Newscasters can deliver the most horrible news in the most routine way. But even the most skillful reporters could not smooth over the latest example of barbaric cruelty by the group known as ISIS; the self-identified “Islamic State.” I will not describe what they did to a Jordanian pilot. If you don’t know already, I urge you to put it out of your mind. Suffice it to say, describing ISIS as a violent terrorist group is a gross understatement; like saying that serial killers are sort of naughty.
In the words of Hosea, “They sow the wind, and they will reap the whirlwind.” And predictably, Jordan has responded with a whirlwind of airstrikes and promises to rain down final destruction on the terrorist perpetrators. But another thought also emerged in my troubled mind. This is not our fight.
Since this latest “situation” (euphemistic news report language) is mainly between ISIS and Jordan, the rest of the world is on the sidelines, at least temporarily. So it’s literally not our fight at the moment. But the issue here is not about our degree of involvement or the need for effective national defense. I take all that as a given. Call self-defense a necessary evil if you want to but there is a difference between force that seeks to limit violence, and force that incites and spreads violence. What I really object to, however, is the notion that any war, perpetrated by anyone, can legitimately be called “holy;” that violence is a good thing as long as it is done in the name of God. Should we attack another country or group in order to establish our version of the kingdom of God? I say that’s not our fight, any more than it should be the fight of ISIS.
The present wave of terrorism is not the first time a group of militants have risked losing their tribal and political support, as well as their moral compass, in order to fight for God and bring down vengeance on their enemies. Notice the words of Ezekiel:
This is what the sovereign Lord says: This is Jerusalem; I placed her in the center of the nations with countries all around her. Then she defied my regulations and my statutes, becoming more wicked than the nations and the countries around her. (Ezek. 5:5-6 NET)
The date of this statement is about five years post 597 BCE, which is when Babylon invaded Judah and deported many including a 25 year old prophet named Ezekiel. Before that, Nebuchadnezzar had defeated both Assyria and Egypt, which had given him unhindered control of Judah. But even without allies, Judah had stubbornly rebelled against Babylon, provoking the siege of 597. Jeremiah, an older man who had first received his prophetic call during the reign of King Josiah, managed to stay in Jerusalem. He had long warned of impending doom because of Judah’s rebellion against Yahweh. And now the predictable had happened.
When we read the prophets it’s tempting to skim over the real issues, glossing over the gross misbehavior of human beings much like reporters matter-of-factly delivering the news. As a result, we often see God as the bad guy; the one who brings wrath and destruction on people who are just sort of naughty.
But Judah’s wickedness, according to the prophets, was serious, systemic, and incurable. There was a lot more to it than just eating the wrong things or being ceremonially unclean. In fact, in a twisted sort of way, Judah was probably more religious at this time than ever before. The leadership had created places of worship on almost every hill. Her religiosity, however, was exhibited primarily in three ways; idolatry, immorality, and violence. And these three were so intertwined and overlapping that where you had one, the other two were also invariably present. And in every area of their depravity, God deemed them worse than the enemy nations surrounding them.
So what did the leaders of Judah do after being annexed by Nebuchadnezzar? They prayed about it, consulted a multitude of loyal, patriotic prophets, and continued to rebel. Being part of a foreign nation was not part of the plan. It was certainly not consistent with the unconditional covenant God had made with David. So they deemed it their right, even their duty to resist anything that took away their sovereignty, self-determination, and religion. And they used whatever means necessary to stay in control and throw off Babylonian rule. We don’t know exactly what methods they used. But it’s not hard to guess.
Ezekiel describes the situation in Jerusalem in terms of a massacre or atrocity–maybe several atrocities, although it’s unclear exactly who the perpetrators and victims are respectively. If Jeremiah’s experience is any indication, those in power fought Babylon (who was equivalent to the great Satan) and then attacked anyone of their own who would not join their insurrection. “He said to me,
“The sin of the house of Israel and Judah is extremely great; the land is full of murder, and the city is full of corruption, for they say, ‘The Lord has abandoned the land, and the Lord does not see!” (Ezek. 9:9 NET).
“You have killed many people in this city; you have filled its streets with corpses” (Ezek. 11:6 NET).
Although God, in the prophets, claims responsibility for repaying evil with evil, historically evil itself always brings about its own judgment. It’s the cycle of violence; the inevitable reaping of the whirlwind. “Therefore, as surely as I live, declares the sovereign LORD, I will subject you to bloodshed, and bloodshed will pursue you. Since you did not hate bloodshed, bloodshed will pursue you” (Ezek. 35:6 NET). God’s wrath is simply the natural and inevitable results of sin.
Ezekiel and Jeremiah may seem to emphasize the negative at times. But we ought to remember that even their strongest words likely under-express the enormity of the problem. If they make God sound hell-bent on revenge, it’s because they are struggling to accurately describe the horror being perpetrated by and on God’s people.
