Violence Of God

[dairygirl4u2c]

here you don't get many accusing christians of blodshed and how God can't be of the bible, as it's too barbaric. i thought i'd give this, which is an apologetic, albeit a weasly one it seems.
so what are your thoughts on the violence God has done and commanded to do, especially in the OT.
(also think about how christians have done many crusades aginst muslims.. muslims have done none)

[quote]
Love of God, Judgment of God


Gregory Koukl

When the armies of Israel conquered the Promised Land, God commanded them to kill every living thing, including women and children. Could there be any possible justification for barbarism?


One of the hardest questions confronting Christians defending the biblical record is, "How could a good God commission Israel to destroy women and children when they're fighting their battles?"
This has happened more than once in the Bible. It's difficult to explain the answer to this, though I think there are a couple of reflections on the issue that offer food for thought. You can approach this from a couple of different directions.

First one caveat. I fully acknowledge that not all good answers are going to be emotionally satisfying to a lot of people. That's why this is a hard issue, because people let their emotional sensibilities rule instead of trying to see the bigger picture.

One way to approach the problem is to show that it's a much bigger problem than first imagined. Curiously, I think this helps make the solution simpler. God's command that Israel destroy women and children in battle is really just the tip of the iceberg.

What about when God slew the firstborn of Egypt? Many of these were women and children, some infants. Every plague on Egypt--the hail, the gnats, the frogs, the locust, the boils--fell on all Egyptians equally, not just upon the soldiers.

What about Sodom and Gomorra in which, with the exception of Lot and his family, every man woman and child was turned to cinder? Everyone was indiscriminately destroyed. The same thing happened in the Genesis flood. Only eight in the entire world survived. It's interesting that I have never heard anyone raise the complaint "What about the women and children?" in these instances.

When you read the book of Revelation you'll find this practice of God's is not limited to the Old Testament. In the future, God will once again visit judgment upon the world and destroy not just the soldiers, but the women and children as well. I've never heard anyone raise an objection about that, but isn't it the same problem, essentially?

The underlying question, "Is it right for Jews to kill women and children at God's command?" can only be answered by answering another question: Can God legitimately judge and destroy the world or any portion of it or its inhabitants that He sees fit to destroy? Is this inside of God's prerogatives or outside of it?

My answer is unequivocal: It is not evil for God to take life, because God is the Author of life. He can give it and He can take it away. That's part of the prerogative of being God. All that He creates belongs to Him. This is His world. He needs no further justification, because He is not compelled by any law higher than Himself.

Second, our notion of the sovereignty of God entails that every detail of the world is under direct control of God. Nothing happens that He doesn't either actively cause or passively allow. God did not create the universe, wind it up, then let it spin out its course without His involvement. Instead, regarding every nation of mankind on the face of the earth He has "determined their appointed times, and the boundaries of their habitation." (Acts 17:26)

This means that since humans are mortal, there comes a time when every life God created "shuffles off its mortal coil" and returns to Him, either for ultimate judgment or for ultimate reward. God, the Giver and Taker of life, calls every life back to Him at some point and in some manner. The timing and the method of each person's demise is somewhat incidental, from a moral perspective. It's up to Him.

So I'm arguing first that it's God's prerogative to take life when He so chooses, and second that the means He uses to take that life is a matter of His prerogative as well. Whether it's by disease, or mishap, or hailstones, or the angel of life, or the sword of a Jewish soldier, the means is up to Him. It's His prerogative.

My third thought has to do with the question, "What did those women and children do? They were innocent." I certainly understand the response and there is a sense in which on an emotional level I am troubled when I consider this. But there's another aspect to keep in mind.

God deals with people not just as individuals, but as groups. When the nation of Israel is doing well as a nation, doesn't He prosper the whole nation, even though there are individuals in the nation that are scoundrels? When the nation is doing well, generally speaking, God blesses the nation and everybody prospers.

However, the flip side is that when the nation is corrupt, then God judges the nation as a whole and everyone gets judged, even those remaining few that might be innocent. God is dealing with the nation as a group, for good and for ill. It works both ways.

This should not be a foreign concept to us, though we probably haven't considered the connection between this biblical reality and modern day practices. When the President and Congress agree to go to war against another country, they act as federal heads of state and commit each and every American citizen to war against a foreign power. The nation is at war, not just our lawmakers.

And we all suffer alike in the process. We surrender our effort and our taxes and even our life blood, if necessary. We all participate, even though war wasn't our idea. We acting as a unit, as a family, as a nation. And those we war against retaliate against us as a unit.

