believe me good will come

I’m concerned about a better world. I’m concerned about justice; I’m concerned about brotherhood; I’m concerned about truth. And when one is concerned about that, he can never advocate violence. For through violence you may murder a murderer, but you can’t murder murder. Through violence you may murder a liar, buy you can’t establish truth. Through violence you may murder a hater, but you can’t murder hate through violence. Darkness cannot put out darkness; only light can do that.
– “Where Do We Go From Here?”, speech delivered at the eleventh annual convention of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, Atlanta, Georgia, 16 August 1967.

Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Hate multiplies hate, violence multiplies violence, and toughness multiplies toughness in a descending spiral of destruction. So when Jesus says “Love your enemies”, he is setting forth a profound and ultimately inescapable admonition.
– Strength to Love, ‘Loving Your Enemies’, II.

[We] should love our enemies [because] love is the only force capable of transforming an enemy into a friend. We never get rid of an enemy by meeting hate with hate; we get rid of an enemy by getting rid of enmity. By its very nature, hate destroys and tears down; by its very nature, love creates and builds up. Love transforms with redemptive power.
– Strength to Love, ‘Loving Your Enemies’, II.

When in speak of love I am not speaking of some sentimental and weak response. I’m not speaking of that force which is just emotional bosh. I am speaking of that force which all of the great religions have seen as the supreme unifying principle of life.
We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow down before the altar of retaliation. The oceans of history are made turbulent by the ever-rising tides of hate. History is cluttered with the wreckage of nations and individuals that pursued this self-defeating path of hate.
– “Beyond Vietnam”, New York, 4 April 1967.

In a real sense, Waterloo symbolizes the doom of every Napoleon and is an eternal reminder to a generation drunk with military power that in the long run of history might does not make right and the power of the sword cannot conquer the power of the spirit.
– Strength to Love, ‘Our God Is Able’, II.

[Nonviolent resistance] is based on the conviction that the universe is on the side of justice. Consequently, the believer in nonviolence has deep faith in the future. This faith is another reason why the nonviolent resister can accept suffering without retaliation. For he knows that in his struggle for justice he has cosmic companionship.
– Stride Towards Freedom, ‘Pilgrimage to Nonviolence’.

Only through an inner spiritual transformation do we gain the strength to fight vigorously the evils of the world in a humble and loving spirit.
– Strength to Love, ‘Transformed Noncomformist’, II.

One will not be asked how many academic degrees he obtained or how much money he acquired, but how much he did for others. Did you feed the hungry? Did you give a cup of cold water to the thirsty? Did you clothe the naked? Did you visit the sick and minister to the imprisoned? These are the questions asked by the Lord of life. In a sense every day is judgement day, and we, through our deeds and words, our silence and speech, are constantly writing in the Book of Life.
Light has come into the world, and every man must decide whether he will walk in the light of creative altruism or the darkness of destructive selfishness. This is the judgement. Life’s most persistent and urgent question is, “What are you doing for others?”
– Strength to Love, ‘Three Dimensions of a Complete Life’, II.

Our nation’s productive machinery constantly brings forth such an abundance of food that we must build larger barns and spend more than a million dollars daily to store our surplus. Year after year we ask, “What shall I do, because I have no room where to bestow my fruits?” I have seen an answer in the faces of millions of poverty-stricken men and women in Asia, Africa, and South America. I have seen an answer in the appalling poverty in the Mississippi Delta and the tragic insecurity of the unemployed in large industrial cities of the North. What can we do? The answer is simple: feed the poor, cloth the naked, and heal the sick. Where can we store our goods? Again the answer is simple: We can store our surplus food free of charge in the shrivelled stomachs of the millions of God’s children who go to bed hungry at night. We can use our vast resources of wealth to wipe poverty from the earth.
– Strength to Love, ‘The Man Who Was a Fool’, II.

As Christians we must think not only about “mansions in the sky,” but also about the slums and ghettos that cripple the human soul, not merely about streets in heaven “flowing with milk and honey,” but also about the millions of people in this world who go to bed hungry at night. Any religion that professes concern regarding the souls of men and fails to be concerned by social conditions that corrupt and economic conditions that cripple the soul, is a do-nothing religion, in need of new blood. Such a religion fails to realise that man is an animal having physical and material needs.
– Strength to Love, ‘What is Man?’, I.

