Monday, 23 June 2014

Acts 9

 I delivered this sermon as the third in a series on the Church and what unites us.

You can find it here:

John 19

I delivered this sermon as the second in a series on the Church and what unites us.

You can find it here:

Wednesday, 14 May 2014

Eugene Peterson: Unnecessary Pastor


The Unnecessary Pastor, a book written by Eugene Peterson and Marva Dawn, is an exercise in understanding what it is that pastors are called to, and what we are not called to. The underlying premise is that the function of a pastor has been hijacked by a culture that has infiltrated the church and re-appropriated to be what the surrounding culture wants or needs the pastor to be. Throughout the book Dawn and Peterson utilize the pastoral epistles as well as large swaths of text from Ephesians and Romans to attempt to understand Paul’s perspective on pastoral ministry. Rather unsurprisingly, the reader comes to understand that the role of pastor has jumped off the rails to the point that we have become rather unnecessary to our congregations, and that what have been truly called to in Christ is rather unnecessary to a church culture that is more like the surrounding society than like the community of God.
            The book starts with chapters regarding the unnecessary role that the pastor has come to fulfill in our culture and a reiteration of what pastors have been called to. Dawn underlines the helpful aid of liturgy and tradition as a point of re-establishing our call to life in ministry. I think their point is that pastoral ministry begins as the life of a Christian. In many ways, the ordination vows we make are not drastically different than what we might expect from anyone in the laity. And this is one of the points Peterson makes throughout the book, that in many ways, the clergy get bogged down by their tasks and their misappropriated tasks and it is left to those in the laity to reappropriate their expectations of the pastor.
            Throughout the book Dawn reiterates these foundations of Christian life as a way of focusing the pastor to concentrate on his or her role as a Christian first and foremost. The concept of liturgy, the aspects of doxology, the reality and truth of the powers and principalities that derail us, the necessity to be transformed and the identity of community are all vital aspects and components of pastoral ministry, but more than this, they are vital aspects of the life of a Christian.
Simultaneously Peterson addresses the Scriptural examples and instances where leadership and pastoral work is spoken of. Peterson observes the position of Paul in Rome, and his relationships with Timothy and Titus in their various ministry experiences and contexts. Paul provides the perspective of someone with a great deal of experience, a voice of longevity who has been involved in a community for quite sometime. His relationship with both Titus and Timothy presents a situation of an older experienced man offering advice to two younger men entering into ministry contexts that are quite different from each other. Whereas Timothy is entering into a community that is already well established, into a well refined community and developed culture, Titus is entering into a community of fresh believers who have little cultural background with which to make contact for the Gospel. Both situations present exciting opportunities for these two young ministers, while at the same time presenting numerous hurdles which will need to be addressed. More than this, these are two completely different proponents of the faith that need different types of encouragement and motivation.
Consequently, Dawn and Peterson have provided a very well-rounded book for anyone considering ministry or currently involved in pastoral ministry for a number of reasons. First, the attention to Scripture and close careful reading of the text is so very refreshing. It does not feel as though Peterson is trying to shoehorn the text into a specific direction he thinks the church should be moving towards. It certainly seems as though he allows the text to speak for itself, while providing the necessary aspects needed to understand the text. There are no current cultural practices that he attempts to establish in favour of the Gospel. No 8 step program, or reconditioning of how the reader should approach the text or their task in ministry, other than thoroughly explaining the areas of ministry that seem to have been hi-jacked by the surrounding society.
Secondly, Dawn’s presentation of the elements of the faith and common pitfalls that are often encountered throughout ministry environments do not seem to be contextually specific. Concerns over the powers and principalities that seek to devour and derail the pursuit of ministry excellence are real threats that crop up in every situation. Whereas some authors attempt to provide some dangers that may occur in a specific ministry situation such as in an urban or rural context, the various aspects that Dawn presents are concerned with the bigger picture.

One of the critiques of the style of the book perhaps, was that it was a little difficult to follow. In some instances I simply did not understand the flow of the chapters and the reason why they were presented in the way they were. This is a small complaint however, and I fully expect that I will return to this book throughout the time God gives me in ministry.

Dawn, Marva J., Eugene Peterson. The Unnecessary Pastor: Rediscovering the Call. Vancouver: Regent College Publishing, 2000.

Foundations of Church Administration



Foundations of Church Administration provides insight and perspective on the various facets of church administration. Covering a wide array of topics such as budgeting, mentoring, and conflict resolution among many other considerations, the book attempts to provide pastors heading into positions of church leadership with tools and resources that will help develop and structure the administrative aspects of church leadership. We will summarize some of the more helpful aspects of the book beginning with the authors concern with Scripture.
            Many of opinions I have heard or the books that I have read regarding administration and Christianity have been significantly unconcerned with what the witness of Scripture has to say about the issue. This is not the case with this book. Rather, I almost found the constant interjection of Scripture to be borderline distracting. That being said, it is refreshing to see a book that takes Scripture seriously in this area of concern. It also seems as though the authors want to find Scriptural grounds of support on matters that they have already deemed to be 'effective' or at least sufficient. The simple reality that many of the chapters are at some level trying to make a case for the reorienting of church administration from a business perspective tells me that they think church should be operating as a business. I do not think I agree with this. Even if they are trying to provide a structure for the church through which the mission of the church is achievable, it simply does not sit right with me. However, the authors certainly do seem to be concerned with providing an administrative framework that is concerned with listening honestly to Scripture.
            The chapter that I found was most interesting and helpful was the chapter regarding organizational behaviours. This is the area I am most interested in and feel least confident with. I want to understand the various aspects of any given church structure so that I can best understand how to appropriate my abilities and serve the church as a whole. I do not think that the pastor is the sole or even the primary leader in the church at least not in the areas of governance and institutional direction. I see the pastor as operating as more of a theological voice that is speaking into the various situations of leadership. building projects, budgets, and programs are not of primary interest to me, certainly not as much as the proper trajectory of the church as a whole.
            The authors also seem to be interested in providing a perspective of leadership that is specific to larger churches. Much of the principles and suggestions that the authors provide are geared toward administrative tendencies that I cannot imagine would work in my church. Even though questions especially concerned with staffing were a little bit out of my experience, the chapters concerned with goal setting and staffing are particularly interesting to me. Perhaps I simply do not understand the intricacies of church administration, even after reading this book, but I have a difficult time understanding how some of these principles apply to our Canadian setting. I think that some of this information is good however, I simply feel as though it would be better to read this book within the context of doing administration. Many of the principles I agree with but have no context in which to understand them. I cannot see how some of them pan out in practicality.
The book is a little bit difficult to summarize because of the wide array of topics covered and the sporadic organization of the chapters. It is possible that because I am simply not geared towards any type of financial competency that I simply do not understand the ordering of the book. That being said, I think it ironic that a book intending to address concerns surrounding administrative structures is presented in a semi-chaotic fashion. There are chapters concerning financial issues eleven chapters apart as well as chapters with an unnecessary amount of sub-titles.

