Deus é cruel no Antigo Testamento?

by Gregory K. Beale

Como Deus pode ser moralmente bom se ele ordena ações aparentemente más — por exemplo, o extermínio dos cananeus? Este livreto explora esse importante tópico do Antigo Testamento.

Navegar pelas questões sobre moralidade, especialmente a moralidade de Deus no Antigo Testamento, exige cuidado especial e um prudente exame das Escrituras. Neste pequeno livreto, é exatamente isso que Beale oferece aos leitores.
— Miles V. Van Pelt

Este livreto trata com competência esse tema difícil e, para muitos, problemático. E o modo como Beale aborda as (duras) questões suscitadas ao longo da história da salvação é particularmente útil e instrutivo.

— Richard B. Gaffin, Jr.

Genres: Christian

54 pages, Paperback

First published July 31, 2013

About the author

G. K. Beale (PhD, University of Cambridge) is professor of New Testament and biblical theology at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He is the coeditor of the Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament and the author of numerous books, including A New Testament Biblical Theology: The Unfolding of the Old Testament in the New.

Reviews

[Felipe Sabino · Rating 5 out of 5]

Muito bom!

[Hobart · Rating 4 out of 5]

★ ★ ★ 1/2 (rounded up)
This originally appeared at The Irresponsible Reader.
---
This is a lot shorter of a work than I usually talk about, but I needed a short read to break up longer, heavier reads. So now I guess I get to talk briefly about it before I talked about longer, heavier reads. (not that this is lightweight by any means)

WHAT'S THE MORALITY OF GOD IN THE OLD TESTAMENT ABOUT?
Believers and unbelievers alike stumble over some of what seems immoral in the Old Testament. Particularly what seems to be evil on the part of God. For example: God's commands to exterminate the Canaanites and the imprecatory (cursing) Psalms.

How ought the believer to respond to their own questions about this, much less the questions from those outside the faith?

Beale looks briefly at a couple of popular responses to this and finds them wanting. In their place, he suggests a "plausible fivefold approach."

There seems to be a better way to look at this problem. We will explore it from five different angles, which will help us to understand it more thoroughly. First, how does the killing of the Canaanites demonstrate God’s justice and righteousness? Second, how could Israel’s unique commission as a “kingdom of priests” (Ex. 19:6) shed light on the extermination of the Canaanites? Third, how does God’s sovereignty over all things help us to better understand that he can be considered blameless in all that he does, despite the problems just mentioned above? Fourth, how does the idea of God’s judgment of unbelieving humanity at the end of time shed light on this problem? Finally, how does the law of loving one’s neighbor now and at the end of time help us to better apprehend the issue about the Canaanites and the psalmist’s cursing of his enemies (though this last point has some overlap with the fourth point)?

Each question gets a couple of pages of explanation before moving on, so that the reader is given the complete fivefold approach along with some idea of how the ideas are worked out.

SO, WHAT DID I THINK ABOUT THE MORALITY OF GOD IN THE OLD TESTAMENT?
Not surprisingly, my main concern is length. I want to see each of these points better developed--I don't think this has the makings of a 200+ page book or anything, but I think it could easily be twice as long to really flesh out some of the points.

The brevity works against itself primarily in that I don't get to see the ideas examined thoroughly, or tested. The reader is given enough to understand the fivefold approach, enough to chew on it. But I'd like to see it worked out. I'd like to see Beale work through one of the difficult passages, or one of the Psalms in question and show "here's where we see this and over there is where you see that aspect in action," etc.

But the point of this series, the point of this being a booklet is for a short introduction to the idea. It's supposed to be enough to show the reader that there are answers to the hard questions, just not enough to convince them. So I have to take it on its own terms--as such, it's fine. Even more than fine. And I think there's something to that fivefold approach, I just want to be convinced. I'm just going to need to look elsewhere for that.

