DEBATE: "It's Just War": Christian Perspectives From Both Sides

 

On March 28, 2014, Anchor-Cross Publishing and Followers of the Way sponsored a debate on the subject of just war. We sought to bring leading thinkers together to discuss the issue in historic Faneuil Hall in downtown Boston. Speaking of behalf of just war were Dr. Peter Kreeft (professor of philosophy at Boston College) and Dr. J. Daryl Charles (Berry College). Speaking against just war and for biblical nonresistance were David Bercot and Dean Taylor.

TO LOVE ONE'S ENEMIES: One Soldier's Journey From Interrogator To Christ Follower

Biggest Threats To U.S. Nuclear Missile Corps:Boredom and Drugs

Every day 90 uniformed men and women in their mid-20s ride elevators 40 to 60 feet below remote fields in Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, North Dakota, and Nebraska in rote preparation for improbable nuclear Armageddon.

They spend some of their 24-hour alerts seated in front of steel Minuteman III missile launch control panels mounted on shock absorbers, with toggle switches capable of hurling 10 to 50 nuclear warheads—each with 20 times the explosive force of the Hiroshima bomb—to the other side of the globe, at speeds of 15,000 mph.

But their day-to-day enemy, for decades, has not so much been another superpower, but the unremitting boredom of an isolated posting that demands extreme vigilance, while also requiring virtually no activity, according to accounts by missileers and a new internal review of their work.

                         

That understandable boredom, when paired with the military’s sky-high expectations for their workplace performance, has pushed some of them to use drugs, others to break the rules, and still more to look for any way out.

 

The millennials who populate this force can watch television, read, study, or sleep in their cramped, often damp quarters. But their checklist routines are typically unvarying, and their moment-to-moment responsibilities are few, and the temperature underground—like the policy requiring their presence—is unnervingly stuck in the mid-60s.


READ FULL STORY HERE>

Part 2: What America Can Learn About Gun Control From Australia

Loving Bin Laden – What Does Jesus Expect Us To Do?

by Ted Dekker and Carl Medearis

 “Do you mind if we blindfold you?” the Hezbollah fighter asked nonchalantly. “If I have a choice, I’d prefer not, but I’m guessing it’s your call,” I replied with a (nervous) smile. For some reason, they simply chose to make me change cars (all black Mercedes) several times on the way to meet with the #2 man in the Lebanese Shi’ite organization.

My two Lebanese Muslim friends and I waited in the hallway of the dark building for about five minutes before someone walked through the door and said “Follow me.” We did, and found ourselves in a room adorned with yellow-and-black Hezbollah flags and big, soft armchairs. And we waited.

It was at this moment when it hit me what we were doing. We were meeting with an enemy of my country.

Probably illegal – I think I had forgotten to check that little detail. (I’m not much for details.) We were surrounded by men with AK-47 machine guns, in an unfamiliar city, in an unknown building, meeting a man I’d never seen, who didn’t know why I was there. Other than that – all was good.

But as soon as our host walked in, I remembered why I was there. He broke into a huge smile as he clasped my hand with both of his and said, “Ahlan WaSahlan” (Welcome). “I’ve heard so much about you,” he continued. Hmmmm? “Heard what, exactly?” I wondered.

It never became clear why he agreed to meet me. Curiosity? To let the West know that the Hezbollah aren’t such bad guys after all? To win me to his point of view – either to Islam or his politics? Not sure. But I decided then and there that I didn’t care and really couldn’t care – otherwise I wouldn’t have come. I knew why I was there: to visibly share the love of Christ with an enemy.

But was he actually my enemy? Did he personally want to harm me? I doubt it. Yet by most definitions he was the enemy of my people, Americans. Maybe even the enemy of Christians. And for sure the enemy of the Israelis. But how could I follow the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth to love my enemies if I never met any? So here I was, on a quest to follow Christ. It wasn’t about doing something with or to Muslims. It was about following Jesus.

That day a friendship began. It was a cautious friendship – on both sides. We were equally skeptical of the other’s agenda. But over the years we have become friends. He’s still a Muslim, still the leader of the Hezbollah in all of south Lebanon, still at war with Israel. But he has now received prayer a thousand times, often by the laying on of hands by my Christian pastor friends I take to see him. He has now read the New Testament. We talk often and deeply about the gospel, about big international issues, about the small hidden things of our hearts. He is my friend!

Since the release of Tea with Hezbollah: Sitting at the Enemies’ Table, the most common question posed to me goes like this: “Yeah, I know that Jesus said to love our enemies, but… I mean, you’re not suggesting that… well, you know, we should, like, love Osama bin Laden, are you?”

