Faith Builders Educational Programs

Nonresistance - Fighting Evil with God’s Weapons

By Stephen Russell

PART I

3D"Text INTRODUCTION

In January, 1991, I was living at home with my mother in Alexandria, Virginia, and like many other Americans I was following the buildup of American and coalition forces in = Saudi Arabia with great interest. The year before on August 2 Saddam Hussein sent the Iraqi army into Kuwait to claim it as Iraq<= /st1:place>’s nineteenth province. Most of = the world, led by the United States, reacted vigorously to this act of aggression, and on August 8 President Bush announced Desert Shield, the deployment of American forces in Saudi Arabia to protect it and other oil-producing Arab states from Iraq’s army. Intense political maneu= vering now began between Iraq= and the United States to secure the most advantage on the world stage. Ir= aq tried to pull the Arab and Muslim world to its side while the United States worked to line up as many countries as possible in its coalition.

Because Iraq’s aggression was against a fellow Arab and Muslim state, the United States had the easier time succeeding in its goal. On November 29, 1990, the United N= ations Security Council authorized the use of force against Iraq if the invading Iraqi forces were not= out of Kuwait by January 15, 1991. On Janua= ry 12 the United States Congress also authorized the use of American forces again= st Iraq in fulfillment of the UN resolution.

On Wednesday, January 16, my mother and I sat = down to watch developments in Iraq on the evening news. Little d= id we realize that that evening, just as we sat down, the war would begin before = our eyes. At 6:38 pm Eastern time, bombs and cruise missiles began to explode on the tv screen as CNN reported from Bagdad. Although it was expected, it was s= till a surprise to realize that a multi-national coalition led by the American army had actually begun the Gulf War against Iraq.

Next Sunday, however, an even bigger surprise awaited me. After the service= that Sunday morning several of the young men were discussing the Gulf War. The intense interest among the youn= g men was understandable, but I was taken aback by some of their language. These young men expressed exciteme= nt as they discussed what “our missiles and bombs” were able to do. What seemed to me an excessive identification with the American Armed Forces and their sophisticated weapo= ns only made sense to these young men. This profoundly touched me because of my own conversion history.

When I was seventeen I heard the Gospel messag= e at a Baptist church and responded by surrendering my life to Jesus. I had been raised in a church-goin= g home and I already knew the essence of the Gospel, but here I heard of the need = to yield my life to Jesus and to follow him.&= nbsp; God worked immediately on my nationalistic attitude. One day I was intensely nationalis= tic and the next day, after surrendering my life to Jesus, I still loved my cou= ntry but I had the strong sense that one should not kill, even for one’s country. I say sense b= ecause although the heart sensed the truth here, I had not yet formulated fully in= my mind what this meant.

Almost four years after my conversion I was wrestling with God’s will for my life when several apparent coinciden= ces led me to join the Beachy= Amish Church. In our local community college lib= rary one day I noticed a church history book and began looking through it. I came to a chapter on the Anabapt= ists. I was struck with the amazing agreement between their beliefs and those I h= ad developed as I read the Bible over the four years since my conversion. The book mentioned that the Anabap= tists were much like the other Protestant reformers of the sixteenth century, exc= ept for five areas of serious disagreement.&nb= sp; The author listed as areas of disagreement positions such as believer’s baptism, voluntary church membership, priesthood of the believers, the sharing of temporal goods, and, of course, nonresistance. Here at last was a clear and unamb= iguous description of what I had come to believe at my conversion. I began to attend the Beachy Amish Church to which som= e of my high school friends belonged. I was impressed with the church’s teaching on many points which were of particular importance to me, especially the ones mentioned above.

I was baptized October 13, one month before I turned twenty-one. The teachi= ng of nonresistance had been a major factor in my decision. So it is easy to see that the atti= tude of some of the young men at my church in Virginia at the beginning of the Gulf War in 1991 might have affected me deeply.

The teaching of nonresistance is not limited to small peculiar isolated sects, as some may think. Christians throughout history and = all over the world have believed and practiced nonresistance to varying degrees= . A story from the late 1940s in the= land variously called Palestine or Israel = will help to illustrate my point.

The story from Father Elias Chacour’s li= fe begins when he was a boy of eight. In 1947 the villagers of Biram in northern Palestine heard that Jewish soldiers wo= uld be coming one day soon and staying in their village.

After having heard that the Jewish forces would be coming= to their village just south of the Lebanese border prior to the end of the Bri= tish Mandate over Palestine, Rudah, Elias’ oldest brother, brought an old rusty rifle into the Chacour home without asking his father, Michael.<= /o:p>

“When Father saw the rifle he erupted in a rare sho= w of anger. ‘Get it out of here! I won’t have it i= n my house.’ Mother and the = rest of us stood frozen and mute.

“Poor Rudah was wide-eyed, stunned. ‘I–I thought we might = need a gun to protect ourselves in case–‘

“‘No!’= Father would not hear more. ‘We do not use violence ever.= Even if someone hurts us.’&nb= sp; He had calmed a bit, and he took the gun.

“‘But Father,’ Rudah persisted, anxious= ly, ‘Why do the soldiers carry guns?’

