The Divine Mandates

Morris A. Inch

The Divine Mandates

Copyright © 2017 Morris A. Inch. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in critical publications or reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without prior written permission from the publisher. Write: Permissions, Wipf and Stock Publishers, 199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3, Eugene, OR 97401.

Wipf & Stock

An Imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers

199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3

Eugene, OR 97401

www.wipfandstock.com

paperback isbn: 978-1-4982-8435-6

hardcover isbn: 978-1-4982-8437-0

ebook isbn: 978-1-4982-8436-3

Manufactured in the U.S.A. February 28, 2017

Table of Contents

Title Page

Preface

Realm of Divine Mandates

Prophetic Times

Prophecy Fulfilled

Apostolic Fathers

The Apologist

Cost & Command

Labor Mandate

Family Mandate

Government Mandate

Church Mandate

Life

Liberty

Pursuit of Happiness

All Things Considered

Bibliography

Preface

Two rival analogies compete for our attention: the law of the jungle and a sacred canopy. As for the former, life consists of the survival of the fittest. As an invitation to materialism and tyranny.

As for the latter, the divine mandates serve as a framework for social enterprise. In keeping with the notion that we live in God’s world, and by his grace. For the purpose of his glory, resulting in our individual and corporate blessing.

The extended discussion explores the topic in greater detail. Initially, with the realm of mandate. What is its nature? As such, what do mandates share in common? How do they structure life? Expressly as reflected in the Mosaic Covenant and that with Noah. As if a means of bringing order out of chaos, recalling how God managed concerning the natural world. And now in context of our social relationships.

Then, in turn, with what is described as the paper trail. Which consists of a brief survey, providing a context for the divine mandates. First by way of exploring the Old and New Testaments. Subsequently, with the apostolic fathers, discourse of the apologist, and an interlude with Dietrich Bonhoeffer. The last of these serves a marked transition into a discussion of the mandates in greater detail while the entries combine to serve as a credible reality check.

The traditional mandates are four in number: As regards the church, family, government, and labor. It amount to a short list, since other options readily come to mind. So while not exhaustive, they provide a valuable framework for casting life in context of the divine mandates.

Although not as a rule discussed in connection with the divine mandate, the notion of endowments is critically relevant. In terms of our bill of rights, they are said to consist of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The sanctity of life being indispensably foundational for the remainder. Liberty being a logical extension, and the pursuit of happiness offering an opportunity but not serving as a guarantee.

All things considered serves to summarize the extended discussion in terms of the divine mandates. You are the light of the world, Jesus informed his disciples. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp; and place it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way praise your Father in heaven (Matt. 5:14–16).

Several observations appear strikingly pertinent. First, faith is associated with its social context, rather than in strict isolation. Allowing for the fact that both solitude and social engagement are contributing features. Each by itself has profound pitfalls and perils. One who wants fellowship without solitude plunges into the void of words and feelings, and one who seeks solitude without fellowship perishes in the abyss of vanity, self-infatuation, and despair. ¹

The divine mandates thus serve in a dual capacity. Obviously, in establishing the credential of select social institutions, but also by insisting that persons comply with legitimate social obligations. Consequently, requiring accountability from those who exercise authority and those subject to it.

Second, so as to solicit praise for the Heavenly Father. With whom life originates in all its multi-faceted benefits. In matters great and small, momentary and lingering. While allowing for the fact that it unravels if not lived according to God’s righteous guidelines.

Instead of courting the approval of others. Recalling that genuine humility is not given to either pride or self-effacement. Since the latter amounts to a negative expression of pride, as unduly dwelling on self. But rather, to God be the glory; since great things he has done and continues to do.

Finally, as implied above, there is the existential feature of life. When I consider your heavens, the work of your fingers, what is man that you are mindful of him, the psalmist reflects. You make him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor (Psa. 8:3–5).

Meant to superintend God’s creation, humans continue to fall short of their appointed task. So that creation suffers as a result, as do humans as well. Along with the diminishing of God’s glory. Calling for a commitment of the divine mandates, seeing that we are at fault in this regard, with disastrous effects by commensurate promise

1. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Life Together, p.

78

.

Realm of Divine Mandates

The Decalogue serves to introduce the realm of divine mandates. Its importance can hardly be overstated. The rabbis "speculated that it was prepared on the eve of creation in anticipation of subsequent use; they asserted as each commandment was sounded from the lofty height of Sinai it filled the world with a pleasing aroma; they concluded that all nature hushed to hear every word as it was spoken.¹

The ten words are apodictic in character, rather than specific instances. In other words, they constitute broad general principles. For instance, You shall not murder (Exod. 20:13). As over against, If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely, but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is a serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, etc. (Exod. 21:22–24).

