[This is an exerpt from a book I'm writing on social justice in the Old Testament. Read the previous entry here.]
Not only do Christians advocate biblical positions out of principle, but they also do so because they believe that society will prosper and have peace when adhering to God’s standard of justice and fairness. Christians believe that God promises blessing for societies that follow His principles and punishment for those that reject those principles. A primary motive of Christian political advocacy, therefore, is a genuine concern for the general welfare of society. This concern is what led Charles Finney, a 19th century American revivalist, to exhort his church congregants to join in an effort to repeal the Fugitive Slave Bill, which required citizens of Northern U.S. States to aid in the capture of fugitive slaves:
Not only do Christians advocate biblical positions out of principle, but they also do so because they believe that society will prosper and have peace when adhering to God’s standard of justice and fairness. Christians believe that God promises blessing for societies that follow His principles and punishment for those that reject those principles. A primary motive of Christian political advocacy, therefore, is a genuine concern for the general welfare of society. This concern is what led Charles Finney, a 19th century American revivalist, to exhort his church congregants to join in an effort to repeal the Fugitive Slave Bill, which required citizens of Northern U.S. States to aid in the capture of fugitive slaves:
Have not all Christian men political duties to perform? Ought they not to search out these duties, and settle in the fear of God all the great questions they involve, and then meet their political responsibilities in the fear of God and for the welfare of the nation?[1]
According to Finney, Christians under democratic systems must not only attempt to understand political questions, but dispassionately and reverently measure the laws and policies of their government against the biblical standard of justice and righteousness and then advocate for the appropriate political change. The motive of this advocacy is twofold: the reverence of God as the true arbiter of right and wrong (“the fear of God,” as Finney writes), and also the peace and prosperity of society (“the welfare of the nation”).
In this sense, Christians in modern democracies have a responsibility similar to Old Testament prophets as prophetic mediators between God and society.[2] God sent these prophets to warn the Israelites—and sometimes, other nations, such as in the case of Jonah and the Ninevites—against immorality and injustice. Nearly every prophetic book in the Old Testament included some warning to society accompanied by a call to repentance and reformation. In one memorable example, in Ezekiel 22:23-29, God speaks through the prophet condemning the violence and injustice that permeated Israelite society at that time. Then, in verses 29-30, God says:
I looked for a man among them who would build up the wall and stand before me in the gap on behalf of the land so I would not have to destroy it, but I found none. So I will pour out my wrath on them and consume them with my fiery anger, bringing down on their own heads all they have done, declares the Sovereign LORD.
God says He looked for someone to stand up against immorality and corruption, and against the injustice perpetrated by leaders and common people alike against the most vulnerable elements of society—in this case, the poor and needy and foreign immigrants. God sought a mediator between Himself and society would work to right these wrongs by warning the Israelites and reminding them of the law given to Moses and principles of justice laid out therein. This mediator’s purpose was to avert the retributive justice of God on the nation. Jonah plays this mediator role to the Ninevites, who were the most powerful nation on the earth at the time, feared by all for their ruthlessness. An Israelite, Jonah reluctantly preached a warning message in the city of Nineveh itself with surprising success:
On the first day, Jonah started into the city. He proclaimed: “Forty more days and Nineveh will be overturned.” The Ninevites believed God. They declared a fast, and all of them, from the greatest to the least, put on sackcloth. … When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he had compassion and did not bring upon them the destruction he had threatened.[3]
The idea that God visits judgment on nations for injustice was expressed eloquently by President Abraham Lincoln in his second inaugural address, given near the end of the Civil War. Instead of vilifying Southerners and blaming the Confederacy for the costliest and bloodiest war in American history, President Lincoln repented for the terrible evil of slavery on behalf of the nation and admitted that the national suffering was an appeasement of divine justice. Because the United States had failed to repudiate slavery, despite the efforts of prophetic mediators like Charles Finney, God was exacting what His justice demanded.
Yet, if God wills that it [the Civil War between the Union and Confederacy] continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said “the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.”[4]
God does not demand retribution, but He demands justice; if there is no justice, then He will bring a just retribution. The Bible consistently depicts God as a righteous and holy Judge who is simultaneously gracious, ready to extend compassion to those who repent and turn from evil. As He said through Ezekiel, “I looked for a man among them who would build up the wall and stand before me in the gap on behalf of the land so I would not have to destroy it.” By advocating policies that adhere to the “true and righteous judgments of the Lord,” as Lincoln put it, Christians cooperate with God in seeking to avert a just retribution upon society. This retribution is not necessarily supernatural, but can be understood to mean the very natural results of egregious inequality and injustice—a breakdown in family relationships, numbed consciences, loss of civility, increased crime, vigilantism, worker strikes, social unrest, and even civil war.
The Book of Judges describes what happened in Israelite society when they abandoned the principles of justice and righteousness laid out in the law given to Moses. Very often, skeptics point to the outrageous injustices portrayed in the Book of Judges as evidence against biblical morality. Because these episodes of fratricide, kidnapping, rape, and mass murder are in the Bible, skeptics blithely assume that God sanctions such actions. However, the Bible includes these tragedies to illustrate the natural consequences for society when it deviates from God’s law. God did not desire Israelite society to tear itself apart in this way—quite the contrary! Appropriately, the last verse of the book reads, “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit.”[5] The inference is that charismatic leadership was not enough; the Israelites needed a just government to enforce God’s principles of justice and righteousness.[6] The example of Judges is contrasted with the Book of Ruth that follows, an uplifting story set during the same period. The Book of Ruth shows how some exceptional communities still adhered to the Mosaic law by providing for the poor and needy in society.
The Book of Judges describes what happened in Israelite society when they abandoned the principles of justice and righteousness laid out in the law given to Moses. Very often, skeptics point to the outrageous injustices portrayed in the Book of Judges as evidence against biblical morality. Because these episodes of fratricide, kidnapping, rape, and mass murder are in the Bible, skeptics blithely assume that God sanctions such actions. However, the Bible includes these tragedies to illustrate the natural consequences for society when it deviates from God’s law. God did not desire Israelite society to tear itself apart in this way—quite the contrary! Appropriately, the last verse of the book reads, “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit.”[5] The inference is that charismatic leadership was not enough; the Israelites needed a just government to enforce God’s principles of justice and righteousness.[6] The example of Judges is contrasted with the Book of Ruth that follows, an uplifting story set during the same period. The Book of Ruth shows how some exceptional communities still adhered to the Mosaic law by providing for the poor and needy in society.
[This post is an excerpt of my work-in-progress book on social justice in the Old Testament. Feedback is welcome! More on Learning to Do Right.]
[1] Charles Finney, August 1852, Guilt Modified by Ignorance, http://www.gospeltruth.net/1852OE/520818_guilt_ignorance.htm
[2] Of course, Christians have this role to play only because of Jesus’ unique work. As 1 Timothy 2:5-6 reads: “For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men—the testimony given in its proper time.”
[3] Jonah 3:4-5, 10
[4] Abraham Lincoln, March 1865, Second Inaugural Address, http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/lincoln2.asp
[5] Judges 21:25, also repeated in 18:1 and 19:1.
[6] Deuteronomy 17:14-20 describes a king who follows the law of God in his personal conduct and in his rule.
1 comment:
you are invited to follow my blog
Post a Comment