The Myth of a Christian Religion

by Gregory A. Boyd

  “Salvation belongs to our God,

  who sits on the throne,

  and to the Lamb”

  Revelation 7:9–10

  What a magnificent vision! John sees that when the Kingdom is fully manifested, Satan will be defeated and Christ will reign as “King of the nations.” Then people from all the scattered tribes and divided nations will be brought back together to worship him. The kingdom of the world will then become “the Kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah.”

  When all people are reconnected with the one true source of Life, they’ll no longer need to feast on their tribal version of the forbidden tree, and so the nations will be healed. The unique “glory” of each nation will contribute to the global display of the multifaceted glory of God.

  The full manifestation of this beautiful, transnational Kingdom lies in the future. But the job of Kingdom people is to put this beauty on display now. If all nations will be reconciled when the Kingdom comes, we’re to manifest national reconciliation now. Since the distinctions among nations, governments, and militaries mean “nothing” to God (Isaiah 40:15, 17), they are to mean nothing to us who live under his reign.

  As we individually and collectively do this, we manifest the beauty of a Life that has a freedom no government can grant or take away. We manifest the beauty of God’s universal love and revolt against the ugly idol of nationalism.

  Viva la revolution!

  CHAPTER 8

  THE REVOLT

  AGAINST VIOLENCE

  Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek,

  but a means by which we arrive at that goal.

  MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.

  Can anything be stupider than that a man has the right to kill me

  because he lives on the other side of a river and his ruler has a quarrel with mine,

  though I have not quarreled with him?

  BLAISE PASCAL

  On the battlefields of ypres, belgium, during the winter of 1914, British and French troops had for weeks been engaged in a fierce battle with the Germans. 1 The two sides were lined up for miles in trenches a mere sixty to eighty yards apart. Both sides had already suffered heavy casualties.

  On Christmas Eve, several German troops put small candle-lit Christmas trees outside their trenches and began singing carols. Then, remarkably, some British and French troops began to sing along in their own language. Before long, up and down the miles of opposing lines the enemy soldiers were singing carols together. The miracle of the moment, contrasting so sharply with the hateful killing that had gone on just hours before, brought tears to some men’s eyes.

  But the real miracle happened next. At some point, soldiers on both sides began raising signs in the enemy’s native language wishing them a Merry Christmas and, in some cases, calling for a Christmas reprieve from fighting. After a while, soldiers on both sides slowly began to put down their weapons and venture out of their cold, muddy trenches to greet one another in “No Man’s Land,” the space between the two sides. Combatants shook hands and began exchanging gifts—tobacco, cognac, newspapers, chocolate, and whatever else they had. There are even reports of enemy soldiers trading spare guns for soccer balls and other items.

  With such an informal truce in place, soldiers first buried the decomposing corpses of their fallen comrades. There are several accounts of combatants helping each other bury their dead and holding joint Christian burial services. Then, for the next week, the two sides enjoyed the Christmas season together. Soldiers played soccer. They shared family photos. Where the language barrier could be overcome, friendships were formed (many Germans had gone to school or worked in Britain before the war). There are accounts of certain combatants laughing hysterically (possibly inebriated) as they lay on the ground together at night and used their pistols to shoot at stars rather than at each other.

  Unfortunately, when word of the truce got back to the generals on both sides, they were furious. Orders were issued to resume fighting immediately. On January 1, 1915, the killing picked up where it had left off a week earlier. It wouldn’t end until another eight million lives had been wasted.

  I’ve sometimes wondered what it must have been like for these soldiers to resume fighting. The night before the young man in the trench across from you was a friend with whom you laughed and shared stories. Now you have to try to kill him. Why? Because he had been born in a different country—something neither of you had any control over.

  All countries try to justify their wars with noble sounding slogans: our soldiers fight for God and country, the motherland, honor, justice, truth, equality, freedom, and so on. But these slogans don’t alleviate the arbitrariness of who we befriend and who we slaughter. Soldiers almost always fight for the slogan they were indoctrinated to believe and for the country they happened to be born in.

  If these soldiers were like the vast majority of tribal warriors throughout history, they believed what they were told by their superiors and assumed it was their sacred, patriotic duty to kill whomever they were told to kill. This mindless obedience is why human history is largely a history of carnage. And it’s not as if humanity is outgrowing this trend. It’s estimated that 86 million people lost their lives in wars between 1900 and 1989. This is more than the combined fatalities of all previous wars of history.

  This is madness. Tragically, it’s a madness we’ve grown accustomed to. It seems normal to us. Yet the madness of this “normal” is exposed when our enemies become friends—as happened on that magical Christmas Eve of 1914. As the soldiers bonded, they couldn’t help but realize that, had they been born in the same country, they might have become best friends instead of mortal enemies.

  Realizing the arbitrariness of such national violence makes it harder to participate in it. Which, of course, is precisely why the generals were outraged by the truce. It’s why the British military leaders commanded that artillery fire be increased on each subsequent Christmas Eve during the war and why leaders on both sides created policies that called for the regular relocation of soldiers when they were involved in prolonged fighting in close proximity with an enemy.