“Slipping his arm around Rudah’s shoulders, Father replied, ‘For centuries our Jewish brothers have been exiles in foreign lands. They were hunt= ed and tormented–even by Christians. They have lived in poverty and sadness. They have been made to fear, and sometimes when people are afraid, they feel they have to carry guns. Their souls are weak because they = have lost peace within.’

“‘But how do we know the soldiers won’t harm us?’ Rudah pressed him.

“Father smiled, and all the tension seemed to relax. ‘Because,’= he said, ‘the Jews and Palestinians are brothers–blood brothers. We share the same father, Abraham,= and the same God. We must never f= orget that. Now we get rid of the gun.’” &= nbsp;

The soldiers arrived about two weeks later. One day by the soldiers told the villagers to leave temporarily for their own safety. After locking everything into their homes and giving the keys to the soldiers, they all left and camped under t= he nearby olive trees. After hea= ring no word from the soldiers and beginning to worry, the village leaders returned= to the village about two weeks after they had left. They were ordered by the soldiers = to leave; this was now Jewish land.

Unsure what to do, the villagers marched to Gish, the nea= rest neighboring village. They fou= nd it deserted as well and decided to settle in the empty houses.

“In November refugees fleeing from larger towns bro= ught more devastating news.

“Pales= tine was to be partitioned in what the UN called a ‘compromise.’ Our elders and hundreds of thousan= ds of Palestinians throughout the land were shocked beyond words, for the terms of the ‘compromise’ were brutal.

“The Zionist were to possess the majority of Palestine–fifty-four percent–even though they owned only seven percent of the land!”

When the village elders investigated again, they discover= ed that Biram has been given to new settlers–Jewish settlers. They were forbidden to return, even though the former villagers offered to share the land with the newcomers.

“‘Children,’ [Father] said softly, turn= ing those sad eyes upon us, ‘if someone hurts you, you can curse him. But this would be useless. Instead, you have to ask the Lord = to bless the man who makes himself your enemy. And do you know what will happen?<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> The Lord will bless you with inner peace–and perhaps your enemy will turn from his wickedness. If not, the Lord will deal with him.’”

The villagers of Biram petitioned the Israeli Supreme Cou= rt to allow them to return to th= eir homes and live together with the new settlers. Twice the Court told the villagers= they could return. The first time = the army simply refused to listen. The second time the army asked for time to prepare. The villagers could return on Dece= mber 25. On December 25 as the vil= lagers marched over the last hilltop anticipating the sight of their village once again, they were greeted with a terrifying and saddening shock. The army had surrounded their vill= age and had begun leveling it to the ground.&n= bsp; Eventually the villagers dispersed to other parts of the new country= , Israel.=

Elias Chacour eventually was ordained as a Mel= kite Greek Catholic priest and made it his life’s work to strive for peace= and reconciliation between the Arabs and Israeli Jews. He has established a whole series = of schools in northern = Israel meant to train Israeli Arabs to fit better into the society in which they f= ind themselves and to promote peace and understanding. This story of the approach to life= by Elias’ father, Michael Chacour, that avoids violence and revenge beca= use of his faith, and the continuing effort by his son because of his faith to further the effort to seek peace and reconciliation where there has been violence and revenge, is but one illustration of the widespread practice of this teaching of Christ. Men = and women in all the various branches of Christianity have heard the voice of Christ call them to follow him even into suffering and sometimes to death.<= /p>

In this first session, we will examine the New Testament teaching on nonresistance. We begin with Jesus. “You have heard that it was said....But I say to you...” Jesus repeated = these words several times in the Sermon on the Mount. They are so familiar. Yet, like so many familiar words, = we have hardly understood them. = Have we really grasped the shock and dismay that these words would have caused t= he first time they were spoken, even among some of the very closest of Jesus’ followers? Who i= s this who would dare to change even the commandments of the Torah?

Perhaps even more importantly, do these words cause us the shock and dismay that we ought to experience as we hear them?<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Not only were they deepening and broadening God’s message as compared with how it had originally been given in the Old Testament, but they were going completely against the natu= ral, though fallen, instincts of man. Is it even possible to live such a life as Jesus described here? Could one actually turn the other = cheek or go the second mile? And, j= ust as his disciples later exclaimed in disbelief when they heard Jesus do away wi= th divorce, many today would think that without the potential escape route of divorce, marriage is not worth risking.&nb= sp; Can a man actually live the way that Jesus taught?

Of course, it is only with the power of God’s Spirit that anyone can live as God calls us to live. With God’s Spirit in us we h= ave all the resources we need to do whatever God commands. Admittedly our appropriation of God’s resources for living is never complete in this life and therefo= re the lives we live are not perfect. Yet as our minds are progressively renewed by a reevaluation of our thinking under the guidance of the Spirit and as we turn to the Lord with an unveiled face, that is, with complete openness and honesty, we are gradually “being transformed into the image [of the Lord Jesus], from one degre= e of glory to another. For this co= mes from the Lord who is the Spirit.”

The question still remains, what is the normal Christian lifestyle? Again, t= he Bible-believing Christian seeks his directions from the whole Bible, but wi= th special emphasis placed on what Jesus said and did and how he understood the scriptures he already had. As implied above, we should attempt to read the New Testament as though for the first time so that the full impact of what Jesus and his disciples had to s= ay penetrates through the protective cocoon of familiarity that repeated readi= ngs of the sacred text may have woven in our minds.

