►If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also.
►Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two.
►Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.
►Give to everyone who asks of you, and whoever takes away what is yours, do not demand it back.
Are these statements of Jesus from Matthew 5:38-42 and Luke 6:27-30 one-offs in His repertoire? Outliers from the rest of the Bible? Is the Sermon on the Mount not for today, only intended for Jesus’ day, or some future date?
Does obeying them make us weak in the eyes of the world? Isn’t it okay to push back, to retaliate in kind, or at least protect what’s our own? Don’t Christians need to stand up for themselves and, if given the opportunity, force our good way of life on everyone else?
In other words, can we safely ignore any words of Jesus?
Context is key
In the immediate context, the sermon itself warned against annulling any of God’s commands. People who do so will be “least in the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 5:18-19). We have to be careful!
The Master also closed the sermon with a warning: “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven.” Those who “hear His words and act on them” are wise and will enter (Matt. 7:21-24). That doesn’t leave a lot of room for parsing any of His statements into oblivion.
Instead, Jesus’ disciples are called to surpass the Pharisees and scribes in righteousness (Matt. 5:20). Jesus Himself did so, and we show we are His by obeying His word. We imitate Him who loved us when we were His enemies. He forgave us and showed us mercy. He turned the other cheek, walked the extra mile, and gave us the shirt off His back. He fulfilled His own law and made us righteous.
The sermon also teaches disciples to trust God as they go about seeking first His kingdom (Matt. 6:25-34). As we are poor in spirit and meek and peaceable, willing to be slapped and robbed and taken advantage of, we throw ourselves on Him in utter dependence.
In other words, we shouldn’t seek the furtherance of His kingdom in ways that are antithetical to the values of the kingdom, right?
The broader context
How do these words of Jesus fit with other parts of scripture? Are they in conflict?
While it may seem that the story of Israel in the Old Testament is full of vengeance, war, and conquest, it also provides precedents for Jesus’ teaching. See Deuteronomy 15:7-8, Proverbs 24:17-18, and Ezekiel 18:23. Even imprecatory prayers against enemies, such as Psalm 69:18-28, express confidence that God will be the one to render justice and care for the oppressed psalmist. We will not have to take matters into our own hands.
We’ve laid the groundwork for mistrust of violence in Earth was Filled with Violence. God’s view of violence can be summarized by Psalm 11:5, “the one who loves violence His soul hates.” The post concludes with Isaiah 53:9’s testimony that Jesus did no violence.
Carrying this ethos into the Church Age in our last post, we saw how the Apostle Paul regretted his past violent aggression, renounced it, and urged church leaders to do the same. Elders and deacons should not to be hot-tempered or pugnacious (1 Timothy 3:3 and Titus 1:7-8). And, since church leaders would be drawn from among the Body, this also means average Christians also should not have violent tendencies, be hostile, combative or belligerent, known for fighting or quarreling.
Such statements in scripture are antithetical to the use of force to achieve kingdom goals.
Context from the intense final days of Jesus’ ministry
The people who heard Jesus’ sermon would have applied the term ‘enemy’ to the Romans. They were an occupying force that coerced them to pay taxes to a far-away ruler. They were oppressors who persecuted them and took their shirts, slapped them around, and forced them to carry heavy loads. He was not painting a picture of hypothetical situations.
Jesus’ “controversial” statements are consistent with things He said at His arrest and during His trials:
- The arrest was a tense moment for the disciples. To their minds, things were getting out of control. Even though Jesus had prepared them for what was coming, they didn’t understand. Unless they acted, it seemed to them the wrong side would gain the upper hand. They felt they should somehow protect Jesus. They ridiculously thought “God needs our help!” If they were itching for a fight (Mk 14:31; Lk 22:33; Jn 13:37), that wasn’t Jesus’ intention. And they eventually learned the lesson; although little is known about how they died, church traditions say they died as martyrs, not combatants.
- “All those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword.” Jesus sharply rebuked Peter for maiming one of the mob who came to arrest Him (Mt 26:51-52; Mk 14:46-47; Lk 22:49-51; Jn 18:10-11). Peter asked whether he should strike, but had failed to wait for an answer. Jesus did not want His followers to needlessly give up their lives, nor did He want them to interrupt God’s plan of salvation.
- Jesus protested the idea He was leading an armed rebellion. He rebuked those who came out to arrest Him with swords and clubs because He intended to cooperate with the arresting officers (Mt 26:55-56; Mk 14:48-49; Lk 22:52-53). He had waged His “battle” for His hearers’ hearts and minds through public teaching of the good news. Should His followers operate in any other manner?
- He was accused of fomenting violence against the Temple (Mt 26:59-63; Mk 14:55-59), but had not lifted a finger against it—unless you count clearing it of those who were hindering the prayers of others. Neither would His disciples participate in its eventual demolition.
- Jesus was mocked and beaten by His countrymen (Mt 26:67-68; Mk 14:65; Lk 22:63-65; Jn 18:23) — people who should have known better than to conduct a mock trial and punish a person yet to be convicted of a crime. In Matthew 7:12 He had said, “Treat people the same way you want them to treat you.” Would He subsequently intend for His disciples to use similar violence against those who opposed them?
