Scott Freeman

The non-violence life is what we see modeled in the person of Jesus. It is consistent in His teachings, life and example.

We have seen the way of Christ exemplified in His denial of self and humility. By way of self-abnegation we are able to make broad steps into a peaceable relationship with others.

Like the proclivity that we have towards elevating the self we also live in a society that propagates anger and rage. For the sake of brevity and staying on point, I will not belabor the prevalence of anger generating avenues of entertainment in our culture. That has been addressed in more detail and depth than I have time or interest to do at this point.
However, it must be noted that, among the plethora of violent video-games and splatter flicks, rage is in.
Couple that with this misguided notion that anger is something that must simply be managed and you have the recipe for violence run amok. I have encountered many people in counselling and pastoral sessions struggling with anger issues.

Jesus knew that anger full grown is murder. He warned us of the murderous seeds that we plant in our own hearts whenever we tap into anger. We saw it in the early days when Cain presented his bruised kumquats to the Lord and grew angry that God was more pleased with Abel’s first fruits. The progressive, insidious nature of anger mushroomed into violent actions in the heart of Cain.

To be non-violent then we must get a hold of our own anger. One of the greatest harbingers of the onset of anger in our society is an escalated sense of entitlement.
Anger often results when we feel that our rights have been violated. If someone comes between us and our ideas of what we deserve then our response is often of a volatile nature.
From a middle finger to the guy that impinges on our rights to navigate the interstates to a nasty email to the co-worker who robbed your right to a peaceful work day we often respond to life’s happenings as if our rights have been encroached and trampled on.

But what we must do is recognize that all that we have and possess (including our rights) ultimately belong to God. If all we have is truly His, then that must include our morality, our virtues, and our entitlements.
Therefore, if someone robs you of what you think is rightfully yours, they are ultimately robbing God. So it’s best to leave it in His hands.

To be non-violent then we must resist anger. We must not allow the seeds of violence to take residence in our hearts. Here are a few suggestions to defeat anger in your life:

1. Seek God’s release from the oppressive hand of rage and anger.
2. Understand that God is in control. What comes your way can be for your benefit.
3. Do an inventory and seek to understand how you may have contributed to the problem. Have you been lazy, negligent, mean, stubborn, inconsiderate or anything else that might have contributed to the current situation you find yourself in.
4. If so, repent and seek to make amends.
5. Ask what Fruit of the Spirit can be honed through these trials.
6. Seek out relationships with people who can have a calming influence.
7. Seek to remove stressors from your life. If you feel yourself more agitated after playing video games or watching violent movies, it’s time to get a new interest.
8. Develop a God-honoring course of action. How can you navigate through the situation
9. Be honest. Speak the truth in all dealings.
10. Deal with the problem. Anger delayed is anger amplified.
11. Journal your struggles with anger. Note the times, situations, and people that are prevalent when you are most likely to respond in a negative way. This will give you insight into situations to avoid, relationships to redeem and whether or not you act out when over-stimulated or tired.
12. In all things give yourself grace.

Non-violence begins with each individual humbling himself and seeking not to respond in anger to the every day situations of life.
As Christians it is up to us to model what that is like. We must not give vent to our anger. Nor must we ever seek to repay evil with evil.

One of the problems that arises in the debate about the biblical foundation for non-violence is a result of flawed theology.

–If you believe that there is going to be a literal, physical war when Jesus returns at the end of some seven year rapture, then you are less likely to see the validity of beating a sword into a plowshare.
–If you believe that God chooses who He will for salvation and the rest of people are just out of luck, then life becomes an us/them proposition.
–If you believe that the world must go to hell in a handbasket before Christ returns, then the prospect of social justice becomes less attractive.

Another barrier to our understanding of non-violence and its implications is our own sinful hearts. Anger, fear, worry and the lionization of the self are stumbling blocks on our way to having peaceable spirits.
I want us to begin to look at these heart issues and how they might preclude us from being non-violent. Let’s look first at the issue of the self.

Self-aggrandizement has plagued us since the fall. The desire to be like God is ever before us. It would be part of the downfall of the Israelite nation. They were known for chasing after their own desires over above those of their God.

In more modern times, men such as Adler, Rogers and Maslow have perpetuated the idea of the self and its fulfillment as being the ultimate end of man. The impact that these men have had in our society in general, and the church in particular has, unfortunately, been monumental.