            While this book clearly has something to say for Scriptural direction, I feel as though many of the areas addressed in the book are matters already known to me, or is content best suited for someone already in these positions of leadership. All in all, I feel as though this book could be helpful, just not at this point in my education. 

Petersen, Bruce L., Edward A. Thomas, and Bob Whitesel, eds. Foundations of Church Administration: Professional Tools for Church Leadership. Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 2010.

Timothy Keller: Centre Church


Timothy Keller's book Centre Church presents the reformed evangelical tradition's understanding and approach to church ministry through a series of concepts surrounding various polemics. His basic premise is that church ministry should be understood as a balance between two ends of a polemic, of which he lists three primary polemics which divide the book into three sections.
The first polemic is situated around issues of doctrine. In this section, Keller attempts to define what the gospel is. He explains that the two sides of this polemic are between legalism and relativism and that if pastors are not carefully attuned to how they are portraying the gospel, they can easily get caught in the pitfalls presented by both sides. It is important for us to recognize that the Gospel is not everything in Scripture, but that the Gospel affects everything involved in creation.
In the second polemic Keller posits surrounds the concerns of how the gospel is portrayed. In this polemic, the balance is struck between the extremes of under and over appreciation of culture. The pastor should be conscious of the various significant aspects that require sensitivity when applying the gospel to the cultural context in which the pastor finds him/herself. An oversensitivity might lead the pastor to drown out the gospel in favour of the cultural particularities, whereas and under sensitivity might lead the pastor to an ineffective presentation of the gospel. Both lead to an ineffective, or unfruitful ministry for various reasons. Throughout this section, Keller makes clear that while there are various 'models' of doing church and ways of understanding how church and culture work together, no model properly grasps an all encompassing structure by which the church should understand itself. Rather, all models fall short in some aspect, though they may be most useful in particular times and places, they are not right for all times and places
The third and final polemic presented to the reader surrounds issues of mission. I think what Keller is trying to present are issues of method as in, how should the church structure itself in order for the gospel to be proclaimed and contextualized? Keller uses the terms organization and organism to distinguish the polemic in this section and emphasizes the need for the church to balance itself between these two extremes. Too much clout afforded to the organization that is the institution of the church and the work of the Holy Spirit begins to be systematically drowned out. Whereas too much concern for the church being led and developed by the Holy Spirit and it will lack any form through which the Holy Spirit can work.
            Throughout the book Keller provides a number of helpful insights no doubt coming from his decades of experience working with both established churches and church plants. First off, it is often pointed to as a sure sign of his fruitful ministry, that we cannot overlook the fact that Keller has planted a church in the heart of one of the most ruthlessly anti-Christian atmospheres in North America, New York. This immediately tells me that this author has something important to tell us. Secondly, he certainly has a desire to draw attention to the hearts of the people who are coming to encounter Christ. I think that his emphasis on the idolatrous heart is good. Idolatry is good language for helping people understand the misplaced desires of their hearts.
            While Keller seems honest in his attempt to provide a framework for how the gospel should go out, there are a few elements of his work that I find either off putting or simply missing the point. First off, I think he misunderstands pietism. Throughout chapter 15 I found that as I read each paragraph, I could not help but think, ‘he is getting this wrong. This is not who we are.’ After I realized that he was misunderstanding this vein of Christianity that I would understand myself to be apart of, it was rather difficult to thoroughly believe what he was saying about other traditions and about his own. There is a possibility that he simply misunderstands, however, knowing his background and the circles that he is apart of makes me wonder if he is willingly trying to subvert my tradition.
            Secondly, I think that his understanding of the gospel is too limited. It is clear that he is coming from a specific tradition that understands the gospel through specific lenses. Keller’s error comes as he attempts to make his tradition’s specific perspective ‘The Gospel’. In essence he reveals one of the idols he holds being his own tradition. It would have been more appropriate to qualify his explanation of the Gospel stating that this is how the gospel works out in his tradition. In which case there is allowance to start a conversation about which is the best approach for understanding the gospel, but even that is a conversation to be having with the specific cultural context that he is in.
Thirdly, I think he is too specific about where the balance should be placed on any of his given polemics. He does not give enough credence to the cultural application or implications of the gospel. It seems as though he wants to say that this is how ministry should be done throughout all places and all times. And I think this is a misappropriation of his work.

In the end I think Keller’s work is moderately useful for a general framework and structure used for understanding ministry in specific locations, but I certainly do not think that everything he says should be used and applied in every situation. 

Keller, Timothy. Center Church: Doing Balanced, Gospel-Centered Ministry in Your City. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012.

