The Violence of Scripture

by Eric A. Seibert

No one can read far in the Old Testament without encountering numerous acts of violence that are sanctioned in the text and attributed to both God and humans.  Over the years, these texts have been used to justify all sorts of violence: from colonizing people and justifying warfare, to sanctioning violence against women and children.  For those who read the Bible as Scripture, these depictions of "virtuous" violence pose tremendous moral and theological challenges.  What can be done to stop people from using the Old Testament in such destructive ways, and how might these violent texts be read more faithfully?

Eric Seibert faces these challenges head-on by confronting the problem of &34; virtuous" violence and urging people to engage in an ethically responsible reading of these troublesome texts.  He offers a variety of reading strategies designed to critique textually sanctioned violence, while still finding ways to use even the most difficult texts constructively, thus providing a desperately needed approach to the violence of Scripture that can help us live more peaceably in a world plagued by religious violence.

Genres: Religion, Theology, Biblical Studies, Christianity

232 pages, Kindle Edition

First published August 1, 2012

Reviews

[John Martindale · Rating 4 out of 5]

I forgot to post a review for this book when I read it last year. After a lot of forgetting of the specifics, what I think I recall, I definitely agree with. That is when we approach many of the text of terror in the Old Testament that are troubling and have borne such bad fruit throughout history, they shouldn't be whitewashed, justified, or worse applied, but rather they must be exposed for what they are, in all their horrific, toxic and deadly grander, labeling it as evil, disarms the text of terror from causing more harm in the future. Next, they can serve an important teaching function, providing an opportunity to search our own hearts, to see if we too, are using God and religion as a cloak to hate, destroy, discriminate, subjugate, and evil kill other people created in the image of God, to build up our own tribe in opposition to the other.
What is discouraging, is this approach is just too bitter of a pill for many Christians to swallow. If the biblical text attribute evil to God or if the heroes of the text do what is evil in the name of God, it is thought this must mean that evil, in these cases was actually good, and not to call evil good, darkness light, hate love, lies truth and black white, would then mean the entire bible is untrustworthy; it would crumble like sand through the hands and we'd be forced into the nebulous void of meaninglessness, leaving us dead in our trespasses and sins--doomed.
Hopefully, Evangelicals will eventually find a way to build their faith on a surer foundation than the doctrine of inerrancy. If they could, then Seibert provides a constructive way to consider all of the scripture profitable for teaching and instruction and training in righteousness, by providing powerful negative examples and illustrations, that can be read in light of history and motivate us not to make the same mistakes.

[Ryan Glass · Rating 1 out of 5]

Seibert does a great job at putting his interpretation onto the biblical text without allowing it to speak for itself. He ignores the context of scripture and looks at it through a pacifistic and close-minded lens that hinders an accurate reading of Scripture. This is a good read if you want to know what some people think about the OT but that's as far as I would go for recommending it.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

A PACIFIST APPROACH TO “READING THE OLD TESTAMENT NONVIOLENTLY”

Eric Seibert is professor of Old Testament at Messiah College; he has also written/cowritten 'Disturbing Divine Behavior: Troubling Old Testament Images Of God' and 'Subversive Scribes and the Solomonic Narrative: A Rereading of 1 Kings 1-11.'

He wrote in the Introduction to this 2012 book, “The premise of this book is simple and straightforward: the Bible should never be used to inspire, promote, or justify acts of violence. This means, among other things, that the Bible should not be read in ways that oppress or otherwise harm people Yet, tragically, this… is how it continues to be used by many people today… Although this book focuses on the Old Testament, I believe many of the reading strategies that will be presented are equally effective in dealing with the New Testament’s troubling legacy… I will advocate reading the Old Testament NONVIOLENTLY in an effort to overcome the Old Testament’s troubling legacy… I have written this book to offer some guidance for dealing with violent Old Testament texts that sanction, and sometimes even celebrate, certain acts of violence… it is crucial to discuss how they should be handled… In this book, I will offer specific guidelines for how to read such texts responsibly by critiquing the violence in them while still considering how these troubling texts can be used constructively.” (Pg. 2-4)

Later, he explains, “I am not interested in judging the morality of ancient Israel’s behavior, let alone condemning it. Rather, I want to determine the extent to which the Old Testament’s assumptions about violence and violent practices should inform our own. Had I lived in ancient Israel, I have every reason to believe I would have shared their assumptions about violence… But since I am not living in ancient Israel, I have a moral obligation to raise questions about the accommodating attitude toward violence found in many of these texts… my interest … [is] to consider the extent to which their views should, or should not, be ours.” (Pg. 9)

