Nonviolence 101 – Concluding Thoughts and Exhortations (part 9)

February 18, 2011 By Kurt Willems 5 Comments

The following is part of a fairly long series on the theology and practice of nonviolence.  If you would like to read all of the posts, you can do so here.

————————————–

Convinced of the theology of nonviolence, I have embraced the essence of my Anabaptist roots.  It would be arrogant to assume that my tradition is the only one with a peaceful witness, as it is exciting to see how many Christians of varying denominations are choosing the dusty road of subversive discipleship.  For the person who reads this and is not ready to buy into the argument presented, I have nothing but respect for you.  I do not believe that the Bible sanctions any combination of Christianity and violence, but I also do not stand in judgment over-against those with whom I disagree.  We serve a God who has always accommodated to incarnate his love and care for humanity, even at the expense of allowing us to live with flawed patterns of belief and practice.  This side of the renewal of creation at the return of Christ–when we “will beat… swords into plowshares and… spears into pruning hooks” (Micah 4.3)–may we choose to love each other in spite of our disagreements.

Finally, I want to give a last word to those of you who have read this exposition of nonviolent resistance and are convinced of the biblical teaching.  The journey ahead will be a difficult one.  Choosing to be an advocate of nonviolence is not popular in our American Christian culture [Read more...]

Filed Under: (Series) Nonviolence 101, Nationalism, Nonviolence, Roman Empire, Theology Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 5 Comments

Nonviolence 101 – 2 "What ifs" [Another Hitler or Someone Attacks Your Spouse/Child] (part 8)

February 17, 2011 By Kurt Willems 58 Comments

The following is part of a fairly long series on the theology and practice of nonviolence.  If you would like to read all of the posts, you can do so here.

————————————–

“What if…” #1

Without fail, there are two “what if” scenarios that always emerge when having this discussion with American friends.  The first of these is: What if a Hitler-like dictator emerges? The conversation usually goes in the direction of claiming that there was no other option than to fight in WWII to stop the genocide of millions of people.  It may be true that by the time the United States intervened, that there was no other foreseeable path but war.  But that is exactly the problem with the question.  It assumes that the war is well under way and that we peacemakers now have to go and turn the hearts of the Nazi’s through nonviolent subversion.  The problem is that WWII is a product of the myths we just dealt with.  Imagine if all Christians in Germany would have “turned the other cheek” and refused to take up arms?  Nazism would likely have come to nothing!  Robert Brimlow, in What About Hitler, takes this a bit further:

If the question is asking how a pacifistic church should have responded to the horrors of the Holocaust, the answer surely lies in being a peacemaking church long before the Halocaust ever began.  The church should have preached and lived a love of the Jews for many centuries before the twentieth; the church should have formed Christians into the kind of people who do not kill Jews, or homosexuals, or gypsies, or communists, or other Christians, or Nazis, or whoever else was victimized by the war.  The church should have lived and taught in such a way that the First World War would have been incomprehensible in a largely Christian Europe…  The failure of the church and of Christians to be peacemakers in 1942 is horrible precisely because it was a result and culmination of centuries of failure.[1]

“What if…” #2

The second “what if” question is no easier than the first, and gets quite personal for someone espousing nonviolence: What if your spouse or child is attacked? This is where we need to go back to our main Matthew text for a moment (to understand this part of the argument, you have to read posts: 2, 3, & 4).  Remember that Jesus instructs his followers to [Read more...]

Filed Under: (Series) Nonviolence 101, Nationalism, Nonviolence, Roman Empire, Theology Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 58 Comments

Nonviolence 101 – Jesus is Irrational! [2 Myths - Christian Nation & Redemptive Violence] (part 7)

February 16, 2011 By Kurt Willems 14 Comments

The following is part of a fairly long series on the theology and practice of nonviolence.  If you would like to read all of the posts, you can do so here.

