WHY I WORSHIP A VIOLENT, VENGEFUL GOD WHO ORDERS ME TO BE LOVING AND NON-VIOLENT

Right and Left

I have crossed the political and theological spectrum from Right to Left. As a scholar at the Chalcedon Foundation[1] I studied with and came in contact with the most patriotic and conservative elements of Right-wing America. The Right pooh-poohs non-violence, and uses Biblical descriptions of violence to justify war, capital punishment, and the Garrison State.

As a member of the Catholic Worker, I have come into contact with equally extremist elements of the far Left. The Left practices non-violence (except when engaged in the physical destruction of military facilities) and pooh-poohs the predestinating God of Isaiah, Jesus, and the rest of the Bible while upholding a process theology version of an ultimately meaningless universe and a finite god.

Both Left and Right fail to understand Christian Anarchism and the Sovereignty of God. And for all their talk about Jesus, they both fail to take seriously the two-edged sword of non-violence: Jesus commands His followers to practice non-violence and to worship a God Who is completely sovereign over violence, and uses violence to destroy violence, and brings about a Kingdom of peace in the midst of violence.

Synopsis: the Apostle Paul

The Life of Paul epitomizes the Christian walk. Functioning successfully as a paid hit-man for the Roman Empire-accredited Israeli ecclesiastical mafia, he harasses, tortures, and even murders those who follow Christ, only to be converted to Christianity, repudiate his violence, live in community, and respond non-violently to the violence inflicted upon him by his violent former-colleagues.

His teaching in Romans 12 and 13 follows Christ's teaching perfectly. Romans 12 is an eloquent and passionate statement of the Sermon on the Mount which springs from his years of life in community with the Christian underground. The Chapter closes with a statement of the paradox of Christian non-violence:

{19} Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written,
"'Vengeance is Mine; I will repay,' saith the Lord." (Deut. 32:35)
{20} Therefore, if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
{21} Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

Chapter 13, often misused as a charter for the institutionalization of human violence ("the State"), then commands Christians to "be subject," i.e., respond non-violently, to the violence of the State, noting that God is ultimately in control of the State, and uses it to bring about divine judgment of violence.

Pacifism and Predestination

In Romans 13, God says, "Don't resist the State, My vessel of wrath, because it is the instrument of My vengeance, and when I am through with it, I will take vengeance on it for its violent deeds."

• "Don't resist" — pacifism
• "My vessel of wrath" — predestination

The offense of this chapter to Calvinists is the pacifism; the "do not resist." The offense of this chapter to everyone else is the offense of "Calvinism" or predestination in general: it denies sovereignty to Man and gives it to God, seemingly making God the Author of evil.

The concept is often called "Old Testamentish." This is a simplistic dichotomization, pitting the Old against the New Testament, but an understandable one, given that the concept of God's sovereign control of evil is so undeniably taught in the Old Testament, but not the New Testament — or at least we think so; our understanding of the New Testament is thoroughly shaped by revivalistic Protestantism, which has so thoroughly subjectivised the New Testament, ignoring its continuity with the Old Testament prophetic tradition and its radical challenge to social idolatry. This individualistic "gospel" is readily received by the masses in a "ME-generation" culture.

A complete reading of the New Testament, noting its ubiquitous references to and reliance upon the Old Testament, will show the New Testament to be as focused on violence, the State, and God's judgment of evil as a means to the end of establishing a Kingdom of Peace as the Old Testament is. The entire New Testament has as its pervasive theme the destruction of Israel for their idolatrous failure to reject Empire and follow Jesus the Messiah, beginning with John the Baptist's indictment in the wilderness, and culminating with the violent "Day of Vengeance" described in John's Revelation.

Violence in Matthew's Gospel

We're going to browse through Matthew, so you might want to have a copy of his Gospel before you. We're going to point out much of the violence of Jesus, and make note of a few themes which are recurring, and which help us understand Jesus' violent ways.[2] We'll start with

John the Baptizer

The Defense of God's violence proclaimed by John the Baptist is both unmistakably clear and easily evaded.

