semiopen

Jews have the same issue of over moralizing. For example, Rachel stealing the Teraphim from her father is considered positive; Joseph's brothers were acting sort of appropriately when they sold him, etc. Other than a few trivial side issues (eg. God visiting Abraham three days after his circumcision, may tell us that it is good to visit the sick) I'm not aware of a single story in the Hebrew Bible with any clear moral message.

This may be a little different in the New Testament, but I'm not convinced that they are telling us anything we don't already know. As the poet said, "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows."

Regarding Transient's comment about Number's 15:32-36 where the man gathered "sticks" (the Hebrew is Eytzim which means trees, translated as wood or sticks here) on the Sabbath. The man was found by the people who warned him of the consequences of gathering wood on Sabbath, but he continued doing so. Moses consulted God about this case, who affirmed the punishment of death by stoning (outside the camp).

The man committed a clear violation of a commandment as opposed to the story about Aaron's sons which is obscure. I don't see God guilty of murder here, not first degree anyway.

I'm not familiar with the Jesus story, but if a person is not warned by at least two witnesses ("two witnesses or three witnesses" Deut 17:6) there is no capital case.

I'm sympathetic to your sentiments Transient, but I consider the bible completely fascinating.

Thomas II

Would you kill a person to steal from this person?

semiopen

Sorry if I offended you Thomas.

Regarding your question, we find several stories offering clear guidance on this issue in the bible, take Shechem (Genesis 34:24-29) for example:

The issue of over moralizing (which I probably expressed improperly) is well known in bible study, for example, in How to Read the Jewish Bible (or via: amazon.co.uk) by Marc Zvi Brettler, the tendency to use ancestors as paradigmatic figures is discussed on page 50.

http://books.google.com/books?id=39n...bible#PPA51,M1

I apologize if perhaps the awkwardness of my previous posts made you think I'd said something offensive.

Patrick F

Thomas, I have a good article on this passage, with some interesting thoughts. It's well written and readable but it's about 2,000 words. There's no link to it but I can post it, if you're interested.

Patrick F

One of the interesting things the article points out is that when Aaron is mourning the loss of his two sons, Moses tells him to stop it or Yawheh will kill him too. Bit of a lack of empathy there.

Thomas II

offended? Not at all. Why would I be?
I'm just trying to understand this lack of moral content you mentioned.
I'm not defending the Bible at all:huh:

Thomas II

Please do. Thanks!

Patrick F

On Fire for the Lord

(Commentary on Leviticus 9-10)


Introduction

The tragic story of Nadab and Abihu’s violent demise is important for a couple of reasons. First, it confirms that many events in the Bible are confusing and the moral implications of these events are often ambiguous. There are a variety of explanations as to why Yahweh killed Aaron’s sons in such a horrible way and no one knows which one is correct. Second, the story reaffirms the image of Yahweh as a stern, vengeful, being with little empathy for human fallibility. Nadab and Abihu clearly did something they weren’t supposed to do, but to argue that they deserved to be burned alive for this perhaps says more about Yahweh’s devotees than it does about the Hebrew god itself.



Who were they?

Not much is written about Nadab and Abihu, but what is written is significant. They are the two eldest sons of Moses’ brother Aaron. When Moses went up to Mount Sinai to receive the Ten Commandments, he took an entourage with him as God commanded. This included 70 elders and also included three individuals God called by name: Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu (Exodus 24:1). These individuals were so special, they were allowed to see Yahweh in person as the deity stood on a sapphire pavement: “Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and the seventy elders of Israel went up and saw the God of Israel. Under his feet was something like a pavement made of sapphire, clear as the sky itself” (Exodus 24:9-10).

Then in chapter eight of Leviticus, Aaron and his sons are ordained by Moses under the command of God. Aaron is ordained first and then come his sons: “Then he brought Aaron's sons forward, put tunics on them, tied sashes around them and put headbands on them, as the LORD commanded Moses” (Lev. 8:13). An elaborate ordination scene is then played out and we are told Aaron’s sons did all that was asked of them: “So Aaron and his sons did everything the LORD commanded through Moses” (Lev. 8:36). In the next chapter they begin their duties as priests and they appear to be doing a fine job. Yahweh tells the new priests to slaughter a series of animals, including a baby ram and baby goat. The animals are put on the altar with the entrails on top, and Aaron’s sons dutifully carry the blood to their father who “splatters” it on the walls. Everything seems fine. Everyone apears to be earnestly doing exactly what has been asked of him. It’s going so well, in fact, that God decides to make a spectacular appearance.


