Progressive Theology

[Bob_Wilson]

The destruction of people groups was for the eradication of an idolatrous and wicked people from a land that would become for Israel… a fulfilment of the promise that their descendants would be a new creation.

God did this that Israel as a whole might succeed in being His light to the world… He did correct the problem… This is how the bible makes theological sense of war and destruction.

You appear to repeat your argument that seeking to slaughter whole peoples seen as idolatrously wrong in their worship “did correct the problem” of Israel being able to be a new creation. Where in Israel’s Scripture do you see stated this outcome of Jews becoming a new creation and light so as to bolster this belief about how war is what effectively overcomes inclinations to idolatry and wickedness?

As I asked before, is even the flood’s universal “eradication” of the wicked presented as profoundly removing wickedness or establishing a new creation? And did even Israel’s most effective military monarchies greatest victories over sinners lead to a great reduction in Israel’s idolatry and perversity?

My impression is that taking the Bible’s sober account seriously calls for observing that this approach to overcoming the temptations of God’s people did not “correct the problem,” but exposes how much Israel then failed to become a light to the nations, and how problematic this approach is for true deliverance.

My reading is that agreeing that violence against threats to Israel is God’s way of protecting them from compromise had left Israel in darkness and lead them to “eradicate” the One who truly was a new creation and the light of the world, who in word and deed challenged this belief about how the problem of wickedness is to be addressed.

[Hermano]

It was the outworking of the victory of Christ’s Cross that was bringing of the devil to nought,

The outworking of the victory of Christ “was” and “still is” bringing the devil to nought. We must keep in mind that it’s after the cross that we read:

Hebrews 2:8
“…You have put all things in subjection under his feet.” For in that He put all in subjection under him, He left nothing that is not put under him. But now we do not yet see all things put under him.

Romans 16:20
The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus be with you.….

“Soon” is a relative term, particularly when inspired by a God for whom ‘a thousand years are as one day.’ 2 Peter 3:8.

The devil is still running around causing death and mayhem—not simply the fear of death and mayhem.

Satan still tempts (1 Thes. 3:5), prowls (1 Peter 5:8), fills people’s hearts to lie (Acts 5:3), hinders ministry travel (1 Thes. 2:18), is considered ‘the god of this age,’ and blinds people’s minds (2 Cor. 4:4), masquerades as a good angel (2 Cor. 11:14), develops plans against us (Eph. 6:11), and deceives and leads people away from devotion to Christ (2 Cor. 11:3).

And even after the return of Christ, Satan will be running around causing death and mayhem, including—as he did in Job 1:16, and as as he tempted the disciples to do in Luke 9:54-55—sending fire “of God” from heaven:

Revelation 20:7-10
7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea. 9 They went up on the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city. And fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them. 10 The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever [or, “to the ages of the ages.”]

(If this Revelation passage indeed speaks of a literal, killing fire, as in Job 1:16, and Luke 9:54-55, you might ask, why would Satan kill his faithful followers? But I would argue that the Egyptians in Exodus were his faithful followers too, and that he nevertheless killed them through the plagues. Satan is a killer, not God. John 10:10.)

We in the Church (figuratively a woman, the Bride) have our rôle in the ongoing, gradual outworking of the victory of Jesus—

Matthew 13:33
Another parable He spoke to them: “The kingdom of heaven is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal till it was all leavened.”

We are to fulfill our responsibility to assist in the leavening process, and thus not ‘neglect our so great a salvation.’ (Hebrews 2:3). And one day, critical mass will be reached, and the whole lump—Creation—will be completely permeated with love and immortality.

We are to submit to God, and resist the devil in our lives, and in our neighbors’ lives, so that he will flee from us (James 4:7)—and so our neighbors too can be free to draw near to God.

[Paidion]

The destruction of some people groups was for the eradication of an idolatrous and wicked people from a land that would become for Israel a world in microcosm, in fulfilment of the promise made to the patriarchs that their descendants would be a new creation.

So does God still wipe out people for the same reason? Many think so, attributing floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, etc as “acts of God” in order to punish evildoers.

If He doesn’t do it today, why not? According to Malachi, He said, “I am Yahweh; I do not change.”
(Malachi 3:6)

[davo]

As I asked before, did even the flood’s most universal “eradication” of the wicked lead to profoundly removing wickedness or establishing a new creation? And did even Israel’s most effective military monarchies greatest victories over sinners lead to a great reduction in Israel’s idolatry and perversity?