He acknowledges, “As a lifelong member of the Brethren in Christ Church, a denomination rooted in the Anabaptist, Pietist, and Wesleyan tradition, I embrace the church’s strong commitment to nonviolence, peacemaking, and reconciliation. Personally, I regard all forms of violence as inappropriate for Christians, and I cannot condone the use of violence in any situation… I should note that my strong presumption against violence does not imply that I think Christians should stand helplessly on the sidelines and so nothing in the face of evil. On the contrary, I am deeply committed to active, nonviolent peacemaking.” (Pg. 6)

He admits, “First, it is important to keep in mind that the Old Testament does not speak with one voice on the issue of violence. Rather, the Old Testament contains enormous diversity… Second, one should remember that God allowed human beings to play a central role in the formation of the Bible. The Bible was neither written by God nor divinely dictated… Rather, over hundreds of years, God worked through human writers who shaped and reshaped the texts that are now included in our Bible… Given the Bible we now have, and the enormous diversity it contains, it would seem that God allowed human beings considerable freedom in this process… it comes as no surprise that [the texts] reflect the particular social and historical contexts of their writers.” (Pg. 7-8)

He outlines, “I want to suggest that the vast amount of violence in the Old Testament is portrayed in one of two ways: positively or negatively. I will refer to violence that is portrayed positively and approved of in some way as ‘virtuous’ violence… ‘Wrongful’ violence, on the other hand, is violence that is portrayed negatively and disapproved of in the text… [I do not want to] give the impression that I actually regard some of the Old Testament’s violence as ‘virtuous.’ … I am only using this designation descriptively, to identify violent acts and attitudes that find approval within the pages of the Old Testament.” (Pg. 28, 30)

He points out, “Even many Christians who have gone to church for years are not always cognizant of just how ubiquitous this kind of violence is in the Old Testament. There are various reasons for this… For some, it is due to the simple fact that they have never actually read the Old Testament… Another reason … is because the church often bypasses the Old Testament’s more violent and difficult passages. In church traditions that follow the Common Lectionary, for example, the vast majority of violent texts are never used in worship since they are excluded from the designated readings.” (Pg. 41)

He asserts, “Old Testament texts, especially those that are morally questionable, need to be ethically critiqued rather than uncritically approved. We must weigh and evaluate the claims such texts make to determine whether they should be accepted or rejected… We should not feel compelled to accept violent or oppressive views that are sanctioned in the Old Testament simply because they appear in the Bible. On the contrary, it is our duty to expose and challenge perspectives we regard as inappropriate, unethical, or immoral.” (Pg. 65)

He provides Three Guidelines for Engaging in an Ethical Critique: “[First,] The Rule of Love: Reading for the Love of God and Others… Whenever we read and interpret the Bible, we should always be asking whether our interpretation increases our love for God and others. If it does not, we should read again… Second, an ethical critique of Scripture is guided by a concern for justice… When we read the text in ways that advance the full humanity of every individual and promote liberation from every oppressive structure, we can be sure we are reading in the right direction… Third, an ethical critique … should be guided by ‘a consistent ethic of life.’ This means that our readings should be life-affirming for ALL people at EVERY stage of life… It also means that every single life is valued and valued equally.” (Pg. 67-69)

He also suggests Five Steps in Reading Nonviolently: “Step 1: Naming the Violence… violent assumptions, attitudes, and actions should be identified and acknowledged as such… It involves reading with special sensitivity to those who are harmed in these texts, even when---and especially when---the text claims they deserved it…Step 2: Analyzing the Violence… if most people are likely to regard the violence as sanctioned… then it becomes crucial to find ways to critique it… Step 3: Critiquing the Violence… One of the most effective ways to critique ‘virtuous’ violence in the Old Testament is to read it from the perspective of the victims: individuals in the text… who are abused, oppressed, or killed… [This] involves reading WITH those who have been marginalized, silenced, and erased by the text… Step 4: Use Violence Constructively… the violent parts of the Bible can help us to see ourselves more clearly and can provide useful insights into the nature and problem of violence itself… Step 5: Transcend the Violence…” (Pg. 67-90)

Of the “Conquest of Canaan,” he states, “The majority of biblical scholars no longer regard the conquest narrative as a historically reliable account of how Israel came to possess the land of Canaan… One primary reason for this is the considerable amount of archaeological evidence that is impossible to correlate with the biblical description … recounted in the book of Joshua… many think that the people we now call the Israelites emerged in the land of Canaan toward the end of the thirteenth century BCE.” (Pg. 97) He suggests that the conquest narrative “makes violence a virtue and mercy a vice. Worse, it sanctions genocide.” (Pg. 100)