- To Pilate, the Roman governor, He said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were of this world, my disciples would fight” (Jn 18:33-38,19:10-11; Mt 27:11; Mk 15:2; Lk 23:3). In other words, they would not fight to obtain power. He acknowledged their competing powers; but when it served the greater power—the kingdom of heaven—to “lose,” it would allow the earthly power to appear to win.
- People had attempted to force Jesus to become an earthly king (John 6:15). Because He is God and had a different agenda, Jesus did not allow it. If He had wanted to defend Himself from false charges before Pilate, He could have called these people as witnesses, but that would have put them in danger with Rome.
- Ultimately, Jesus’ enemies showed the kind of people they were when they preferred the release of a murderer rather than have a healer and teacher returned to them (Mt 27:15-18; Mk 15:6-10; Jn 18:39).
What about Luke 22:35-38, where Jesus said the disciples should carry swords from now on? Commentators note that this statement is a one-off, and are unwilling to make it an endorsement of violence on the part of the Church. Some refer to Isaiah 53:12 say that the possession of swords among his followers would number Jesus among lawless rebels. Because two swords were hardly sufficient protection or defense for eleven men, others point out that Jesus is letting the disciples know that, from now on, life for them would be more difficult.
The most convincing argument against taking up arms for the cause of Christ appears a few verses later, in Luke 22:50-51. “No more of this!” is a strong rebuke to Peter when he struck off the servant’s ear, and provides the necessary correction to anyone thinking that sword fights are what is wanted when confronting opposition to the Gospel.
If He had wanted to conquer the Romans (or the Jews), Jesus would not have called men to fight for Him. He would have commandeered the hosts of heaven (Mt 26:53), as He will in the final battle. That victory will be ALL of Him and His heavenly hosts, and none of us (Revelation 14:14-20, 19:11-21).
Context from Jesus’ overall ministry
By the time of Jesus’ arrest, the disciples may have forgotten other things that He’d said.
►For instance, many of His parables revealed how His kingdom would grow: like seeds buried in the ground, or hidden treasure; like the tiniest seeds that miraculously grow into bushes large enough to support perching birds, or to offer shade; like a relatively small amount of yeast that works its way through a larger lump of dough and causes it to double in size. In other words, God’s kingdom is not like an army conquering territory or displaying force. Rather, its growth is mysterious, by the power of God, and not at all by the power of man.
►Jesus had also likened the Pharisees and legal experts to those who’d killed God’s prophets in the past, because He knew they were plotting to kill Him (Luke 11:49-51). Violence is the method used by wicked people to silence God’s messengers. His followers should not behave in their way.
►Violence was characteristic of demon-possessed people (Matthew 8:28). Is it fitting for godly people to be like them?
►Violence also coincides with bad theology. In Matthew 24:45-51, Jesus noted that those who disbelieve His second coming will use that as an excuse for abusing others—beating them, withholding their food—and indulging themselves. See also 2 Peter 3:3-4.
This is all to say that the kingdom of God… the Church… does not grow by might, power, force, coercion, violence. We wrestle NOT against flesh and blood (Ephesians 6:12). The battle is spiritual, and waged spiritually through proclamation and prayer.
So when the question comes up as to whether Christians should resort to violence to achieve their goals, we have pretty solid reasons for answering in the negative. This view is buttressed by many passages of scripture. We can make a strong biblical case against the use of force in strengthening or growing the kingdom of Christ.
Support in church history
Rome continued to trouble the early church, but Christians continued a quiet way of life even under severe persecution, as recorded in The Epistle to Diognetes by an unknown author (AD 130):
"For the Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, nor the customs which they observe. For they neither inhabit cities of their own, nor employ a peculiar form of speech, nor lead a life which is marked out by any singularity…. But, inhabiting Greek as well as barbarian cities, according as the lot of each of them has determined and following the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking method of life.
"They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers. They marry, as do all others; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring. They have a common table, but not a common bed. They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives. They love all men and are persecuted by all.”
As seen in Parable for Pro-Lifers, the way to increase in numbers is to prepare the soil, till and nourish it. Growth is not through force or threats.
A contemporary case in point
You can read or listen to her testimony online, or buy her book Blood Money. To summarize, because someone was faithful to Jesus’ teaching and example and did not take her life into their own hands, Carol Everett became an outspoken opponent of abortion and advocate for life.
Would violence against Carol or her clinics have been God's will to save the lives of preborn babies? How many were lost in the time it took for her to accept the forgiveness of Christ? How many have been spared because she has subsequently told her story? These are calculations known only to God.
Violence against abortion clinics and their workers tragically short-circuits the work of God. So does violence against politicians with whom we disagree, or religious people who are outside Christianity.
God is patient (2 Peter 3:9) and so should we be. According to Jesus, we do not have the right to hate His enemies, decide they’re too sinful for God’s grace, or blame Him for being slow to act. We do not have the right to speak or act violently.
__________________________
Comments
Post a Comment
Thank you for visiting my blog and going to the trouble of commenting. Once your comment is approved, you should receive notification of its publication.