Yahweh Has Always Been a Peacenik

Oct 5, 2017 by

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

blog-logo-webWhere did Jesus get his inspiration? From the Torah, the Prophets and the Writings, of course. Little of what Jesus said was original with him. His genius was not so much in the substance of his sayings as in the way he curated his source material, the methodology he used for selecting what to highlight and what to leave on the shelf. And Jesus left a lot on the shelf.

He ignored the negative qualities attributed to Yahweh: the wrath, the retribution, the jealousy, the pettiness. He also ignored accounts of Yahweh’s military exploits, those occasions where God is portrayed as siding with one Iron Age tribe over other Iron Age tribes.

I believe Jesus knew, intuitively, that stories of Yahweh behaving badly were projections of the humans who wrote the texts. He understood that “Yahweh the Warrior” was a literary character, created by the scribes for their narratives about Israel’s glorious past.

Instead, Jesus resonated with Yahweh’s noblest attributes. He took seriously the account in Exodus 34 where Yahweh described himself as compassionate, merciful, loving and forgiving.

Jesus scoured his scrolls for passages showing God in the best light:

— “The love of the Lord never ceases, his mercies never come to an end” (Lam. 3:22).

— “Can a woman forget her nursing child or show no compassion for the child who came from her womb? Even these may forget, yet I won’t forget you” (Isaiah 49:15).

— “If your enemies are hungry, give them bread to eat. If they are thirsty, give them water to drink” (Prov. 25:21).

— “If there is among you anyone in need, do not be hard-hearted or tight-fisted. Open your hand willingly to meet the need, whatever it may be” (Deut. 15:7-8).

— “The Lord is good to all, and his compassion is over all that he has made” (Psalm 145:9).

— “Don’t take vengeance or bear a grudge against anyone. Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev. 19:18).

Passages like these helped Jesus develop his philosophy of conciliation, affirmation and pacifism. Jesus was confident that the God who really exists — the Source of All Truth and Beauty in the Universe — is conciliatory, affirming and nonviolent. Any teachings or texts not in harmony with God’s mercy and compassion simply carry no weight.

This perspective isn’t novel or unique. Several early Quakers were of the view that God never approved of violence, even in the days of Moses, Joshua and David. Hannah Barnard, for example, was a Quaker preacher from Hudson (N.Y.) Meeting. In 1798, she went on a speaking trip to Ireland and England and soon found herself the focus of controversy for her ideas.

Historian Peter Brock, in Pioneers of the Peaceable Kingdom (Princeton University Press, 1968), says this about Barnard: “Her espousal of the peace testimony had led her to have strong doubts whether a beneficent deity could ever have sanctioned war under the old dispensation. If he had, she reasoned, did not this constitute ‘an impeachment of the divine attributes’ of love and goodwill toward the creation? Surely Old Testament wars, like modern ones, stemmed wholly from men’s passions and lust.”

Five decades later a Philadelphia Quaker named John Jackson published Reflections on Peace and War (1846). Of violence in the Old Testament, Jackson wrote: “Once take the ground that men have been divinely commissioned to fight, there is no war for which this authority will not be claimed.” The Jewish writers, he insisted, had been mistaken in believing that their wars were divinely inspired.

Again from the pen of Peter Brock: “His reasons for doubting their claims Jackson drew from his understanding of God’s love as revealed by Christ in the New Testament. How, he asked, could the barbarous policy of extermination pursued by the ancient Jews against the Canaanites and other tribes be reconciled with the spirit of Christian forgiveness?”

In our own tradition, Anabaptist leader Hans Denck refused to believe God could be vindictive or wrathful, no matter what the Bible says. The essence of the Divine is love, said Denck. God’s actions and teachings can never contradict that essence.

Werner O. Packull, in Mysticism and the Early South German-Austrian Anabaptist Movement (Herald Press, 1977), touches on this idea when discussing Denck’s universalism: “Christ, himself a manifestation of divine love, had taught us to love our enemies. If God did otherwise he contradicted his revelation in Christ.”

As pacifists, this should thrill us. It relieves us of the need to come up with complex theological theories to explain why Yahweh was a warrior in one era and antiwar in another. Now, thankfully, it is easier to assert with confidence that Yahweh has always been a peacenik. Yesterday, today and forever.

Charlie Kraybill lives and works in the Bronx, New York City.

Comments Policy

Mennonite World Review invites readers’ comments on articles. To promote constructive dialogue, editors select the comments that appear, just as we do with letters to the editor in print. These decisions are final. Writers must sign their first and last names; anonymous comments are not accepted. Comments do not appear until approved and are posted during business hours. Comments may be reproduced in print, and may be edited if selected for print.

  • Conrad Hertzler

    What a relief to hear that we have a God who is easily understood by us humans! I guess we in our knowledge and understanding have even surpassed Apostle Paul who was astounded at the “unfathomableness” of God when he said it Romans 11, ”
    33 Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and[i] knowledge of God!
    How unsearchable his judgments,
    and his paths beyond tracing out!
    34 “Who has known the mind of the Lord?
    Or who has been his counselor?”[j]
    35 “Who has ever given to God,
    that God should repay them?”[k]
    36 For from him and through him and for him are all things.
    To him be the glory forever! Amen.

    My question for you is, if God is not a God of judgement and righteousness, what’s so amazing about His grace and mercy? It is because I know that God has every right to execute judgment on my wrong doing, that I am even more astounded by the grace that he instead has chosen to show to me.

    If we can just discount or cut out the parts about God that are difficult to understand, then we are able to create God in our image. I believe He calls that idolatry.

  • Gene Mast

    Why is work by this author considered appropriate for this publication?

    • Wilbur H. Entz

      The one and only qualification any writer needs to be published in MWR is that that he/she is a STRONG MENNONITE. This ought to tell us something.

      • Gene Mast

        If I may offer a facetious response, assuming being a strong Mennonite is the one condition for being accepted for publication, Charlie would hardly qualify if only because by his own profession he is a Marginal Mennonite. But the serious side of your point is taken.

  • Matthew Froese

    Thanks for this article, Charlie. Although you’ve apparently have ruffled a few feathers here, I think this is one of the central questions that stems from our faith that “God’s peace is most fully revealed in Jesus Christ”. Do we mean that God’s intention for peace changed from the Old Testament to the time of Christ, that God’s intention for peace is inseparable from violent earthly judgment in some times and places, or that God’s intention for peace is unchanging but somehow poorly revealed to the people of the time and the Biblical writers? Any attempt to simply resolve this question raises yet more questions.

    Note 4 under article 22 in the Confession of Faith in a Mennonite Perspective is perhaps a bit understated when it says “There is no simple explanation for the practice of war in the Old Testament.” Thanks for reminding us how others in the peace tradition have wrestled with this question in the past.

    Peter Enns book “The Bible Tells Me So” includes an interesting (but very different) take on how we might think about the morality of the Canaanite genocide. It’s a good read and led to a great discussion in a reading group at my church.

  • Rainer Moeller

    Well, the story about God as a peacenik may as well be “a projection of the humans who wrote the text”.
    Quakers wisely finished the practice to use Biblical texts as authority, neither for nor against any position.

  • Loren Yoder

    This is where we are at. When you negate the truth of Scripture every “opinion” is valid, nothing is for sure and things I don’t understand or like must be reasoned away. It is following the formula of satan in Genesis three “Has God indeed said……? How unbelievable sad.

Latest from MWR