Nowhere is the tragic tendency to conform more evident than in the church, an institution which has often served to crystallize, conserve, and even bless the patterns of majority opinion. The erstwhile sanction by the church of slavery, racial segregation, war, and economic exploitation is testimony to the fact that the church has hearkened more to the authority of the world than to the authority of God. Called to be the moral guardian of the community, the church at times has preserved that which is immoral and unethical. Called to combat social evils, it has remained silent behind stained-glass windows. Called to lead men on the highway of brotherhood and to summon them to rise above the narrow confines of race and class, it has enunciated and practiced racial exclusiveness.
– Strength to Love, ‘Transformed Noncomformist’, II.

Gradually, however, the church became so entrenched in wealth and prestige that it began to dilute the strong demands of the gospel and to conform to the ways of the world. And ever since the church has been a weak and ineffectual trumpet making uncertain sounds. If the church of Jesus Christ is to regain once more its power, message, and authentic ring, it must conform only to the demands of the gospel.
– Strength to Love, ‘Transformed Noncomformist’, II.

Gandhi – Non-Violence in Peace and War

Mankind has to get out of violence only through non-violence. Hatred can be overcome only by love. Counter-hatred only increases the surface as well as the depth of hatred. II – 97

There is no escape for any of us save through truth and non-violence. I know that war is wrong, is an unmitigated evil. I know too that it has got to go. I firmly believe that freedom won through bloodshed or fraud is no freedom. I – 75

Non-violence is the supreme law. During my half-century of experience I have not yet come across a situation when I had to say that I was helpless, that I had no remedy in terms of non-violence. I – 172

I know this cannot be proved by argument. It shall be proved by persons living it in their lives with utter disregard of consequences to themselves. I – 122

The ideal of satyagraha is not meant for the select few – the saint and the seer only; it is meant for all. I – 34

To me it is a self-evident truth that if freedom is to be shared equally by all – even physically the weakest, the lame and the halt – they must able to contribute an equal share in it defense. How that can be possible when reliance is placed on armaments, my plebeian mind fails to understand. I therefore swear and shall continue to swear by non-violence, i.e., by satyagraha, or soul force. In it physical incapacity is no handicap, and even a frail woman or a child can pit herself or himself on equal terms against a giant armed with the most powerful weapons. II – 35

Without the recognition of non-violence on a national scale there is no such thing as a constitutional or democratic government. I – 199

I could not be leading a religious life unless I identified myself with the whole of mankind, and that I could not do unless I took part in politics. The whole gamut of man’s activities today constitutes an indivisible whole. You cannot divide social, economic, political and purely religious work into watertight compartments. I – 170
 
Just as one must learn the art of killing in the training for violence, so one must learn the art of dying in the training for non-violence. I – 335

You are no satyagrahis if you remain silent or passive spectators while your enemy is being done to death. You must protect him even at the cost of your own life. II – 63

The virtues of mercy, non-violence, love and truth in any man can be truly tested only when they are pitted against ruthlessness, violence, hate and untruth. II – 85

If one has pride and egoism, there is no non-violence. Non-violence is impossible without humility. My own experience is that whenever I have acted non-violently I have been led to it and sustained in it by the higher promptings of an unseen power. Through my own will I should have miserable failed. I – 187

Truth and non-violence are not possible without a living belief in God, meaning a self-existent, all-knowing, living Force which inheres in every other force known to the world and which depends on none, and which will live when all other forces may conceivably perish or cease to act. I am unable to account for my life without belief in this all-embracing living Light. II – 212

The root of satyagraha is in prayer. A satyagrahi relies upon God for protection against the tyranny of brute force. II – 62

My greatest weapon is my mute prayer. I – 251

My faith in the saying that what is gained by the sword will also be lost by the sword is imperishable. I – 211
 
Jesus was the most active resister known perhaps to history. This was non-violence par excellence. II – 16
 
If non-violence does not appeal to your heart, you should discard it. II – 134

– from Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violence in Peace and War, 1948.

Whatever names we dignify ourselves with, whatever uniforms we wear, whatever priests we anoint ourselves before, however many millions we possess, however many guards are stationed along our road, however many policemen guard our wealth, however many so-called criminals, revolutionists, and anarchists we punish, whatever exploits we have performed, whatever states we may have founded, fortresses and towers we may have erected – from Babel to the Eiffel Tower – there are two inevitable conditions of life, confronting all of us, which destroy its whole meaning; (1) death, which may at any moment pounce upon each of us; and (2) the transitoriness of all our works, which so soon pass away and leave no trace.