As we consider the sort of life that God calls= his children to live, our focus will be on what God expects of us as we relate = to others. We will consider five areas: the two kingdom concept, the church and state, our citizenship in he= aven and on earth, and active nonresistance or love in action, which is our Christian warfare.

THE TWO KINGDOMS

The Old Testament shows that God controls all = of history. This applies even to= the details, such as who rules. A= ll throughout Israel’s history God chose who would rule his people. But God chooses not just Israel&= #8217;s kings but he also chooses the rulers of all nations. And God uses these rulers, whether= good or bad, to accomplish his own purposes.&nb= sp; Some, like Cyrus the first ruler of the Persi= an Empire, God uses in powerful and positive ways in spite of the fact that they are pagans and do not know him. Others God uses to chasten and pun= ish even the people over whom they rule. In any case the principle is the same;= God rules in the affairs of men without being thwarted and accomplishes all his purposes.

What, then, is the relationship between the church, God’s people, and the state which God has also established? The church was founded that first Pentecost after the resurrection of Jesus when God’s Spirit came to d= well in his people as his presence had once dwelt in the T= emple in Jerusalem. These members of the new covenant = with God were the earthly part of the kingdom of God that Jesus h= ad come to proclaim and establish. They were those who had freely and consciou= sly yielded to God’s rule in their lives. While it is true that God also controlled the earthly kingdoms, it was not by means of a conscious or yiel= ded submission on their part. Ind= eed, these earthly kingdoms were actually controlled in a more direct and obvious way by the devil whom Jesus recognized as the ruler of this world.^{^[1]}

Thus there are two kingdoms at the present tim= e in this world. The kingdom of God on earth is composed of those who have repented of their sins and chosen to give their lives to God. Its members consciously desire to be ruled by God. It is also called the Church, the = Body of Christ, the Israel of God and the Bride of Christ. Everything and everyone else that = is still in rebellion against God is, in contrast, part of this world’s system and thus under the rule of the devil. Until the Lord returns and ends all rebellion this dichotomy between the two kingdoms will remain and allow no = room whatsoever for neutrality. Al= l are either under the lordship of God, or else their master is the devil. We all either say, “Yes, Lord!” to Christ= or we implicitly say, “No!” and reject Christ’s lordship in our= lives. “Do you not know that friend= ship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.”

Martin Luther during the Reformation proclaimed the truth of the two kingdoms, but he did not emphasize or even recognize t= he fact that the devil was the ruler of the kingdom of this world. For him the two kingdoms were two = realms of action, one spiritual and the other physical. Christians could be involved in bo= th, although the Christian did not actually need the earthly political kingdom because he followed a higher law. However, because of his higher calling, it was better for all if the Christian chose to participate in the political system, thus providing it w= ith the benefit of his spiritual nature and insight. Thus participation by the Christia= n in the kingdoms of this world was justified by Luther because of the benefit it brings to everyone, believer and unbeliever alike. This is essentially how most modern Christians understand the two kingdoms concept today.

The biblical picture of the schism between the= two kingdoms is much starker than that portrayed by Luther. His understanding was conditioned = by twelve centuries of close interaction between the church and state which eventually included the joining together of the two into a union after the = time of Constantine the Great. Jes= us himself insisted that we would either store up treasures here on earth or e= lse in heaven, but not in both. H= is point was that “no one can serve two masters, for either he will hate= the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other.” The Chris= tian’s first loyalty must be to the Kingdom of the Lord of heaven and no commitmen= t or partnership of any kind is to come between the believer and his Lord. Paul says in 2 Corinthians 6 that = the Christian is not to dilute his loyalty to God with any other commitments but rather the Christian is to be separate from connections involving worldly loyalty, “for we are the Temple of the living God.” This restriction does not exclude those interactions that pertain to daily living but do not involve a commitment of loyalty, “since then you would nee= d to go out of the world.” B= ut we are to be in the world, though not of it, otherwise we could not bear witne= ss to our Lord and his grace in our lives, as we are called to do in order to = win others to his Kingdom.

These two kingdoms are diametrically opposed s= ince the bases upon which each is built are contradictory. Because the one is based on loyalt= y to God and the other, consciously or not, is based on self-will and rebellion against God, a constant warfare rages between the two. Not everyone recognizes this warfa= re since it is spiritual and not physical.&nb= sp; But the believer must recognize it in order to remain spiritually so= und and to maintain healthy growth. Otherwise he is in danger of compromise and laxness in the struggle against our enemy. As in any conflict the consequences of being caught off guard can be catastrophic bec= ause our “adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.” So,= like good soldiers, we are called to “be sober minded; [to] be watchful.”

