This is a paper I wrote concerning Pacifism in the Old Testament from Jeremiah 29:1-9 (and some following verses). The formatting may not be great on here since the cut/paste feature doesn't seem to be an exact process. If there are questions about the sources, make a comment, and I'll do my best to clarify.
“Jeremiah 29: A Call to Passive Resistance”
Jeremiah 29:1-9 is a letter written from the prophet Jeremiah to the first wave of exiles in Babylon under King Nebuchadnezzar. Patrick D. Miller argues that this letter is telling the exiles “Do not resist; carry on your lives; learn to come to terms with your situation.”[1] While I agree with Miller on the second point, I disagree with his first point, which is the most fundamental point to the entire passage. I will argue that resistance is exactly what Jeremiah intends to incite through this letter. Jeremiah is not calling for armed resistance, nor is he calling for rebellion or even civil disobedience. Instead, Jeremiah is calling upon the exiles to maintain their Jewish[2] identity in an act of passive resistance to the Babylonian oppressors who hold them hostage. As is often the case, when once culture dominates another, especially by force, the “victim culture” loses its identity at worst, or at best, they often maintain some of their identity with concessions and adaptations to the oppressor’s culture. God, through Jeremiah’s letter is calling upon the exiles not to fall into the trap of losing any of their identity as God’s Chosen People. I will begin by setting the stage for the context of this passage with a brief historical setting. Following the historical background, I will give evidence of tactics used by oppressors to remove the identity of those whom they oppress. I will then give evidence of how this passage advocates resistance in a non-violent manner to the status quo until a time in which God will set the exiles free. Following that, I will explore the part of the passage that says that the welfare of Babylon will be the welfare of the exiles.[3] I will also include a section that discusses the dangers of misreading this passage in which an oppressor could “wrongly justify” their oppression using this text. I will finally discuss how this text speaks to people today through its overt message as well as through its imagery to maintain identity as a form of non-violent resistance.
In 597 BCE, Babylon deported a first wave of exiles from Judea into Nebuchadnezzar’s Kingdom of Babylon[4] (roughly located in modern day Iraq). Ten years later in 587 BCE, Jerusalem was destroyed[5] and a new wave of exiles was taken into Babylon. For some reason, the Babylonians allowed correspondence (of which this passage is an example) between Judean and the exiles in Babylon. This unlikely arrangement can be explained by assuming that the Babylonian authorities wanted to keep the exiles informed of events in Jerusalem, possibly to demoralize them, and they also wanted to remind Zedekiah, the King of Judea, that Babylon had the real power, and holding hostages was one method of proving that and making sure that tribute payments were paid to Babylon.[6] The exiles were held in Babylon until the Persians led by Cyrus assumed control and issued a decree in 538 BCE releasing the hostages back to Jerusalem and providing them with funds to rebuild their Temple.[7]
“Build houses…plant gardens…take wives…have sons and daughters...take wives for your sons…give your daughters in marriage, that they may bear sons and daughters; multiply there, and do not decrease...”[8] Each of these commands in Jeremiah’s prophetic letter invoke God’s commands of maintaining the Jewish identity and culture amid oppression and exile. Each command also explicitly tells the exiles that while they are to live peaceably among the Babylonians (“…seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare,”[9]), they are not to become influenced by the Babylonian culture, identity, or religion. The exiles are to remember their identity and to produce a new generation of Jewish people, while still under oppression. While violent resistance may produce a quick end (either end to the oppression or an end of the Jewish people through destruction by the Babylonians), God is commanding the Jewish people to resist through passive means by in maintaining their Jewish identity through forming communities by building houses, planting gardens, continuing to have children, allowing their children to marry, and maintaining their daily lives.
