nonviolence is at the heart of the Gospel非暴力核心是福音

Thanks to感谢 Graham格雷厄姆 who recently shared谁最近共享 this link此链接 on his blog.在他的博客。 Here’sa snippet:以下是摘录：

I suggest that these verses [Matthew 5:21-48] exhibit the core of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection which most distinguish him among all the world’s religions.我建议这些诗[马修5:21-48 ]展览的核心，耶稣的生命，死亡，与复活，其中最分辨他之间的世界上所有的宗教。 The Buddha perhaps comes closest.佛陀或许最接近。 But even he allows violence in defense against one’s enemies.但即使是他允许的暴力防一的敌人。 In the last century, the Hindu Mahatma Gandhi (one to whom Martin Luther King, Jr. explicitly traveled to study in 1959) held the Sermon on the Mount in the highest esteem when interpreting his own Hindu scriptures to reveal a God who is “perfect” with respect to loving nonviolence.在上个世纪，印度教圣雄甘地 （一人小马丁路德金明确走过的研究在1959年）举行的山上宝训在最高的自尊时，解释他自己的印度教经文揭示了上帝谁是“完美“尊重与爱非暴力。

But is this teaching in the Sermon on the Mount the core of Jesus’ faith and teaching?不过，这是教学中的山上宝训的核心，耶稣的信仰和教学？ The ultimate test must be the focus of the Gospels themselves, namely, Jesus’ act of going to the cross.最终的考验，必须重点福音本身，即耶稣的行为，一定要跨。 Jesus came not primarily as a didactic teacher of principles to live by, but as a prophet who came to incarnate God’s Word through faith and action.耶稣来并非主要是作为一个教师教学的原则，生活，但作为一个先知谁来到肉身的上帝的话语通过信仰和行动。 When considering fundamental issues such as a nonviolent response to violence in light of the New Testament, the Cross itself is the center.当考虑等根本问题作为一个非暴力的回应暴力结合新的证明，两岸本身就是中心。 For the Cross of Jesus Christ is essentially God’s nonviolent response to human violence. Richard Hays , in his essay on “Violence in Defense of Justice,” sums this up well:为两岸耶稣基督，基本上是上帝的非暴力的反应对人类的暴力行为。 理查德海斯 ，在他的散文对“暴力在国防，司法， ”总结这个好：

“When the New Testament canon is read through the focal lens of the cross, Jesus’ death moves to the center of attention in any reflection about ethics. “当新约圣经佳能是通读的焦点透镜的十字架，耶稣死亡的举动，该中心的重视，在任何的思考，以德治国。 The texts cannot simply be scoured for principles (the imperative of justice) or prooftexts (”I have not come to bring peace but a sword”); rather, all such principles and texts must be interpreted in light of the story of the cross. 文本不能简单地冲刷为原则（必须正义）或prooftexts （ “我来不是要带来和平，而是剑” ） ;相反，所有这些原则和文本的解释，必须在轻的故事两岸。 The meaning of dikaiosyne (”justice”) is transfigured in light of the one Just One who exemplifies it: Christ has become our dikaiosyne (1 Cor. 1:30). 含义dikaiosyne （ “正义” ）是在变形根据一个只有一个谁充分体现了它：基督已成为我们的dikaiosyne （ 1肺心病。 1:30 ） 。 When we hear Jesus’ saying that he has come to bring not peace but a sword, we can hear it only within the story of a Messiah who refuses the defense of the sword and dies at the hands of a pagan state that bears the power of the sword. 当我们听到耶稣的话说，他已经到了不能带来和平，而是剑，我们可以听到它只是内部的故事，一个弥赛亚谁拒绝的防御，剑和模具在手中，一个异教的国家承担的权力剑。 The whole New Testament comes rightly into focus only within this story.” 整个新约圣经来正确地成为焦点，只有在这个故事“ 。

The more I read the Bible through the lense of Jesus’ ministry and death (and resurrection), the more it “clicks” for me.更我看了圣经，通过伦泽耶稣部和死亡（和复活） ，更多的“点击”对我来说。 I’m convinced that many of our false readings of the Bible (in particular Paul) have come out of a desire to justify ourselves.我坚信，我们的许多虚假的读数圣经（特别是保罗）出来的欲望，自己的理由。 For example, the way in which Romans 13 is interpreted apart from Paul’s clear references to Jesus’ teachings regarding love of enemy is astounding.举例来说，以何种方式罗马13的解释是，除了保罗的明确提及耶稣的教诲，关于爱情的敌人是令人惊叹。 What was supposed to be an exhortation for the church in Rome to submit to the government out of love for the enemy has become the basis for the Church’s understanding of the State as the legitimate wielder of violence and, therefore, the basis for our own use of violence in complicity with the State.什么是假定是一个告诫，为教会在罗马向政府提交了爱敌人，已成为基础，为教会的认识，国家为合法wielder的暴力行为，因此，依据我们的自己使用暴力，共谋国家。 In other words, we have created exactly the scenario in which it is ok to kill our enemies in a passage where Paul calls upon Jesus’ teaching to challenge us to love our enemies.在其他换言之，我们已建立了完全的情况，它是确定以杀死我们的敌人在一个通道的地方保罗吁请耶稣的教学的挑战，我们要爱我们的敌人。

for further reading .为进一步读。 . 。 . 。

• None Found无发现