Drunken Mystic

Of course we can include any religion other than Christianity in this. Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, and several others have naturally grown due to the larger number of immigrants from certain parts of the world. These do not regard Christ as the only way within their doctrines, however they may honor Him as a good man or prophet.

As a historian, I am familiar with many pacifists, their views and methodologies. Three of them I am especially fond of: Martin Luther King, Jr., Gandhi, and Dietrich Bonhoeffer. One of my favorite books to read to American History classes is A Testament to Hope, a collection of Dr. King’s complete writings and speeches. It’s a big book (no, I haven’t read it all), but indispensable for understanding his philosophy.

I will not attempt to really place all three of these men in the same category, only to use these unique individuals to find some important common ground within pacifism to make a couple points. (I place Gandhi within this group because, while definitely not a Christian, he based much of his philosophy on Christian principles)

Pacifism is a belief that is not an appropriate means to any end. Pacifism, at its heart, sees any done of man against man as wholly evil and to be avoided.

I actually find strict pacifists quite noble. But true, biblical pacifism, is willing to suffer , even to the point of , in order to show love to those bound by violent solutions. Biblical pacifism is not non-confrontational. Rather, it is fairly aggressive in its passion to show love speak truth. It is realistic in its expectation that while true love is shown in righteousness, will be shown by others, many times to great extremes.

All three of these men, King, Gandhi, and Bonhoeffer, all made the ultimate sacrifice for their beliefs. King and Gandhi were both assassinated by those of extreme predjudice, and Bonhoeffer was executed by the regime he opposed in his own home country. While neither desired , nor did they shrink from it.

Another common theme, however, was their ultimate failure in their respective causes. Gandhi mourned the division of India and Pakistan, of Hindu and Muslim; even though they gained freedom from their British oppressors, Gandhi knew they were still bound by their religious . Bonhoeffer suffered in prison as other nations brought Germany down and the aggressive German resistance, which actually attempted to assassinate , failed. It was Bonhoeffer’s hope that Germans would rise up to oppose . It never really happened.

And for our great Dr. King. He stood next to Johnson for the signing of the Civil Rights Act of ‘64 and made his famous “I have a Dream” speech that still gives us all chills. But he was largely marginalized by the youth movement in the early ’60’s that rejected his nonviolent approach and insisted whites be seen and treated as the enemy. What was once a wonderful movement for peace and brotherhood disintegrated into division and power plays and, yes, .

While each definitely moved with spiritual motivation, they also fought for temporal gain. Here is where modern pacifism breaks down.

True pacifism only works when exercised by the people of God, filled with the Spirit of Christ, and done for eternal reasons alone. Each of these men, while great men of history and greatly inspiring to me personally in their writings and example, sought temporal gain (Bonhoeffer with the salvation of Western Civilization and the removal of the regime, Gandhi with an independent and united India, and King with equal rights under the law for all men).

Jesus and the apostles of the New Testament, while supremely non-violent, were not concerned about these things. They were only concerned with the organic and pure growth of the Church as in the world but not of it. None of these men, the Son of God included, could have approved of the highly oppressive actions of the Roman empire, based on the principles of their teaching and writings. They most assuredly condemned them, but neither did they try to change them.

If we could assume any political concern, it was within the influence of the Jewish culture unto Christianity. Clearly, however, it was not a political concern, i.e., the rise or fall of a Jewish state in opposition to the Roman tion. The apostles were not concerned with an independent Jewish OR Christian state. There was no attempt to convert the Roman empire into a Christian state. They were also not concerned with the equal rights of all men under Roman law (half of the men and women in the Roman empire were slaves).

We hear nothing of these issues in relation to the world, even though they were highly problematic.

But they did address them in the Church. We fight for an eternal kingdom. Our citizenship is in heaven, so we are concerned with heavenly things. Earthly distinctions (rich/poor, master/slave, Jew/Gentile) all disappear within the community of faith. There we are equal. You do not lie or steal or cheat or bring if you are in the Church. There is no need. This is the standard for the Church because we alone possess the indwelling Spirit of Christ that can empower us to live such a life.

But it is severely unwise to hold the world to such a standard. First of all, the world does not have the Spirit of God and cannot truly love at great cost to themselves, even their own . And secular pacifism also mixes a type of godliness with temporal agendas (equal rights, social injustice, poverty relief, political success, or the removal of one from power).