[Josh · Rating 4 out of 5]

Beale's purpose in writing this book is to succinctly discuss "the problem of how God can be considered to be morally good, while at the same time he does things and commands people in the Old Testament to do things that do not appear to be good." Beale's question is a legitimate question, and if we are being honest with each other, one that all of us, as Christians, have thought about at one time or another. I don't have any statistics to back this up, but if I had to wager a guess I would assume that this is one of the reasons why a lot of Christians avoid the Old Testament. To them, it appears as if this is a completely different God than the New Testament Jesus who is both "unjustly" cruel (commands Israel to kill all the men, women, and children of the Canaanites) and always angry about something (makes Israel march for 40 years in the desert while killing off the disobedient generation who doesn't believe God's Word that the Promised Land is theirs for the taking). Though there are a lot of different "problems" that can be discussed as it pertains to God's morality in the Old Testament, Beale's book focuses on the ethnic cleansing of the Canaanites and then the imprecations (cursings) in the book of Psalms. If we come to biblical conclusions about God's commandements pertaining to the ethnic cleansing of the Canaanites and imprecations in Psalms, then that will provide a biblical approach on how to handle the other moral "problems" of God that one might come across in the Word. [Normally, the best way to approach a review of a smaller book such as this one is to provide a succinct review, but the subject matter of the book is so deep that a more thorough review is required.]

The first possible solution to the dilemma that Beale mentions is that wartime ethics are legitimately different from peacetime ethics, and the use of lying and deception are "an accepted ethic in wartime". For example, "an army may ambush another army through deceptive tactics. This is legitimate practice during war. Killing the enemy is also condoned during battle." This was true in ancient times just like it is true of modern times. However, the killing of all the men, women, and children is not condoned in modern times of war (even though it happens). How does one reconcile the fact that God is the one who commands the Israelites to annihilate all of the Canaanites, and it wasn't a bunch of Israelites taking orders from corrupt leaders? Beale doesn't answer the question right away, but moves on to laying out for the reader other possible solutions to the moral dilemma.

Next, there is the possible solution that the divine command to kill all women and children is not meant to be taken literally, and "merely refers to wiping out only all the armies of the Canannites." The gist of this possible solution is the focus on "total and decisive victory over the fighting forces" and not on the utter destruction of all the Canaanite men, women, and children. Those this solution is possible, it doesn't look to be highly probable based on the evidence provided in the Bible. Truth be told, there were more than likely Canaanites who repented of their wickedness and were spared, and also others who escaped, but the evidence seems to support the fact that God wanted his commandment to be carried out literally.

Beale then proceeds to offer five different angles that might better help us understand this moral "problem" more thoroughly, and then provides a detailed breakdown of each of these angles in proceeding chapters:

(1) How does the killing of the Canaanites demonstrate God's justice and righteousness?
- Israel is uniquely seen as God's instrument of justice in a redemptive-historical setting that pertains to the exterminating of a people who were wickedly depraved, and is something that is not to be repeated in history again. Basically, there is a standard for righteousness, and the Canaanites violated that standard and were rewarded with destruction. Beale rightly asserts that the problem with this view is that it really doesn't provide an answer as to why killing defenseless women, elderly, and children is needed in order to execute God's justice.

(2) How could Israel's unique commission as a "kingdom of priests" shed light on the extermination of the Canaanites?
- The focus, again, of this chapter is a view of Israel from a redemptive-historical vantage-point. The Garden of Eden was to be a Sanctuary and to expand is reaches to the rest of the earth. Adam failed to keep it from uncleanness, was kicked out from Eden, commissioned to become a "kingdom of priests" (Ex. 19:6), and to "enter the Promised Land and make it another garden temple by completely cleansing it from the uncleanness of the Canaanites." The Promised Land is even referred to as being "like the garden of Eden" (Gen. 13:10; Isa. 51:3; Ezek. 36:35; Joel 2:3). As a "kingdom of priests", Israel was to exterminate all Canaanite uncleanness, just like the Priests in Jerusalem were to keep out every bit of uncleanness from the Temple. Again, this is a unique commandment and not one that was to be repeated.

(3) How does God's sovereignty over all things help us to better understand that he can be considered blameless in all that he does, despite the problems previously mentioned?
- The self-sufficiency of God is defined (no one else helps him to be who He is and to do what He does; He is unconditionally self-existent). Therefore, He has the freedom to determine what He will do towards His creation and we have no right to question it since God's will is perfect and not dictated by anything outside of Himself, but is always done with a mindset to bring Him the greatest glory. And the greatest thing that can happen for man is that God be eternally passionate for His own glory since He is not subject to the same rules of humility that His creation is subject to (since we are creatures and He is the Creator).

(4) How does the idea of God's judgment of unbelieving humanity at the end of time shed light on this problem?
- Basically, Beale presents an eschatological view of the annihilation of the Canaanites that says, "God's command to annihilate all the Canaanites is an anticipation of the end-time judgment of all people and thus a suspension of the expression of His common grace to unbelievers during the epoch of Israel." The command to destroy the Canaanites was done with an eye on the day of Judgment when "ordinary ethical rules of the pre-consummation world are suspended and the ethical principles of the last judgment penetrate back into history." The scale to which this was carried out against the Canaanites was small compared to what will be meted out to the rest of the unbelieving world in the end-times.

