Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Baby Smashing? | Ps 137:9 | Just Read Mark | 110912 | ||
Any thoughts on how to interpret this "blessing" from Psalm 137? | ||||||
2 | Baby Smashing? | Ps 137:9 | dwilde | 110942 | ||
Blessed be the Lord for he is just and righteous. Isaiah 13 11And I, the Lord, will punish the world for its evil 16Their infants also will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses will be plundered and their wives ravished. This whole prophecy is generally conceded to have been written well over a century (170 years, according to archbishop James Ussher) before Babylon's downfall, when the circumstances necessary for its fulfillment seemed most improbable--but it has been literally fulfilled in detail. Human keenness of foresight could not possibly have foreseen that great Babylon would be wiped from the face of the earth (Isa. 13:19), become ruins infested by wild animals (Isa. 13:21, 22), be feared because of superstition by the Arabs (Isa. 13:20)--with only a small village near the area to mark the place where, since the days of Nimrod, mighty kings had exalted themselves above the God of heaven. Various conquerors during the centuries contributed to Babylon's downfall until, by the first century B.C., it was as utterly and hopelessly destroyed as Sodom and Gomorrah (Isa. 13:19). Jeremiah 25 12Then when seventy years are completed, I will punish the king of Babylon and that nation, the land of the Chaldeans, says the Lord, for their iniquity, and will make the land [of the Chaldeans] a perpetual waste.(3) 13And I will bring upon that land all My words which I have pronounced against it, even all that is written in this book, which Jeremiah has prophesied against all the nations. From Bible Gateway |
||||||
3 | Baby Smashing? | Ps 137:9 | Just Read Mark | 111027 | ||
The violence of nationalism. Thanks for your great answer. There is much to think about there. Here's what I've been thinking about since I posted the question. I'm not certain about it (and its definately a different take than what you have offered) but I think it makes sense. I read this Psalm with great empathy, thinking of all that they have lost. Their whole sense of God's action in their midst was centred on the Temple and the promised land --- losing both must have been devastating. It seems to me that, while God can execute judgement, it is not our place to call out for the smashing of baby's heads. God is judge; we are to turn the other cheek and get hit again (Matt 5:39). Since violence begetts violence, God often uses the wicked to judge the wicked --- which doesn't leave much room for "Blessed"... To destroy the children for the parents' fault also goes against Ezekiel 18. So, what then to make of this verse? Certainly it is the human cry of anger and humilation, crying out for "justice." But, as we are prone to do, it is a vision of justice gone awry. Then, looking back up the Psalm, we see other distortions that lead the lament to this point. The identification with Jerusalem is stronger than the identification as God's people. Exile does not alienate them from being God's people --- in fact, exile is anticipated in the Mosaic covenant (Deut 29:28). But, due to their nationalism, they are unable to sing the Lord's song in a foreign land. "If I do not set Jerusalem above my highest joy." (v 6) Only God should be their highest joy. Thus, their idolatry of national pride leads them to the brutality of the final verse. |
||||||
4 | Baby Smashing? | Ps 137:9 | srbaegon | 111065 | ||
Hello JRM, You have mentioned several things here. Let me try to address some. 1) Violence does not necessarily beget violence. In the world of fallen men, the use of force is about the only thing that keeps political peace. 2) While asking for the dashing babies against rocks, remember that this (and worse) was typical amongst the barbarous peoples surrounding Israel. 3) Christians are free to ask for God's vengeance. See for example Rev 6:10. 4) Ezekiel 18 was written about individuals, not nations. Also, it was directed to those who knew what the right was and was willing to do it. If we were to make your application of Ezek 18 to the whole of Scripture, then God sinned in telling Joshua to wipe out the Canaanites. 5) Jerusalem was their highest joy because that was where God made His name and presence to dwell. It had great spiritual significance. They could not come before God. To say this was simply nationalistic pride doesn't do justice to what was involved. Steve |
||||||
5 | Baby Smashing? | Ps 137:9 | Just Read Mark | 111183 | ||
Hi Steve. Thanks for your message. Part of me agrees with what you have said.... Part of me sees things another way. So, humbly, I submit these thoughts: 1) There is more than one category of violence, I guess. Sorry for my original blanket statement. So what kind of violence do we see in verse 9? The kind that "keeps political peace"? 2) The Israelites, surely, were called to different standards than the surrounding cultures. 3) Christians are free to ask for God's vengeance --- but are we to ENACT it? The radical nature of the gospel is that we are to submit, immitating Christ's submission. See the instruction to slaves suffering unjust treatment (1Peter 2:18-23). The Church is built by the blood of its martyrs --- literally and figuratively. It is interesting that the Isaiah text that mentions the smashing of babies has the Medes doing the dirty work (Isaiah 13:17), not God's chosen people. 4) God's judgement must come against nations and individuals alike. With Sodom and Gomorrah, the innocent were evacuated before the destruction. In Canaan, "Rahab the prostitute did not perish with the disobedient" (Hebrews 11:31) Surely, then, the justice of Ezek 18 can still apply. Although, perhaps this wasn't understood at the time Psalm 137 was written? It seems Ezekiel 18 was written as a counterpoint to the interpretation of other scriptures (where descendants are punished for their parents' actions). 5) Certainly, "Jerusalem was where God made his name and presence to dwell". But the exile began to pose some problems for this theology ---- even after the exile, they remained an occupied people. Even with the Maccabean uprising --- the dynasty that followed was far from faithful. Thus, the picture of what the "kingdom of God" should look like never really happened. It is this unfulfilled expectation that adds such drama to Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem. As Christians, we depoliticize "Jerusalem", understanding this merging of politics and faith to be about heaven. We are still, of course, politally active --- but "Jerusalem" becomes a symbol of our ultimate home. We can look back at Psalm 137, and see the view of Jerusalem as a distortion of God's plan. (Of course, how could they have known? But how can we read it without hindsight? How do we read without anachronism?) 6) Can you imagine Jesus smashing the baby's heads? A naive (and, again anachronistic) question, but I'll ask it anyway. Yours, JRM |
||||||
6 | Baby Smashing? | Ps 137:9 | srbaegon | 111197 | ||
Hello JRM, I'll give these a try. 1) I would say this is clearly retributive violence. You really can't read it any other way. 2) Yes, Israel was called to a different (higher) standard. That did not prohibit them from calling on God to have the Babylonians endure what they suffered. 3) It's God's job to enact vengeance (Rom 12:19). 4) I don't know of any scriptures that state or imply descendants were to be punished for the sins of their parents. We do have Exod 20:5b "For I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me." Therefore it was perfectly acceptable for God to allow retribution on the children as a natural consequence of the parents' sins. Now, take note that I firmly believe that those who cannot believe because age will go to heaven. 5) How could it have posed a problem with their theology? The only problem was that they were removed from God, and they knew it. I'm not sure it matters that they were occupied. When Judah returned to the land, they were free to worship again and fellowship with God. I don't "depoliticize Jerusalem" except for the promise of the New Jerusalem being set up on earth. Psalm 137 does not view Jerusalem as a distortion of God's plan. In the context of progressive revelation, they were in the middle of God's redemptive plan. 6) No. That's why he allowed sinful nations to do it. Steve |
||||||