VIOLNCIA NA BBLIA

Daniel Sotelo
INTRODUO

O livro de Ren Girard sobre J trata de aspectos interessantes. Nesta obra, o

autor analisa a questo da violncia em quatro partes: o caso de J; a mitologia
e a verdade; a mimeses e o mecanismo do ritual; e a vtima da confisso. O
ttulo original em francs mais significativo que a sua traduo para o ingls.
Em ingls, J, a vtima de seu povo; em francs, Rota antiga dos homens
perversos. A obra ainda no existe em portugus.

No primeiro captulo, o autor analisa o caso de J e subdivide-o em trs

partes: J, a Vtima de seu Povo; J, dolo de seu Povo e A Viagem Antiga:
passagem para a maldade. O segundo captulo dividido em quatro partes: As
Armadas Celestiais; O Realismo e a Transfigurao; dipo e J; e Jezebel
Pisoteada at a Morte sob as Patas dos Cavalos. O captulo terceiro dividido
em trs partes: Todo Pas Possudo pela Dana de So Vitus; O Salmo 73; e A
Torrente da Montanha.

O captulo quarto est dividido em cinco partes: O Pblico; O rfo Escolhido

de L; Origem e Repetio; J e o Rei Sagrado; A Evoluo Ritual. O captulo
cinco tem seis partes: O Juzo Totalitrio; A retribuio; O Lapso de J; Minha
Vida Defendida; O Sangue Resgatado para a Cidade Frentica e o Deus da
Vtima. Faremos uma leitura do livro de Girard.
 1. O CASO DE J

J, a Vtima de Seu Povo O que sabemos sobre J? No muito. Ele perde

seus filhos e filhas, bens e toda a famlia, e est cheio de lceras. A sua
desfortuna est em J 1- 2. No prlogo do livro de J, encontramos esta
narrativa. A sua desfortuna causada pela permissio dei e por satans. Deus
autoriza satans fazer o que quer de J. Paremos um pouco para falar sobre o
livro de J. O livro bblico de J tem duas formas.

Uma cpia do J babilnico. A outra uma criao literria de um autor da

poca exlica ou ps-exlica. O livro de J composto de prosa e poesia,
narrativa e sabedoria. Pode ser comparado a um quadro de uma pintura de um
autor famoso com uma moldura e o desenho propriamente dito. A moldura
formada pelo prlogo e pelo eplogo. O desenho, miolo ou centro, de forma
potica, a pintura desta moldura. H uma narrativa que introduz e conclui a
sabedoria do centro do livro. Poderamos dividir o livro em vrias partes. J, o
dolo de Seu Povo Por que J torna-se objeto de lamento de sua comunidade?
Nenhuma resposta pode ser dada.

Talvez seja melhor este caminho de interpretar ou ler desta forma. Se o autor
for identificado com um elemento ou indivduo mencionado como certo
incidente da origem possvel do mal, pode-se pensar imediatamente na
resposta que conhecemos. J no um indivduo, mas pode ser o coletivo. J
e seu sofrimento so identificados como sofrimento de um povo no exlio.
Assim, paramos de questionar a violncia. Na realidade, podemos saber
menos que isto. Mas no assumimos que estes dilogos esto completamente
em silncio. Eles esto cheios de indicaes, se conhecermos o que vemos
neles. Em nossa busca de uma explicao da escolha de J como bode
expiatrio, no se pode responder assim.

Seus amigos no tm nada de interessante a dizer sobre esse assunto.

Procuramos tornar J responsvel pelas crueldades das quais feito para
suport-las. Sugerimos que sua avareza foi a sua desfeita. Talvez ele fosse
severo com o seu povo. Ele usou sua posio para explorar o pobre e o
oprimido J parece ser virtuoso, mas pode, como dipo, ter cometido um
grande crime. Ou talvez seu filho ou outro membro de sua famlia tenha feito
isto. Um homem condenado pela voz do povo duramente, mas inocente.

J defende-se assim vigorosamente, alegando que no tem qualquer culpa

para acusao. Toda acusao foi desfeita gradualmente. Alguns exegetas
reprovam J por sua autodefesa. Ele carece de humildade, e seus amigos
justos esto escandalizados. Tal reprovao completa a descompreenso da
natureza ou debate entre ele e os sbios. A indignao de J pode ser
colocada em seu prprio contexto, como ele mesmo define e como deve ser
compreendido. Ele no diz que nunca pecou. Ele diz que no tem feito nada
que merea tal extrema desgraa. Assim, hoje pode ser errado dizer que foi
tratado como um santo, mas que agora tudo est contra ele.

No que ele tenha mudado, mas o povo ao seu redor que mudou. J
detesta ser diferente dos homens venerados. O J dos dilogos no qualquer
um que fez muito dinheiro e que perdeu tudo. Ele no uma pessoa que tem
um grande esplendor e que vai parar na misria. Decide falar sobre seus
amigos, os quais atribuem a Deus e a uma metafsica do mal, o seu mal. J
dos dilogos no o J do prlogo. Ele um grande lder que primeiro exige
respeito ao povo e ento abruptamente desdenhado por ele. J 29,2-25
mostra-nos a apelao de J a Deus.