Philosophy of Ministry

I feel slightly awkward as I approach this paper, predominantly because I am forced to express outright without much room for explanation or context my thoughts and views regarding ministry. In truth any paper I write will be somewhat limited in scope regarding issues pertaining to pastoral ministry what with my limited experience. It is important to recognize right off the hop that every ministry context is different and demands to be addressed on its own merits and conditions. Keeping this in mind, we will be examining my understanding of what in general pastoral ministry includes and who is involved with pastoral ministry. I am perhaps at a slight advantage when writing a paper like this, since my denomination has a set list of affirmations by which we hope to guide the various communities involved in our conference towards what we believe Christ is calling us to. When I think about a philosophy of ministry, I first think about who is involved in this ministry and second what those parties are called to. Therefore, this paper will examine the parties involved in ministry, and how those involved live into their respective aspects through the lens of the Covenant Affirmations.
I have been told that when it comes to theology, the best place to begin is with Jesus, since He is the where the divine and human entities dwell, from Him comes both our understanding of who God is and who we are as humans. Everything we know of Jesus comes from Scripture it is central to our understanding of who God is and so it is to Scripture we will now turn. I have spent most of my time with Jesus through reading the Gospel of John. I really like this Gospel because I feel it summarizes Jesus’ ministry and appropriates the response of those who came into contact with him. The prologue of John begins by telling us that the Word was in the beginning, the Word was with God, the Word was God, and most excitingly for us, the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. I believe that this is where ministry begins, with people who live and well with others. It is primarily done in the context of long-term relationship. The Greek is a little more explicit, literally translated it means ‘the Word ‘tented’ among us.’
Pastoral ministry, seen through the lens of Jesus is not contained to a single action or service. We read in John that Jesus attended weddings, and travelled with His disciples, He spoke publicly and privately with people who were confused and caught up in circumstances they could not get out of. Some of these people were people of high distinction, lawyers and priests, as well as those the Bible portrays as lower-class citizens, beggars and prostitutes. Throughout the entirety of the Gospel according to John we see Jesus patiently working with those who come to him, answering their questions and doing some very spectacular things. We also see that Jesus was not shy when it came to addressing issues that arose in the communities He was involved in, seeking to present every opportunity for those around Him to turn away from the idols they had established and follow Him as Messiah and king, to recognize Him as God. Sadly, Jesus’ ministry was something we today might call a failure. Very few people came to recognize Him as God. Only after He was abandoned by His friends, only after He died on the cross and only after He was resurrected on the third day did His closest followers finally comprehend what He had been trying to tell them for the last three years.
In John 21, we read of His final interaction with Peter. We read that Jesus asks Peter three times if he loves Him, three times Peter responds that he indeed does love Jesus and three times we read that Jesus commands Peter to feed and tend to His sheep. This is ultimately how I understand the pastor’s role. I look at the way Jesus interacted with the people He was ministering to and I am overcome by two substantial observations. First, Jesus is truly remarkable. Second, even though the disciples rarely understood what it was Jesus was telling them, or even who He was, God was gracious and loving enough that He was willing to work through them and continues to work through us today. For the rest of this treatise, I will unpack the who, what, when, where, why, and how of ministry in an attempt to articulate just how God works through us today.
There are three primary participants in church ministry; God, the congregation, and the pastor. God as seen through the trinity plays a tremendous, indeed the most important aspect in the life of the church. It is because of Him that we are here. It is because of Him that we breath. It was He who took on flesh and dwelt among us. It was He who died on the cross because of our selfish impudence. It was He who was resurrected to new life. And it was He who ascended into heaven to sit at the right hand of the father and intercedes on our behalf. It was He who came to show us the truth, to open our eyes to the work and glory of God. It was Him who led the disciples out of Jerusalem to the rest of the world. It was He who gave them words to explain who Jesus was and what He had done. It was around Him that new converts gathered to worship and praise Him. It is because of Him that Christians all throughout the centuries were willing to die in service to others. It is because of Him that Christians have no use for their possessions other than to serve God and others around them. For those who are called the church, the Body of Christ, God is everything.
The congregation is perhaps a little bit more difficult to describe. There is a particular amount of anomaly when discussing who the church is. In John 3, Jesus tells Nicodemus that only by being reborn in the Spirit will Nicodemus truly understand the truth that Jesus offers him. Ultimately, the church is comprised a congregation of sinners who rely on the person and work of Jesus for their righteousness, who have been reborn in the Spirit, who have been baptized into the life of Christ, and who continually turn to Jesus as they live into the righteousness propitiated to them through Christ’s resurrection. However, this definition is rather vague. How this plays out is sloppy and quite inarticulately. Paul provides for us a picture of the church being the body of Christ. As we are baptized into that body, we use the abilities and gifts that God has given to us towards building a unified community. This means that mechanics, artists, cooks, mothers, students, teachers, doctors, philosophers, even sociologists work towards expressing the love that Christ offers through the acts of love Christ has told us to carry out. One person cannot be all these things, rather we need those who think, do and speak differently to serve others in whatever way they can so that through their actions and words others might know that we are different than the way the world does and understands things.
In this way, the pastor is absolutely no different than the rest of the congregation. The pastor is first and foremost a servant of God simply using their gifts and abilities to serve others that they might believe in Christ and that through believing they may have eternal life. However, where a CEO provides financial and administrative structure for a company, a pastor provides understanding regarding finances so that people might understand how to honour God with their money. Where an artist might paint a beautiful picture, a pastor will craft a beautiful sermon. Where a teacher might explain a math equation, a pastor will explain Scripture. Jesus calls Peter to feed and tend His flock, this is what a pastor does. Personally, my gifts and abilities are most like a teacher in that I think I have been given a mind that understands the way theology and life intersect.
One of the models for pastoral ministry utilized by the reformed tradition is understanding the three offices of prophet, priest, and king. A prophet communicates and encourages a person or people to understand the direction God is calling them. A priest is heavily involved in the life of people, they are involved in the messy aspects of a persons life, they also facilitate a number of functions such as weddings. Finally, a king is gifted with the ability to manage and direct a kingdom towards financial responsibility. I most closely identify with the prophet and priest mentalities. I care deeply for people in day to day situations and want to understand where God is calling the congregation and follow Him where he leads us.
We have already begun to address what these participants do, but perhaps a more thorough explanation is required. While everything we are addressing in this treatise in connected in some respect, the ‘what’, ‘where’, and ‘why’ of ministry are intricately connected. Together, the church is committed to the entire mission of the church. This entirety involves two spheres, the inner community of the church, those who have been baptized into the church and participate regularly with others in worship, fellowship and devotion to Jesus. Of the twenty-seven books that comprise our New Testament, twenty-two of those books are written to churches and leaders regarding how to do church together, explaining how to do life together as Christians, and what happens when conflict arises. The primary role of the church is to work towards unity in Christ. The secondary element in the life of the church is the continual inclusion of others whose eyes have been opened by the Spirit. Not conversion necessarily, conversion is a work and operation solely of God. However, once conversion has taken place in the life of a person, they need to be connected with the greater body of the church so as to come to a fuller understanding of who God is. The ‘where’ of ministry is both in the inner congregation and the surrounding culture. As we gather, we gather with purpose, and as we go out, we go out with purpose. Why do we do this? Because we love God and we have been called to tend His flock and feed His sheep. Because the night before Jesus died, He washed the feet of sinners and served the one who was about to betray Him. Because when we drink the cup and eat the bread, we are reminded of grace that He provides for us, and this should make us want others to experience that grace for themselves.
The ‘how’ of ministry is where I as a pastor step up. Understanding that every congregation is different and requires different elements to be fruitful in its contribution to this mission of the church, there are some aspects that separate the pastor from the broader community. Hopefully, one of those aspects is education. Whatever the occupation or calling of the various congregants in the community, there is expected that they know something more about their particular vein of expertise than those who are not working in that field. A doctor has spent a fair amount of time learning about the body and about medicine, they are employed in a hospital or clinic because they know more about these aspects. A mechanic is expected to know something about cars and to be able to demonstrate that knowledge through their ability to fix a car. Similarly, it is expected that a pastor knows something about theology, they have spent years pouring over the writings of theologians throughout the centuries, they have spent time studying Scripture, they have spent time with various spiritual disciplines for the express purpose of the benefit and wellbeing of the community.
There are two primary places where pastoral ministry occurs, what some might understand as ministry on the ground, and ministry from the air. Ministry on the ground can be seen as how the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. God comes to us humans as a human and lives with us for 35 years. He spends time with the people. He interacts with those who come to hear Him speak. He eats with sinners and tax collectors. He walks with His disciples. He washes their feet. There is nothing clean about Jesus' ministry, it is very messy. Ministry from the air can be understood as Sunday morning. The climax of Jesus' ministry was His betrayal, death, resurrection, and ascension. This is why we come together on Sunday mornings to be immersed in this climax every week. We come together to share in this feast of blood and flesh. We come together to remember the death and resurrection of our baptisms. We gather around to remind ourselves that Jesus is alive and well and that He is coming back soon. These two aspects of ministry should hopefully lead into each other. We cannot come together on Sunday mornings without the daily ministry to each other. And when we gather together to remember Jesus we should want to minister to each other, to invite each other over for a meal, to pray together in our houses, to study Scripture together. The pastor is there to facilitate and model this balance.