• Clear: "O generation of vipers, the axe is laid unto the root of the trees; therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire" (Matthew 3:7,10).[3]
• Evaded: "John the Baptist was essentially an 'Old Testament' figure."

Jesus' identification with the Old Testament

In his first public teaching recorded by Matthew, the "Sermon on the Mount," Jesus makes plain the continuity between his ministry and that of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and the violent, vengeful God of the Old Testament:

The Violence of Prophetic Rhetoric

While we are in almost universal agreement that the Old Testament reveals a God Who predestines, controls, and exploits violence for the cause of His Kingdom, Jesus is said to be one who is "loving and forgiving." There is truth here, as Jesus commands His followers to be in submission to the State and die under its violence rather than return violence for violence (I Peter 2:13-25). But Jesus' language reveals His belief that undergirding His own earthly non-resistance and that of His followers is the heavenly Vengeance of God, Who stands in judgment on violence and controls it, moving it to its own self-destruction.

For example, The "loving and forgiving" Jesus of 20th-century subjectivist individualism would seek to enhance the "self-esteem" of the idolatrous religious leaders of His day by remarking on their theological "creativity" (in their liturgically innovative evasions of "Old Testamentish" justice and concern for the poor), and sympathizing with their "dysfunctional" family backgrounds.

In Matthew 7:19 He unapologetically plagiarizes the violent rhetoric of John the Baptist and prophecies the imminent judgment of idolatrous Israel. In a crushing blow to their already-crumbling self-image, Jesus, calling Himself their "Lord" (7:22), speaks of His cosmic rejection of their hypocritical lives (7:23). The people, having heard Him speak of these "foolish men" (7:26) and the fall of their "house" (v. 27 [compare 23:38 and 24:43]), were, to put it mildly, "astonished," because when it came to the hypocritical violence of evil men, Jesus was not "accepting" and "forgiving," but judgmental, in a very Old Testamentish sense. And more ominously, "He taught them as One having authority," or as Luke puts it, "power" (4:32). "Power" to do what? By the end of the New Testament, we will see.

The Casting Out of Israel

It is impossible to understand the New Testament without grasping two facts: first, the fulfillment of Micah's prophecy of world-wide conversion is now beginning (and significantly, "world-wide" means not just Israel, but the despised "Gentiles"); second, in their pride, Israel rejected the Old Testament prophecies of world-wide peace, thus declaring war on Christ's Kingdom.

And it will come about in the last days
That the mountain of the House of the LORD
Will be established as the chief of the mountains
And it will be raised above the hills
And the peoples will stream to it.
And many nations will come and say,
"Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD
And to the House of the God of Jacob,
That He may teach us about His ways
And that we may walk in His paths."
For from Zion will go forth the Law
Even the Word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
And He will judge between many peoples
And render decisions for mighty, distant nations.
Then they will hammer their swords into plowshares
And their spears into pruning hooks;
Nation will not lift up sword against nation
And never again will they train for war.
And each of them will sit under his
Vine and under his fig tree,
With no one to make them afraid.
For the LORD of hosts has spoken.
Though all the peoples walk
Each in the name of his god,
As for us, we will walk
In the Name of the LORD our God
forever and ever.
In that day, saith the LORD, will I assemble her that halteth,
and I will gather her that is driven out,
and her that I have afflicted;
And I will make her that halted a remnant,
and her that was cast far off a strong nation:
and the LORD shall reign over them in mount Zion
from henceforth, even for ever.

The vision of "all nations" worshipping the True God was a burden of all the prophets. When Jesus attacked the temple religion by overturning the tables of the moneychangers, He made reference to Isaiah and Micah's prophecy of the gentiles coming to "the Holy Mountain":

The popular "swords into plowshares" vision is contingent on the "many nations shall come" concept which the Jews rejected.[11] And having rejected Christ's peace, they were left with war and violence. Jesus drew this contrast in Matthew 8:5-13. A Roman (Gentile) soldier approaches Jesus and asks for healing for his slave. He says that as a soldier he knows that Jesus need only command the healing and the order will be carried out.