Os trs debates terminaram com os amigos de J. J reassume a sua prpria

causa fazendo uma grande e violenta apelao para Deus. A resposta de Deus
comea em J 38,1. Antes, ele torna um bode expiatrio. J viveu por um
perodo de extraordinria popularidade margeando a idolatria. Vemos
claramente nesta passagem que o prlogo no tem nenhuma relevncia no
livro todo. Se o prlogo for retirado, o texto, em seu miolo, pode ser lido
naturalmente. Se J realmente perdeu seu gado e seu filho, sua reminiscncia
sobre o passado proveu a oportunidade de mencionar tudo que perdeu. Mas
no h referncia disto.

O contraste entre o passado e o presente no do rico ao pobre, de sade

doena, mas do favor ao desfavor com o povo. Os dilogos no so sentidos
puramente como drama pessoal ou mudana simples de circunstncia, mas
fala do comportamento de todo o povo na direo do cuidado que tem sido
destrudo.

A acusao contra J no o assunto questionvel, mas revelador. A falha

potente reprovada no abuso do poder: uma acusao que no pode ser feita
contra qualquer proprietrio de terra, contra qualquer rico. J nos faz lembrar-
se do tirano das cidades gregas Elifaz, que pergunta: por tua piedade que te
corrige Entra contigo em julgamento? No antes por tua grande malcia E por
tuas inumerveis culpas? Exigias sem razo penhores de teus irmos E
despojavas de suas roupas os nus; No davas gua ao sedento e recusavas
po ao faminto; Entregavas a terra a um homem poderoso, Para ali se instalar
o favorecido; Despedia as vivas com as mos vazias, Quebravas os braos
dos rfos (J 22,4-9).

Este texto relata a interveno de Elifaz. O seu ataque violento. Os leitores

modernos aceitam facilmente a viso do prlogo sobre o mal e satans porque
isto ocorre em seu prprio mundo ou em nossa idia de que isto acontece em
todo lugar. Os acontecimentos consistem em ter muitas possesses ou tornar
possvel uma doena, um mal, ou alegrar-se num frenesi eterno do consumo
do prazer. Nos dilogos de J, s uma coisa conta, e este o relacionamento
de J com o povo. J retrata um perodo triunfal como o outono de sua vida
em outras palavras, a estao que precede o gelo do inverno da perseguio.
A desgraa foi realmente recente e acabou depressa. A extrema vibrao com
que J se torna um eterno desgosto.

J parece no ter entendido esta mudana rpida que tomou lugar. J 29

uma narrativa em forma potica que denuncia as queixas e faz uma apologia
de J. Neste local, encontramos como eram os tempos antigos e J recorda o
seu tempo de antanho. Este texto narra uma vida digna de recompensa. Nos
trs debates com os amigos, J reassume a sua prpria causa, ele faz um
apelo para que Deus o ajude. O mistrio de J apresentado num contexto
que no se explica, mas pelo menos serve por situ-lo.

O bode expiatrio um dolo destrudo. A origem e queda de J so juntadas

uma na outra narrativa. Os dois extremos parecem estar conectados; no
entendido separadamente e no a causa do outro. Sentimos certa doena,
mas o fenmeno social mais real e a provvel revelao desses eventos. De
uma coisa em comum entre esses dois perodos existem a unanimidade da
comunidade: primeiro, a adorao e, depois, a repugnncia. J a vtima de
um enorme e rpido reverso de opinio pblica que instvel, caprichosa e
vazia de toda moderao.

Parece dura, mas a comunidade responsvel pela mudana desta opinio

pblica, como Jesus para a mudana entre o Domingo de Ramos e a Sexta-
feira Santa. Para esta unanimidade, existe um duplo contgio mimtico.
Membros da comunidade influenciam-se reciprocamente. Eles limitam cada um
numa adorao fantica e ento cada um se torna mais fantico hostilmente.
 2. O QUE NORBERT LOHFINK DIZ SOBRE A VIOLNCIA NA BIBLIA:

La historia de la violencia en la Biblia comienza com Can y Abe!. Este

comienzo tiene sus consecuencias y tiene un fin. Se detiene en el diluvio, que
es algo as como la experiencia primera del fin del mundo <fin de toda carne..
: Gn 6, 13). Se llega hasta l a travs de uma genealoga, siguiendo una lnea
que, de padres ahijos, va desde Can hasta Lamec. Genealoga de seres
humanos, pero tambin inhumanos: Si la venganza por Can es de siete
veces, la venganza por Lamec ser de setenta veces siete.
Lamec, descendiente de Can, aparece con la generacin del diluvio; es
tambin el padre de No. Enseanza fundamental: est inscrito en la
naturaleza de laviolencia que sta tenga que multiplicarse; prolifera, se acelera,
y su producto es una violencia todava mayor. Y as hasta el fin de toda
carne... No acabaramos nunca de trazar toda la historia de esos momentos
colectivos de violencia que fueron las guerras en el pueblo de Israel.
Casi ininterrumpidas desde Josu hasta los ltimos reyes de Jerusaln,
volvieron a presentarse en tiempos de los macabeos. Nos limitaremos por tanto
a centrar nuestra atencin en algunos textos de especial inters, que muestran
cmo se fue introduciendo en la experiencia de la violencia guerrera la
experiencia de su contrario, hasta que lleg adibujarse la imagen de una
victoria alcanzada sobre la violencia por la mansedumbre.
 3. O QUE ROLAND DE VAUX DIZ SOBRE A VIOLNCIA NO ANTIGO
ISRAEL:

