I’m not a pacifist. At least in the sense that it is a definable position for me. I do, however, subscribe to what I believe is the very Christian idea of non-violence. What I mean by that is that I do not believe that my commitment to non-violence exists as a belief structure outside of my commitment to following in the steps of Jesus. In other words, to me, non-violence is non-distinguishable from being a Christ-follower.

Topics such as pacifism and non-violence are getting a lot of press these days. In the midst of war and terror, I feel that is only appropriate. There must be discourse and dialogue during any troubling and problematic time. And the interchange of ideas is crucial in a world such as this.

My understanding of non-violence is shaped by many thinkers, theologians and, yes, even bloggers. I do not kid myself into thinking that I can shed any greater light on this debate than that which is provided by far loftier minds than mine. If you need a more scholarly treatment then I can give you some quality resources. However, over the course of the next few weeks I will attempt to carve out my own territory in this debate.

As a result I hope several things occur:
1. That greater understanding is secured among those who disagree. I am committed that this discussion proceed in a civil manner.
2. That legitimate objections to non-violence can be addressed without condescension, flippancy or evasion.
3. That I can work out my own salvation in this area. My response to a violent world is something that robs me of sleep and peace far too often.
4. That the discussion can be accessible and understandable for folks like me who are a little slower on the uptake.

As I progress I hope to specifically address some problematic areas that proponents of non-violence are often confronted with. Far too often, these questions are side-stepped and avoided rather than honestly and sincerely dealt with. Concerns we will address include:
–God’s apparent saction of war in the Hebrew Scriptures.
–Whether Jesus used physical violence in the Temple
–Our allegiance to Rome as Paul encouraged in Romans 13
–The scenario: what do you do when your family is being attacked.
–The notion that non-violence represents cowardice, passivity, or naivete.
–The co-existence of non-violence and “security” forces.
–The problem of evil in today’s society

It has become readily apparent to me that non-violence can spark some pretty strong and negative reactions from people. It also must be acknowledged that those who subscribe to non-violence can also be fairly “physical” in their words and attitudes. Therefore, to keep this discussion in the realm of civility, here are some guidelines, caveats and disclaimers:

1. Many godly men and women have served their country in various ways out of the sincerity of their conviction. I do not, in any way, disparage their convictions and contributions to this world.
2. Please participate in the discussion. But limit it to the topic at hand. If we are discussing war in the OT please don’t jump ahead to “The Scenario.”
3. Play nice. Peace means nothing if it doesn’t first begin in our own hearts and words.
4. Agree to disagree. Godly men and women can draw different conclusions.
5. Please, please, please understand the distinction that is made when I talk about “we.” I am talking about the church, not the US or any other nation-state. This is not a political issue for me.