The glory of the Lord

Upon completion of the sacrifices by Aaron and his sons, an apparition manifests among the people described only as “the glory of the Lord.” Unfortunately we’re not given any details so we don’t really know what this would have looked like. However, passages elsewhere in the Bible give us some ideas. Ezekiel, chapter one, describes the “glory of the Lord” as having a human like form, sitting on a throne of sapphire, and with a brightness all round like a rainbow. From the waist up the figure was like “gleaming metal” and from the waist down it was like fire (Ezekiel 1:26-28). In Exodus 24, verse 17, the glory of the Lord is described simply as a “consuming fire” with no apparent human characteristics, and no throne.

Whatever version of the glory of the Lord appeared, this one had a practical mission. We are told that fire came out from the presence of the Lord and “consumed” all the sacrificed animal parts, even consuming the fat as well. The people are overjoyed to see this and fall on their faces. It’s just when things are going so well, however, that disaster strikes.



First Offence

Right after this, Nahab and Abihu take their censers (metal vessels suspended by chains, used for burning incense), put fire and incense in them, and offered this to Yahweh. Unfortunately for the two young priests they offered a fire that was “unauthorized” or “strange” depending on the translation. For this, Yahweh burns them to death:

Aaron's sons Nadab and Abihu took their censers, put fire in them and added incense; and they offered unauthorized fire before the LORD, contrary to his command. So fire came out from the presence of the LORD and consumed them, and they died before the LORD (Lev. 10:1)

At first glance the punishment seems excessive to say the least. For this reason commentators have assumed there had to be more to the sin than just offering the wrong kind of fire. Apologists, in particular, have worked hard to find more palatable solutions. Rather than focusing on one error, some will say that the punishment was justified on the grounds that Nadab and Abihu were guilty of multiple sins compounded together. Like prosecutors, they build a case against Nadab and Abihu, a clever character assassination. While there is no doubt one of the mistakes was offering “strange” fire, other charges include disrespect, drunkenness, unlawful entry into a sacred place, and even exposing themselves. All these offences are somehow culled from the same terse text.

Disrespect for Yahweh

Some commentators say the sin was specifically disrespecting or dishonoring God. Immediately after the young priests are killed, Moses appears to be telling Aaron why it happened: "This is what the LORD spoke of when he said:" 'Among those who approach me I will show myself holy; in the sight of all the people I will be honored.’”(Lev.10:3). Thus it is inferred that the boys must have dishonored God. But is this really any different from the sin of unauthorized fire? One would assume that offering Yahweh unauthorized fire would surely be a form of disrespect, so they could be said to be one in the same.

Drunkenness

A strong case can be made for the charge of drunkenness for two reasons. First, Nadab and Abihu should have known better than to offer unauthorized fire. They were the eldest sons of the high priest and were being groomed to eventually replace him. They would have known what kind of fire to use. Second, right after the incident, Yahweh gives Aaron the following rule: “Then the LORD said to Aaron, "You and your sons are not to drink wine or other fermented drink whenever you go into the Tent of Meeting, or you will die” (Lev. 10:9). However, other Bible teachers have quite rightly noted that a moment of drunken stupidity is not a sufficiently compelling reason kill someone so they argue against this idea. First, they note that Nadab and Abihu didn’t need to be drunk to bring the wrong fire. It could have been done on purpose. Second, just because Yahweh gives this directive shortly after the deaths does not necessarily mean they are connected. This part of Leviticus is generally a long list of dos and don’t.