It’s one thing to ask Western Christians to follow Jesus and point out that one of the things he clearly said, and taught, was to love our enemies. It’s another thing altogether to make that teaching specific with an actual enemy. Like Bin Laden.

The question is a good one: what do we do with our actual, physical enemies (rather than our theoretical enemies), people who might want to kill us if they had the chance? We’re not talking about an ideology or a religion, but a real person, like Bin Laden. What do we do with Bin Laden?

There are three biblical ideas that can help us think clearly about how to treat an actual, literal enemy.

·       

          Joshua 5:13-14 is the story of the angel who appears to Joshua right before he takes Jericho. Whose side is the angel on? Neither. He is the Commander of the Lord’s army. Understanding that God is on His own side is a great place to start when we think about our enemies. God is neither “for” or “against” America. He is hoping we are on His side, but He’s not on ours.

·          

      In Luke 6:35 Jesus states, “Love your enemies and do good to them.” Pretty clear. The idea of “doing good” to our enemies is a powerful one. It really “works” to do good to our enemies – as a strategy for overcoming their agenda.

·       

           In Romans 12:21 the apostle Paul says, “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” This is a rarely-followed biblical truth – to overcome evil by doing good to the one who is evil. We more naturally think of running from evil – a good strategy at times – but not necessarily fighting evil with the frontal assault of goodness!

I believe that this topic is critical for our age. I doubt that we (“Christians”) have more enemies now than at other times in history, but because of the “flatness” of a globalized world, we simply know about our enemies more than ever before. We see them on the news every day. We are reminded of them several times a day through various sources. So if there was ever an opportunity to fear the enemy, it’s now.

Most Christians are left with only two choices, both political: the more “conservative” route of building a strong military case against our enemies, or the more “liberal” route of favoring diplomacy. (Both are generalizations, of course). But isn’t there a third way that’s actually more powerful, more pragmatic and therefore more effective? How about the way of Jesus? It’s not passive, not wimpy, but instead an incredibly compelling method that moves beyond mere dialogue to actual solutions.

But because politicians, and believers of all stripes, don’t think this way of Jesus is very useful, it’s simply ignored. One of the most interesting aspects of the trip that Ted Dekker and I took was our question to the leaders of the Hezbollah, to Hamas, and to the Bin Laden brothers – what was Jesus’ most famous teaching? Most of them said, “To love your enemies.” We’d then ask the “Dr. Phil” question, “So how’s that goin’ for ya?” To which they’d respond, “Not very well because it’s not practical.” I assured them that unfortunately most of my American friends thought the same.

So basically, few of us really believe that “doing good to our enemies” is actually a strategy to “win.” But Jesus did.

Before I get into some specific suggestions for loving our enemies, let me share the three most common objections I get to this idea:

     

      “It sounds like pacifism, and I believe in the Just War theory.” But I’m not speaking politically. So that argument simply becomes an excuse to not personally follow a direct command of Christ. What the government has to do in order to keep its citizens safe is a great discussion – just not this one.

      “It doesn’t take into account that there is real evil in this world and that some Muslims are, in fact, engaging in a Jihad of terrorism against the West.” While I agree that some Muslims have and will engage in clear and horrific acts of terror, it doesn’t follow that we should therefore stop loving our enemies. In fact, this may be the best argument for loving them. Could it be that this is our best, and possibly only, weapon against potential future terrorists? Could it be that if they personally experience the love of Jesus from one of His followers, they would not engage in such activity? Very possibly. I am not naïve. Several times my family and I have been the focus of violent actions by those who bear the label “Muslim.” Evil is real, and it has a root – our one and only Enemy with whom we cannot reconcile – the Devil.

     

      “‘Love’ doesn’t always work against such people.” If we’re using “love” as a strategy to “get them,” then it won’t work. But if we love our enemies because God does, and if our hearts are soft towards them because we see God weeping over them, the effect is direct and powerful.

Love is by far the most powerful and forceful weapon we have at our disposal. It is not wimpy. It’s not naïve. It led to the most violent, non-passive, act in history – the Cross. Love does not roll over and lay down. Love conquers all.

So, if you’re still with me, here are three steps for employing this strategy of Jesus:

      Take time to think about who your actual enemies are. It could include an in-law, a physical neighbor, even an enemy of the State – the Bin Laden variety. Then engage that person emotionally and spiritually. In other words, force yourself to think about him or her. Imagine what his or her life is like. Why is he the way he is? Now pray for him. Allow God to begin to place compassion and insight into your heart for that person, and to give you perspective. This is critical if you are going to make it to step two. And, by the way, this first step takes a ton of spiritual maturity on our part. Because, if someone is your enemy, you don’t want to do this. But do it anyway!