We can look at other historical situations to see the tactics used by oppressive regimes to gain control of those whom they oppress. During China’s Cultural Revolution from the 1960’s to the 1970’s, led by Mao Zedong, the Chinese leadership further oppressed Tibet, which they had annexed in 1950 into the nation of China in the name of “liberation.” This so called “liberation” turned out to be oppression of the Tibetan people, religion and culture (along with that of most people in China). Tibetan artifacts that were at least a thousand years old were destroyed, and the Chinese Communist regime even convinced some of the Tibetan citizens, including Buddhist Monks, that this was the right thing to do. Names were changed and transcribed into Chinese, and thus, were pronounced with a Chinese accent.[10] Almost anything tying Tibetans to their native culture was eliminated or put under strict regulations by the Chinese Communists. In a different book, Alex Haley’s semi-autobiographical novel, Roots gives several examples of losing one’s identity in the face of oppression. One such powerful example is a scene where a slave in the American South named Samson approaches the character Kunta Kinte. Samson tries to convince Kunta that his name is Toby, the name given to him by the slave master. Kunta continues to hold that Toby is not his name; his name is Kunta Kinte![11] By taking away his name, the slave master is, in effect, trying to dismantle Kunta’s identity as an African and to convince Kunta that his identity is an American Slave as he had already accomplished with Samson. Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright, Jr. states that oppressors begin oppression by first taking away the names and stories of the oppressed.[12] As we’ve seen in the two previous examples of Tibet and American Slavery, Rev. Wright is correct on this issue. Rev. Wright’s sermon discusses how slave traders and then later, racist people unwilling to integrate with former slaves or their descendents treated the African-Americans as sub-human. When cultural roots, histories, shared stories, and names are taken away from a group of people, generations will be “lost” by forced-integration into the oppressive culture.
If we read Jeremiah 29 intertextually with the book of Daniel, a book that is also set during the exile, we see the names of the Jewish Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah being changed by Babylon’s chief official to Beltesheazzar, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, in an attempt to take away their Jewish identity.[13] Though the actual historicity of this passage can be put into question, and many consider this to be a mythic tale, the underlying message cannot be discounted. Oppressors attempt to change identities of those whom they oppress. In another intertextual reading with Daniel, King Nebuchadnezzar had a large golden statue made of him. He commanded that at the sound of the music, everyone was to fall down and worship this statue. Seeing this as idol worship and staying true to their roots, Daniel and his friends refused to worship this statue. After being interrogated by Nebuchadnezzar, the four exiles were thrown into the Fiery Furnace heated seven times hotter than normal, but they were left unharmed through divine intervention. In this apocalyptic story, we can see yet another account of an oppressor (in this case, Babylon, the same oppressor in Jeremiah), attempting to wipe away the culture and personhood of those under their oppression.[14] Babylon attempted to wipe out the very religion and roots of the Jewish people under their control.
As the exiles in Jeremiah 29 build houses, have children, let their children marry, and increase in population, they are resisting these oppressive tactics that would cause them to lose their identity. By maintaining their identity under unfavorable conditions, the exiles are passively resisting the Babylonian oppressors. In keeping homes and having families, they can hold onto their own names, culture, and religion (even just if at home), and they are holding onto the message passed from generations before that no matter what the Babylonians do to them, they are a different, special, and Chosen People of the one true God. As they have their children marry and reproduce, they are maintaining their historical link to the Promised Land to which they hope to someday return. Through oral tradition, they can keep traditions, stories of Israel and Jerusalem, and the hope of return alive. Through these acts the exiles are not allowing the Babylonian culture to totally defeat them through forced enculturation. Though they have been defeated in might and strength, by following God’s commands in this letter, they can never be defeated as a people with names, culture, religion, and history. Even today, the Jewish people in the Diaspora hold special feelings for Israel, Jerusalem, and especially the hopeful rebuilding of the Temple.
The idea of kinship cannot be understated in the identity of the Jewish people (or any other “tightly knit” ethnic/cultural/religious group). Kinship of all Jewish people has been important throughout history since antiquity. The Jewish People hardly (if at all) distinguished between “good Jews” and “bad Jews.” All of Jewish heritage are, and have been, identified as Jews.[15] Accordingly, the exiles in Jeremiah 29 see themselves as a people united by that very kinship. This is proven through three observations of the text. First of all, the exiles were taken into Babylon from one “nation (Judea),” and/or one city, Jerusalem. Judea, and especially Jerusalem was central to Jewish life, culture, and religion. The Temple in Jerusalem was seen as the house of God on earth. Second, these people believed in the God of the Jewish people, Yahweh. One can see proof of this by merely scanning the passage and seeing that the letter from Jeremiah is speaking of this one God. Had they not been unified by belief in this God, this letter would hold no credence as a prophetic letter. These people were the Chosen People of this God. They were chosen by God to be the vehicle that would allow God’s justice to spread to the whole world as a “light to the nations.”[16] Third, by maintaining their culture through the construction of houses and forming communities and families separate from the Babylonians, the Jewish people are asserting their kinship with one another. As they kept community with other Jews, these exiles kept their roots central to their being. Kinship assumes a shared history and/or a shared story. When a culture loses its history, they die.[17] When a new history is given to the younger generations, those generations “die” to their native culture as well. Rev. Jeremiah Wright explains this using the current experience of African-Americans. Through centuries of oppression, their homeland and native culture has been called inferior to Western standards. As this is drilled into the minds of people, they begin to accept it as true. Each generation loses a little more of their history as each generation passes, thus causing even more of a loss of identity. After losing identity, the exiles, (African-Americans in Wright’s example) take on the fashions, culture, and lifestyles similar to those of their oppressors.[18] Despite the tactics that the Babylonians used, the exiles in Babylon continued to maintain their culture and identity, and they remained a people, and no less, the Chosen People of God, with a shared history, story, and culture.