Whatever we may do – found companies, build palaces and monuments, write songs and poems – it is all not for long time. Soon it passes away, leaving no trace. And therefore, however we may conceal it from ourselves, we cannot help seeing that the significance of our life cannot lie in our personal fleshly existence, the prey of incurable suffering and inevitable death, nor in any social institution or organization.

Whoever you may be who are reading these lines, think of your position and of your duties – not of your position as land-owner, merchant, judge, emperor, president, minister, priest, soldier, which has been temporarily allotted you by men, and not of the imaginary duties laid on you by those positions, but of your real positions in eternity as a creature who at the will of Someone has been called out of unconsciousness after an eternity of non-existence to which you may return at any moment at his will.

Think of your duties – not your supposed duties as a landowner to your estate, as a merchant to your business, as emperor, minister, or official to the state, but of your real duties, the duties that follow from your real position as being called into life and endowed with reason and love.

– Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You: Christianity Not as a Mystic Religion But as a New Theory of Life, XII.

Leo Tolstoy – The Kingdom of God is Within You

One sometimes wonders what necessitated the corruption of Christianity which is now the greatest obstacle to its acceptance in its true significance. VII

[N]o honest and serious-minded man of our day can help seeing the incompatibly of true Christianity – the doctrine of meekness, forgiveness of injuries, and love – with government, with its pomp, acts of violence, executions and wars. The profession of true Christianity not only excludes the possibility of recognising government, but even destroys its very foundations. X

The position of Christian humanity with its prisons, galleys, gibbets, its factories and accumulation of capital, its taxes, churches, gin-palaces, licensed brothels, its ever-increasing armament and its millions of brutalized men, ready, like chained dogs, to attack anyone against whom their master incites them, would be terrible indeed if it were the product of violence, but it is pre-eminently the product of public opinion. And what has been established by public opinion can be destroyed by public opinion – and, indeed, is being destroyed by public opinion. XI

The condition of Christian humanity with its fortresses, cannons, dynamite, guns, torpedoes, prisons, gallows, churches, factories, customs offices, and palaces is really terrible. But still cannons and guns will not fire themselves, prisons will not shut men up of themselves, gallows will not hang them, churches will not delude them, nor customs offices hinder them, and palaces and factories are not built nor kept up of themselves. All those things are the work of men. If men come to understand that they ought not to do these things, then they will cease to be. XI

[T]here can only be a semblance of ethics in which murder in the shape of war and the execution of criminals is allowed, but no true ethics. The recognition of the life of every man as sacred is the first and only basis of all ethics. XII

The doctrine of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth has been abrogated by Christianity, because it is the justification of immorality, and a mere semblance of equity, and has no real meaning. Life is a value which has no weight nor size, and cannot be compared to any other, and so there is no sense in destroying a life for a life. Besides, every social law aims at the amelioration of man’s life. What way, then can the annihilation of the life of some men ameliorate men’s life? Annihilation of life cannot be a means of the amelioration of life; it is a suicidal act. XII

Share all you have with others, do not heap up riches, do not steal, do not cause suffering, do not kill, do not unto others what you would not they should do unto you, all that has been said not eighteen hundred, but five thousand years ago, and there could be no doubt of the truth of this law if it were not for hypocrisy. Except for hypocrisy men could not have failed, if not to put the law in practice, at least to recognize it, and admit that it is wrong not to put it in practice.
      But you will say that there is the public good to be considered, and that on that account one must not and ought not to conform to these principles; for the public good one may commit acts of violence and murder. It is better for one man to die than that the whole people perish, you will say like Caiaphas, and you sign the death sentence of one man, of a second, and a third; you load your gun against this man who is to perish for the public good, you imprison him, you take his possessions. You say that you commit these acts of cruelty because you are part of the society and of the state; that it is your duty to serve them, and as landowner, judge, emperor, or soldier to conform to their laws. But besides belonging to the state and having duties created by that position, you belong also to eternity and to God, who also lays duties upon you. XII

– from Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You: Christianity Not as a Mystic Religion But as a New Theory of Life (first published in 1894).

[you can read the whole book online here, though it's probably easier on your eyes to borrow the actual book from the library...]

