“You
just need to look at what the gospel asks, and what war does. The gospel asks
that we feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked, welcome
the homeless, visit the prisoner, and perform works of mercy. War does all the
opposite. It makes my neighbor hungry, thirsty, homeless, a prisoner, and sick.
The gospel asks us to take up our cross. War asks us to lay the cross of
suffering on others.” —Dorothy Day
By Sean Finnegan
Introduction
Is it right for
Christians to volunteer in the United
States
Now, I realize that
the moment I suggest that violence is wrong for Christians, a whole slew of
questions and “what ifs” come to mind.
Let me start by saying that these types of questions have good answers
and we have collected a number of answers to difficult questions on our
website.[3] However, it would not be prudent to handle
all of the “objections” prior to laying out the case for nonviolence
biblically, logically, and historically.
Therefore, it is my intention to present both the clear biblical
teaching on this subject and the theological framework into which this teaching
fits.
Though adherents to
nonviolence are still unquestionably in the minority, as of late more and more
leaders from non-Anabaptist[4]
traditions are beginning to speak up. As
I have researched this subject, in an effort to gain answers to the tough
questions that face Christian pacifism, I have been surprised to find how
central kingdom
of God kingdom
of God kingdom of God
The Kingdom of God
Though the biblical
concept of the kingdom
of God
1 Chronicles
17.11-14
11 When your days are fulfilled to go to be with your ancestors, I
will raise up your offspring after you, one of your own sons, and I will
establish his kingdom. 12 He shall build a house for me, and I will
establish his throne forever. 13 I will be a father to him, and he
shall be a son to me. I will not take my steadfast love from him, as I took it
from him who was before you, 14 but I will confirm him in my house
and in my kingdom forever, and his throne shall be established forever.
David’s royal
descendant will rule on David’s throne, in Jerusalem Judah
was a rollercoaster ride, mostly downhill, until the Davidic throne was at last
subjugated to the scepter of Babylonia . Throughout this time, God sent prophets to
call the people to repentance, warn them of coming judgment, and confirm that
God’s grand vision for the future was not forgotten. One of the most vivid pictures of the future
was given by both Isaiah and Micah:
Isaiah 2.2-4
2 Now it will come about that In the last days The mountain of the house of the LORD Will be established as the chief of the mountains, And will be raised above the hills; And all the nations will stream to it. 3 And many peoples will come and say, "Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, To the house of the God of Jacob; That He may teach us concerning His ways And that we may walk in His paths." For the law will go forth fromZion And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem
2 Now it will come about that In the last days The mountain of the house of the LORD Will be established as the chief of the mountains, And will be raised above the hills; And all the nations will stream to it. 3 And many peoples will come and say, "Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, To the house of the God of Jacob; That He may teach us concerning His ways And that we may walk in His paths." For the law will go forth from
The prophets spoke
of an age to come which would be characterized by peace, justice, and
healing. God would raise up from the
felled stump of Jesse,[6]
a shoot who would be empowered by the Spirit to judge righteously with wisdom
and strength. He would vindicate the
poor, punish the wicked, and bring about an age of restoration. The blind would see, the lame would run like
the deer, the oppressed would be set free, the oppressors would be judged, and
the land would finally be redeemed. Even
though the prophets consistently called the people of God to repentance, they
continued in their hardhearted disobedience to oppress the widows, the orphans,
and the vulnerable. They worshipped
other gods and committed adultery with them under every leafy tree. Finally, time ran out, and God used Babylonia , and her head of fine gold—Nebuchadnezzar—to
punish his people. The Babylonian army
destroyed Jerusalem , the Temple
During the seventy
year Babylonian exile, it would have been easy to lose hope in God’s grand
covenant to David, except for exilic prophets like Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and
Daniel who explained to the people that they had been judged for their sin, but
that God would again act to bring about their restoration.
One of these
prophets, Daniel, interpreted the dream of Nebuchadnezzar, and in so doing
revealed that God still had plans to establish a kingdom. The statue in the dream represented various
human kingdoms, which were destroyed by a rock cut out without hands. When the stone hit the feet of the statue,
the whole image broke into a million pieces.
Then the rock became a mountain that filled the whole earth.
Daniel 2.44
44 And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed, nor shall this kingdom be left to another people. It shall crush all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, and it shall stand forever;
44 And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed, nor shall this kingdom be left to another people. It shall crush all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, and it shall stand forever;
Furthermore, at a
later time, Daniel saw a vision of four beasts coming out of the watery
chaos. Each of these represented a
kingdom: a lion, a bear, and a leopard.
Then the last in this sequence of animalistic kingdoms was a beast so
terrifying that no earthly analog was available. From this last, terrifying beast, arose a
little horn who waged war with the saints and overcame them. However, God himself, the Ancient of Days,
passed judgment upon the last kingdom in fiery act of divine justice. Then, at last, a son of man came up to the
Ancient of Days.
Daniel 7.13-14
13 As I watched in the night visions, I saw one like a human being
[son of man] coming with the clouds of heaven. And he came to the Ancient One
and was presented before him. 14 To him was given dominion and glory
and kingship, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him. His
dominion is an everlasting dominion that shall not pass away, and his kingship
is one that shall never be destroyed.
Finally, a divinely
sanctioned humane kingdom would arrive on the earth to bring lasting change. This eternal kingdom was to be given to the
“people of the saints of the Highest One” who will enjoy it forever.
After the exile, the
people returned to the land under Zerubbabel and Joshua to rebuild the Temple Jerusalem Palestine Judea for
sixty years. The people of God chafed
under each empire and some even gave up hope that the Messiah would ever
come.
Then, to a poor
Jewish virgin, from the ignoble town of Nazareth
Luke 1.31-33
31 And now, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you
will name him Jesus. 32 He will be great, and will be called the Son
of the Most High, and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his ancestor
David. 33 He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his
kingdom there will be no end."
Fascinating! Jesus, the virgin-born son of Mary would be
the one to fulfill the promise God had made to David a millennium earlier. God had not forgotten about his covenant, and
he was planning to act in a big way through this Jesus of Nazareth. As Mary’s son grew, he not only heard stories[7]
of Roman brutality but he also witnessed firsthand the humiliating practice of
Roman soldiers who forced peasants to carry their gear for a mile. Once he was
about thirty he began his ministry by going to John for baptism.
John was an ascetic,
apocalyptic preacher who conceived of the world in two categories: the people
of God and everybody else. John preached
with red-hot passion and used poignant agricultural imagery to get people’s
attention as he prophesied of the one to come—the Messiah.
Luke 3.16-17
16 John answered all of them by saying, "I baptize you with water; but one who is more powerful than I is coming; I am not worthy to untie the thong of his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. 17 His winnowing fork is in his hand, to clear his threshing floor and to gather the wheat into his granary; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire."
16 John answered all of them by saying, "I baptize you with water; but one who is more powerful than I is coming; I am not worthy to untie the thong of his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. 17 His winnowing fork is in his hand, to clear his threshing floor and to gather the wheat into his granary; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire."
As the farmer
separates out the grain from the chaff so the Messiah would judge between the
people of God and the wicked. In this
way John cried out in the wilderness, urging the people of God to get right
with God because the Messiah was soon to appear. From John’s perspective, when the Messiah
came, God would act in an irreversible way to bring about his kingdom on earth
as opposed to the kingdom of Rome or Parthia or whatever the current
incarnation of Satan’s rule happened to be.
Of course, Jesus
agreed with John’s apocalyptic message, or else he would not have gone to John
for baptism and publicly associated himself with John’s ministry. In fact, to emphasize the continuity of message
between John and Jesus, Matthew used the identical summary phrase, “Repent, for
the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matthew 3.2; 4.17). Jesus did not change John’s message about the
coming kingdom and the need to repent nor did he depart from the apocalyptic
worldview of John. However, he did enact
the kingdom in fresh ways—as would only be fit if he were, in fact, the
Messiah. But, before looking at how
Jesus as Messiah embodied the kingdom in his ministry, a word or two must be
said about Satan, God’s archenemy and the one with whom Jesus found himself in
the wilderness, just after his baptism.
Satan, that old
serpent who had duped the first Adam, now with (at least) four more millennia
of practice, approached the second Adam.
All three temptations were ways of getting Jesus to doubt or prove that
he really was the Son of God (i.e. the one destined to rule the world).[8] At one point the Devil took Jesus up to a
very high mountain and showed Jesus all of the kingdoms of the world in a
moment of time. He said, “I will give
you all this domain and its glory; for it has been handed over to me, and I
give it to whomever I wish. Therefore if
you worship before me, it shall all be yours.” (Luke 4.6-7). Note the echoes of Daniel’s vision that a son
of man would receive “dominion, glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples,
nations and men of every language
might serve him.” (Daniel 7.14). Jesus
did not challenge Satan’s claim that he was the present ruler of the kingdoms
of the world. (It is clear from the rest
of the New Testament[9]
that Satan is the puppet master pulling the strings of the kingdoms of this
age). Rather, Jesus resisted him by
saying, “You shall worship the Lord your God and serve him only.” With this response, Jesus overcame the
temptation to grasp for the scepter of power, and become the ruler of the world
apart from God’s plan. Since he was
confident in the promises of God he limited his ascension to a position of
power to God’s timing. Even though, the
first century Mediterranean world would have been much better off with Jesus in
charge instead of Satan, Jesus still said no to the temptation to take dominion
before the kingdom arrived. He did not
function by the ends-justifies-the-means thought process; instead his focus was
on staying faithful to his God even in the face of the temptation to take Judea back for God.
Jesus’ Ministry: Fresh Signs of the Kingdom
After three rounds
with the Tempter in the desert, Jesus emerged victorious and began his Galilean
ministry “in the power of the spirit” (Luke 4.14). In Nazareth
Luke 4.18-19
18 "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has
anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release
to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go
free, 19 to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."
Then from the lips
of Jesus came these astounding words, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled
in your hearing.” For Jesus, this text
was the foundation of his ministry. In
the context immediately preceding this quotation from Isaiah, the city of Jerusalem
Two more texts need
to be addressed before we approach Jesus’ teaching ministry, and begin to think
explicitly about nonviolence. The first
is Jesus’ response to the disciples of John who asked him, in somewhat coded
terminology, “Are you the expected one or do we look for someone else?” At that very moment Jesus was engaged in
extensive healing and demonic exorcisms, and so he replied, in an equally
cryptic manner:
Luke 7.22-23
22 And he answered them, "Go and tell John what you have seen
and heard: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are
cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, the poor have good news brought
to them. 23 And blessed is anyone who takes no offense at me."
This obscure
response gains clarity once we realize that Jesus conflated two texts from
Isaiah: one from chapter thirty-five and the other from sixty-one. Since we have already considered the latter
briefly, we will now turn our attention to the thirty-fifth chapter:
Isaiah 35:4-6
4 Say to those who are of a fearful heart, "Be strong, do
not fear! Here is your God. He will come with vengeance, with terrible recompense.
He will come and save you." 5 Then the eyes of the blind shall
be opened, and the ears of the deaf unstopped; 6 then the lame shall
leap like a deer, and the tongue of the speechless sing for joy. For waters
shall break forth in the wilderness, and streams in the desert;
This chapter, as was
sixty-one, is unquestionably a prophecy of the coming kingdom. When God’s reign is established on earth the
deserts will blossom, the lame will walk, the wicked will be judged, and even
the mute will shout for joy. Jesus’
answer to the emissaries of John was an emphatic, “Yes! I am the one.” Still, what should grab our attention here is
the fact that Jesus’ miracles are signs of the kingdom which testified to who
he was—the Expected One (i.e. the Messiah). Even so, his signs were not limited to healing
people; he also performed exorcisms, which testified to the kingdom as well.
After his first
recorded sermon, about which we have already commented, Jesus went to Capernaum
Luke 4.34
34 "Let us alone! What have you to do with us, Jesus of
Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are, the Holy One of
God."
Apparently, the
demons interpreted Jesus’ ministry in an eschatological light. They knew who he was and thought that he was
coming in judgment. However, Jesus,
rather than carrying on a dialog with the demon, rebuked it, told it to be
quiet, and cast it out. Later that
night, a mass of sick and demonized people assembled in a line outside of Simon
Peter’s house to be healed by Jesus.
Luke 4.41
41 Demons also came out of many, shouting, "You are the Son
of God!" But he rebuked them and would not allow them to speak, because
they knew that he was the Messiah.