In the same way, when I nation rebels against God, it is not uncommon for God to go to war against that nation itself and not just against a few rebellious individuals. God takes up arms against the land and against every man, woman, and child.

Let's keep this in perspective, though. In the case of the nations in question that were utterly destroyed by God, it isn't a few citizens that imperiled the many. We know from Abraham's appeal on behalf of Sodom and Gomorra that God will spare a whole city of sinners for the sake of a handful of righteous people. Instead, there was a pattern of ongoing, thorough-going, and persistent moral rebellion against God that went on for years--in many cases, for generations--in spite of repeated warnings by God.

There's a third thing. It pertains to the challenge, "If God were really good, how could He do such a thing? How could He destroy these innocent people? This is barbaric." They take this record of God's judgment as evidence that the God of the Bible isn't really good at all, and therefore should not be believed in.

I approach it from a different direction. I think the preponderance of evidence from the same historical record--the Old Testament-- is that God is good. He continually demonstrates not just his holiness, but also His patience and forbearance for those that consistently rebel against Him, though He has graciously cared for them.

This gives us good reason to trust Him. And if we have good reason to trust Him, then when we see things that seem to go against our sense of goodness and justice, it seems only fair to give the benefit of the doubt to God, who just might know something more than we know.

When we were children, our own parents acted in ways we didn't understand. We didn't think their decisions were fair. Later we learned that, for the most part, they had insight and information unavailable to us that influenced their decisions. Many times we learned that they were acting in our best interests after all, though we didn't see it at the time.

These are the kind of things we discover as we grow up. We learn that our parents were right most of the times we thought they were off base. The same kind of hindsight is true with God. God may know a few things we don't know.

By the way, the question has also been raised, "Why destroy the cattle, too?" My understanding is that in many of those cultures the people were so decadent they were having intercourse with animals. This caused rampant venereal disease in animals and humans that even infected children as well. So this may be-- I'm not sure, but it may be-- another reason God wanted these entire cultures wiped out. Because of their moral corruption, they were physically corrupt, and this represented a health threat to the new inhabitants of the land, the children of Israel.

Even if that wasn't the case, as the Author of life God still has the right to take life according to His own judgment. I've given you three good reasons to help make sense of that. Whether it's emotionally satisfying for you or not is another issue altogether.
[/quote]

[Paddington]

Thanks for posting about this.

I look at the Muslim/Christian history as a 2-way street from the little that I know.

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1194433' date='Feb 14 2007, 12:35 AM']
here you don't get many accusing christians of blodshed and how God can't be of the bible, as it's too barbaric. i thought i'd give this, which is an apologetic, albeit a weasly one it seems.
so what are your thoughts on the violence God has done and commanded to do, especially in the OT.
(also think about how christians have done many crusades aginst muslims.. muslims have done none)[/quote]Hi Dairy,

Could you explain what you mean by, "muslims have done none"?

Regarding the difference between bloodshed in the Old Testament and the Quran, I would begin by saying: The Quran has verses which instruct how Islam should be spread for all times. For example:[quote name='Quran 9:29']Fight those who believe not in Allah or the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission and are subdued.[/quote]I don't think you would find a Christian or Jewish equivalent call to spread their faith by the sword.

When Christian empires spread through warfare, there wasn't anything like the quoted Quranic verse for them. In the case of South America, for example, clergy were often at odds with the Spanish military's treatment of natives.

As for the violence in the Old Testament, I can't think of anything to add to the quoted text. I would only say that these were events commanded by God, and God has never commanded Christians to act in this way, in the entire 2,000 years of Christianity.

[Anomaly]

dairy,
I like the answer, but there are even deeper philosophical and logic conclusions. Repeatedly, God shows that people can merit punishment and/or reward as a whole on the behalf of others. As the author pointed out, God blesses or punishes nations as a whole. The Hebrew people as a group, were exiled or saved as a group. Many, many times, the good or bad acts of a few have an impact on the many.

At the crux of this fact, is where we have both hope and expectation that we can and do merit Salvation because of One person, Jesus Christ. If we all recieve perfect judgement (rewards and punishment) on just our own efforts or accomplishments, we very likely would be in a sorry state. Since others can (and do) earn blessings on our behalf, we can share the blessings with those who may not deserve them, or we may ourselves, share in reward we did not completely earn ourselves. The balance of that, is that we can reap punishment on ourselves for what we've done, and also cause other innocents to suffer from our own just punishment.
It's like a ying/yang thing.