(you can click on the photos to link through to the webpages from which I took them…)

Thousands of Burmese monks have been staging protests over the last three days in support of the All-Burmese Alliance of Buddhist Monks’ nation-wide monastic boycott of the military government.

Find out more here and here.

See more images here.

Not even sure where Burma is? :P –

WWJD, I Kissed Dating Goodbye, Left Behind, The Purpose Driven Life, The Prayer of Jabez (ever wondered what happened to the author of The Prayer of Jabez?), The Passion of the Christ…

John Eldredge’s Wild at Heart joins the list of recent Christian fads. The first copy I received I exchanged for a book on Christian apologetics. I was sent another copy while in China, but stopped reading it when I got to the part where Eldredge implies that Jesus is more like Braveheart’s William Wallace than Mother Teresa (p. 24). Last week I borrowed Wild at Heart and decided to [try] read[ing] it with a more open mind (third time lucky?).

Eldredge argues that men “long for adventures and battles and a Beauty” (p. xi). Wild at Heart’s basic thesis is that men are wild at heart because God is wild at heart. Both men and women need to understand this so that men can live the wild lives for which God created them.

Wild at Heart provides an interesting critique of political correctness and how it has negatively impacted gender roles. Eldredge obviously wants to help hurting people. But anyone with a basic understanding of the Bible will find [some of] Eldredge’s approach problematic. Too many Christian authors manipulate the Bible to fit their arguments, presumably because they feel pressured to back up their claims with scripture. Yet the misuse of scripture doesn’t strengthen an argument, it weakens it. For example:

• Eldredge begins by arguing that man was meant to be wild and undomesticated because Adam was created outside the Garden of Eden and then placed there by God (p. 3-4; Ge 2:7,8,15). Eldredge implies that Adam’s place in the garden was less than ideal, that man’s true place is in the wilderness. But presumably God put Adam in the garden because it was the ideal dwelling place for him. Eldredge’s interpretation suggests that even God doesn’t fully understand the wildness of man’s heart…

• Eldredge argues that nature’s fierceness – tigers, killer whales, the jungles of India – reflects the nature of God (pp. 29-30). But others would argue that nature’s fierceness is a consequence of the Fall. Furthermore, the Bible says that the Messiah will usher in an age even more tranquil than that described in Eden – “The wolf will live with the lamb”, etc. (Isa 11:6-9; Isa 65:17-25; Rev 21:3-5; Rev 7:17). Eldredge’s wild masculinity would be out of place in a peaceful heaven where there may be adventure, but there will be no battles to fight or beauties to rescue.

• Eldredge states that God’s wild nature is evident in His “willingness to risk” (pp. 30-32). A risk implies uncertainty and the possibility of failure. But the Bible states that God is all-powerful and all-knowing (Eph 1:11; Isa 46:9-10). By claiming that God takes risks, Eldredge has to conclude that faith in God is a risk: “He rigged the world in such a way that it only works when we embrace risk as the theme of our lives, which is to say, only when we live by faith” (p. 200). But “faith” and “risk” are not the same. The Bible says faith is not risky, but is “being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see” (Heb 11:1). Christian faith is anchored in the objective, historical figure of Jesus.

• Eldredge derides the “false self” that desires a “guarantee of success” before following God (p. 213). Yet Jesus guarantees success – following him has no risk of ultimate failure (Jn 10:28-29; of course worldly success is not guaranteed: Mt 6:19-21). It seems that Eldredge fails to understand the earthly aspect of our existence in light of the heavenly (Mt 6:33). For the Christian, following God is success.

• Eldredge says Jesus is like William Wallace, as depicted in the film Braveheart (pp. 22-25). Christ “picks a fight” with the Pharisees; He is fierce and wild (p. 24). Yet the Bible focuses not on Jesus’ wildness, but on His complete submission. Jesus only said and did what the Father wanted Him to (Jn 8:28-29; Php 2:5-8). He condemned the hypocrisy of the Pharisees and drove the moneychangers from the temple, but these demonstrate obedience to the Father as much as they indicate wildness.

• Jesus’ anger and ‘wild’ actions (such as driving the moneychangers from the temple) were not a reaction to wrongs against Him, but were carried out in defence of the Father (Jn 2:16). Throughout the Passion story, Jesus would not defend Himself physically against his attackers, and hardly even defended Himself verbally. As Christians, we are not to seek justice or revenge for ourselves (Ro 12:19-21; Mt 5:38-42). Contrast that with Eldredge’s advice to his son to meet violence with violence when confronting a bully (pp. 78-79).

