Does Psalm 109 describe what should happen to President Obama?

Max stirred up  a load of you know what over at the Arkansas Times Blog concerning the growing cottage industry for t-shirts and such denouncing the President in the words of Psalm 109. Is this appropriate?

This passage is part of what is called the “imprecatory” Psalms. It calls for retribution against an enemy. For starters, here’s the complete text. After all, if we are going to look at the Bible seriously, there has to be some context. This is the NASV rendering.

For the choir director. A Psalm of David.

¹O God of my praise,
Do not be silent!
²For they have opened the wicked and deceitful mouth against me;
They have spoken against me with a lying tongue.
³They have also surrounded me with words of hatred,
And fought against me without cause.
⁴In return for my love they act as my accusers;
But I am in prayer.
⁵Thus they have repaid me evil for good
And hatred for my love.
⁶Appoint a wicked man over him,
And let an accuser stand at his right hand.
⁷When he is judged, let him come forth guilty,
And let his prayer become sin.
⁸Let his days be few;
Let another take his office.
⁹Let his children be fatherless
And his wife a widow.
¹⁰Let his children wander about and beg;
And let them seek sustenance far from their ruined homes.
¹¹Let the creditor seize all that he has,
And let strangers plunder the product of his labor.
¹²Let there be none to extend lovingkindness to him,
Nor any to be gracious to his fatherless children.
¹³Let his posterity be cut off;
In a following generation let their name be blotted out.
¹⁴Let the iniquity of his fathers be remembered before the LORD,
And do not let the sin of his mother be blotted out.
¹⁵Let them be before the LORD continually,
That He may cut off their memory from the earth;
¹⁶Because he did not remember to show lovingkindness,
But persecuted the afflicted and needy man,
And the despondent in heart, to put them to death.
¹⁷He also loved cursing, so it came to him;
And he did not delight in blessing, so it was far from him.
¹⁸But he clothed himself with cursing as with his garment,
And it entered into his body like water
And like oil into his bones.
¹⁹Let it be to him as a garment with which he covers himself,
And for a belt with which he constantly girds himself.
²⁰Let this be the reward of my accusers from the LORD,
And of those who speak evil against my soul.
²¹But You, O GOD, the Lord, deal kindly with me for Your name’s sake;
Because Your lovingkindness is good, deliver me;
²²For I am afflicted and needy,
And my heart is wounded within me.
²³I am passing like a shadow when it lengthens;
I am shaken off like the locust.
²⁴My knees are weak from asting,
And my flesh has grown lean, without fatness.
²⁵I also have become a reproach to them;
When they see me, they wag their head.
²⁶Help me, O LORD my God;
Save me according to Your lovingkindness.
²⁷And let them know that this is Your hand;
You, LORD, have done it.
²⁸Let them curse, but You bless;
When they arise, they shall be ashamed,
But Your servant shall be glad.
²⁹Let my accusers be clothed with dishonor,
And let them cover themselves with their own shame as with a robe.
³⁰With my mouth I will give thanks abundantly to the LORD;
And in the midst of many I will praise Him.
³¹For He stands at the right hand of the needy,
To save him from those who judge his soul.

The center of conservative criticism of President Obama is v. 8, “Let another take his office.” I am told that some early versions of the King James translation correctly render the language as “take his possessions”

The tone of Ps. 109 is intense and some might think that Christians should not ever utter such a prayer as is attributed here to King David. The ESV Study Bible has some background.

This is an individual lament, geared to a situation in which a faithful Israelite is suffering the attacks of vicious accusers who return evil to him for the good he has done to them (vv. 1–5). It contains an extensive prayer that his accusers (or their chief) would receive what they deserve (vv. 6–20), and finishes with a prayer that appeals to, and rests confidently on, God’s “steadfast love” (vv. 21–31).

If we are to follow the rule of allowing Scripture to interpret itself, there is some assistance available in Acts 1, in which the replacement for Judas the betrayer of Jesus is being discussed. In Acts 1; 20, Peter directly cites Ps. 109; 8 and Ps. 69; 25 as a prediction of Judas; treason.

New Testament Christians should know that the passage in Ps. 109; 8 is a direct prediction of Judas being replaced as an apostle after his death. Let’s consider the larger context of the passage.

⁸Let his days be few;
Let another take his office.
⁹Let his children be fatherless
And his wife a widow.

If one’s days are “few” and his wife is a “widow,” it must logically follow that the object ot the prayers is dead. Can conservative opponents of the President be so biblically illiterate not to understand this?

You may well wonder abut the general tone of the Psalm. Is it appropriate for a Christian to pray to the God of love for revenge on his enemies? We know that the person being prayed about is liar (v. 2-3) and great harm has been caused by the misrepresentation. In fact, as was the case with Judas, the representations resulted in death.

¹⁶Because he did not remember to show lovingkindness,
But persecuted the afflicted and needy man,
And the despondent in heart, to put them to death.

To be perhaps a bit too concise about this entire passage, murder and lying are joined in a single offense related by King David against some of his false accusers and referenced by Peter as a foreshadowing of Judas. One particular false accuser leveled charges against David which may be seen as foreshadowing Christ’s passion.