Aunque la exgesis (R. de Vaux, G. von Rad) h adoptado en varias

ocasiones el trmino de guerra santa para designar a las que se atribuyeron
a un mandamento de YHWH, este trmino est ausente de la Biblia. El mismo
R. de Vaux, por otra parte, no vacila en subrayar (una puntualizacin preciosa
para el lector de hoy) que las guerras santas de Israel no tienen nada que
ver com las guerras de religin.
En todos los pueblos antiguos, la guerra estaba asociada con actos
religiosos: se emprenda por orden de los dioses, o por lo menos con su
aprobacin significada por los presagios, iba acompanhada de sacrificios, se
llevaba a cabo con la ayuda de los dioses, que otorgaban la victoria y a los que
se daba gracias mediante la ofrenda de una parte del botn. As, toda guerra
antigua es santa, por lo menos en sentido lato. Los griegos llamaron ms
propiamente guerras santas (hieroi polemoi) a las que la anfictiona de
Deltos hizo contra aquellos de sus miembros que haban violado los sagrados
derechos de Apolo.

3.1. CONTINUA ROLAND DE VAUX:

,.. Todas las instituciones de Israel revestan cierto carcter sacral... Esto, no
obstante, no significa que la guerra sea una guerra de religin, aspecto que no
aparecer sino ms tarde, bajo los macabeos (R. de Vaux, Instituciones del
Antiguo Testamento. Herder, Barcelona 1964, 346). Lo esencial de los
resultados obtenidos hasta uma fecha reciente se encuentra clasificaqo y
evaluado en R. de Pury, La guerre sainte isralite: Etudes thologiques et
religieuses 56 (1981) n. 1, 5-38 (El volumen enterro est dedicado a la guerra
santa).
La obra de base es la de G. von Rad, Der Heilige Krieg im alten Israel. Gotinga
1969: La investigacin no ha dejado de dejarse estimular por (su) hiptesis
(R. de Pury). La coleccin de datos factuales se nos ofrece en la obra antes
citada de R. de Vaux, Instituciones del Antiguo Testamento. Herder, Barcelona
1964, 346-357, com una presentacin de las etapas de esta institucin.
 4. POR OUTRO LADO NORBERT LOHFINK DIZ SOBRE A VIOLNCIA:

Ms recientemente, en la obra colectiva Gewalt und Gewaltlosigkeit im Alten

Testament. Friburgo-BasileaViena 1983, cL la aportacin de N. Lohfink, Die
Schichten des Pentateuch und der Krieg (p. 51-111). El autor insiste muy
particularmente en el ideal no-violento de la fuente sacerdotal (de la que
veremos ms adelante que coincide al menos con un pasaje del cronista, para
quien la figura de David est ensombrecida por sus guerras: 1 Cr 22,8).
Observa (p. 87-90) la pertenencia de Gn 9,2 (<<Os temern y os respetarn
todos los animales) a las tradiciones literarias de la guerra santa y las
consecuencias que hay que sacar de su contraste explcito con Gn 1, 26.28
para la interpretacin. Finalmente, N. Lohfink establece un vnculo entre el
nuevo rgimen posdiluviano y la prctica sacrificial de la que es una condicin
de posibilidad. Seala entonces un paralelismo con la problemtica de Ren
Girard.

4.1. Num livro mais recente sobre a violncia e a guerra no Antigo

Testamento:

A. van der Lingen, Les guerres de YHWH. Cerf, Pars 1990, atribuye a uma
poca mucho ms reciente las fuentes de las que G. von Rad haba sacado los
motivos para describir esta institucin como arcaica. Concluyamos con dos
observaciones:
1) La primera est sacada de R. de Pury: No habra nada tan infiel al espritu
del Antiguo Testamento como admitir, para el tema de la guerra santa, una
lectura em primer grado, una lectura triunfalista... Lo fundamental es descubrir
el desnivel existente entre el modelo o el ideal que resaltan los autores bblicos
en un perodo determinado y la realidad histrica del momento (o. C., 37-38).
2) La segunda se refiere al conjunto de estdios mencionados. Aun en el caso
de G. von Rad, el inters por la realidad histrica de una institucin (si no de la
guerra tal como se hizo -lo cual es algo distinto-) prevalece sobre el estudio del
modelo o del idea!. Al menos esto es lo que se deduce de la brevedad de
los estudios dedicados ordinariamente a los textos tardios ms alejados de la
institucin. La aportacin de N. Lohfink (que seala en von Rad esta laguna
relativa al sacerdotal) debera estimular a los autores a corregir esta tendencia.
 5. VIOLENCIA NO NOVO TESTAMENTO EM OSCAR CULLMANN:

Jess purific el templo. Tal es el hecho que ms parece abogar en favor de la

tesis unilateral sobre el Jess revolucionario; de hecho, sus partidarios le
atribuyen la mayor importancia. No constituye un acto tan contundente el
punto de partida y el criterio en que hemos de basarnos para juzgar los otros
elementos de la tradicin de los Evangelios? Em todo caso, ese acto resulta
molesto para los que, de una manera igualmente unilateral, sostienen que
Jess habra sido fiel defensor del orden existente. Pero resulta tambin
molesto para la tesis que pretendo sostener aqu, de que, finte a las
instituciones de su pas, Jess est por" encima de nuestros antagonismos?

