Jonathan Burnside on Deuteronomy 4.5-8: God's Law and the Nations

* More thoughts from Jonathan Burnside's Words of Wisdom, Words of Prophecy: Why and How Biblical Law Speaks in the Public Square.  See Applying God's Law Today for previous post.

"Deut. 4:5-8 indicates, strikingly, that Israel is obliged to communicate the wisdom of Torah to the surrounding nations, even though they do not share what would nowadays be called Israel’s ‘private commitment’ to the deity. Even (or especially) after 40 years in the wilderness, Israel is exhorted to positive political engagement with the nations. Moreover, the reference to “the peoples” in verse 6 includes even those people-groups with whom Israel is in armed conflict. Deut. 4:5-8 thus envisages the potential for persuasive communication even in the most hostile of political contexts.

“See, I have taught you statutes and rules, as the LORD my God commanded me, that you should do them in the land that you are entering to take possession of it. Keep them and do them, for that will be your wisdom and your understanding in the sight ofthe peoples, who, when they hear all these statutes, will say, ‘Surely this great nationis a wise and understanding people.’ For what great nation is there that has a god sonear to it as the LORD our God is to us, whenever we call upon him? And what great nation is there, that has statutes and rules so righteous as all this law that I set beforeyou today?” (Deut. 4:5-8; Moses speaking).

"The key point is that Israel communicates divine laws to the nations through practical action(“keep them and do them”). Although there is no reason to think either teaching or instruction(as opportunity permits) is excluded, it is only when Israel herself follows Torah that Deuteronomy expects the nations to respond positively and enthusiastically.60 The criteria of practical action reminds us that, contrary to the claims of modern biblical scholars, biblical law is not presented as utopian or élitist. It is always presented as practical and populist (even though it may not always be popular). This means that the virtue of Torah is publicly ascertainable – even to those outside the faith community.

"As far as Deuteronomy is concerned, then, the criteria for successful communication in a pluralist context is practical action."
_________________
Footnote 60: Notably the nations’ observation does not lead them to conclude the laws are bad, or evil. It may well be the case that part of the reason why a negative view has been allowed to form about biblical law is because, for example, the Christian church has not engaged in practical action that reflects the concerns of biblical justice. It is hard to do this, of course, when the texts themselves are ignored and misunderstood within the church. It is notable that when it has tried to do so, as in the Jubilee 2000 campaign, the results were powerfully effective.

Applying God's Law Today

Jonathan Burnside has written a fascinating and major work on understanding biblical law and applying it to contemporary issues.

Dr. Burnside's book God, Justice, and Society: Aspects of Law and Legality in the Bible was honored with critical interaction in the journal Political Theology 14 (5) 2013.  I have not had the opportunity to review these essays but I did read Dr. Burnside's response "Words of Wisdom, Words of Prophecy: Why and How Biblical Law Speaks in the Public Square" and it has a number of important insights.

Here is one particularly good section on applying biblical law:

"One aspect of the problem of applying biblical law is the persistent tendency to view it in an‘all or nothing’ manner. It is assumed that if we are not advocating, say, the stoning of children – to use Nevader’s emotive example – I am being ‘inconsistent’ and so the game is up. But matters are hardly that simple. 

"Take, for example, how lawyers interpret the law. Modern law consists of a wide range of material that is explicitly legal (including all manner of primary and secondary legislation) as well as (so the legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin would argue) material that is implicitly legal (e.g. values, principles and implicit assumptions). They are all part of ‘the law.’ For a Dworkinian lawyer it is all equally authoritative in the sense that it is all, equally, a resource which the judge (or any other legal interpreter) can draw on in reaching a legal decision. Butthat does not mean it all ‘applies’ to the instant case in exactly the same way. Far from it. In reaching a decision the judge is guided by considerations of consistency to the past and considerations of justice to create the most plausible and appealing account of the law that s/he can. A process of selection is going on with the result that not every element within the resources available to the judge will favour the final decision. But we do not thereby conclude that the judge has not ‘applied the law’ or that the process of application is arbitrary. This is because law consists of a whole body of discourse and thinking which guides the judge one way or the other in reaching a decision. 

"Without advocating a Dworkinian reading of biblical law – for one thing, Dworkin can be criticised as subordinating legal texts to the morality of the individual judge – my general point is we should not assume that because we are not ‘applying’ one bit of biblical law (e.g.‘stoning children’) in one particular way (impliedly, in a literal manner) that we cannot speak of ‘applying’ any of it. This is not how modern law works and I do not think it is a sensible reading of biblical law either. We should see the whole of biblical law as a body of discourse and thinking that provides resources and direction for us in responding to current issues. At the same time we cannot, as it were, start with our preferred account of public policy (the free market over socialism, say) and then construct a biblical social vision to match. In this respect my approach differs from Dworkin inasmuch as I regard legal texts (in this case, biblical legal texts) as possessing more authority than Dworkin is prepared to admit. Our present ideas, of social justice or whatever they might be, are open to challenge by the biblical texts at every point. It goes without saying that certain texts are bound to speak in certain times and places far more sharply than others. There is hard thinking to be done and we have to be prepared for a potentially dangerous political stance. 