————————————–

Now that we have thoroughly explored a theology of nonviolence, based on the New Testament witness, we need to address the common hurdles to holding this as truth.  For most of my life, nonviolence seemed so irrational that I thought: This couldn’t be what Jesus actually meant? This defies all common sense!  In fact, it is foolishness!  And after finally embracing my Anabaptist roots, I now realize that accepting nonviolence does not make it any less ridiculous.  But, believing such may offer something to the world that it is starving to find, a counter-cultural kingdom community that operates so irrationally that it is attractive.

Reflecting back, I think that there are two myths and two “what ifs” that were roadblocks in my journey.  For this reason, I want to briefly explore these and then offer a new way forward as radical bringers of peace.

2 Myths

There are two myths that have captured the imagination of many American Christians.  The first of these is the “myth of a Christian nation.”[1] This is the belief that the United States of America is a Christian nation.  And there is some justification for why this is ingrained in many folks’ consciousness.  Many of our founders held to some kind of belief in God (although many were deists) and claimed to found this nation on Biblical principles.  Not only so, but in our day we have slogans such as “in God we trust” and have in our pledge of allegiance, “under God.”  This belief is further reinforced by many conservative pastors and leaders who preach a God and country gospel.  The greatest evidence of this is found in the newly published: The American Patriots Bible.[2] Or consider this statement from Robert Jeffress from a chapter called “America is a Christian Nation:”

…Our ancestors built their dream of a new nation on the bedrock of Christianity.  John Quincy Adams, sixth president of the United States… offered this assessment of the linkage between Christianity and the founding of our country: “The highest glory of the American Revolution was this; it connected, in one indissoluble bond, the principles of civil government and the principles of Christianity.”[3]

There is this inherent belief that the United States is a Christian nation and that what is good for the country is good for God’s purposes in the world.

Pastor and Theologian Greg Boyd questions this thesis.  He argues that Christian conservatives who are fighting to take this country back for God, are wasting their time, because this nation was never Christian.  New Testament faith demands allegiance primarily to the kingdom of God.  No nation outside of such a reign can ever be properly deemed Christian.  And besides, when was America establishing itself as Christian? [Read more...]

Filed Under: (Series) Nonviolence 101, Greg Boyd, Nationalism, Nonviolence, Roman Empire, Theology Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 14 Comments

Nonviolence 101 – Other Key Passages that Deal With Violence [White Horses, New Testament Soldiers, & Swords] (part 6)

February 15, 2011 By Kurt Willems 13 Comments

The following is part of a fairly long series on the theology and practice of nonviolence.  If you would like to read all of the posts, you can do so here.

————————————–

Now that we have looked at the two key texts in the New Testament that address the issue of nonviolence, there are other relevant texts and theological themes that should briefly be mentioned.  Each of the following could take up several pages of investigation and reflection, but for our purposes I will highlight them with brevity.

  • John 18.36 – “Jesus said, ‘My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.’”  Here we have an indication that the kingdom of God is distinct from the empires of this world.  In God’s kingdom, disciples do not resort to violence.
  • Luke 6.27-36 – This passage is a parallel to the section of the Sermon on the Mount we dealt with in great detail, with various nuances.  It has a strong emphasis on love of enemies.
  • Luke 22.35-38 – Jesus tells his disciples that if they do not have a sword to “sell their cloak and buy one.”  The disciples then grab two swords, only to hear Christ respond: “That’s enough!”  This is not Jesus’ warning that when he gets taken that they will need to fight the authorities, but rather (as most commentators agree) the sword serves as a metaphor for the coming strife that they will face.  Jesus responds to them out of frustration because they are too dense to understand.  Imagine him raising his voice to say the equivalent of “enough of this!”[1] For a more detailed look, go here.
  • 1 Peter 2.19-24 – Here, Christians are encouraged to “bear up under the pain of unjust suffering;” to “suffer for doing good;” to endure after the patter of Christ’s suffering as “an example… [to] follow in his steps.”  Following Jesus in this way remembers how when he was insulted “he did not retaliate” or make “threats.”  “Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly.”  This passage is a call to radical non-retaliation.
  • Soldiers in the New Testament – It is commonly held that there are Roman soldiers [Read more...]
Filed Under: (Series) Nonviolence 101, Nationalism, Nonviolence, Roman Empire, Theology Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 13 Comments
« Older Posts