The Old Testament Case for Nonviolence

Old-Testament-Case-Featured.jpg

First of all, the book “The Old Testament Case for Nonviolence” by Matthew Curtis Fleischer was provided by the SpeakEasy blog program in exchange for a review.

Secondly the opinions contained in this review of the book are the opinions, views, beliefs and thoughts of myself, and don’t necessarily reflect the views, beliefs and opinions of the wider Veritas Community.

With those two caveats out of the way, let’s jump into the review of this book.

Over the last 10-15 years of my life, one of the biggest faith struggles that I have had was in relation to, how to understand the violent depictions of God in the Old Testament, while at the same time looking to Jesus as the Prince of Peace, and wholly non-violent. As as Anabaptist who has been committed to the way of peace for many years, I was bothered by the violence within the Old Testament, and how to understand the Old Testament in the light of Jesus.

I’ve read many different books related to these questions. I have read “Crucifixion of the Warrior God” by Greg Boyd (which the author Fleischer draws heavily from), Fight by Preston Sprinkle, God Behaving Badly by David Lamb, Farewell to Mars and Sinners in the Hands of a Loving God both by Brian Zahnd. Each of these books also make an appearance in “The Old Testament" Case for Nonviolence.

I will say that my first understanding of the book, based on the title, was misleading. I thought the author would stay extensively within the pages the Old Testament and make his case for nonviolence solely on the merit of what was found within those pages. But after reading the book, and thinking about it, I realize that one of the foundational principles for interpreting all texts, is to interpret everything within Scriptures through the lens of Jesus- what Greg Boyd and the author call “the cruciform hermeneutic”. This is foundational because if Jesus is the perfect representation of God (which he is) then all interpretation of the Scriptures regarding God need to be seen through that lens.

Probably one of the best parts of the book, for me, had to deal with what the author calls “incremental character revelation”. He says this, “If he had to take a pedagogical approach to teaching humans about ethics, wouldn’t he have to also take such an approach to teaching them about this nature.” The idea of God stooping down to meet humanity where it was, and then moving them along incrementally to better understand who God truly is. That the Bible isn’t a static book, but shows the moral, ethical and understanding of God movement of the people of God.

A quote that stuck out to me regarding the argument that the author was making is, “The overall logic here is straightforward. Because Jesus is the full and perfect picture of God (according to Jesus himself and all the NT writers) and he was entirely nonviolent (according to the plain meaning of his words and actions, including those on the cross), we must conclude that God is entirely nonviolent. And because God is entirely nonviolent, we must also conclude that the violent portraits of him were wrong. Of course, this doesn’t mean they were entirely wrong, just wrong to the extent they attributed violence to God.”

There is more I could say about this book, to unpack interpretation, conversations around how we understand the Bible, conversations about Ancient Near Eastern culture and their view of God (and how that influenced the early writers of Scripture), etc.. But more than anything else, this book points of Jesus- the author and perfecter of our faith, his nonviolence and calls us to follow Jesus into a life of nonviolence.

I would encourage you to read it. It will, no doubt, challenge you in how you read the Old Testament pictures of violence. And it will challenge you to follow the Prince of Peace into a life of Shalom.