It is important to
keep in mind that up to this point the term “Messiah” would have been
inseparable from the “messianic age” (i.e. the kingdom of God). No one anticipated the Messiah to come prior
to the messianic age much less that he would die for the sins of the
people. Rather the traditional expectation
as articulated by John the baptizer was that when Messiah came, he would enact
God’s final judgment and usher in the eternal age of peace, justice, and
political security for Israel
In another incident,
later in his ministry, a demon-possessed man who was blind and mute was brought
to Jesus for healing. The crowds in
amazement mused, “This man cannot be the Son of David, can he?” However, the Pharisees, unable to deny the
miraculous, crafted an accusation which acknowledged the exorcism but denied
that this meant that Jesus was the king of God’s coming kingdom. They said, “This man casts out demons only by
Beelzebul the ruler of demons.” Jesus
defended himself against this absurd criticism with plain logic:
Matthew 12.26, 28-29
26 If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how
then will his kingdom stand?... 28 But if it is by the Spirit of God
that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come to you. 29
Or how can one enter a strong man's house and plunder his property, without
first tying up the strong man? Then indeed the house can be plundered.
Jesus associated his
victory over demons in terms of the kingdom
of God
Jesus’ ministry was
thoroughly soaked with kingdom language and imagery. The gospel he was commissioned to proclaim
from village to village was called “the gospel about the kingdom of God Israel
The Sermon on the Mount
In this sermon,
Jesus laid out the kingdom ethic, the new way of being the people of God while
waiting for and actively anticipating the coming kingdom. The Sermon on the
Mount is so radical that it is often dismissed, domesticated, or else
completely ignored. In my own
dispensationalist heritage the Sermon on the Mount was dismissed as the ethic
Jesus gave to the Jews, the lost sheep of the house of Israel Israel
First of all, it may
be beneficial to note that the overall structure of the Gospel of Matthew
breaks Jesus’ teachings into five blocks, as if to say that with Jesus came a
new Torah (more on this later).
Furthermore, in Matthew, Jesus’ own life took a very Moses-shaped
path. Jesus narrowly escaped an
imperially sanctioned infanticide as a young child. After sojourning in Egypt
In the Sermon on the
Mount Jesus explicitly mentioned the kingdom nine times (not counting
allusions), which tells us that he could not separate doctrine from ethics or
belief in the kingdom from the lifestyle of its citizens.
The beatitudes
wonderfully illustrate how the future makes sense of the present. For example, one aspect of the kingdom is
that when it comes there will be a series of reversals: the last will be first,
the poor will become rich, the afflicted will be comforted, and the powerless
will be given positions of authority, and so on. Jesus puts it this way: Those who are poor in
spirit now will receive the kingdom then.
Those who mourn now will be comforted then. Those who are meek now will inherit the earth
then. Those who desire
righteousness/justice now will be filled then…and so on. On this basis, Jesus pronounced blessings on
those who fit into these categories.
What may not be
immediately obvious is how radical these categories are: Blessed are the poor
in spirit, those who mourn, the meek, those who hunger and thirst for justice,
the merciful, the pure in heart, the peacemakers, and the persecuted. But, once we invert the list, suddenly the
full force of Jesus’ blessings is felt: Cursed are the rich in spirit, those
who are not mourning, those who assert their “rights” using force, those who do
not care about justice, the unmerciful, the wicked in heart, the “warmakers,”
and the persecutors.
Obviously some of
these cursed behaviors were endorsed or at least permitted by the Law of Moses,
but Jesus is doing something new. To
further illustrate the newness of Jesus’ instructions, it would be helpful to
see how Jesus used a series of formulas to quote the Law and then modify it.
The Law prohibited murder and brought
murderers to court.
Jesus said that anger should have the same punishment, that a
derogatory remark puts one in danger of the highest court, and that calling
someone fool makes one guilty enough to go into the fiery hell.
The Law prohibited adultery (on pain of
stoning).
Jesus said that looking with lust is equivalent to committing adultery
in the heart. In fact it would be better
to be maimed than to lust.
The Law permitted divorce if any “indecency”
was found in one’s wife.
Jesus prohibited divorce altogether (except for fornication) and also
prohibited remarriage to the one who had been divorced
The Law permitted vows made to Yahweh so long
as they were fulfilled.
Jesus prohibited all oaths and instead argued for integrity of speech.
The Law required civil punishment to be
equitable: an eye for an eye.
Jesus said not to resist an evil person but rather to turn the cheek,
give the coat, and walk the second mile.
The Law required the love of the neighbor but
permitted the hatred of the enemy.
Jesus said to love the enemy; pray for the persecutor so that they
would be the children of God who provides rain for the righteous and wicked.
So, it is clear that
Jesus elevated the moral standard
beyond what the Torah required.
Ironically, it has been our tendency as Christians to lower the standard of morality to be
less than the Law of Moses. We have
comforted ourselves in a blanket of justification-by-faith and used it to
protect ourselves from the words of Jesus, as if the accomplishments of his
death abrogate the instructions he gave during his life. To the contrary, Jesus’ death, resurrection,
and subsequent outpouring of the Holy Spirit have modeled, vindicated, and made
possible obedience to the Sermon-on-the-Mount lifestyle. Time would prohibit us from examining the
entirety of this sermon in detail, but suffice it to say Jesus was doing
something new. He was not just telling some wayward Jews to
get back to Torah.
Since the aim of
this work is to provide a theology of nonviolence, we will limit our attention to
only the portions of the Sermon on the Mount which relate to this topic. There are two beatitudes and two commands
that we need to examine before we can look at how Jesus practiced what he
preached. The first is:
Matthew 5.5
Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.
The meek are those
who “endure injury with patience and without resentment.”[14] Because they shun the use of coercive tactics
to assert themselves, they are the last ones who would ever possess the
earth. The meek are the ones who are
oppressed by the warlords and their accomplices. But, according to Jesus, the meek are exactly
the ones God intends to put in charge of his creation.
The next beatitude
was addressed to the peacemakers:
Matthew 5.9
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be
called sons of God.
The word peacemakers
could be translated literally the “peace-doers.” It may be hard for us to think differently
than our typical ends-justify-the-means mentality about this, but the
peacemakers are not those who use
violence as a means to bring about peace.
In other words Jesus is commending those who “do peace,” not those who
“do war” for the sake of peace. The
peacemakers, not the “warmakers,” will be called the sons of God. Much more could be said about peace,
especially in the context of the New Testament as a whole,[15]
but for now we need to focus on the famous resist-not-evil passage.
Matthew 5.38-42
38 "You have heard that it
was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' 39 But I say
to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right
cheek, turn the other also; 40 and if anyone wants to sue you and
take your coat, give your cloak as well; 41 and if anyone forces you
to go one mile, go also the second mile. 42 Give to everyone who
begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.
This instruction has
to do with justice. The book of
Leviticus had commanded, “If a man injures his neighbor, just as he has done,
so it shall be done to him, fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for
tooth…” (Lev 24.19-20). The
Israelite had the right to demand
retributive justice in accordance with the injury he suffered. Jesus, however, argued for a new course of
action; a strategy that involved giving up one’s personal rights.
Two typical ways to
read this are (1) to understand the text as call to passive non-resistance or
(2) to pull interpretive tricks to make exceptions for self-defense, military
participation, and civil service. The
Amish have taken the former as their rule of life to such a degree that a man
would allow his wife to be attacked without attempting to defend her. To the battered wife the passive
non-resistance advocate merely advises her to “turn the cheek,” even if it
means becoming a punching bag.
The second strategy is
generally held to by most Christians.
The reasoning works like this: In
my own dealings with my wife, my children, my coworkers, and my neighbors I
should turn the cheek, give up my right to sue, and walk the second mile. However, if an intruder breaks into my house
I’ll blow his head off with the hand gun I keep under my pillow. Furthermore, if someone is employed by the
military, the police, or a security agency, he may disregard the commands of Jesus,
because he is not acting out of personal concern but out of his or her
representational role for the state, society, or employer. So, the person reasons, in my personal life I
will not resist an evil person, but while on the job (in the real world) I will
do what is required of me, especially if my life is endangered. The basis of these interpretative tricks was
pioneered by the fourth century theologian, Augustine, who conceived of a
dualism between the internal and the external.
Lee Camp explains:
Whereas the early church did not, for example, spend a
great deal of time asking whether “Jesus really meant” what Matthew records in
the Sermon on the Mount, later Christianity began to “spiritualize,” to
interiorize, Christian discipleship—discipleship becomes more a matter of one’s
“heart” than all of one’s life…Christ’s teachings are meant to inform our
attitudes, but not our actions, it is claimed.
We, for example, “love our enemies” in our hearts, while our role as
emperor or hangman or soldier requires that we kill our enemies. With regard to Matthew 5:39—…Augustine, for
example, commented that “what is here required is not a bodily action, but an
inward disposition.”[16]
Yet, there is a
third option, which stays faithful to the text, yet does not make us doormats
or hypocrites. One name for this third
way is confrontational non-resistance.[17] The idea is quite simple: the follower of
Jesus is called to confront the oppressor nonviolently and in so doing show him
how brutal he really is. Civil law
cannot change the heart; it merely acts to restrict the behavior of people so
that they will not harm others. So, in
the old way, if an unjust offense occurred one could bring the offender to
court and demand retribution. Jesus is
showing a better way, a way that can actually challenge the offender in his act
of oppression. Jesus’ way invokes a
provocative alternative to the tired old fight or flight dichotomy. He calls us to deconstruct our oppressor’s
underlying assumptions through creative acts of self-sacrificial and
confrontational nonresistance. This
response challenges the underlying assumptions which enable their brutality and
opens the door to repentance and even reconciliation.
Before we look at
the three examples Jesus gave, we need to address the command, “Do not resist
evil.” What does Jesus mean by this
simple phrase? Is he saying that one
should never oppose evil? But, didn’t
Jesus himself resist evil people? He
certainly did. Remember the time that he
railed against the scribes and Pharisees with seven thunderous woes (Matthew
23.1-36)? Or what about the time he
fashioned a whip and drove out the animals, causing a raucous in the temple as
a prophetic enactment of judgment upon a system of greed? The key to understanding this phrase lies in
knowing a bit about the word translated “resist.” The word literally means to stand against,
which was frequently used as a military term.[18] When two armies met in battle they would
“stand against” each other. Jesus was
not saying do nothing to oppose evil.
That would be hypocritical because his entire life resisted evil (Jesus
even stood against Satan’s temptations).
No, Jesus was saying that the new way should not combat evil with
evil. Rather than, “an eye for an eye,”
Jesus was saying that if someone poked out an eye, the victim should not “stand
against” them by poking out their eye, rather seek a creative alternative to
bring resolution. Don’t fight fire with
fire; fight it with water. As we will
soon see, all three of the examples that Jesus gave were actually ways of confronting
evil without being reduced to vengeful behavior.
In order to better
understand Jesus’ response we need to work through each of the three examples
in light of the cultural context of the time.
Our guide for this exercise is Walter Wink, Professor of Biblical
Interpretation at Auburn Theological Seminary, whose work on this subject has
been quoted by both liberal (Marcus Borg) and conservative (Lee Camp)
theologians alike.
Turn the Cheek – whoever slaps you on your
right cheek, turn the other to him also
At the time Jesus
spoke these words, in Jewish Palestine, there was a vast economic divide
between the “haves” and the “have-nots.”
Perhaps as few as three percent were wealthy, which meant that in all
likelihood those people listening to him were the poor who struggled to eek out
an existence in the shadow of the Roman empire and the wealthy Jewish
aristocrats who partnered with Caesar.
In such a society, and throughout the Mediterranean world, people were highly
stratified.
Ancient Mediterranean societies tended to be very
hierarchical. It was a world where
everyone knew their place in relation to countless superiors and
inferiors. Those who neglected or forgot
this stratification of rank would be readily reminded by those around…Social
convention dictated gestures of deference and respect from inferior to superior
at every point along this hierarchy. In
the presence of someone of high rank, low bows or prostrations were expected.[19]
Keeping all of this
in mind, consider for a moment, what kind of strike is being used as an
example. Probably, most of us envision a
right hook, like would be common in a brawl between equals. However, this is impossible because that sort
of blow would land on the left cheek.
Then, maybe we should imagine a left hook, but this is impossible
because the left hand was reserved for unseemly tasks. Furthermore, “to even gesture with the left
hand brought shame on the one gesturing.”[20] So, what was in mind here was a slap with the
back side of the right hand. Such a hit
would not be used to inflict harm but instead shame. This is the sort of thing a superior would
use to humiliate an inferior in order to put him in his place. So what does it mean to “turn the cheek”
after such a slap?
By turning the other cheek, the person struck puts the
striker in an untenable spot. He cannot repeat the backhand, because the
other’s nose is now in the way. The left cheek makes a fine target, but only
persons who are equals fight with fists, and the last thing the master wants is
for the slave to assert equality (see the Mishnah, Baba Kamma 8:6). This is, of
course, no way to avoid trouble; the master might have the slave flogged to
within an inch of her life. But the point has been irrevocably made: the
“inferior” is saying, in no uncertain terms, “I won’t take such treatment
anymore. I am your equal. I am a child of God.” By turning the other cheek, the
oppressed person is saying that she refuses to submit to further humiliation.