There has been a shift in our time, within the church, to a gospel, borne not out of discipleship and self-sacrifice, but, instead, of self-love and self-aggrandizement.
The unbiblical doctrine of the self and its actualization and glory is rarely, if ever, questioned. Instead it is embraced as being the foundation for a meaningful life.

Today, it seems that there is little difference between the church and the world when it comes to the view of the individual. Many Christian writers either tout self-esteem and self-actualization or assume it in their writing.

I’m not saying that feeling good about yourself is a bad thing. But the example we see from Jesus is not self-fulfillment but instead self-denial.

Jesus was never self-oriented. Instead He was others-oriented.

He was never concerned with esteeming Himself. Instead He humbled Himself to the point of the cross.

But much of the talk about non-violence today centers upon the notion of protecting ourselves, defending ourselves, standing up for our own rights.

But Jesus did not protect Himself, He surrendered to others. He did not stand up for Himself but knelt to serve them.

If Christ did not esteem Himself, how can we, of mere flesh and blood, presume to do anything more? How arrogant are we if we profess that we should esteem ourselves when Christ continually lessened Himself?

To be truly non-violent then we have to understand the example of Christ. His example was about that of self-abnegation not exalting Himself or His rights.
It was about considering others better than Himself. And He was God!

If we begin to truly view people as Jesus views them, then our propensity to lash out in violent words or deeds dissipates.

The words of A.W. Tozer will serve us well: “So keenly do we men enjoy dominion that we like to think that we hold in our own hands the power of life and death. We love to think that hell will be easier to bear from the fact of our having gone there in defiance of some power that sought to rule us.”

It seems that there are many misconceptions about non-violence. Opponents and those who dismiss it outright tend to gravitate toward scenarios where it would seem to be impossible to not retaliate in a physical manner.
Often the questions focus on how it can’t be done rather than on how to truly be non-violents.

Misconceptions are thus:

1. That non-violence is passive. Non-violence does not mean that you will be chanting and burning incense in a corner while your family is being attacked.
2. That non-violence is unrealistic. However, it has been successful hundreds of times in effecting revolution and peace.
3. That non-violence is anti-american. The success and legacy of those involved in the civil rights movement should effectively lay to rest that claim.

What is established is this:

1. It is Biblical. We see the prophets lay forth the vision of peace, of the lion and the lamb and the sword being beaten into plowshares.
2. It is the way of Christ. He could have deployed an army at Calvary exacting military retribution for the oppression of His people. Yet He did not. Instead, He humbled Himself, even to the point of the cross.
3. It is largely untried. Part of the reason this conversation is so difficult for us is that true meekness is not something that is instilled in us. We are taught the virtue of pride. We gossip. We use our tongues as weapons against other.

For the sake of this individual post, I’d like to take aim at the first misconception. Hear this, clearly. Non-violence is not doing nothing.
It requires more creativity and action than violence does.
This is one of the reasons that I shy away from use of the word pacifism. It sounds to close to passive.
However, Jesus shows us the creative ramifications of non-violence (HT: Walter Wink; I’m relying heavily on his scholarship)

There are a lot of things that Jesus does not address in His teachings: abortion, homosexuality, instrumental music, the role of women, etc.
But He does talk quit a bit about non-violence. To wit:

In Matthew 5: 39, He tells us “Do not resist the one who is evil.” This is a progression of the laws of retaliation that were prominent in the Torah that proclaimed an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. It’s important to note that laws of retaliation were prescribed through the courts, not individual vengeance.
It’s important that we understand what Jesus means by “resist.” The Greek word is anthistemi and doesn’t really mean resist. Anti–against. Histemi has a noun form that means violent rebellion. As a matter of fact, that is how it is rendered most times in the Greek OT. It refers to armed revolt.
So, what Jesus is saying is not to resist evil. Of course, we are supposed to. What He is saying is not to resist evil by lashing back with your own violent acts. It has also been translated “be hostile towards” or “rebel.”
Anthistemi was a military term. It’s used in Ephesians 6 in regards to taking up the full armor of God. It’s also used to mean insurrection and rioting in the NT.
Josephus used this term for military conflict.
So, what Jesus is truly saying is, “Don’t strike back against evil.” Violence is not the answer to violence. The scholars version says “Don’t react violently against the one who is evil.”
The Good News Bible says “Do not take revenge on someone who wrongs you.”