On both accounts, not really… now see my response below.

The destruction of people groups was for the eradication of an idolatrous and wicked people from a land that would become for Israel… a fulfilment of the promise made to the patriarchs that their descendants would be a new creation.

God did correct the problem… This is how the bible makes theological sense of war & destruction.

You appear to repeat your argument that seeking to slaughter whole peoples seen as idolatrously wrong in their worship “did correct the problem” of Israel being able to be a new creation.

You’re not really reading my argument, i.e., war happened mainly on two accounts… either because of the initial clearing of idolatrous wickedness OR the threat from outside to the safety of God’s chosen people. IF Israel was wiped out, internally or externally, so too was the world’s reconciliation — that was the primary reason for these actions.

Where in Israel’s Scripture do you see this outcome of Jews becoming a new creation stated so as to bolster this belief about how war is what effectively overcomes inclinations to idolatry and wickedness?

The premise of your question is entirely wrong, i.e., that such as I’ve explained is about bolstering a justification for war, I’m not… I’m simply explaining the why of war as it then happened.

As I answered previously in bold in my last post where I repeated that the ultimate rectifying of “the problem” was in Christ where his sacrifice initiates the new creation… this was prophesied about and then duly fulfilled. War, which was to abate the frustration of God’s redemptive plan, had by its very nature, unwelcome consequences — but ultimately Jesus in fulfilling his mandate brought all such conflict in terms of redemption and reconciliation to an end.

[davo]

This was never gratuitous violence for the sake of satiation.

If you don’t thinking killing everyone, including children and infants constitutes “satiation” (as in the cases of the Canaanites and Amalekites) or everyone who wasn’t a female virgin (as in the case of the Midianites), what would you consider “satiation”?

Satiation?.. probably the heinously wicked and idolatrous practices of the aforementioned… which is why they paid such a heavy price in terms of actions and consequences.

The Canaanites for example were destroyed due to their wicked idolatry, and as such their continued presence in the land threatened to jeopardise Israel’s purity as Yahweh’s servant nation, as per…

Deut 6:14 You shall not go after other gods, the gods of the peoples who are all around you…

Deut 7:4 For they will turn your sons away from following Me, to serve other gods; so the anger of the LORD will be aroused against you and destroy you suddenly.

Deut 12:29-31 “When the Lord your God cuts off from before you the nations which you go to dispossess, and you displace them and dwell in their land, take heed to yourself that you are not ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed from before you, and that you do not inquire after their gods, saying, ‘How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.’ You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way; for every abomination to the Lord which He hates they have done to their gods; for they burn even their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods.

Deut 20:18 …lest they teach you to do according to all their abominations which they have done for their gods, and you sin against the Lord your God.

Thus the evil of these nations was sufficient justification for the invasion and judgment on account of their great wickedness (Deut 9:4-5). So, just as the macrocosm was once cleared of corrupted life before the then ‘new creation’ (Gen 9:1-7) so too the land of Canaan is cleared of corrupted life before the consummation of the ‘new creation’ promised to Abraham.

Again… as much as the violence of the biblical story (as recorded) is so unpalatable it is DISHONEST to simply and glibly edit or excise uncomfortable portions of it because of our own sensitivities — it is simply IMO a dishonest thing to do the text.

All that said, although I take it as occurring… there is no actual archaeological evidence confirming the conquest, and the biblical account in keeping with literary conventions of the day can be overstated according to genre, e.g., hyperbole, something Bob keeps choosing to ignore my acknowledgement of as this doesn’t suit his rolling resistance; and also… said victories were really achieved more by God’s miraculous intervention rather than by Israel’s military might — Gideon being a classic case in point.

[davo]

The destruction of some people groups was for the eradication of an idolatrous and wicked people from a land that would become for Israel a world in microcosm, in fulfilment of the promise made to the patriarchs that their descendants would be a new creation.

So does God still wipe out people for the same reason? Many think so, attributing floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, etc as “acts of God” in order to punish evildoers.

If He doesn’t do it today, why not? According to Malachi, He said, “I am Yahweh; I do not change.”
(Malachi 3:6)

Well no, He doesn’t, as His plan for redemption and reconciliation was completed back some 2000yrs ago in the Cross and the Consummation event! As Yahweh prophesied through Isaiah…

Isa 43:18-19 “Do not remember the former things, nor consider the things of old. Behold, I will do a new thing, now it shall spring forth.”