(5) How does the law of loving one's neighbor now and at the end of time help us to better apprehend the issue about the Canaanites and the psalmist's cursing his enemies?
- The psalmist's cursings need to be read in light of their ultimate fulfillment in the New Testament, and specifically those that are applied to Christ. Beale also discusses in pretty good detail how certain laws have been "uniquely suspended" throughout history for positive typological reasons (see 1 Samuel 21:1-6 / Matthew 12:3-4). Reading these examples throughout Scripture shows us that the "suspending" of the moral law of "loving one's neighbor" is not violated in the end-times when true justice is brought down by God on those who reject Him. Of course, an objection to this suspension and application of certain moral laws is that it leads to "moral relativity". Beale again answers this, like he has done many times before, with the fact "that certain episodes in Israel's history were uniquely designed to be pre-figurements of later end-time events in redemptive history, whether events concerning Christ's first coming or his final coming and last judgment."

Beale spends a good bit of time towards the end of his book devoted to helping the reader understand the uniqueness of what God was asking Israel to do, and the cursings of the psalmist towards wicked men, and how those things were foreshadowings of judgment and some of redemption. He repeats that their was a temporary suspension of the moral law to "love one's neighbor" because the Israelites are carrying out a judgment that typologically prefigures the last judgment.

Overall, this was a really good book that lays out most of the arguments for and against why God commanded Israel to annihilate all of the Canaanite men, women, and children, as well as the curses found in the Psalms, and how the carrying out of these things does not violate the moral goodness of an omnipotent God.

Title: The Morality of God in the Old Testament (Christian Answers to Hard Questions)

Author: Gregory K. Beale

Publisher: P & R Publishing (2013)

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher through the P & R Publishing book review bloggers program on NetGalley. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission's 16 CFR, Part 255 : "Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising."

[JD Veer · Rating 3 out of 5]

Simple, concise, and enlightening.

[Lucas Bradburn · Rating 3 out of 5]

Small, but helpful.

[WH · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very short but really packed. Needed to read this slowly and carefully, which was a little unexpected. The review questions at the end of each section were extremely useful.

[Tengxiang · Rating 3 out of 5]

写得不错，但这个fivefold approach读���还是不满意。主要是第四点里，infants这个方面的讨论依然如鲠在喉。

[Morgana Santos · Rating 5 out of 5]

Um assunto difícil, confesso. Mas, o livro levanta bons argumentos.

[Saul W · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kline vindicated.

[Jimmy · Rating 4 out of 5]

NOTE: This book is provided to me free by P&R Publishing and Net Galley without any obligation for a positive review. All opinions offered above are mine unless otherwise stated or implied.

A work that is accessible for a lay audience on the problem of the righteousness of God as He is revealed in the Old Testament. Although the author G.K. Beale focuses specifically on the genocide of the Canaanites and the imprecatory Psalms in this work, the principles Beale employ would apply to other similar dilemma people might have with the Old Testament. Beale appeals to the fact that the Canaanite genocide was a specific redemptive historical event that cannot be repeated again, as a special suspension of the second table of the Ten Commandments that foreshadows the final Judgment Day. While I agree with Beale that the imprecatory Psalms and elimination of the Canaanites points ahead to the final Judgment of God, I think Beale’s argument is rather weak when he said “such brief behavioral suspensions do not occur during the era of the church age because God has designed no events during this time as foreshadowings of the future” (Location 348 onwards). There are I believe, New Testament events that foreshadow the future such as the Lord’s Supper which points towards a future return of Christ (1 Corinthians 11) where we will dine with Him one day, the Holy Spirit’s manifestation at Pentecost pointing forward to a future release of the Spirit, etc. Beale’s stronger argument is the one in which he draws parallel between the ceasing of miracles after the New Testament era likewise there is a ceasing of the mandate for war against Canaanites and imprecatory Psalm for right now as well. I think Beale’s position could have also benefited from noting the difference between the institutions of the Church versus that of the state of national Israel. Ultimately, I think the best defense of the morality of God in the Old Testament is the Ex Lex approach as advocated by Gordon Clark and Jay Adams. I see this approach employed in the pages of Scripture such as in Job 38-42, Habakkuk and Romans 9: God is the source of morality; he has not many any laws forbidding Him to judge the wicked, so therefore there really is no rational ground to charge God for immoral conduct. Beale does appeal to God being above the second table of the ten commandments but he could have capitalized on this more and made it the centerpiece of his thesis. After all, the issue seems to be not whether it’s applicable today but the fact that God even allowed imprecatory Psalms, killing of Canaanites, etc. I think appealing to Ex Lex goes to the heart of the issue. What I most appreciated from this work is the excursus in the end by Beale which gives a solid exegetical argument for why we must take the Canaanite killings as literal and not just a hyperbole. Here Beale does an excellent job interacting with Paul Copan’s position and the scholarship behind Copan’s arguments. I definitely recommend this work but believe this can be supplemented by other works.

