Month / January 2017

by Matt Landis

The State: Ordained In the Zone of Destruction

In the Schleitheim Confession ‘s discussion of the state’s use of the sword there is a creative tension. The sword is “outside Christ” and yet “ordained of God”. Likely because of the grave danger to Anabaptist lives that could result if this were further defined (and then misused), this creative tension was allowed to remain. In our day this undefined space has become a license for some to become what might almost be described as “apologists” for humans acting as the state in the “Red Zone” to the exclusion of calling them to the Kingdom. In an effort to challenge Kingdom Christians to rather be apologists for the Kingdom and all men joining the Kingdom (Green Zone”) I’ve created this PowerPoint slide.

I welcome critique.

tension-of-State-and-Kingdom.png

by Matt Landis

Romans 13 & Proverbs: Wisdom Says No to Violent Revolution & The KING Says Yes Only to Love

Does Paul derive the critical passage in Romans 13 on how Christian’s should relate to “the king” from the very pragmatic, earthy & Jewish book of Proverbs? Below is a demonstration that Romans 13:1-7 seems to essentially be the Apostle Paul using Proverbs as pragmatic & pithy advice to early Christians to discourage violent revolution, against withholding the hated tribute & against unwisely & unnecessarily invoking the inevitable violence of the king. But more importantly it is a positive call, along with the entire text of Romans 12 and 13, to use Love (not violent revolution!) as the force to overcomes evil in the world.

Here is a comparison that might indicate Paul is stitching together Proverbs to create the text of the first part of Romans 13.

Romans 13:1 – Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Proverbs 24:21 – Fear the king. Proverbs 8:15-16 – By God kings reign. By God all princes & judges on earth rule. Proverbs 21:1a – The king’s heart is in the hand of the LORD…
Romans 13:2 – Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. Proverbs 24:21 -…meddle not with them that are given to change [NIV=rebellion]: Proverbs 24:22/NLT – for disaster will hit them suddenly. Who knows what punishment will come from the LORD and the king? Proverbs 20:2b – whoso provoketh him [the king] to anger sinneth against his own soul.
Romans 13:3 – For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: Proverbs 14:35 – The king’s favour is toward a wise servant: but his wrath is against him that causeth shame.
Romans 13:4 – For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Proverbs 8:15 – By me kings reign, and princes decree justice. Proverbs 14:35a – The king’s favour is toward a wise servant: but his wrath is against him that causeth shame. Proverbs 20:2 – The fear of a king is as the roaring of a lion: whoso provoketh him to anger sinneth against his own soul. Proverbs 16:14a – The wrath of a king is as messengers of death…
Romans 13:5 – Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. Proverbs 14:35 – The king’s… wrath is against him that causeth shame. Ecclesiastes 8:2/NIV – Obey the king’s command, I say, because you took an oath before God.
Romans 13:6 – For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Proverbs 3:27a – Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due… Proverbs 21:1a – The king’s heart is in the hand of the LORD…
Romans 13:7 –  Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. Proverbs 3:27 – Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due, When it is in your power to do it. (Commentary: and the king is due fear!) Proverbs 24:21 -…fear thou the LORD and the king:

If Proverbs guides us in what Romans 13:1-7 is saying, it certainly communicates a Christian condemnation of the kind of violent revolution that is at the core of the founding of many nations, including the United States. If Romans 13:1-7 says anything, it condemns “Christian’s” founding a nation using violent revolution.

An implicit condemnation in Romans 13 comes from the fact that the characteristics of “the king” are characteristics Christians should expressly not have! “The king” as a “violent lion” is contrasted with the very different standard that Paul is explicitly calling the Romans to, and God is calling all men to, that of Love , which was taught & modeled by the King of Kings (the Lion of Judah! the one “Lion & Lamb” referred to in the Bible). The King of Kings first call to humans is to “Owe no many anything but Love”.

Kingdoms which use violence, even in the name of a more perfect order, are doomed to be kingdoms that pass away. Outside Christ and His Kingdom, outside of the “very good” Creation, God has given power to a “rev limiter”, a stop gap on evil run out of control, and that is the human self destruction of violence against violence. As Jesus says it: “They that take the sword shall perish by it.” and John confirms that the holy are patient because “They that kill with the sword will be killed by it” (Re 13:10) This world is by necessity one which will “perish” and “pass away” because destruction is in it’s DNA.

Daniel says “[God’s kingdom] will crush all those kingdoms and bring them to an end” (Daniel 2:44/NIV). How? Paul himself notes one way just a few chapters later in Romans “The God of Peace will soon crush Satan under your feet.” (Romans 16:20) What can Love of Jesus in the hearts of humans do other than be the “destruction of destruction”?