The context of the Decalogue follows the pattern of a vassal treaty. In which the Sovereign Lord pledges to intercede on behalf of his chosen people on condition of their faithful observance of the covenant provisions. Initially, the Suzerain announced: I am the Lord your God, who brought you up out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. Hence, deserving of their resolute faithfulness.

You shall have no other gods before me. Thus the first ‘word’ takes aim at atheism (we must have a God), idolatry (we must have Yahweh as our God), polytheism (we must have the Lord God alone), and formalism (we must live, fear, and serve the Lord with all our heart, soul and strength, and mind. The ground of all morality begins here² Consequently, before me implies that we should not allow for other deities, regardless of their subordinate rank.

If not acceptable to God, then to whom? Either as a consensus, or imposed by those in authority. Which is calculated to serve invested interests. As such, unworthy to be considered as a credible ethic.

You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below as a logical progression. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.

It goes without saying that anything is comprehensive. So when a human agenda is given prime importance, it amounts to idolatry. Recalling the sage observation, It is not the blatant evil we do, but the lesser good that more likely threatens the greater good.

The rabbis also reasoned that we should take the greatest of care not to give the impression that we engaged in idolatry. So it was that they counseled that should one drop money before an idol, he or she should turn away before picking it up. They reasoned further that even a legitimate effort to recover their funds might adversely condition them. While this may seem unlikely, it reveals how seriously they endorsed the prohibition.

"The accompanying rationale recognizes the social implications of our actions. That is, whatever we do or fail to do impacts on others. Even so, God promises to restrain evil influence which cultivating the good we do.³ So that while living in a fallen world is not the best of situations, neither is it the worst.

You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name. Negatively, this precludes taking the name of God casually, hypocritically, or for magical purposes. Initially, one much not employ God’s name thoughtlessly. As is a habitual practice, void of significance.

Nor in hypocritical fashion. And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, Jesus admonished his disciples, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men (Matt. 6:5). They have their reward, such as it is; but lack any reason for divine commendation.

Nor for magical purposes. Since magic entails the idea that we can manipulate the powers that be. As such, it not only disarms the Almighty, but is essentially void of moral considerations.

Positively considered, one is to employ God’s name reverently, lovingly, and earnestly. Reverently, because God is both great and good. As sovereign, he is deserving of our respect. As benefactor, he is worthy of our appreciation.

Lovingly, in response to God’s love extended to his fallen creatures. Giving rise to C.S. Lewis’ observation that because God loves us, he endeavors to make us lovable. Serving as a gracious initiative with which we should heartily cooperate.

Earnestly, as one striving for excellence. Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Paul rhetorically inquires. Run in such a way as to get the prize (I Cor. 9:24). Which requires strict training in preparation, and vigorous execution.

Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant of maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates. Out of deference to the Almighty, and a reminder of the critical role he plays in Life’s equation.

This admonition recalls how God had rested from his creative activity, thus setting a precedent (cf. Gen. 2:2–3). So that in Jewish tradition it precluded anything that might be thought analogous. Such as preparing food, although partaking of food is said to be especially enjoyable in context of the Sabbath celebration.

It was not generally understood that those other than the chosen people were obligated to observe the Sabbath, unless associated with them. Certain rabbis allowed that it was optional. If of intrinsic value, it would seem to be at least permissible. If only a distinctive feature of a select community, then not obligatory.

Thus concludes the first segment of the Decalogue, focusing on the relationship between God and the covenant community. Consisting of singular worship, refraining from the use of idols, prohibition of using God’s name in vain, and the Sabbath observance. Giving the impression that Idolatry would be a continuing temptation that must be strictly rejected. So that the rabbis reason it is the source for evil in its multi-faceted expression.

The second segment addresses the tenuous relationship among humans. As a logical extension of the previous injunctions. In this regard, If anyone says, ‘I love God,’ yet hates his brother, he is a liar, for anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen. And he has given us this command, ‘Whoever loves God must also love his brother’ (I John 4:19–21).

Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you. This consists of respect, obedience, and meeting their needs, especially during their declining years. First, respect of one’s parents. Since they with God were involved in giving birth, and each has a legitimate invested interest.

Moreover, the rearing of children is a formidable undertaking. Near constant attention early on, and with lingering obligations. Not that parents are without fault, but neither can they be blamed for all that goes wrong It is not simply the circumstances, but how we respond to them that determines the outcome.

While bearing in mind that God as a rule employs imperfect means to achieve his gracious purposes. So that we ought not to demean such as serves his agenda. Nor the parents’ willingness to comply, qualifications notwithstanding.