"This means that the question of applying biblical law is not straightforward. It can’t simply be reduced to a matter of ‘what rules does the Bible have on this subject?’ or ‘what does the Bible expressly say?’ about this or that. Instead, it means drawing on and being aware of a host of contextual beliefs, values, narrative and worldview in which we are active participants, as McConville recognizes. It means recognising, as William P. Brown puts it, the “formative as well as normative, impact that Scripture qua Scripture makes upon reading communities” (emphasis original). If biblical law has a role to play in shaping basic worldview, values and identity then clearly this is not something that can suddenly be switched on when a moral dilemma presents itself. What is required, as Bruce C. Birch and Larry L. Rasmussen recognize, referring to the use of the Bible generally in ethics, is “long-term nurturing of the community of faith.” If the distinctive social vision of biblical law has not already been internalized it can hardly be drawn on appropriately or effectively in the face of a given social challenge. This underlines the need, once again, for biblical law to be widely known and understood (not least in our churches) so that it informs the worldview out of which reading communities seek to be salt and light in public life."

A few comments:

1.  Why do people always bring up the stoning of children as if that is a sure-fire way to show the absurdity of biblical law?  This law needs to be understood in its biblical contexts.  When this is done the law is not found to be crazy or absurd.  It may even have something to show us in terms of application for today.  See my study on this issue: The Penalty for Rebellious Children: What Does the Bible Say and What Does it Mean?

2.  The last paragraph cited above is most interesting to me.  Understanding how biblical law functions "means drawing on and being aware of a host of contextual beliefs, values, narrative and worldview in which we are active participants."  It is not simply a matter of looking up a few references or citing a specific piece of legislation divorced from the larger narrative context.  We must become attentive readers and active participants in seeking the wisdom of God to be manifested in all of our lives.  Burnside helpfully reminds us, "If biblical law has a role to play in shaping basic worldview, values and identity then clearly this is not something that can suddenly be switched on when moral dilemma presents itself."  Quoting Birch and Rasmussen, he notes the need for "long-term nurturing of the community of faith."  We need communities where the law of God is known, studied, and engagingly applied within a communal context.  This points up the need for teaching about and from the law of God.  "If the distinctive social vision of biblical law has not already been internalized it can hardly be drawn on appropriately or effectively in the face of a given social challenge."  If the community of faith has not internalized the law as set forth in the larger narrative structure of the Bible then how can the church effectively speak this law in a responsible and helpful manner into the cultural conflicts of our time?  Our ignorance of the law and our lack of internalized virtue stemming from deep communal meditation on it is one cause of our ineffectiveness in being "salt and light" to the world.
__________

For a few other posts in which I quote from Jonathan Burnside's God, Justice, and Society:

The Value & Insight of the "Old" Law Code in the Bible

Reading the Law within Narrative: Notes to a Muslim Student

Reading the Law within Narrative: Notes to a Muslim Student

* Note: A gentleman stopped in at the college where I'm employed and asked about resources regarding religion and banking.  He is a Muslim doing Masters level work in a Middle Eastern country.  I sent him the following:

Greetings!  We met last week when you stopped by and chatted with a few of us 

about your thesis you are working on regarding the religious foundations of banking 

practices.  I did a little digging and came up with a few articles that may be of 

interest to you.  

Lending and Interest in the Old Testament by Klaus Issler

Usury in Scripture by Chad Brand

Five Myths About Jubilee by Art Lindsley

Jubilee and Social Justice by Michael Harbin

I would especially recommend the Klaus Issler piece in that it reflects a detailed 

textual analysis of key Old Testament texts, works through interpretative options, 

and provides a wealth of bibliographic data.  There is even a brief mention of 

Islamic banking in footnote # 74 on page 785.

The Chad Brand piece is not as detailed as Issler but he covers more texts.  You 

may notice some interpretative differences between Issler and Brand.

In that you are attempting to compare, integrate and synthesize the various 

textual materials from the Old Testament, New Testament, and the Qur'an I 

thought it might be helpful to consider how the law code functions in the Torah.  

