about-bg about-bg


Imitating Indiscriminate Love

• Greg Boyd

Jesus taught us to love our enemies. While central to everything he taught, the church has long evaded its straight-forward implications. What then are we to do with his words?

Show Extended Summary Hide Extended Summary

This teaching goes against all reason, a love that goes beyond common sense. This teaching reflects the love revealed on Calvary, but this goes against our instinct of self-preservation, and it goes against a conviction we have all been enculturated to believe. We are trained to operate within the logic of the myth of redemptive violence, which assumes that violence solves problems.

For the first three centuries, the church embraced this non-violent perspective, but things changed when Emperor Constantine legalized Christianity and then gave them a seat at the table running the Roman empire. Thinkers like Augustine spent extensive energy to find ways to justify violence. As a result, we eventually ended up with what is called the Just War Theory, where a group can argue that we should kill one-another if we have logical reasons to do so.

But there is a problem: People always feel justified when acting violently. Thus, we water down “loving enemies” into something like, “loving our grouchy in-laws.” But Jesus calls for an un-commonsensical love. For first century Palestinian Jews, “enemies” were the Romans, who were terrorists. If there was not an exception in the first century for the Romans, there are no exceptions for any other time.

Another tactic taken by Augustine operates around the question: What really is love? Commenting on Jesus’ teaching to never retaliate and to turn the other cheek, Augustine wrote, “What is here required is not a bodily action, but an inward disposition.” ­­­­He argued, you can love someone in your heart while nevertheless torturing them. Therefore we don’t actually have to take Jesus’ words seriously.

Let’s consider this passage from this point of view: What if someone broke into your home and was threatening to harm your spouse, friend, child or partner? What if we start with the assumption that, if we can’t see the goodness of a teaching of Jesus when he’s teaching on love, the problem is with us. If we practice non-violence day in and day out, we’ll develop the character that sees the goodness of Jesus’ teaching. We then will be more likely to develop a character that isn’t just trying to obey a rule. We actually love the aggressor.

Therefore, we would do everything we could to prevent this person from harming a family member. Not only because I love my family member, but also because I love my enemy. Killing is off the table. Obeying Jesus’ teaching only makes sense, and is only made possible, when we live in an eternal narrative instead of a finite narrative.

Stanley Hauerwas writes:

 “We cannot deny that in certain circumstances it may be necessary to watch others die unjustly – which is surely harder even than envisioning our own deaths. The only thing worse would be our failing to witness to our brother and sister that God’s love took the form of a cross so that the powers that make our world so violent might be defeated. That our death and the death of others might be required if we are faithful to that cross cannot be denied, but it would only be more tragic if we died in a manner that underwrites the pagan assumption that nothing is more tragic than death itself. Without such an eschatological conviction, how the Christian pacifist serves the neighbor in a violent world cannot help but be unintelligible.” – Stanley Hauerwas, “On Being a Church Capable of Addressing a World at War”

We can only commit to loving life-threatening enemies to the degree in which we’re confident we never really die.

A person or people group will always feel justified using violence to defend or promote their highest ideals – whether this ideal be a country, a philosophy, or themselves. Unless their highest ideal includes the call to love enemies and the absolute prohibition on violence, people will continue to kill other people in the name of their highest ideal. Our job is to be like John the Baptist and prepare the way of the Lord. To be a window through which those who have eyes to see can behold a reflection of this beautiful, loving, and non-violent Kingdom.

Hide Extended Summary

Topics: Love, Nationalism, Non-Violence

Sermon Series: Sermon on the Mount, Against All Reason

Downloads & Resources

Audio File
Study guide
Group Study Guide
The MuseCast: July 6

Focus Scripture:

  • Matthew 5:42-48

    “Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you. You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers and sisters, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”

Subscribe to Podcast

5 thoughts on “Imitating Indiscriminate Love

  1. Chad says:

    I’m an Afghan War veteran and lawyer. I found this sermon challenging. On the one hand, the idea that Jesus tells us to radically love even our enemies is compelling. I recognize the world-changing power of living our lives that way. On the other hand, I have a hard time accepting that violence is never the best available option in a particular moment.

    1. Maggi says:

      I hear you Chad. I grew up in the military. I also wonder/struggle with: if there is a reasonable spiritual category of violence or level of violence that is acceptable. I am praying about this and will pray for clarity for us both.

  2. Kenny says:

    It is a truth that if the United States committed to the principle of doing no violence, then unless God miraculously intervened, that in a short amount of time other violent countries, would by violence take over this country. Then it is very possible that there would, in this world, be no christian Churches. It is possible that in this world there would be no Preachers/ Teachers. It is possible that there would be no Christians, unless they were underground Christians. To, as a whole nation of people, follow Greg’s teaching, would truly be an experiment of such magnitude that this world has never seen. We would just have to see how it turned out.

  3. Ray Brackman says:

    I am a veteran of the Vietnam war, and a pretty patriotic American. Also a member of Woodland Hills for 25 + yrs. I appreciate & agree with much of the teachings, and am a better christian/ kingdom man for it. As for this sermon, I would like to know what country down thru history has EVER gone to war feeling it was not justified. No nation does that. As for “redemptive violence”, it appears much of the old testament accounts show God himself engaging His chosen people in it. What really bothers me about this teaching is to then be told (on the 4th of July ,no less) that as a person who is thankful for political freedom , and having served to help keep that freedom, now I am guilty of “nationalistic idolatry”, since I somehow get my life and fulfillment from patriotism, and not from God himself! This is very offensive to me, and quite judgemental. I am in process of addressing this conflict with my Brother in Christ. Pray for us, please.

    1. Maggi says:

      Prayed for you Ray. For you both.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *





"I have found, in you, a place where the preached word profoundly resonates with my own recent journey of faith and has cemented a new way of thinking, I suppose like jigsaw pieces falling into place. I am grateful that a friend pointed me in your direction."

– Elaine, from the United Kingdom