In conclusion I realize that the ways in which I have been speaking about ministry is rather vague and ambiguous speaking more of principles than of concrete structures. Truth be told if I simply stated that pastoral ministry is about developing programs or organic development of a community I would be speaking to a particular context which does not pertain to all contexts. The reality of it is that I have no idea what ministry looks like or how to express the various ways it plays out in day to day life other than to describe why we do ministry and the reasons for ministry. In the last chapter of John we read of Jesus’ exchange with Peter. Jesus does not ask Peter if he has cast a vision for ministry, or if he feels compelled to serve the church. Jesus simply asks Peter, “Peter, do you love me? ‘Yes Lord I love you.’ Then feed my sheep.” In turn I will serve the body of Christ for no reason other than that I love Jesus.

The Problem of War and Violence in Joshua

Blessed are the peacemakers. A proclamation made by Jesus in the Gospel according to Matthew summarizes many Christians view regarding violence and war. Throughout the centuries Christians have struggled to understand and realize the peace that Jesus spoke so much of in the New Testament. For as many centuries as the church has been established, there have been as many ways to account for the violence commanded by God in the Old Testament. Contemporary questions regarding the congruence of the God revealed in the Old Testament and the Jesus revealed in the New Testament have left Christians baffled and in some ways conflicted about how we should be approaching the issues of war and violence in our current social environment. When it comes to this matter, many Christians are practical Marcionites, either conflicted by, or ignoring entirely the Old Testament witness. Our commitment to Jesus’ commands of peace are made even more conflated by the difficult political circumstances of our times. The Arab spring, and the western reaction to it has proven that much of the world is still caught up in the realities of war for the sake of the divine. And yet, many in our society are simply tired of violence and war. These actions taken by many in the East are reminiscent of the accounts of conquest in Joshua. Truly one of the most terrifying, and at the same time awe inspiring books of the Old Testament. This paper will attempt to understand how we can account for the violence of conquest within the book of Joshua.
            “...thirty-one kings in all.”(NIV) According to this list provided in Joshua 12, there were thirty-one kings and thirty-one kingdoms put under the sword for the sake of providing for Israel the land promised to them. I remember reading this passage when I was very young and infatuated with the idea of war. I am not sure what my thinking was at the time, whether I simply had thoughts of glory in my mind with the prospect of battle. Perhaps I had recently watched Disney’s Robin Hood and the general excitement of danger and victory clouded my mind. Whatever I was thinking, I remember that this was the most obvious display of God’s power, why were not more people Christians? Sure, Jesus healed a bunch of people, but what power is that? As I grew in wisdom and age, I came to be conflicted by the difficulties of violence presented in Scripture, particularly that in the book of Joshua. If we are not going to adopt a heretical position that either denies the witness of the Old Testament, or divides the trinity into the evil god of the Old Testament and the good god of the New, we must address this tension.
            One of the more obvious places in which this contentious violence presents itself is in Joshua. The first half of the book of Joshua, that is, Joshua 1-12 is concerned with the conquest and domination of the inhabitants in the land of Canaan. summarized by the verse quoted earlier in   the second half of 12:24; “...thirty-one kings in all.” Although this paper is not primarily concerned with exegesis, it is necessary to spend some time in Joshua in order to give us a glimpse of the violence enacted by both Yahweh and Israel. For the purposes of the paper, we will concentrate primarily on the first half of the book, which contains the violent aggressions we are interested in.
            The first four chapters in Joshua are not immediately important to us, although it is important to be reminded that these chapters are concerned with our topic, but in a more preparatory way. For now it is important to know that Joshua was called to lead the people of Israel across the Jordan. Joshua sends spies into the land who are saved in Jericho by Rahab the harlot as the NASB so lovingly refers to her. We arrive therefore in chapter five with Israel positioned on the eastern side of Jericho, readying for war. In chapter five, the narrative takes time to inform us that the kings of the Amorites and the kings of the Canaanites heard of Israel's crossing the Jordan and they were greatly disheartened. Joshua is commanded to circumcise the men of Israel, because the men of war who had come out of Egypt all died in the wilderness and the offspring of those warriors were not circumcised because they were travelling through the wilderness. Once they are healed from their circumcision, they observed the passover by partaking in some of the produce from the promised land. The day after they partake of the passover, the manna ceases and they eat from the bounty of that land henceforth. The chapter ends with Joshua being confronted by a man standing with his sword drawn informing Joshua that he is neither for Joshua, nor against him, but the captain of the host of the Lord. Joshua prostrates himself and asks what the Lord asks of His servant. The captain instructs Joshua to remove his sandals, for he is standing on holy ground and Joshua obliges.
            Chapter six jumps straight to Jericho where Joshua finds the city to be tightly shut. The LORD tells Joshua that he and Israel are to march around the city once a day for six days, on the seventh day they are to march around the city seven times and on the seventh march, seven priests will blow seven horns, the people are to shout upon hearing the horns and then the walls will come down. The priests and the people did as they were instructed, on the seventh day, after the seventh march, the horns were blown and Joshua instructed the people to shout. But more than instruct the people to shout, Joshua warns the people that the city is under a ban. Everything in the city belongs to the LORD, except for Rahab and her family. All the silver, gold, bronze and iron is sacred. The people shouted. The walls came down and the people went in to claim their booty, they rescued Rahab and her family, they burned everything in the city, men, women, and children except for the metal that was found.
            Chapter seven immediately continues after the fall of Jericho saying that the sons of Israel acted unfaithfully, Achan took some things that were under the ban. Not knowing this, Joshua sent men to Ai to scout the city. The scouts advise Joshua to only send a few men to take the city. Joshua heeds their advice and sends only three thousand men, but the men are repelled by Ai and the people of Israel become disheartened. Joshua laments and asks the Lord why he would lead them across the Jordan only to be defeated by the Amorites. Yahweh informs Joshua that some in Israel have taken things that were under the ban. Through a long process involving the casting of lots, Joshua sniffs out Achan and discovers that Achan took a mantlet, some silver and some gold and buried them under his tent. Then Joshua took Achan, the silver, the mantlet, the gold, his sons, daughters, oxen, donkeys, sheep, tent, and all that belonged to him. Joshua and all of Israel stoned them, then burned them with fire and heaped stones over them to mark the spot.
