Friday, March 7, 2014

Theological reflection of "the ban"

        In Chapter 20 of Deuteronomy, it sets out God’s command to the Israelites when they approach the lands of the Hittites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites. If the people of the land do not accept an offer for peace and submit themselves to the Israelites as forced labor, the Israelites should kill all its males and take as booty the woman, the children, livestock and other things in the town. This is referred to as the ban or holy war. Its purpose, according to Deuteronomy, is that “they may not teach you to do all the abhorrent things that they do for their gods, and you thus sin against the Lord your God” (Deut 20:18). 

        The story of Jericho in Chapter 6 of Joshua is an ideal instance of the ban. The extent of killing is even more than that stipulated in the Deuteronomic law – all the Canaanites living there including men and women, young and old, oxen, sheep and donkeys were killed, with the only exception being the prostitute Rahab, who helped the spies of the Israelites, together with her family members. There is also no mention that the Israelites made an offer for peace to the Canaanites residents nor were the former under the oppression of the latter as in the scenario of exodus. Although the story of Jericho is believed not to be a historical account, it begs the question on the justification of the divine command of the ban.

        While the ban is obviously unacceptable from the modern ethical standards, there are a couple of theological explanations for it. First, the Book of Deuteronomy and the Book of Joshua were written under the heavy influence of the Josiah’s reform in 7th century BCE and the core parts of the narrative might be written then. At that time, “Judah was emerging from the shadow of Assyria, and laying claim to sovereignty over the ancient territory of Israel” (Collins 194). It was thus important for Judah to establish a national identity which differentiates itself from those which were close but different. The worship of YHWH is by far the most important differentiation of the Jewish people from the other nations. The ban in the Deuteronomic law and the story of Jericho can therefore be seen as a clear advice to the Israelites that they were strictly forbidden to engage in the unlawful practices by the people of their nearby nations from the purist viewpoint, in particular those concerning the worship of God. From a slightly different perspective, the elimination of impure nations by the ban can be regarded as “a picture of the ideal Israel under ideal leadership” (Brown, Fitzmyer, Murphy 112).

        Second, the final redaction of the Deuteronomistic History, including the Book of Joshua, is believed to be done during Babylonia exile in 6th century BCE. At that time, the Jewish people should have already suffered from the violent conquest by their conquerors. They attributed their defeat and exile to their disobedience with God’s commands. As such, the ban in the story of Jericho would on the one hand provide some consolation to them, while on the other remind them that they should repent and recognize God as their only savior once again, or else their fortune would be no better than the Canaanites.

        A slight relief of the story of Jericho is that the household of the prostitute Rahab is spared. It is common in the Bible that God lifts up the poor, the under-privileged and the lowly. Rahab, a woman and an outcast, is one such example. It is also noted that her family would continue to live in Israel – a conversion into Israelites. To sum up, in order to appreciate the theological meaning of the ban by the modern readers, “the viewpoint of the biblical writers must be recognized: Israel’s enemies were of no account, mere puppets, as it were, in Yahweh’s hands as he continued his purposes for Israel” (Brown, Fitzmyer, Murphy 122).

Bibliography


Brown, Raymond Edward., Joseph A. Fitzmyer, and Roland E. Murphy. The New Jerome Biblical Commentary. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1990. Print.


No comments:

Post a Comment