The next stop along our way through the Bible is the united kingdom of Israel. If we’re extremely generous in defining this period (including Samuel and maybe Eli), Israel was truly united for all of 150 years. There is a disproportionate amount of material in the Old Testament about this time period, so it can seem longer.
During this time, especially under David and Solomon, Israel had great military success. The borders of Israel were expanded to basically take in all of the land which had been promised to Israel. Under David’s rule, idolatry was suppressed, if not eliminated.
We find some interesting comments on war in this section:
- In 1 Chronicles 20:1, we find the comment “In the spring, at the time when kings go off to war…,” with an implied criticism of David for not going out with his army. There’s no record of Solomon ever going out with the army, so it’s hard to know how strong of a custom it was that kings went to war in the spring. But we can imply, at least, that it was David’s custom.
- 1 Chronicles 22:8 “You have shed much blood and have fought many wars. You are not to build a house for my Name, because you have shed much blood on the earth in my sight.” Solomon, in 1 Kings, says that David couldn’t build the temple because there was no peace in his lifetime. David, however, says it was because of the blood he had shed. (See also 1 Chronicles 28:3) That is not an implication of guilt; I think it has more to do with the ceremonial cleanness needed for those dealing with the tabernacle/temple.
Some have also pointed to the celebrations of victory during this time as being parallel to Christians celebrating military victories today. I’ll throw that out there and see if anyone has any comment on it.
Maybe someone can help me with this: I can’t remember a time when David fought battles outside of the promised boundaries of Israel. (Num 34:3-12) I’m open to correction on that one. My theory is that his warfare was only for securing the Promised Land; please poke holes in that if you are able.
Are you counting his warfighting as a Philistine operative, or only his time as the accepted king of Israel?
Interesting question, Nick. I guess I’m open to insights from either timeframe. I can’t remember where he fought with the Philistines. The whole of Philistia fell within the promised territory, did it not?
1 Sam 27 to 2 Sam 2, where David lived in Ziklag under the rule of Achish for 16 months. David seems to have lied about who he was raiding, but he made sure no one could contradict his story, and since he delivered all the loot to Achish, the Philistine ruler was pretty happy with him. It makes for challenging reading.
Tim,
i wonder if “at the time when kings go off to war” had more to do with practical considerations than with custom or some sort of game-season. In other words, maybe it was harder to maintain and care for an army in the winter. Maybe military campaigns in the Fall were risky because they might last into the winter. So in other words, kings tried to wait until Spring to launch their various military campaigns because it was the most prudent time to do so, given the various obligations of leading an army.
What would that mean? Maybe it would mean that the text isn’t necessarily indicting David for not being at the front. As you point out, it’s unclear that Solomon was always at the front, but does the text indict him for it?
Anyway, just a theory that i’m shooting from the hip. Could be dead wrong.
Tim–tell me, what’s at stake in trying to have a tidy code for Jewish war policy? i mean, i KINDA see the motivation, but ultimately it was the world’s only “true” theocracy, right? Insomuch as that’ll never happen again, then there’s no need to worry about war policy (IF pacifism is the accurate position of the NT era), no?
–guy
OK, fine, make me look up where these people were. :-)
The text says David raided “the Geshurites, the Girzites and the Amalekites.” Joshua 13 says the Geshurites lived within the Promised Land. Girzites are a bit more difficult, since they’re not mentioned elsewhere. As for the Amalekites, well, if Saul had wiped them out as ordered we wouldn’t have this fighting… nor the trouble in the book of Esther!
The text also says that these peoples lived in the area “extending to Shur and Egypt.” One problem we run into here is the ambiguity of “the river of Egypt” which defines the southeastern border of the Promised Land. Probably not the Nile. Probably one of the rivers (wadis) crossing the Sinai Peninsula. It’s really hard to say one way or another whether or not these people lived in the Promised Land. It’s also difficult to know if David was doing the right thing or not… but that goes for a lot of the Old Testament, doesn’t it? Not much moralizing by the authors.
A question I failed to address was whether or not David would have fought with the Philistines against Israel. I doubt it, but it’s hard to tell from the text. He certainly wouldn’t have fought directly against Jonathan or Saul.
Guy,
Admittedly, a lot of my motivation is purely apologetic. “God ordered warfare in the Old Testament” is the trump card for many people, even good ol’ CofC people who scream at most uses of the Old Testament. I think it’s important to see that that warfare bore no resemblance to what is being justified today.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
Tim,
i see that–i mean, i get the general dialectic. But what do you think about the response that Israel was also a theocracy, and there is no true theocracy today? Do you consider that an insufficient response to the objection you’re talking about?
–guy
Guy,
I don’t consider it insufficient, though possibly incomplete. I think there is a theocracy today, the Kingdom of God. I think that physical Israel was a type of the Kingdom of God (and no, I don’t interpret all of the Old Testament typologically). The efforts to reach, purify and defend the Promised Land teach us more about our salvation than they do about Christians using guns to defend a physical nation.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
Tim,
i guess i wouldn’t call the Kingdom of God a theocracy because i take theocracy to reference an actual nation-state–with physical borders, a civil law, and some head of state. i take it that God has only made one of those in human history–namely, Israel. And it’s just because Israel was an actual nation-state instead of just a religious body that made certain things appropriate: war and capital punishment, for instance.
So i take it that if you or i were born a Jew in Israel around 1200 B.C. or whatever, then we would have, in fact, been obligated to take up arms and behave violently toward national enemies. But the conditions necessary to create that moral obligation no longer hold.
What do you think?
–guy
I agree with Guy. The situation is completely different now, primarily because Jesus has now redeemed us through His vicarious sacrifice on the Cross. They did not have that advantage in the Old Testament, though a few like David could sense it was coming. Unlike those of other religions who respond with violence when they don’t like what someone says, we don’t take up physical arms against any enemy.
Instead, our weapons are prayer, the Bible, and the truth of salvation. We let God draw them to Himself, rather than drawing swords to dispatch them. And Tim, I think you’re right that David never battled outside of Palestine, which includes Philistine territory.
~ VT
Pingback: THE CHRISTIAN AND PACIFISM « Committed To Truth