This is not submission, as the churches have insisted. It is defiance.[21]
Suddenly the
offender finds himself in an awkward position.
He has only two options: (1) Stop abusing the person or (2) hit him as
an equal. Either way the “inferior”
person has nonviolently confronted the abuser without resorting to using the
same violent tactic, which was not really an option anyhow. I imagine the most common response of a Jewish
peasant humiliated in this way by a Jewish or Roman aristocrat was to endure
the slap, glare at the offender, seethe internally, and curse under his
breath. Due to social constraints the
slapped one would have no recourse to acquire justice. He could not take the offender to court or
respond in kind; rather he would have to endure the humiliation. In light of this, Jesus gave his audience a
provocative new way to confront evil without becoming the very thing they
hate. Perhaps another example will help
to make the point.
Giving the Coat -- If anyone wants to sue you
and take your shirt let him have your coat also
In our culture,
clothing is mass produced, relatively cheap, and diverse. We have multiple items of clothing for
different parts of our body. If someone
sued me for one of my twenty shirts I could easily give it to him along with
one of my three or four coats. In their
culture things were quite different—especially among the poor. The average person wore only one or two full
length garments at a time. The tunic was
worn next to the skin and the coat was used as an outer garment which doubled
as a blanket for sleeping. So, if
someone had no land, no crops, and no other way to pay his debt he could be
sued for the clothes on his back. We are
talking about someone who has suffered misfortune after misfortune, he has
nothing left and he has succumbed to the economic squeeze of Romanization (i.e.
becoming “civilized”). The landowning
Jew or Roman suing the peasant was being absolutely ruthless; he has bought
into the might-makes-right system of predatory wealth-building. He is ready to take this man’s second to last
article of clothing, stopping just short of stripping him completely naked.
Furthermore, Jesus’
culture was heavily based on honor and shame.
One did not seek wealth, success, and education the way we do in
twenty-first century America
Nakedness was taboo in Judaism, and shame fell less on
the naked party than on the person viewing or causing the nakedness (Gen
9:20-27). By stripping, the debtor has brought the creditor under
the same prohibition that led to the curse of Canaan .
And much as Isaiah had "walked naked and barefoot for three years" as
a prophetic sign (Isa. 20:1-6), so the debtor parades his nakedness in
prophetic protest against a system that has deliberately rendered him
destitute. Imagine him leaving the court, naked: his friends and
neighbors, aghast, inquire what happened. He explains. They join
his growing procession, which now resembles a victory parade. The entire
system by which debtors are oppressed has been publicly unmasked. The
creditor is revealed to be not a legitimate moneylender but a party to the
reduction of an entire social class to landlessness, destitution, and
abasement. This unmasking is not simply punitive, therefore; it offers
the creditor a chance to see, perhaps for the first time in his life, what his
practices cause, and to repent.[22]
To say exactly, what
would happen in that court room would be impossible, but suffice it to say that
Jesus gave the financially abused man a new way to confront financial injustice
without resorting to violence or similar predatory practices. He is now able to symbolically demonstrate
that the system was stripping him of everything. Though they wear fine robes of
dignity in fact they are brutal savages deserving of burlesque not honor.
Going the Second Mile – Whoever forces you to
go one mile, go with him two
One of the most
hated sights in all of Galilee was no doubt
that of a Roman soldier. This was partly
because their presence meant that the people were not free, but under Caesar’s
thumb—a thumb which increasingly was pressing down on the people, squeezing
them for taxes through the local client king Herod Antipas. A second reason why the Roman troops were
despised was because of the practice called angareia. A marching infantryman customarily pressed
peasants into service by ordering them to carry his heavy pack for him.[23] Due to abuses Rome
Just imagine what it
would have been like to be forced to carry a conquering Gentile’s seventy pound
military pack. The person only had two
options: (1) resist the soldier which would immediately escalate the situation
and possibly get arrested or beaten or (2) submit to the injustice and bear the
burden for the required mile. At the one
mile stone the peasant would drop the soldiers stuff and storm off in a rush to
get home furious for being made a donkey to bear Rome
But, what does Jesus
say? “Go with him two.” Excuse me?
Go a second mile with the Gentile savage? What would happen if someone actually did
this? The Jew passes the mile marker and
the Roman soldier says, “Halt, you’ve gone far enough. Return to me my pack.” But, the peasant responds, “No, I’d like to
go a second mile.” Since it was against
Roman law to force someone to carry their belongings for more than a mile, the soldier could get into serious trouble if
anyone found out. It is hard to know what
punishment would result, but options ranged from his superior rebuking him to
being given barley instead of wheat rations to arrest or even flogging. Perhaps, even because of the uncertainty of
the punishment, the soldier would have all the more reason to obey the law.
From a situation of servile impressment, the oppressed
have once more seized the initiative. They have taken back the power of
choice. The soldier is thrown off balance by being deprived of the
predictability of his victim's response. He has never dealt with such a
problem before. Now he has been forced into making a decision for which
nothing in his previous experience has prepared him. If he has enjoyed
feeling superior to the vanquished, he will not enjoy it today. Imagine
the situation of a Roman infantryman pleading with a Jew to give back his
pack! The humor of this scene may have escaped us, but it could scarcely
have been lost on Jesus' hearers, who must have been regaled at the prospect of
thus discomfiting their oppressors. Jesus does not encourage Jews to walk a
second mile in order to build up merit in heaven, or to exercise a
supererogatory piety, or to kill the soldier with kindness. He is helping
an oppressed people find a way to protest and neutralize an onerous practice
despised throughout the empire. He is not giving a non-political message
of spiritual world-transcendence. He is formulating a worldly
spirituality in which the people at the bottom of society or under the
thumb of imperial power learn to recover their humanity.
One could easily misuse Jesus' advice vindictively; that
is why it must not be separated from the command to love enemies integrally
connected with it in both Matthew and Luke. [24]
The ancient
Mediterranean world was rife with injustices, especially for peasants. The question was not, whether or not an
injustice occurred, but rather, when it occurred what to do about it. The Sadducean response was, “If you can’t
beat ‘em join ‘em.” The Essenes pulled
out of society and willingly exiled themselves in desert communities. The so-called fourth philosophy said, “This
is God’s country, and we will not stand to see it dominated by these heathen
one moment longer. We need an armed
revolution!” But, what does Jesus
say? How should a follower of this Jewish rabbi behave in the face of
injustice? Firstly, don’t become what
you hate—don’t enter into combat with evil on its own terms. Rather, find creative ways to confront it
self-sacrificially. Incredibly, by doing
so, one rediscovers his own dignity whereas the oppressor is thrown off guard
and challenged to rethink his participation in the system.
I realize that this
reading of Jesus command, “Resist not evil” is probably new to many, but we
should also admit that for followers of Jesus there are really only two
options: (1) accept the Wink interpretation of confrontational nonresistance or
(2) accept the traditional Anabaptist interpretation of utter passiveness in
the face of evil. Let the reader
decide. Either way, violence is excluded. Now we shall turn to the most poignant text
on this subject and the first mention in the Sermon on the Mount of the word
love:
Matthew 5.43-48
43 "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet only your brothers and sisters, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
43 "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet only your brothers and sisters, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
Of course, the Law
never explicitly taught that one should hate his enemies. One of the primary aims of the Law was to
facilitate a lasting, equitable and peaceful community that reflected God’s
beauty. Thus, the command to love one’s
neighbor (Leviticus 19.18) was a major step forward. The people were to love each other—like a
family. The original context said:
Leviticus
19.16-18 [NASB]
“You shall not go
about as a slanderer among your people…you shall not hate your fellow
countryman in your heart…nor bear any grudge against the sons of your people,
but you shall love your neighbor as yourself, I am the Lord”
This command
prohibited internal strife and urged the people to live in solidarity with
their brothers and sisters—the descendants of Abraham. Even so, it did not prohibit nationalism or
the hatred of others outside of Israel Israel had been oppressed by Assyria, Babylonia , Persia ,
Greece
Jesus told his
followers to pray for those who persecuted them. In the similar passage from Luke, Jesus went
on to add, “Do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you” (Luke
6.27-28). Why should one follow this
upside-down course of action with regard to the enemy? Jesus explained that the reason was so that
the children would be like their Father.
In other words, the disciple practices enemy love not because it is
effective but because that is what God does.
The Father does not withhold sunshine from the wicked and he sends them
rain as well. The people of God should
love brothers and even foreign oppressive powers because they are to be like
their Father in heaven. Besides, if one
merely loved those who loved him, how would that be different than the
pagans? Everybody loves those who love
them! No, the followers of the way of Jesus
are to love even those who persecute them, and in so doing their love is
perfected.[25] It is not an imperfect love—a love merely for
the lovable—but a perfect love, which transcends nationalism, ethnocentrism,
sexism, and every other barrier.
What is universally
acknowledged by Christian and non-Christian alike, even to this day, is that
Jesus was no hypocrite. He was a man who
practiced what he preached. And so, when
we read these staggering words in the Sermon on the Mount, we are not left
without an example of what the way of Jesus looks like in full color. Jesus said, “Blessed are the meek,” and when
he was given opportunity to seize the royal robes of world-rulership from the
fist of Satan, Jesus refused and instead entrusted himself to God’s way. Jesus said, “Blessed are the peacemakers,”
and throughout his ministry, not least in his exorcisms, he made peace between
people and through his death he made peace between humanity and God. Jesus said, “do not resist an evil person,
turn the cheek, give your undergarment, and walk the second mile” and when his
beard was ripped out, his garments torn off, and the cross placed upon his
back, he uttered no threats, he harbored no bitterness, and yet through it all
he looked them in the eye and confronted their savagery by providing for them a
ready mirror which reflected back to them their own brutality. He could have called legions of angels but he
did not choose that path. Jesus who said,
“love your enemy,” washed Judas’ feet, spoke truth to Pilate, and in a moment
that must have astounded those standing by, he prayed for those who were
crucifying him, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are
doing.” So, throughout his ministry,
even during his trials, torture, and death, Jesus lived out the way that he
taught in the Sermon on the Mount, effectively putting to rest once and for all
the idea that this way of being the people of God was impossible.
The Cross as an Example for us to Emulate
Almost as fast as
one can say, “Jesus showed us that another way is possible,” I can already hear
the rebuttal, “But, that was Jesus. I’m
not Jesus. He was the Son of God. I’m just a sinner saved by grace.” In order to see if this way of reasoning is
legitimate we need to look at how other New Testament authors spoke about the
cross. The first chart below shows how
Jesus’ death on the cross has opened up a new way for us to live. The second chart demonstrates that Jesus’
suffering and death is as an example for us to follow.
Chart 1: Cross Effects New Way
Romans 8.3-4: When God’s Son was given as an offering for sin; he
condemned sin in the flesh so that we
would walk according to the Spirit not according to the flesh
Hebrews 2.14-15: Through death he rendered the devil powerless and
freed us who were slaves under the old principalities and powers
Hebrews 9.13: The death of
Christ was vastly superior to the sacrifices offered under the old covenant;
his blood cleanses even our consciences from dead works and enables us to serve
the living God
2 Corinthians 5.14-20: If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature;
the old things have passed away and new things have come: God has now given us
the very same service of reconciling that God performed through Christ. Thus, we are ambassadors for the Messiah, who
continue his ministry of reconciliation
Revelation 1.5-6; 5.9-10: We have been released from our sins by his
blood and made into a new priesthood who serve God now and who will reign upon
the earth in the future
Chart 2: Suffering and Death as Example
Philippians 2.5-8: Jesus’ obedience to the point of humiliation and
death is our example for how we
should humbly relate to one another.
Paul starts with the words, “Let the same mind be in you that was in
Christ Jesus…”
Romans 6.2-11: All who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been
buried with him, so that as Christ was raised into the newness of life we too
would live out a whole new way of life.
In other words, we were crucified with Jesus, so that we would no longer
be slaves to sin, but freed people whose members are instruments of
righteousness.
Romans 8.17: We are to join him
in suffering so that we may also join him in glory.
Ephesians 5.2: We are to walk in love just like Christ who loved
us by giving himself up for us as an offering and a sacrifice to God
Of course, the Greek
Scriptures have a lot to say about how Jesus’ death was for our sins as well. But,
Jesus’ crucifixion was not only something that dealt with sin, it also opened
up a new way for us to be the people
of God and therefore the Bible speaks of his suffering and death as our
example. Perhaps no text makes this
point more clearly than the famous words of Peter when he said that we should
follow Jesus “in his steps.”
1 Peter 2.21-24
21 For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered
for you, leaving you an example, so that you should follow in his steps. 22
"He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth." 23
When he was abused, he did not return abuse; when he suffered, he did not
threaten; but he entrusted himself to the one who judges justly. 24
He himself bore our sins in his body on the cross, so that, free from sins, we
might live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed.
