ST. CATHARINES CONCORDIA - Brock University

John R. Wilch: ABRAM IN EGYPT: SINNER OR SAINT'? 25
Or could we imagine that ethical aclion for God and His faithful in the Old
Testament pcriod is to bc distinguished from that of the New Testament period?
I-lardly, for St. Paul deceived his enemies in Damascus by letting himself be lowered
from the city wall in a basket a1 night to escape them (Ac. 923-25). He later wrongly
to be on trial for preaching the rcsusscction of thc dead in order to instigate a
disrupling debate between his Pharisee and Sadducee accusers of the Sanhedrin,
resulting in thc Roman commander's rescuing him from them (23:6-10). Even our
~ord Jesus Christ was not above misleading people by somehow disguising Himsclf
from recognilion, Sor example: by Lhe people of Nazareth who wanted to kill Him (Lk.
4:29-30). Aftcr His Resurrection, Hc was not easily recognized by Mary Magdalene
(Jn. 20:14-16), the disciples on the way to Ernmaus (Lk. 24:15-16), and by seven
disciples on the beach (Jn. 21 :4). Indeed. one of His great stratagems lhroughoul His
ear.thly ministry was "the Messianic secret:" He successfully disguised Ilimsclf as the
promised Christ from most people until after His Resurrection (see Mark 1:40-44;
3: 11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9; 11:33; I,uke 24:26-27,44-48; John 12Z-41).
IVhat lessons do we learn from this? First, in such cases as those of Jesus'
"Messianic secret," His disguising Hirnself Crom Mary Magdalene and certain disciples,
and the dcccptions by Joscph of his brothcrs, of the two mothers by Solomon,
and oP David by Nathan, they were pedagogical lessons to lead those involved to a
dceper recognition of God's will. Secondly, in most other cases, such as of our Lord's
disguising IIimself from the would-be executioners of Nazareth. David's fcigning
n~adness before the Philistines of Gath, St. Paul's escaping from Damascus, and
Rahab's hiding Isracl's spics, it was the necessity of secretive action in order to prevent
ham to God's faithful who were being critically threatened by enemies of both
themselves and God. Similarly, the rnilitmy schemes of Abram, Joshua, Ehud, Jael,
Gideon, etc., wcrc ncccssary to savc God's pcoplc from His and their enemies. They
were ulti~nately doing battle with the forces of evil.
Augustine declared: "We must never al a11 tell a lie " I'or i Twe always tell the truth,
55'
God will always make a way of escape (1 Cor. 10: 13). But that is misusc of Scripture,
hr lo tell the lr~~th to an enemy and expect God to deliver one is "demonic theology."
Indeed, it is the Satanic temptation, testing God (Matt. 4:7). No one may impose a
requirement upon God, expecting Him to deliver oneself when one refuses to do so
oneself. 56
Can it bc, then, that thcrc arc two scts of norms for the Christian--two ethical
systems? The one would follow natural law and God's Law strictly, not allowing any
deception whatsoever, as long as there is a situation where one can reckon with juslice
and fair play. But the other system would allow for dcception in word or dccd whcn
one is confronted by an enemy of God and of justice. Is the one norm that of the Law
and thc other that of freedom from the Law? Dr. Hackmann rejected every ethical
system for the Christian as a system of law. because the Christian is freed bp Christ
55 1)e Mer~rlncio, Nicerre rindl'ost-~Vrcene Pnfhn-S, first ,Yurres, 111, 42-43, pp. 476-477; ct. Jeske 125.
56 Rusiidoony 544.