2

      Begin to ask God for a plan, for a specific strategy for meeting this person and talking to him or her. I didn’t show up at the Hezbollah leader’s office without first taking a lot of time to think, pray and plan how I would do that and what I would say once I was there. If you don’t plan for this, it won’t happen. So make it real. Make it practical. I am currently planning to meet some other high-profile enemies so that I can continue my quest of obeying Jesus in everything. And I pray that I will have the courage and the words to say what God gives me to say when the time comes.

      Go across the street. Around the world. But you have to go. It’s not rocket science for a reader like you. I’m guessing you’ve traveled before. You’ve been in cross-cultural situations and gone out of your comfort zone. This is simply one step further. You’re now going to meet an actual enemy.

Think about it. What’s the worse thing that could happen to you? “I could be killed,” you say. But you’re going to die anyway, so seriously, what’s the worst thing? I think the worst thing is this – you fly halfway around the world to meet “Mr. Bad Guy,” and you show up at his doorstep, and he isn’t there to meet you.

In that case, you wander around a bit and come back the next day. If he never shows up, you’ve had a good time of prayer and maybe have made some new, unexpected friends. Not so bad, really!

Oh, and by the way, the last time I was having tea with the Hezbollah, here’s what I said: “Have you ever thought about employing the strategy of Jesus in relation to Israel? It’s simple, has immediate impact and can be done unilaterally. You can do it right now, all by yourself. You can forgive them. Love them. Start doing good things to them. Bless them. Pray for them. It will annoy and confuse them as much as anything else you’ve ever done. What do you think?”

The Hezbollah leader’s reply? “Carl, Carl, Carl. I know this is the way of Jesus, but it won’t work with them.

They will simply abuse this kind of niceness, and then where will we be?”

Undeterred, I asked, “So how is your current strategy working? I mean, what do you have to lose?”

He looked down and said, “You know, I’m not sure I have the courage to do this. It might cost me everything.”

“Thank you for your honesty, sir,” I said. “It cost Jesus everything, too.”

Then we prayed. We gathered around him and prayed. We prayed for wisdom. For courage. For honor. For him to do the right thing, the thing Jesus would do.

And, well, who knows? It just might work.

Because in this case, the “it” is Jesus!

Reposted from   http://www.missionfrontiers.org/

G.I. JESUS?

NO JUST WAR: Daniel Berrigan

"I think the term Just War should be removed from the Christian vocabulary. No modern war can be just, because it’s indiscriminate and because it’s launched against the people and the world. We should be getting back to the Gospels and Christ’s teaching on violence. On this point Jesus is unequivocal, when he criticises those with hatred in their hearts. Man is at war with the global ecosystem and with his fellow man, and I denounce it." - Fr. Daniel Berrigan

THE HIDDEN COST OF WAR

WHY IS THE CHRISTIAN PEACE MOVEMENT SO SMALL?

Thoughts from the blog of Tim Suttle: 

Why is the Christian peace movement so small? Why are so many Christians willing to engage in a search and destroy mission around issues like homosexuality (upon which Jesus did not comment), or insistent upon adherence to Jesus’s teaching on divorce, and yet so willing to ignore the clear command to “love your enemies,” that is part of the very same chapter of Matthew as the divorce teaching?

For most of us as evangelicals, the faith of our fathers and grandfathers did not include any kind of strict adherence to Jesus’s teaching on violence. Christian non-violence was never mentioned as a possibility in my Southern Baptist upbringing. In fact Matthew 5:38-48 remained indeterminate in all of my discipleship and training until I ran into Stanley Hauerwas, John Howard Yoder, as well as many of my professors and fellow students at seminary. That Jesus’s teaching on non-violence is so largely ignored or misunderstood in the general culture has to be at least part of the reason Reza Aslan’sZealot could become a best seller. Anyone steeped in the tradition of Christian non-violence would quickly point out the way Aslan completely ignored huge swaths of Jesus’s life and teaching, especially the way that non-violence is essential to a Christian understanding of the gospel.

The obvious exception to this would be the Anabaptists. I often think that God preserved two important doctrines among the Anabaptist people. The first is the gospel of the kingdom of God (as opposed to a gospel of sin management & how to get into heaven when you die). The second is the doctrine of Christian non-violence. The Anabaptists are now powerfully and prophetically teaching the rest of us these essential doctrines to the wider church.