This post triggered by another post: Is Romans 12 & 13 a Medley of Proverbs?

by Matt Landis

Some Things You May Not Have Known about Martin Luther King

I’ve recently been working through Martin Luther King’s “A Testament of Hope”. Here are some quick thoughts from my notes on this holiday honoring Martin Luther King.

My overall thoughts are that MLK challenged practices in “Christian” America that were anything but Christian. I am continually scandalized at what “Christian America” could consider Christian not that long ago! The challenge for me today is humility & repentance for the perpetual challenge, facing even those of us inside the church, of setting ourselves up as superior to others and seeing God’s Kingdom as big as it truly is.

So now, some other random thoughts:

MLK says much about peace that conservative Anabaptist’s agree with & Evangelical Christian’s can learn from

For example he notes on page 10 “Always avoid violence…” and he meant exactly what he said. Also: “violence, even in self-defense, creates more problems than it solves…” [p58] MLK spent much effort convincing others that the proper Christian response was one of love and not violence.

I am impressed by the many meetings (noted in “Stride Toward Freedom”) the black leaders of Montgomery had to train in extremely practical ways (It reminds me of Mennonite bible school sessions on nonresistance!) on how to respond with love and respect in challenging situations. A question I have: If we are going to “learn war no more” (as the ancient Jewish prophet noted) wouldn’t it stand to reason that we will start “learning peace”?

Surprisingly MLK might not have been as gung-ho about Boycotts as you might expect

I always had the impression that MLK was an all out, no questions asked “boycott” supporter. But then I came across this: “I had to recognize that the boycott method could be used to unethical and unchristian ends…From then on I rarely used the word ‘boycott’…” [p428]. This was at the beginning of the events in Montgomery, which was at the beginning of MLK’s career as a civil rights leader.

MLK only had 20 minutes to prepare for “the most decisive speech of my life”

The Dec 5, 1955 speech launching the “noncooperation with the evil” of the Montgomery bus system was prepared in 5 minutes of prayer and 15 minutes of study [p433]. MLK had considerable concern about only having 20 minutes to prepare when he normally spent 15 hours preparing for a sermon. One of his main concerns was ensuring that he communicated & encouraged the Love of Jesus for all in the response. Listen to it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TmoFoG5P-U

MLK had words of truth for his fellow blacks

“Many of us [Negros] live above our means, spend money on nonessentials and frivolities…” [p150] In a magazine interview MLK was asked why donations largely come from non blacks and he noted:”We have to face and live with the fact that the Negro has not developed a sense of stewardship…”

I recommend reading “Stride Toward Freedom”

This is the narrative of what MLK called the non-cooperation with the Montgomery bus discrimination. It is very accessible and a good story to be familiar with.

Point of Disagreement: Nonresistance vs Nonviolence

In “Stride Toward Freedom” [p335] MLK notes “Nonresistance leaves you in a state of stagnant passivity and deadly complacency.” A question for those of us who use the term nonresistance might be: Is our nonresistance actually more passivity than loving the enemy? Is what I call nonresistance  actually a complacent attitude?

As I have thought about the difference between King’s “nonviolence” and conservative Anabaptist “nonresistance” I think the difference is not “action” versus “passivity”. This seems well demonstrated by the stories we tell. The “action” of Dirk Willems actively rescuing his pursuer. Or the “action” of the Mennonite pastor who heard his roof being destroyed in the night by hoodlums and who welcomed the troublemakers in for a good breakfast, thereby “loving them” into appropriate behavior.

Neither is the difference a willingness or unwillingness to be involved in nonviolent civil disobedience. Anabaptists have continually shown themselves willing to “obey God rather than men”. From the subversive act of baptizing only believers in the 1500’s to a willingness to reject portions[1] of the Pennsylvania Child Care Act in the 21st century because it is deemed to inappropriately place the State between brothers & sisters speaking truth to each other and is seen as compromising the structural integrity of an autonomous church, conservative Anabaptist’s are no stranger to “obeying God rather than men”.

The crucial difference between King’s nonviolence and conservative Anabaptist’s nonresistance seems to be who is being demanded to change. The conservative Anabaptist’s “protest for justice” includes demands only of themselves and to others only a offer and call to voluntarily join the Kingdom.

I am challenged to ensure that what I call nonresistance is living the Power of God’s Love, and that this love is something that is seen as “Overcoming Evil”. In another passage MLK makes a comment that might indicate he is not as far away from “nonresistance” as even he thinks: “History has proven…unmerited suffering is redemptive…” [p222]

[1] – I say “reject portions” very advisedly. Conservative Anabaptists agree with the goal of the Pennsylvania Child Care Act: to protect children against abuse. This cannot be over emphasized. It is only the means that causes disagreement.