Questioning Common Sense, Pt. 7

The Just War Theory is slowly eroding of its supposed scriptural support as we continue to examine the passages in the New Testament which are often used to support this theory. Next in the tangent of citations is a rather simple one to refute. In John 2, Jesus cleanses the temple of unrighteous religiousness, as the Jewish leaders are making a mockery of the sacrificial system. We do not need to get into all the details concerning this passage and the prophetic symbolism to understand that this narrative does not justify violence. What is focused on primarily here is one particular detail of this story.

And making a whip of cords, he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and oxen. And he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables.
(John 2:15 ESV)

Okay, so Jesus makes a whip and drives everyone out of the temple. Where is the violence? Nothing indicates that He whipped anyone or even the animals with the whip. Why then did He make a whip? Jesus was angry and expressed His anger in a most tangible way. You can really get your point across when you've got a whip in your hands! People will pay attention to what you're doing when you lash with a whip! Seriously though, I can imagine that whipping the ground a few feet from an animal will surely provoke the creature to flee immediately. Other reasons could be thought up to explain the presence of the whip, but these are just opinions and John does not tell us exactly why Jesus made and used the whip.

I could say more, but nothing else really needs to be said to prove the point that no violence is involved in this scenario. However, though I am going to explore some more practical implications of non-violence after we work through the Scriptures, allow me to address a common misconception concerning non-violence.

Another word to describe non-violence is pacifism. Personally, I do not like the word because it is generally associated with concept of being passive, even though the etymology of the word harks back to the image of a pacifier; as to allay anger or agitation. Non-violence does not mean you assume a helpless, cowardly and inactive posture - at least not according to Jesus. Non-violence also does not mean non-aggression. Our thinking can become so binary at times. Either Jesus is a 'hippie picking lilies with his friends' (as one rapper put it) as an effeminate blonde hair, blue eyed European or he is a 'prize fighter with a tattoo on his leg and a commitment to make someone bleed' (as one pastor put it). Neither figure conveys the historical Jesus. We will explore more of this later, but that should at least begin to help us see that Jesus doesn't have to be either a weak wimp or a wild warrior.