Probably the most controversial and confusing portion of Jeremiah’s Letter to the exiles is where God, through Jeremiah tells the exiles to seek the welfare of the city where they are exiled and to pray for its wellbeing because their own wellbeing is tied to that city.[19] This must have come as an unwelcomed surprise to the exiles. It is difficult to imagine God telling an obviously oppressed group of people that they are not only to live in harmony with their captors, but they are also to pray for them. Logic would say that they must have wondered if this was a real command from God or the uttering of some false prophet. Jeremiah counters this thought by writing that the prophets and diviners among the exiles (who are prophesying a quick return) are not from God, and they are not to listen to them.[20] William Holladay describes this letter as a “Rude Letter” from God.[21] Holladay says that in verse 7, the English translated word “welfare” is actually the word “shalom” (Hebrew for “peace”).[22] In light of this, Holladay paraphrases Jeremiah’s letter to imply: “Ah, you are listening for ‘peace be to you’ but you listen for it in vain until you do some work of your own…(My own emphasis added).”[23] I argue that Holladay is emphasizing the need for peace and peaceful resistance. Thich Nhat Hanh, a nominee for the Nobel Peace Price by Martin Luther King, Jr. writes, “Evil is never overcome with evil to produce peace.”[24] War and violence only quiets or subdues the losers. Sometimes the losers are subdued forever, but many times, the losers are only subdued until they can gain enough strength to again lash out, but this time with more anger than before. In fact, Biblical/Christian Pacifism is not rooted in efficacy (violence often produces results quicker than passive resistance), but rather it is rooted in a particular interpretation of God’s will as discerned through the Bible. Patience in the face of oppression “is not a means to a greater good, but it is the good itself.”[25] Jeremiah, through God’s leading, realized that the good must be honored in telling the exiles that their resistance was not to be violent. Jeremiah realized that Babylon should not be subdued by force, but that through patience, endurance, and passive resistance, the Jewish people would be vindicated.
By telling the exiles to seek the peace of Babylon and to pray for them, and by further explaining that the exiles’ peace is tied to Babylon’s peace, God, through Jeremiah’s Letter is commanding that they not take up arms or violence against their oppressors. Much like most cultures today, the exiles, and even the Babylonians, built their civilizations upon the lie that “we, not God, are the masters of our existence.”[26] Almost all nations and cultural groups, whether religious or not attempt to be the masters of their own existence through trying to manipulate their circumstances in social orders, laws, treaties, and so forth. Despite Jeremiah’s letter at least some of the Jewish exiles still held to the thought that they, and not God, would one day avenge their situation. They even composed a Psalm saying, “Happy shall they be who take your little ones and dash them against the rock!”[27] This Psalm came as a result of tormenting of the exiles to “sing us [the Babylonians] one of the songs of Zion.”[28] Understandably, the exiles wanted to return home, and while returning home, they wanted to return revenge. God’s precepts, however, do not work that way. Ellen Davis gives and interpretation of this Psalm and others like it. She says that these “cursing Psalms” are a cry for vengeance asking God to act.[29] Reading this text through the lens of Christ, we can see that the call to “turn the other cheek”[30] is not unique to the New Testament, nor is “love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.”[31] This is an Old Testament example of the call to live in voluntary subordination (similar to Christ’s teachings previously cited). When doing so, the subordinate group holds the moral authority over the dominant group calling upon them to forsake their “domineering use of that status.”[32]
Even though this passage speaks to a specific situation, we must also explore the potential dangers of interpreting it wrongly. Though it is God’s will that the exile took place,[33] it should not be interpreted that every (or any) oppressive situation is God’s will. One could take this passage out of context and use it to justify oppression and attempt to subdue those being oppressed by saying that their situation is “God’s will.” Oppressors have often used biblical interpretation to justify their wrongs. For example, slavery has been justified using Genesis 9:22-27 (Noah’s curse of Ham’s descendents), the book of Philemon (Paul returning Philemon’s slave Onesimus), and 1 Timothy 6:1-6 where Paul tells slaves to regard their masters as “worthy of honor.”[34] Though slavery was a cultural norm in the Biblical period, hardly anyone would argue that such oppression of a human is acceptable today. So must one see Jeremiah 29. God ultimately causes the exile and oppression for the peoples’ unfaithfulness. The exile is not merely a military conquest with the victor claiming the resources and people. This is an act of God after repetitive prophetic warnings. Repressive regimes must not use this text to legitimate their oppression and say that it is “God’s will.”