            The eighth chapter sees Joshua return to the business of Ai, the Lord comforts Joshua by saying that He will deliver the king of Ai and the people to Israel and instructs Joshua that he is to do the same with Ai as they did with Jericho. Joshua chooses 30,000 men this time and devises a plan for attack. The plan works and Israel sets fire to Ai killing everything except the cattle. Joshua hangs the king of Ai, then takes his body and places it at the entrance of the city and raised a heap of stones over it. Joshua then built an altar just as the book of the law of Moses commanded. They offered burnt offering on it and sacrificed peace offerings. Joshua writes upon the altar the law of Moses and Joshua reads before the people that law.
            Chapter nine describes the deception of the Gibeonites where the Gibeonites dress as weary travellers to fool the Israelites. Where the other Canaanites and Amorites gather to make war with the Israelites, the Gibeonites deceive Joshua into making a Covenant with them. After Joshua makes a covenant with them they bring the Israelites to their city and reveal that they are actually inhabitants of the land. Joshua and Israel are bound by the covenant established with Gibeon and relent in destroying them, but set them to the task of drawing water and hewing wood for the congregation of Israel.
            After hearing of the covenant the Gibeonites make with Israel, the Amorites set out to attack Gibeon. Gibeon requests aid from Joshua and the Israelites, and they respond. Through the combined action of the Lord and Israel, the Amorite kings were slaughtered at Gibeon, although the five kings of the Amorites escape and hide themselves in a cave. Joshua sends the Israelites after those who escaped the slaughter to kill those retreating to their cities. Once Israel had finished defeating the retreaters, they remove the stone from the cave in which the kings were hiding. Joshua brings the kings out and publicly disgraces them by instructing the men of war to put their feet on the necks of the kings and encourages the men that the LORD will do the same to the remaining enemies of Israel. Joshua kills the kings, hangs them from a tree until sunset then puts their bodies back in the cave and sets stones at the mouth of the cave. The rest of the chapter recounts the victories over the rest of the kings and kingdoms in the south. Joshua utterly destroyed all that breathed in the land and then returned to Gilgal.
            Chapter eleven portrays the kings of the northern kingdoms gathering to defeat Joshua at Merom with horses and chariots. Again Yahweh comforts Joshua by ensuring him that He will deliver these enemies to Joshua. Yahweh instructs Joshua to hamstring the horses and burn their chariots. Joshua therefore hamstrings their horses and burns their chariots. Following this is a similar recounting as with the southern kingdoms, Joshua kills every living thing in all the cities of the north, setting fire to the cities and killing all the kings.
Finally, chapter twelve recounts all the kings and kingdoms that Joshua put under the sword. All the cities in which there were living things which Joshua killed and all the cities he set to fire, a reminder of the destruction and devastation caused by Joshua perhaps a reason why so many people, Christians included, have come to reject or ignore the book of Joshua.
            This short summary of these seven chapters finds a large swath of disturbing tales. The stories recount the utter desolation of people living in the land, what some have come to identify as genocide. More than this however, is the fact that it is by Yahweh’s command and direct participation by which these people are defeated and slaughtered. It is here in these tales of systematic elimination of a people that many have stumbled in their appreciation of this God Yahweh and the seemingly inconsistent actions presented in the Old Testament when compared to the revealed and risen Son Jesus in the New Testament. It is towards understanding this tension that we now turn. As such, there are a number of aspects that we need to highlight in the narrative in order to focus our study towards those themes that will bear fruit. First, is the confusing appearance of the ban under which the people of these cities lie. Secondly, there are particular exceptions to this ban, such as the Gibeonites, Rahab, and the cattle. Why, of all things, are cattle distinguished from the other living breathing things in the cities? Why are they spared when men, women, and children are put to the sword? Thirdly, why the Canaanites? Is it really necessary for God to requisition the life of every breathing thing in the cities encountered by Joshua? Finally, and most importantly, how can we account for these actions of Yahweh? Is this even the same God who sent His Son Jesus into the world?
            The difficulty of this concept regarding the ban placed upon these cities and all that are in them comes with the root word used to signify this ban, herem. There are many ways in which the word has been translated: ban, dedicated, proscribed, devoted, and devoted to destruction.[1] None of these translations really gets at the meaning of the word. The problem being, all of these words either explain what herem is or the result of being under the herem, but not the context in which herem is demanded. For instance, if we use the English word ban, it does not communicate to us exactly what is meant by under the ban, the religious and spiritual realities caught up in herem are lost. Likewise, if we use the translation devoted to destruction, we are still left with questions regarding why these people are destined for destruction. These translations ultimately lead us to asking more questions than we had before the use of the term. Thus, when we read of the genocidal narratives in Joshua, we are left with an empty feeling in our stomach that perhaps Yahweh is exactly the kind God many accuse Him to be.
The term herem first appears in the book of Exodus 22:20, “He who sacrifices to any god other than to the LORD alone, shall be utterly destroyed.”(NASB) Although this verse seems to come out of nowhere and seems even a far stretch to be taken and applied to the Canaanites in the land, we are given a firm basis for understanding the context of the term. Whatever herem is, it is associated with idolatry. It then appears in Leviticus 27 mostly being applied to land but also being applied to a person. This does not alleviate our confusion however, for the land described in Leviticus is set apart in the sense that it is Holy, whereas 27:29 states that any man who has been set apart, shall be put to death. Does holiness qualify as death? In Numbers, we see the first use of the term being applied to warfare in which a Canaanite king is placed under herem for standing in the way of Israel claiming the land they were on.
While these references help us to understand usages for herem, they are not quite what we are looking for. In order to find a more directly associated usage of the term in Joshua, we need to turn our attention to the book of Deuteronomy. As Jerome Creach indicates in his commentary on Joshua, there have been two theories about Joshua’s placement in the canon and both highlight the book’s importance and significant tie to Deuteronomy.
