It was to some poor shepherds one night in a field outside of Bethlehem that a heavenly army of angels appeared delivering a message of “peace on earth, goodwill towards men.” The Prince of Peace had been born in a stable, wrapped in swaddling clothes, and laid in a manger. Contrary to the Marcionite dichotomy between the vengeful God of the Old Testament and the forgiving God of the New, the Prince of Peace is no less a warrior than the Old Testament God, declaring in Matthew 10:34-36 that he did not come to bring peace, but a sword. He brought a message of judgment for Israel, promising that Israel would shortly be destroyed (Mt. 24; Mk. 13; Lk. 21). He drove the money lenders out of the temple with whips. At the cross, where the Prince of Peace crushes the head of the serpent, an army of angels stood ready to deliver Him from suffering and death and wipe out his onlookers should He call on them to do so (Mt. 26:53). Ananias and Saphira were struck down instantly for lying to the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:1‒11). Herod Agrippa was killed by the angel of the Lord for his arrogant blasphemy (Acts 12:23). The imagery of the Apocalypse is more terrifying than anything in the Old Testament as Christ Himself descends with a sword in his mouth, slaying all his enemies, and allowing the birds to feed on their carcasses (Rev. 19:15‒17). Yet the problem with Yahweh’s direct or indirect use of violence in the Old Testament remains, which seems to be at odds with the broader themes of reconciliation and forgiveness proclaimed throughout Scripture. How do we make sense or attempt to justify the use of violence depicted throughout the historical books of the Old Testament and reconcile this with the Christ we meet in the Gospels? If God’s acts are consistent with his nature, one must seek to rectify this tension between Yahweh’s stated hatred for violence and his seeming acts of violence and commands to commit violence against his enemies. To make sense of Yahweh’s use of violence in the Old Testament narratives, we must read the Bible on His terms and understand the problem texts within the larger theological context of the redemptive-historical story being told.

An honest examination of the issue will require reading the biblical account within the proper framework and seeking to apply the proper definitions of terms. In an essay entitled “Is Theology Poetry?”, C.S. Lewis contrasts a scientific worldview from a theologically-based worldview by likening them to dreaming and waking, respectively. Dreams, he says, can be explained by the waking world, which is more real, whereas the waking world cannot be explained in the context of a dream. Thus, it is the latter that should interpret the former.

For the same reason I am certain that in passing from the scientific point of view to the theological, I have passed from dream to waking. Christian theology can fit in science, art, morality, and the sub-Christian religious. The scientific point of view cannot fit in any of these things, not even science itself.^[1]

Lewis’ principle is applicable to analyzing the subject of violence. If Scripture, like the sun, is the light by which we see everything else, then it stands to reason that Scripture’s reality must inform our own understanding of violence rather than our own understanding judging the text. Otherwise, we learn nothing new. Scripture becomes merely a collection of stories and teachings that we filter through our own interpretive grid of assumptions and definitions. In doing so, we either create a god in our own image, who always agrees with us, or reject a god we have either failed to understand or who we deem to have failed to live up to our ethical code. Peter Leithart makes the connection between such modern methods of interpretation and ancient allegorical interpretation.

In both, reality is named by some extrabiblical system, whether Neoplatonic or Stoic philosophy, or evolutionary science and ‘scientific’ historical research. Both methods seek the meaning of the text in some reality ‘behind’ or ‘underneath’ the text, and thus both read the text in the context of the world rather than the world in the context of the text.^[2]

An honest inquiry into the theological problem with the use of violence in Scripture must allow the Bible’s reality to inform our own, that we may look at the world in the light of the sun rather than judging the sun based on our experiences groping in the dark.

In this first installment on the divine sanction of the use of violence in the Old Testament, we will examine Yahweh’s stated hatred of violence and then address two contextual considerations in interpreting the violent commands and acts of God in Scripture. First, violence committed or condoned in the Old Testament occurs within the broader context of mercy. Second, violence often comes as the result of human choices and actions wherein God allows the natural consequences and repercussions to take their course on violent men and women. In the second installment, we will look at the theological significance of the violent episodes in Israel’s history.