The "weeping and gnashing of teeth" is an all-too-appropriate description of the violent, fiery destruction of Israel which would soon occur.

Jesus does nothing to dispel popular notions of Sodom being deliberately destroyed in a violent judgment of sin by God. In fact, Jesus is banking on it. If God did not destroy Sodom, then Jesus owes Israel an apology. And if God does not destroy Israel for her outrageous idolatry in the face of the incarnate Christ among them, then God owes Sodom and Gomorrah an apology.

"But this is so harsh, judgmental, and unloving," some will say, as though idolatry has some kind of "natural right" to exist, not only in private, but even to publicly spit in the face of God. "Jesus came to help us get in touch with our selves, and to bring inner peace as we become centered in our Higher Power." This may be true for those who are willing to bow down before the Son of God, but for those who are not, Jesus has quite a different message:

Q. What?! How could anyone be "offended" at gentle Jesus?
A. Just as Isaiah the Old Testament prophet said they would:

What does Isaiah mean, "hides His face from Jacob?" Is this more of that predestination stuff? Loving, non-violent Jesus would never hide His face from anyone.

Jesus and Justice

Many in our day believe that Jesus opposed the strict implementation of the Old Testament law, favoring instead a more "merciful" and "loving" approach. Everything about this belief is violent and wrong.[16] We are so accustomed to violence and autonomy[17] that anti-Law caricatures of Jesus go unquestioned. Jesus defended God's Law ("the Mosaic Law") against the violent pseudo-righteousness of the Pharisees.

John's account of the woman accused of adultery is usually given as an example of the merciful Jesus' attack on the harsh law of Moses. "The law of Moses would have put the woman to death," we are told; "Jesus liberated her." A closer analysis[18] would show that the woman could not have been convicted and put to death under the Mosaic Law, and that Jesus was (again) upholding the Old Testament Law against the lawless religious leaders.

Matthew does not provide an account of this woman's story, but has other incidents which show Jesus defending the Law against those who attack it while publicly posturing as its defenders. In chapter 12, Jesus and His disciples pick corn on the Sabbath. The pharisees are outraged. Jesus says the Old Testament holds such people "blameless" (v.5). He says that if the Pharisees understood the Old Testament, they "would not have condemned the guiltless." "Wherefore," He says, "it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days" (v. 12).

Were the pharisees happy that the Law had not been broken, and that freedom under God's Law had been established?

Jesus is the culmination of the Old Testament; the embodiment of all its principles and prophecies. If you're like the Pharisees, and you hate the vengeful, predestinating God of the Old Testament, you'll hardly feel comfortable around Jesus. You may even want to kill Him.

Jesus as agent provacateur

"Entrapment" occurs when police officers entice someone to commit a crime. For example, with taxpayers' money, they'll approach someone and offer to buy drugs. If he is enticed by the money and makes a sale, then he is arrested and charged with "possession for sale," or some such crime. The police, of course, are not guilty of anything.

Jesus kept the truth from the Pharisees, egged them on in their wickedness, and then had the audacity to violently destroy them in judgment. "Entrapment?"

Consider the parables. Some people think Jesus was a great teacher for his ability to teach profound truths using simple parables. The Pharisees didn't think that. In fact, Jesus told His disciples that the reason He spoke in parables was so that the Pharisees would not understand, and would not be saved, thus justifying their violent destruction.

