Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 1
Howard Voss insists that nonviolence “is not optional” but also “is not a strategy”; where do you feel the pull in your own thinking to justify enemy-love mainly because it “works,” and what does it reveal about what you believe God is like when you need guaranteed outcomes?
Another way to ask: When do you support loving your enemies mainly because it seems like it will “work”? What does that say about what you think God is like when you want guaranteed results?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
The transcript pushes back against justifying enemy-love because it “works,” and it suggests that needing guaranteed outcomes reveals a desire to stay in control rather than trusting God’s way of conquering evil. When we require results, we may be acting like God is not really in control—or not trustworthy unless He proves it.
- The speaker says Voss insists nonviolence “is not optional,” but “is also not a strategy.”
- Nonviolence is “not a way to improve the world…[or] end war,” and it “doesn’t always work in a worldly point of view.”
- It is “the fruit of being faithful to the way of Jesus,” not a technique to secure success.
- The speaker emphasizes, “We don’t have to be in control. God is in control.”
- Violence comes when “we feel it’s up to us to make things right,” implying a demand for control and predictable outcomes.