But what are we to do:

Jesus says to turn the other cheek. Jesus says if someone strikes you on the right cheek, offer the left. Why the right cheek?
Again, Wink gives us tremendous insight. The left hand was used in the first century for unclean tasks. The only way that you could hit someone on their right cheek with your right hand would be to backhand them.
It was the greatest insult that could be given in that culture. You could be prosecuted in both Jewish and Roman courts for such an offense. According to the Mishnah the fine for backhanding someone was 100 times greater than hitting them with your fist.
This is a personal affront mean to bring about embarrasment and humiliation. A backhand would by employed to establish domination over another.
Jesus says, “give them the other cheek as well.” In other words, rob them of their power over you. Take away the indignity by embarrasing them.
It’s an emphatic statement that “you cannot diminish my worth. I am just as valuable a person as you are.”
It’s not fighting back. It’s turning the tables completely.
Without violence.

Then Jesus says “Hey, you are being sued for your tunic, go ahead and give them your cloak as well.”

Wink says,

Only the poorest of the poor would have nothing but an outer garment to give as collateral for a loan. Jewish law strictly required its return every evening at sunset, for that was all the poor had in which to sleep.

To do what Jesus said would be to strip off all of their clothes and leave the court without a stitch of clothing. This is civil protest at its finest.
Take what you want, but you won’t rob me of dignity.

Then Jesus says that if you are compelled to go one mile, go ahead and go the second. If a Roman soldier try to require a Jew to go more than a mile, he would face severe penalties.
If you go the second mile what are the implications?
–That you are stronger than the Roman soldier?
–That you are possibly being forced, inviting investigation of the Roman official?

Again, the tables are turned.

What we see in each of these scenarios is that the non-violent approach is not a do-nothing way of living. It is an active, creative way of turning the tables back upon your attacker.

If someone backhands you, the human impulse is to strike back. But instead, expose them for the aggressor that they are, maintaining your own dignity.
If someone sues you needlessly, don’t sue them back. Instead look for creative ways to establish your independence for usurious laws.
If someone forces you to work against your will, turn it to your will.

Non-violence IS harder than violence. It involves more creativity, more action, more diligence.
It involves standing your ground by rising above your attacker.

Part One
Part Two
Part Three

There is nothing in the life of Christ that support or proclaims violence as a legitimate end. His life, teaching and example was about another way. A way that rejects violence and passivity.
A way that embraces effecting positive change through the turned cheek, the second mile and the love of enemies.

This is problematic because it runs counter to our instincts. Loving enemies, praying for those who persecute you, and foregoing the opportunity to strike back are not natural to us.
But if Jesus touts a different way, what do we make of the Hebrew Scriptures?

Again this is problematic. The surface understanding of who God appears to be in the OT is not a God that illicits a bunch of warm fuzzy feelings. He seems too wrathful for that.

I step on tenuous ground here on at least two fronts: one is, ultimately, I cannot speak for God. His ways are not my ways. I don’t understand why He has done all the things He has done. And likely never will.
Second, is the seeming dismissal of the literary use of war metaphors and manipulations in the editing process in favor of pure literalism. But that’s a road I’m not fully prepared to go down.