CHURCH AND STATE

What, indeed, then, is the proper relationship between the church and the state? Since the very orientation of each is antagonistic to the other, sho= uld there be outright conflict between the two? Although there is ample opportunit= y for conflict to erupt between earthly expressions of the two kingdoms, they have been ordained by God for two different spheres of operation, so ideally the= re is no need for conflict to arise. By and large the New Testament deals with the Christian’s relationship with the state from an ideal situation with little or no confl= ict between the two. Only occasio= nally does it face the unpleasant possibility that from time to time the state wi= ll abandon its proper role and usurp what properly belongs to the individual, = to the church or to God.^{^[2]}

So, first let us consider how the church is to relate normally to the state, when both the church and the state are in the= ir proper sphere of action. The state’s proper sphere of action is to restrain evil and to reward, honor and encourage good. The point of the state is to restr= ain fallen man from pursuing his natural course of action which is always self-centered and often destructive or oppressive towards others. The highest goal for the state is = to maintain equity by which every man receives his just due and carries out at least the minimum required responsibilities, which may vary from one societ= y to another. Ideally the state wi= ll interfere in the life of the individual only to the degree necessary to maintain this state of equity.^{^[3]} The more the state impinges upon t= he conscience of the individual, the more the state risks losing its legitimac= y.

The church, on the other hand, has as its task= the Great Commission given by Jesus: “Go therefore and make disciples of = all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, = to the end of the age.” = In this short command to the church we can see all the areas of responsibility that God has given to the church. She is to proclaim throughout the earth the Gospel and to call people from all the nations of the earth to become followers of Jesus and thus subjects of the Kingdom of God. She is to initiate formally by bap= tism those who respond positively to this invitation, and to announce their submission to God and the church. And finally she is responsible to instruct and guide all believers i= nto complete obedience. Her spher= e of action is twofold: proclamation throughout the whole earth to those who do = not yet believe and the exercise of authority throughout the body of believers.= There is no room for the exercise = of authority by the church outside the body of believers. The more the church attempts to ex= tend its control beyond the boundaries of the body of Christ, the more it runs t= he risk of devaluing and sullying its moral authority even among unbelievers a= nd of obscuring the clarity of its true task of wooing the lost into the Kingd= om of heaven and then guiding them “to grow up in every way into Christ.” Both bodies ha= ve their proper area of operation and if either steps outside that sphere it inevitably undermines and upsets the fulfillment of its proper work.

Clearly the state exists to maintain order and= to protect lives and property and to lessen and resolve the tensions and animosities that naturally arise among fallen men. Just as clearly the church is ther= e to call men to a higher life and give direction on that road to full maturity. When both are functioning accordin= g to the plan of God, how should the Christian relate to the state? The New Testament has four main pa= ssages that deal with this topic: Romans 13.1-7, 1 Timothy 2.1-10, Titus 3.1-11 an= d 1 Peter 2.13-21.

Perhaps the most significant detail from these various passages is the recognition that believers now live differently from their past lives. Whereas the= y were “once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing [their] days in malice and envy, hated by others and hat= ing one another,” now they were “to be obedient, to be ready for ev= ery good work, to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and = to show perfect courtesy toward all people.” Out of this fact flows the rest of= the details from these passages dealing with the relationship between church and state. By the very fact that = their lives have changed, the believers should generally not run afoul of the government, at least not when the government is operating in its proper sphere. Christians are the on= ly truly free persons there are since they are no longer under obligation to t= he passions and sins that once controlled and enslaved them.

The one who is being transformed by the work of the Holy Spirit in his life is then able to “be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor = as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good.” The governing authorities have, after all, their sphere of responsibility and Christians are required to accept this and to honor these authorities in the fulfillment of their ministry from God. As the Christians do this, their o= wn sphere of ministry–the proclamation of the Kingdom of God–should be open for greater exercise. Admittedly this does not always happen because the state often tries= to control and limit the church’s exercise of its ministry since it sees= the church as a competitor for the people’s allegiance and an adversary because of the refusal by the faithful church to yield the state unconditio= nal authority in the areas of life in which God has spoken. One command from these passages th= at Christians have concerning the government can help avoid this problem, or, = if the government has begun to act against the church, it can soften the persecution or even bring it to an end.&nb= sp; We Christians are told to pray “for kings and all who are in h= igh positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified = in every way.” Of course, = we are given no guarantee that the rulers will automatically respond and relent, b= ut we must nevertheless be faithful to God.&n= bsp; Normally it is true that no one will “harm you if you are zeal= ous for what is good. But even if= you should suffer for righteousness’ sake, you will be blessed. Have no fear of them, nor be troub= led, but in your hearts regard Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in = you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience, so that, w= hen you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put= to shame. For it is better to su= ffer for doing good, if that should be God’s will, than for doing evil.= 221;

Beyond praying for the rulers of earth’s kingdoms, there are several other positive commands that we are given in re= gard to the state. We Christians a= re told to “honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor.” Each part of this verse relates to= our relations with the state and society outside the church, for, if we fear God and love the brotherhood, our witness to the world will be strong and cause them to respect and honor us. And, if we honor everyone, and especially the emperor, our respect will be retur= ned, and if any false charges are brought against us, their lack of substance wi= ll be obvious to all who are open to the truth. Furthermore, we are to “pay = to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue= is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed” because these men, although they may not be believers, are God’s serv= ants and deserve their reasonable compensation for “attending to this very= thing.”

There are some pacifists who argue that this passage in Romans 13 tells us to pay these things to those to whom they are due, and that it is then our responsibility to decide to whom they belong.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Yet the passage itself makes it am= ply clear that all government officers, not some or those we choose to submit t= o or consider honorable, are chosen by God and the Christian has the responsibil= ity to obey this command. This ho= nor is not dependent on our evaluation of their service as government officials, a= ny more than the respect we owe to all men is dependent on whether we think th= ey have earned it.

