I used to think of Jesus as this loving, mellow, pacifist person, quite like myself. hehe After reading Walter Wink’s book, my paradigm has shifted. wSo now whenever people describe Jesus as a pacifist, my spirit cringes.

I guess it’s because the term has such a negative connotation in many circles. Pacifists are so often thought of as someone who does absolutely nothing, avoiding onflict at all costs. Yet, Jesus did not live that way. He fought evil and injustice and with every fiber of His being. He used creative, loving confrontation to help bring the sinner to repentence and bring attention to the humanity of the victim.

He help the oppressed gain back their dignity. He was not passive, and He didn’t sit around on His butt dreaming of a peaceful resolution. He was active in every sense of the word to bring that peace to reality. But yet, he did it in a loving anner, with true grace and respect for all parties involved. Just being like his Daddy, ya know? That’s the way I want to live.

So, whenever prompted, I choose this phrase instead:

Jesus was non-violent.

:)

Ohav Shalom,
Jamie

The original Greek word that was later translated “resist” in this passage “resist not evil” is “antistenai”. It is made up of two parts: “anti” which literally means against; and “histemo” a verb that in it’s noun form means violent rebellion, armed revolt, sharp dissention. In the Greek Old Testament the word is used primarily for military encounters. It refers to the moment when two armies collide, steel on steel, until one side breaks and flees. So a proper translation of Jesus’ teaching would be “Don’t strike back at evil in kind.”

Jesus was very comitted to opposing evil and fighting for justice, the difference was HOW one should fight evil. :)

Great discussion!

Ohav Shalom,
Jamie

Let’s be honest, there are a few Christians I can quote at this point to, with some messed up theology. I’m not saying Gandhi is an overall example of Christianity, by no means, but to some degree I think he gives us an example of “do not resist” and to that degree I think it is fair to look at him.

I’m a visual person, and an examples person. I’m not trying to uphold Gandhi overall, just this example of his movement as being a good embodiment of the scripture we were talking about.

“God is that indefinable something which we all feel but which we do not know. To me God is Truth and Love, God is ethics and morality. God is fearlessness, God is the source of light and life and yet. He is above and beyond all these. God is conscience. He is even the atheism of the atheist. He transcends speech and reason. He is a personal God to those who need His touch. He is purest essence. He simply Is to those who have faith. He is long suffering. He is patient but He is also terrible. He is the greatest democrat the world knows. He is the greatest tyrant ever known. We are not, He alone Is.”

WHAT?!?!?! NO!!!!!!! Yes, we can know God. God is much more than “morality.” He is definitely not atheism, nor is the atheist an “equal” to Christians. He doesn’t transcend reason. And He is not at all a tyrant. Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t think we should be looking to Gandhi as our example on what it means to be a Christian.

Ariah – since I don’t think the passage can be taken literally (see my earlier comment) it seems to me like we need to find an alternate interpretation. Therefore I fall back on the Old Testament law. The “eye for an eye” was from the Old Testament and back then everyone would realize that’s what Jesus was referring to. But can you give me one example where Jesus completely reversed Old Testament law? Never – he did modify it, but the basic principles were always the same. “Don’t murder” became “don’t even think about murdering – be loving.” “Follow these 3 billion specific rules for sacrifice and living” became “Do everything for the glory of God.”

Maybe one of your future posts can discuss why you focus on Jesus’ words as opposed to God’s? They’re the same person, right? So they can’t think two different things.

Second, it’s interesting that you bring up MLK Jr. His “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” was entirely about how to disobey authority. How is that “not resisting.” The reason he was in jail was for resisiting! He did it peacefully, but again – not a literal interpretation of that passage.

More later…