5 When King David came to v Bahurim, there came out a man of the family of the house of Saul, whose name was w Shimei, the son of Gera, and as he came x he cursed continually. 6 And he threw stones at David and at all the servants of King David, and all the people and all the mighty men were on his right hand and on his left. 7 And Shimei said as he x cursed, “Get out, get out, you man of blood, you worthless man! 8 The Lord y has avenged on you all z the blood of the house of Saul, in whose place you have reigned, and the Lord has given the kingdom into the hand of your son Absalom. See, your evil is on you, for you are a man of blood.” (ESV)

Of course, those familiar with the story know that David was completely blameless of any blood against Saul or his house. Shimei and Judas are both traitors.

So David had good reason to ask God to bring judgment against his enemies. That is quite a bit different from taking matters into one’s own hands. It is not necessarily wrong to seek divine justice in the face of grave wrongdoing.

Is it appropriate for political opponents to pray for the President’s death or an end to his term. Scripture has a few things to say about political leaders.

First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, 2 v for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and w dignified in every way. 3 This is good, and x it is pleasing in the sight of y God our Savior, 4 who desires z all people to be saved and a to come to b the knowledge of the truth. (1 Tim. 2; 1-4 ESV)

Romans 13 at least hints that we ought to respect the President.

Let every person p be subject to the governing authorities. For q there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you r will receive his approval, 4 for s he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, t an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also u for the sake of conscience. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7 v Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.

And there is this …

Remind them x to be submissive to rulers and authorities, y to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, 2 z to speak evil of no one, a to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and b to show perfect courtesy toward all people (Titus 3; 1-3).

But Christians must not submit to immoral laws and are certainly allowed to use their civil rights to appeal to government. We are commanded to pray for civil rulers and we must speak out against bad public policy. But, just maybe, it is a bit over the top to call for President Obama’s death, as is suggested in Ps. 109.

This has been rather brief and does not begin to do justice to the larger subject, but I think you get my drift.

Filed under: Christian Worldview, Commentary, Obama

KARK Wednesday Wake Up (Bill Vickery lives in another world)

UPDATE: Here is a link to the video of today’s Wednesday Wake-Up Call.

If Vickery works from the assumption that the best defense is a good offense, I agree entirely that it was probably a good idea to start off by making the sometimes violent right-wing soreheads who disrupt public discussions of essential national business the “winner”s. Yes, free speech is a fundamental human right and what the videos from many of these ugly confrontations show is anything but free speech. It is raw physical intimidation.

You may know that I am now a student of theology. This conversation has made me wonder if, from the biblical evangelical position which I occupy, free speech is a God-given right. Any takers on that one? The “Comment” button is at the upper right.

I am proud to say that my first  e-mails in reaction to this morning’s appearance. Let us review. A viewer in Hope, Arkansas sent this at 6:59, within five minutes of the broadcast.

I was absolutely disgusted by your appearance on KARK Ch. 4 on Wednesday, 8/12/09 with your statements regarding Americans at the town hall meetings as “un-Americans”.  As an American, it is my God given right, not to mention my Constitutional right, to criticize the President and the government.  These town hall meetings provide Americans their right to voice their opinions.  I find it very ironic how a so-called community organizer is now trying to stop communities from organizing because they are voicing their opinions.

To which I responded as follows.

The videos (readily available across the internet) show a pattern of violence and intimidation. This is very far from a constitutional God-given right to self-expression. In fact, those who attended expressly refused to listen to the answers to the questions they demanded.

Those who seek to subvert fundamental human rights are un-American.

Thank you for watching,

Pretty reasonable, huh? Pat the Peacemaker! But did that kindly and restrained response satisfy my antagonistic corespondent?

The inability to voice our opinion and not question decision have only one place, in a socialistic society, which is NOT what this nation was founded on or based on. Our govt is a govt of the people, by the people, and for the people. Any move to take that away, which is what this administration is doing, is actually the the un-American activities. I’m sure obama and his socialistic followers are disappointed that the American people are following along like the good little sheep he’d hoped we’d be, but this is America and until they take away our rights we question, demand answers, and fight those who dare to turn the nation into something that our founders fought against!

GOD bless America
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

Well, sir, it would seem to me that you guys have had a full helping of free speech, right down to taking away the free speech rights of others and the right and necessity of open discussion of important public policy decisions. I don’t know much about socialism, but the tactics employed by those who have so vehemently expressed themselves is quite reminiscent of some totalitarian states. That is a trend to be avoided and hardly in keeping with American traditions.

Understand, George Washington was burned in effigy and political opposition and vigorous free speech is part of the American character. An orchestrated scheme to shut down discussion by means of intimidation and physical force is akin to the Know-Nothings of the 1800s. Their riots are a blemish on our national story.

Such protests as we have seen are unnecessary. Congress is elected by the people and every member of the House is up for election next year. People can be heard without shutting others up. That’s the line that has been crossed here, in my opinion.

My winner was Todd Turner and the Arkansas group that opposed the Payday Lenders. Total victory has been achieved as the last one of these cockroaches left the state yesterday.

