In all of the discussions of the theological and ethical problems raised by the holy war texts in the Old Testament, there is a glaring assumption.  The question is often raised “what if we were to wage war in God’s name” or in a similar manner.  The dangerous assumption is that we (America) will always be the one fighting for God.  This seems to be the same problem facing Israel in the texts of the latter prophets.  Amos in particular points out the justice flaws of the Northern kingdom, which was smug in it’s prosperity.  The day of the Lord would not be a pleasant experience of divine favor, but a reception of wrath.  I can’t help but think of the United States as being in a similar place.  We often assume that we speak for God or that he is on our side.  It’s easy to get caught up in the deception – some believe that America is simply a Christian nation, case closed.  Others believe they are supporting the poor and doing God’s work by purchasing fair trade coffees and scones that are $6 a piece (when they could be putting that money to better use and actually helping somebody).   In the holy war texts should we place ourselves on the giving or receiving end?

Within one chapter of 1 Samuel we get seemingly contradictory portraits of God’s knowledge:

15:29 – “Moreover the Glory of God of Israel will not recant or change his mind: for his is not a mortal, that he should change his mind.”

15:11 – “I regret that I made Saul king, for he has turned back from following me, and has not carried out my commands.”

It would seem that if one does not change their mind, they couldn’t regret something.  If God’s vision of the future is exhaustive, how can he do something that he would “later” regret?  I have always heard that biblical texts that present aspects of God that seem to give him human attributes are merely examples of the Bible “speaking on our level” since we are not perfect and all knowing individuals and the Bible must accommodate our shortcomings; but if we aren’t all knowing, how could we possibly possess the ability to distinguish which biblical texts to take literally?  What are we to do with such texts?

The complimentary pictures of the Israelite inhabitation given in Joshua and Judges parallel the dominant mental models many Christians create when thinking about divine providence.  Either God works gradually and little by little or he does so in great and mighty acts.  Often we look for one method while excluding the other.  We may praise God for a sudden and unexpected miracle, while ignoring the “still small voice” that is with us constantly.  I think Gideon fits well into such an impatient model.  When we first meet Gideon, he questions God’s providence – “if the lord is with us, why then has all this happened to us?”  The audience can smile or cringe at the dramatic irony, since we know that the “Israelites did what was evil in the sight of the LORD.”  Dramatic irony does not get Gideon off the hook, however.  He continues to ask for signs from God (6:17, 39).  It is clear that Gideon can only see the acts of God that are right in front of him at any moment.  He is blind to the big picture; but his ways of thinking and doubting are not so far from our own.  Questions of “where was God” are all too common among believers today because many assume that God only acts in big and mighty ways.  We must constantly be reassured of his presence, because we are insecure and cannot trust the simple and understated ways of God.  Perhaps the question we should be asking is not “where was God,” but rather “where am I looking for God?”

Soul competency and individual autonomy are staples of Baptist life and in the war against fundamentalism they are highly emphasized.  It seems that in an effort to combat legalistic conservatism some have sworn blind allegiance to individual freedom that liberalism can offer.  But what is the liberated Baptist to do with lengthy lists of laws, commands, and punishments as listed in Leviticus 8-20?  Certainly the liberating and fulfilling actions of Christ must be taken into consideration, but OT commands certainly cannot be dismissed without consideration.  How do we as Baptists deal with seemingly black and white/yes or no statements?

It would seem that at best, the Israelites only indirectly considered God in their complaining in Exodus 2, if at all.  They critique and insult Moses when he first discusses the potential for freedom (2:14) and complain continually both during and after he delivers them from Pharaoh (5:21, 15:24, 16:2, 17:3, etc..).  Based on their complaining attitudes, it is difficult to even remotely consider their cries in 2:23 as prayers asking God for deliverance.  It would seem that God is responding to a perceived need, not a direct request.  Does this action of God influence our view on the power of prayer?  Does a prayer from a believer have more influence on God’s actions or does God respond based on the severity of the situation, regardless of the faith of the person praying?  In Genesis 18 we see Abraham intercede for the potential righteous individuals in Sodom and God responds to his direct request, but here in Exodus we see God responding to a request that is implied at best.  What conditions determine how God responds (if at all) to prayer?

Genesis 32:9-12

9 Then Jacob prayed, “O God of my father Abraham, God of my father Isaac, O LORD, who said to me, ‘Go back to your country and your relatives, and I will make you prosper,’

10 I am unworthy of all the kindness and faithfulness you have shown your servant. I had only my staff when I crossed this Jordan, but now I have become two groups.

11 Save me, I pray, from the hand of my brother Esau, for I am afraid he will come and attack me, and also the mothers with their children.

12 But you have said, ‘I will surely make you prosper and will make your descendants like the sand of the sea, which cannot be counted.’ ”

I find myself identifying with Jacob in this Passage.  What at first glance seems like a lofty and grand prayer, fails upon closer inspection.  Up until this point in his life, Jacob has lied and deceived his immediate and extended family and grifted through life.  He had certainly lived up to his name.  He had not relied on God for his blessing, but rather on his own cunning and sly abilities.  Suddenly, we see him cry out to God.  Esau is coming, and he is not alone!  The last interaction between the two brothers was not positive and Jacob is afraid of the actions his brother (and his 400 men) will take against him (32:7).   Jacob’s prayer is not motivated by thanksgiving, but by fear and necessity.  I can certainly relate.  I have voiced more than a few prayers that were motivated by mistakes coming back to haunt me.  The most recent examples that come to mind are procrastination and lengthy seminary assignments.  The closer the due date (or time), the more “heartfelt” my prayers become.  There are many more examples of insincere prayers that I have spoken over the years.  In most cases when the request is granted, my actions reveal that my prayer was insincere and I go right back to the behavior that initially motivated my frantic prayers.  Again, I find a parallel in Jacob.  After the brothers reconcile, Jacob’s actions reveal a less than grateful heart that does not represent the lofty prayer language in 32:7.  He lies to Esau and ditches him to go to Succoth.  Jacob’s actions betray the kindness that Esau showed him.