The leading theory is that Joshua initially was part of the Deuteronomistic History, a literary complex stretching from Deuteronomy through Kings that promotes Deuteronomy’s sense of religious purity as the standard by which Israel should be judged... Another theory about Joshua’s composition is that it began as part of a Hexateuch, which told the story of Israel’s salvation, beginning with God’s pledge to give Israel the Land of Canaan in Genesis 12 and concluding with the fulfillment of that promise in Joshua.[2]
In either case, we have Joshua explicitly tied in importance to Deuteronomy. As such, we can rely on the use of herem in Deuteronomy to help us understand herem’s usage in Joshua.
There are three instances in Deuteronomy where a form of herem is used and might lend some understanding. The first reference is found in 7:1-5 and 20:16-18 in which Yahweh instructs Israel of seven nations that Israel is not to interact with. Once they are in the land, Yahweh will deliver them into the hands of the Israelites and they are to utterly destroy them. Furthermore, they are not to intermarry with them, an interesting addition considering that if they were utterly destroyed none would be left to intermarry with. The reason for their strict dealings with these kingdoms is so that the sons of Israel will not be turned from worshipping Yahweh. The other two references are concerned with those who take the idols of these other nations, worship them, and in so doing betray the covenant established by Yahweh. All of these instances and by association, those instances in Joshua in which herem is demanded are inextricably tied to the worshipping of a god or gods other than Yahweh.
Herem in the instance of Joshua then, can be considered as Yahweh’s efforts of eradicating any possibility for Israel to be enticed into the worshipping of any deity other than Yahweh. As Creach has already noted, Joshua’s place in the Old Testament canon is inextricably linked to the book of Deuteronomy in that it is the outpouring, or execution of the consequences of Mosaic law. Aggression against Jericho, Ai, the southern and northern kingdoms are an expulsion of idol worship. But there is more to this concept of herem. However, the utter destruction of these kings and their kingdoms is the result of something more than Herem. For we have yet to account for the exceptions in these circumstances.
Both Rahab and the Gibeonites recognize the supremacy of Yahweh and the necessity of turning from their Canaanite gods to worshipping only Yahweh. This does not however account for the exception of cattle in Joshua 11, a point which Kenneth Younger draws out in his book, Ancient Conquest Accounts. In the book, Younger points to some examples of conquest accounts that were used by other ancient near-eastern societies to depict their power, might, and utter destruction of enemy nations. Younger bases his argument on our understanding of the genre of history. What we have in the accounts of ancient conquests are depictions of what the writers believe to be true, thus the intermingling of truth, myth, and ideology are all valid aspects to consider. What is written is still true, but it is true in a specific way that our modern minds often do not understand or conceive.
In essence, the ideologies of a culture’s perception of itself, the enemy and the acts of war are deeply interwound, and it is ultimately these ideologies that we are to be concerned with. The structure presented in Joshua therefore, is quite typical of what we find in other ancient near-eastern accounts of conquest. For instance, “The Hittite imperial ideology was very similar to the Assyrian ideology, although it placed less emphasis on ‘an ideology of terror’ than its Assyrian counterpart.”[3] Whereas Egyptian ideology focuses on the power of the king to protect against the inferior neighbouring enemies. Regardless, the accounts of conquest represent a certain amount of figurative speech. “Like their counterparts in Hittite and Assyrian conquest accounts, Egyptian conquest accounts are figurative accounts.”[4] The same figurative language is utilized in Israel’s account of conquest in Joshua. Thus we can understand that Israel destroyed every living thing, and yet there is cattle left to be taken as the spoils of war.
            When we come therefore, to Israel’s ideology found in Joshua, we find that their direct contact and involvement with Yahweh is their primary motivation for conquest, and is enough reason to do precisely what Yahweh commands them to do. Moreover, concerning the herem or ban, Younger says this, “The concept of total war(i.e., the destruction of the population as well as the military) was a practice which one encounters on numerous occasions in the ancient Near Eastern conquest accounts.”[5]
However, this explanation leaves us wanting. We believe in the uniqueness of Israel, in the uniqueness of Yahweh, because of the uniqueness of Jesus. Even if the conquest described in Joshua is commonplace in the literary structures of the accounts of many surrounding cultures, we are left with asking ourselves if Yahweh is truly unique, and in what way is Yahweh unique? This tension is addressed by Walter Brueggemann in his book, Divine Presence Amid Violence. Brueggemann, arguing from the perspective of social and rhetorical criticism, is ultimately concerned with the reader’s hermeneutic and, conveniently for us, utilizes Joshua 11 to make his point. Ultimately, he addresses the same question we are, “What shall we do with all the violence and bloody war that is done in the Old Testament in the name of Yahweh? The question reflects a sense that these texts of violence are at least an embarrassment, are morally repulsive, and are theologically problematic in the Bible, not because they are violent, but because this is violence either in the name of or at the hand of Yahweh.”[6]
Brueggemann focuses on the utilization of horses and chariots by the Canaanites as they muster against the Israelites as a sign of monopolized surplus and oppressive tendency. Thus in this instance, the violence enacted upon the Canaanite kings is an act along the same lines as what we see in Exodus, an act of violence for the sake of liberation from oppression. Israel is to destroy the horses and chariots because they represent a method of oppression. This point is echoed by Creach when he says, “What seems to be narrated in Joshua 10-11 therefore, is a repudiation and defeat of royal power. The problem is not monarchy itself, but a form of monarchy that is based on oppression.”[7] The cattle on the other hand, are a completely different matter. Whereas in 11:6 we have a harsh command, 11:14 states that the cattle are taken as spoils of war. “It is curious that in the very text which urges that ‘nothing be left breathing,’ cattle are exempt.”[8] He points out that both actions, to destroy everything and that they spared the cattle, go beyond the immediate command in verse 6 to hamstring the horses and burn the chariots. More than this, they are both actions taken based on the memory and command of Moses. We might then deduce, that if Israel were willing to make distinctions between cattle and horses based on Moses’ command that they were to destroy and leave nothing breathing because of herem, they may have made similar distinctions in other circumstances.
However, neither of these explanations fully address our present concerns. Whether the violence sanctioned and commanded by Yahweh can be explained as liberating violence based on the limitation of dominating oppression, or whether Yahweh and Israel are simply doing what all other nations and deities did, we are ultimately left with the same question of, how can we account for these actions of Yahweh? It is towards this question that the rest of this paper will be directed to.