The phrase “in his
steps” refers specifically to the suffering
that Christ underwent. Though many think
Jesus suffered only because he was the
lamb of God who accomplished redemption through the cross, this text makes it
clear that his suffering was an example
for us to follow—in his steps. Where did
his steps lead? How did he walk? He did not sin or speak deceitfully. He did not return evil for evil or even utter
threats, but entrusted himself to God the righteous judge. He did all of this so that we would die to sin and live in the same right way. Furthermore, this section of Peter’s letter
was specifically addressed to slaves who were being abused unjustly! Even under such deplorable and humiliating
conditions, violence was not considered an option. Rather, Peter said, “to this you have been
called,” to suffer like Christ. But,
again, just like Jesus, Peter knew what he was talking about; for after he and
John were arrested and flogged by Sanhedrin they went their way “rejoicing that
they had been considered worthy to suffer shame for his name” (Acts 5.40).
Indeed, Jesus himself had directed two of the beatitudes to those who
suffer persecution saying, “Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in
heaven” (Matthew 5.12). Even so,
Christians are not to go out of their way for the sake of suffering, and our
suffering does not earn salvation because Jesus has already accomplished
that. Lee Camp’s words are helpful in
clarifying and distinguishing our role from Christ’s.
One thing should be made clear, if it is not already: we
are not called to be the Messiah, but to follow the Messiah. There is, unquestionably, a unique role given
to the Son of God who is the Savior and Redeemer…In his death, Jesus as the
Anointed, as Son of God, accomplished certain things in behalf of humankind that
we were (and are) unable to accomplish ourselves.
But the Christendom model increasingly made Jesus’ way of
effecting reconciliation irrelevant to the way of Jesus’ disciples. The cross of Jesus increasingly became a
symbol of legal atonement that could be conveniently separated from our own
lives. The cross is looked upon as
something Jesus does for us—he dies so we don’t have to… The New Testament,
however, makes very clear that the cross is not something reserved for Jesus
alone.[26]
Sadly, taking up the
cross has sometimes been trivialized to mean, suffer through the flu without
being a grouch. However, the suffering
we are called to is not merely that which is common to all who live in this
fallen world. No, we are called to
follow in his steps. We are given a new life, made priests, so
that we would minister the kingdom gospel to a world in desperate need—just
like Jesus did. Thus, while we preach
the gospel Jesus proclaimed we also embody the kingdom the way he did. John Howard Yoder, put it this way:
The believer’s cross is no longer any and every kind of
suffering, sickness, or tension, the bearing of which is demanded. The believer’s cross must be, like his
Lord’s, the price of his social nonconformity.
It is not, like sickness or catastrophe, an inexplicable, unpredictable
suffering; it is the end of a path freely chosen after counting the cost. It is not…[as some contend]…an inward
wrestling of the sensitive soul with self and sin; it is the social reality of
representing in an unwilling world the Order to come.[27]
Apostles Confirm Jesus’ Teaching on
Nonviolence
The apostles
understood Jesus’ teaching and life (especially how he endured torture and
execution) as their standard for what it meant to be a follower of the
way. We will return to the idea of
embodying the kingdom in a while, but for now we must look at other New
Testament writers who mention the notion of nonviolent enemy love. We will consider two examples before moving
on to discuss two more theological bombshells that Jesus unleashed:
resurrection and Holy Spirit.
Though Paul is often
accused of diverting from the way of Jesus, in fact, his words to the nascent
Christian community at the imperial capital were remarkably reminiscent of
Jesus’ own teaching in the Sermon on the Mount:
Romans 12.14, 17-21
14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them… 17
Do not repay anyone evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in the
sight of all. 18 If it is possible, so far as it depends on you,
live peaceably with all. 19 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." 20 No, "if your enemies are
hungry, feed them; if they are thirsty, give them something to drink; for by
doing this you will heap burning coals on their heads." 21 Do
not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
Twice in this
section we encounter the word “never”: never
pay back evil for evil and never take
your own revenge. I suppose we could ask
ourselves, what part of never is hard
to understand? The disciple has a
different calling than everyone else, he or she is called to overcome evil with
good, to feed the enemy, to trust God with such childlike faith that space is
made for God to exercise his divine prerogative of vengeance. The Apostle Peter echoed this same sentiment
when he said:
1 Peter 3.8-16
8 Finally, all of you, have unity of spirit, sympathy, love for
one another, a tender heart, and a humble mind. 9 Do not repay evil
for evil or abuse for abuse; but, on the contrary, repay with a blessing. It is
for this that you were called-- that you might inherit a blessing. 10
For "Those who desire life and desire to see good days, let them keep
their tongues from evil and their lips from speaking deceit; 11 let
them turn away from evil and do good; let them seek peace and pursue it. 12
For the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous, and his ears are open to their
prayer. But the face of the Lord is against those who do evil." 13
Now who will harm you if you are eager to do what is good? 14 But
even if you do suffer for doing what is right, you are blessed. Do not fear
what they fear, and do not be intimidated, 15 but in your hearts
sanctify Christ as Lord. Always be ready to make your defense to anyone who
demands from you an accounting for the hope that is in you; 16 yet
do it with gentleness and reverence…
The follower of
Christ is to be harmonious, sympathetic, brotherly, kindhearted and humble in
spirit. Surely the beatitudes are lurking
somewhere behind this list of Christian virtues. Furthermore, he instructs us not to return
evil for evil but give a blessing instead.
The disciple must turn away
from evil and be good to people. He must seek peace and pursue it. That is not to say that genuine Christians
are doormats who are prohibited from defending themselves. We should always be ready to make a defense,
yet with gentleness (not violence) and respect.
The Christian receives suffering but does not afflict others with
suffering in return. This is not an
argument for passiveness but an admonition towards activism—to bless those who
are doing evil to us, to make a defense, to seek peace and pursue it. Perhaps by now many “what if” statements are
coming to mind,[28]
but, for now, our theology is incomplete.
We have come to understand the instruction of Jesus and the apostles,
and the example of Jesus on the cross (which we saw is normative for
Christians), but until we come to grips with the resurrection of Jesus and the
subsequent outpouring of the Holy Spirit we will be left with a knowledge of
correct behavior without the empowerment.
The Resurrection of Jesus Explodes on the
Scene
Without
exaggeration, the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth was the most significant
event in human history. What this event
did to the theology of the fledgling Jesus community was like a comet hitting
the earth. The initial impact shocked
everyone and called for fresh faith in the crucified one, and the residual
shockwaves continuously reshaped everything they believed about Jesus,
themselves, and the eschaton. A kingdom
event had erupted on the scene.
Something that was prophesied to happen in the end to everyone had happened
early to one man. No one had seen it
coming.[29]
The resurrection of Jesus
the Nazarene meant that he had been vindicated by God. Even though he had been publicly disgraced,
which brought intense shame on himself, his family, and his followers, now
through a fresh act of God, this Jesus had been set free from the power of death
and honored with God’s unique seal of approval.
Furthermore, since the resurrection was often connected with the age to
come in their Scriptures,[30]
it had a distinct kingdom flavor to it when Jesus, who claimed to be the
Messiah, rose from the dead. Resurrection was not, as I used think, merely
a necessity following his death for our sins (which was what really
mattered). No, the resurrection was
God’s vindicating seal upon his Son as the one anointed to rule the coming
kingdom—the Messiah.[31]
Furthermore, the
resurrection of Jesus made a mockery of the ruling powers. This is because the cross already had a
theological meaning at the time. It
symbolized Caesar’s right to rule the world through the raw brutality of violence. “If you buck the system, this is what happens
to you,” is the message people got as they walked by crucified insurrectionists
and brigands. The meaning was clear
enough: “Don’t mess with Caesar.” In
fact, crucifixion, in contrast to modern execution tactics, was intended to be
public, humiliating, excruciating, and long lasting. The Roman cross was a perennial reminder that
Rome Rome Roman
Empire ?
The resurrection
meant that the power of Caesar—Satan’s puppet du jour—had been broken.
Naturally, the foundations of imperial power rested in its ability to
torture and kill its enemies. That very
power was unleashed on Jesus in full measure.
He drank the cup to the dregs and it killed him. But, then a resurrection happened, and
suddenly something new dawned. Rome
A dead man
lives! A dead man lives! He was put to death by wicked conspiring
humans cooperating with the Roman system of “justice” but God raised him from the dead.
The resurrection of Jesus was big news.
It was something that changed everything. It was worth traipsing about the
Mediterranean world proclaiming from city to city. God had acted decisively, in the middle of
history, to make it clear to all that this Jesus of Nazareth was the true Lord
of the world, the genuine Son of God, whose kingship is superior to even Caesar. Thus, the resurrection ultimately brought up
the question of allegiance. If Jesus was
the true Lord of the world and not Caesar, then of course anyone who has faith
in this gospel would revoke his or her allegiance from the imperial imposter
and pledge it to the real Son of God who had been vindicated by God and
authorized to rule all kingdoms.
We are sojourners
who reside as aliens in the kingdoms of this world until finally God’s kingdom
is established on the last day. When
that happens all nations will be subdued, like in Nebuchadnezzar's vision, and
God’s Messiah will set the world aright.
Until then, we are sojourners like our spiritual ancestors who have come
before us.[32] We are the resurrection people who believe
God has already acted in history in anticipation of his coming age of justice
and peace. Thus, our role is not the
same as the pagans among whom we reside.
But, before we can describe in particular how this all works out we need
to focus our attention on the third kingdom event that gushed onto the
historical scene: the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
The Spirit of the Kingdom Poured out Early
Just before he
ascended our Lord commanded his disciples to stay in Jerusalem Israel Israel
Furthermore, Jesus
had just spent the last forty days after his resurrection speaking to them about
the kingdom of God
Isaiah 32.14-18
14 For the palace will be forsaken, the populous city deserted; the hill and the watchtower will become dens forever, the joy of wild asses, a pasture for flocks; 15 until a spirit from on high is poured out on us, and the wilderness becomes a fruitful field, and the fruitful field is deemed a forest. 16 Then justice will dwell in the wilderness, and righteousness abide in the fruitful field. 17 The effect of righteousness will be peace, and the result of righteousness, quietness and trust forever. 18 My people will abide in a peaceful habitation, in secure dwellings, and in quiet resting places.
14 For the palace will be forsaken, the populous city deserted; the hill and the watchtower will become dens forever, the joy of wild asses, a pasture for flocks; 15 until a spirit from on high is poured out on us, and the wilderness becomes a fruitful field, and the fruitful field is deemed a forest. 16 Then justice will dwell in the wilderness, and righteousness abide in the fruitful field. 17 The effect of righteousness will be peace, and the result of righteousness, quietness and trust forever. 18 My people will abide in a peaceful habitation, in secure dwellings, and in quiet resting places.
This text and others
like it clearly link the outpouring of the spirit to the coming judgment and
restoration (i.e. the kingdom).
Furthermore, John the Baptist’s prophecy linked the baptism of the
spirit to the final judgment to be executed by the Messiah when he comes (Luke
3.16-17). From John’s perspective, there
was no timing distinction between the pouring out (immersion) of the Holy
Spirit and the eschatological fiery judgment.
So, when Jesus quoted John and told the disciples that they would be
baptized in the spirit in only a few days, their minds linked his statement to
the spirit prophecies in their Bible and John’s prophecy in particular. Since these spirit passages are in the
context of God’s final act to bring about lasting justice and peace to Israel Israel
Acts 1.7-8
7 He replied, "It is not for you to know the times or periods that the Father has set by his own authority. 8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you will be my witnesses inJerusalem , in all Judea and Samaria
7 He replied, "It is not for you to know the times or periods that the Father has set by his own authority. 8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you will be my witnesses in
Jesus explained that
there was to be an interim between
the arrival of the kingdom, about which only the Father knows the timing, and
the advent of the Holy Spirit, which is needed now so they can fulfill their
role as witnesses throughout the world.
So, the spirit arrived early (i.e. in advance of the kingdom).[34] Further confirmation for this can be found by
Peter’s first recorded public sermon at the Feast of Weeks. As a result of the outpouring of the Holy
Spirit, the apostles all began to miraculously speak foreign languages. Some who heard this criticized the apostles
as being full of new wine. Peter’s
spirit-inspired response took them back to the prophecy from Joel. Here are Peter’s words:
Acts 2.16-17
16 No, this is what was spoken through the prophet Joel: 17 'In the last days it will be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh…
16 No, this is what was spoken through the prophet Joel: 17 'In the last days it will be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh…
In the tongues Peter
saw the fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy.
Something from the age to come had broken into the present evil
age. A kingdom event had burst forth onto
the scene right before their eyes.