Finally, we Christians have been given some commands concerning government officials that might be described as more negative. We are to fear them= and obey them in all things that do not infringe upon God’s call on our lives. When the government do= es infringe on God’s call on us, we must give our loyalty completely to = God. Twice the apostles were commanded = by the Jewish authorities in Jerusale= m not to speak of Jesus or spread the gospel. Forthrightly they explained, ̶= 0;We must obey God rather than men.” They simply left it to their tormentors to decide “whether it = was right in the sight of God to listen to [them] rather than to God.” The apostles chose to obey God and= to leave the results in his hands. In the end all but one of the apostles suffered martyrdom for his faith and witness, but they regarded this as a small thing so long as they could be f= ound faithful to God.

Paul told the Christians not to resist human authority since it had been established by God, and resisting it would be t= he same as opposing God himself. This does not mean that all authority is righteous or good or even capable. But God chooses whom he will and f= or his own purposes. It may be that a people has turned its back on God and deserves a ruler who will bring disas= ter upon them. Regardless, it is = not our place to judge them or to try to replace them, but rather to support th= em by prayer and to encourage them to do their best.

Before moving on to the next point, it is necessary to evaluate one very important challenge that the Pharisees, Herodians, scribes and chief priests directed towards Jesus. It speaks in a very decisive way a= bout the whole question of our responsibility to government and to the limits of governmental authority. It is certainly one of the best known of the Gospel stories. In an attempt to trap Jesus some J= ewish authorities came to him and asked a question meant to trap him whichever wa= y he answered it. After telling Je= sus that they were convinced that he never showed partiality and therefore would answer truthfully, they asked him, “Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caes= ar or not?” If Jesus said = not to pay taxes to Caesar, they could turn him over to the Roman officials as a malefactor and rebel. If he s= aid it was permissible to pay taxes to a foreign oppressor, they felt sure he would lose his popularity and influence with the common people.

But as in many other cases Jesus surprised the= m by his answer. As he often did, = he responded to their question with his own question: “Show me a denarius. Whose likeness and inscription does it have?” The answer was obvious and surely they were taken completely off guard. Candidly they responde= d, “Caesar’s.” Jesus then told them, “Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” The story ends by saying that Jesus’ opponents “were not able in the presence of the people to catch him in what he said, but marveling at his answer they became silent.”

There are at least two truths that we often mi= ss in this very familiar story from the two Gospels. The first has to do with the fact = that things bear the mark of the one to whom they belong. There is some clear resemblance th= at says, I belong to this one. I= n the case of man the mark is that very special characteristic that is mentioned = in God’s first expression of the thought of creating man in Genesis 1. It is the image and likeness of Go= d that man alone bears of all God’s creatures. It has been marred by the Fall, bu= t it remains the identifying mark of mankind.&n= bsp; It says in a very special sense that we belong to God. But this is not the only place whe= re the mark of ownership can be seen. Jesus says that the Roman coin bears the same sort of sign of ownership. In this case it is= the image of Caesar that the coin bears. And just as our bearing the image of God marks us as God’s rightful possession, so too, the bearing of Caesar’s image by the coin marks it as rightfully belonging to him.&n= bsp; This truth is obvious, but it was an obvious truth that needed to be proclaimed before it could be perceived.&n= bsp; As we think of this principle further, it becomes obvious that not o= nly the coin, which literally bears Caesar’s image, but other things which are made by Caesar also bear his image.&nb= sp; So, schools and airports and roads and harbors and governmental buildings and many other things bear the mark of Caesar’s or the government’s ownership as well. And all these things belong to or are under the rightful control of = the government.

This brings us to the second truth from this passage. All of those things = that bear Caesar’s image, literally or figuratively, belong to him and mus= t be responsive to his commands. H= e can do with them whatever he will. Like the builder or maker of any object, its fate lies in the hands of the one w= ho made it. He can cherish it an= d take care of it, or he can abuse it and destroy it. Even so, the same is true of manki= nd. Mankind belongs to the one who mad= e him and whose image he bears. And= man ought be responsive to the co= mmands of the one who made him. God = can do with us whatever he will. But= in his grace and love he yearns for the blessing and salvation of each one of = his creatures that bear his image. For he “desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.” Thus by right o= f the mark of ownership, all men ought to obey their maker. In the final analysis the only one= who has the right to take man’s life is the one who bestowed it. For the Christian this ought to be self-evident and an unchanging principle in his approach to living with others. God has given life to= man and only God has the right to end it. The government, on the other hand, has full say over those things wh= ich it has built or made possible–the roads and schools and hospitals and much more–all of them things without life.