In his massive work God, Justice, and Society: Aspects of Law and Legality in 

the Bible Jonathan Burnside writes:

"One of the most striking aspects of how law is presented in the Hebrew Bible 

is its integration with narrative, by which we mean the specific biblical story of 

God's involvement with humanity.  It is crucial to recognize that bibilcal law is 

not presented as 'codified law' but is integrated 'at every stage' into the wider 

story of God's purposes for Israel, and, beyond that, for the world.  For example, 

the Sinai narrative (see Chapter 2) switches between story (e.g., Exodus 19:1-25); 

law (Exodus 20:1-17); story (Exodus 20:18-21), law (Exodus 20:22-23:33), and 

back to story again (Exodus 24:1-18).  What is true of the Sinai narrative 

(Exodus 19-24) is true of the Pentateuch as a whole.  All of the Pentateuch's 

legal collections are firmly embedded in their own narrative contexts.  This 

means that to be good readers of biblical law, we should not split what authors 

and compilers have joined together.  Nor should we imagine we have arrived 

at the'true' meaning of biblical law when we have 'boiled off' the narrative to 

a set of rules or underlying principles."  (p. 14)

This focus on the narrative context of biblical law is important.  There are 

developments in the law and fresh applications as the narrative of God's 

dealing with his people Israel develops.  Burnside, again, captures this dynamic:

"Biblical law is dynamic.  As we study it, we will see how Torah adapts itself to 

new circumstances.  This is partly because, as we have seen, it is integrated 

into the story of God's involvement with Israel and the world--and this story 

keeps on developing.  Because biblical law is embedded in a story arc, we 

must keep a constant eye on such things as plot, character, and setting.  

We need to know where we are 'in the story' to be able to interpet biblical law." (p. 22)

This focus on narrative as the context for biblical law is unique.  I am not a student 

of the Qur'an but Ida Glaser in an essay entitled "Qur'anic Challenges for the Bible 

Reader" mentions the following point:

"The Qur'an is almost entirely horatory.  Although it contains narrative, nearly 

every story is told as part of an argument or exhortation.  The stories are most 

often used as illustration, as warning or as encouragement, or as indicating the 

pattern of divine and human action through history.  In contrast, Barry Webb 

describes narrative as the Bible's 'master' and 'indispensable' genre."  

(Chapter from The Enduring Authority of the Christian Scriptures edited by D. A. 

Carson, page 1027)

This difference in the Bible's and the Qur'an's understanding and use of narrative 

creates different kinds of interpretative communities with varying interpretative 

expectations.  Glaser notes that, in regards to the Bible, "the form is as much a 

part of the revelation as is the content." In seeking to determine what the form 

of the Bible  tells us about its content Glaser notes the following four points:

* If the Bible is largely narrative rather than exhortation, that implies an emphasis 

on the history of God's covenant interaction with his world rather than on his 

commands to his creatures.

* If it includes the prayers of God's people, that implies an emphasis on a two-way 

relationship between God and humanity rather than on prophetic words from God 

to people.

* If it includes human wisdom and questioning about death and suffering, that 

implies an emphasis on human response to God.

* If a large proportion of the Gospels is given to accounts of the crucifixion and 

resurrection, that implies an emphasis on God's finding a way to deal lovingly 

and justly with covenant breaking rather than on judgment of disobedience.  

(p. 1049) 

I hope that my comments and quotation are helpful in your interpretative 

endeavors. 

I would recommend Burnside's book to you.  His first chapter--"The Character 

of Biblical Law"--is important reading for understanding the nature of biblical 

law and how to properly interpret it.  Also, he has two full chapters that may 

be of more direct relevance to your thesis: chapter 6 "People and Land"; 

chapter 7 "Social Welfare."

 Please feel free to interact with my thoughts.  I wish you well in your 

research and writing.

Richard Klaus

The Value & Insight of the "Old" Law Code in the Bible

* A selection from the introduction to Jonathan Burnside's God, Justice, and Society: Aspects of Law and Legality in the Bible.

"We live in a neophiliac culture, which means that we value what is new and automatically assume--correctly--that the latest iPod is better than the previous version.  In the same vein, we naturally assume that subjects such as medicine and the natural sciences are far more sophisticated than they were three or four thousand years ago.  Unfortunately, the same reasoning does not apply when carried over to other fields of human endeavor, such as law.  We cannot assume that 'new law' is always 'best,' that antiquity is a disqualification when it comes to legal reasoning, and that the past has nothing to do with today.  The reverse, in fact, is as likely to be true.  We find in biblical rules and judgments a level of insight that has rarely, if ever, been surpassed.  Nor do we find in other legal systems a more positive vision for humanity and the world than that found in the biblical legal collections.  Neither should we underestimate the intellectual or the literary powers of people in biblical society.  The student of biblical law who explores the texts in detail finds that they are sound, wise, and practical.  Just as in Dworkin's theory of liberal jurisprudence, we find Law's Empire, so in biblical jurisprudence, we encounter what we can call 'Law's Splendor.'"  (p. xxxviii)