Is God a Racist?

Part of today's bible reading comes from Ezra chapters 9 and 10. The most striking theme in this Old Testament story is on the subject of Intermarriage. Or more specifically, I was puzzled by Ezra's reaction when he found out that “The people of Israel, including the priests and the Levites, have not kept themselves separate from the neighboring peoples with their detestable practices, like those of the Canaanites, Hittites, Perizzites, Jebusites, Ammonites, Moabites, Egyptians and Amorites. They have taken some of their daughters as wives for themselves and their sons, and have mingled the holy race with the peoples around them. And the leaders and officials have led the way in this unfaithfulness.” (Ezra 9:3). Ezra tore his tunic and cloak, pulled hair from his head and beard, and went into a rather prolonged frenzy and tandrum (this was my gut reaction when I read all the emotional and physical outburst he threw himself into).  He then required all the "Jewish exiles" to assemble in Jerusalem in heavy rain within three days with the threat of confiscating their property. He then commanded them to "Separate yourselves from the peoples around you and from your foreign wives.” (Ezra 9:10). He was in essence telling those who had married foreign wives to send their wives and their children away. This just didn't sit well with me. God loves these foreign wives and the children too. What are we saying to the world that God only cares for the Jews (the holy race) and not any other race at all?

I picked a rather provocative title for this blog. It came from this commentary "Is God a Racist? Using Context to Untangling Ezra’s Prohibition of Intermarriage" from the site Hank Speaks Out. Hank advocated that "a text without a context is a pretext". He illustrated this with another example in scripture that speaks about intermarriage:

"“You shall not intermarry with them” (Deut. 7:3) is contextualized by the words, “they will turn your sons away from following Me to serve other gods” (Deut. 7:4). In other words, the aim of God’s command was the obliteration of wickedness, never the obliteration of the wicked, or a racist motif. Not only so, God’s purposes were to use Israel as a light to the nations, and thus they were not to reflect the practices of the pagan nations around them. As such, those from the nations who embraced Yahweh were considered true Israel, and those who did not were those considered to be aliens or foreigners, but even there, God unequivocally commanded Israel to treat the aliens living among them with respect and equality (Exod. 22:21; Lev. 19:33-37). Such concern for foreigners demonstrates that mercy was to be shown to those who repented of idolatry and were, therefore, grafted into true Israel. "

I also learned a few interesting perspectives from Jewish sources. In myjewishlearning.com I learned that in the Hebrew tradition, Ezra and Nehemiah are combined as one book entitled "Ezra" and Nehemiah is simply the second part of Ezra. Parts of Ezra are written in Aramaic, which was the common language of the Middle East at the time (the only other OT book not entirely written in Hebrew is the book of Daniel! Just another trivia:-). Being the only completely historical book in the third section of the Hebrew Bible, Ezra chronicled the return of the remnant of Jewish exiles from Mesopotamia to Zion. This occurred in 538BC when the Babylonia empire was replaced by the Persian empire. "One of the first rulers of the empire, Cyrus, sought to show tolerance to all of the communities in Mesopotamia. Cyrus issued a famous edict, narrated at the very beginning of the book of Ezra, allowing Jews who wished to return to "Jerusalem that is in Judah” and build a “House for the God of Heaven” to do so.". "The book of Ezra tells of the three distinct stages in the return, and of the challenges and practical difficulties that the returnees faced at each stage. Not all the Jews in Mesopotamia were interested in returning to Zion. Those who did were fired by the hope of building a society which would restore Israel's ancient glory."

The two central issues in building this society were:
1) The attempt to define the boundaries of the society's members. "Who was a (true) Israelite?" was an issue of great concern.
2) The attempt to turn the laws of the Torah into the laws of the society.

So with this perspective in mind: "Ezra's reaction is easy to understand: the returnees believed that the kingdoms of Israel and Judah were destroyed because their inhabitants did not live up to God's laws, and Ezra was determined to avoid a similar fate for the new society they were building. (Intermarriage with the inhabitants of the land is forbidden, according to Deuteronomy 7:3).Therefore, the laws of the Torah had to become the blueprint for the new society. Ezra convinced the people to begin a process of separating from non-Israelite wives, but the process "was longer than one day or two days' work" (Ezra 9:13); and it is doubtful if the process was ever completed."