All three or my examples, King and Bonhoeffer expecially, understood the truth that tyranny and oppression are evil and not of God and must be opposed on some level, but not at the expense of one’s own soul. Hence their non-violent philosophies (to varying degrees and method).

Biblical non-violence and pacifism seeks the eternal redemption of man above all other agendas, which also includes the building of the CHURCH, not manufactured organizations centered on dogma but organic communities of faith centered on love. Christians seek the redemption of others even at great physical, emotional, and relational cost to themselves. Jesus suffered the sin of mankind and the rejection of His Father. Moses asked to be stricken from God’s Book rather than see Israel forsaken. Paul was willing to be accursed for the veil to be lifted from the Jews.

So … if a Christian tells me that he is a pacifist, that he cannot justify of any kind, will not participate in it, will not support it, and seeks the same testimony among the Church for the sake of love, I’m all for it. This can be a high vision of love and supported by scripture.

However, if a Christian uses the same priciples to apply pacifism and non-violence to the world, he is unwise and due for disappointment. His pacifism becomes an idol that cannot speak or act, and without the regenerative power of the Holy Spirit of God, it is doomed to temporal and eternal failure (a sad but great definition of “epic failure”). It is an idol because he is worshipping something man can create apart from the Church, the dwelling place of God, the “work of his own hands.”

Next week I’ll tackle one short idea and bring some balance to all of this before a conclusion.

Peace.

As before, we’ll start with the Ten Commandments. “Thou shalt not murder” is there.

But we can also go a little further back to Cain and Abel. The first murder occurs in the second generation of mankind … before adultery. Not soon after that, God judges the earth for being “filled with violence” in a flood. After the flood, God gives a law within His covenant with Noah, “whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed. For in the image of God He made man.”

So even in Genesis, God deals with the violence of man against man, and He connects its seriousness with man’s created image, a divine spark that is to be respected and protected.

Before we move on to the New Covenant, we have several prophetic verses and psalms that equate evil with violence. One is a messianic prophecy quoted heavily by the early church: “They shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks” Isaiah 2:4. We must be cautious sometimes with messianic prophecies because they also speak of the heavenly realities at the end times, as well. But for those who pray, “on earth as it is in heaven,” even these verses apply.

In Romans 1:30, Paul lists being violent as evidence of being given over to a debased mind. In Galatians, he lists contentions, outbursts of wrath, and murders as works of the flesh. Peace and longsuffering are the fruit of the Spirit. Colossians tells us to put of anger and wrath as part of the old man.

In Hebrews 10:34, the author commends the Christians in Rome for “joyfully accepting the plundering of your goods, knowing that you have a better and an enduring possession for yourselves in heaven.” Rome kicked out all the Jews at one point from the city, and the writer of Hebrews notes that while violence was being done to them, they did not return it. Rather, they joyfully accepted the persecution.

Is this not like Christ? Jesus tells Peter to put down his sword because “those who live by the sword shall die by the sword” Matt 26:52 … Jesus was actually quoting Ezekiel 7:15 before healing the ear of a man leading Him to His death.

Jesus also says in His “good confession” before Pilate: “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews” John 18:36.

We are told to live in peace with all men. Jesus tells us, “Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called Sons of God” Matt 5:9.

Nowhere in the New Testament are we encouraged to be aggressive or violent to get our way (or even God’s way). In fact, we are taught to have the mind of Christ, to be willing to suffer violence ourselves for the redemption of others. We are told to love our enemies, that love never fails.

We could find many examples of God ordained violence in the Old Testament, though. God has not changed, so don’t get confused.

The Covenant has changed. Where the physical Israel had a constant physical struggle to inherit a physical promise, we have no such promise in the New Covenant. On the contrary, our promise is wholly eternal and spiritual. Therefore, we fight by spiritual means against spiritual forces to attain a heavenly kingdom. “We wrestle not against flesh and blood.”

And the New Covenant is infinitely better than the Old, as Hebrews states. With such a heavenly promise, we have no earthly kingdom to attain or fight for. Remember, when Judas runs out to betray Jesus, Christ says, “now the Son of Man is glorified.”

We (as in Christians) need to stop trying to build kingdoms on this earth through our political ideologies, national allegiances, social agendas and ministries. Of all of those, God is most offended when we build a kingdom for ourselves and call it a ministry.

If we have no kingdom on this earth to identify with and we’ve forsaken our possessions and family to be His disciple, what do we have to fight for?

We’ll try to pull it all together tomorrow.

Peace.