The first premise that is discerned from the witness of Scripture is that Yahweh hates violence. It was the fact that the earth was filled with violence in Genesis 6:11 that occasioned God’s pronouncement of judgment through the Flood. Psalm 11:5 says that Yahweh observes all the actions of men from his holy throne and his soul hates the one who loves violence. In Proverbs 10:11 and 13:2 respectively, it is the wicked who conceals violence and the treacherous who desires violence. The prophet Habakkuk laments, “O Lord, how long shall I cry for help, and you will not hear? Or cry to you “Violence!” and you will not save? (1:2, ESV), implying his awareness of Yahweh’s intolerance for violence. Isaiah prophesies concerning the eternal city of Zion that “Violence shall no more be heard in your land” (60:18, ESV). Scripture is replete with references to Yahweh’s condemnation of violence, and contrary to popular opinion, most of those references come from the Old Testament. Yet, Yahweh either commands or condones the use of violence on numerous occasions throughout the Old Testament narratives, most notably in the conquest of Canaan in the books of Joshua and Judges, such that it would seem the aforementioned premise is either false or Yahweh is an inconsistent and unpredictable God. If God truly hates violence, we must seek to understand why His apparent support for the use of force does not constitute violence in the sense that He despises.

Next, it must be stressed that Yahweh’s commendation of force occurs against a background of mercy. The Prayer of Humble Access for the Order of Holy Communion in the Book of Common Prayer states that it is God’s property always to have mercy.^[3] When reading the Old Testament narratives, one cannot help but be astounded by the abundant mercy and the longsuffering nature of God. Yahweh’s judgment is always preceded by warnings and calls to repentance. Modern readers may be offended by the brutal force utilized by Joshua and the Israelites as they invaded the land of Canaan. However, the real surprise to the careful reader is not that the Canaanites were killed or driven out of the land, but rather why this did not happen earlier in the story. In Genesis 15, Yahweh tells Abraham that one day his descendants will be established in the land of Canaan. Abraham must live by faith trusting that God will give him a son and believing that one day his descendants would have a permanent home in the land rather than wandering as nomads. Why must Abraham wait before seeing God’s promises fulfilled immediately or even in his lifetime? Because of his mercy to the Amorites whose iniquity was not yet full (Gen. 15:16). Yahweh provides the Amorites living in the land of Canaan more than four centuries to repent and turn to the true God of whom Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are witnesses. In Genesis 49, Simeon and Levi are cursed by their father, Jacob, on his death bed for their use of violence against the Hivite men of Shechem who defiled their sister, Dinah, in Genesis 34. Though the Hivites were one of the tribes of Canaan that the Israelites were to completely drive out, the time for their removal had not yet come and Jacob’s sons are condemned for resorting to violence too soon. Moreover, the children of Israel would suffer for generations as slaves in Egypt while Yahweh patiently gave the Canaanites an opportunity to repent and worship their Creator rather than idols. Scholars Paul Copan and Matthew Flannagan conclude,

[E]ven when Canaan occupied land to which Israel had legal title, the inhabitants could not simply be evicted on a whim. It was only when certain immoral practices had been culturally entrenched in the Canaanites for centuries without repentance that Israel would be permitted to drive them out.^[4]

God’s mercy extends even to those who will later cause trouble for his people. Yahweh proves to be the God who sees to the Egyptian slave girl who had been impregnated by Abraham and cast out into the wilderness to die by Sarah. The Egyptians would later enslave the Hebrews and Ishmael would prove himself a rival to the line of Isaac for millennia. Yet rather than let Hagar conveniently disappear from the story in the wilderness, Yahweh’s character is always to have mercy and the salvation of Hagar will be used to educate Abraham about his duties as a father to his family to prepare him to be a father to a new nation. In Genesis 18, Yahweh determines to destroy the evil cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. For the sake of Abraham, Lot and his family are spared judgment even though Lot’s presence in that wicked city and his willingness to accommodate the mob of rapists beating down his door by offering them his daughters is hardly commendable. After leaving the city and fleeing to the mountains, Lot commits incest with both of his daughters, producing two sons, Moab and Ammon, that will trouble the people of Israel for generations. Later, it will be Saul’s first test as king to deliver Jabesh-Gilead from the Ammonites. Would it not have been better for Israel if Yahweh, knowing all things, simply decided to let Lot die in Sodom so that the Moabites and Ammonites never would have come into being? Yet, it is His character always to have mercy. Lot had been a member of Abraham’s household and Yahweh was faithful to Abraham.

As the time of the Israel’s invasion of Canaan drew near, the Canaanites were given even greater warnings. Israel wandered for forty years in the wilderness after the exodus from Egypt and their deliverance at the Red Sea, providing time for the peoples of Canaan to hear the report of what God had done in Egypt and repent. This is demonstrated clearly in Joshua 2 in the account of the conquest of Jericho. When Joshua’s spies enter the city of Jericho, they are hidden by Rahab, a prostitute in the city. Rahab’s words to the spies are quite striking. She confesses what she already knows to be true: “I know that the Lord has given you the land” (Josh. 2:9, ESV). Rahab then goes further and states that the terror of Israel had fallen upon the entire city of Jericho.