[Josh · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is another great book in a series that P&R and Westminster Press have teamed up to publish. If this is not the best one, it is definitely right up there and a genuine 5 star book (especially when looking at it for what it is).

The question of God’s morality in light of certain events recorded throughout Scripture is one argument that will be cited over and over again by skeptics and unbelievers. Beale looks at this topic, narrowing his focus on how to specifically defend the morality of God against accusations made based on this particular event.

“The purpose of this booklet is to discuss the problem of how God can be considered to be morally good, while at the same time he does things and commands people in the Old Testament to do things that do not appear to be good. One famous example is God’s command to israel to exterminate every man, woman, and child of the Canaanites (e.g., cf. Deut. 20:12–15 with 20:16–18).”

Beale presents the problem and takes the reader through a few possible defenses including : “The Divine Command to Kill All Women and Children Is Not Meant to Be Taken Literally” and “Wartime Ethic Legitimately Different from Peacetime Ethic”, where it is argued that what is considered good moral behavior in war is sometimes different from that in peacetime. Neither of these are convincing to Beale and he settles on a 5 fold approach to defend the morality of God as presented in Old Testament Scripture.

Beale makes a great case and explains it clearly and forcefully. While he does not hold to the “not literal” argument, he gives plenty of space in the book to explain its merits and leaves the reader with a rather forceful argument for it as well. Will this book settle in everyone’s hearts and minds the issue of certain Old Testament wrath passages or imprecatory Psalms coupled with God is love and a “love your neighbor” ethos that pervades the New Testament? Probably not. But it is a great primer and a great place to go when faced with these passages and these concerns. Beale gives the willing reader the ammunition to go and face Scripture on this issue rather than avoid it, which is a mighty task in its own right. This book is well worth the money and the time. Pick up and read!!

I received a review copy of this to provide an honest review.

[Andrew · Rating 5 out of 5]

G.K. Beale addresses the common argument made by unbelievers concerning God’s morality in the Old Testament he discusses in particular God’s command to wipe out the Canaanites and the Imprecatory Psalms answering from the standpoint of Biblical Theology here is an excerpt of part of his answer to why God commanded that the Canaanites be wiped out by Israel:

“Just as Adam was to keep the Eden sanctuary clean and then later Israel’s individual priests were to keep the temple completely clean from defilement, so the Israelite warriors were to wipe out the Canaanites and purify the land, since it was to be pure like the sanctuary of Eden and Israel’s temple. Israel, as corporate Adam, was to do what Adam had been commissioned to do but did not do. In fact, the Promised Land referred to at points throughout Scripture as being “like the garden of Eden” (of “like the garden of the LORD”) (see Gen 13:10, Isaiah 51:3, Ezekiel 36:35, Joel 2:3). Against this background, God’s command to Israel to exterminate the Canaanite uncleanness was a commission to wipe out every aspect of impurity. Just as Israel’s priests in the Jerusalem temple were to keep out every bit of uncleanness, so was Israel as a nation of priests to purge every bit of defilement from the land as a temple. This is why every idolater, whether young or old or male or female, ideally had to be killed or driven out from the land. Again, this was a unique and unrepeatable commission which in no way applies after the epoch of Israel’s theocracy" (pg.11).

[Mark A Powell · Rating 4 out of 5]

How can God be the good deity He claims if He sanctions the deaths of people like the Canaanites in the Old Testament? Several theories have been proposed to resolve this apparent conflict, and here Beale gives a brief survey of them, driving to a conclusion that holds to both the accuracy of Scripture and the goodness of God. Beale’s scholarship is typically top shelf, and his arguments are largely persuasive without being overbearing or dogmatic.

[Jennifer · Rating 4 out of 5]

Review on my blog: http://bit.ly/1g8gVKh