Bible.org also has a commentary concerning this. The focus on Ezra's reaction and seemingly drastic solution to the problem of Intermarriage was to preserve the holiness of God's elect.

"The theme of holiness emerges first in Ezra 2:58-63 . Two groups of Returnees, one lay and the other priestly, were unable “to declare the house of their fathers and their seed, if they were from Israel” (2:59 ). Although the text gives no indication of what action was taken with regard to the lay group, the fact that they are included in the list implies that they were among the returning exiles. On the other hand, the priests who were unable to prove their lineage were regarded as profane and unfit to participate in the priesthood or to eat from the “most holy things.” This restriction was, however, limited until a priest (presumably the high priest) could pronounce judgment on their legitimacy using the Urim and Thummim. Within the framework of the narrative, this brief scene serves as a reminder of God’s requirement for those who serve Him as priests: they must be from the tribe of Levi, the house of Aaron. If they were not from the lineage of those whom God had separated unto Himself and sanctified to the ministry of the priesthood (Num. 8:14-19), they were not acceptable. In this way, this passage links holiness to obedience to God’s word as well as highlighting the importance of holiness in the priesthood. Since the priests were at the center of the nation’s spiritual life, that they meet the divine requirements for service was paramount. The denial of their right to participate in the priesthood also establishes the principle that holiness is more important than one’s livelihood."

The final and most significant development of the holiness theme in the book takes place in chapters nine and ten where we read the account of Ezra's dealing with Intermarriage, particularly among the priests and the leaders of the returning people.

In the United Church commentary, I learned another perspective:

"While it is possible that some of the new arrivals could have been guilty, it seems unlikely that any of them would have entered into marriages with foreigners in just a few months' time. More likely, the guilty were only of those Jews who already lived in the land when Ezra arrived. In stating that the transgressors were "of those who had been carried away captive," Ezra must have meant they were the descendants of those who returned with Zerubbabel. Certainly those who already had children by these illegal marriages had to have been in these marriages prior to Ezra's arrival.

It is pointed out to Ezra that the leaders and rulers of the people led the way in this transgression (Ezra 9:2). Leaders always have an opportunity to serve as examples for others to emulate—whether for good or ill. When those in such responsible positions are corrupted, they often lead others astray.

Specific motivations behind what happened are not given. "Humanly speaking there may have been reasons for such intermarriages, such as a disparity between the number of returning men and available Jewish women" (Expositor's Bible Commentary, note on verses 1-2). Yet it would have been far better to remain single, even if it meant living alone with no perpetuation of one's family lineage, than to so flagrantly disobey God. The One who created marriage desires for people to experience its benefits, but only within the boundaries He has set. This is important for all of us to remember. Christians in the New Testament are instructed to not marry unbelievers (2 Corinthians 6:14; compare 1 Corinthians 7:39). This is for our own sake and that of any children we might produce—and that of the rest of the Church. Of course, many when they are first converted and become part of God's Church are already married to a spouse who is not yet called of God—and in this case the apostle Paul instructs that the marriage be maintained if the unbeliever is willing to continue the marriage in fidelity and peace (see verses 12-16).

Verses 10-12 of chapter 9, while stated as if a single quotation from the law regarding the present sin, actually draw from many passages (see Deuteronomy 7:3-4; 11:8-9; 23:6; Proverbs 10:27; 13:22; 20:7; Isaiah 1:19)."


So what do I take from all that. I still maintain that:

• God loves all peoples.
• If we are to marry, it is important to marry someone who shares the same faith - not just intellectual faith, but living faith. This is for our own good so that we can experience God's love and goodness more completely.
• That the message in Ezra speaks of God's intention to show his mercy through a people who had repeatedly violated his good intention for them, which included a close relationship with the merciful God, and which required separating themselves from the pagan practices around them (one of the really horrible practices included sacrificing their own children!).
• In Romans 12:2 we are exhorted to "Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is--his good, pleasing and perfect will."