Obedient Lovers of Jesus

 

Jesus equated love with obedience:

“If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commands and remain in his love.  I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete. My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you.” [John 15:10-12]

But the idea of loving others can be challenging. Especially when it comes to loving our enemies.

 

I've been in numerous debates in the last few days. Mostly with Christians who want to wiggle out of Jesus' command to love our enemies. We want to redefine "Love" or look for different meanings of the word "Kill", or make ammendments for self-defense.

 

Then, quite often, Christians will bring up the Holocaust or the Nazi's in WW2 and ask, "Why didn't non-violence stop Hitler? 

Here's something almost no one realizes: The Nazi's had no way of dealing with those who responded with non-violent resistance.

“B.H. Liddell-Hart, widely acknowledged as the foremost military writer of our times, discovered in his interrogation of Nazi generals after World War II that they had little trouble dealing with violent resistance except in mountainous areas of Russia and the Balkins, or where advancing armies were close. But they expressed complete inability to cope with nonviolence as practiced in Denmark, Holland, Norway, and, to a lesser extent, in France and Belgium.

“’They were experts in violence, and had been trained to cope with opponents who used that method. But other forms of resistance baffled them. They were relieved when nonviolence was mixed with guerilla operations, which made it easier to combine suppressive action against both at the same time.’

“The generals found friendly noncompliance more frustrating than any other form of resistance, and had no effective means to counter it. ‘If practiced with a cheerful smile and an air of well-meaning mistake, due to incomprehension or clumsiness, it becomes even more baffling…. This subtle kind of resistance cannot really be dealt with in terms of force: indeed, nothing can deal with it. There is really no answer to such go-slow tactics.”  - Excerpt from "Engaging the Powers" by Walter Wink.

 

So, we can't point to a conflict which was initiated, and escalated, by those who believe in violence as an example of how non-violence couldn't stop it. Especially when we can see that non-violence does work - and did work - in situations where it was actually put into practice. [And there are several examples of how non-violence worked during WW2, and in other conflicts worldwide, from Liberia to India and even in the good ole' USA].

 

But, again, please keep in mind that Christian non-violence is not "doing nothing". It involves trusting Jesus for wisdom, strength, protection and grace in the midst of suffering, oppression and hate.

The goal is not to become door mats. The goal is to become ambassadors of Christ and to demonstrate - as He did - the abounding, endless, audacious love of God to those who have never experienced it as we have.

 

The hope is that our enemies will be transformed by the surprising love of Christ when we return blessings instead of curses, and love instead of hate.

 

Many have been completely transformed by this unexpected outpouring of love in response to acts of violence. Early Christian history - the first 300 years especially - is full of examples of exactly this kind of radical love which transforms the purveyors of violence.

 

When it works this way, it's beautiful. No weapon can stop it. No aggression can overcome it. Light truly does push back the darkness. Love really does overwhelm hate.

But, sometimes it doesn't always result in repentance and transformation. And in those cases, we may die. But if we die, then we die, and in that way we "share in the sufferings of Christ". What greater honor can there be than to follow Jesus all the way to our death?

I don't know about you, but I would rather die because I was putting the commands of Jesus into practice than to kill another person because my Government said so.

For a follower of Jesus, death is where we begin our journey with Him:

 

"For we died and our lives are now hidden with Christ in God." [Col. 3:3]
"If anyone would follow me let him deny himself, take up his cross daily, and follow me." -Jesus

Self-preservation is not our goal. Obedience unto death to the Lord of Life and the Prince of Peace is.

Do we trust Jesus to take care of us as we put His commands into practice? And if we suffer for doing good, that's what it's all about, isn't it?

 

“But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God. To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.” [1 Peter 2:20-21]

Yes, non-violence quite often does work, when it is put into practice by obedient disciples of Jesus who are following His example of humility and love.

And even if it doesn't end with our lives being spared, that's not the point. The purpose is to put on display the extravagant love of Jesus that has filled us, and the whole earth.

 

This is the love that can change the human heart and transform our community, our nation and our world - one person at a time.

 

But it will only work if we put the commands of Jesus into practice.

 

"A new command I give you: Love one another as I have loved you." - Jesus

 

How has Jesus loved you? This is how you should love others - yes, even your enemies.

 

"If you only love those who love you, what credit is that to you?" - Jesus

 

Are we really following Jesus, or do we just "believe in" Him?

 

If we really love Jesus, according to Him, we will obey His commands.

 

Jesus makes it very clear: "Love your enemies and do good to those who hate you" [Luke 6:27].

 

I would never kill someone I loved. Therefore, we cannot kill our enemies if we hope to be obedient disciples of Jesus, the Prince of Peace.

 

"Now these three remain: Faith, Hope and Love. And the greatest of these is Love". [1 Cor. 13]

 

-kg

**

[Special Thanks to Travis Glenn Blankenship for the Walter Wink reference]

Just War or Passive Resistance?

I recently started reading a book called "The Essential Writings of Ghandi” at about the same time my family and I took a trip to Washington D.C. While we were there we visited the Holocaust Museum. I remember coming home that night and reading the next chapter in this book which was, coincidentally, about Gandhi’s view that Hitler could have been stopped through non-violent resistance. The horror of what I’d seen at the Holocaust Museum that morning was still fresh in my mind. I remember closing the book and shaking my head in disbelief. "How could Gandhi believe that non-violence could have stopped Hitler?" I wondered. It’s one thing to use non-violence to change the culture of a land, or to resist an unjust law, but Hitler’s regime seems so much more evil than any of that. If people weren’t moved to lay down their weapons when they saw thousands of Jewish women and children being starved to death, or shot in the head, or burned alive in massive ovens, then how could they possibly be moved by a show of solidarity and determination to resist evil to the point of death?