[T]he fear of you has fallen upon us, and that all the inhabitants of the land melt away before you. For we have heard how the Lord dried up the water of the Red Sea before you when you came out of Egypt, and what you did to the two kings of the Amorites who were beyond the Jordan, to Sihon and Og, whom you devoted to destruction. And as soon as we heard it, our hearts melted, and there was no spirit left in any man because of you, for the Lord your God, he is God in the heavens above and on the earth beneath (2:9‒11, ESV).

By Rahab’s own admission, the entire city of Jericho was not only aware of what God had done for the people of Israel since the crossing of the Red Sea forty years earlier, but lived in dread of the day when Israel would come to the promised land and take it. Yet, in all this time there was no repentance or a desire to direct their worship to the one true God. Their hearts were hardened against Yahweh. Even as Israel crossed the Jordan and stood before them, the people of Jericho sought in their rebellion to thwart the will of God. The Gibeonites in Joshua 9 also testify to the mercy of God by acknowledging Israel’s right to the land and their knowledge of Yahweh’s judgment to come.^[5] When asked by Joshua why they deceived the Israelites, they reply:

Because it was told to your servants for a certainty that the Lord your God had commanded his servant Moses to give you all the land and to destroy all the inhabitants of the land from before you—so we feared greatly for our lives because of you and did this thing. And now, behold, we are in your hand. Whatever seems good and right in your sight to do to us, do it. (9:24‒25, ESV)

Despite the fact that the Gibeonites were clearly told that the land belonged to the Israelites and that Yahweh had given orders to destroy all he inhabitants of the land, they did not repent or submit to Israel’s God, but instead attempted to deceive Israel into entering a peace treaty under which they would be able to continue to live in the land and worship their own gods. Yahweh would have every right to have them destroyed at this point, but he tells Joshua that the people of Israel must honor the treaty made with the Gibeonites, even though it was obtained by deception. The book of Joshua reveals the callousness of the human heart and the unwillingness to repent even when there is a certain knowledge that destruction is coming.

Yet Rahab believed and serves as an illustration of Yahweh’s willingness to forgive those who repent and turn to Him in faith. Like Abraham, Rahab’s faith was counted unto her as righteousness and her life and the lives of her family were not only spared, but they enjoyed the blessed existence of joining the covenant people of God. Yahweh held out the offer of salvation even to those who repented at the last possible moment. Should Jericho and all the cities in the land of Canaan have repented even as the armies of Israel were on their doorstep, Yahweh would have spared them and extended his covenant promises to them.

Yahweh also demonstrates his longsuffering character when dealing with the people of Israel in the land. The repeated cries of David in the Psalms “how long, O Lord?” are a testament to God’s mercy toward the wicked. David spent years fleeing from Saul in the wilderness awaiting deliverance but refusing to commit violence against the Lord’s Anointed. Yahweh did not strike Saul dead after Saul defied God’s command to devote the Amalekites to destruction. Despite the fact that Ahab and Jezebel had reintroduced Baal worship and were the worst monarchs to reign in Israel up to that time, Yahweh delivered Ahab from Ben-Hadad of Syria (I Kings 20) and promised that the destruction that would fall on his household would not occur until after his death (I Kings 21:25‒29). By the time that Ahab’s dynasty did fall to the violence inflicted by Jehu, the honest reader is relieved that justice has been served at last, rather than troubled that Yahweh has been too hasty in judging wickedness. When the people of Judah were condemned to exile in Babylon, it is only after the particularly dreadful reign of Manasseh, the most evil of kings who yet enjoyed the longest reign of any king in the history either the northern or southern kingdom (2 Kings 20:21). The prophets spent their entire lives publicly preaching the same message, pleading with their hearers to repent before it was too late. “Come now, let us reason together, says the LORD” (Is. 1:18, ESV). Those who suffer violence and destruction directly or indirectly by Yahweh never do so without warning or because of an arbitrary whim. Yahweh presumes his people’s ability to reason and calls them to respond to His warnings of judgment.