Desde ahora podemos ver cul es la caracterstica de la actitud de Jess

respecto a todaslas instituciones existentes. Es fundamentalmente crtica. No
les reconoce ningn valor eterno. Forman parte de este mundo perverso, que
pasar. Mas, como Jess sabe que pasarn con este mundo, se limita, de un
lado, a anunciar su carcter caduco y, de otro, a purificar lo que se puede sin la
destruccin violenta de su misma existencia.
No pierde el tiempo tomando parte en una accin encaminada a la demolicin
de las instituciones por las armas; no quiere desviar a los corazones del objeto
de su predicacin, que es el reino de Dios El falso testimonio (Me 14, 57 s.)
consiste probablemente en el hecho de que los falsos testigos ponan em la
primera parte de la expresin la primera persona. La forma juanista del
principio (Jn 2, 19): "destruid este Templo" (es decir, cuando este Templo sea
destruido) se acerca sin duda ms a las palabras primitivas.

Que no es de este mundo. "Lo que El prepara no es el fin perseguido por los
zelotes: uma nueva organizacin sacerdotal. La purificacin del Templo, acto
individual, signo proftico de Jess y no elemento de un plan zelote, ha de
llamar la atencin sobre el culto verdadero, espiritual, que se practicar al
margen del marco de las instituciones terrenas. De los elementos del culto
existente, Jess cambia los que estn en flagrante contradiccin con la esencia
de todo culto y que son ms susceptibles de ser cambiados sin que haya
necesidad de suprimir el culto mismo por la violencia.
La purificacin del Templo no afecta de manera inmediata ms que a un sector
muy limitado del culto judo . Por tanto, Jess impone a su resistencia um lmite
que resulta esencial. No se trata de uma actitud dictada por una tendencia al
compromiso, sino por el radicalismo escatolgico. Porque, visto desde ese
ngulo, el cambio que prepara Jess es mucho ms radical que el que buscan
los zelotes. Efectivamente, aunque su esperanza supone la intervencin
milagrosa de Dios, se realiza en la esfera terrena y nacional. Jess estigmatiz
en su predicacin la injusticia social de su tiempo, en lo cual comparte tambin
una de las preocupaciones esenciales de los zelotes. Toda esta cuestin la
considera El tambin a la luz del reino de Dios. Denuncia sin compasin esa
injusticia en su predicacin "Ay de vostros, ricos!" (Le 6, 24).

Proclama bienaventurados a los padres, porque el reino de los cielos es de

ellos. La parbola del rico y del pobre Lzaro (Le 16, 19 ss.) sita tambin la
diferencia social a la luz del reino futuro; y la parbola de Le 12, 16 hace lo
mismo respecto a la locura del rico. Podemos preguntarnos si en las palabras,
um poco enigmticas, sobre "los violentos que hacen fuerza al reino de Dios y
lo arrebatan por la violencia" (Mt 11, 12), palabras que no se sabe si contienen
una censura o un elogio, Jess piensa en los zelotes.
El trmino griego que traduzco por violencia (bia), parece sugerir ms bien una
censura. Pero es posible que la palabra sea intencionadamente equvoca, en
cuyo caso reflejara bien el doble sentimento de, Jess respecto a los zelotes.
El captulo juanista sobre "el buen pastor" (Jn 10), creo que comprende una
alusin a ciertos jefes zelotes que entregaban a los suyos a ser degolados por
los romanos. Tal me parece la explicacin, si no absolutamente cierta, en todo
caso la ms probable con mucho, del pasaje sobre los falsos pastores (v. 8)
(mercenarios), y podra basarse en una tradicin histrica: "Todos cuantos han
venido antes que Yo son ladrones y sediciosos".
En todo caso, se admita o no se admita esta manera de ver, es cierto que
consider siempre como una tentacin, como su tentacin particular, la
concepcin poltica del Mesas. Por eso Mateo y Lucas colocan al principio
mismo de su ministerio el relato de la tentacin, destinado a destacar ese
rasgo. Es el diablo el que le muestra los reinos de la tierra: "Todo esto te dar."
Le propone el ideal zelote. Jess responde: "Retrate, Satans" (Mt 4, 10). No
nos sentimos tentados ms que por las cosas que estn cerca de nosotros.
Ante la expectacin ferviente de los zelotes, compartida por vrios de los
discpulos de Jess; ante el gran xito conseguido entre las turbas que le
ofrecan la realeza, no poda por menos de pasarle por la mente la idea de que
quiz debiera realizar ya en la tierra el reino de Dios. Cualquiera que sea el
ncleo histrico del relato de la tentacin, contiene el hecho innegable que
podemos comprovar a travs de todos los Evangelios: que Jess consider la
concepcin zelote del Mesas, es decir, poltica, como su tentacin por parte
del diablo: Retrate, Satans!
 6. OUTRO TEXTO DE NORBERT LOHFINK:

Hay mansedumbre en el Antiguo Testamento. y hay violencia en el Nuevo

Testamento. Hablar de la violencia del Nuevo Testamento de manera
demasiado estrecha, contentndose con inventariar os lugares y las
expresiones con que se habla de ella, sera alterar su mensaje. Lo que hay que
hacer es interpretarlo, mostrar su relacin con la verdadera mansedumbre. Por
otra parte, hablar de la mansedumbre en el Nuevo Testamento, no ser
salirse de nuestro tema? Hay una cosa segura: no podemos ocultar esa
violencia.
Por otro lado, los nicos en ignorarlo seran los que no han abierto nunca un
evangelio. Una sola vez en el relato de su vida, y solamente en el cuarto
evangelio, Jess se sirve de un azote de cordeles para obtener lo que quera
(Jn 2, 15). Pero sus palabras fueron violentas en ms de una ocasin: "Ay de
ti, Corozan! Ay de ti, Betsaida! (Mt 11, 21). La conclusin de la parbola de
los "talentos (en Lucas) choca con nuestra sensibilidad.
El rey dir: "A esos enemigos mos que no me queran por rey traedlos ac y
degolladlos en mi presencia (Le 19, 27; cf. en Mt 21, 41 el castigo de los
viadores homicidas). Habr que recordar la clera del Cordero (Ap 6, 16s) y
la sangre de los pecadores que, en el Apocalipsis de Juan (14, 20), corre con
una sobreabundancia que ningn otro libro de la Biblia haba mostrado hasta
entonces? Es un buen mtodo partir de lo ms cierto. Y en este caso lo ms
cierto es que en el centro de todo se hace ver el espectculo de la violencia
sufrida. El centro de todo es la cruz. En ella, uma violencia se transforma en
otra violencia: la violencia del odio se convierte en violencia del amor. Es la
obra de la violencia del Espritu.
 7. GOD AND VIOLENCE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT.

The Old Testament has a reputation: it is a book filled with violence, including
the violence of God. The New Testament commonly avoids such a charge; but
it, too, is filled with violent words and deeds, and Jesus and the God of the New
Testament are complicit in this violence. Yes, the Bible does often promote
nonviolence; indeed, the basic eschatological reflections of the Old Testament
are marked by visions of peace and nonviolence, extending even to the animal
world (e.g., Isa 2:24; 65:1725)these texts constitute a fundamental witness
that violence is an unwanted intruder in Gods world.

At the same time, the Bible also and oftendefends the use of violence,
including capital punishment, war, and self-defense. The New Testament
especially, with its talk about hell, even envisions an eternal violence, in which
God is very much involved (e.g., Matt 13:3650; Rev14:911). My task is to
reflect on some theological directions for considering the violence in Old
Testament texts, especially divine violence. The recent proliferation of literature
regarding the Bibles violence and, more generally, the linkage between religion
and violence is remarkable, sparked not least by the end of the millennium, and
other terrorist activities in the name of religion.

At the same time, Stephen Stein rightly claims that the systematic study of the
relationship between religion and violence is not very far advanced. Steins
indictment of the church and other religious communities for this inattention is
appropriate; he speaks of the relative absence of self-reflection by the religious
traditions on their role in generating, sponsoring, promoting, supporting, and
maintaining such violence. That would include the role that the Bible has
played in the perpetration of violence across the globe over the centuries. In
thinking through the violence in the Bible, the need for a closer definition of
violence quickly comes into view; it must be a definition that can encompass
both divine and human violence.
For many people, especially in these post-days, only physical violence truly
qualifies as violence. But, certainly, violence is more than killing people, unless
one includes all those words and actions that kill people slowly. The effect of
limitation to a killing fields perspective is the widespread neglect of many other
forms of violence. We must insist that violence also refers to that which is
psychologically destructive, that which demeans, damages, or depersonalizes
others. In view of these considerations, violence may be defined as follows: any
action, verbal or nonverbal, oral or written, physical or psychical, active or
passive, public or private, individual or institutional/societal, human or divine, in
whatever degree of intensity, that abuses, violates, injures, or kills.

Some of the most pervasive and most dangerous forms of violence are those
that are often hidden from view (against women and children, especially); just
beneath the surface in many of our homes, churches, and communities is
abuse enough to freeze the blood. Moreover, many forms of systemic violence
often slip past our attention because they are so much a part of the
infrastructure of life (e.g., racism, sexism, age-ism).6 If the Bible had described
the course of the twentieth century, it would be a much more violent book than it
is not least because there are so many more people around to be violent!

7.1. HUMAN VIOLENCE

The Old Testament certainly knows of human violence that fits our definition.
This is the case, most basically, because the world of which it speaks is filled
with violence, including institutionalized violence, and the Old Testament does
not shrink from telling it like it is. Readers should be grateful that the Bible does
not try to paper over what life is really like for individuals, families, and
communities. Violencefrom robbery to rape to homicide to warappears near
the beginning of the Bible and does not let up along the way.