My loser is the Pulaski County Comptroller, Mike Hutchens. He is the master of diversion by blustering about the polygraph tests being administered to his employees. That does not explain the missing $20,000, or is it $15,000? Oh, they don’t know how much cash was in the office!

As to the office “policy” to which Hutchens refers in various news reports. How is an unwritten policy enforceable? How is an employee supposed to know such a policy? Can you say C-Y-A? (I thought you could.)

What the devil does the Comptroller do anyway? This is a substantial sum of money. The exact amount missing is unknown. That in itself is grounds for immediate dismissal of the responsible person, Hutchens. I am bewildered. County government is showing its ineptness by the timidity in approaching this incredible incompetence.

Aside from the obvious criminal implications, this is a case of mismanagement. The solution seems fairly straightforward.

Filed under: Arkansas, Commentary, Health Insurance Reform, National politics, Obama, Pulaski County

George W. Bush invoked “Gog and Magog” while planning to invade Iraq

But now, let’s move on to something a little lighter, like World War III,

First thing, I better distance myself from the source. The Council for Secular Humanism is not going to give President Bush’s (or even my own) religious beliefs a fair hearing. Let is be noted that the report is put forward by a bunch of atheists and they have some reason to suspect the motives of  religious people.

The scene is the build-up to the Iraq war and putting together a “coalition of the willing.” Bush calls Jacques Chirac, the President of France.

Now out of office, Chirac recounts that the American leader appealed to their “common faith” (Christianity) and told him: “Gog and Magog are at work in the Middle East…. The biblical prophecies are being fulfilled…. This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people’s enemies before a New Age begins.”

The Old Testament Book of Ezekiel speaks of Gog and Magog, and not in very glowing terms either. God, in fact, denounces them in Chapters 38 and 39. Chirrac called on a theologian by the name of Thomas Roemer to explain the context of this strange behavior.

James A. Haught, author of the Secular Humanism article, discusses his sources.

In 2007, Dr. Romer recounted Bush’s strange behavior in Lausanne University’s review, Allez Savoir. A French-language Swiss newspaper, Le Matin Dimanche, printed a sarcastic account titled: “When President George W. Bush Saw the Prophesies of the Bible Coming to Pass.” France’s La Liberte likewise spoofed it under the headline “A Small Scoop on Bush, Chirac, God, Gog and Magog.” But other news media missed the amazing report.

Subsequently, ex-President Chirac confirmed the nutty event in a long interview with French journalist Jean-Claude Maurice, who tells the tale in his new book, Si Vous le Répétez, Je Démentirai (If You Repeat it, I Will Deny), released in March by the publisher Plon.

Not really understanding the import of this disclosure, and too anxious to condemn former President Bush as a”drunk” and a “crackpot,” the Secular Humanist analysis misses the enormous influence of Dispensational theology in American culture.

To be a little more precise, we are dealing with “Dispensational Premillennialism” There is a rightful Christian expectation of Christ’s literal return to earth to fully establish his reign over a redeemed cosmos. Some folks, however, have always tried to read prophesy in the same way we read history. Those who hold this form of interpretation have some very definite ideas about the tribulation, and specific events leading up to the Second Coming.

We are living in the “end times,” which began with the resurrection. Nonetheless, plenty of religious thinkers have had ideas on the matter including William Miller, Cyrus Scofield, and Herbert W. Armstrong. The entire Left Behind series has given birth to a new generation of premillennial believers. Apparently President Bush is among them.

If this story about Bush is true, and it certainly seems possible, there are two apparent difficulties in his application of prophetic interpretations. The very idea that we are able to distinguish the identity of modern nations based on ancient texts poses some problems. The other, even worse, idea is that, by starting a shooting war, we can help God along in fulfilling His eternal plan.

The Bible is dependable and Jesus is coming back. It is a tricky practice, perhaps even dangerous, to impose our own limited human understandings on biblical texts. When approaching scripture (especially for me), a little humility goes a long way.

In the realm of public policy, it would have been so much better if the president also had opinions available from orthodox Christians taking a different eschatological approach. (Like the big word? Pretty impressive, huh?)

Let me add that these opinions are my own.

Filed under: Christian Worldview, Commentary, National politics

Ethiopian News Forum: Is Shale Gas the Climate Bill’s New Bargaining Chip?

This one beats all. First thing, I don’t have a dog in the fight except that I do reside on planet Earth, and I do breathe air, and I would like to hang around for a few more birthdays. The most recent bill to curb carbon emissions looks like more corporate welfare from over here, but maybe I’m wrong.

All of this leads us to a little item I came across in the Ethiopian Review (I have no idea!). Its about what looks like another shameless shell game that leaves the rest of us on our own to deal with global warming as best as we can. Opps, well the cat is out of the bag now. Yes, global warming is real, and if it’s not, we should not be fooling around with that kind of risky stuff anyway.

Natural gas may have an important role in our energy future, though I seem to recall that it is a crushing expense and I am glad to be all-electric. It looks like the public interest is the last thing anybody will ever think about on this one and I am sure Blanche and Mark will be on the look out for big money interests in the Fayetteville Shale.

Filed under: Commentary, Economy, National politics