Stanley Hauerwas often says that Christians are not committed to non-violence because they think it will be an effective strategy to rid the world of war. Christians are committed to non-violence because they cannot imagine any other way to live in light of the life, teaching, death, and resurrection of Jesus. I find it ironic, then, that for the most part the opposite is true. Most Christians in our society cannot imagine livingnon-violently in such a violent world. We have no imagination for what it might mean to respond to our dog eat dog world by turning the other cheek, offering our cloak & tunic, and going the extra mile. I had been following Jesus for at least twenty-five years before anyone challenged my thinking in regard to violence and war and Jesus’s teaching on the matter.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE >

Where Does God's Kingdom Come From? by Josh Lawson

There has never been a mightier man to walk the earth than Jesus of Nazareth. His moral, emotional, and spiritual strength was unparalleled by anyone of his day. It remains unmatched to this hour.

Yet his message was unequivocaly one of non-violence.

The first three centuries of Christian history following his advent into the world attest to the fact that the overwhelming majority of those who first followed in Christ’s way upheld this conviction of non-violence with great passion. Soldiers abandoned their posts upon coming to the Lord. They refused military service. When struck upon one cheek they offered the other.

This practice only began to change with the unholy alliance of church and state under Constantine in the third century. What little evidence there is to suggest otherwise is not difficult to refute. Keith Giles has written an article recently that explores this notion in more detail, which I highly recommend you read.

Even still, living in America today it is hard to refute Gandhi’s painful observation: “The only people who don’t see Jesus and his teachings as non-violent are Christians!”

WHY CHRISTIANS FIGHT

What is the reason for this quandary? It is simple, really.

Under interrogation by Pilate Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world” (John 18:36).

Note that Jesus’ disciples did want to fight to keep him from being handed over. This is because, like Jesus said, they still thought his kingdom was of and from the world. Right up to the moment of his ascension they were still clinging to this belief (see Acts 1:6).

Also note that there is a difference between God’s kingdom being from the world and its being for the world. Just because His kingdom is not of the world does not mean it is not for the world. On the contrary, it is. This simply goes to show that it is not advocating any form of spiritual escapism to proclaim that God’s kingdom is not of this world.

So why did Jesus’ disciples want to fight? Why did Peter draw his sword and cut off one man’s ear? Simply because they thought their Rabbi’s kingdom was of the world.

And why do some of Jesus’ followers still want to fight today? Why do they support war and the military industrial complex? For the same reason. There remains a widescale confusion as to where God’s kingdom is coming from. Nevertheless,

God’s kingdom is not coming from a world where men fight to overthrow regimes and establish new orders. God’s kingdom is coming from heaven where the battle is won by a Lamb laying down his life.

SOMETHING WAS DIFFERENT 

So it would do us well to take a fresh look at the words of Jesus. If you’re not sure where you stand in regards to this issue you may want to consider the testimony of the first three centuries of Christian history prior to Constantine. Something was different, and you owe it to yourself to find out what that something was.

There was a reason Celcus said of the Christians: “If everyone were to act the same as you, the national government would soon be left utterly deserted and without any help, and affairs on earth would soon pass into the hands of the most savage and wretched barbarians.”

There was a reason Martin of Tours proclaimed: “I am Christ’s soldier, I am not allowed to fight.”

There was a reason Tertullian declared: “When Christ disarmed Peter, he disarmed every soldier.”

Behind all these words there is a deep and positive reality, and you can be sure it is not any form of cowardice or escapism. The pen may be mightier than the sword, but the cross is mightier still.

PROACTIVE LOVE - MARCH 15, 2014 AT BIOLA

PACIFIST FIGHT CLUB | ROUND 4
"PROACTIVE LOVE"

Saturday, March 15, 2014

at Biola University

13800 Biola Ave., La Mirada, California 90639

 

Our Fighters:

*Mike Izbicki - Former Naval submarine officer who read the Sermon on the Mount and is now a conscientuous objector.

*Dr. Thomas Crisp - Co-Founder of PFC and Professor of Philosophy at BIOLA.

*More to be announced.

 

IT'S NOT ABOUT PACIFISM by Keith Giles

Personally, I am not at all interested in a world filled with pacifists. Pacifism, in itself, is of no interest to me whatsoever.

But what I am very interested in is a world filled with people who love Jesus and take His commands seriously - including His commands to love our enemies, and practice extravagant, preemptive love to everyone within arms reach.

