripture. I believe the Bible to be the Word of God. I believe that the whole Bible is inspired. I personally feel that many of our problems come from trying to make the Bible into something that it’s not, trying to make it a law book or a science book or a history book. It’s none of those and isn’t meant to be read like any of those. It’s not even a love letter, which has been popular the last few years. It’s a collection of writings, of different genres. But above all, it’s a holy book and needs to be read as such.

I take Paul’s words to Timothy in 2 Timothy 3 very seriously. I know that he was writing specifically about the Old Testament, but I don’t have a theological problem with applying them to the rest of Scripture:

“But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:14-17)

It’s all inspired. It’s all useful. It can make me wise for salvation and thoroughly equip me for what I need to do. The Old Testament and the New Testament.

I willingly and intentionally place myself under Scripture. I don’t seek to master the Bible; I seek to be mastered by the Bible. When there is something I don’t understand, I place the blame on me and not on Scripture. When there is something I don’t agree with, I accept that I’m wrong. Again, I know that it’s popular to scoff at such a view. Feel free to scoff. As the commercial says, I’m comfortable in my own skin. I’m comfortable with my relationship with Scripture. And I’m comfortable in my belief in God.

Does the Old Testament call for cutting a woman’s hand off?

8 Replies

Yesterday I mentioned Frank Viola’s long post titled “What is God Really Like? Hell, the Old Testament God, and Love Wins – An Interview with the Author of “Is God a Moral Monster?””

One thing I found interesting was a discussion of a difficult Old Testament passage, one which a friend and I were discussing just a few weeks ago. Here’s the beginning of that discussion (which is in the form of an interview; bold represents question asked of author):

    If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity (Deuteronomy 25:11-12) Doesn’t this make clear that the Old Testament was written by a man? Come on now. How is this consistent with a good, loving, reasonable God? If God wrote this, I wouldn’t want anything to do with a God like that. So what did God have in His mind when He authored this Law? And how does it reflect His nature? What say you?

    This action was considered shameful—touching an area where only a man’s own wife is allowed to touch. Also, the man could possibly be permanently injured and thus deprived of future children. At first blush, this passage apparently requires that a woman’s hand must be cut off if she seizes the genitals of the man fighting with her husband—and scholars typically take this view.

    If so, this would be the only biblical instance of punishment by mutilation; beyond this, where ancient Near Eastern laws call for bodily mutilation for various offenses, the Mosaic Law does not. The Babylonian code of Hammurabi insisted that certain crimes be punished by cutting off the tongue, breast, hand, or ear—or the accused being dragged around a field by cattle. The Law of Moses—though not ideal—presents a remarkable improvement when it comes to punishments.

Read the rest of the interview and tell me what you think.

(Yeah, the book image is an associate link. If you decide to buy and use that link, I get enough commission to buy a stick of gum)

Is God a Moral Monster?

4 Replies

I wanted to send you today to read an interesting article. Frank Viola has a long post entitled “What is God Really Like? Hell, the Old Testament God, and Love Wins – An Interview with the Author of “Is God a Moral Monster?”” The title should clue you into the fact that it’s a long post!

The interview at the end of the post is fascinating. I’m interested in reading this book now, Is God a Moral Monster? Read through some of his explanations. Is he overreaching to justify God or do you think what he says has some validity? I’d like to hear your thoughts.

(Yeah, the book image is an associate link. If you decide to buy and use that link, I get enough commission to buy a stick of gum)