We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.
Does God Inflict Physical Disabilities?
In Exodus 4, we find Moses claiming that he could not be used by Yahweh to get the children of Israel out of Egypt because he was “slow of speech and tongue.” To this Yahweh replies, “Who gave human beings their mouths? Who makes them deaf or mute? Who gives them sight or makes them blind? Is it not I, the LORD” (Ex 4:10-1)?
However, this is not what we find in the teachings and life of God’s ultimate revelation in Christ. Without exception, when Jesus confronted the crippled, deaf, blind, mute, diseased, or demon-possessed, he uniformed diagnosed their affliction as something that God did not will. Often Jesus or the Gospel authors specify that it was evil forces (Satan or demons), not God, that were causing the afflictions (see Mk 9:25, Lk 11:14; 13:11-16, Acts 10:38).
How then should we assess this passage in light of the uniform view of Jesus, the NT and early post-apostolic church that all such infirmities are directly or indirectly brought about by Satan and his minions and are against God’s will?
To begin, it is exegetically significant that the passage from Exodus 4 does not suggest that Yahweh determines which individuals will be deaf, mute or blind, “as if God entered into the womb of every pregnant woman and determined whether and how a child would have disabilities,” to quote Terrence Fretheim.[1] The afflictions mentioned in this passage are spoken of in general terms and simply reflect that Yahweh is the Creator and Lord over a creation that unfortunately includes such things as deafness, muteness and blindness. This is closely related to the ANE concept of a kingdom as a king-centered corporate whole, which also could be plausibly appealed to as a means of accounting for this passage. And one could argue that the need for God to over-emphasize the importance of creational-monotheism to his people at this early stage in the progress of revelation and/or perhaps even the metonymy of the subject could also be appealed to along these lines.
Yet, we see how this passage bears witness to the cross, as I argue in my recently-released Cross Vision, only when we interpret it through the lens of Calvary. As he did on Calvary, I submit that Yahweh is here communicating to Moses in a way that reflects his willingness to assume responsibility for all the afflictions that unfortunately take place in his demonically-oppressed creation, despite the fact that every one of these afflictions are contrary to his will, as Jesus’ ministry makes clear. And Yahweh in this particular instance is speaking this way in order to reassure Moses that his speech-impairment is hardly an insurmountable problem for him—though, much to the chagrin of Yahweh—Moses continued to refuse this assurance, resulting in Yahweh accommodating Moses’ stubbornness by letting Aaron serve as his spokesperson (Ex 4:13-6).
Join us next week at the Cross Vision Conference to explore questions like these further.
[1] T. Fretheim, Exodus (Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 1992), 72.
Photo credit: ILO in Asia and the Pacific via Visualhunt / CC BY-NC-ND
Category: General
Tags: Cruciform Theology, Sickness, Spiritual Warfare
Topics: Interpreting Violent Pictures and Troubling Behaviors
Related Reading
Cross-like Love and Non-Violence
Cosmo Spacely via Compfight Though it seems to have been forgotten by many today, the cross wasn’t simply something God did for us. According to the NT, it was also an example God calls us to follow. Hence, after John defined love by pointing us to Jesus’ death on the cross on our behalf, he…
Podcast: Can We Still Take Comfort in the Old Testament?
Greg considers the Old Testament revelations that are consistent with Christ crucified. http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0199.mp3
God’s Moral Immutability
Classical theologians from the fourth and fifth centuries on were very concerned with protecting their understanding of the metaphysical attributes of God—like timelessness, immutability, impassibility—by assessing biblical portraits that conflicted with these attributes to be accommodations. However, once we resolve that all our thinking about God must be anchored in the cross, our primary concern…
If the violent depictions of God in the Bible are not completely accurate, isn’t all of Scripture up for debate?
Question: I’m very intrigued by your cruciform hermeneutics and can’t wait for your book (Crucifixion of the Warrior God) to come out. But I have to say that it strikes me as dangerous. You’re basically saying that the violent portraits of God in the OT are not completely accurate. But doesn’t this place us flawed…
Podcast: Overflow Episode 1 — Dust, Flashlights, and Heathens
Dan and Brianna tackle some tough questions: —Is it okay for Christians to be cremated? —How can we preach from the OT with authority? —What should a Christian academic know in a secular school? http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0320_overflow_1.mp3
How God Judges Sin
In his third sermon covering material from his book Crucifixion of the Warrior God, Greg explores the topic of judgment. In this clip, Greg suggests that while God certainly does judge sin, how he judges is very different than we might expect. You can view the entire sermon here on the Woodland Hills Church site. You can find the…