CITIZENSHIP IN HEAVEN

Considering the nature of the two kingdoms, one potential area of conflict for the Christian is citizenship. In our modern world almost everyon= e is considered a citizen of the country in which he was born, or from which his parents came. The concept of citizenship as we know it, has its roots in ancient Greece and Rome and was given its modern form under the influence of the Enlightenment and the American and French Revolutions. In all these cases the citizen was the person who had rights that were protect= ed by the state, and who owed the state the fulfillment of certain duties in return. Unlike the modern wor= ld the ancient world was very sparing in awarding citizenship to its inhabitants.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> It was a high honor that was not t= aken for granted. The rights that = it conferred were significant and elevated the position of citizen high above = that of mere subject. Paul’s= Roman citizenship was an extremely valuable asset and set him apart as one of the elite within the Empire. That= is why those who were about to flog Paul as a means of discovering the reason = for the riot in the Temple left his presence so quickly when they heard he was a Roman citizen, and why the tribune who was questioning Paul was also afraid= .^{^[4]}

Citizenship in the modern western world confers enormous privileges and rights on all who live in the western democracies.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> The protections and safeguards tha= t the average person in the West experiences because of his citizenship are far beyond anything that any but the most privileged in the past could have expected. Because of this we westerners are very possessive of our rights as citizens.

However, we Christians must also remember that we possess another citizenship. “O= ur citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Chr= ist.” Unlike Paul’s Roman citizens= hip which was limited to a small minority of the Roman Empire, this heavenly citizenship belongs to all who are part of God’s Kingdom. Like Roman citizenship it also has rights and duties. Although t= hese are not specifically enumerated as the rights and duties of citizens in the tex= t, they can be ascertained by a careful reading of the New Testament. As would be expected of a Roman ci= tizen, the citizen of the heavenly Kingdom owes honor and respect of the highest o= rder to his ruler, as well as heartfelt loyalty and obedience to his commands. Jesus told his followers, “I= f you love me, you will keep my commandments” and, “If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father̵= 7;s commandments and abide in his love. These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and th= at your joy may be full.” = Our commitment to this Kingdom is to be so great that it overrides natural human fears so that, not only should we believers help those in physical need, bu= t we are also called on “to lay down our lives for the brothers.” Paul himself lived his life recogn= izing this and was committed “to be poured out as a drink offering upon the sacrificial offering of your faith.”= Indeed, in what was probably his last letter before his martyrdom, P= aul repeats this verbal picture in admonishing Timothy to carry on his ministry after Paul is gone: “For I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come. I have fought the good fight, I ha= ve finished the race, I have kept the faith.”

Furthermore we have the duty to give verbal testimony to God’s work in our lives. When Christ left his disciples out= side Jerusalem to ascend into heaven, he commanded them to “be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in= all Judea and Samaria<= /st1:City>, and to the end of the earth.” To fulfill this requirement God has commissioned his people to fill = two necessary functions in this fallen world.&= nbsp; First of all he has made his people “a kingdom of priests.R= 21; This commission is a fulfillment o= f the commandment in Exodus 19.6 for the nation of Israel to be a kingdom of pri= ests to make God known to all the world. Now the church is “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession” so that they “may proc= laim the excellencies of him who called [them] out of darkness into his marvelous light.” Just as the pri= ests in the Old Testament had specific duties, so too the priests in the New Testament have similar duties. In the Old Testament the priests offered sacrifices for the people of God, offered incense and prayers for them, taught them God’s law, judged cases and made practical decisions about issues that were not otherwise dealt with in= the law. Today God’s people= as priests of the living God do these same things, but in the context of the n= ew covenant. God’s people,= who are all priests, make known and apply to others the one true sacrifice of Christ. They pray for all men, especially for their salvation. They proclaim God’s moral law and his judgment. And they seek in God’s Spiri= t to make practical decisions about living for God in today’s world. Their efforts are making God, his Kingdom, the invitation to enter his Kingdom, and God’s glory known throughout the whole world.

The second function we have as witnesses in the world is related to our role as priests and citizens of the heavenly Kingdom. As those who have experienced God’s favor and the reconciliation with God that is in Ch= rist even while we were yet alienated from him because of our sin and enmity, we= are able to convey the message of God to those who are yet his enemies in langu= age they can understand. Thus, “we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore [all who have not yet responded positively to the Gospel] on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.” Each of us has a testimony that is precisely the one that a particular unbeliever needs to h= ear to be able to respond to the Gospel. Conversely we as ambassadors “have boldness and access with confidence through our faith in [Jesus]” to approach God on behalf of those who struggle as they seek him. As is true of any ambassador, our primary loyalty is to the kingdom = we represent and we must allow nothing to come in the way of fulfilling this responsibility.

There are many other rights and duties we have= as Christians and citizens of the Kingdom of God. The ones already mentioned relate = most directly to our responsibilities to the fallen world and how we are to rela= te to others. It is because Chri= st “has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to t= he kingdom of his beloved Son” that we are able to “have redemptio= n, the forgiveness of sins” in Jesus.&n= bsp; This salvation makes us “partakers of the divine nature” because we “share in Christ.”&= nbsp; Because we share in Christ and are thus children of God, we also sha= re in discipline “for our good, that we may share in his holiness.” And all of t= his leads us to “the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus̶= 1; when we finally “attain the resurrection from the dead” when “our lowly body” will be changed “to be like his glorious body, by the power that enables him to subject all things to himself.”= ;

