Tip-Toeing Through the Conquest Narratives

One of the major stumbling blocks of a "peaceful reading" of Scripture is "what do you do with the conquest narratives" in the Hebrew Scriptures. Joshua was told to take the land - and the Israelites violently took control over the land promised to them. How can we make sense of this?

I begin by admitting that this is not an easy topic. But first, we must realize that much of the Western tradition of Christianity has used the Hebrew Scriptures as the theoretical backdrop for a Christian nation. The concept of "just war" is conceptually tied the Scriptures where "God's people" are to fight in order to establish a righteous nation. These injunctions in the Hebrew Scriptures are then believed to carry over to the necessity of fighting evil and establishing God's rule.

The pacifist seems hemmed in at this point. One can deny that God really told the Israelites to fight, but this seems to violate what Scripture tells us. Or one can give in and agree that God used violence to establish the kingdom of Israel ....but are these the only options?

Let me suggest a different way of reading these Scriptures, a nuanced way that makes all the difference in the world. One hermeneutical turn can change the way the conquest narratives are read. And it is a simple suggestion, but makes a huge difference.

Here it is - one major reading strategy that may change your view. READ THE BIBLE AS A NARRATIVE STORY. Read the Bible as the story of God's redemption unfolding first through Abraham, Moses, and the people of Israel, but then moving forward to Christ. The story changes, God reveals himself more and more, and the plot is advanced toward the centerpiece of Christ. Read the Bible christologically, with Christ as the center, the fullest expression of God's will. When you read this way - you can see that God may have used violence in the conquest of Canaan in order to establish his people, but the story develops more fully in the incarnation of Christ.

We do this all the time in other areas. Why don't we as Gentiles eat kosher? Because we believe that Christ advanced the story to include Gentiles without them having to eat like Israel. Why don't we practice circumcision as a sacrament in the church? Because we believe Christ advanced the story so that Gentiles do not have to practice circumcision as a mark of their belief. If we read this way in most other areas - why do we insist that the Hebrew Scriptures are the last word that God speaks about violence. Why don't we take seriously Jesus own words about "loving our enemies". And when Jesus could have "called ten-thousand angels" to rescue him from the powers of the world, he instead refused to come down from the cross.

I believe Jesus now sets the example of interaction with the world. Instead of violently taking control of the world, Jesus shows what suffering looks like. Again, not passivity - he suffered because he stood up to the powers of the world - knowing that the cross is the world's answer for those that dare unmask the hidden structures of the world.

There it is - that is my answer so far. It may not satisfy everyone, but I believe that it is a sensible answer that makes a big difference. I believe taking Jesus seriously will change the way that we read the conquests of Canaan.

Pacifism: What is in a name?

Let me start with a short post about the name "pacifism". I like the term because people associate it with a tradition of peace. But I don't like the term because most people misunderstand it. What comes in mind when people here the word pacifism?......passive!

Actually, the root word for pacifism is the Latin word, "pacis" which means "peace". There is really nothing in the word that connotes passivity. But what about Jesus words in Matthew 5:39 where he says, "But I say to you, do not resist an evil person...". Some pacifists have taken and still take this verse quite literally - that we should not stand in the way of evil. But the Greek word translated as do not "resist" is a strong word that is used in other contexts as violent warmaking. So the verse really means don't use violence as a tool against violence. It does not preclude standing up in other ways!

I love how Ted Grimsrud describes this in his article in the book, "Transforming the Powers". Grimsrud says:

"As a Christian, I argue for a different, biblically oriented understanding for peace - "shalom". I see peace as a holistic concept best understood in relation to a constellation of concepts such as the well-being, wholeness, and health of the entire community on all levels. We may think of respect and harmony in relationships among human beings and between human beings and the rest of creation. Pacifism, then, is a positive concept, reflecting a vision for how life can and should be. For pacifism, nothing is as important as love, kindness, restorative justice, and healthy relationships with all of creation. "

Pacifism then, is a positive concept that means "working and standing for peace without using the world's violent means of bringing about peace". Jesus himself was not passive, yet stood against the structures of the day that kept people oppressed. Ultimately, Christian pacifism stands on this example of Jesus - standing strong with the oppressed and testifying of a new way to live. But more about that in another post.

Pacifism: A New Frame of Mind

I have had several people ask me recently about some of the theological changes in my life. I have had several changes in my 20+ years of ministry and study. Some might regard my changes as theological mood swings, not to be trusted. I would hope others see my shifts as attempts to think through my faith, not as reactionary whims, but as honest, soul-searching inquiry to know the heart of God better.

One of the most abrupt changes in the last few years has been my support of a pacifist way of life. I say "abrupt" only in the sense that it seemed not to be on the radar screen and then all of a sudden it was there. But that is not really the case. I have been reading and studying a particularly vexing problem for several years: religion and violence. Why does it seem that "love of God" seems to have created a lot of hatred of neighbor over the centuries? But a bigger question yet, "What should a follower of Jesus think about violence"?

I hope to spend the next several blogs trying to decipher my own thoughts on these issues. As the title of this blog already states - I have tipped my hand that I am now in the pacifist camp. Even as I say it, I know that is makes little sense to some people. Here are some of the questions that will come to mind:

1. What about the Old Testament - didn't God order Israel to make war?
2. What about Hitler? How would you have responded to that crisis?
3. What if everyone was pacifist? The US would surely be take over by others if everyone thought like me.
4. What about Jesus - was he really a pacifist?
5. Isn't pacifism just another way of saying - "chicken"? You let others die for your country, while you enjoy the benefits. Isn't pacifism cowardice?
6. Isn't pacifism unrealistic? There are bad guys out there wanting to do us harm, how are we to respond?

These are some of the questions that I will be attempting to work through over the next few weeks. Wish me luck - this is an attempt to think out loud - usually a dangerous thing.