We recently received this comment on our new project page “Honor Their Memory – Be a Hero for Peace”:

You say you are Christian based but you don't quote scripture in your so called peace movement. Let's take this step by step, First of all the name Raven alone you will find that it is a unclean bird and unclean people assocciate themselves with such, book of LEVITICUS. The book is about Clean and Unclean. Jesus Christ did not come to give peace on earth but, rather a division,LUKE Chapter 12 Verses 51,52,53.
You want others to be a hero for peace, So lets find it in our FATHERS word, PSALMS Chapter 144 Verses 1,2

I responded with this:

Hi,

Thank you for your comment. Indeed, the raven is an ambiguous creature, but the raven is not a bad bird. It is part of God's good creation. Humans have done a good job scapegoating ravens, which is a major reason we chose to identify ourselves with it. But remember, it was the raven who came to the prophet Elijah's aid in the desert. Ravens can be an instrument of God. If Elijah can associate himself with the "unclean" we figure we can, too.

In the first century, Jesus did bring division between family members. That is true - and he continues to bring division between family members today. He challenged human systems of violence and encouraged his followers to challenge those systems, too. That challenge causes family divisions because family members may think that violence is redemptive, which it isn't. Only love is redemptive, which is why Jesus calls his followers to love their enemies. Any quote from Jesus that looks like an endorsement of violence must be interpreted through the cross, where Jesus takes the human system of violence upon himself and refuses to retaliate in kind. He subverts violence in the most subversive way: with forgiveness - "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."

I'm not sure what you mean by referring to Psalm 144:1-2. Are you suggesting that if we kill all our enemies we will have peace? It seems as though humans have been trying that for a while now, and it hasn't worked. It has only led to more cycles of imitative violence. Isaiah 53, Leviticus 19:18, and Jesus offer the way out. It's time we take them more seriously.

Thanks again,
Adam

I think my response was fair, but, I really wanted to respond with something like this:

First, we really don’t claim to be a Christian movement.  We are ecumenical in our project and hope Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Secularists, and Atheists will join in the movement to bring peace by peaceful means.  But we do happen to be Christians, and as a Christian I feel responsible to comment more about the statement, “Jesus Christ did not come to bring peace on earth but, rather division.”  In my original comment I pointed to the partial truth of that statement.  Unfortunately, partial truths are always misleading.  If we want to see why Jesus is a hero for peace, then we must look at the historical context of first century Rome and the Jesus movement.

First century CE Rome was guided in large part by Caesar Augustus’s exploits during the first century BCE.  In fact, the Battle of Actium between Octavian (who, of course, would become Caesar Augustus) and the forces of Mark Antony and Cleopatra was a battle for the future of Rome.  Octavian won that battle, due in large part to the poor military strategy of Antony and Cleopatra, who decided to have their army hide out in a swamp … a mosquito infested swamp.  OOOPS!!!  That was more than an annoying blunder, as many of their soldiers caught malaria and died.  Antony and Cleopatra soon committed suicide.  Octavian won, changed his name to Augustus, and sought to conquer the world.

But, really, Augustus was offering the world peace.  The Pax Romana.  For Rome to spread Roman peace, it had to spread Roman culture.  Thus, Rome sought to “Romanize” the world.  And Augustus had the god given right to force people to become Romanized and to live into the Pax Romana.  A whole Roman theology of conquest was created to support Roman political conquest.  For example, in Virgil’s Aenid we are given this line from the great Roman god Jupiter: “For these I set no bounds in space or time; but have given empire without end [to] the Romans, lords of the world, and the nation of the toga.  Thus it is decreed” (I.278-83).

“The nation of the Toga.”  Thanks be to the Romans for togas.

Aeneas, the original Roman, was reminded of Rome’s manifest destiny by his father, Anchises – “You, Roman, be sure to rule the world, to crown peace with justice, to spare the vanquished and crush the proud” (6.851-53).  Of course, “the proud” consisted of anyone who wanted to maintain their culture by refusing to become Romanized.