Though Jeremiah 29 calls for non-violence, it is not a call for religious people to be silent in the face of oppression. The vindication of the exiles is prophesied in Jeremiah 50:1-3 where God says that Babylon’s idols will be put to shame, and a nation from the north (most likely the Persians led by God’s decree) will destroy Babylon. The reader must remember that though God uses human sources to carry out this vindication and revenge, the action originates from God and not from humans.
“The word of God is living and active…”[35] Just as the call for non-violent resistance applied for the exiles in Babylon so too, it applies today. The world is ripe with injustice and oppression. If we are to take the words of Jeremiah seriously, we must look at our own situations and use Jeremiah 29 as a model for seeking justice and an end to oppression. Again, quoting Stanley Hauerwas from The Peaceable Kingdom, Patience in the face of oppression “is not a means to a greater good, but it is the good itself” (page 146). Violent action may be more efficacious and bring a quicker solution, but violence is against the Will of God. We are not to seek our own vengeance, but rather we are to allow God to have the vengeance. Romans 12:19 says, “Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave room for the wrath of God; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.’” As followers of God, we must either allow God to be God, or we must forsake the covenant and be our own “gods.” But, if we choose the latter, we must be ready to face the consequences. As Jesus said in Matthew 26:52b, “…for all who take the sword will perish by the sword. Violence never has a good end. Even if violence quashes an oppressor, there will always be oppressors and evildoers who will fill the vacuum of the one who was destroyed and blood will always be on the hands of the one who uses violence. Even in our own figurative exiles to “Babylon” (whether in the form of oppression, addiction, conflict, or any other wrong), we must turn to the words of Jeremiah 29 and only resist passively.
If Jeremiah’s letter ended in verse 9, the exiles then and those in exile (figurative or literal) now would not see hope in their passive resistance. Fortunately, Jeremiah includes more in this letter. Verses 10-14 go on to say, “For thus says the Lord: Only when Babylon’s seventy years are completed will I visit you, and I will fulfill to you my promise and bring you back to this place. For surely I know the plans I have for you, says the Lord, plans for your welfare and not for harm, to give you a future with hope. Then when you call upon me and come and pray to me, I will hear you. When you search for me, you will find me; if you seek me with all your heart, I will let you find me, says the Lord, and I will restore your fortunes and gather you from all the nations and all the places where I have driven you, says the Lord, and I will bring you back to the place from which I sent you into exile.” As people of God, we, just as the exiles, can take comfort in knowing that God has a future for us, and that future is for our benefit and not our harm if only we live up to our end of the covenant.
Works Cited:
Richard A. Burridge, “Being Biblical?: Slavery, Sexuality, and the inclusive community,” HTS Theological Studies (HTS 64(1), 2008).
R.E. Clements, Interpretation: Jeremiah (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1988).
Ellen F. Davis, Getting Involved With God (Lanham Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc.: 2001).
Alex Haley, Roots (New York: Gramercy Books, 2000).
Thich Nhat Hanh, Living Buddha, Living Christ (New York: Penguin Group Inc., 2007).
Stanley Hauerwas, The Peaceable Kingdom (Notre Dame: The University of Notre Dame Press, 1983).
