I’ve had it on my list to write a piece on blood violence and bloodguilt and recent mass shootings in the U.S. have only emphasized the need to address the subject. Blood violence and bloodguilt are subjects prevalent in Scripture yet rarely spoken about in churches I’ve been associated with. By rarely, I mean never spoken about.
A False Confidence in the Second Amendment & Our Forefathers
While sermons on bloodguilt are lacking, it’s amazing how often there are passionate defenses of our Second Amendment right to bear arms, often coupled with the false claim that God gave us the right to bear arms.
This claim has its basis in another bogus claim that America is a Christian nation whose government was crafted by our forefathers who were “men of God”. Many certainly exhibited Christian faith but that hardly establishes that the government or nation they formed was at God’s direction. There’s certainly no biblical support for such a notion.
But that hasn’t stopped many of our pastors from “conferring” upon our forefathers a status approaching Apostolic. They often speak of our forefathers as men of great, godly wisdom, as if their words and counsel are infallible. What they cannot see, is that they make the same mistake as our Israelite forerunners who supplanted God’s Word with the teachings of their forefathers. The teachings of our forefathers should not substitute for Scripture.
Think about it. When was the last time Moses descended from Mount Sinai with a second amendment to the Ten Commandments? When did Moses descend the Mount with any Amendments to the Ten Commandments? We all know the answer. He never did, because when God does something, He gets it right the first time. No amendments needed. It should be our first clue that the right to bear arms didn’t come from God!
But I’ve personally had no luck advancing this argument. Christians just don’t believe it. The Second Amendment has become sacrosanct. As one liberal writer put it, “In America, life isn’t sacred – the guns are“. Another said, “America, how long will you sacrifice your children on the altar of gun worship?”, pointing out that in 2022, there’s been more than one mass shooting per day in America! Given how passionate these arguments can be, I’ll endeavor to make a scriptural argument, examining bloodguilt from an angle I doubt any Christian will hear in church, but one that I think every Christian should consider.
God’s Prohibition on Blood Violence
Our starting point is the Noahic covenant of Genesis 9:6 which states ““Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind.” The covenant followed the flood which came in judgment of great violence on the earth that brought bloodguilt (Genesis 6:11, 13). It warns if a man sheds the blood of another, God will require his blood through the agent of another man. Men who kill men, will be killed by other men.
The reason given is that man is made in the image of God. Thus, any attack on a man is an attack on God as man is God’s earthly representative. He bears God’s image. To attack God’s image is to attack God. We also learn that life is in the blood (Genesis 9:4-5).
Numbers 35:33 expands on this prohibition, adding that bloodshed also pollutes the land (earth) and atonement for the land can only be secured by the blood of the perpetrator who shed the blood. Thus, it is not just a crime against the one murdered, but against the land or earth.
Christians are often quick to argue that God gave His people the right to defend themselves. But the restriction against bloodshed is surprisingly limited. If a thief breaks into your home at night and is struck a fatal blow, there is no bloodguilt (Exodus 22.2). But if the thief breaks in during the daylight when he can be seen, there is bloodguilt.
It limits self-defense to home break-ins at night when the intruder can’t be seen! It’s a surprisingly strict limitation. Any time there is opportunity to flee, that is the expectation. Confrontation or “standing your ground” was never anticipated in the law.
Israel’s Lengthy History of Bloodguilt Climaxing in King Manasseh
The prophets indicted Israel for a lengthy history of bloodshed (Isaiah 5:7; Ezekiel 7:23; 9:9; 22:2; 24:6, 9; Hosea 4:2; Micah 3:10). Much of it resulted from the people offering their children to the fires of Baal – a strong argument against abortion, which is simply an “extension” of child-sacrifice. But Christ affirmed that God’s prophets were also martyred (Matthew 23:37).
Israel’s bloodshed reached a tipping point in Manasseh who filled the streets of Jerusalem with blood (2 Kings 21:16). Jewish tradition has it Manasseh had Isaiah sawn in two. God warned Manasseh to no avail (2 Chronicles 33:10) and then led him into captivity to the king of Assyria (vs 11). Manasseh’s imprisonment brought repentance and God restored him (vss 12-13). He then removed the foreign gods, “the image” from the temple and restored the altar of the Lord (vss 15-16), entreating the people to serve only God.
Manasseh’s reforms were largely undone by his son Amon, but then came Josiah, Israel’s great reformer (2 Chronicles 34), doing all that God required. He fully purged Judah and Jerusalem of their idolatry, restored God’s temple, renewed the covenant and “did not fail to follow the Lord” (vs 33).