Pacifism implies a dedication to political peace, and while I am certainly not against a more peaceful society, the main thing that drives me is the Gospel of Jesus, and putting the teachings of Jesus into practice. These teachings and commands are explicity centered on being proactive lovers of God and lovers of people.

To me, this is not a gray area. Jesus is crystal clear. He says that we should be marked by our exceptional displays of love for one another, for the stranger, for the poor, and even for our enemies.

"But Jesus knocked over some tables in the Temple!" people shout. Yes, he did do that. But he did not do so in order to set an example for how we should behave. For that we need only turn to the dozens of commands and numerous, vivid examples Jesus gave us to follow.

Like the time he washed his disciples feet and said, "They will know that you are my disciples if you love one another" (John 13:35) Or the time when he stood up on a hillside and proclaimed loudly, "You have heard it said, 'love your neighbor and hate your enemy' but I say to you, love your enemy, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you." (Matt. 5:43-45) Or when he said, "If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Don't even tax collectors do that?" (Matt. 5:46)

Following Jesus means doing what he said to do. One of those things is to love, and not to hate. Another is to bless and not to retaliate. Another is to forgive and not to take vengeance ourselves.

As followers of Jesus, we should already be very well acquainted with the concept of transformative love and the power of forgiveness and mercy to change a person from within. Isn't that how we arrived here with a cross on our back and our footprints in the sand next to His?

If so, let us not abandon the path that Jesus has laid out for us. It is a path of peace. It is a path of extravagant, proactive, audacious love in the face of violence, hate, and anger.

Our weapons, remember, are divine. Our weapons are powerful. Our weapons demolish demonic strongholds. Our weapons (which are not of this world) are mighty. More powerful than AK-47's. More effective than missiles. More explosive than nuclear warheads.

If you believe that, and if you follow Jesus, the time to start putting these things into practice is now.

Pacifism will not save us. But following Jesus will.

-kg

Be Crucified

Let yourself be persecuted, but do not persecute others.

Be crucified, but do not crucify others.

Se slandered, but do not slander others.
...
Rejoice with those who rejoice, and weep with those who weep: such is the sign of purity.

Suffer with the sick.

Be afflicted with sinners.

Exult with those who repent.

Be the friend of all, but in your spirit remain alone.

Be a partaker of the sufferings of all, but keep your body distant from all.

Rebuke no one, revile no one, not even those who live very wickedly.

Spread your cloak over those who fall into sin, each and every one, and shield them.

And if you cannot take the fault on yourself and accept punishment in their place, do not destroy their character.

-St Isaac the SyrianSee More

Pete Seeger: Descendend From Killers

“You and I are descended from killers. If you weren’t a good killer you didn’t survive. For millions of years we’ve had good killers and if we didn’t you and I wouldn’t be here today. So, you might say there was a time when the human race needed good killers. But now, if we don’t change our way of thinking, there will be no more human race here. Because science acts very irresponsibly. Some information is good, but some information we need to forget about until we solve some other problems first. Einstein is the first person who said that. He said, “Everything has changed now, except our way of thinking, and we’ve got to find ways to change our way of thinking.”” – Peter Seeger.

 

Why I Practice Non-Violence (And Why I Understand If You May Not) by D.L. Marshall

 

In the opening chapter of his book, Fight, Preston Sprinkle writes:

"…what has shocked me … is how outraged Christians get toward those who disagree with them on [how one should respond to warfare and violence]. If you ever want to stir up your Bible study, ask the other people if it’d be okay to join the military, kill an intruder, or assassinate Hitler if you had the chance. Ask them if they wept or cheered when bin Laden was killed. The question themselves make people angry. I’ve dealt with many issues over the years- free will and election, spiritual gifts, the end times- but I have never seen such heated discussions erupt as when issues of war, violence, and nationalism come up. Never. Disagreement over these issues pricks something deep in the heart of us.["1]

 

Needless to say, Sprinkle is poignantly correct. I have personally experienced the backlash of moving away from a futurist view of eschatology, but there is nothing like getting in a debate with an American Christian when it comes to violence. It can quickly evolve from a disagreement over the Bible to a matter of nationalistic pride and vigor; something us Americans tend to take very seriously.

 

It’s because of this that I’ve learned to be more graceful in the way I present my views and theories, but even still, I am constantly faced with people telling me that living a life of non-violence may be “nice in theory, but useless in practicality”. I mean, if we don’t fight against the bad guys, who will protect America? Who will defend justice and honor? Do we really want to let the lives shed for this country be in vain?