Over the last few months I believe I’ve come to some better understanding of what Gandhi meant, and also what a Christian non-violent response could have accomplished against Hitler’s schemes.

Obviously what I'm going to share is complete supposition. At best, I am only thinking out loud and inviting you to consider these thoughts along with me.

What I wonder is what an organized, non-violent response to Hitler might have accomplished. What if, from the beginning, the Jews and others in Germany had collectively refused to cooperate with the injustices imposed upon them and said, "You can kill us, but we will not wear the Gold Stars. We will not comply with your racist and oppressive rules and laws." What would have happened? Would it have made any difference?

As we consider this, let me remind you that non-violence and passive resistance don't emphasize passivity. On the contrary, it requires great courage and it involves laying one's life on the line to oppose injustice. In other words, many people would probably have still died in the battle. But, it would have been a battle where only one side was the aggressor and the other side was a unified force that refused to go along with even the tiniest injustice imposed against people – regardless of their own race or creed.

What was missing from this equation was someone like MLK, or Gandhi, or an inspired follower of Jesus who would lead the way. What was required was someone who had an influence on the people, someone with a voice who could inspire the people to agree together that they would not stand for the racist laws, and that they would not comply in even the smallest way with the unjust policies imposed upon them or others.

Not to place the blame on the victims, but history shows us that, without such an inspiring leader to point the way, the Jews did what everyone else would do in such a case – they mostly went along with what was asked of them by their Government. They were good citizens who believed that what was asked of them was something temporary, or inconvenient. None of them had any idea just how deadly and malevolent the process would eventually become.

Certainly some did resist the unjust laws and policies, but those individuals were quickly killed or arrested to set an example to any others who might attempt to resist. Those who watched these people being arrested or killed probably wondered if it was worth the price they had to pay in order to resist. However, it’s theoretically possible that, as in the case of MLK, or Gandhi, if everyone together collectively agreed to resist - even to the point of death - and regardless of how many of them were arrested or put to death, we might have seen a vastly different outcome.

Of course, we do not know this for sure. I understand that. I do.

Simply acquiescing to evil is not the same as passively resisting it. As Gandhi famously said, (and I’m paraphrasing) "I will lay down my life to oppose injustice and evil. But I will not kill anyone." So, our commitment has to be to die for what is right - to fight - but not to do violence or to kill anyone in the process.

As a follower of Christ, I'm skeptical about whether or not anyone other than a follower of Jesus can ever actually do this. It’s not that I believe Christians are more loving or self-sacrificing. It’s more that I’m skeptical of any human ability to lay down their life for strangers. I'm not sure I believe that anyone, apart from the indwelling love of Christ, is capable of loving their enemies enough to lay down their lives and die to themselves, and for one another, in such a way. For example, those who followed Martin Luther King, Jr. did so because they were followers of Christ, primarily. Those who marched were largely church members. Those who resisted to the point of shedding their own blood were Christians. And, of course, they were African-Americans. They were the oppressed.

Even Gandhi, I believe, had a basic faith in Christ that informed his own passion for justice and inspired a willingness to follow Jesus' example of overcoming evil with good, even to the point of death.

As an aside, Gandhi read the Sermon on the Mount every day and wrote as much about Jesus in his writings as any modern Christian author does. I wonder, what do you call someone who reads the words of Jesus every day and puts his teachings on love and forgiveness and service and self-sacrifice into practice? Regardless of whether or not Gandhi would have called himself a Christian (and he wouldn't have), I personally feel that he was a better follower of Jesus than I am at times, and perhaps a better follower of Jesus than most American Christians.

Maybe I’m wrong about this, however. Again, this is all supposition anyway. But, maybe with the right inspiration and an organized non-violent strategy the Jews could have successfully stopped Hitler in the earliest stages and the Holocaust could have been avoided. Or not.

Still, my mind goes back to the images of the death camps. I see again in my memory the heart breaking despair and unbelievable inhumanity expressed under the Nazi regime and I find it hard to accept that anyone or anything could have stopped this evil, short of assassination or war.

But, was this war - the only viable candidate for anything near to what could be referred to as a “Just War” – truly just? Was it truly the best possible solution to answer this atrocity?

Above all other wars in human history, World War Two alone stands as the primary (if only) example of what a Just War could look like. Laying aside for a moment whether or not you believe that a Just War is even possible, let's look at the fruit of this “Just War.” What did it produce, other than the eventual end of Nazi Germany?

*The development of nuclear weapons

*The death of 80k people in Hiroshima

*Another 60k dead due to radiation poisoning

*73k killed in Nagasaki

*Another 70k after that due to radiation

*50 plus years of Cold War escalation as nuclear weapons proliferated between the US and Soviet Russia

*A total of over 70 million fatalities

Let’s remember that America did not enter the war in order to stop Hitler. We knew all about what Hitler was doing to his people and to neighboring nations and we did nothing. In fact, if it were not for the fact that Japan dared to bomb Pearl Harbor we would never have considered entering the war at all. So, if we are honest, we only entered the war when it was about defending our own pride, not because the lives of others were at stake.

World War Two was the deadliest conflict in human history. It brought about millions of deaths. It created the atomic monster that continues to plague our world and threatens still to blow up the planet ten times over.

Is that what a "Just War" looks like? Is this - the best of all possible wars - really something we hope to emulate again?

Whether or not the war against Hitler was justified, the costs were enormous, and it should cause us to rethink the idea of war and to become desperate to find peaceful means to resolving future conflicts.

As followers of Jesus - the Prince of Peace - we need to become experts in peace. We must take seriously the promise of Jesus when he said, "Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall inherit the Earth."

Are we peacemakers? If not, are we really followers of Jesus?

-kg