The second consideration is that not only does the use of violence against Yahweh’s enemies in Scripture take place against the background of God’s mercy, but it also often occurs as a natural consequence of the violent intents or actions of the wicked. Just as the natural man in Romans 1, apart from grace, is given over to sinful desires because of his idolatry and suppression of the truth, Yahweh often gives the violent over to a violent end. Those who perpetuate violence bring violence down upon their own head. This wisdom principle is stated clearly in Proverbs 26:27: “Whoever digs a pit will fall into it, and a stone will come back on him who starts it rolling” (ESV). Likewise, Proverbs 21:7 says, “The violence of the wicked will destroy them, Because they refuse to do justice.”^[6] The wicked pursue a course of violence, generating momentum, and then find they are propelled forward by violence until it crushes them. In such cases, Yahweh does not directly engage in violence but rather turns the violence of the wicked back against them. In Psalm 7, David celebrates a victory over his own enemies saying,

Behold, the wicked man conceives evil and is pregnant with mischief and gives birth to lies. He makes a pit, digging it out, and falls into the hole that he has made. His mischief returns upon his own head, and on his own skull his violence descends (v. 14, ESV).

Repeatedly, this principle is illustrated in the historical narratives of the Old Testament. In Judges 9, Jotham, the youngest son of Gideon, prophesies that fire would come out of the bramble and burn up the men of Shechem who had made Abimelech to be king or fire would come from the men of Shechem and burn up the bramble. In accordance with Jotham’s prophesy, the violence inflicted by Abimelech and the Shechemites upon sixty-nine sons of Gideon is visited in turn upon them by Abimelech when they attempt to rebel against his rule. Furthermore, Abimelech’s violence and desire for conquest leads him to the walls of Thebez where a millstone crushes his skull. “Because of this fact, the brambles cannot win in history. Eventually they destroy each other.”^[7] Joab, the Machiavellian commander of David’s armies, was a man who lived by the sword and shed the blood of war in a time of peace. Driven by ambition, Joab opportunistically used violence to murder rivals even contrary to David’s commands and thus his gray head would not be allowed to go to the grave in peace and would die by the sword (I Kings 2:5‒6). Ahab and Jezebel, who did great violence to the prophets of God (I Kings 18:4; II Kings 9:7), suffered violent and disgraceful deaths along with their entire household. Ahab was killed by a random arrow in a battle he was advised by God’s prophet to avoid (I Kings 22:6-7, 34). Jezebel was thrown from a window at the command of a challenger to the throne of Israel and the dogs drink her blood. During Israel’s exile, the Persian satraps plotting the downfall of Daniel were thrown into the lion’s den with their wives and children by order of the same king they sought to trick into condemning Daniel to death (Dan. 6:24). Haman, who desired to inflict mass violence upon the Jews living in the Persian capital of Susa was hanged on the very gallows that he had built for the execution of Mordecai and the Jews (Est. 7:9‒10). As Jesus would warn Peter in the garden at the time of his arrest, those who live by the sword, die by the sword (Mt. 26:52). Examples abound throughout history of those who resort to violence in their quest for power often meet a violent end. For this reason, Isaiah prophesies concerning the rule and reign of Christ from Mount Zion that worshippers “shall beat their swords into plowshares, And their spears into pruning hooks; Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, Neither shall they learn war anymore” (Is. 2:4). Rather than simply allowing the violence of the wicked to be turned back upon them, the nature of Yahweh’s rule in the end is an intervention to stop the cycle of violence and ensure that peace prevails.

Having laid this foundation, we will next time explore the theological significance of the acts of violence in the Old Testament.

Notes

1. C. S. Lewis, The Weight of Glory and Other Addresses (New York: HarperOne, 2001), 139‒140. ↑
2. Peter J. Leithart, A Son to Me: An Exposition of 1 & 2 Samuel (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2003), 21. ↑
3. The Book of Common Prayer: And Administration of the Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, According to the Use of the Reformed Episcopal Church in North America, Together with the Psalter or Psalms of David, fifth (Philadelphia, Pa.: Standing Liturgical Commission of the Reformed Episcopal Church, 2013), 100. ↑
4. Paul Copan & Matthew Flanagan, Did God Really Command Genocide?: Coming to Terms with the Justice of God, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books), 2014 ↑
5. Ibid, 65. ↑
6. The word for violence here is shod and refers to destruction or ruin as distinct from chamas, which is a sinful use of force. This further supports the point that Yahweh does not act with chamas (see note 8), but destruction is brought about as a natural result of the violent actions of the wicked. Strong’s Hebrew: 7701. שֹׁד (SHOD). Accessed December 1, 2023. https://biblehub.com/hebrew/7701.htm. ↑
7. James B. Jordan, Judges: A Practical and Theological Commentary, (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 1999), 167 ↑