 

While I understand the sentiments of these questions (and others), the one thing that I keep returning to is Jesus on the Cross. According to Paul in 1 Corinthians, the cross is foolishness to those that do not understand God, yet to Christians, it is a demonstration of His power (1:18).

 

Think on that for a minute.

 

The cross: the self-sacrificing event when God-in-flesh gave up his own body in order to redeem mankind, to disarm the principalities and powers of this world…This is the power of God.

 

In Paul’s mind, it was not when the entire universe was created, nor was it when God flooded the world, separated the waters for Moses, or even the walls of Jericho fell. It was when his own blood was shed in order to preserve and sanctify the blood of the people of this world. I don’t know about you, but this verse gives me chills. And I’m not complaining.

 

To be fair, I haven’t always thought this way. Growing up in an LDS household, there was never a dichotomy between military and faith. Both of my parents served in the Air Force, and in the fall of 2012, I had considered joining as a chaplain. I was raised with the knowledge that there were guns in the house, and I even went to a few firing ranges when I was younger and enjoyed it. I spent several years wrestling in school, not to mention nearly getting in a fight at church when a kid was mocking me for not being “worthy” to take the sacrament. (I also remember my dad saying that if I had beaten him up, he wouldn’t have been mad at me.)

 

So when I became a Protestant in 2009, there was no reason for me to change my mind on this matter. The pastors I did read/listen to had no problem with violence; Mark Driscoll seems to thrive on the idea that he can’t beat up Jesus, and John Piper believes that it is “right for God to slaughter women and children anytime he pleases. God gives life and he takes life. Everybody who dies, dies because God wills that they die.”[2] Even C.S. Lewis has a chapter in The Weight of Glory dedicated to why just war is supported by Christian ethics. So yeah, I never really gave it much thought. I never planned on hurting anyone, but I had no problem with the thought of having a gun in case someone broke into my home. (Granted, I would have tried to aim for his knees rather than a killing shot, but still.)

 

The change in my life didn’t come from a pastor or author, however. Even after reading The Cost of Discipleship, I thought that Bonhoeffer was an incredible example of how Christians should live, but I mean, he eventually tried to kill Hitler; being a pacifist doesn’t work when you have people like Hitler in the world.[3] The change actually came when I had to choose a research paper topic for my Intermediate Writing class, and I decided to write on hell. Although the paper was not centered on the violence aspects of eschatological judgment, doing these studies began to open my eyes to how the two are related, and it was a jarring experience, to say the least. Here’s the second to last paragraph:

 

To those who do believe in a Hell that consists of eternal punishment and torment, however, it is very beneficial for them to see how this plays out practically in their lives, whether in their homes or in their political endeavors. According to a New York Times article published on January 20, 2006 by Charles Marsh, “87 percent of all white evangelical Christians in the United States” agreed with President Bush’s decision to enter into war, whereas “recent polls indicate that 68 percent of white evangelicals” are still in agreement that the war at the time was justifiable.[4] What this means in practicality is that even though a large majority of these people believe Hell is eternal and an undesirable place to end up at, they are still willing to support a war against a strongly non-Christian area of the world, which means that for every person there that dies without believing in Jesus receives a full-ride to Hell, not to mention any soldiers in the American Army that die without faith in Jesus as their Lord and Savior, as well. This year, a survey showed that approximately half of the nation is pro-life in relation to abortion[5], a view held by many Christians[6], which means that while these Christians are pro-life in relation to American unborn children, their choice of being pro-war results in the death of any child that is killed in the process of war. Factor in American Christian’s 74% support of the death penalty[7], and one may see that for a people who claim that Hell is evil, there is a glaring contradiction in their beliefs and their attempts to save people from this impending doom.

 

While I would nuance a few of those statements after a year of reflection and learning (hindsight is 20/20, after all), the point still remains that although we as American Christians use war and violence as means of self-preservation, we are, inevitably, ending the lives of others; lives of people that are still made in the image of God, despite religious beliefs, social conditions, etc. This, when coupled with the idea that we are to “give up our lives for Jesus” and “die to ourselves”, seems to be contradictory, especially when Jesus is our “example” and he willingly laid his life down for his enemies (note: us).

 

With this mindset in tow, reading the Bible was a new experience for me. Although I was initially haunted by the violent, God-endorsed happenings in the Old Testament, I was confident in John’s testimony that knowing Jesus was knowing the Father; that the author of Hebrews was right in saying that the Son is the perfect representation of who God is. This isn’t to say that the Old Testament isn’t reliable, or that these violent events didn’t happen, but that everything needed to be filtered through who God is, and we see that most clearly on the cross.

