Did you overstate the case for Amalekites being accepted as
immigrants into Israel?
[Draft: July 31/2010]
Someone asked
this good question about something I said in the
article
on the "Butchering of the Amalekites":
"I deeply appreciate
the comprehensive
study of this long-standing ethical problem which your paper
presented. It is by far the best analysis and examination I have
seen. I’m grateful to have found it in my preparation to teach 1
Samuel 15 Sunday.
"It seems to me you may have overstated the case for Amalekites being
accepted as emigrants into Israel. I find the young man in 2
Samuel 1 as the only example, and it doesn’t seem clear whether he was
a soldier under Saul, a POW set free accidentally in the confusion of
battle, or what. We do have the examples of Rahab and Ruth, but
of course they were not Amalekites. Do you have any further
example or clarification at this point?
I was
traveling when I replied to this, so the diction/style is very
hurried:
We don't have many specific examples of
non-Israelites mentioned in the
bible, but the extensive legal directives about 'one law for the native
born and for the foreigner living among you' create the
presumption of
a large body of 'resident aliens' protected by God's law--without
restriction as to nationality.
Here's some quick data from 2 resources, and I will comment on these in
a minute:
"The Mosaic legislation was quite open to receive outsiders into the
covenant community (hence the LXX rendering of ger proselytos).
Certain rights were conceded to them, including sabbatical rest (Ex.
20:10; 23:12; Dt. 5:14), a fair trial (1:16), access to the cities of
refuge (Nu. 35:15; Josh. 20:9), and participation in the Feasts of
Booths and Weeks (Dt. 16:11, 14). Their sustenance was to be guaranteed
by provision for gleaning (along with other needy groups, Lev. 19:10;
23:22), by the triennial tithe (Dt. 26:11f) and by the produce of the
land during the Sabbatical Year (Lev. 25:6f). Indeed, the juxtaposition
of ger with "native of the land"
(e.g.,
Ex.
12:19, 48), "your
countrymen" (lit "your brother"), "sons of Israel,"
and similar expressions clearly indicates that sojourners were to be
treated for the most part just like ordinary Israelites. Their
privileges and responsibilities thus included
observing the Day of
Atonement (Lev. 16:29), the Passover (Ex. 12:49; Nu. 9:14), Unleavened
Bread (Ex. 12:19); sacrificial procedures (Lev. 17:8; 22:18; Nu.
15:14–16); atonement for
unintentional and defiant sin (15:26–31);
purification rites after eating unclean meat (Lev. 17:15; Nu. 19:10),
sacrifices to Molech (Lev. 20:2); blaspheming the name of the Lord
(24:16), sexual and moral purity (18:26), lex talionis (24:20–22). Lev.
19:33f summarized the idealized position of the gerger’s
position
was
so secure that his prosperity could conceivably
exceed that of the native Israelites, and the latter could become
servants for the former (Lev. 25:47–55). Covenantal infidelity would
bring these conditions as a curse upon Israel (Dt. 28:43). ... Such
rights and privileges only accrued to the sojourner following
complete identification with the covenant community, including
circumcision (Ex. 12:43–47). Those
who refused were treated as
foreigners. Whereas Lev. 17:15 forbids the native and the
ger to eat animals that have
died a natural death, Dt. 14:21 suggests
that such animals could be given to the ger or sold to foreigners for
consumption. Rather than treating the former reference as a postexilic
development, in which the ger’s
status
had
improved greatly, as is
commonly done, the conjoining of ger
with norî suggests
that
the
term
is not being used technically, the allusion apparently being to an
uncircumcised ger. ... At an
early period Israel probably adhered to these ideals (Dt. 29:10f
[MT 9f]; cf. also 31:12, which included the sojourners in the assembly
of those gathered for instruction in the Torah and the fear of the
Lord). The gerîm were also present at the covenant renewal
ceremony conducted at Mt. Ebal and Mt. Gerizim (Josh. 8:33). ...
Second-class treatment of sojourners
may, however, be documented from
later history. The gêrîm
noted separately in David’s census
(2 Ch. 2:17 [MT 16]) became the basis of Solomon’s work crews, some of
which consisted entirely of sojourners (cf. 1 Ch. 22:2). Nevertheless,
in Ezekiel’s vision of the restored
community (47:22), the
identification of the gêrîm
with native Israelites is
almost complete, even to receiving an inheritance of land in the midst
of the tribe in which they resided. [ISBE]
"Foreigners or sojourners had certain
rights but also certain
limitations while in Israel. They could offer sacrifices (Lv
17:8;
22:18) but could not enter the sanctuary unless circumcised (Ez 44:9).