Peter’s flow of thought went like this: the speaking in tongues indicated
that Jesus had poured out the spirit. Although
he was crucified, God raised him from the dead and ascended him into
heaven. Therefore Jesus is both Lord and
Messiah. The advent of the spirit, and
in this case, the glossolalia in
particular, strengthened their witness to the kingdom message by enabling the
apostles to make the case that Jesus was the ascended Messiah.
So, there are really
three eschatological events that have already taken place: (1) The Messiah has come, (2) a resurrection
has occurred, and (3) the Holy Spirit has been poured out. Would we expect that the people of God would
be the same after the Messiah had come?
Of course not! Every Jew knew
that when the Messiah came, the messianic age would dawn, God would win the
decisive victory over the forces of evil, and lasting justice and peace would
be established forever in the world.
Jesus did not change this basic outline; but he did add a twist to the
messianic stereotype when he ended up condemned on a Roman cross. Rather than defeating the hated Romans and
reclaiming Israel Israel
The next event we
would expect to occur is the coming of the kingdom (which would be accompanied
by justice, peace, outpouring of the spirit, resurrection for the righteous dead,
return of sovereignty to Israel
Next came the outpouring
of the spirit during the Feast of Weeks.
As we have already seen, the spirit prophecies in the Hebrew Bible were
in the context of the kingdom. Thus, it
would be wrong to divorce spirit from kingdom.
Everything that flows from the spirit, all of the events that bubble up
from this new experience of the presence of God testify about the kingdom. Jesus’ ministry was the paradigm that the
apostles worked within as they went out to share the good news with the
world. Before long, the Gentiles also
had a Pentecost experience; the spirit fell upon those assembled before Peter
while he preached at Cornelius’ house.
Peter concluded that if God had accepted the Gentiles into the people of
God, then he could not refuse them to be admitted into the community of the
redeemed, so he ordered them to be baptized in Jesus’ name.
New Covenant
Theology
Suddenly, a fresh
set of questions emerged about whether or not Gentiles needed to keep the Law
in order to be included in the people of God.
The apostles correctly decided in the famous Jerusalem
Jesus had already
prepared the disciples for this revelation, for the night Jesus was betrayed he
entered into a new blood covenant with his disciples by offering them the cup
of wine: “This cup is the new covenant in
my blood…which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins” (Matthew 26.28;
1 Corinthians 11.25). As time went on,
the apostles (notably Paul) came to understand that Jesus’ death, resurrection,
ascension, and outpouring of the spirit brought about changes in how God related
to his people. A new covenant had been
established.
This covenant is a
better covenant because Jesus belongs to a superior priesthood (Hebrews
7.22-24) and because he entered into the real tabernacle in heaven through his
own blood (Hebrews 9.11-14) as opposed to entering into Herod’s temple through
the blood of animals. By one offering,
Jesus accomplished permanent sanctification for the people of God (Hebrews
10.14). Furthermore, Jesus is the
mediator of a better covenant than Moses because it has been enacted on better
promises (Hebrews 8.6). Here is a list
of new covenant promises as described in Hebrews 8.10-12:
1. I
will put my laws into their minds
And
I will write them on their hearts
2.
I will
be their God
And
they shall be my people
3. Everyone
will not teach his fellow citizen, saying “Know the Lord”
For
all will know me from the least to the greatest
4. I
will be merciful to their iniquities
And
I will remember their sins no more
The law was written
on our hearts by the Spirit, which stands in contrast to “the letter” (i.e. the
letters engraved on stones, which stands for the whole Mosaic Law) (Romans
2.29; 7.6; 2 Corinthians 3.3, 6-8).
2 Corinthians 3.6-8
6 [God] has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant,
not of letter but of spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. 7
Now if the ministry of death, chiseled in letters on stone tablets, came in
glory so that the people of Israel
Notice how the Holy
Spirit is tied to the new covenant. We
will return to this connection in a short while, but for now we need to
establish that the new covenant is in effect today. It is true that in the parallel passages to
Jeremiah 31.31-34, the context is eschatological. But, by now is this not what we would expect? The Messiah has come. The resurrection has occurred early to one
man. The Holy Spirit has been poured out
on all who are willing to submit to Jesus as Messiah through baptism. So, to think that the new covenant has
already begun as well is not unreasonable.
But, alas the author of Hebrews is not leaving anything up to inference;
he (or she) states in no uncertain terms that the covenant has been brought
into effect.
Hebrews 10.14-22
14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. 15 And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us, for after saying, 16 "This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the Lord: I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds," 17 he also adds, "I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more." 18 Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin. 19 Therefore, my friends, since we have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus, 20 by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain (that is, through his flesh), 21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22 let us approach with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.
14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. 15 And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us, for after saying, 16 "This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the Lord: I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds," 17 he also adds, "I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more." 18 Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin. 19 Therefore, my friends, since we have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus, 20 by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain (that is, through his flesh), 21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22 let us approach with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.
Note that he focuses
on promise #4: forgiveness from sin. Is
there any Christian who would deny that our sins have been forgiven because of
the shed blood of the Lamb of God? This
blood inaugurated for us a new and living
way. Our hearts have been sprinkled clean and our bodies have been washed, making us fit for relationship with God. We need not instruct one another to know God,
for each one of us has been given firsthand knowledge of God through the Holy
Spirit within us. Through our high
priest we have permission to pass beyond the veil right into the holy of
holies, where God dwells.
Ephesians 2.14-19
14 For he is our peace; in his flesh he has made both groups into one and has broken down the dividing wall, that is, the hostility between us. 15 He has abolished the law with its commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new humanity in place of the two, thus making peace, 16 and might reconcile both groups to God in one body through the cross, thus putting to death that hostility through it. 17 So he came and proclaimed peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near; 18 for through him both of us have access in one Spirit to the Father. 19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are citizens with the saints and also members of the household of God,
14 For he is our peace; in his flesh he has made both groups into one and has broken down the dividing wall, that is, the hostility between us. 15 He has abolished the law with its commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new humanity in place of the two, thus making peace, 16 and might reconcile both groups to God in one body through the cross, thus putting to death that hostility through it. 17 So he came and proclaimed peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near; 18 for through him both of us have access in one Spirit to the Father. 19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are citizens with the saints and also members of the household of God,
The people of God
are one. There are not two standards:
one for Jews who are bound to obey Torah and another for Gentiles who keep the
Noahide laws. No, because of Jesus’
death the dividing wall has been abolished in his flesh—the Law of commandments. The new covenant makes the first obsolete
(Hebrews 8.13). This cleared the way for
peace between Jew and Gentile as one new humanity. Furthermore, we have not been driven farther
from God because of this; rather we are now given access in one spirit to the
Father. There is no loss for the Jew
either because the new covenant is superior to the old.
The new covenant is
in full effect now. If it is not, then
that means that we are under the old covenant (which means you can’t eat bacon,
mow the lawn on Saturday, or wear mixed fiber clothing). Either we relate to God through his covenant
mediated by Moses or his covenant mediated by Jesus. If we are not now living under this new and living way then why does the
Scripture use the present tense in referring to Jesus’ mediation of the new
covenant? For it says:
Hebrews 8.6
But Jesus has now obtained a more excellent ministry, and to that degree he is the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted through better promises. (emphasis added)
But Jesus has now obtained a more excellent ministry, and to that degree he is the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted through better promises. (emphasis added)
By the blood of the
Messiah our very consciences were cleansed, for we have been redeemed from the
transgressions that occurred under the first covenant, so that we who have been
called would receive the promise of the kingdom inheritance (Hebrews 9.14-15). We have not come to Mount Sinai with its
blazing fire and blaring trumpet, rather we have come to Mount Zion
Galatians 3.23-29
23 Now before faith came, we were imprisoned and guarded under the law until faith would be revealed. 24 Therefore the law was our disciplinarian until Christ came, so that we might be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer subject to a disciplinarian, 26 for in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith. 27 As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to the promise.
23 Now before faith came, we were imprisoned and guarded under the law until faith would be revealed. 24 Therefore the law was our disciplinarian until Christ came, so that we might be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer subject to a disciplinarian, 26 for in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith. 27 As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to the promise.
The Law brought us
to Christ, but now something new has
come, which erases previous distinctions.
No longer are their ethnic barriers (Jew vs. Greek), class distinctions
(slave vs. free man), or gender inequalities (male vs. female), for we have all
been made one in the Messiah (i.e. things have changed). We have been released from the Law, since in
Christ we died to it, thus we are able to serve in the newness of the Spirit
rather than the oldness of the letter (Romans 7.6). In fact, the requirement of the Law is
fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the
spirit (Romans 8.4). Thus, the Holy
Spirit does not merely empower followers of the Messiah to testify about his
resurrection in word, but also by their entire lifestyle as they live out the
new covenant.
Galatians 5.16-25
16 Live by the Spirit, I say, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17 For what the flesh desires is opposed to the Spirit, and what the Spirit desires is opposed to the flesh; for these are opposed to each other, to prevent you from doing what you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not subject to the law. 19 Now the works of the flesh are obvious: fornication, impurity, licentiousness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, anger, quarrels, dissensions, factions, 21 envy, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these. I am warning you, as I warned you before: those who do such things will not inherit thekingdom of God
16 Live by the Spirit, I say, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17 For what the flesh desires is opposed to the Spirit, and what the Spirit desires is opposed to the flesh; for these are opposed to each other, to prevent you from doing what you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not subject to the law. 19 Now the works of the flesh are obvious: fornication, impurity, licentiousness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, anger, quarrels, dissensions, factions, 21 envy, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these. I am warning you, as I warned you before: those who do such things will not inherit the
Morality under the
new covenant, the way of Jesus, is intimately linked to the outpouring of the
Holy Spirit. For example, once Paul
cogently concluded that in light of Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection,
God’s people are no longer under the Law, he immediately stressed that this
does not precipitate antinomianism. The
deeds of the flesh are still marked out by the Law as sinful, and pursuing
those actions will block entrance into the kingdom of God
Furthermore the Holy Spirit is a pledge of what is to come (2 Corinthians
1.22; 5.4-5; Ephesians 1.13-14). For
example, when one goes to buy a house he makes an offer for the house and sends
with it a check, which, if accepted, seals the deal. The check is the pledge. It is the guarantee that his offer is
serious, that if agreed to, he will go through the rest of the closing process
to buy the house. Similarly the Holy
Spirit is a pledge of the kingdom. The
Spirit is what God has given his people to guarantee that the rest is
coming. Thus, the pouring out the spirit
not only regenerates our hearts but makes us heirs according to the hope of
life in the coming age (Titus 3.5-7).
Called to Embody the Kingdom
Our tendency is to
forget that the Holy Spirit really belongs to the age to come since it is already
here now. The new covenant is the way of
living and relating to God that belongs to the kingdom. Consider this list of Christian experiences:
Adapted
from Hebrews 6.4-5
we have been enlightened
we have tasted of the heavenly gift
we have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit
we have tasted the good word of God
we have tasted the powers of the age to come
So, as new covenant
people we are those who walk by the spirit, manifesting the lifestyle of the
age to come, even while we live in this present age. We are the kingdom people, the future of
humanity. We are privileged and
commissioned to give the world a foretaste of the kingdom through our actions and words, by modeling a new way of
redemption, wholeness, reconciliation, and restoration. We are to reflect the coming kingdom both
individually and collectively. Our lives
should be characterized by outrageous acts of self-sacrificial cross-shaped
love, not by the retaliatory ends-justify-the-means mentality which has
justified so much bloodshed throughout the church’s history. Once we enter into this new covenantal
relationship with God through faith in the gospel, repentance by baptism, and
receiving the spirit, we are changed.
Our minds are no longer shaped by this age, but instead they are made
new through God’s transformative power (Romans 12.2).
Even so, we are not
so naïve as to think that loving our enemies will solve all the problems of
violence in the world. In fact, as Dr.
Stanley Hauerwas has noted, our peace witness may actually make the world more
dangerous. However, our goal is not fix
all the problems of the world, but merely to be faithful to what Jesus has
said. Our role is prophetic rather than goal-oriented. The question we ask is, “How can I bring
forth signs of the kingdom like Jesus did?” rather than, “How can I fix this
problem with a minimum of collateral damage?”
Thus, as followers of the slaughtered lamb, sometimes we get slaughtered
too. But how do we interpret this? Do we say, “Well, that was stupid, Polycarp[35]
should have escaped! What good does he
do now that he has been executed by the State?”
No! Rather we say, “Look at
Polycarp! He was faithful until the end, and he testified (martyr means one who
testifies) to the existing powers and to the people in the arena that Jesus is
Lord and that nothing can cause him to betray the Messiah.” Perhaps we need to recover our theology of
martyrdom?
Then again,
sometimes our prophetic role as kingdom people does bring about lasting social
change. As African-Americans protested
nonviolently to the oppressive Jim Crow laws, the rest of society took notice,
and today there are no such laws in the United States
We are the people of
God who have a prophetic message to deliver.