Gen 6:1113, reporting the violence of all flesh that led to the violence of the
flood, tells the story of our ownand everytime: Now the earth was corrupt
in Gods sight and the earth was filled with violence. We should be thankful that
God has promised never to visit the earth in flood-like ways again (Gen 8:21)!
Besides the physical violence to which the Bible witnesses, especially to be
noted is the exercise of violence through the use of words, e.g., slander, false
charges, character assassination, and gossip. Such language has the capacity
to promote distrust, disrespect, and enmity, which often lead to physical
violence (e.g., Ps 140:3, 11; Prov 10:6, 11; 16:2730; Jer 9:28; note the link
between peace and violent speech in Ps 34:1314).

Perhaps especially uncomfortable is the extent to which violence is associated

with economic issues, not least the pursuit of wealth; as Mic 6:12 puts it without
qualification: Your wealthy people are full of violence. The most common
Hebrew word for violence is used almost exclusively for human violence and is
almost always condemned, implicitly or explicitly. God sharply rejects violent
people: The Lord...hates the lover of violence (Ps 11:5), commands that Israel
do no wrong or violence to the alien, the orphan, and the widow (Jer 22:3),
demands that violators of the command put away violence and oppression
(Ezek 45:9), and condemns those who do violence to the earth (Hab 2:8, 17;
see Zeph 1:9). The divinely appointed Davidic kings job de-scription, mirroring
that of God, is to redeem people from oppression and violence (Ps 72:14).

Knowing that God has these commitments, and expecting God to be on their
side, the psalmists cry out to God for deliverance from those who are violent,
from the dark places of the land [that] are full of the haunts of violence (Ps
74:20; see also Ps 25:19; 140:1, 4, 11). The righteous think they have a just
case to bring before God and they seek to motivate God to act on their behalf
by claiming that they have avoided the ways of the violent (Ps 17:4). And then,
when they have been delivered from violent people, they sing songs of
thanksgiving (2 Sam 22:3, 49; Ps 18:48).

The righteous are confident that God will see to a future when violence shall no
more be heard in your land (Isa 60:18). Such a resolute divine opposition to
human violence is important to remember in reflecting upon divine violence. In
sum: if there were no human violence, there would be no divine violence. To
this interhuman violence, we must add the violence of the human against the
nonhuman. It is recognized as early as Gen 9:2 that, in the wake of human sin,
animals live in fear and dread of human beings. More indirectly, interhuman
violence has a devastating effect on the environment. For example, Hos 4:13
establishes a clear link: human swearing, lying, murder, stealing, adultery, and
bloodshed have highly adverse effects upon the land, animals, birds, and fish.
On the other hand, the violence of nonhuman creatures against human beings
is no small matter (e.g., Gen 9:5; Exod 21:28).

7.2. DIVINE VIOLENCE

If human violence were the only story about violence in the Bible, this could be
a briefer, if bloody, discussion. But that is not the case. The most basic
theological problem with the Bibles violence is that it is often associated with
the activity of God; with remarkable frequency, God is the subject of violent
verbs:9 From the flood, to Sodom and Gomorrah, to the command to sacrifice
Isaac, to the plagues, to all the children killed on Passover nightand we are
not yet through the book of Exodus! What will we make of this divine violence?

Questions raised about Gods violence in the Bible are not simply of recent
vintage. The concern goes back at least as far as the second-century gnostic
Marcion, who set aside the Old Testament (and much of the New Testament).
He made this move at least in part because of the violence of God portrayed
therein,and he has had many followers through the centuries. The church rightly
rejected the approach of Marcion, but the disquiet about the Bibles divine
violence has been intensifying in recent biblical work.

Some studies even want to set aside the references to divine violence, at least
in terms of serious theological consideration, if not actually to remove from the
biblical text. At the same time, and in possible reaction to such views, the
church and its spokespersons have often gone to the other extreme and sought
to defend the Bibles portrayal of the violence of God, of whatever kind, at all
costs. I seek to steer between these two extremes. On the one hand, I want to
claim that the Bibles talk about divine violence must be taken seriously into
account in any accurate portrayal of the biblical God.
Even more, divine anger and judgment, which may entail violence, are
absolutely crucial to our continued reflection about God and Gods ways in the
world. On the other hand, some of the ways in which Gods violence is depicted
in the Bible should not stand unchallenged. I take a closer look at these two
perspectives, though much work remains to be done.

7.3. THE THEOLOGICAL/ETHICAL IMPORTANCE OF DIVINE WRATH

AND JUDGMENT

Gods uses of violenceand that phrasing is importantare associated with

two basic purposes: judgment and salvation. Sometimes the same event may
have both effects; for example, Persia under Cyrus mediates salvation for the
exiles in Babylon and, at the same time, passes judgment on Babylon. Such
divine activity often entails Gods use of agents that are capable of violence,
both human (e.g., Israelites, Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus) and nonhuman (e.g.,
clouds, darkness, waves, etc. at the Red Sea).

