both in the gospels and other books of the new testament. in each gospel these violent events are treated with more intense detail than any other portion of that gospel's narrative. scholars note that the reader receives an almost hour-by-hour account of what is happening.: p.91 christ on the cross. 19th century painting by gustave doré apocalypse the book of revelation is full of imagery of war, genocide, and destruction. it describes the apocalypse, the last judgment of all the nations and people by god, which includes plagues, war, and economic collapse. some other books of the gospels also use apocalyptic language and forms. scholars define this as language that "views the future as a time when divine saving and judging activity will deliver god's people out of the present evil order into a new order...this transformation will be cataclysmic and cosmic." whenever jesus calls people to a new vision in light of god's impending kingdom, judgment, or a future resurrection, he is using apocalyptic speech. for example, jesus uses apocalyptic speech in matthew 10:15 when he says "it will be more bearable for sodom and gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town," and in mark 14:62, where he alludes to the book of daniel with himself in the future "sitting at the right hand of god." bailey and vander broek go on to say, "in the material about john the baptizer there also appear apocalyptic images: 'the wrath to come' (luke 3:7); 'the axe ... lying at the root of the tree' (luke 3:9); the coming one with 'winnowing fork ... in his hand' (luke 3:17); and chaff burning with 'unquenchable fire' (luke 3:17).": 124 charles b. strozier, psychoanalyst historian says: "the most troubling dimension of 'endism' is its relation to violence. ... fundamentalists generally believe... transformation can only be accomplished violently, and that the move from our time into the next requires mass death and destruction when '...this earth will be purged in the fires of god's anger, that jesus will return, and that a new heaven and a new earth will be reborn'". the book of revelation has been used to justify violence and has served as an inspiration of revolutionary movements. according to richard bauckham, the author of the book of revelation addresses apocalypse with a reconfiguration of traditional jewish eschatology that substitutes "faithful witness to the point of martyrdom for armed violence as the means of victory. because the lamb has won the decisive victory over evil by this means, his followers can participate in his victory only by following his path of suffering witness. thus, revelation repudiates apocalyptic militarism, but promotes the active participation of christians in the divine conflict with evil". theological reflections and responses texts of violence have produced a wide variety of theological responses. collins as part of the many reflections on religious violence inspired by the abrahamic religions that followed 9/11, john j. collins wrote a short book called "does the bible justify violence?".: 1–3 in the book he reviews the passages in the bible describing violence done by god, commanded or promised by god, and done by people, as well as how these texts have been used by religious people and governments throughout history. for example, he discusses the exodus and the conquest of the canaanites in the subsequent book of joshua, as two sides of the same coin; the exodus story has inspired hope for millennia as well as civil rights movements; at the same time people identifying with the liberated israel supported by god have cited the conquest to justify actions ranging from genocide of indigenous peoples to apartheid.: 19–20 collins concludes that the bible speaks in many voices. he writes that: "....historically people have appealed to the bible precisely because of its presumed divine authority, which gives an aura of certitude to any position it can be shown to support -- in the phrase of hannah arendt, 'god-like certainty that stops all discussion.' and here, i would suggest, is the most basic connection between the bible and violence, more basic than any command or teaching it contains....the bible has contributed to violence in the world precisely because it has been taken to confer a degree of certitude that transcends human discussion and argumentation.": 32–33 collins, writing as a christian scholar, also notes: "it is not unusual for christian interpreters to claim that 'the biblical witness to the innocent victims and the god of victims demystifies and demythologizes this sacred social order' in which violence is grounded. such a selective reading, privileging the death of jesus or the suffering servant, is certainly possible and even commendable, but it does not negate the force of the biblical endorsements of violence that we have been considering. the full canonical shape of the christian bible, for what it is worth, still concludes with the judgement scene in revelation, in which the lamb that was slain returns as the heavenly warrior with a sword for striking down the nations.": 27 schwartz regina schwartz is among those who seek to reimagine christianity and the christian biblical canon in ways that reduce violence. she describes violence as arising from the ancient israelite invention of monotheism and the ways ancient israelites conceived of themselves in relation to that one god and to other peoples. christians inherited this view but only in part. she writes that: "the other, against whom israel's identity is forged is abhorred, abject, impure, and in the "old testament," vast numbers of them are obliterated, while in the "new testament," vast numbers are colonized (converted). the tying of identity to rejection runs counter to much of the drive that could be found elsewhere, both in the bible and throughout religious myth and ritual, to forge identity through analogy, even identification....among all the rich variety, i would categorize two broad understandings of identity in the bible: one grounded in negation (or scarcity) and the other in multiplicity (or plenitude).: 18–19 near the end of her book, she says: "my re-vision would produce an alternative bible that subverts the dominant vision of violence and scarcity with an