We announce the failure of the world’s gospel of technological,
therapeutic, consumer, militarism[36]
while delivering the good news of God’s coming kingdom of justice and peace. This gospel is delivered in conjunction with
living out the new kingdom script (even though we still dwell in the midst of
the old tattered world.) Thus, we live the age to come in the present,
not as if the age to come has been spiritualized—that is, we have not
domesticated the kingdom by redefining it into a few warm fuzzies in our hearts
because Jesus “reigns” within us. Nor do
we attest to a “spatialized” hope as if God has given up on this earth project
in favor of scrapping it and moving his chosen to heaven at death. No, we live out the future in the present in
the power of the spirit as an appetizer of what is to come, a sneak preview, a
prophetic signpost of God’s future stamped across our entire lives, from the
way we do marriage to the way we do homework to the way we do evangelism. We are to be signs of the coming kingdom like
the road sign one might see for an upcoming exit on the highway. Is that sign which says “Exit 6” really exit
six? No, of course not, it testifies to
the fact that in a couple of miles exit six will be here and so we should move
over to the right lane in preparation.
In the same way we are signs of the coming kingdom. Strictly speaking we are not the kingdom but
by looking at us the world should ascertain that a kingdom is coming, for that
is what our whole lives, both individually and as a community,
communicate.
Pulling everything
together, Jesus’ teachings on nonviolence fit perfectly within this theological
framework. One of the problems with
other approaches to nonviolence is that by saying “violence is wrong,” we
unwittingly condemn the Old Testament saints as well as God for their use of
violence. How can we say that Joshua was
wrong to obey God when he was commanded to use violence to conquer the Promised
Land? But, if Joshua was not wrong to use violence, then how can
I say that violence is wrong? The answer is that things have changed. Massive events have occurred which open up a new way that was unavailable to the
saints of old. The Messiah has come, a
resurrection has occurred, the spirit has been poured out, and the new covenant
has been brought into effect by the bloody sacrifice of the Lamb. Since these kingdom events have exploded onto
the historical scene, the people of God are given a new way to live. For us to revert to the old covenant way of
thinking and being would be amount to denying that the Messiah has already
come.
For example, when
the Apostle Paul wrote to the Corinthian church, he had to address the issue of
the Christians suing each other (1 Corinthians 6.1-9). Paul was bewildered that Christians were
taking each other to court. He could
barely believe that something so absurd could even happen. Of course, from an old covenant perspective,
there is nothing wrong with taking one’s neighbor to court if there was a just
cause. In fact, extensive provision was
made for exactly such a scenario under the Mosaic Law. So, what is so shocking here? Why is Paul beside himself? There are two offenses: (1) they were taking
their fellow Christians to court and (2) they were going to court before
non-Christians. His motivation for
thinking is found in the statement, “Do you not know that the saints will judge
the world?” If the Corinthians disciples
are destined to rule the world, can they not figure out how to do community
without appealing to outsiders to settle matters? Is there not even one wise man among them
before whom the two could go? In fact,
it would be better to be defrauded than to go before unbelievers since that
would testify to the opposite of the
kingdom message. Besides, the
unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom.
Notice how the people’s future role as kingdom citizens was to affect
how they lived. The first question is,
“How will it be in the kingdom.” The
next is, “How can I incarnate kingdom living now in this situation?”
Another example of
this can be found in the way early Christians thought of themselves in light of
the prophecy in Micah and Isaiah about swords turning into plowshares and
spears turning into pruning hooks.
Consider these quotations from the second and third centuries:
Justin Marytr (a.d. 160)
[W]e who were filled with war, and mutual slaughter, and every wickedness, have each through the whole earth changed our warlike weapons,— our swords into ploughshares, and our spears into implements of tillage, —and we cultivate piety, righteousness, philanthropy, faith, and hope, which we have from the Father himself through him who was crucified; [37]
[W]e who were filled with war, and mutual slaughter, and every wickedness, have each through the whole earth changed our warlike weapons,— our swords into ploughshares, and our spears into implements of tillage, —and we cultivate piety, righteousness, philanthropy, faith, and hope, which we have from the Father himself through him who was crucified; [37]
Irenaeus (a.d. 180)
If any one, however, advocating the cause of the Jews, do
maintain that this new covenant consisted in the rearing of that temple which
was built under Zerubbabel after the emigration to Babylon, and in the
departure of the people from thence after the lapse of seventy years, let him
know that the temple constructed of stones was indeed then rebuilt (for as yet
that law was observed which had been made upon tables of stone), yet no new
covenant was given, but they used the Mosaic law until the coming of the Lord;
but from the Lord’s advent, the new covenant that brings back peace and the law
that gives life have gone forth over the whole earth, as the prophets said:
“For out of Zion will go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from
Jerusalem; and he will rebuke many people; and they will break down their
swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks, and they will no
longer learn to fight”… these [Christians] did form the swords and war-lances
into ploughshares, and changed them into pruning-hooks for reaping the corn,
[that is], into instruments used for peaceful purposes, and that they are now
unaccustomed to fighting, but when smitten, offer also the other cheek. [38]
Tertullian (a.d. 197)
Isaiah in the ensuing words announces, saying, “…and they shall join to beat their swords into ploughs, and their lances into sickles; and nations shall not take up sword against nation, and they shall no more learn to fight.” Who else, therefore, are understood but we, who, fully taught by the new law, observe these practices,—the old law being obliterated, the coming of whose abolition the action itself demonstrates? For the inclination of the old law was to avenge itself by the vengeance of the sword, and to pluck out “eye for eye,” and to inflict retaliatory revenge for injury. But the new law’s inclination was to point to mercy, and to convert to tranquility the original ferocity of “swords” and “lances,” and to remodel the original execution of “war” upon the rivals and foes of the law into the peaceable actions of “ploughing” and “tilling” the land. Therefore as we have shown above that the coming cessation of the old law and of the carnal circumcision was declared, so, too, the observance of the new law and the spiritual circumcision has shone out into the voluntary obedience of peace.[39]
Isaiah in the ensuing words announces, saying, “…and they shall join to beat their swords into ploughs, and their lances into sickles; and nations shall not take up sword against nation, and they shall no more learn to fight.” Who else, therefore, are understood but we, who, fully taught by the new law, observe these practices,—the old law being obliterated, the coming of whose abolition the action itself demonstrates? For the inclination of the old law was to avenge itself by the vengeance of the sword, and to pluck out “eye for eye,” and to inflict retaliatory revenge for injury. But the new law’s inclination was to point to mercy, and to convert to tranquility the original ferocity of “swords” and “lances,” and to remodel the original execution of “war” upon the rivals and foes of the law into the peaceable actions of “ploughing” and “tilling” the land. Therefore as we have shown above that the coming cessation of the old law and of the carnal circumcision was declared, so, too, the observance of the new law and the spiritual circumcision has shone out into the voluntary obedience of peace.[39]
Origen (a.d. 248)
And to those who inquire of us whence we come, or who is our founder, we reply that we are come, agreeably to the counsels of Jesus, to “cut down our hostile and insolent [wearisome] swords into ploughshares, and to convert into pruning-hooks the spears formerly employed in war.” For we no longer take up “sword against nation,” nor do we “learn war any more,” having become children of peace, for the sake of Jesus, who is our leader, instead of those whom our fathers followed, among whom we were “strangers to the covenant,” and having received a law, for which we give thanks to Him that rescued us from the error (of our ways)…[40]
And to those who inquire of us whence we come, or who is our founder, we reply that we are come, agreeably to the counsels of Jesus, to “cut down our hostile and insolent [wearisome] swords into ploughshares, and to convert into pruning-hooks the spears formerly employed in war.” For we no longer take up “sword against nation,” nor do we “learn war any more,” having become children of peace, for the sake of Jesus, who is our leader, instead of those whom our fathers followed, among whom we were “strangers to the covenant,” and having received a law, for which we give thanks to Him that rescued us from the error (of our ways)…[40]
The early Christian
community applied the same thinking of Paul to the Corinthians to the subject
of war and violence. One need only
glance at a few of the grand portraits painted of the kingdom in Scripture to
realize that the age to come will be characterized by peace: peace between
individuals, families, tribes, ethnicities, nations, and even animals. The early church reasoned that if they were
going to testify to the gospel of peace (that God would ultimately fix up this
world and establish everlasting peace) then they should begin to live in peace
already. Their prophetic witness to the
world was that since the Messiah had come, since the new covenant was here, it
only made sense to beat their swords into ploughshares and embark on a life of
nonviolent peace. Just imagine having a
dialog with a Jew and when he challenged you to prove that the Messiah had
come, you say, “Just look at us Christians, we used to be violent but now we
are at peace.” Such a line of thinking
was normal for the first few centuries of the churches existence.
The Testimony of the Early Christians
I have selected thirteen
quotations from ten authors ranging from the Didache, which may be as early as
the first century (before the book of Revelation was written), to Lactantius
who wrote the same year as the edict of Milan
The Didache (a.d.
