"peace by way of war is like purity by way of fornication." - derek webb
"nonviolence is a powerful and just weapon, which cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it. it is a sword that heals." - martin luther king jr.
"eye for an eye leaves everyone blind." - gandhi
"do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good." - paul the apostle
"love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, and pray for those who abuse you." - Jesus
8 opinion(s):
If this was Facebook, I would hit the "like" button. :)
"'Not by might, nor by power...but by my Spirit,' says the Lord Almighty." - Zechariah
"I do not have a foreign policy. I have something better--a church constituted by people who would rather die than kill." - Stanley Hauerwas
"...the starting paradigm for Christian courage is not war, but martyrdom, and the exemplar of courage is for him not the soldier in battle but the martyr." - Bryan Stone (on Aquinas)
i would hit the "like" button as well...
but as a comment, why is it then that the biggest proponents of the war are almost always Christian? and why do Christians make you feel like a hypocrite if you don't actively support the armed services? why can't they understand the connection between being a lover of peace and opposing efforts made to kill others?
Scripture says 'the LORD is a warrior; Yahweh is His name.' (Ex. 15:3). It also says His name is Prince of Peace (Is. 9:6). God is a God of justice, and a God of mercy. Is that what you call a dichotomy? Dave, you made me get out my Bible, concordance, and dictionary this time. I love how you make me think and study. It's good for my aging brain :)
I'm with you. But answer me this: How do I apply this to my spiritual battle? I have to starve out sin, crucify my flesh, gouge out my fleshly eye - all acts of violence. My spiritual battle is one of violent upheaval and removal of the things that hinder me. They are bullies and they won't go quietly.
How do I merge physical non-violence with spiritual violence? Both are attitudes, one carried out in the flesh, one carried out in the spirit. We are to deny the one in the flesh, but engage in the one in the spirit?
Galatians 5:17 - they are at WAR
with each (flesh and spirit). Thus Abraham had to physically send out the fruit of his flesh to die in the desert (Ishmael).
Honestly, it seems hard to have the mindset of violence against the spiritual bully (lust, hate, bitterness,etc) but non-violence against the physical bully (the neighbor who mocks you, the Hitlers, the Husseins, etc).
Talk me through this (because I honestly do agree with you.)
I know we've talked about it, but sometimes the biggest advocates of pacifism are also the most destructive with their attitudes regarding it. I see a sense of disconnect here - that it is okay to destroy someone with your argument, as long as it is not physically. If someone is a true pacifist, won't that carry over into attitudes of argumentation as well? Isn't your entire being one of non-violence?
You know I lean in the direction of peace at all costs, but I just wonder about this sometimes. That's why I asked that question - are you only talking non-violence in a physical way? Because I've seen some very angry responses to people from pacifists toward people who promote war.
So that's my biggest question: Where do you truly draw the line, because if you convince me of the pacifist route, which is possible, I will only go there if I go there all the way. In every area of my life.
I have a Menno friend (his term, not mine) who is great friends with another guy who is in the Navy. They used to argue pacifism until I thought they wouldn't be friends. Thankfully they stopped, but it did make me think.
Looking forward to hearing your answers to TDag's questions.
Well, I used to live in Central PA - right outside Amish country. About 20 minutes from Messiah college, a Brethren in Christ college (which is pacifist). The majority of "Christians" I met there were Mennonites, which are also pacifist. The Amish are a great example of pacifists, their convictions make them extremely unpopular and definitely different than the rest of us. They let your convictions, and not just their pacifist convictions, dictate their way of life. Do you remember the school shooting at the Amish school? These were REAL PEOPLE who were going through a much harder tragedy than you or I have most likely ever had to face, and they handled it by staying true to their convictions. I truly want to be able to mimic the Amish in such areas, and to be a pacifist in all areas of my life.
Including, if not ESPECIALLY, arguing. I find no gain from arguing, even if you truly believe in your stand. By no means am I very good at it! But it is what convicts me. It may not be popular, or even natural - I find myself needing to bite my tongue quite a bit - but it's what I feel most comfortable with. I find myself only revealing my true convictions when I am asked point blank, and I am never very popular afterwards! Imagine actually telling someone that you disagree with war - any war - and our countries armed forces, and then allowing yourself to not argue your point. It's difficult, and people think I'm crazy. But I am ok with that. :-)
Most people don't understand it - but only because they don't want to. The definition of pacifism seems to be so simple, and definitely against our human nature, but it ends up being difficult when you attempt to apply it in every aspect of your life. Of course questions will arise about how to reconcile it with the rest of your life, but that's just something that you will have to work at. Like I said, I am sure that I fail at it in my personal life quite frequently, but it really only makes me want to understand how to make it work even more.
Post a Comment