The best I can do is lay out a series of thoughts:
–God has often employed a sort of progressive redemption (HT: William Webb). He took people where they were and moved them in the direction that He wanted them to go. He does not take us from A-Z in one fell swoop, but instead is patient with us. The OT is replete with things that God tolerated but was not necessarily fond of: polygamy, slavery, repression of women, etc. But He acknowledged where the people were primitively and moved them on from there. Would any of us doubt today that God despises slavery, although it happened through the NT times? Would any of us doubt that God hates the second class treatment of women, although it continues to this day? God may have utilized war but it was never His ideal. He created us to be in union with each other, not dis-union.
–Ultimately, if we take the stories of the Israelites conquest of Canaan and God’s instructions against the Amalekites then the OT example for us is not warfare, but genocide. Hopefully, none of us are that barbaric to think that should be the lesson we learn from the Hebrew Scriptures.
–The Ultimate Mover of these conquests in the OT was God, not man. His blessings were given upon those He commanded to act in such a way. I have never received a direct order from God to attack anyone. Without His bellowing from the Heavens to attack then we become far too presumptuous to go on the offensive.
–Israel wanted a king because they wanted to be like the other nations. God warned them that having a king would move them toward warfare, toward the establishment of armies.
–There is a strong sense that God is operating under the constructs of fallen man, not on the ideal. When the Perfect came, we see His intents and purposes come into full view. The stipulation against David building the temple because of his status as a warrior is not something to be glossed over. If war precludes building a temple and the Temple today is not made by human hands but is the individual believer, then it seems to reason that the Temple of the individual believer must not be given to violence.
–We have much to learn from the prophets. We see a systematic laying out of the ideal for the Kingdom. The visions were of swords being beaten into plowshares, of the lion laying down with the lamb. It was a vision of peace. God was emphatic that He detested people dying without a relationship with Him. Jonah is prime example of that: he was dispatched, not to condemn, but to proclaim a saving relationship.
–Ultimately, Israel was to be the avenue for all people to know God. Any failure in that regard was the fault of the nation-state, not of their God.
–The prophets proclaim the way to the peaceable kingdom. They point the way to the Messiah who would be both Suffering Servant and Victorious Warrior. (A fact that many Jews did not get because they were anticipating two distinct Messiah’s.)
–Again, the ultimate way to understand this progression is through the person of Jesus. He tells us in Matthew 5:17 that He had come to fulfill the law and the prophets. He was the culmination of what the Hebrew people were called to be and do. What was that? What was the true message of the Hebrew Scriptures? Very simple:

“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandment depend all the Law and the Prophets.”

The more I study both the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament the more convinced I am that it all comes down to these two ideas: Love Him and love each other. All else is commentary.

Ultimately, what we have from the OT is this:
–We can trust in God and His might. Or our own. That’s idolatry.
–To view God as warrior in the OT is to look over the more plenteous aspects of His personality there: lover, Father, protector, merciful, shepherd, redeemer, kinsman, deliverer, and on and on.

There is nothing in the Hebrew Scriptures that gives us license to perpetrate violence on another. Especially when we see the Hebrew Scriptures through the one who fulfilled them: Jesus Christ. To understand the OT apart from Jesus, His life, teaching and example is to miss the God of grace and wonder.
Again, we are back to Christ.
Again, we are back to non-violence.

Jesus lived a consistent life. His actions and His words match up all the way down the line. And that’s a good thing.
If His actions deviated at any point from His words, then He would relinquish His diety.
And He would be a hypocrite.
That’s why there are a couple of problematic verses that people want to gravitate to whenever the contemplate the non-violent example of Jesus.
One thing that continually amazes me is the speed with which people go to the temple incident
as if that negates everything he said about loving your enemies and turning the other cheek.
Yes, Jesus was angry. Yes, he drove out the the animals. But the passage never says that He used physical violence.
It also does not say that he drove out the moneychangers.

The original Greek reads like this:
(He drove out the sheep the oxen poured out the sellers money overturned the tables)

Reading physical violence into this is a mistake in translation. It’s not there.
The word (exeballen) was not physical. It was the same word that was used in conjunction with sending out. In fact, every other time it is used in the NT that is the translation: Sent out.
Simply put, he did not hit anyone. He did not use violence to make a point. If He had, His entire message of turning the other cheek would have been lost.
Turning the other cheek was a way to shame the oppressor. It was an active way to seize the upper hand at the same time retaining your own humility.

Another amazing point of the temple story is their reaction after the fact. Was Jesus arrested for assault? No.
Did anyone try to fight back? No.
Where were the Roman Guards? It’s Passover. The Roman Guards are on HIGH ALERT for any type of insurrection with up to 2.25 Million Jews in Jerusalem. But they do nothing.
If Jesus is beating people up, they would have intervened.

Instead, the Jews ask Him a question! “What sign do you show us for doing these things?”
A reasoned discourse is not typically the follow-up to an assault.
If that is the case then the Pharisees would have been the one to turn the other cheek. Not Jesus.
Jesus would have been a hypocrite. With an amazing lack of self-control.
And therefore, not the Messiah.
But get this: Luke indicates that He continued to teach in the temple.
If He had assaulted people, would He have been allowed back?
Of course not.