ideal of plenitude and its corollary ethical imperative of generosity. it would be a bible embracing multiplicity instead of monotheism.": 176 geller stephen geller notes that both the deuteronomist and the priestly authors working in the axial age were re-evaluating and reformulating their traditions, like their neighbors were, using the literary means available to them. the deuteronomists expressed their new notions of the transcendence and power of god by means of ideas and associated laws around unity—the one-ness of god, worshipped at the one temple in jerusalem, by one people, kept distinct from the rest of world just as god is; zealously and violently so.: 32–22 likewise the priestly author adapted the myths and rituals of the ane and the specific traditions of the ancient israelites to forge different meanings for blood sacrifice than their neighbors had, specifically in the elaborate and precarious rituals on the day of atonement when the high priest had to enter the holy of holies and the presence of god; in their work the priestly authors also attempted to express the transcendence and unity of god who is yet in a relationship with humanity with all its variable sinfulness. in geller's reading the blood is not magical nor is the animal just a substitute for a human sacrifice; instead blood is at once an expression of the violence of the fallen world where people kill in order to eat (unlike eden) and the blood itself becomes a means for redemption; it is forbidden to be eaten, as a sign of restraint and recognition, and is instead offered to god, and in that action the relationship between fallen humanity and god is restored. the priestly authors underline the importance of all this by recalling the mortal danger faced by the high priests, through the telling of the deaths of nadab and abihu when god refused their "strange offering" and consumed them with fire.: 32–22 one result of this reformulating work, is a god with aspects of terrifying and powerful otherness; as annie dillard wrote in pilgrim at tinker creek: "does anyone have the foggiest idea what sort of power we so blithely invoke? or, as i suspect, does no one believe a word of it? the churches are children playing on the floor with their chemistry sets, mixing up a batch of tnt to kill a sunday morning. it is madness to wear ladies’ straw hats and velvet hats to church; we should all be wearing crash helmets. ushers should issue life preservers and signal flares; they should lash us to our pews. for the sleeping god may wake someday and take offense, or the waking god may draw us out to where we can never return." others evan fales, professor of philosophy, calls the doctrine of substitutionary atonement that some christians use to understand the crucifixion of jesus, "psychologically pernicious" and "morally indefensible". fales founds his argument on john locke’s statement that revelation must conform to our understanding. philosopher and professor alvin plantinga says this rests upon seeing god as a kind of specially talented human being. historian philip jenkins (quoting phyllis trible) says the bible is filled with "texts of terror" but he also asserts these texts are not to be taken literally. jenkins says eighth century bce historians added them to embellish their ancestral history and get readers' attention. old testament scholar ellen davis is concerned by what she calls a "shallow reading" of scripture, particularly of 'old testament' texts concerning violence, which she defines as a "reading of what we think we already know instead of an attempt to dig deeper for new insights and revelations." she says these difficult texts typically have internal correctives that support an educative reading.: 8–9 the problem of evil the devil, in opposition to the will of god, represents evil and tempts christ, the personification of the character and will of god. ary scheffer, 1854. discussions of the bible and violence often lead to discussions of theodicy - the question of how evil can persist in the world if god is all-powerful, all-knowing, and good.: xv–xvi philosopher david hume summarizes: "is god willing to prevent evil, but not able? then he is not omnipotent. is he able, but not willing? then he is malevolent. is he both able and willing? then from whence comes evil?" according to john kemp, evil cannot be correctly understood on a simple scale of pleasure vs. pain, since the national institute of medicine says pain is essential for survival. the first systematic reflections on the problem of evil by jewish philosophers is traceable only in the medieval period. the ancient books of the hebrew bible do not show an awareness of the theological problem of evil, and even most later biblical scholars did not touch the question of the problem of evil. while there are secular responses to the problem, the problem of evil is primarily a challenge to christianity. the christian ethic includes three main responses. the freewill defense by alvin plantinga assumes that a world containing creatures who are significantly free is an innately more valuable world than one containing no free creatures, and that god could not have made a world containing complexity and freedom without including the possibility of evil and suffering.: 30 the soul-making theodicy advocated by john hick says god allows the evil of suffering because it produces good in its results of building moral character. christian ethicists such as david ray griffin have also produced process theodicies which assert god's power and ability to influence events are, of necessity, limited by human creatures with wills of their own.: 143 in one version of this, jon levenson resolves the problem of evil by describing god's power not as static, but as unfolding in time: "the operative dichotomy, thus, is not that between limitation and omnipotence, but that which lies between omnipotence as a static attribute and omnipotence as a dramatic enactment: the absolute power of god realizing itself in achievement and relationship. what this biblical theology of dramatic omnipotence shares with the theology of the limited god is a frank recognition of god's setbacks, in contrast to the classical theodicies with their exaggerated commitment to divine