Unauthorized entry

Later on in Leviticus, in chapter 16, verse 1, the Bible says, “The LORD spoke to Moses after the death of the two sons of Aaron who died when they approached the LORD”. Then, right after this, in verse two Yahweh elaborates, “Tell your brother Aaron not to come whenever he chooses into the Most Holy Place behind the curtain in front of the atonement cover on the ark, or else he will die, because I appear in the cloud over the atonement cover.” So, not even Aaron, the chief priest, can come into the “Most holy place” whenever he chooses. Certainly, then, his sons would not be allowed whenever they chose. Apparently, Yahweh thinks this kind of indiscretion warrants the death penalty. But again it’s not certain that arbitrarily approaching the “Most Holy Place” was the sin that caused Yahweh to kill them simply because it’s not clearly stated anywhere.



Nudity can get you killed

There is one more possibility to consider, but it’s a little strange. There is a passage from Exodus which speaks directly to how Aaron and his sons should act in the sacred tent. It even explains that if the instructions are not followed, the offenders will suffer death. The strange part is that it involves the exposing of the penis, although it doesn’t explain how Yahweh, who supposedly created the organs, would be so offended by their site that he would think it necessary to kill the owners of the organs:

“Since Aaron's sons are priests, they should also look dignified. So make robes, sashes, and special caps for them. Then dress Aaron and his sons in these clothes, pour olive oil on their heads, and ordain them as my priests.

Make linen shorts for them that reach from the waist down to the thigh, so they won't expose themselves. 43Whenever they enter the sacred tent or serve at the altar or enter the holy place, they must wear these shorts, or else they will be guilty and die.” (Exodus 28:42)




The sin was strange fire

While the other “sins” may be involved to a degree, it seems that the main problem was the offering of strange fire. The incident is mentioned a couple of other times in the Bible. Numbers 3:4 states: “Nadab and Abihu, however, fell dead before the LORD when they made an offering with unauthorized fire before him in the Desert of Sinai.” And again, later in Numbers we are told, “But Nadab and Abihu died when they made an offering before the LORD with unauthorized fire” (26:61). No other sins are even mentioned here. The significant transgression is obviously the unauthorized fire.

What exactly was this unauthorized fire? Coals for the fire were supposedly to come exclusively from the sacrificial altar. It is assumed that Nadab and Abihu used coals from elsewhere. Smith’s Bible Dictionary says: “Fire for sacred purposes obtained elsewhere than from the altar was called "strange fire," and for the use of such Nadab and Abihu were punished with death by fire from God.” Holman’s Bible Dictionary says, “If fire was used for sacred purposes and obtained other than from the altar, it was called “strange fire” for which use Nadab and Abihu, two sons of Aaron, were punished immediately by divine execution.”


Nadab, Abihu, and Christian Rock? No I’m not kidding.

While the specific sin may have been offering unauthorized fire, many preachers extrapolate from this story a more general sin, which is worshiping God in a way that isn’t specifically sanctioned by the Bible. From this they claim that worshiping in any way not sanctioned by God is a serious sin. They point to part of the verse in question which says that they, “offered unauthorized fire before the LORD, contrary to his command.” Believe it or not, many preachers, particularly in the United States, use the story of the death of Nadab and Abihu to claim that certain types of modern worship are unacceptable to God. Not surprisingly, one of the most offensive of these is Christian rock music.

Pastor David L. Brown, Ph.D. of the First Baptist Church of Oak Creek, Wisconsin wrote an article about the connection between Nadab, Abihu and Christian rock that exemplifies this kind of thinking. Quoting from the book America, the Sorcerers New Apprentice, by popular evangelical writers Dave Hunt and Thomas McMahon, Brown notes that “‘Traditional drumming and dancing techniques are designed to achieve the Shamanic State of Consciousness.’ You see, the beat ‘is a vehicle for demon infestation’” Citing a Jesus Rock Concert, during Expo ’72 in Texas, as a seminal introduction for teens to Christian Rock, pastor Brown laments, “They had taken "strange fire" from the pagan altar and offered it to God.”

The punishment

Of course, it would be preposterous to claim that children attending a rock concert should be burnt to death for worshiping in a way that wasn’t specifically commanded, and yet Christian apologist are at pains to defend Yahweh’s burning of the young priests. This may be because it’s easier to defend something that happened in the distant past, where it’s harder to really feel the suffering involved for either the victims or their loved ones.