  They had to ensure that friendships could not be forged. They could not afford to have the arbitrariness and madness of war exposed.

  You simply can’t sustain an effective war unless soldiers remain confident that something more than chance decided who they should kill. To be willing to kill, soldiers must believe they are the good guys who are righteously fighting the bad guys—to defend God, country, truth, justice, equality, freedom, or whatever.

  The soldiers of World War I commemorated the Savior’s birth by rising above the madness, laying down their arms, and befriending enemies. In this chapter we’ll see that followers of Jesus are to commemorate our Savior’s birth by living just like that every day of our lives.

  A DIFFERENT KIND OF POWER

  Jesus was praying in the garden of Gethsemane, when, suddenly, a group of temple guards showed up to arrest him. Peter immediately drew his sword and started swinging it, cutting off a guard’s ear.

  From the world’s point of view, this violence was justified. Peter was simply defending himself and his master. Yet Jesus rebuked him, reminding him that “all who draw the sword will die by the sword.” Jesus then pointed out to Peter that if he was interested in force, Jesus himself could have called on more than twelve legions of warring angels. But this, clearly, was not the kind of power Jesus was interested in employing.

  Jesus then proceeded to demonstrate the kind of power he was interested in—by revealing God’s love for his aggressor and healing the man’s severed ear. Through his actions, Jesus showed that the Kingdom of God relies not on the power of the sword, but the power of love that seeks to serve and heal enemies. It’s the same power he demonstrated several hours earlier when he washed the feet of his disciples, one of whom he knew would bet ray him, Judas, and one of whom he knew would deny him, Peter.

  After this, Jesus was questioned by Pilate, who asked him if he w
as the king of the Jews. Jesus responded, “My kingdom is not of this world.” And then he pointed to his followers’ refusal to fight as proof that his Kingdom “is from another place” (John 18:36). While all the kingdoms of the world use violence to fight enemies who threaten them, Jesus commands his followers to refuse violence and serve enemies—regardless of how justified the use of violence might seem by “normal” standards.

  After his encounter with Pilate, Jesus was tortured, mocked, and crucified. He had the power to avoid all this, but he chose not to use it. Why? Because he knew that using violence to protect himself, while justified by worldly standards, would not have benefited his enemies, nor would it have manifested God’s universal and unconditional love. It would not have manifested what it looks like when God reigns in someone’s life.

  Had Jesus defeated his foes by asking his followers to fight for him or by calling on legions of angels, he would have manifested a high-powered version of the kingdom of the world, but he would not have manifested the Kingdom of God. Had Jesus conquered his foes by force, he would have locked them into their rebellious stance against him and his Father instead of offering them the possibility of reconciliation. Had Jesus engaged in a “just war” against his foes, he would have legitimized violence rather than defeating it.

  By voluntarily giving his life for his enemies—which includes you and me—Jesus made it possible for us to be transformed by the beauty of his love and to be reconciled to God. And the clearest evidence that we are being transformed by God’s love and participating in the Kingdom that is not “of this world” is that we adopt the same nonviolent, self-sacrificial stance toward enemies that Jesus had.

  PURGING VIOLENCE FROM OUR MINDS

  When most people think of violence, they think of physical violence. But the truth is that our actions are only violent because our hearts and minds are violent first.

  For this reason, Jesus emphasizes purging violence from our minds as much as from our physical behavior. In Matthew 5:21 – 26, he reminds people of the Old Testament command not to murder, for “anyone who murders will be subject to judgment” (v. 21). But he goes on to stress that hostile thoughts and emotions against others are as inconsistent with God’s reign as actual murder: “I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment” (v. 22).

  Violent attitudes are also reflected in violent speech, which is also inappropriate for followers of Jesus. So Jesus adds, “Anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the Sanhedrin. 2 And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell” (v. 22, and Matthew 12:36).

  Jesus is saying that anyone who harbors anger toward another or makes a slanderous comment stands under the judgment of God as much as if they had actually committed murder. For such thoughts, emotions, and words violate the intrinsic unsurpassable worth of people and are inconsistent with the reign of God.

  If we are going to live in the peace-loving way of Jesus, the place for us to start is by “taking every thought captive to Christ” and purging all violence from our minds.

  TURNING THE OTHER CHEEK

  But Jesus had a good deal to say about purging violence from our behavior as well. He said, “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also” (Matthew 5:38 – 39).

  The Old Testament taught that retaliation against an offending party is justified as long as the retaliation is proportional to the offense. If someone pokes your eye out, for example, you have the right to take out one (but not both) of theirs. This quid pro quo mindset is foundational to the ethics of the Old Testament, as evidenced by how much the Old Testament concerns itself with precise reparations to be paid to people who have been wronged in various ways. Amazingly, in the passage we are discussing Jesus announced that this quid pro quo has been abolished in the Kingdom he brings.