CITIZENSHIP ON EARTH

But we must not forget that we also possess an earthly citizenship. This also confers real rights and duties and we must recognize this. But all the while we must also rem= ember that our primary citizenship is in heaven and whatever relationship we have with the state here on earth is temporary, secondary and subservient to our= citizenship in heaven and its call on our lives. Whatever good we could do by expending our time, talents and wealth = on this earthly commonwealth pales in comparison to the eternal results that c= ome out of lavishing our efforts on serving Jesus in the Kingdom of God. Where there is no conflict, howeve= r, we do need to remember that we are in the world and we need to carry our fair share and provide for the smooth functioning of the our earthly community.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> This is not only equitable, but it= will also allay bad feelings that may hinder us in our primary goal of wooing unbelievers into the Kingdom. Besides the obligations mentioned earlier toward the state of honori= ng and obeying our rulers and paying the taxes that fall to them as ministers = of God in this sphere, we should look for ways to help out locally that do not jeopardize our witness and that truly help the community as a whole. Helping with disaster relief, ambu= lance work and volunteering with the local fire department are some obvious possibilities. And we should = seek as well to help out in useful ways in the broader world community with disa= ster relief and educational or medical assistance.

How, then, should we use this earthly citizens= hip in relation to our heavenly citizenship?&n= bsp; Paul himself, because of his use of his Roman citizenship, gives us = some good clues. Three times the b= ook of Acts records Paul’s use of his Roman citizenship as he exercised his duties to his heavenly citizenship.^{^[5]} It is important to notice that Paul never used his citizenship to try to change the Roman system as it stood by seeking a high office where he could influence the decisions of state. In each case where we see Paul usi= ng his Roman citizenship, he is using it to advance the Gospel. Each time Paul uses it to protect = not so much himself as the reputation and expansion of the gospel.

In the first instance Paul was misused in Philippi after he had cast a demon out of a slave g= irl who made her masters money by fortune-telling. Her owners brought Paul and Silas,= his helper, before the magistrates to complain of unlawful behavior and causing= a disturbance. Apparently their= real grievance, that their slave girl no long told fortunes, was either not grou= nds for action or impossible to prove. As often happens, a crowd gathered and, becoming caught up in the ex= citement, also threw accusations against Paul and Silas. The magistrates ordered them strip= ped, flogged and thrown into jail. After all, these men seemed inconsequential and this action would appease the men with whom the officials had to do business on a daily basis.

In the morning the magistrates again take the easiest way and tell the jailor to release the prisoners so they can leave = the city. Now Paul demands that h= is rights as a citizen be recognized by the magistrates. Is Paul simply demanding his right= s like so many Americans would? Or is something else happening here? It is far more likely that Paul is acting, not out of grievance or retaliation, which would go against so much of Jesus’ teaching and Paul’s message, but rather that he is seeking to eliminate a danger to the infant church in Philippi. In the confusion and disorder of t= he previous day, the general population of Philippi would have gotten the impression that Paul, the troublesome leader of a very disreputable group, had been punished. The whole reputation of the church = in this city and its future progress depended on the outcome of this run in wi= th the government officials. Paul intended one outcome alone from his demands–that the appearance of evil be removed from his actions so that the church would not= be rejected out of hand by the people as dangerous or dishonorable. Thus Paul secured the place of Christianity in Philippi by demanding the apology and escort out of the city by the magistrates. Thus, the name of the small, fledg= ling church was cleared!

In the second instance another tumult put Paul’s life in danger. = This time Paul was in the Temple in Jerusalem helping four men fulfill thei= r vows to God. The apostle James, the leader of the Jerusalem church, had suggested this course of action by Paul to remove suspicions in= the minds of the local believers about Paul.&n= bsp; Unfortunately this backfired and almost cost Paul his life when some Jews from Asia who had opposed Paul’s teaching, accused him to the pe= ople in the Temple of preaching against the law and the Temple and of bringing a Gentile into the forbidden courtyard of the Temple. Again Paul was seized by a crowd t= hat really did not know the true situation.&nb= sp; Nonetheless they dragged him out of the Temple to stone him. The Romans had a fortress next to = the Temple to enforce= order there. Noticing a disturbance= , a band of soldiers came out and arrested Paul. The tribune allowed Paul to addres= s the crowd, which began rioting again when Paul mentioned his mission to the Gen= tiles. In order to learn the reason for t= he disturbance, the tribune carried Paul back to the barracks and ordered him flogged “to find out why they were shouting against him like this.= 221;

In this more settled environment Paul simply asserts his protective right to avoid an unnecessary beating. The soldiers and their officers re= spond as they should have, and Paul is not beaten. However, in the course of trying to decide what to do with Paul, the third situation arises where Paul uses his Roman citizenship.

Paul had been transferred to Caesarea, the cap= ital of Roman rule in Palestine. The Jewish leaders sought to kill = Paul to end his influence on the people. Realizing their scheme to take his life, Paul refused the Roman governor’s request to go back to Jerusalem to be tried there on the charges of the Jews. Paul declared, “I am standing before Caesar’s tribunal, where I ought to be tried....I appeal to Caesar.”