Virgil’s theology of Roman conquest and Augustus’s actual conquest reinforced each other.  Take this inscription Augustus made in the city of Nicopolis, named after the Roman god of victory, Nike, “From here I went forth under heavenly protection to complete my divine mission and to fulfill Rome’s imperial destiny.”  Octavian left Nicopolis to defeat Antony and Cleopatra.  His “heavenly protection” came in the form of mosquitoes.  But it didn’t matter how he won.  What mattered was that victory meant the gods were on his side.

Then there’s the inscription Augustus had engraved in a monument at Ancyra, Turkey.  “I added Egypt to the empire of the Roman people.”  He then continued to create a long list of other nations he conquered, including this statement, “When an army of Dacians crossed the Danube, it was defeated and routed under my auspices, and later my army crossed the Danube and compelled the Dacian peoples to submit to the commands of the Roman people.”  All of this, of course, was in the name of bringing “peace” to the world.  As Augustus would claim, “I brought peace to the Gallic and Spanish provinces as well as to Germany.”  Roman peace was secured by victory; by defeating the enemies of Rome and killing “the proud.”

This was the way of Rome and it was strengthened by a theology of conquest, military might, and the leadership of Caesar.  Dominic Crossan, in his book God and Empire, puts Caesar’s influence like this, “There was a human being in the first century who was called ‘Divine,’ ‘Son of God,’ ‘God,’ and ‘God from God,’ whose titles were ‘Lord,’ ‘Redeemer,’ ‘Liberator,’ and ‘Savior of the World’” (28).

Anyone who said otherwise would be viewed as an enemy of Rome and killed in the name of “peace.”

Enter Jesus.

It’s true.  Jesus did not come to give peace, at least, not peace like Roman peace.  For Jesus, peace would come only by way of peaceful means.  That is why he refused to use violence.  He could have.  He had the choice to be like Rome.  When he was arrested, one of his followers attempted to protect him by hacking off someone’s ear.  Jesus replied, “YOU FREAKIN’ IDIOT!  WHY ARE YOU SO DAMN SLOW?!?  YOU’VE BEEN FOLLOWING ME FOR THREE YEARS AND YOU STILL DON’T GET IT!”

Okay, that’s not exactly what Jesus said.  According to Matthew he said, “Put your sword back in its place; for all who take the sword will perish by the sword.  Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels?”

Jesus could have used violence, but he refused.  And he asked his followers to do the same.  And eventually they got it.  The first century Christians refused to use violence and they would call Jesus names like, “Divine,” “Son of God,” “God,” and “God from God,” and they would give him titles like “Lord,” “Redeemer,” “Liberator,” and “Savior of the World.”

I fully admit that those names and titles weren’t original, but they were high political treason.  Which makes the early Christians officially B.A.  In claiming “Jesus is Lord, God, Son of God, and Savior of the world,” they were saying “Caesar is not.”  In claiming that Jesus is the “way, and the truth, and the life” (John 14:6) they were subverting Caesar’s way of violence.

Jesus had choices, and he chose love and non-violence.  We have choices, too.  We can choose to respond to violence with the way of Caesar or the way of Christ.  When George W. Bush sent us into the “War on Terror” he did so in the name of God.  That was the god of Caesar, not the God of Jesus.  When Barack Obama claimed “anyone who would question that the perpetrator of mass murder on American soil didn’t deserve what he got needs to have their head examined” he was speaking as a follower of Caesar, not a follower of Christ.

Like Jesus, we have options.  We are not enslaved to the gods of Rome.  We can choose another way.  We can choose to claim that Jesus is Lord.  We can choose to claim that the way of violence and revenge is not Lord of our lives.  We can choose to show the world another way that involves courage, forgiveness, turning the other cheek, and loving our enemies. It’s been 2,000 years.  It’s time Christians choose the way of Jesus.  It’s time we choose peace by peaceful means.