All that said however you are hardly consistent at all with your opposing position that depending on which way the wind blows you likewise choose to have a bob each way; for example you have said…

But JESUS revealed God as He truly is. Jesus is Another exactly like God—the exact expression of God’s essence (Hebrews 1:3). And Jesus never killed anyone…

Is that what you really believe? Consider Jesus’ words here…

Lk 12:49 “I came to send fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled!

Jn 10:30 I and My Father are one.”

…which pretty much aligns with you own 2 Yahweh’s doctrine spelt out here…

Gen 19:24 Then the Lord rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from the Lord out of the heavens.

Of which you claim…

Wow, so what do you really believe? ...Statement of Faith

Paidion, Isaiah 43:11 says this: " I, even I, am the Lord, and there is no savior besides Me."

“I am Yahweh, and there is no Savior besides Me.”
I have no problem with that statement. The Father and the Son share the name “Yahweh.”

Then Yahweh rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from Yahweh out of heaven (Genesis 19:24)

Two different Individuals in one verse, each of which is called “Yahweh.” The One on earth, with whom Abraham was talking, was the One through whom the sulfur and fire rained upon the cities, but the source of the sulfur and fire was the One in heaven. There was One in heaven called “Yahweh” from whom the sulfur and fire originated, and One on earth called “Yahweh” by whom the fire and brimstone rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah. Both are so united in character, purpose, etc. that they may be called "One." That’s what Jesus meant when He said, “I and the Father are one.” (John 10:30).

And then in confirmation of this you appeal to Justin Martyr’s “Dialogue With Trypho” of whom you claim to be in lockstep agreement with, saying…

Wow, so what do you really believe? ...Statement of Faith

He had also indicated that the Father could not appear on a small part of the earth since He fills all things. So He indicated that “the Lord” (or Yahweh) was the Son of God, who received the commission from “the Lord” who remained in heaven to bring destruction to Sodom.

Here you have it… BY YOUR OWN TESTIMONY your doctrine SHOWING both Father AND Son together raining death, doom and destruction upon men, women and children!

Your credibility in this conversation Paidion?… Bah Humbug!!

[Bob_Wilson]

[quote=“davo, post:78, topic:14234, full:true”]

Did Israel’s most effective military victories over sinners lead to a reduction in Israel’s idolatry?

Not really.

The destruction of people groups was for the eradication of an idolatrous and wicked people from a land that would become for Israel… a fulfilment of the promise that their descendants would be a new creation.

(Davo’s clarification) You’re not reading my argument, i.e., war happened…
because of the initial clearing of idolatrous wickedness… .
IF Israel was wiped out INTERNALLY… so too was the world’s reconciliation.

(And to qaz, Davo adds) "The evil of these nations was sufficient justification for the invasion…
so the land of Canaan is cleared of corrupted life before the consummation of the ‘ new creation.

Davo, you appear to still maintain that what would make divine genocidal orders moral is “the clearing of idolatrous wickedness” that spares Israel from “internal” corruption, since it was essential that their “land is cleared of corrupted life” in order that their descendants can be a new creation.

But I contended the Bible tells us such brutality did not even begin to spare Israel from “idolatrous wickedness.” And that God’s way of dealing with evil and bringing the new creation did not require
that Israel not experience “internally” being wiped out!

In fact, the NT shows that we need to see that Israel (& all men) descend into “corrupted life” even immediately following such lethal violence against sinful “flesh and blood.” For such means are not even what defeats the Enemy of our internal life, and Israel does not need to be spared from idolatrous temptation or internally (or externally) ‘wiping out’ in order to have a ‘consummation of the new creation.’

For the way sin and corruption will be defeated, and the new creation established, is not found in Israel and its’ approach, but in the one violently eradicated Israelite whose way of establishing righteousness challenges Israel’s previous OT assumptions, and who thus can be the true Light of the world.

Many of my fundamentalist friends continue to reason that the God sanctioned moral way to “clear”
and “eradicate” “idolatrous wickedness” is lethal violence and war upon those with idolatrous beliefs, especially those of other faiths such as Muslims. Though you do not intend it, your unwillingness
to challenge the morality of Israel’s ancient beliefs, based on the new and better way of Christ,
leaves the very kind of genocidal OT reasoning that they endorse bolstered.

And I’m willing to be “progressive” about the applicable assumptions.

[Holy-Fool-P-Zombie]

Probably God was not angry, with the OT Israelites. But wanted to shake them up a bit, from time to time. Like Dr. Frankenstein does, with his assistant Egor.