Aaron certainly appears to be devastated by the death of his sons. Moses asks why the sacrificial meat has not been touched by Aaron and his remaining two sons and Aaron replies, “Today my sons presented both their sin offering and their burnt offering to the Lord. And yet this tragedy has happened to me” (10:19 NLT). Of course it would be a tragedy for Aaron to lose half of his children, especially having to watch their charred bodies being dragged outside the camp for burial. Any father would have been torn apart to think how his boys would have suffered so much pain. It is almost unfathomable that right after the boys are burnt to death, Moses has to tell Aaron that if he allows himself to show any signs of mourning for his children, Yahweh will kill him too, as well as threaten the rest of the community: “Do not show grief by leaving your hair uncombed or by tearing your clothes. If you do, you will die, and the Lord’s anger will strike the whole community of Israel” (Lev. 10:6 NLT).

This may be cold and callous enough by itself, but there is another issue that gets missed when talking about the sin of Nadab and Abihu. Since apologists defend Yahweh’s retribution by condemning the young priests for their terrible sin, a sin so great that they deserved to be burnt to death, one can assume they will not be going to heaven. For those who believe that hell is a place of everlasting suffering, they must come to terms with the idea that because these young men put the wrong kind of coals in their censers, they were burnt to death and then sentenced to suffer day and night for ever and ever. That’s an interesting concept of justice, let alone mercy.


Burnt Alive

There is a famous account of a Buddhist monk, Thich Quang Duc, who committed suicide by self immolation in a busy Saigon intersection in 1963 to draw world attention to the demands of South Vietnamese Buddhists. It got people’s attention. Journalist David Halberstam witnessed it and used the following poignant words to describe it: "I was to see that sight again, but once was enough. Flames were coming from a human being; his body was slowly withering and shriveling up, his head blackening and charring. In the air was the smell of burning human flesh.” For Halberstam, and for the bystanders, even watching it was painful enough.

Anyone who’s read accounts of people who have survived massive burns knows how incredibly painful this can be. The Burn Survivor Resource Centre says, “A serious burn is one of the most horrendous traumas the body can suffer.” Tragically, burning people alive has been used as a brutal form of torture by ruthless people in too many cases. Amnesty International reported that people were burned alive during Saddam Hussein’s brutal repression of the 1991 uprisings in Iraq in order to instill terror in his enemies. In South Africa in the eighties, government collaborators were burned alive by a method that became known as “necklacing” where a petrol soaked tire was placed around the victim’s neck and set ablaze. The Nazis burned men, women, and children alive. More recently reporters in Darfur have told stories of Janjaweed militia attacking villages, chaining people, and burning them alive.

There’s nothing remotely merciful about this choice of punishment. There’s really nothing good about it either. Nadab and Abihu had apparently been faithful followers of their god for all their lives up to this point. There is nothing in the Bible that says they’d been anything but good sons and good priests. For those who choose to take the story literally, it is must surely be a matter of faith to believe that these boys deserved to be burnt alive and then condemned to eternal suffering because of this one mistake.

Thomas II

Beautiful post! :thumbs:

And all this takes place inside a tent, The Holy of Holies, were they would keep the Ark of the Covenant...Is this significant?

Of course I am looking for natural causes, as supernatural causes would be considered *after* we have exhausted the natural ones.

Nadab and Abihu were:
1.Careless (possibly inebriated).
2.They were holding *metallic* incense burners...
3. Next to an object capable of powerful electrical charges, reactive to any kind of touch...
4. bump!...whu?...Zaaap!...

There is also the story of Uzzah (2 Samuel 6:6-7), were he touches the Ark so it would not fall, as the oxen pulling the cart carrying the Ark stumbled, and Zaaap!
Many other people died from being in contact with the Ark.
So what the heck was the Ark, or what the heck was *in* the Ark?
Was it a powerful generator, a capacitor, or something similar?

semiopen

Glad to see you having an intelligent discussion of moral content.

Nice post Partick, it fails to mention the lack of children of the sons, perhaps they had girls though.