Jesus then represents Himself as overseeing their violent end:

1) Upholds the "death penalty" of the Mosaic Law (v.4);
2) Again repeats the violent diatribes of Isaiah (vv. 7-9);
3) Further offends the religious hierarchy (vv. 10-12);
4) When asked why He wasn't more "loving and forgiving," again threatened their violent destruction (vv. 12-13);
5) Adds insult to prophesied injury (v. 14);
6) Calls a Canaanite woman a "dog" (v.26).[19]

Jesus comes to Jerusalem, both to undergo His predestined assassination, and to pronounce final judgment on the city. An entire essay could be written on Jesus' cleansing of the temple (chapter 21), the violent Old Testament prophecies which lie behind it, and the violent destruction of which the event is but a foreshadow. Jesus speaks in a less than "loving and forgiving" manner of that judgment:

In chapter 22, Jesus begins giving more details of His coming destruction of Jerusalem at the hands of the Roman armies. God's invitation to Israel to be His bride is rejected, as Israel would rather play the harlot with the Roman Empire (John 19:15).

Days of Vengeance — a commentary on the Book of Revelation, by David Chilton

The Great Tribulation — a future event in Jesus' day; a past event in ours.

How the Violent destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70) should have affected our eschatology.

The Day of Vengeance

If John the Baptist laid the axe to the root in chapter 3 (v.10), then we see Jesus' back swing in chapter 23.[20] Jesus "meek and mild," that figment of the 20th century's imagination, is nowhere to be found in chapter 23.[21]

• We see more of Jesus' identification with and defense of the Old Testament in verse 23.
• The violence of the prophetic concept of an absolutely just God is seen throughout the chapter.
• More "entrapment" by Jesus is seen in verse 32 and following; all the blood they shed throughout the Old Testament is coming due upon "this generation" (vv. 34-36).

This destruction is then prophesied of in more detail in chapter 24 (see v. 34)

Chapter 24 is a sustained prophecy of war and destruction of Jerusalem. Especially from verse 29 on, Jesus draws extensively from Isaiah and other Old Testament prophets who revealed the predestined destruction of God's enemies, and the Pharisees knew that Jesus was turning the tables on their claim to Old Testament authority, and they were outraged.[22]

The Book of Revelation is an extended commentary, as it were, on Matthew 24. Although the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 took place at the hands of the Roman Army, Scripture says that these soldiers were but tools in the hands of a Sovereign God. And not just any god, but Jesus Christ Himself. And His disciples rejoice in the destruction.

After Jerusalem's destruction is described in Revelation 18, the Force behind the destruction and the reaction of those saints (which experienced persecution at the hands of Israel) is described in Revelation 19.

Failure to understand the pervasive and significant character of Jesus' "coming" against Israel, that is, His predestination of the Roman Army to destroy her, has led to theological viewpoints which are as innumerable as they are bizarre. Most of the Church — Catholic and Protestant — has become "Hal Lindseyized" because of their failure to understand this theme.

Jesus sets forth the basis of this judgment in three parables in chapter 25. The third parable is almost a Catholic Worker slogan ("I was thirsty and you gave me drink, etc."). Jesus says those who gave "to the least of these my brethren" will know "life eternal" (verse 46). But He also says that those who did not give to the poor will know "everlasting violence." If Jesus' prediction of violence on God's part is (1) a lie (2) a sick projection of Jesus' own violence, or (3) an embarrassing mistake, then how do we know His concept of eternal life can be trusted? Maybe the nazi-hucksters are right: we should "look out for numero uno" and end our "co-dependence" with "useless eaters." Why sacrifice to serve the poor if we can just as well exploit them? Who can we believe?

CONCLUSIONS

Do we really know Jesus? Or do we just know what a lot of trendy, upper-middle class, State-accredited theologians have said about Jesus?

Are we willing to know Jesus? Are we willing to put our own will on the altar and let our thinking be transformed by the same Spirit Who caused the prophets to speak in the Scriptures?[23]

The Empire's theologians have a subconscious need to defend their lifestyles, their reputations, their credentials. They are embarrassed at the Bible's war against Empire, consumerism, and modernism. Their desire to "be as gods" (Genesis 3:5) will not allow them to submit to the God of Isaiah. We need to pray for them, as well as for ourselves.

To continue study of the doctrine of Predestination, click here.

If you came to this site from the Virtue site, and wish to continue on "the Path to Virtue," please click here.