[SJRod55]

I have discussed this thread with some of the Muslims I work with here in Albania and we feel that branding or generalizing that Muslims are a violent people is based upon the actions of a minority. It would be akin to stating that Catholics were violent and intolerant based on the activities of the IRA in Northern Ireland and England in the 1970's - 1990's. There will always be fringe groups. There will always be those who passionately believe in their cause and will go 'beyond' their 'belief' however I must again stress that the majority of Muslim people I live and work with are exactly the same as you or I with regards their respect for human life and tolerance. In Albania, rather like Ethiopia, Christians, Orthodox and Muslims live together, side by side in total harmony. We are NOT the exception. Please cancel out much of the media hype and look at those communities where integration and coexistence has worked well for years.

[dairygirl4u2c]

Alright well thanks for the ideas about muslims. I knew when typing it I shoulda have made a separate thread for that.

Now to the ideas that God is violent given the old testament.

[kenrockthefirst]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1194433' date='Feb 14 2007, 12:35 AM']
here you don't get many accusing christians of blodshed and how God can't be of the bible, as it's too barbaric. i thought i'd give this, which is an apologetic, albeit a weasly one it seems.
so what are your thoughts on the violence God has done and commanded to do, especially in the OT.
(also think about how christians have done many crusades aginst muslims.. muslims have done none)
[/quote]

Christianity is a revealed religion, i.e. God has revealed Himself progressively throughout history. The ultimate revelation of God is, of course, embodied in the person of Jesus Christ.

God's directives to the Israelites in the OT to "put their enemies to the edge of the sword" revealed an attribute of God vis-a-vis His hatred and judgment of sin. The "violence of God" has its ultimate expression in the Crucifixion, once for all time.

In terms of the Crusades and the Muslims, while one can certainly question the merits of the Crusades within the context of the ethos of Christianity, Islam was literally spread "by the sword," and as other threads and posters have pointed out, the use of violence is allowed if not condoned by Islam. In a sense, Islam is one long "Crusade."


[quote name='Rod' post='1194810' date='Feb 14 2007, 11:56 AM']
I have discussed this thread with some of the Muslims I work with here in Albania and we feel that branding or generalizing that Muslims are a violent people is based upon the actions of a minority. It would be akin to stating that Catholics were violent and intolerant based on the activities of the IRA in Northern Ireland and England in the 1970's - 1990's. There will always be fringe groups. There will always be those who passionately believe in their cause and will go 'beyond' their 'belief' however I must again stress that the majority of Muslim people I live and work with are exactly the same as you or I with regards their respect for human life and tolerance. In Albania, rather like Ethiopia, Christians, Orthodox and Muslims live together, side by side in total harmony. We are NOT the exception. Please cancel out much of the media hype and look at those communities where integration and coexistence has worked well for years.
[/quote]

The view of your friends is ironic given that Islam was spread to Albania forcibly through conquest by the Ottoman Turks.

[SJRod55]

[quote] Islam was literally spread "by the sword," [/quote]

As was Christianity in Latin and South America! Two wrongs do not make a right.

[kenrockthefirst]

[quote name='Rod' post='1194984' date='Feb 14 2007, 02:48 PM']
As was Christianity in Latin and South America! Two wrongs do not make a right.
[/quote]

Yes, the use of violence in the name of Jesus is wrong. The difference between Christianity and Islam is that repudiation of violence is the mainstream Christian view.

BTW, speaking of the "violence of God," what is your view of the conquistadores' forcibly putting an end to the Aztec practice of human sacrifice?

[SJRod55]

[quote]BTW, speaking of the "violence of God," what is your view of the conquistadors' forcibly putting an end to the Aztec practice of human sacrifice?[/quote]

Throughout the ages representatives from different religions, be it Christian or Muslim or Hindu etc have imposed their standards and 'norms' on indigenous peoples. In Africa great social problems were caused by 'missionaries'. It is relative and each situation is far more complex than a simple condemnation or praise. Today the Orthodox Christians in Ethiopia have a 'special' way of killing the sheep before they eat them, to all intents and purposes a 'sacrifice', the Muslims do it differently but to the same 'end'.

I am not saying the Muslims are snow white innocent, but all the great religions have their fair share of 'black spots' throughout history.

[dairygirl4u2c]

my friend said judging muslims by the fanatics who kill is like judging christians by catholics..... ha
sure maybe that should be catholics of the crusades and those who participated in the inquisition of the state, but i thought you'd get a kick out of that.

also no one has addressed why even the few innocent must die. perhaps it is nenessary to cut off all the ties with an evil culture and God does know mre than us. but that just seems like a weasle answer. when faced with sayiing God knows more than us and saying perhaps the God of the OT is false, or not completely true, the latter makes more sense....