Martha Himmelfarb, “Judaism in Antiquity: Ethno-Religion or National Identity,” The Jewish Quarterly Review, Winter 2009.
William L. Holladay, “God Writes a Rude Letter,” Biblical Archaeologist, Summer 1983.
Thomas Laird, The Story of Tibet: Conversations with the Dalai Lama (New York: Grove Press, 2006).
Patrick D. Miller, Commentary on Jeremiah, The New Interpreters Bible: A Commentary in Twelve Volumes, vol. 6, Leander E. Keck, ed., et. al. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2001).
Rev. Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr., “Faith in a Foreign Land,” Words from the Pulpit, (Summer 2007).
John Howard Yoder, The Politics of Jesus: Second Edition (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1994).
Dr. Anathea Portier-Young, Class Lectures (Duke Divinity School: 2011).
Works Consulted:
B.O. Banwell, “Prophets of Non-Violence,” Journal of Theology for Southern Africa.
Walter Brueggemann, The Prophetic Imagination (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001).
Rachel A. R. Bundang, “Home as a Memory, Metaphor, and Promise in Asian/Pacific American Religious Experience.
Stanley Hauerwas, The Hauerwas Reader, ed. John Berkman and Michael Cartwright (Durham, Duke University Press, 2001).
John Lamoreau and Ralph Beebe, Waging Peace: A Study in Biblical Pacifism (Newberg, OR: Barclay Press, 1981).
Victor H. Matthews, Social World of the Hebrew Prophets (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 2001).
[1] Patrick D. Miller, Commentary on Jeremiah, The New Interpreters Bible: A Commentary in Twelve Volumes, vol. 6, Leander E. Keck, ed., et. al. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2001), 792.
[2] The term “Jewish” may be anachronistic to the time period of this passage; however, these exiles and their descendents are the people who are known from antiquity to modern times as the Jewish People. This possibility of the term “Jewish” originating in this time period was discussed by Dr. A. Portier-Young in a class lecture on January, 28, 2011 giving the Historical Overview of that time period.
[3] Jeremiah 29:7.
[4] Miller, Commentary on Jeremiah, The New Interpreters Bible: A Commentary in Twelve Volumes, 791.
[5] R.E. Clements, Interpretation: Jeremiah (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1988), 171.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Dr. Anathea Portier-Young, Class Lecture: Historical Overview (Duke Divinity School), January 28, 2011.
[8] Jeremiah 29:5-7.
[9] Jeremiah 29:7-8.
[10] Thomas Laird, The Story of Tibet: Conversations with the Dalai Lama (New York: Grove Press, 2006), 348-349
[11] Alex Haley, Roots (New York: Gramercy Books, 2000), 214.
[12] Rev. Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr., “Faith in a Foreign Land,” Words from the Pulpit, (Summer 2007), 242.
[13] Daniel 1:7.
[14] Daniel 3.
[15] David Goodblatt, Elements of Ancient Jewish Nationalism (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 19-26; quoted in Martha Himmelfarb, “Judaism in Antiquity: Ethno-Religion or National Identity,” The Jewish Quarterly Review, Winter 2009, 68.
[16] Isaiah 51:4.
[17] Jeremiah Wright, 241.
[18] Ibid., 242.
[19] Jeremiah 29:7.
[20] Jeremiah 29:8-9.
[21] William L. Holladay, “God Writes a Rude Letter,” Biblical Archaeologist, Summer 1983.
[22] Ibid., 145.
[23] Ibid., 145-146.
[24] Thich Nhat Hanh, Living Buddha, Living Christ (New York: Penguin Group Inc., 2007), 75.
[25] Stanley Hauerwas, The Peaceable Kingdom (Notre Dame: The University of Notre Dame Press, 1983), 146.
[26] Ibid., 142.
[27] Psalm 137.
[28] Ibid., vs. 3.
[29] Ellen F. Davis, Getting Involved With God (Lanham Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc.: 2001), 27.
[30] Matthew 5:39.
[31] Matthew 5:44.
[32] John Howard Yoder, The Politics of Jesus: Second Edition (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1994), 186.
[33] Mentioned intermittently from Jeremiah 1-27.
[34] Richard A. Burridge, “Being Biblical?: Slavery, Sexuality, and the inclusive community,” HTS Theological Studies (HTS 64(1), 2008),159.
[35] Hebrews 4:12.
No comments:
Post a Comment