24 Furthermore, Josiah got rid of the mediums and spiritists, the household gods, the idols and all the other detestable things seen in Judah and Jerusalem. . . . 25 Neither before nor after Josiah was there a king like him who turned to the Lord as he did—with all his heart and with all his soul and with all his strength . . . 26 Nevertheless, the Lord did not turn away from the heat of his fierce anger, which burned against Judah because of all that Manasseh had done to provoke him to anger. 27 So the Lord said, “I will remove Judah also from my presence as I removed Israel, and I will reject Jerusalem, the city I chose, and this temple, about which I said, ‘There shall my Name be.’” 2 Kings 23 (cf. Jeremiah 15:4; 2 Kings 24:2-4).
God’s Rejection of His People for their Bloodguilt
Despite Manasseh’s repentance and despite Josiah’s unparalleled reforms, God was determined to deliver His people into the hands of Babylon because of the sins of Manasseh. Great carnage would follow during the destruction of Jerusalem with many killed by the sword (Jeremiah 15:2). It would seem God fulfilled His Noahic warning. Jerusalem shed innocent blood and their blood was shed by others (the Babylonians).
A Surprising Outcome, A Sobering Warning
God’s Kindness
Israel shed blood and their blood was shed by others. That’s not surprising. What is surprising, is that the judgment did not fall on the generation that shed the blood! Manasseh reigned fifty-five years, Amon two years, Josiah thirty-one years, Jehoahaz three months, Jehoiakim eleven years, Jehoichin 3 months and Zedekiah eleven years before the fall of Jerusalem. Thus, the judgments for Manasseh’s sins were exacted forty four years after Manasseh’s lengthy reign. The judgment for Manasseh’s sins fell on the generation(s) to follow, not those guilty of the bloodguilt during Manasseh’s reign!
It shows that the Noahic judgment could be fulfilled in the children or grandchildren of the perpetrators. In God’s eyes, the posterity can stand in proxy for those perpetrating the crime of bloodshed. How can this be?
Coming from their loins, the posterity are an extension of the parents, and thus God can bring judgment upon the children of those guilty. To us, it seems unfair. God would never judge children for their parent’s sins. Yet the judgment that fell upon Adam and Eve persists even today. It is a judgment every generation has endured!
If it seems unfair, consider the kindness and mercy of God. Had He repaid Manasseh’s generation, then their children and grandchildren might never have been born. By delaying judgment, God not only allowed future generations, but provided opportunity for these future generations to seek salvation! The righteous in heaven have actually been increased! Isn’t this what He also did with Adam and Eve? Had judgment been immediate, there would have been no children and thus no opportunity for salvation.
The Sternness of God
It emphasizes the need to have our hands clean of any bloodshed. No Christian would want bloodguilt passed to their children or grandchildren. Yet few Christians consider the possibility of inadvertent bloodguilt. Christians don’t kill. But does that preclude possible bloodguilt?
Deuteronomy 21:1-9 presents a ritual required in Israel when a person was found murdered but the killer was unknown. The elders and judges from nearby towns were to offer a heifer as atonement for the bloodshed. They would wash their hands over the heifer saying, “Our hands did not shed this blood, nor did our eyes see it done. Accept this atonement for your people Israel . . . do not hold your people guilty” and atonement for the innocent blood would be secured “since you have done what is right”.
Key to securing atonement was innocence. They were innocent, having not been party nor witness to it . I have often asked myself, “Could our church leaders (or even congregants) declare their innocence when we so ardently resist gun control, even simple background checks? Could we honestly say to God that our beliefs played no part in all the innocent bloodshed in our country when we know that easy access to guns fuels violence? It’s a question we must ask ourselves.
A Closing Challenge
I live in Germany where gun control is the norm. Anyone who has examined the stats on gun violence and gun deaths knows there’s a dramatic difference in deaths in every country with gun control, and that difference has persisted every year for the last half century. It’s not even close. The facts are undeniable.
You can blame the gun lobby, you can blame gun enthusiasts but there are gun lobbies & gun enthusiasts in all these other countries. The difference is gun violence is not tolerated in these other countries. It is in the U.S. An outcry against so much innocent bloodshed is absent in the church. There is silence or opposition to gun control, even when our schoolchildren are being senselessly murdered.
Recognizing church impact on abortion policies in the U.S., it is inconceivable that we could not bring just as great an impact for sensible gun control. If we are honest, there would have been gun control long ago if the church supported it. And gun control would save countless lives each year. The data is inarguable.
The church must embrace the truth. It is time to reconsider our stand regarding guns. The blood of countless innocent victims is on our hands because we could easily stop much of it but adamantly refuse. Let’s stop the bloodshed before we reap what we have sown and bloodshed plays out on our children and grandchildren (see Revelation 13:10).