Much of the divine violence in the Old Testament is associated with these
contexts, but there are important exceptions, not least the book of Psalms,
which is filled with violence Judgment. Divine violence seems always to be
related to human sin. Generally speaking, if there were no human violence,
there would be no divine wrath or judgment, which may take the form of
violence, depending upon the agent used. Abraham Heschel has stated well
what is at stake in this matter:

[Our] sense of injustice is a poor analogy to Gods sense of injustice. The

exploitation of the poor is to us a misdemeanor; to God, it is a disaster. Our
reaction is disapproval; Gods reaction is something no language can convey. Is
it a sign of cruelty that Gods anger is aroused when the rights of the poor are
violated, when widows and orphans are oppressed? Violent human actions
lead to violent consequences. That there are such consequences to human
violence is named divine judgment. Just how God relates to the movement from
sin to consequence, however, is not easy to sort out. Generally speaking, the
relationship between sin and the judgment of violence is conceived in intrinsic
rather than forensic terms; consequences grow out of the deed itself. That is,
God mediates the consequences of sin that are already present in the situation,
rather than through the imposition of a penalty from without. Ezek 22:31 well
illustrates the point.

God declares, I have consumed them with the fire of my wrath, and
immediately states what that entails: I have returned their conduct upon their
heads. Israels sin generates certain snowballing effects. At the same time,
God is active in the interplay of human sinful actions and their effects, and God
uses third parties as agents for that judgment (e.g., the Assyrians). Both divine
and creaturely factors are interwoven to produce the judgmental result, which
may include violence. Such consequences do not take place in some inevitable
or mechanical way; the causal weave is complex and loose so that, for
example, the wicked may prosper (see Jer 12:14) and room is left for chance
(time and chance happen to them all, Eccl 9:11).

Remarkable correspondences exist between Gods actions and those of

Nebuchadnezzar. God will not pity, spare, or have compassion (Jer 13:14),
because that is what the Babylonians, the instruments of divine judgment, will
not do (Jer 21:7; see 27:8). The violent words/deeds appear to be used for God
because they are used for the actions of those in and through whom God
mediates judgment; the latter will certainly act as kings and armies in that world
are known to act. The portrayals of Gods wrath and violent action are
conformed to the means that God uses. God thereby accepts any fallout that
may accrue to the divine reputation. The ethical implications of such an
understanding of divine anger are considerable. I have stated it this way:
Human anger at injustice will carry less weight and seriousness if divine anger
at injustice in the service of life is not given its proper place. If our God is not
angry, why should we be? Salvation.

Violence becomes the means by which Gods people are delivered from
violence. So, for example, violence against the Egyptians leads to Israels
salvation from Egypts violence (e.g., Exod 15:13). Or, God uses the violence
of the Persians under King Cyrus against the enslaving Babylonians as a
means to bringsalvation to the exiles (e.g., Isa 45:18). In the first case, God
uses violence to save Israel from the effects of other peoples sins. In the
second, God uses violence in order to save Gods people from the effects of
their own sins, which got them into exile in the first place. Salvation is thus
comprehensively conceived.

7.4. GOD AND VIOLENCE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT

These two ways of speaking of Gods use of violence may be reduced to one.
That is, Gods use of violence, inevitable in a violent world, is intended to
subvert human violence in order to bring the creation along to a point where
violence is no more. Walter Brueggemann says it well: It is likely that the
violence assigned to Yahweh is to be understood as counterviolence, which
functions primarily as a critical principle in order to undermine and destabilize
other violence.

And so, Gods violence is not blind or unbridled violence, but purposeful in the
service of a nonviolent end. In other words, Gods violence, whether in
judgment or salvation, is never an end in itself, but is always exercised in the
service of Gods more comprehensive salvific purposes for creation: the
deliverance of slaves from oppression (Exod 15:7; Ps 78:4950), the righteous
from their antagonists (Ps 7:611), the poor and needy from their abusers
(Exod 22:2124; Isa 1:2324; Jer 21:12), and Israel from its enemies (Isa
30:2733; 34:2; Hab 3:1213).

This is one of the meanings of the anger of God: the end of indifference with
respect to those who have suffered human cruelty.29 In so stating the matter,
the divine exercise of wrath, which may include violence, is finally a word of
good news (for those oppressed) and bad news (for oppressors). As I have
noted, the Bible understands that some forms of violence, both human and
divine, are legitimate. Here I consider several forms of violence whose
theological legitimacy has been called into question. The above considerations
should make it clear that I do not hereby intend to make the God of the Bible
more palatable to contemporary taste. We are always in danger of doing this, of
course, especially regarding matters of judgment; we must certainly learn to
read the Bible over against ourselves, allowing the text to interrogate us, to be
in our face.

But is everything in the Bible that offends us appropriately offensive (e.g., the
Bibles patriarchy)? Is it not also dangerous simply to repeat uncritically those
texts that denigrate the place of women and portray God as one who orders the
wholesale slaughter of cities? And, if we are not critical of those texts wherein
the God of the Bible engages in such violent acts and violent speech, does not
that, however subtly, commend a way of life for those who follow this God? It is
important to note that an inner-biblical warrant exists for the people of God to
raise questions and challenges regarding Gods (anticipated) actions.

Examples include the biblical laments (e.g., Ps 44); Abrahams challenge in

Gen 18:25, Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just? and that of
Moses in Exod 32:714. Do not such texts show the way for the important work
we have to do regarding this interpretive issue? Moreover, we will be helped if
we talk about a biblical center in terms of which all other texts are to be
interpreted, evident most clearly in the creedal formulations of both Old
Testament and New (e.g., Exod 34:67).