[Paidion]

Lk 12:49 “I came to send fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled!

Don:
God is a consuming fire. He came to consume evil from the earth.

Jn 10:30 I and My Father are one.”

Don: Certainly, They are one—one in purpose, one in thinking, one in LOVE.
However, Jesus is not one with the “God” depicted by Moses and some of the prophets.

…which pretty much aligns with you own 2 Yahweh’s doctrine spelt out here…

Gen 19:24 Then the Lord rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from the Lord out of the heavens.

Don:
I didn’t claim a “2 Yawheh’s doctrine.” I claimed two divine Beings, the Father and the Son, that share the name “Yahweh.” Nor did I invent this. I learned it from Justin Martyr.

Your credibility in this conversation Paidion?… Bah Humbug!!

Don:
I acknowledge the compliment, and return it with thanks.

[Hermano]

… there is no actual archaeological evidence confirming the conquest,

For consideration, at least–

Regarding Jericho (Joshua 6):

“Believers Score in Battle Over the Battle of Jericho” (NY Times 1990)

and also,
“Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho? A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence” (Biblical Archeology 2008)

Regarding Ai (Joshua 8:2):

“Exploring the Ruins of Ai: Archeological Find in Israel Confirms Historicity of Biblical Account” (Christian News 2014)

Regarding Hazor (Joshua 11:11):

“The Burning of Hazor” (Archaeology, 1998)

Regarding the Amarna letters (correspondence on clay tablets, mostly diplomatic, between the Egyptian administration and its representatives in Canaan), from the New World Encyclopedia:

Biblical scholars are particularly interested in the correspondence between the local kings of Canaan and their Egyptian overlords, in which a group of nomadic raiders known as the Habiru are mentioned as a military threat, raising the possibility that this group may be related to the biblical Hebrews.

[davo]

But I contended the Bible tells us such brutality did not even begin to spare Israel from “idolatrous wickedness.” And that God’s way of dealing with evil and bringing the new creation did not require that Israel not experience “internally” being wiped out!

That’s because God in Christ stepped in and doing “a new thing” changed it all… once and for all.

For the way sin and corruption will be defeated, and the new creation established, is not found in Israel and its’ approach, but in the one violently eradicated Israelite whose way of establishing righteousness challenges Israel’s previous OT assumptions, and who thus can be the true Light of the world.

Which is somewhat close to what I’ve just said above.

[davo]

Don:
I didn’t claim a “2 Yawheh’s doctrine.” I claimed two divine Beings, the Father and the Son, that share the name “Yahweh.” Nor did I invent this. I learned it from Justin Martyr.

No one is fooled and knows EXACTLY who you spoke of, as in, the Father and the Son, i.e., JESUS.

The whole reason I provided your linked quotes was so all could see EXACTLY what you actually said AND meant… despite you now trying to backtrack at a thousand miles an hour to distance and disown your own words because your error is exposed, which totally nullifies your position…

In league with Justin Martyr you point-blank claim that… the Son of God received the commission from “the Lord” who remained in heaven to bring destruction to Sodom.

You were very clear.

[Bob_Wilson]

The way corruption will be defeated, and the new creation established, is not found in Israel…
(thus) I contended the Bible tells us… that God’s way of bringing the new creation did not require that Israel never experience “internally” being wiped out!

That’s because God in Christ stepped in and did a new thing…

Exactly, and I appreciate the agreement. But I presented this conclusion you affirm to refute your justification that it was moral for God to call for genocide because it was the only way God could keep Israel from ‘wiping out internally.’ Indeed you asserted, "IF Israel was wiped out INTERNALLY… so too was the world’s reconciliation," concluding that therefore the promise of a new creation could never be fulfilled.

If you grant that Israel wiped out internally, yet Christ’s way still could step in, do a “new thing,” and establish a new creation, then you appear to have removed your justification for genocide being necessary and thus morally justified.

[davo]

The way corruption will be defeated, and the new creation established, is not found in Israel…
(thus) I contended the Bible tells us… that God’s way of bringing the new creation did not require that Israel never experience “internally” being wiped out!

That’s because God in Christ stepped in and did a new thing…

Exactly, and I appreciate the agreement.

Cool.

But I presented this conclusion you affirm to refute your justification that it was moral for God to call for genocide…

I’m not sure who you might have in mind… I haven’t argued nor made any mention of moral matters you yourself have recently mooted. I’ve been interested in what the texts actually say and given plenty of these in my posts. I’ve made one mention of justification but that wasn’t any appeal to morality… that was simply giving the reasons for any potential action.