 

Think about it this way: if you were to read Lord of the Rings, beginning with the Hobbit, with no foreknowledge of the plot and/or ending, you might be a bit confused in why Bilbo let Gollum live. This is drawn out immensely in The Fellowship of the Ring, when Frodo becomes exasperated over his uncle’s mercy towards Gollum.

 

“But this is terrible!” cried Frodo. “Far worse than the worst that I imagined from your hints and warnings. O Gandalf, best of friends, what am I to do? For now I am really afraid. What am I to do? What a pity that Bilbo did not stab that vile creature, when he had the chance!”

 

“Pity? It was Pity that stayed his hand. Pity, and Mercy; not to strike without need. And he has been well rewarded, Frodo. Be sure that he took so little hurt from the evil, and escaped in the end, because he began his ownership of the Ring so. With Pity.”

 

“I am sorry,” said Frodo. “But I am frightened; and I do not feel any pity for Gollum.”

 

“You have not seen him,” Gandalf broke in.

 

“No, and I don’t want to,” said Frodo. “I can’t understand you. Do you mean to say that you, and the Elves, have let him live on after all those horrible deeds? Now at any rate he is as bad as an Orc, and just an enemy. He deserves death.”

 

“Deserves it! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends.”[8]

Now, I’m not quoting this simply because Gandalf seems to be saying something that supports my views here. Rather, it’s because while Bilbo’s act may not make sense at this point, it becomes more than clear at the end of The Return of the King.

 

“Well, this is the end, Sam Gamgee,” said a voice by his side. And there was Frodo, pale and worn, and yet himself again; and in his eyes there was peace now, neither strain of will, nor madness, nor any fear. His burden was taken away. There was the dear master of the sweet days in the Shire.

 

“Master!” cried Sam, and fell upon his knees. In all that ruin of the world for the moment he felt only joy, great joy. The burden was gone. His master had been saved; he was himself again, he was free. And then Sam caught sight of the maimed and bleeding hand.

 

“Your poor hand!” he said. “And I have nothing to bind it with, or comfort it. I would have spared him a whole hand of mine rather. But he’s gone now beyond recall, gone forever.”

 

“Yes,” said Frodo. “But do you remember Gandalf’s words: Even Gollum may have something yet to do? But for him, Sam, I could not have destroyed the Ring. The Quest would have been in vain, even at the bitter end. So let us forgive him! For the Quest is achieved, and now all is over. I am glad you are here with me. Here at the end of all things, Sam.”[9]

 

The reason I bring all of this up is because when anyone starts the Lord of the Rings series for the first time, this entire story is new to them. Even with potential spoilers, the way Tolkien weaves you in and out of the canon of Middle-Earth keeps you on your toes and doesn’t let you hold onto your assumptions too tightly (as we have seen with Gollum). Nevertheless, once you are finished with the book, the entire story changes for you. You don’t look back at the events from before in the same light, and you surely wouldn’t read the books again with the same “naiveté”, so to speak, as you had before. To do so would be irresponsible and hinder you from gaining anymore insight from the books in front of you.

 

In the same way, this is what the cross does for Christians. We look at the Old Testament (and life in general) with the knowledge that Jesus is the perfect revelation of God’s character, and that even though there may be things we don’t understand, we do know what God desires for us, and it is to love as God loves; to love the way Jesus did on the cross.

 

To me, this puts everything in a new light. The Beatitudes go from rules that people will inevitably fail (as some Christians view them) to being announcements of “the arrival of the kingdom of God”; as our “Bill of Rights”, so to speak.[10] Things are changing, Jesus is saying, and this is what it looks like to be God’s people. It matters no longer where you were born or how well you keep the law, but in the way you love God and others, and this comes from making peace and living self-sacrificially.

 

Even the idea of the cross was transformed for me. Instead of being the moment where God was the most “wrathful”, we see God shedding divine blood in order to redeem mankind. As Paul so beautifully wrote, “God was reconciling the world to himself in the Messiah, not counting their transgressions against them. […] The Messiah did not know sin, but God made him to be sin on our behalf, so that in him we might embody God’s faithfulness to the covenant” (2 Corinthians 5:19, 21, KNT, emphasis mine).

 

There is no wrath here. Only love. And according to the author if 1 John, “This is how we know love: he laid down his life for us. And we too ought to lay down our lives for our brothers and sisters” (3:16).