That center provides a kind of canon within the canon that means that not
everything in the Bible is to be placed on the same level of importance and may
provide a place on which we can stand to bring a critical word to bear regarding
some portrayals of God. At the least, we must be honest in recognizing the
problems the Bible raises regarding divine violence. As I have stated
elsewhere: The patriarchal bias is pervasive, God is represented as an abuser
and a killer of children, God is said to command the rape of women and
wholesale destruction of cities, including children and animals. To shrink from
making such statements is dishonest.

Even more, the church must recognize the long history of negative effects that
many biblical texts about God have had on our life together. With all the
emphasis these days on what a text does to a reader, we should be absolutely
clear: among the things that the Bible has done is to contribute to the
oppression of women, the abuse of children, the rape of the environment, and
the glorification of war. Attempts are often made to explain away the force of
these texts or to soften their impact. Take the violence of the conquest as an
example; Deut 20:1617puts the issue squarely before us.

God commands, But in the cities of these peoples [Canaanites] that the Lord
your God gives you for an inheritance, you shall save alive nothing that
breathes, but you shall utterly destroy them (see 1 Sam 15:3). Israel carried out
this command in various battles recorded in Joshua 611.36 These divine and
human activities have often been spiritualized (put on the whole armor of
God), historically adjusted (turn the conquest into a land settlement or a
primitive view that Israel outgrew), idealized (taking a utopian stand against
idolatry), viewed as a metaphor for the religious life, or reduced to Gods
mysterious ways.

No satisfactory explanation of this Israelite practice is possible, or, for that

matter, of the other uses of divine violence noted above. Yet, certain
considerations may help us understand such violence, if not to excuse in every
respect the God who is portrayed here (nor those who carried out the divine
commands).

God works in and through human beings, with their foibles and flaws, in the
achievement of Gods purposes, and God does not perfect them before
deciding to work with them. God works with what is available, including such
institutions in that ancient context involved in the waging of war and other
governmental trappings. Violence will be associated with Gods work in the
world because, to a greater or lesser degree, violence is characteristic of the
persons and institutions through whom that work is done.

Thus, such work will always have mixed results and will be less than what
would have happened had God chosen to act alone. Moreover, God does not
necessarily confer a positive value on those means in and through which God
works (e.g., Isa 47). Human beings will never have a perfect perception of how
they are to serve as Gods instruments in the world. Israels perceptions were
often expressed in terms of the direct speech of God.
Inasmuch as this is a phenomenon rare in the New Testament, should we
understand that Israel may have put into direct divine speech understandings
they had gained through study and reflection rather than through an actual
hearing of Gods words? And they may not have fully or properly understood.

That God would stoop to become involved in such human cruelties as violence
is, finally, not a matter for despair, but of hope. God does not simply give people
up to experience violence. God chooses to become involved in violence so that
evil will not have the last word. In everything, including violence, God seeks to
accomplish loving purposes. Thereby God may prevent an even greater evil. By
so participating in our messy stories, God takes the road of suffering and death
(e.g., Exod 3:7). Through such involvement, God absorbs the effects of sinful
human efforts and thus suffers violence (not least because a divine promise of
land for Israel lies behind the whole affair).

There remains a certain ambiguity of the Bible toward violence. God does not
intend the violence that disrupts the life of the world, rooted as it is in the
sinfulness of humankind. Again and again, God takes the side of those afflicted
by violence. God so engages the divine self on behalf of those entrapped in
violence and its effects that God enters deeply into the life of the world, most
supremely in Jesus Christ, and shows thereby the most basic stance of divine
nonviolence in the face of violence. But, in order to accomplish Gods work in
the world, God may respond in violent ways in and through various agents so
that sin and evil do not go unchecked in the life of the world.
 CONCLUSO

Esta uma interpretao brilhante do livro de J que estende e amplifica a

teoria de Ren Girard sobre a violncia e as origens do mal expressadas em
outras obras como Violncia e o sagrado, O bode expiatrio, As coisas
escondidas desde a fundao do mundo e Eu via satans caindo do cu. Esta
obra permeia a exegese, a antropologia e a crtica literria.

O autor discute o sacrifcio como uma fora diretora e vetora da cultura. Ele
insiste que o livro de J no uma disputa metafsica sobre o problema do mal,
como sugerem o prlogo e o eplogo do prprio livro de J. isto que sugere a
maioria dos telogos e exegetas em vrios sculos. Ren Girard v J como
um homem que se protege com a sua inocncia contra uma comunidade que
est unanimemente querendo a sua destruio. J o bode expiatrio da
sociedade, a vtima que sofre a salvaguarda da comunidade.

Ele no trata o livro como mistrio teolgico ou com uma moral abstrata e como
dilema, mas como um drama sacrificial. O livro de Girard uma forma de
dilogo crucial, e o conflito que o dilogo torna explcito ao comparar a
explorao dinmica do jogo em que o autor rev outros mitos como Sfocles
(dipo rei e Antgona), squilo (Eumnides) e Racini (A Itlia e Britnia).

Para o autor, a situao de J revela todo elemento de uma crise sacrificial,

como ele bem definiu em suas obras j citadas, alis, a performance como
papel consolatrio, os quatro interlocutores de J que podem persuadi-lo a ser
imolado, para que tudo isso seja unnime na comunidade: no h fim nessas
palavras de vocs, mas um longo flego foi me dado.
REFERENCIAS