[Bob_Wilson]

(You asserted, "What I’ve explained is about bolstering the justification for war… IF Israel was wiped out INTERNALLY… so too was the world’s reconciliation," so that the promise of a new creation could never be fulfilled.)

But I contended the Bible tells us… that God’s way of bringing the new creation did NOT require keeping Israel from being “internally” being wiped out!

Cool… But I have not argued any mention of moral matters.

Cool. But I thought our whole dispute was whether a genocidal war should be deemed justified or morally necessary. If you do not argue with me that it is problematic as a moral matter, and we even unite that it was not necessary for accomplishing God’s promise of a new creation, we truly agree

[davo]

But I thought our whole dispute was whether a genocidal war should be deemed justified or morally necessary .

Well that explains a lot… your false assumptions distorting what I write.

[Bob_Wilson]

I thought our whole dispute was whether a divine genocidal war should be deemed moral .
(If you actually do not argue with me that it is problematic as a moral matter, we agree!)

Well that explains a lot… your false assumptions distort what I wrote.

Thanks, I began all this by arguing that Jesus’ attitude toward wicked enemies condemns your insistence that God actually has a “positive attitude” toward genocide, and arguing that it was necessary to prevent Israel’s internal corruption.

If you didn’t realize I was offering an exclusively moral critique, you misunderstood everything I was presenting. But I’m glad we agree that while writers portray God as ordering genocide, there is no way to defend it as a “moral” notion.

[davo]

I began all this by arguing that Jesus’ attitude toward wicked enemies condemns your insistence that God actually has a “positive attitude” toward genocide, and arguing that it was necessary to prevent Israel’s internal corruption.

Bob, your constant attributing this mistruth to me or my words is so tiresome… YOU alone invented and inserted this repetitious perversion of my position. I’ve made NO insistence at all, that… “God actually has a “positive attitude” toward genocide” — I have pointed this out numerous times but still you persist in this deliberate perversion. I’m not sure what else I can say to this but to keep calling you on it.

Again, my contention is… I believe the text, period — not because of inerrancy but simply because I believe the text. Thus, said commands are correctly attributed, BUT, were understood as per hyperbolic genre which was common; of which the internal evidence also suggests the hearers likewise understood and so acted, i.e., to my knowledge there is NO recorded genocide having occurred at the hands of Israel anywhere in Scripture.

Example: in no uncertain terms the sports coach instructs his team midway through the game to… “get back out there and kill these guys, wipe the floor with them, take them to the cleaners…!!” Now of course there are always the exceptions, but only the foolish actually thinks the coach’s commands are literal — what the coach MEANS in his hyperbole, i.e., a figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, is… do what is needed for victory.

[Alex_Smith]

This post was flagged by someone reading along. Brothers, please try to be more gentle in your disagreements. Kind regards, Alex

[Hermano]

I believe the text, period —

…as per hyperbolic genre…

…to my knowledge there is NO recorded genocide having occurred at the hands of Israel anywhere in Scripture.

Genocide: “the policy of deliberately killing a nationality or ethnic group”

• Numbers 21:3 The LORD listened to Israel’s plea and gave the Canaanites over to them. They completely destroyed them and their towns; so the place was named Hormah [English: destruction].

• Numbers 31:7 They fought against Midian, as the LORD commanded Moses, and killed every man.

• Deuteronomy 2:33-34 The LORD our God delivered him [Sihon king of Heshbon ] over to us and we struck him down, together with his sons and his whole army. At that time we took all his towns and completely destroyed them—men, women and children. We left no survivors.

• Joshua 6:21 They devoted the city [Jericho] to the LORD and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it—men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.

• Joshua 8:24-25 When Israel had finished killing all the men of Ai in the fields and in the wilderness where they had chased them, and when every one of them had been put to the sword, all the Israelites returned to Ai and killed those who were in it. Twelve thousand men and women fell that day—all the people of Ai.

• 1 Samuel 15:8 He took Agag king of the Amalekites alive, and all his people he totally destroyed with the sword.

• 1 Samuel 27:8-9 Now David and his men went up and raided the Geshurites, the Girzites and the Amalekites. (From ancient times these peoples had lived in the land extending to Shur and Egypt.) Whenever David attacked an area, he did not leave a man or woman alive, but took sheep and cattle, donkeys and camels, and clothes. Then he returned to Achish.