120)
3 What these maxims teach is this: “Bless those who curse you,” and
“pray for your enemies.” Moreover, fast “for those who persecute you.” For
“what credit is it to you if you love those who love you? Is that not the way
the heathen act?” But “you must love those who hate you,” and then you will
make no enemies. 4 “Abstain from carnal passions.” If someone strikes you “on the right
cheek, turn to him the other too, and you will be perfect.” If someone “forces you to go one mile
with him, go along with him for two”; if someone robs you “of your overcoat,
give him your suit as well.” If someone deprives you of “your property, do not
ask for it back.” (You could not get it back anyway!)[42]
“Mathetes” (a.d. 130)
1 For the Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, nor the customs which they observe. 2 For they neither inhabit cities of their own, nor employ a peculiar form of speech, nor lead a life which is marked out by any singularity... 4 But, inhabiting Greek as well as barbarian cities, according as the lot of each of them has determined, and following the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking method of life. 5 They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers. 6 They marry, as do all others; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring. 7 They have a common table, but not a common bed. 8 They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. 9 They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. 10 They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives. 11 They love all men, and are persecuted by all. 12 They are unknown and condemned; they are put to death, and restored to life. 13 They are poor, yet make many rich; they are in lack of all things, and yet abound in all; 14 they are dishonored, and yet in their very dishonor are glorified. They are evil spoken of, and yet are justified; 15 they are reviled, and bless; they are insulted, and repay the insult with honor; 16 they do good, yet are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice as if quickened into life; 17 they are assailed by the Jews as foreigners, and are persecuted by the Greeks; yet those who hate them are unable to assign any reason for their hatred.[43]
1 For the Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, nor the customs which they observe. 2 For they neither inhabit cities of their own, nor employ a peculiar form of speech, nor lead a life which is marked out by any singularity... 4 But, inhabiting Greek as well as barbarian cities, according as the lot of each of them has determined, and following the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking method of life. 5 They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers. 6 They marry, as do all others; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring. 7 They have a common table, but not a common bed. 8 They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. 9 They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. 10 They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives. 11 They love all men, and are persecuted by all. 12 They are unknown and condemned; they are put to death, and restored to life. 13 They are poor, yet make many rich; they are in lack of all things, and yet abound in all; 14 they are dishonored, and yet in their very dishonor are glorified. They are evil spoken of, and yet are justified; 15 they are reviled, and bless; they are insulted, and repay the insult with honor; 16 they do good, yet are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice as if quickened into life; 17 they are assailed by the Jews as foreigners, and are persecuted by the Greeks; yet those who hate them are unable to assign any reason for their hatred.[43]
Justin Marytr (a.d.160)
[W]e who formerly used to murder one another do not only now refrain from making war upon our enemies, but also, that we may not lie nor deceive our examiners, willingly die confessing Christ.[44]
[W]e who formerly used to murder one another do not only now refrain from making war upon our enemies, but also, that we may not lie nor deceive our examiners, willingly die confessing Christ.[44]
Clement of Alexandria
For it is not in war, but in peace, that we are trained. War needs great preparation, and luxury craves profusion; but peace and love, simple and quiet sisters, require no arms nor excessive preparation.[45]
For it is not in war, but in peace, that we are trained. War needs great preparation, and luxury craves profusion; but peace and love, simple and quiet sisters, require no arms nor excessive preparation.[45]
Tertullian (a.d. 200)
But now inquiry is made about this point, whether a believer may turn himself unto military service, and whether the military may be admitted unto the faith, even the rank and file, or each inferior grade, to whom there is no necessity for taking part in sacrifices or capital punishments. There is no agreement between the divine and the human sacrament, the standard of Christ and the standard of the devil, the camp of light and the camp of darkness. One soul cannot be due to two masters—God and Cæsar. And yet Moses carried a rod, and Aaron wore a buckle, and John (the Baptist) is girt with leather and Joshua the son of Nun leads a line of march; and the People warred: if it pleases you to sport with the subject. But how will a Christian man war, nay, how will he serve even in peace, without a sword, which the Lord has taken away? For albeit soldiers had come unto John, and had received the formula of their rule; albeit, likewise, a centurion had believed; still the Lord afterward, in disarming Peter, [disarmed] every soldier.[46]
But now inquiry is made about this point, whether a believer may turn himself unto military service, and whether the military may be admitted unto the faith, even the rank and file, or each inferior grade, to whom there is no necessity for taking part in sacrifices or capital punishments. There is no agreement between the divine and the human sacrament, the standard of Christ and the standard of the devil, the camp of light and the camp of darkness. One soul cannot be due to two masters—God and Cæsar. And yet Moses carried a rod, and Aaron wore a buckle, and John (the Baptist) is girt with leather and Joshua the son of Nun leads a line of march; and the People warred: if it pleases you to sport with the subject. But how will a Christian man war, nay, how will he serve even in peace, without a sword, which the Lord has taken away? For albeit soldiers had come unto John, and had received the formula of their rule; albeit, likewise, a centurion had believed; still the Lord afterward, in disarming Peter, [disarmed] every soldier.[46]
Tertullian (a.d. 211)
Shall it be held lawful to make an occupation of the sword, when the Lord proclaims that he who uses the sword shall perish by the sword? And shall the son of peace take part in the battle when it does not become him even to sue at law? And shall he apply the chain, and the prison, and the torture, and the punishment, who is not the avenger even of his own wrongs? Shall he, forsooth [indeed], either keep watch-service for others more than for Christ, or shall he do it on the Lord’s day, when he does not even do it for Christ Himself? And shall he keep guard before the temples which he has renounced? And shall he take a meal where the apostle has forbidden him? And shall he diligently protect by night those whom in the day-time he has put to flight by his exorcisms, leaning and resting on the spear the while with which Christ’s side was pierced? Shall he carry a flag, too, hostile to Christ? …Then how many other offences there are involved in the performances of camp offices, which we must hold to involve a transgression of God’s law, you may see by a slight survey. The very carrying of the name over from the camp of light to the camp of darkness is a violation of it. Of course, if faith comes later, and finds any preoccupied with military service, their case is different, as in the instance of those whom John used to receive for baptism, and of those most faithful centurions, I mean the centurion whom Christ approves, and the centurion whom Peter instructs; yet, at the same time, when a man has become a believer, and faith has been sealed, there must be either an immediate abandonment of it, which has been the course with many; or all sorts of quibbling will have to be resorted to in order to avoid offending God, and that is not allowed even outside of military service; or, last of all, for God the fate must be endured which a citizen-faith has been no less ready to accept.[47]
Shall it be held lawful to make an occupation of the sword, when the Lord proclaims that he who uses the sword shall perish by the sword? And shall the son of peace take part in the battle when it does not become him even to sue at law? And shall he apply the chain, and the prison, and the torture, and the punishment, who is not the avenger even of his own wrongs? Shall he, forsooth [indeed], either keep watch-service for others more than for Christ, or shall he do it on the Lord’s day, when he does not even do it for Christ Himself? And shall he keep guard before the temples which he has renounced? And shall he take a meal where the apostle has forbidden him? And shall he diligently protect by night those whom in the day-time he has put to flight by his exorcisms, leaning and resting on the spear the while with which Christ’s side was pierced? Shall he carry a flag, too, hostile to Christ? …Then how many other offences there are involved in the performances of camp offices, which we must hold to involve a transgression of God’s law, you may see by a slight survey. The very carrying of the name over from the camp of light to the camp of darkness is a violation of it. Of course, if faith comes later, and finds any preoccupied with military service, their case is different, as in the instance of those whom John used to receive for baptism, and of those most faithful centurions, I mean the centurion whom Christ approves, and the centurion whom Peter instructs; yet, at the same time, when a man has become a believer, and faith has been sealed, there must be either an immediate abandonment of it, which has been the course with many; or all sorts of quibbling will have to be resorted to in order to avoid offending God, and that is not allowed even outside of military service; or, last of all, for God the fate must be endured which a citizen-faith has been no less ready to accept.[47]
Hippolytus (a.d. 215)
A soldier of the civil authority must be taught not to kill men and to refuse to do so if he is commanded, and to refuse to take an oath. If he is unwilling to comply, he must be rejected for baptism. A military commander or civic magistrate who wears the purple must resign or be rejected. If an applicant or a believer seeks to become a soldier, he must be rejected, for he has despised God.” [48]
A soldier of the civil authority must be taught not to kill men and to refuse to do so if he is commanded, and to refuse to take an oath. If he is unwilling to comply, he must be rejected for baptism. A military commander or civic magistrate who wears the purple must resign or be rejected. If an applicant or a believer seeks to become a soldier, he must be rejected, for he has despised God.” [48]
Origen (a.d. 248)
In the next place, Celsus urges us “to help the king with all our might, and to labour with him in the maintenance of justice, to fight for him; and if he requires it, to fight under him, or lead an army along with him.” To this our answer is, that we do, when occasion requires, give help to kings, and that, so to say, a divine help, “putting on the whole armour of God.” And this we do in obedience to the injunction of the apostle, “I exhort, therefore, that first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; for kings, and for all that are in authority;” and the more any one excels in piety, the more effective help does he render to kings, even more than is given by soldiers, who go forth to fight and slay as many of the enemy as they can. And to those enemies of our faith who require us to bear arms for the commonwealth, and to slay men, we can reply: “Do not those who are priests at certain shrines, and those who attend on certain gods, as you account them, keep their hands free from blood, that they may with hands unstained and free from human blood offer the appointed sacrifices to your gods; and even when war is upon you, you never enlist the priests in the army. If that, then, is a laudable custom, how much more so, that while others are engaged in battle, these too should engage as the priests and ministers of God, keeping their hands pure, and wrestling in prayers to God on behalf of those who are fighting in a righteous cause, and for the king who reigns righteously, that whatever is opposed to those who act righteously may be destroyed!” And as we by our prayers vanquish all demons who stir up war, and lead to the violation of oaths, and disturb the peace, we in this way are much more helpful to the kings than those who go into the field to fight for them. And we do take our part in public affairs, when along with righteous prayers we join self-denying exercises and meditations, which teach us to despise pleasures, and not to be led away by them. And none fight better for the king than we do. We do not indeed fight under him, although he require it; but we fight on his behalf, forming a special army—an army of piety—by offering our prayers to God. [49]
In the next place, Celsus urges us “to help the king with all our might, and to labour with him in the maintenance of justice, to fight for him; and if he requires it, to fight under him, or lead an army along with him.” To this our answer is, that we do, when occasion requires, give help to kings, and that, so to say, a divine help, “putting on the whole armour of God.” And this we do in obedience to the injunction of the apostle, “I exhort, therefore, that first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; for kings, and for all that are in authority;” and the more any one excels in piety, the more effective help does he render to kings, even more than is given by soldiers, who go forth to fight and slay as many of the enemy as they can. And to those enemies of our faith who require us to bear arms for the commonwealth, and to slay men, we can reply: “Do not those who are priests at certain shrines, and those who attend on certain gods, as you account them, keep their hands free from blood, that they may with hands unstained and free from human blood offer the appointed sacrifices to your gods; and even when war is upon you, you never enlist the priests in the army. If that, then, is a laudable custom, how much more so, that while others are engaged in battle, these too should engage as the priests and ministers of God, keeping their hands pure, and wrestling in prayers to God on behalf of those who are fighting in a righteous cause, and for the king who reigns righteously, that whatever is opposed to those who act righteously may be destroyed!” And as we by our prayers vanquish all demons who stir up war, and lead to the violation of oaths, and disturb the peace, we in this way are much more helpful to the kings than those who go into the field to fight for them. And we do take our part in public affairs, when along with righteous prayers we join self-denying exercises and meditations, which teach us to despise pleasures, and not to be led away by them. And none fight better for the king than we do. We do not indeed fight under him, although he require it; but we fight on his behalf, forming a special army—an army of piety—by offering our prayers to God. [49]
Cyprian (a.d. 250)
Consider the roads blocked up by robbers, the seas beset with pirates, wars scattered all over the earth with the bloody horror of camps. The whole world is wet with mutual blood; and murder, which in the case of an individual is admitted to be a crime, is called a virtue when it is committed wholesale. Impunity is claimed for the wicked deeds, not on the plea that they are guiltless, but because the cruelty is perpetrated on a grand scale.[50]
Consider the roads blocked up by robbers, the seas beset with pirates, wars scattered all over the earth with the bloody horror of camps. The whole world is wet with mutual blood; and murder, which in the case of an individual is admitted to be a crime, is called a virtue when it is committed wholesale. Impunity is claimed for the wicked deeds, not on the plea that they are guiltless, but because the cruelty is perpetrated on a grand scale.[50]
Cyprian (a.d. 250)
Adultery, fraud, manslaughter, are mortal crimes. Let patience be strong and stedfast in the heart; and neither is the sanctified body and temple of God polluted by adultery, nor is the innocence dedicated to righteousness stained with the contagion of fraud; nor, after the Eucharist carried in it, is the hand spotted with the sword and blood.[51]
Adultery, fraud, manslaughter, are mortal crimes. Let patience be strong and stedfast in the heart; and neither is the sanctified body and temple of God polluted by adultery, nor is the innocence dedicated to righteousness stained with the contagion of fraud; nor, after the Eucharist carried in it, is the hand spotted with the sword and blood.[51]
Arnobius (a.d. 305)
For since we, a numerous band of men as we are, have learned from His teaching and His laws that evil ought not to be requited with evil, that it is better to suffer wrong than to inflict it, that we should rather shed our own blood than stain our hands and our conscience with that of another, an ungrateful world is now for a long period enjoying a benefit from Christ, inasmuch as by His means the rage of savage ferocity has been softened, and has begun to withhold hostile hands from the blood of a fellow-creature. But if all without exception, who feel that they are men not in form of body but in power of reason, would lend an ear for a little to His salutary and peaceful rules, and would not, in the pride and arrogance of enlightenment, trust to their own senses rather than to His admonitions, the whole world, having turned the use of steel into more peaceful occupations, would now be living in the most placid tranquillity, and would unite in blessed harmony, maintaining inviolate the sanctity of treaties. [52]
For since we, a numerous band of men as we are, have learned from His teaching and His laws that evil ought not to be requited with evil, that it is better to suffer wrong than to inflict it, that we should rather shed our own blood than stain our hands and our conscience with that of another, an ungrateful world is now for a long period enjoying a benefit from Christ, inasmuch as by His means the rage of savage ferocity has been softened, and has begun to withhold hostile hands from the blood of a fellow-creature. But if all without exception, who feel that they are men not in form of body but in power of reason, would lend an ear for a little to His salutary and peaceful rules, and would not, in the pride and arrogance of enlightenment, trust to their own senses rather than to His admonitions, the whole world, having turned the use of steel into more peaceful occupations, would now be living in the most placid tranquillity, and would unite in blessed harmony, maintaining inviolate the sanctity of treaties. [52]
Lactantius (a.d. 313)
Or why should he carry on war, and mix himself with the passions of others, when his mind is engaged in perpetual peace with men? Doubtless he will be delighted with foreign merchandise or with human blood, who does not know how to seek gain, who is satisfied with his mode of living, and considers it unlawful not only himself to commit slaughter, but to be present with those who do it, and to behold it![53]
Or why should he carry on war, and mix himself with the passions of others, when his mind is engaged in perpetual peace with men? Doubtless he will be delighted with foreign merchandise or with human blood, who does not know how to seek gain, who is satisfied with his mode of living, and considers it unlawful not only himself to commit slaughter, but to be present with those who do it, and to behold it![53]
Lactantius (a.d. 313)
It is not right that a worshiper of God should be injured by another worshiper of God.[54]
It is not right that a worshiper of God should be injured by another worshiper of God.[54]
The Mutation of Christianity under Constantine
Reading through
these quotations it is hard to envisage such a church today. Naturally, the question we ask is: What
happened to the non-violent way of Jesus to which the early Christians
testified? Of course the church didn’t
wake up one day and suddenly become militaristic; it was a process that took
time and thinking in order to produce new theology in place of the old. Surprisingly, brutal persecution by the State
did not bring about Christian
violence; rather, it was the invitation to imperial power that wooed the church
away from her radical kingdom witness. Rome
When, beginning with the emperor Constantine, the
Christian church began receiving referential treatment by the empire that it
had once so steadfastly opposed, war, which had once seemed so evil, now
appeared to many to be a necessity for preserving and propagating the gospel.