To maintain that Jesus used violence in the temple is reading into it your own ideas. There is not one whit of evidence that He did.
We still have to wrestle with what Jesus said and did, which was remarkable consistent. If we are able to construct a defense of using violence in our lives, then we have to look somewhere other than the Christ in which to do it.

Part of the problem with this discussion is due to our proclivity to jump ahead in the story. To proceed in a systematic order we have to determine the best place to start.
With the guidelines firmly in place (and I am thankful for the civil discourse thus far) it is imperative that we find the most appropriate place to begin.
When initially thinking of penning this series I intended to begin chronologically with the Hebrew Scriptures. However, I think that moving along a linear timeline loses the normative voice for the Christian’s conclusions on non-violence.

The normative voice is Jesus. I believe that most of us who affiliate themselves in the Christian colony can affirm that the standard is Christ.
In any debate that centers on matters of a Christian nature then Jesus must be both the author and perfector of that argument. The Alpha and Omega, so to speak.
What does Jesus say? Let’s begin there. Pardon the length but this is just a sampling of what Jesus has to say on the subject.

For the purposes of this post let us strive to look at what He SAID and not place our human conditions on that. We can suss out further implications as we go along. (Quotes from English Standard Version)

Matthew
5:5 “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
5:7 “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.
5:9 “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
5:10 “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
5:11 “Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. 12 Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

5:21 “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ 22 But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire. 23 So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift. 25 Come to terms quickly with your accuser while you are going with him to court, lest your accuser hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the guard, and you be put in prison. 26 Truly, I say to you, you will never get out until you have paid the last penny.

5:38 “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 the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41 And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you.

5:43 “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 sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 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, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? 48 You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

6:12 and forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.
6:14 For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you, 15 but if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

7:1 “Judge not, that you be not judged. 2 For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. 3 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.

7:12 “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

26:52 Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword. 53 Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels? 54 But how then should the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must be so?”

Mark
11:25 And whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone, so that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses.”

Luke
3:14 Soldiers also asked him, “And we, what shall we do?” And he said to them, “Do not extort money from anyone by threats or by false accusation, and be content with your wages.”

6:27 “But I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. 29 To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either. 30 Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back. 31 And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.

6:32 “If you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to those who do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. 34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount. 35 But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil. 36 Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful.

6:37 “Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven; 38 give, and it will be given to you. Good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For with the measure you use it will be measured back to you.”

9:51 When the days drew near for him to be taken up, he set his face to go to Jerusalem. 52 And he sent messengers ahead of him, who went and entered a village of the Samaritans, to make preparations for him. 53 But the people did not receive him, because his face was set toward Jerusalem. 54 And when his disciples James and John saw it, they said, “Lord, do you want us to tell fire to come down from heaven and consume them?” 55 But he turned and rebuked them. and he said, “You do not know what manner of spirit you are of; for the Son of Man came not to destroy people’s lives but to save them” 56 And they went on to another village.

10:25 And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” 26 He said to him, “What is written in the Law? How do you read it?” 27 And he answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” 28 And he said to him, “You have answered correctly; do this, and you will live.”

10:29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” 30 Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead. 31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32 So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. 34 He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 And the next day he took out two denarii [3] and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ 36 Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” 37 He said, “The one who showed him mercy.” And Jesus said to him, “You go, and do likewise.”

23:32 Two others, who were criminals, were led away to be put to death with him. 33 And when they came to the place that is called The Skull, there they crucified him, and the criminals, one on his right and one on his left. 34 And Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” [2] And they cast lots to divide his garments.

John

8:3 The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst 4 they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. 5 Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” 6 This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 7 And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 And once more he bent down and wrote on the ground. 9 But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. 10 Jesus stood up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” 11 She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.”]]

The evidence is staggering: Jesus chose the way of the cross. Our mind typically flies to scenarios where this kind of living does not make practical sense. Where if falls outside of human wisdom and reason. But yet, that is what Jesus did. It’s how He chose to live and His teachings to us smack of grace, mercy, love of enemy and turning the other cheek.

Here is where we must start. Are we called to live like Him? If yes, then we must look deeply at the implications of what He said. For ultimately, our allegiance must be to Him, and Him alone.

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.