  In sharp contrast to the Old Testament, Jesus teaches that his followers should not “resist an evil person.” He then illustrates what he means by telling his disciples to “turn to them the other cheek also” when struck.

  Although it might appear that Jesus is telling his followers to be passive, masochistic doormats in the face of evil, that is not what he’s suggesting. The word translated “resist” (antistenai) doesn’t necessarily suggest passivity. Rather, it connotes responding to a violent action with a similar violent action. We aren’t to passively let evil have its way, but neither are we to sink to the level of the evil being perpetrated against us by responding in kind. Our response is rather to be consistent with loving the offender.

  This sheds light on why Jesus said, “If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.” He was most likely referring to the practice of Roman guards using the back of their right hand to slap the right cheek of Jewish subjects. This was an insulting slap, used to demean subjects and keep them in their place. Responding to such a strike by offering the left cheek was a way of defiantly rising above the intended humiliation. 3

  The thrust of Jesus’ teaching in this passage, then, is that Kingdom people are to respond to evil in a way that doesn’t allow the evil they’re confronting to define them. We are n’t to be passive, and we aren’t to be doormats. But because we aren’t to be defined by the evil we confront, neither are we to become violent. As we noted above, the quid pro quo mindset has been entirely abolished in the Kingdom Jesus brings.

  Paul makes the same point: “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good” (Romans 12:21). When we respond to hostility by becoming hostile, we allow the evil in the heart of the enemy to define us. We are “overcome by evil.” But when we resist the urge to retaliate and instead respond to an enemy with love—feeding them if they’re hungry and giving them something to drink if they’re thirsty (v. 20)—we allow love to define us and open up the possibility that the enemy will be transformed into a friend. We are overcoming evil with good.

  Though refusing to respond to enemies with force may look weak to the “normal” way of thinking, the truth is that the love that refuses to retaliate is the most powerful force in the universe. Laws may control behavior and violence may annihilate enemies, but only this kind of love has the power to transform the heart of an enemy. It’s the only response to evil that doesn’t perpetuate evil.

  LOVING AND SERVING ENEMIES

  Not only are Kingdom people forbidden to respond in kind to their aggressors, we’re commanded to love and serve them. In contrast to the “holy war” tradition of the Old Testament, in which Israelites were at times commanded to kill enemies, Jesus taught, “Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you” (Luke 6:27 – 28). 4

  Note that loving our enemies, according to Jesus, entails doing them good. It is important that we understand this because there’s a long and sad Church tradition, dating back to Augustine, that divorces one’s loving disposition toward an enemy from one’s actions. This allowed Christians to torture and kill their enemies while claiming to love them.

  In reality, Jesus doesn’t leave open this possibility. Just as God demonstrates his love toward us by acting in self-sacrificial ways to bless us, so we are to demonstrate our love toward even our enemies by acting in self-sacrificial ways toward them—to “bless them.” By “love your enemies,” Jesus means we must do good to them.

  For the first three centuries of Church history Christians followed the example of Jesus and refused to respond to their enemies with violence. Sadly, this was the first thing to go when the Church acquired political power in the fourth century. Because many leaders viewed this political power as a blessing from God rather than a temptation from the enemy (see Luke 4:5 – 7), Jesus’ example of voluntary suffering on behalf of his enemies had to be radically rethought.

  Augustine speculated that Jesus’ decision to suffer unju
stly rather than use coercive force was not intended to be a permanent example for all Christians to follow. Rather, he reasoned, Jesus had to suffer and die unjustly because he was the Savior, and his suffering and death were necessary for us to be freed from the devil and reconciled to God. Now that this has been accomplished, thought Augustine, and now that God (allegedly) had given Christians the power of the sword, it was not only permissible for Christians to use violence when the cause was “just,” they had a responsibility before God to do so.

  This was the beginning of what’s called the “just war” tradition within Christendom.

  Whatever one thinks of the just war theory as applied to secular governments, it has no place in the life of Jesus’ followers. For, contrary to Augustine, the New Testament is as clear as it can be that Kingdom people are called to follow Jesus’ example of suffering unjustly rather than resorting to violence.

  Paul commands us to “follow God’s example “ and to “walk in the way of love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us”—while we were yet enemies of God. Peter encourages us to be willing to suffer injustice out of “reverent fear of God,” for “it is commendable if you bear up under the pain of unjust suffering because you are conscious of God.” And our model in this is Jesus himself. When people “hurled their insults at him,” Peter continues, “he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats.” Instead, Peter says, “He entrusted himself to him who judges justly.”

  Peter further encourages people facing persecution to “revere Christ as Lord” in “their hearts” by responding to their persecutors with “gentleness and respect.” Following the example of Christ who “suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring [them] to God,” followers of Jesus are to maintain a gentle, loving attitude so that “those who speak maliciously against [their] good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.” Our willingness to suffer serves our enemies, for, as we saw above, it opens the door that they will be convicted and change their ways.