They were allowed to participate in the three great Jewish festivals
(Dt 16:11, 14) but could not eat the Passover meal unless circumcised
(Ex 12:43, 48). Foreigners
were
not
obliged to follow the Israelite
religion, but shared in some of its benefits (Dt 14:29). They
were not
to work on the sabbath and the Day of Atonement (Ex 20:10; 23:12; Lv
16:29; Dt 5:14) and could be stoned for reviling or blaspheming God’s
name (Lv 24:16; Nm 15:30). Foreigners were forbidden to eat blood (Lv
17:10, 12) but could eat animals that had died a natural death (Dt
14:21). Israel’s code of sexual morality also applied to the foreigner
(Lv 18:26). There were prohibitions
against Israelite intermarriage
with foreigners, but it was nevertheless a common occurrence (Gn
34:14;
Ex
34:12,
16; Dt 7:3, 4; Jos 23:12). ...Civil rights were
provided for foreigners by the Law of Moses (Ex
12:49; Lv 24:22), and they came under
the same legal processes and
penalties (Lv 20:2; 24:16, 22; Dt 1:16). They were to be treated
politely (Ex 22:21; 23:9), loved as those
under the love of God (Lv
19:34; Dt 10:18, 19), and treated generously if poor and receive the
fruits of the harvest (Lv 19:10; 23:22; Dt 24:19–22). They could
receive asylum in times of trouble (Nm 35:15; Jos 20:9). Foreign
servants were to receive treatment equal to Hebrew servants (Dt 24:14).
A foreigner could not take part in tribal deliberations or become a
king (17:15). The prophet Ezekiel
looked forward to the messianic age
when the foreigner would share all the blessings of the land with God’s
own people (Ez 47:22, 23) in Israel. . [Baker Ency of the Bible,
'alien']
The only
stated restrictions, btw, that are ever mentioned are those
for which God made exceptions(!): no Moabite (Ruth), no Ammonite
(Rehoboam's mother was an Ammonite wife--for good or mostly ill--of
Solomon, so Ammonite blood went into the Davidic line at that
point--like Moabite blood had earlier), no Canaanite (Rahab), and no
Amalekite (the case in 2 Sam, by my reading).
[Even the forbidden-from-worship eunuch
would have a place in the
future kingdom, even though we don't have examples in the OT: see Deut
23.1 followed by Is 56.3-5, which includes the foreigner.]
The 'foreign rabble' that came out of Egypt with Israel (that helped
get them into trouble!) is also part of the backdrop of God's
acceptance of foreigners--of whatever background--into the community
(but not the 'communion') of Israel in the land.
We also have the case of the runaway slave, who is allowed to dwell
anywhere in the land he chooses--without
ethnic/national
exclusions.
In the specific passage I was discussing, let me explain my reading. On
the Amalekite's status, btw,
I take the first part of his statement
("I am the son of a sojourner...")
to
identify
him as being an immigrant--even though the rest of his
testimony is clearly false. He
might have been a mercenary in Saul's army [Eglon of Moab used
Amalekite mercenaries], but that would
not exclude him from being the
son of a sojourner, of course. [If he were a solider in the
victorious
Philistine army--as some commentators take him--he wouldn't have come
to
court David's favor, IMO.] It was the
falsehood
part
of his statement
that he was trying to use to win David's approval--his status as 'son
of sojourner' wouldn't necessarily have been to gain favor... and his
self-identification as an Amalekite would not have been a ploy to gain
David's approval either(!!), of course. So, I don't see any
reason for
falsehood in the identification part
of
his
statement--only in the latter.
(And
David's
presumption
that the Amalekite understood about 'the
LORD's anointed' -although it could have been an ironic statement to
prove to the Amalekite that he was not
a truly-integrated
sojourner--still makes me think David accepted his identification as
'the son of a sojourner' as being accurate.). So, it's the 'son of a
sojourner' phrase that tips the scales for me, into believing
this man
was at least the SON of an immigrant Amalekite. Note, though, that he
doesn't indicate that he himself was
a
'sojourner'--but
this might have
been just to emphasize the
2nd-generation 'stronger' status of his position.
I should also mention that I cannot think of a
single other ENEMY of
Israel in the OT (of any scale) that we do not have at least one
example of a 'favorable' or 'friendly' contact from that group.
Uriah
the Hittite is a good
example. Even though he was a soldier, he was
obviously well-integrated into Israel at some level. Bathsheba his
wife/widow was probably the granddaughter of David/Absalom's famous counselor
Ahithophel. Nahash the Ammonite king
took
care
of David's family during
his persecution by Saul. Araunah the Jebusite, Ittai the
loyal
Philistine friend/supporter of David from Gath (2 Sam 15), etc.
Even the hated Edomites are
mentioned as
a covenant partner of the Lord (e.g. Deut 2.1-8), and participated in
military alliances WITH--not always against!--Israel (2 kings 3).
It is not that these people are 'sojourners' but rather that the
'ethnic boundaries'
of Israel and the community, or the relationship-area 'around' her were
perhaps a bit more porous than we might otherwise suspect. And
that the
lack of a specific people's mention (e.g. another mention of Amalek)
would
NOT be an indication of their exclusion from this general 'openness'
of
biblical Israel to sincere immigration desires. just FWIW.
Good question--thanks!
Glenn
The Christian ThinkTank...[https://www.Christianthinktank.com]
(Reference Abbreviations)