In his commentary on Joshua with Gordon McConville, Stephen Williams addresses this rather repulsive aspect of text by first reminding us that life in Canaan before the conquest was not innocent. “Canaanite life for a sizable number, as for so many in our world today, may have been so nasty and brutish that they might have preferred it to be short.”[9] But more than this Williams also asserts that “the book of Joshua is set in the canonical context of testimony to God’s hatred of violence.”[10] It is with these two concepts in mind, that we are prepared to address the violence depicted in this book. Violence is not an invention of Yahweh. It is evidenced by His response to Cane after the exile from the garden that Yahweh is incredibly patient regarding His response to human sinfulness. We can only assume that Yahweh’s actions in Joshua are therefore a response to a people’s sinfulness so deep and intrusive, that it took the wholesale destruction of a people to prepare the land for Israel’s inheritance. It is with this in mind that Williams can express the reality that this is not so much a war of men involving the genocide of other men, but a war of Yahweh against the idols established in Canaan. It is ultimately a war waged against sinfulness. Thus, our response to this violence is really a stance of our belief of Yahweh. Either we believe the acts commanded and acted out by Yahweh are evil and therefore Yahweh is evil. Or, we believe that Yahweh is Holy and thus his requests and actions are in turn Holy. In this light, we can understand the generous patience of Yahweh being quite congruous with the person and work of Jesus found in the New Testament.
This transitional interest from the God who speaks in the Old Testament to the God embodied in the New is a line of interest taken up in the book, Show Them No Mercy. In the book, we find a conversation being taken up by four authors in which they discuss the continuity, or lack thereof, between the Old and New Testaments on precisely how we can understand the transition from Old and New Testaments regarding God’s disposition towards war and violence. There are four stances taken and none of them completely agree on how to account for this transition. The first author, C.S. Cowles understands the shift in presentation as a radically discontinuous theological direction. “What Jesus was introducing was nothing short of an entirely new rewrite of Jewish theology.”[11] Cowles quite appropriately expresses the thoughts and opinions of many Christians who cringe at the retelling of the violent Yahweh of the Old Testament, and voices his frustration with Yahweh’s actions.
Eugene Merril sees a moderate disconnection between Old and New Testaments arguing that many of the themes presented with herem or Yahweh war are present in the New Testament within the apocalyptic texts. However, Christians are not called to live according to what was that case(Israel in conquest), nor are we to live in anticipation for what will be the case(Jesus’ second coming). Christians are called to live in absolute pacifism when it comes to war being waged in the name of Yahweh. This position is similar to yet a third position which is taken up by Daniel Gard in which he defends an eschatological view of continuity. The Yahweh of the Old Testament enacts the same ‘plan’ or ethos in the New through Jesus Christ who is the eschatological fulfillment of the Davidic king expected to reinstate Israel. Yahweh will again impose the herem but when He does this time, it will be the enemies of the church, not of Israel, who will succumb to His wrath. It appears that the primary distinction between the second and third perspectives is with regards to the author’s understanding of what is continuous and what is discontinuous. The second view understands that the people are discontinuous with regards to their actions, Israel was called to war, we the church are not. The third view is less concerned with the actions of the people than with the continuous actions of Yahweh and focuses primarily on the reality that there will come a time when He  will again enact herem, only this time it will be upon all creation, not just the Canaanites.
The fourth and final position offered is presented by Tremper Longman III who seeks to understand the continuity of the Testaments through their spiritual connection. Longman argues that herem should be understood as a particular aspect of Holy war, not necessarily the Holy war itself. Herem is understood as the offering of the spoils of war to the one who won the battle, in the case of the book of Joshua, this would be Yahweh. The only way for these unholy spoils to be taken into the presence of Yahweh is through death. Thus, while the concept of herem is discontinuous from Old to New Testaments, Yahweh is not. Furthermore, whereas in the Old Testament, the warrior Yahweh fought against the flesh and blood of His enemies, the New Testament Yahweh through the incarnate Jesus fights against His Spiritual enemies.
All four of these views have something significant to offer us and it is important to listen to our brothers and sisters of the faith, even, and perhaps especially, when we may disagree with them. These are some of my thoughts regarding the continuity of Old and New Testaments; What we have in Jesus Christ of Nazareth, is indeed a contradiction. But it is a contradiction established by God not against Him. He has shown in Joshua, the Pentateuch and all throughout the Old Testament that He is a God of His word, He will keep the Covenant, regardless of our, or in the case of the OT, Israel’s disobedience. He is a jealous God, and He is a Holy God. He is a God who will do anything and everything to provide ways for His people to respond to His love and kindness. We have seen in the Old Testament the extent that He is willing to go, and we see in the New Testament the exact same thing. We see a God willing to sacrifice even Himself if needs be, so that His people may walk holy and blameless before Him. Thus, we can read of the Yahweh in the Old Testament claiming herem on every living thing in the land and the Jesus who wants peace above all, for it is only through the former that the latter can be realized. It is through obedience that we live Holy and blameless before God, and it is through that obedience that peace is possible. In both instances, God is not looking for blood but obedience. Not death but life, and life in His name. As such, I think my own position is some sort of combination of the second, third, and fourth positions presented in this book. If there is discontinuity between the two texts, it is with regards to Yahweh’s concern for holiness. However, this leads us to another question that we simply do not have space for; What does holiness mean?
In conclusion, herem is by no means a concept that is easily understood, nor is Yahweh a God who is easily comprehended. The entire subject of violence in the Old Testament is a rather contentious subject, one that demands thorough investigation and one that demands to be taken seriously. What we can say in concluding remarks is that Yahweh is not a God who relishes violence against His rebellious and sinful creation. He is a God who prefers obedience and holiness to any situation that leads to the requisition of human life. However, the holy Yahweh will do whatever is necessary to ensure the holiness of His people. In some instances this means the death of His creation, and in other circumstances it means the death of His Son. Furthermore, herem does not legitimate or encourage physical aggression, or aggression of any type for that matter. What we as the church are called to is not the same circumstance or situation that Israel was called to; Rather, whatever victories are to be had that involve the church shall be won only through the action of Yahweh.

