Non-violence

 Try to turn on any news channel any day. You might hear about rain or drought, natural disasters and incredible acts of kindness, but you’re also likely to hear about conflict. Politicians may be squabbling over this issue or that issue; anything between civil debate to hurling insults. Individuals and nations may be at war with one another, each of them doing their very best to inflict maximum injury on the other. 

The ancient writers recognized the dual nature of good and evil in us humans. Modern scientists have identified our most basic response to danger, real or perceived, as “fight-or-flight.” Some people tend to be more on the confrontational side of the spectrum. Most, however, tend to respond with avoidance. These two responses tend to result in either injury or lingering resentment. A third way is the restoration of the relationship to the state it was in before it was broken.

When Jesus says to turn the other cheek in Matthew 5:39, he doesn’t mean to run away. What he demonstrates is an active non-violent response, not just passive non-resistance. The act of turning the other cheek implies an invitation to resolve the conflict; to restore the relationship. 

Responding with violence is almost certain to result in harm to at least one and more likely to both. Remaining on the scene ready to engage in conflict resolution is not without risk either. It takes a lot of courage to not only resist the temptation to retaliate, but also to accept the possibility that the attacker might actually slap you again.

Humans have been blessed with a brain more capable of overriding basic instincts than any other in the animal kingdom. With few exceptions, we have all experienced regrets. We have all done or said things we shouldn’t have and immediately regretted it. We know it is going to happen again. The trick is to learn to recognize the triggers, the situations where this is likely to happen so we can prepare to intervene in our automatic responses.

The trouble is that our culture keeps telling us the opposite. We are constantly encouraged to be the first, strongest, fastest, richest, always in competition with one another even though we know that we can accomplish so much more together than we can individually.

Salvation

The idea that Jesus somehow took all our sins upon himself as a sacrificial lamb so that we can have eternal life in Heaven continues to persist to this day. But was that really the message of Jesus?

What Jesus really did was show us a way to live in peace and harmony with one another, God’s plan for us. The Hebrew word for peace is Shalom. It does mean the absence of conflict in our relationships with each other, but it also means health, justice and contentment or prosperity, abundant life. Prosperity here does not mean the excesses of the rich and powerful glorified so much in contemporary literature, but having enough. If all the riches of the world were distributed equally, everyone would have what they need with some to spare, some to give to those who don’t. That is what abundant life means.

Salvation is the realization that the Way of Jesus is the way to Shalom, the way to wholeness or completeness. Faith alone is not enough. It must be followed by action. You may have heard the expression:

Love is an action verb.

The first step to Shalom is to Believe, believe that Jesus is the Way and then actually go his way.

Repentance

The world is going to smash and the only way to stop it is to do a 180 degree turnaround; to completely change the way we think about the world and our role in it; our relationships with God and other people. Jesus illustrates this by saying that we have to become like little children again. Yes, even be born again so to speak.

Atonement for Sins

 

Unlike some other well-known concepts, the concept of Atonement for sins is in fact found in the Bible. It says things like:

For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.

While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

He died for us so that, whether we are awake or asleep, we may live together with him.

All of these references to dying or sacrifice can be found in letters attributed to Paul. Paul’s letters were written during the first few decades following the crucifixion of Jesus. They are widely considered to be among the first New Testament texts and the concept of Atonement for sins has been part of church doctrine for hundreds of years since then.

Paul’s authority to speak on Jesus’ behalf has been questioned by both modern scholars as well as opponents in his own time. Paul’s connections with the Jewish community and meeting with the apostles in Jerusalem undoubtedly helped boost his standing as did his undeniably successful effort to spread Christianity to the entire region. When Paul spoke, people generally listened. But was he right?

Many decades later, John writes that 

God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son

I don’t see anything about Jesus as a sacrifice for our sins in that statement. What I see is Jesus as a light in a world full of darkness. He is our only hope for a world without suffering.

It is true that Jesus did die a gruesome death, but it did nothing to restore the Garden God had created and we had destroyed. What it did do is shine a spotlight on what had caused this tragedy, namely human hunger for wealth and power. Jesus knew what had to be done to fix it, to love God and to love one another, so for the rich and powerful to maintain power, he had to be eliminated. They chose to do it the worst possible way guaranteeing enmity and suffering to continue to be in our lives.

Jesus did not come to be sacrificed for our sins. He came to save us from ourselves.

The Trinity

 

The Holy Trinity is a human concept. It is not mentioned in the Bible at all. You might be able to make an argument that Jesus’ instruction to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit establishes the Trinity. If so, it serves to illustrate the depth and breadth of God; the diverse, yet united nature of God. Perhaps you could think of the Trinity as the past (Father), the present (Son) and the future (his legacy).

The question was debated at the highest level of the church in both the Council of Nicea (325CE) and the Council of Constantinople (381CE). No doubt, people had been talking about it among themselves long before that and I have no doubt the arguments would have been quite heated. Even today it tends to divide us more than unite us.

My question is, “Is this really important?” I would say no, but I also know that it is for a lot of people. Most churches even today teach that the Trinity is a very important if not the most important aspect of Christianity, but there are a few who do not. 

One reason it tends to persist is, of course, as I have mentioned many times before, that Pastors are often either employees or depend financially on the support of their congregations. They tend to avoid the subject or resort to telling people what they want to hear and congregants are generally very sensitive to change.

What is important, though, is the one concrete thing we have to hang on to, namely the teachings and example of Jesus Christ. His story may have been made up to some extent, but I’m sure there is enough substance that we can believe there is a Way and a hope for the suffering of this world to end. It’s not going to happen by the intervention of a God outside of creation. It depends on the attitude and example of all of us.