Second, through obedience. Allowing for the fact that they are more knowledgeable. Along with the realization that what we do or fail to do impacts others. Accordingly, in keeping with their calling as parents.

Obedience extends beyond reluctant compliance to a ready acceptance. Such as is exhibited in the positive attitude we cultivate. While extending to related matters, thought consistent with our obligation.

This is calculated to stand one in good stead as he or she matures. When no longer expected to inquire of one’s parents for their direction, but faithfully applying their teaching to subsequent developments. In other words, making decisions consistent with one’s upbringing.

Finally, in taking care of one’s parents. Not only concerning their physical needs, but social and spiritual as well. In characteristically progressing fashion, as the need increases along with the means to meet it.

Then, when the parents have passed on, to appreciatively remember them and their service. As when one puts flowers on the grave, or simply recalling some pleasant event from the past. As a sage reminder, gone but not forgotten.

You shall not murder. That is, to take one’s life without due cause. Which assumes that there is justification, and that the means is authorized. It also allows for a distinction between premeditated and accidental behavior.

Undergirding this prohibition is the sanctity of life, as a divine provision. Giving rise to what is identified as the old absolute, as set over against the new absolute. As for the former, Human Life from conception to natural death is sacred and worthy of protection. In greater detail, The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away; may the name of the Lord be praised (Job 1:21). As for the latter, Human life, which begins and ends when certain individuals or groups decide it does, is valuable as long as it is wanted.⁴

Recalling John Calvin’s observation that if one can save a life, and fails to do so, he or she has committed murder. Since sins of omission are no more acceptable than sins of commission. Thus leaving persons with difficult decisions concerning the preservation of life, and the risk involved.

You shall not commit adultery. While insisting on marital fidelity, this prohibition was thought to extend to a wide variant of unacceptable sexual behavior. For instance, No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations (Lev. 18:6). As another, Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman (18:22). And still another, "Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it: (18:23).

In conclusion, Keep my requirements and do not follow any of the detestable customs that were practiced before you came and do not defile yourselves with then. I am the Lord your God (18:30). As otherwise expressed. "Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is; his good, pleasing and perfect will: (Rom. 12:2). In both instances, persons are enjoined not to continue an unacceptable practice that characterizes the prevailing culture.

Instead, to be transformed by the renewing of one’s mind. Having dwelt on the prophetic word, embrace it. Along with the expectation that this will result in a radical departure from previous ways of thinking and behavior. So likewise convinced that this is not only for the better but without exception the best of alternatives.

You shall not steal. According to rabbinic tradition, one is guilty whether he or she brazenly robs in public or in secret; whether in taking possession from another or kidnapping the person; whether involving much or little; whether outright or with usury; whether concerning property or reputation.⁵

In a peasant society, where the margin for survival is minimal, any theft might result in hardship, if not in death. In a covenant community, theft, no matter how otherwise serious, was an affront to God and a denial of life together. Recalling the satirical comments, What is mine is mine, and what is his is mine as well.

Theft can be of personal or of corporate nature. As the former, it need not pertain to material possessions, but anything rightly belonging to another. Such as demeaning one’s character or intent. As for the latter, excessive taxation amounts to corporate greed and theft.

You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor. The seriousness of this prohibition can be seen in that it could result in his or her death. If not, then in lesser punishment. Neither of which was acceptable in a covenant community.

Persons are admonished to tell the truth, the whole truth, an nothing but the truth. The truth in contrast to what is false. If such occurred, report it as having happened. If not, do not pretend that it transpired. When much or little is at stake.

The whole truth without which it is distorted. Which allows for extenuating circumstances. Along with accounting for differences of perception. As a means of reconciliation, where this is feasible. And justice. Regardless of outcome.

Nothing but the truth so not to introduce unrelated matters. Thereby to divorce truth from its essential context. Whether with intent or lack of discipline. In keeping with Augustine’s provocative comment, All truth is God’s truth.

You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or his donkey or anything that is your neighbor’s "House means ‘household’, in the early sense of the word, and the thought of ‘wife’ is primary. Ox and ass are the typical wealth of the bronze age peasant or semi-nomad, for whom the perplexities of developed society have not yet arisen. ‘Slaves are the only other form of movable property."⁶

This final interdict makes explicit what has been implicit up to this point: our predatory desires give rise to our perverse practices. Recalling the vivid contrast mentioned at the outset between the law of the jungle and sacred canopy. As for the former, where those most fit survive. As for the latter, where life is celebrated as God’s benevolent design, and lived out according to his righteous instructions.

"When people saw the thunder and lightning and heard the trumpet and saw the mountain in smoke, they trembled with fear. They stayed at a distance and