He says, “I am convinced it is best to regard the Old Testament’s description of God’s involvement in war as reflective of how people thought about God in a particular historical context---rather than as descriptive of what God actually said or did.” (Pg. 118) Later, he adds, “While I have no doubt that God was involved in the formation of Scripture in various ways, I think these individuals OVEREMPHASIZE God’s involvement and UNDERESTIMATE the very real and significant role human beings played in the process.” (Pg. 160-161)

He concludes, “Old Testament texts have been used to justify an astonishing array of moral atrocities, oppressive practices, and violent acts…. Since the Old Testament’s troubling legacy has been a long time in the making, it will not vanish overnight. But we can make real progress if we commit ourselves to reading in ways that do no harm… the approach offered in this book… should certainly help us avoid some of the most egregious forms of abuse.” (Pg. 156-157)

This book will be of great interest to Christians---particularly those from “peace” churches, and in more “progressive” traditions---concerned about such issues.

[Jeremiah · Rating 2 out of 5]

Others may find this book helpful but, as an Autistic person, I had difficulty with the emotional appeals this book is rife with. Seibert's plea for reading the bible "non-violently" made too many assumptions of the reader. As a graduate student currently studying the conquest narratives as part of my coursework, I found his arguments wholly anachronistic.

Violence is a problem and the Bible is full of it, but it is also normal for an iron-age culture. Of course, we are millennia away from that point in history. While I would argue we haven't evolved as far as Seibert seems to claim, I agree the violence of the Bible has been used to inappropriate and oppressive ends. That is an issue of interpretation, not an issue with the text itself.

This book only got two stars because he backloaded the book with what he should have included in the beginning: the conquest narratives are history, which is always selective, and our understanding should start with understanding the past and move outwards. Otherwise, the whole book just reads like a blog rant.

[Jonathan Gardner · Rating 2 out of 5]

Pointless drivel

So many issues with this book. It's view on scriptural authority is questionable at best. It relies on reader-centric, postmodern "interpretive" strategies that are little more than re-writing the text to fit one's own worldview. Such strategies are eisegetic and invalid. It also relies on a large number of a priori assumptions that aren't valid or true. It makes a number of massively overstated claims. It also seeks to complicate legitimate issues when a modicum of attention to the text plus a little background research would solve the vast majority. Finally, it assumes a narrow-minded ethic as the only right way of thinking.

It asks good, legitimate questions and serves as an introduction to postmodern mental gymnastics but offers nothing of substance or value beyond this.

[Brenda Funk · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm reading through my Bible this year, and find myself more disturbed than ever before at the 'God' I see portrayed in the OT. One who seems to support genocide, murder of infants and mothers, painting the 'enemy' (as in the Canaanites and Philistines), all black -- (just as it is done today to gain support for wars by the way). And so many violent stories, some of which God seems to endorse, some in which it is not directly stated. I gained new hope in the reading of Eric Seibert's book. He promotes a 'non-violent' reading of the scripture, and tells us what that means and how to go about it. He says we 'must' critique what we read and wrestle with it. This book may be instrumental in saving my faith! Thanks.

[Erin Sigmund · Rating 2 out of 5]

While Seibert's book serves as an excellent introduction to reading texts non-violently, I found his points to be excessively repetitive which significantly diminished the power of his argument. The ever-constant quoting of other scholars, while on one hand helpful in building a non-violent biblical bibliography, felt more like reading an unedited dissertation than a book for, as he intended, lay-people as well scholars. All in all, a helpful book, but I will likely choose another if recommending to my church community despite agreeing with the author's thesis and premises.

[Jacob · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting book. I think that there are many great ideas and theologies that should be applied from this book. I think the author's blanket statements about reading the Bible non violently is a great thought, one that I agree with. But God also stood up for the lowly and protected the weak. There is more to this argument than "take all violence out of scripture". I do love the way it challenges things that we do easily swallow growing up in the church like: David killing Goliath, Noah and the Ark and God constantly threatening his people through the prophets. It is an interesting read that has its merits but also takes the opinion a bit too far in my opinion. Those who believe in the inerrancy and authority of Scripture beware

[Patrick Mulcahy · Rating 5 out of 5]

An outstanding and challenging read. It will open your eyes to the problem of virtuous violence in the Old Testament, and it provides a method for reading the Old Testament conversationally, critiquing its ethical and theological content.