---

To be honest, I originally considered writing an article where I argued against every scripture/idea (that I knew of) that promoted “violence”, but honestly, I no longer have the energy or desire to do so. I’ve found that while deconstruction is necessary for learning, there are people out there that do a much better job at that than I do, and I’m okay with that. Rather, the reason I’m writing this is because I believe there are very good reasons to adopt a lifestyle of non-violence, even though it may not seem to be logical.

 

I mean, I do understand the logic. We want to have the freedom to protect our families (and ourselves) when danger comes our way. We like the liberties we have here in America, and if anyone threatens that, we obviously feel the need to retaliate. And let’s face it: there are definitely people that are morally corrupt in this world. There is justice that needs to happen, and for some people, the method is through violence. I get it.

But the thing I don’t understand is we always talk about how Christianity “doesn’t make sense”. We go on and on about how the world “just doesn’t understand”, and according to the passage I quoted at the beginning in 1 Corinthians, the cross is foolishness, so one would be right in saying that Christian beliefs aren’t going to be logical. However, the element Paul is coupling with foolishness isn’t just Christianity: it’s the fact that even though Rome and the Pharisees thought they had won by crucifying the “so-called” Messiah, that even though Jesus refused to raise a finger against them, God ultimately vindicated Jesus by raising Him from the dead.

God had the last word in that argument, and it was that even though the powers and authorities of the world used violence to “win”, it would be an act of self-sacrifice that would truly triumph.

 

All I ask is that through this article, you reflect on the way you love people. If we believe that everyone is made in the image of God, then that should make us pause in whether we want to lay a finger against them or not. If we believe that we are called to “lay our lives down for the Lord”, then why are we more willing to end someone else’s life than give up our own? If we believe in the idea of an afterlife that is defined by eternal, conscious torment[11], then why are we supporting decisions that make life hell for people, here and later? If we are “already saved”, then wouldn’t it be more cruel to seal the fate of someone else’s salvation compared to extending grace and mercy? And, most importantly, if our greatest command is to love others as God loves us, then how can we do that by hurting and killing another? If Jesus died for all mankind and showed us that we have a worth that is beyond comprehension, then can we really say that our life is more important than anyone else’s?

 

At the end of the day, I side with Walter Wink when he says, “So while I do not believe that Christians have a vocation for violence, and should actively oppose its use, we are also not permitted to sit in judgment over those who resort to violence. God can take care of that.”[12] Everything I’ve written here is meant to inspire genuine and somber reflection and prayer. I’m not an apologist by any means, but I’ve seen the fruit of violence in my own life, and I can say that there is more joy to be found when I make peace and not war. I know not all of you will agree with me on this, and that is fine. Again. All I ask is that you consider what I have written here and deeply pray about it. This topic is so much more than just being “theologically correct”. It’s about the way we love others and proclaim that Jesus is Lord.

 

“My kingdom isn’t the sort that grows in this world,” replied Jesus. “If my kingdom were from this world, my supporters would have fought to stop me from being handed over to the Judaeans. So, then, my kingdom is not the sort that comes from here.” (John 18:36, KNT)

 

By D.L. Marshall

Follow His Blog Here>

---

[1] Sprinkle, P. (2013). Fight: A Christian case for non-violence. Colorado Springs: David C. Cook. Kindle Edition.

[2] http://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/what-made-it-ok-for-god-to-kill-women-and-children-in-the-old-testament

[3] I still believe that Bonhoeffer never did attempt to assassinate Hitler, despite the claims that he did. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/jesuscreed/2013/10/28/bonhoeffer-was-he-really-involved-in-the-attempt-to-kill-hitler/

[4] http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/20/opinion/20marsh.html?_r=1&

[5] http://www.christianpost.com/news/gallup-pro-choice-americans-at-record-low-75414/

[6] http://www.christianpost.com/news/gallup-nonreligious-are-least-pro-life-75772

[7] Zylstra, S. (2008). “Capital doubts.” Christian Century,52 (3). 20.

[8] Tolkien, J.R.R. (1984*). The fellowship of the ring. New York: Ballantine Books. 92-93

[9] Tolkien, J.R.R. (1984*) The return of the king. New York: Ballantine Books. 276-277

[10] Zahnd, B. (2012). Beauty will save the world. **: Passio Publishing. 186.

[11] Which I don’t.

[12] Wink, W. (2003). Jesus and nonviolence: A third way. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. 86.

* My editions don’t make it clear when they were published.

** I cannot find the physical address for Passio Publishing, but they’re a subset of Charisma. If anyone could provide this information, that would be appreciated!