Stephen
Terry, Director
Our
Forgiving God
Commentary
for the November 16, 2019 Sabbath School Lesson
"Those of Israelite descent had separated themselves
from all foreigners. They stood in their places and confessed their sins and
the sins of their ancestors." Nehemiah 9:2,
NIV
When it comes to ethnic diversity, our understanding of the
Bible, and therefore by attribution, God, can appear quite schizophrenic. This
makes it difficult to come to consensus on how we should relate to people with
ethnic, cultural, linguistic and geographic differences from our own. We tend
to "cherry pick" biblical passages based upon our own prejudices or
lack thereof. For political isolationists, texts such as the one above can be
twisted to equate sin with being a foreigner. Modern American evangelicals have
often demonstrated such a bias with their political activism regarding the
immigration to the United States of people hailing from countries and
ethnicities that they have determined to be hostile to their faith. In some
cases this is because faith and nationalism have become bedfellows to such an
extent that hostility by others to the policies of one's country becomes
tantamount to blasphemy against God.
This may be a knee-jerk reaction based on previous
experiences. For instance, when terrorists attacked and leveled the World Trade
Center and the Pentagon in 2001, the commonality of faith and ethnicity of the
terrorists created a deep suspicion of all who shared those traits. To a
degree, this is understandable. If a person is attacked by a leopard, they may
become very defensive around other felines. They may be right in regards to
panthers, cougars, and other large cats. But even so, if that fear morphs into
a mortal dread of even domestic house cats, we may question its rationality. Perhaps
if we can understand the rational limits to such fear, we can also understand
that fear of other cultures based on limited past experience may have its
rational limits as well.
We should also realize that basing isolationism or an
antipathy toward people of other races and cultures belies what missionaries
have long sought to establish, that the Bible is a multicultural tome written
to bring salvation to every people, kindred and tongue.[i] If we are to segregate
ourselves from those in other cultures based on a supposed biblical pretext,
then which culture is the right one? Which race? If that is truly the message
of the Bible, then isn't it the message to them and their culture as well? For
them, aren't we the evil foreigners? When dealing with those in the Levant,
they might have even more of a basis for believing this than we do, for Jesus
and the Bible were both products of their culture, not the Caucasian cultures
of Europe or North America. In many ways, we have appropriated the Bible and
made it a tool of white imperialism and ethnic superiority over the very
peoples we were supposed to evangelize. As a result, those other cultures have
come to see evangelization as synonymous with white ethnic superiority. This can
make it hard to know who is responding to the missionaries and becoming
Christian because of genuine conversion and who is doing so simply to worship
at the same shrine to power that has brought wealth and technology to the
countries where the missionaries originated.
While some use examples like Nehemiah to build a foundation
for exclusion, God seems to have different ideas. Those ideas are directly contrary
to what even Moses was said to have written about the subject. For instance, he
wrote that Moabites were not to be allowed into the congregation of Israel,
even for ten generations, because of how the Moabites treated them on their
journey from Egypt to Canaan.[ii] But subsequent events
bring into question whether this was the result of God's demands or of the hard
hearted spirit of vengeance nurtured by the Israelites. Jesus referenced this
hard heartedness on another topic when queried about something else written in
the Pentateuch,[iii]
so there may be foundation for that understanding. In spite of what had
specifically been written about the Moabites, only a few generations later,
Ruth, the Moabitess, marries Boaz, great-grandfather to King David, and son of
Salmon who married Rahab, the Canaanite harlot from Jericho. While some are
equating those raised outside the faith with ethnic lepers, God seems to have
no qualms about not only including them, but also incorporating their DNA in
the messianic line that eventually brought us Jesus. Even in King David's case,
in spite of all of his faithful Jewish wives, it was as a result of an adulterous
relationship with the wife of a Hittite, a man David subsequently murdered so
that he could have her, that God brought forth, not only the continuation of
the Davidic royal line through Solomon, but again, the Messiah as well. Perhaps
in our attitude toward other cultures and ethnicities, we have missed something
from scripture. Perhaps there is more biblical basis for inclusion than
exclusion.
It is the depth and breadth of the genetic pool that serves the best chance of
survival for a species faced with catastrophic challenge. The same may be true
of mankind's cultural achievements. We often refer to the period before the
Renaissance as the Dark Ages, because so much knowledge was lost with the collapse
of the Roman Empire. Even relatively simple concepts such as how to produce concrete
were lost. Only much later was it discovered that much knowledge was preserved and
even improved upon by the Muslim world. Later some of this literature and
science filtered back into Europe over trade routes established by European and
Arab merchants. The homogeneity of European culture made it prone to
devastating collapse and loss, but the diversity that existed on a global level,
and a willingness to allow its return to Europe through the minds and writings
of foreigners, proved salvific.
Even a child learns the adage about not putting all of
the eggs in one basket. Why then do we continue to strive for homogeneous,
cultural and ethnic unity? Perhaps it is because that unity enhances power, but
diversity by its very existence questions the foundations behind that kind of
power. If one can still be accepted by God in spite of diversity, there is
little basis for preserving homogeneity solely for the sake of unity. God's
creation has such diversity that he seems to delight in the very diversity that
we may feel threatened by. Why do we feel this way? Why do we look at our own
country or race and feel that we are the epitome of development while others
are only stupid attempts at emulation? Why aren't the lives of everyone equally
viable and precious?
We can find in scripture some validation for the idea of
seeing those different others as equals and endorsing their appreciation of
their self-worth. If we accept the popular idea of both Exodus and Deuteronomy
having the same author, then we must admit that the tone toward the Moabites in
Deuteronomy and the overall attitude toward foreigners in general are not
consistent with one another. In fact, in some ways, scripture is more progressive
in principle than we are today. For instance, in Exodus, we are told that both
the Israelite and the foreigner enjoy equal protection under the law. While the
context refers to celebration of the Passover, the principle is one of
equality. In our day, in the United States, we deny the very existence of that
principle when it comes to foreigners when we deny them the same constitutional
protections we grant our citizens. This is a denial of the very founding principle
of our nation as stated in the Declaration of Independence that "all men
are created equal." We fought a great war over the understanding of that
right and hallowed the ground with the blood of many young men securing the
right of all men and women to be free, regardless of ethnicity or previous
bondage. It makes little sense then to persecute those who we would have to be
our modern Moabites. And it is especially wrong to do so in the name of God. If
we truly believe that divine inspiration is behind the writing of the Bible, we
cannot ignore the instructions to not oppress or mistreat foreigners.[iv] If repetition is
emphasis, the fact that those instructions were given twice within a few verses
of each other may be significant in indicating that God felt we would stumble
over this.
With the many thousands held in concentration camps in
the United States for daring to come to the United States, maybe we are indeed stumbling.
Maybe it is time we stopped looking to the world's way of dealing with
foreigners and looked to the counsel of Jesus instead. It is possible to treat
people humanely in spite of our fears. We may fear the criminal elements who
may gain entrance. But if we look at history, with the Italians came the Cosa
Nostra, and with the Irish came the Irish mob. Each wave of foreigners has had
its criminal element, but we have survived in spite of it and many of those
immigrants have become leading citizens who have been blessed by the
egalitarian principles this country has long stood for. The forgiveness our
lesson this week alludes to cannot exist without mercy and compassion. It is
those two elements that have kindled and maintained the light that has drawn
many from darkness. It is now the choice of our current generation whether we
wish to keep that flame bright or hide it from all who might be drawn to its
glow. What would Jesus do?[v]