To put it bluntly, Judah at this time was a culture of violence. People solved personal and national problems by using methods of terror. Even their forms of worship became so barbaric that the sanitized reporting by both Ezekiel and Jeremiah cannot hide the horror. They “sacrifice their sons and daughters by fire.” And God, especially, is so horrified and repulsed by this behavior that he doesn’t even want to think about it. He says, “it never even entered my mind to command such a thing!” (Jer. 7:31 NET)
Worship always reflects the kind of God people think they are worshipping. It even reflects the kind of God they want, in this case an Ammonite God called Moloch. But it also reflects and justifies behavior. We can be sure that as they heard reports of the advancing Babylonians, the people of Judah were motivated to do whatever they could think of to their enemies. The people of Zion had become a nation of insurgents. They were the ISIS of that time, fighting against God in the name of God. No atrocity was considered unthinkable. Human life was cheap. And it was all acceptable as a means to defend God’s kingdom.
As the Babylonian armies approached, some residents of Judah wisely defected and surrendered to the enemy. Naturally they were regarded as traitors. The false prophets, who had the ear of King Zedekiah, all agreed; God will protect and save. So just stand up to the enemy, don’t defect, have faith and everything will be ok in a short time. These messages of peace and safety had nothing to do with God’s grace or good news. In fact they served to intensify the violence. God was trying to tell them even then, that this was not their fight. They should quit fighting and end the cycle of violence.
But tell the people of Jerusalem that the LORD says, ‘I will give you a choice between two courses of action. One will result in life; the other will result in death. Those who stay in this city will die in battle or of starvation or disease. Those who leave the city and surrender to the Babylonians who are besieging it will live. They will escape with their lives. (Jer. 21:8-9 NET)
But they did not listen. Any cycle of violence is hard to break. But violence in the name of God and country is neigh impossible to stop, even for God. He just gets blamed for it. But violence even when used by religious people, cannot establish righteousness. Not surprisingly, Jeremiah was not very popular with the “peace and safety” prophets whose messages were encouraging the fight. God assured him saying, “Those prophets are just prophesying lies. They are prophesying the delusions of their own minds” (Jer. 23:26 NET).
Jeremiah alienated himself even further from his colleagues by telling people to pray for Babylon. It’s one thing to shrink from a fight. But to give aid and comfort to the enemy is treasonous. But sometimes people forget who the enemy really is. And for his part, God was simply trying to end the cycle of violence. He was bringing grace to an impossibly ungracious situation. So instead of encouraging prayers for Judah’s success in waging war against Babylon, God asked Judah to pray for Babylon’s success in bringing peace! “Work to see that the city where I sent you as exiles enjoys peace and prosperity. Pray to the LORD for it. For as it prospers you will prosper” (Jer. 29:7 NET).
The second siege and deportation (586 BCE) was brutal. After being captured, King Zedekiah lost both eyes, but only after his captors forced him to watch his sons being slaughtered. The Babylonians wanted that to be his last and most enduring visual memory. What goes around comes around, they probably thought. But in spite of the vicious way Nebuchadnezzar put down the insurgency, he also became an agent of God’s grace. He did what Judah had refused to do. After deporting the rich and the nobles who were responsible for Judah’s state of corruption, he gave good news to the poor! “He left behind some of the poor of the land and gave them fields and vineyards” (2 Kgs. 25:12).
We now flash forward six centuries as the “righteous descendent of David” (Jer. 33:15) is arrested. If anyone had reason to use violence to establish a kingdom, it was him. But had he done that, instead of ending hostilities, he would have perpetuated them.
“Those who live by the sword, die by the sword,” said Jesus, effectively stopping the disciples from causing any more mayhem. I suspect the high priest’s servant ducked just in time. Otherwise he would have lost a lot more than an ear. But why didn’t Jesus put up a fight? Besides the disciples’ sincere but ineffective defense, Jesus might have found a way to resist arrest. He said he had an army of 72,000 angels (12 legions) ready and willing to intervene. Instead he healed the severed ear and submitted to an illegal arrest and night trial (see Matt. 26:51ff).
To Jewish leaders of the first century, being saved from their sins meant reversing the lingering effects of Israel’s captivity—with violence if necessary. The so called “thieves” crucified with Jesus, were likely Jewish insurgents who had been caught. Like them, Barabbas had been convicted of a capital crime committed during an insurrection. So Jesus was accused of being a wannabe King of the Jews, an insurgent messiah. But he didn’t quite fit the role in which he was cast, particularly regarding a violent revolt.
Jesus said to Pilate that his kingdom was not of this world. “If my kingdom were from this world, my servants would be fighting to keep me from being handed over to the Jewish authorities” (Jn. 18:36 NET). In other words, Jesus said, this fight between Jews, Romans, and all the various messianic factions, was not his fight. It was not anyone’s fight. It is not the fight of humans to establish the kingdom. As Zechariah wrote “‘Not by strength and not by power, but by my Spirit, ’says the LORD who rules over all” (Zec 4:6 NET).
So the righteous descendent of David, rather than dish out violence to protect himself and the kingdom, took the brunt of evil’s fury instead. Ultimately, violence does not end violence. Only the gospel can end violence for good.
It’s a good thing deliverance from sin is not our fight.
________________________
Author’s note:
I had promised to continue the theme of last month’s blog, “Inventing Jesus.” But because of the recent reports regarding ISIS, I wanted to deal with the issue of violence and God’s kingdom. I will publish “Not the Messiah We Wanted” next month. Hopefully!