Opere Citato

Alexander, T. Desmond, and David W. Baker, eds. Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 2003.

Brueggemann, Walter. Divine Presence Amid Violence: Contextualizing the Book of Joshua. Eugene: Cascade Books, 2009.

              Cowles C.S., Eugene H. Merrill, Daniel L. Gard, and Tremper Longman III. Show Them No Mercy: 4 Views on God and Canaanite Genocide. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003.

Creach, Jerome F.D. Joshua. Interpretation Commentaries. Louisville: John Knox Press, 1989.

              McConviille, J. Gordon, and Stephen N. Williams. Joshua. The Two Horizons Old Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2010.

             Younger, K. Lawson. Ancient Conquest Accounts: A Study in Ancient Near Eastern and Biblical History Writing. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1990.



Bibliography

Alexander, T. Desmond, and David W. Baker, eds. Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 2003.

Brueggemann, Walter. Divine Presence Amid Violence: Contextualizing the Book of Joshua. Eugene: Cascade Books, 2009.

Cowles C.S., Eugene H. Merrill, Daniel L. Gard, and Tremper Longman III. Show Them No Mercy: 4 Views on God and Canaanite Genocide. Counterpoints. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003.

Craigie, Peter C. The Problem of War in the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co,, 1978.

Creach, Jerome F.D. Joshua. Interpretation Commentaries. Louisville: John Knox Press, 1989.

Hess, Richard S. Joshua: An Introduction & Commentary. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 1996.

Hobbs, T.R. A Time For War: A Study of Warfare in the Old Testament. Old Testament Studies. Wilmington: Michael Glazier, 1989.

Kang, Sa-Moon. Divine War in the Old Testament and in the Ancient Near East. New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1989.

Longman, Tremper, and Daniel G. Reid. God is a Warrior. Studies in Old Testament Biblical Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995.

Matties, Gordon H. Joshua. Believers Church Bible Commentary. Waterloo: Herald Press, 2012.

McConville, J. Gordon, and Stephen N. Williams. Joshua. The Two Horizons Old Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2010.

McDonald, Patricia M. God & Violence: Biblical Resources for Living in a Small World. Waterloo: Herald Press, 2004.

Rad, Gerhard von. Holy War in Ancient Israel. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1991.

Sloane, Andrew. At Home in a Strange Land: Using the Old Testament in Christian Ethics. Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 2008.

Thomas, Heath A., Jeremy Evans, and Paul Copan, eds. Holy War in the Bible: Christian Morality and an Old Testament Problem. Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 2013.

Younger, K. Lawson. Ancient Conquest Accounts: A Study in Ancient Near Eastern and Biblical History Writing. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1990.


[1] T. Desmond Alexander, and David W. Baker, eds, Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch(Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 2003), 383-387.
[2] Jerome F.D. Creach, Joshua, Interpretation Commentaries(Louisville: John Knox Press, 1989), 1.
[3] K. Lawson Younger, Ancient Conquest Accounts: A Study in Ancient Near Eastern and Biblical History Writing(Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1990), 163.
[4] Younger, 189.
[5] Younger, 235.
[6] Walter Brueggemann, Divine Presence Amid Violence: Contextualizing the Book of Joshua(Eugene: Cascade Books, 2009), 17.
[7] Creach, 94.
[8] Brueggemann, 36
[9] J. Gordon McConviille, & Stephen N. Williams, Joshua: The Two Horizons Old Testament Commentary(Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2010), 111.
[10] McConville, 112.
[11] C.S. Cowles et al., Show Them No Mercy: 4 Views on God and Canaanite Genocide(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003), 24.