There are many articles that go into far more detailed criticisms, particularly relating to Wild at Heart’s theological problems. I don’t agree with all of these criticisms, but they raise many interesting questions. Some of the more comprehensive reviews:

Rut Etheridge, ‘God in Man’s Image: A Critique of John Eldredge’s Wild at Heart’
“Wild At Heart is a heartfelt, emotionally moving but ultimately dangerous book because it is severely lacking in biblical truth….Eldredge rightly points out that men and women have fallen prey to culturally popular but deplorable ideas about masculinity and femininity. Eldredge wants men to be real men and women to be real women.  But Eldredge’s unbiblical methodology of helping people along this road is what necessitates the rejection of the key principles of the book.”

Gary E. Gilley, ‘Wild at Heart - Part 1’
“But what is so bad about Wild at Heart?  Are we just picking apart something because it is successful?  I trust not, for Wild at Heart is so full of unbiblical content and downright error that even Christianity Today wrote a negative review….Christianity Today implied that Wild at Heart is a “syrupy pop book that pleases undiscerning ears” and then stated clearly, “The therapeutic virtues of the book, however, do not outweigh its theological and cultural vices….Theological error emerges by page three.”

Randy Stinson, ‘Is God Wild At Heart? A Review of John Eldredge’s Wild at Heart‘
“With all of the good insights Eldredge offers in this book, it is actually a little painful to mention two of what should be considered very significant problems which undermine the entire book.”

-

“It is no good asking for a simple religion. After all, real things are not simple. They look simple, but they are not.” – C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Book II.

I am not a good Christian because I have no desire to convert anyone.

Last night I was at a Christian small group meeting and the discussion turned to the Harvest Crusade. The Harvest Crusade is an evangelistic outreach event with “great contemporary Christian music and a clear presentation of the good news of Jesus Christ”. It’s coming to Wellington later in the year. Last night we went around the circle and everyone gave the names of “unsaved” people they would like to bring to the event. Everyone except me. I don’t have anything against the Harvest Crusade (other than the use of the word ‘crusade‘ in the title), but I wouldn’t want to take any non-Christians along to it.

Last Saturday I went to the Kilbirnie mosque open day. A nice guy called Abdi showed us around. Abdi’s faith was clearly central to his identity – a source of great confidence and comfort for him. I respect that. I wouldn’t want to convert Abdi to Christianity. I wouldn’t invite him to the Harvest Crusade. Similarly, I don’t want to convert to Islam. If Abdi were to invite me to a massive rally which had the sole purpose of trying to convert me to Islam, I would not want to go.

Can someone be a Christian and not seek converts?

Here’s a random page that was on the front of one of my course readings. It’s about a missionary’s troubled efforts to translate John 1:1 into the Luo language:

‘Who Created You (or Who Are You)?’

But the Luo language does not have an independent concept of Create or Creation, hence the question was rendered to mean

‘Who moulded you?’

Still, this was meaningless, because human beings are born of their mothers. Therefore, the elders told the visitor they did not know.

The missionary was not satisfied with their answer and instead insisted that they must give a satisfactory answer.

Then one of the elders remembered that, although a person may be born of his mother normally, when he is afflicted with tuberculosis of the spine, then he loses his normal figure, he gets ‘moulded’.

So he said, ‘Rubanga is the one who moulds people’.

Rubanga is the name of the hostile spirit, which the Acholi believe causes the hunch or hump on the back.

The missionary, not knowing what Rubanga meant to the people, started preaching that it is Rubanga (the hunch or hunchback spirit) who created the Acholi people.

Also, the Acholi did not think metaphysically. The Greek concept of logos does not even exist in their thinking. So, [Word] was translated to mean News or Message.

Moreover, the Acholi are not concerned with beginning or end of the world. Thus, ‘In the beginning’ was rendered ‘from long long ago’.

Thus, when the famous, already problematic, passage from the Gospel of John 1:1 was translated into Acholi, it read:

‘From long long ago there was News, News was [with] the Hunchback Spirit, News was the Hunchback Spirit’.

- Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Vol. 28, No. 2, 1999, p. 354. (the page had two obvious typos, which I have corrected in the passage above - in the parts with these brackets: [ ])