Edited February 14, 2007 by dairygirl4u2c

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='Rod' post='1194810' date='Feb 14 2007, 11:56 AM']I have discussed this thread with some of the Muslims I work with here in Albania and we feel that branding or generalizing that Muslims are a violent people is based upon the actions of a minority.[/quote]The issue is not whether any group can be branded or generalized as violent. Humanity has shown itself to be violent. The distinction that Islam holds is that their holy book includes support for violence against non-believers. Compare Our Lord's command to give the other cheek to the counsel of Allah:[quote name='Quran 2:191']And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter.[/quote]This seems to be the perfect quote to defend the actions of the Crusaders, who returned to "drive out" the Muslims from the "places whence they drove you [i.e. Eastern Christianity] out." But the Holy Bible does not provide quotes from Our Lord which encourage killing non-believers. In contrast to the Quran's command to slay non-Muslims, look at Our Lord's alternative:[quote name='Matthew 5:39-48']"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, offer no resistance to one who is evil. When someone strikes you on (your) right cheek, turn the other one to him as well. If anyone wants to go to law with you over your tunic, hand him your cloak as well. Should anyone press you into service for one mile, go with him for two miles. Give to the one who asks of you, and do not turn your back on one who wants to borrow.

"You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your heavenly Father, for he makes his sun rise on the bad and the good, and causes rain to fall on the just and the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what recompense will you have? Do not the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brothers only, what is unusual about that? Do not the pagans do the same?

So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect.[/quote]The closest thing in the Quran that I can find is when Muslims are "merciful" to their non-Muslim subjects, but this is always in the context of the non-Muslims "feeling subdued."
[quote name='Rod' post='1194810' date='Feb 14 2007, 11:56 AM']It would be akin to stating that Catholics were violent and intolerant based on the activities of the IRA in Northern Ireland and England in the 1970's - 1990's. There will always be fringe groups.[/quote]Repeating my point: there is no Bible quote which called these factions to violence. The issue was allegence to Britain ([url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Republican_Army#_note-3"]see note number 4 on this link[/url])

[quote]There will always be those who passionately believe in their cause and will go 'beyond' their 'belief' however I must again stress that the majority of Muslim people I live and work with are exactly the same as you or I with regards their respect for human life and tolerance.[/quote]Fair enough. Given Albania's history under communism, It only makes sense that Christians and Muslims wouldn't be "at eachother's throats," since they had a common enemy for so long.
[quote]In Albania, rather like Ethiopia, Christians, Orthodox and Muslims live together, side by side in total harmony. We are NOT the exception. Please cancel out much of the media hype and look at those communities where integration and coexistence has worked well for years.[/quote]Unfortunately, it is a more fundamentalist brand of Islam which has been exporting its ideology out of the Gulf to incite Muslims in more moderate countries, in the hopes of "correcting" the moderates' understanding of Islam. I do hope that the moderate Muslims prevail in the long run.

[kenrockthefirst]

[quote name='Rod' post='1195000' date='Feb 14 2007, 03:05 PM']
Throughout the ages representatives from different religions, be it Christian or Muslim or Hindu etc have imposed their standards and 'norms' on indigenous peoples. In Africa great social problems were caused by 'missionaries'. It is relative and each situation is far more complex than a simple condemnation or praise. Today the Orthodox Christians in Ethiopia have a 'special' way of killing the sheep before they eat them, to all intents and purposes a 'sacrifice', the Muslims do it differently but to the same 'end'.

I am not saying the Muslims are snow white innocent, but all the great religions have their fair share of 'black spots' throughout history.
[/quote]

We're going to have to agree to differ on two fundamental points:

1. Where Christians have used violence, that was wrong, and an aberration within the context of the ethos espoused by Jesus. In the Islamic worldview, the use of violence for furthering religious ends is the norm.

2. I can only deem Islam a "great religion" in terms of its number of followers, and historical and cultural impact. In no other way can I accept it as "on par" with Christianity.

[SJRod55]

[quote]We're going to have to agree to differ[/quote]

We can indeed do that. Let us pray that our enlightenment is shared with others throughout the world and that violence of any kind is diminished.

[cmotherofpirl]

Go here: [url="http://jimmyakin.typepad.com/defensor_fidei/2007/02/index.html"]http://jimmyakin.typepad.com/defensor_fide...7/02/index.html[/url] and read his Feb 1 posting on violence in the OT.