Paul had several motives for this appeal. First, he recognized the depth of = hostility of the Jewish leaders against him. Probably Festus the newly appointed governor did not understand this= and only sought to gain favor with the Jewish leaders by trying Paul before the= m. It is unlikely that he was willing= ly seeking a miscarriage of justice. Paul was undoubtedly also seeking to bring a resolution to his imprisonment which had already lasted two years. And finally, Paul knew that God in= tended for him to witness for God in = Rome since the Lord himself had appeared to Paul in prison and told him this, and this surely influenced Paul’s use of his citizenship to demand a deci= sion in his case by Caesar.

It is obvious that it is permissible to use our earthly citizenship to advance the cause of the Gospel. In our modern world our passports = and our citizenship open many opportunities to us to travel safely and to testi= fy in places that might otherwise have no Gospel witness. But we must be careful not to depe= nd on this citizenship or value it in such a way that it usurps the place of our heavenly citizenship.

CHRISTIAN WARFARE

One serious objection to nonresistance is the appearance that it is passive. Even some who accept the doctrine struggle with its apparent passivity. It is true that there is a certain seeming passivity inherent in some aspects of the teaching, but when the complete range of action is understood, nonresistance appears in a complete= ly different light. Indeed, prop= erly understood, nonresistance is how a Christian fights in this world. There are two aspects to this war = that is the Christian’s battle on earth.&= nbsp; There is an internal battle against the strongholds of the devil in = our lives and there is the external battle in this war for God. The external battle, however, unli= ke any physical battle, is to be fought with love, even with love directed toward those who hate us and make themselves our enemies. And it is fought for the good of o= ur enemies, as well as our own good. Let us look at these two aspects of the Christian’s warfare.

One very unique feature of this war is that its purpose is to achieve shalom, or peace and welfare for all mankind–including the enemy. The enemy is not destroyed in the Christian’s warfare. Instead the Christian hopes to per= suade him to turn to God for his own good. Once again, in the Sermon on the Mo= unt Jesus warned his followers against anger which only stirs up dissension and strife. And Jesus not only re= jected retaliation and replaced it with good deeds towards those who hurt his disciples, but he even demanded of them that they “love [their] enemi= es and pray for those who persecute [them], so that [they] may be sons of [the= ir] Father who is in heaven.” God himself in his perfection cares for those who love him and obey him, and for those who are unjust and disobedient. Amazingly, God calls on Christians to imitate him in his perfection = by loving those who are unloving and do not return their love.

Paul is quite explicit, both in Romans 12 and = in Romans 13 after the passage on our duties to rulers, about how Christians o= ught to conduct themselves with others. It is significant that these two passages come on either side of the most important scripture dealing with our responsibilities towards the government. We are to put beh= ind us the deeds of our past lives and to “walk properly as in the daytime.” We are to “owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law.” This love is described in detail: “Let love be genuine. Abhor what is evil; hold fast to t= hat which is good. Love one anoth= er with brotherly affection. Out= do one another in showing honor. Do = not be slothful in zeal, be fervent in spirit, serve the Lord. Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer. Contribute to the needs of the saints and seek to show hospitality.<= /p>

“Bless those who persecute you; bless an= d do not curse them. Rejoice with = those who rejoice, weep with those who weep.&nbs= p; Live in harmony with one another.&n= bsp; Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be conceited. Repay no evil for evil, but give t= hought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends = on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, = for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.’ On the contrary, ‘if your enemy is hungry, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.’ Do not be overcome by evil, but ov= ercome evil with good.”

I have quoted this rather lengthy passage verb= atim because there is no way to say it any better. In one short passage Paul makes it= clear that he is calling for a lifestyle that is the exact opposite of how the non-Christian would see things or how the natural fallen man would respond = to opposition and conflict and even outright persecution. This does not mean that the Christ= ian automatically responds as he should. If that were so, this passage would be useless. No, the Christian needs direction = and encouragement from the Word of God to take hold of the resources of the Spi= rit that he has within himself if he truly is born again, and he needs the supp= ort and spiritual enablement of other brothers and sisters in Christ “to = grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ...so that [the body] builds itself up in love.”

We Christians are to live in harmony with each other as befits members of the body of Christ. We are to seek actively to grow in= to the likeness of the one who is our head. Moreover we Christians are to live peaceably with unbelievers “= ;so far as it depends on [us].” The duty of this command rests with the believer regardless of how h= e is treated by those who reject and persecute Christians and Christianity. In our own strength this would be a fearful thing to contemplate, but it is not our own strength that we must r= ely on. “Do you not realize= this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?” Most of us Christians stumble in t= his and fail to live up to our calling, not because it is impossible, but becau= se we do not remember that “he who is in [us] is greater than he who is = in the world.” Yet this is= the challenge that God puts before us and this is the conflict that we are call= ed to. Perhaps we ignore this ca= ll to spiritual warfare and instead turn to physical battles, whether political or military, personal or national, because our real warfare is so hard and goes against all that we naturally think or feel.

But this is not right for the Christian! So long as we continue to fight wi= th one another–whether among ourselves in the church or with those outside, = it does not matter–“you are still of the flesh. For while there is jealousy and st= rife among you, are you not of the flesh and behaving only in a human way?” This particular p= assage concerns the internal fighting within the church, but the same principle applies to our relationships with those outside the church. Whether in large matters or small,= we are to “seek peace and pursue it.&nb= sp; For the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous, and his ears are open= to their prayer. But the face of= the Lord is against those who do evil.”