Christianity's weaponless victory over the Roman empire eventuated in the weaponless victory of the
empire over the gospel. No defeat is so
well-disguised as victory! In the year
303, Diocletian forbade any member of the Roman army to be a Christian. By the year 416, no one could be a member of
the Roman army unless he was a Christian. [55]
John Howard Yoder
identified six fundamental shifts[56]
between pre and post-Constantinian ethics.
Each of these resulted from the historical occurrence of Constantine ’s “conversion” and subsequent promotion of
Christianity as the “in” religion of Rome
1.
The
church was redefined from those committed souls who were willing to follow the
way of Jesus by life or by death to a preferred society looked upon as
something to join in order to win favor with the “Christian” emperor. Thus, the church flooded and it was suddenly
difficult to discern between genuine and nominal Christians.
2.
The kingdom of God
was no longer conceived of as a political governance to be established at the
return of the Messiah, but instead it became conflated with the Christian kingdom of Rome
3.
Since
the emperor was Christian a new question arose in place of the old. Before people asked: What does it mean to
follow the way of Jesus? Now people
asked: Is it reasonable to expect the emperor to be constrained by such a
radical way? Does he not have “duties”
that require a certain leniency?
4.
Since
many of the new Christians did not have personal commitment, regenerated
hearts, the guidance of the Holy Spirit, or the encouragement and mentoring of
the family of God it was now considered unreasonable to expect them to actually
follow the teachings of Jesus. Besides
if everyone in the empire lived a radically Christian life, who would hold off
the pagans from seizing the power? Who
would stop the barbarians from invading?
5.
For the
first time, the measure of a given ethic became its effectiveness. What’s good for the Roman
Empire (the church-State) is how ethics needed to be
measured. The notion of being faithful
to the instruction of Jesus and the apostles was not enough reason to insist on
a given behavior.
6.
Lastly,
a new dualism emerged into Christian thought.
A split was made between inward attitudes and actual deeds. Thus, one could love the enemy internally
while cutting his head off with an axe as the State executioner. Inner disposition became the primary place
for Christian ethics over and against actual obedience (especially with respect
to civic duties).
The cumulative
result of these shifts is well illustrated by Yoder’s remark, “Before Constantine it took courage to be a Christian; after Constantine
It fell to Augustine (d. 430) to make the accommodation
of Christianity to its new status as a privileged religion in support of the
state. Augustine believed, on the basis
of Matt. 5:38-42, that Christians had no right to defend themselves from
violence. But he identified a problem which no earlier theologian had faced:
what Augustine regarded as the loving obligation to use violence if necessary
to defend the innocent against evil. [In
other words, violence cannot be used to defend oneself but it should be used to
defend others.] Drawing on Stoic just
war principles, he articulated the position that was to dominate church
teaching from that time right up to the present. Ever since, Christians on the
left and on the right, in the East and in the West, have found it exceedingly
easy to declare as "just" and divinely ordained any wars their
governments desired to wage for purely national interests. As a consequence, the world regards
Christians as among the most warlike factions on the face of the earth. And little wonder; two-thirds of the people
killed in the last 500 years died at the hands of fellow-Christians in Europe , to say nothing of those whom Christians killed in
the course of colonizing the rest of the world.”[58]
A Call to Return to Nonviolence
Before returning to
the Constantinian corruption and the challenge that faces us today, allow me to
summarize the major themes that form the framework for the Christian notion of
nonviolent enemy love. A millennium before
the birth of Jesus, God had promised that one of King David’s descendants would
be his Son and would rule forever.
Several hundreds of years later God gave Daniel visions about the coming
son of man who would rule over all peoples and nations. These two promises converged on one man—Jesus
from Nazareth Israel from Roman oppression and establishing
the kingdom of God
The new reality Jesus proclaimed was nonviolent. That much is clear, not just from the Sermon
on the Mount, but his entire life and teaching and, above all, the way he faced
his death. His was not merely a tactical
or pragmatic nonviolence seized upon because nothing else would have worked
against the Roman empire 's near monopoly on
violence. Rather, he saw nonviolence as
a direct corollary of the nature of God and of the new reality emerging in the
world from God. In a verse quoted more
than any other from the New Testament during the church's first four centuries,
Jesus taught that God loves everyone, and values all, even those who make
themselves God's enemies. We are
therefore to do likewise (Matt. 5:45; cf. Luke 6:35)…Thus nonviolence is not
just a means to the Kingdom
of God
We could summarize the
case for nonviolence in the following manner:
1.
Jesus, the mediator of the new covenant, commanded his followers to love
their enemies.
2. The
Apostles confirmed this teaching with instructions to “never return evil for
evil” and “overcome evil with good.”
3. The
early Christians for more than two hundred years were faithful to Jesus’
teaching on nonviolence.
4.
Under Constantine, who used the name of Christ on the shields of his
soldiers in order to violently conquer Rome Rome
5.
Finally, Ambrose and then Augustine developed the necessary theology to
insure Christian cooperation with the State through Just War theology
The early peace
witness mutated with time, largely due to the irresistible temptation to make Rome Constantine
invited the persecuted bride of Christ into his imperial bed-chamber, he
adorned her with a scarlet dress, fit for a princess, and whispered innumerable
sweet promises of protection and fidelity if she would only wed herself to Rome Nazareth
Ironically, once
Christians got into political power, the pax
Romana ended and Rome
It is time for the
bride of Christ to wake up from this bloody nightmare, and call for a divorce
from the Serpent and his client kings.
Maybe, just maybe, the slaughtered lamb will have the slaughtering bride
back if she will repent of her wicked complicity with the empire? Maybe she could put her sword down, take off
the mantle of power—the royal robes of Babylon
The issue I am raising is just this– can Christians in
good conscience participate in violence. Many Christians of course will say
yes. They will not interpret ‘thou shalt not murder’ in a way that prohibits
such activity, nor will they interpret the Sermon on the Mount the way I and
many other pacifists do.
I respect these other opinions, but I am quite convinced
they are wrong. Before Constantine Christians simply refused to serve in the
military, refused to co-operate with violence, and were often killed because of
it. They saw this as a matter of ethical principle. So do I.
It is the job of Christians to provide the world with a
window on the future eschatological kingdom, or heaven if you like. We are
meant to be a preview of coming attractions, as the prophets foretold about
peace on earth and goodwill to all humans. Call us the loyal opposition to the
majority, in any given age. This in turn means that the ethics applicable to
general persons in the culture are not the same as the ethics required of
Christians who signed on to follow Jesus.[60]
As Christians we are
called to embody the kingdom, to bring forth signs of God’s future, and testify
that the Messiah has come, that we have been justified already in anticipation
of the justification of the whole world.
Our message is that there is something worth living and dying for,
something lasting, something beautiful.
It is time to lay down our sword, pick up our cross and follow the one
who stood power on its head, who won the greatest victory by loosing his life
to a State execution. Our testimony says
the story didn’t end there because God raised him from the dead. Therefore, the world is not the same because
Jesus, not Caesar, is Lord. The question
is whether or not we take him seriously?
Luke 6.46-49
46 "Why do you call me 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I tell you?
46 "Why do you call me 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I tell you?
FOOTNOTES
[1]
This question would apply equally to any nation on earth. I am writing as an American primarily to
Americans. If you are not an American,
feel free to substitute your nation for the U.S.
[2]
Due to space constraints we will not be able to work through the remarkable
glimpses of nonviolent theology found in the Old Testament (like when God
prohibited David from building the Temple because he was a man of war, Elisha’s
instruction to feed and release the Syrian army, the time Jehoshaphat put the
praise band in front of the military, or the other times God fought for his
people using unconventional means.)
[4]
Anabaptists refers broadly to those groups during the 16th century,
during the reformation years, who alleged that Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin were
not going far enough to restore the church to its roots. As a result, the Anabaptists formed their own
fellowships and both postulated and pursued the radical idea that one should
obey Jesus’ teachings literally (especially those in the Sermon on the
Mount). Consequently, the Anabaptists
more almost entirely comprised of pacifists.
Modern descendants of these groups include the Mennonites, Hutterites,
Amish, and those who live in the Bruderhof.
[5]
Books that major on the kingdom while addressing the subject of nonviolence
include: Leo Tolstoy: The Kingdom of God
is within You; John Howard Yoder: The
Politics of Jesus, Gregory Boyd: The
Myth of the Christian Nation; David Bercot: The Kingdom that Turned the World Upside Down; Lee Camp: Mere Discipleship; Shane Claiborne and
Chris Haw: Jesus for President.
[7]
One such story involved the slaughter and enslavement of thousands of people
living in Sepphoris (just two miles from Nazareth
[9]
The devil is “the ruler of this world” (John 12.31) and “the god of this age”
(2 Corinthians 4.4). “The whole world
lies in the power of the evil one” (1 John 5.19). He deceives the whole world (Revelation
12.9).
[11]
Think judge in the sense of the book of Judges rather than in the sense of American
court judges.
[12]
In fact, Matthew specifically cites this as a fulfillment of the text from
Hosea where it is said, “Out of Egypt, I have called my son.” In its original context, Hosea spoke of the
exodus from Egypt
[14]
meek. (2009). In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. Retrieved April 3, 2009, from
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/meek
[15]
John 14.27; Romans 12.17-19; 14.19; 1 Corinthians 7.15; 2 Corinthians 13.11;
Galatians 5.22; Ephesians 4.1-3; 1 Thessalonians 5.12-13; 2 Thessalonians 3.16;
Titus 3.1-2; Hebrews 12.14; James 3.17-18; 1 Peter 3.10-15;
[17]
As used by Tom Lock, founder of nonresistance.org, in his fine sermon, Christianity, Violence, & War, which
can be downloaded at loveyourenemies.wordpress.com under the “Audios and
Videos” section.
[18]
“The word here for resist (antistenai) almost attains the sense
of a technical term, used by Josephus 17 times—fifteen of those times Josephus
means “violently resist.”” Lee Camp, “Why the Christian Church Ought to be
Pacifist,” September 2001, published in New
Wineskins, p. 3.
[19]
Jason David BeDuhn, Truth in Translation,
(Lanham , MD
[20]
Walter Wink, “Can Love Save the World?” Published in Yes Magazine, winter 2002
(http://www.yesmagazine.org/article.asp?ID=485).
[21]
Walter Wink, “Can Love Save the World?” Published in Yes Magazine, winter 2002
(http://www.yesmagazine.org/article.asp?ID=485).
[22]
Walter Wink, “Beyond Just War and Pacifism: Jesus' Nonviolent Way
[23]
For an example of a Roman soldier forcing a native to bear a burden, think back
to when Simon of Cyrene was pressed into service (the verbal form of angareia)
to carry Jesus’ cross (Matthew 27.32).
[24]
Walter Wink, “Beyond Just War and Pacifism: Jesus' Nonviolent Way
[25]
The command to be perfect as God is not an injunction to moral perfection as
Wesley and others have understood. The
word perfect in Greek has the connotation of completeness. Incomplete or imperfect love only loves those
who reciprocate, but complete or perfect love even includes one’s enemies.
[27]
John Howard Yoder, Politics of Jesus,
(Grand Rapids
[28]
For answers to common objections, log on to our website (www.LoveYourEnemies.wordpress.com)
and click “difficult questions.”
[29]
Even though Jesus had told them in advance the Scripture specifically states
that they did not understand. The idea
that one man would be resurrected in advance of the rest of God’s people was
foreign to their worldview.
[34]
Of course, God was active through the Spirit prior to Pentecost, but it was
never available to as many as call on the name of the Lord, only to certain
individuals whom God empowered for a given task (cf. Exodus 31.3).
[35]
Polycarp was martyred in the second century by the Roman official who was incensed
that Polycarp would not offer a pinch of incense to Caesar and curse Christ.
[39]
An Answer to the Jews, chapter 3
(ANF: Vol. 3, p. 154). The following Old
English words were replaced: glaive -> sword; wont -> inclination;
tranquillity -> tranquility; clemency -> mercy; pacific -> peaceable;
pristine -> original; obediences -> obedience
[41]
The edict of Milan
[47]
Since leaving the military was illegal, a soldier who converted to Christianity
was in a difficult spot. He could desert
and make his escape, remain a soldier without offending God (which Tertullian
thinks is impossible), or else die as a martyr in the same way as many civilians
have.
[55]
Walter Wink, “Beyond Just War and Pacifism: Jesus' Nonviolent Way
[56]
These six shifts were taken from Mark Nation’s book: John Howard Yoder, (Grand
Rapids
[57]
John Howard Yoder as quoted by Stanley Hauerwas at The Burke Lecture, UC at San
Diego delivered in April 2004, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPPJCkfxdTs).
[58]
Walter Wink, “Beyond Just War and Pacifism: Jesus' Nonviolent Way
[60]
Ben Witherington III, commenting on his blog post “Deck the Malls with Guns and
the Gory” (benwitherington.blogspot.com/2007/12/deck-malls-with-guns-and-gory_12.html)
on December, 17, 2007.
