My father gave me this book as a way to thouroughly explain his pacifism. It did. This is truly an inspiring book and a must read for anyone, on either side of the argument! Get this book today; I promise you won't regret it.

This book is a collection of answers to the age-old question: If a violent person threatened a loved one, what would you do? It is a treasured part of my library because it provides both simple responses (my favorite being courtesy of Joan Baez), and complex discussions of the values shifts necessary to to deny violence in all its forms. You won't come away from this book with a pat answer to a troubling question, but at least you will know there ARE answers.

Since 1950, H. Richard Niebuhr's Christ and Culture has set the terms for understanding the relationship of the Church to the wider culture. He delineated five ideal types or stances, but clearly preferred the "transformationist" type. The influence of Niebuhr at this point cannot be overstated as the book was a staple of seminary courses throughout North America, influencing 3 generations of pastors and theologians. The sole dissenting voice for some time was that of Mennonite theologian John Howard Yoder who, in a privately circulated manuscript, contended that Niebuhr mis-discribed the "against" culture type and was guilty of both Trinitarian errors and a mis-use of typology. Now, at last, that inciteful critique is presented in a polished and revised form. However, Authentic Transformation is not simply the published form of Yoder's critique of Niebuhr. It also presents a previously unpublished article by Niebuhr and a partial defense of Niebuhr by Lutheran ethicist Diane Yeager. The book's greatest strength, however, lies in the concluding two chapters by the editor, Baptist ethicist Glen Stassen. In his first chapter, Stassen basically agrees with Yoder's critique of Christ and Culture, but places this work in the larger body of H. Richard Niebuhr's work. In this way, he shows what influences and factors caused HRN to make the mistakes Yoder notices and what features of his larger work could correct those problems. In the concluding chapter, Stassen gives a programmatic statement for what kinds of concrete practices churches would need to embody in order to "authentically transform" the wider culture. In this he draws on insights from Yoder & Yeager, his own original biblical work, and recent sociological studies of effective and ineffective congregations. Although the final chapter was written solely by Stassen, Yoder and Yeager endorse it's conclusions in broad terms. The result is a tour-de-force for Christian ethics: a thorough critical re-thinking of the relationship of Christianity and culture combined with concrete guidelines for implementing authentically transformative practices.

Fifty years after his death members of the Bruderhof communities (which he founded) chose those excerpts of Arnold's talks and writings, which they felt, were the most moving and relevant to them personally. This selection became the manuscript for God's Revolution, which Plough later published. Orbis Press has also just come out with another fine book entitled Eberhard Arnold / Writings Selected that readers of this book should look at. It is part of their Spiritual Masters series.

Once again Yoder speaks to the issue of peace with utmost clarity and insight. Leaning heavily on the Bible, Yoder's book is a series of sermon-like chapters that address various aspects of the scriptures in relation to peace and the kingdom of God. This book is somewhat of a focusing-in-on the peace issue within Yoder's theology... pure, non-diluted peace theology... vintage Yoder. This book is an example of why Yoder has been my mentor in theology... and ethics.
peace out...
Marco

John Howard Yoder's collection of essays in "The Original Revolution" approaches the topic of religious pacifism on many fronts. It is a disjointed grouping, a fact which Yoder readily admits in his introduction, but it thereby allows for a fuller treatment of his convictions.

OVERVIEW: The book is divided into two sections. The first deals with Biblical perspectives of war and peace. From the political options which the inauguration of Jesus' kingdom might have taken to Yoder's discussion of the continuity of the Bible's teachings on war from the Old Testament to the New, this section remains firmly rooted in the Biblical witness and delves deeply into the world of the text.
The second section then deals with the ramifications of the first. Once the church has accepted a nonresistant Jesus, what will she do with him? Yoder suggests that we should proudly claim the position of Jesus, not because it is efficacious, but because it is obedient to Jesus' witness. The claim that "Jesus is Lord" is also the claim that "we are not." As such, it is no longer our place to see that history works out in the way we see fit (the self-conception of Christianity since Constantine), but rather simple obedience to Jesus, and thereby, a forceful proclamation of his gospel, his revolution.

"The Original Revolution" provides a vision of Yoder's view on pacifism, from its origin to its manifestation. It challenged my traditional views on war and led to greater reflection on the claim not only of Jesus' teaching, but also of his life.

Though a pacifist, John Yoder approaches the Just War tradition on its own terms and respectfully outlines the questions raised by the tradition itself. This is a must read for anyone seeking to apply the Just War Tradition into their own lifestyle and politics.

The late John Howard Yoder was one of the most influential Mennonite theologians of his time. This book argues the case that Jesus believed in a "Christian Pacifism." This is in contrast to the common view of many Protestants in "Christian Realism." In Yoder's view Jesus' opinions are not to be dismissed and downgraded under the general fact of his atonement for the world's sins. Nor are his views to be (tactfully) dismissed as representing a rustic world-view based on personal relationships which does not really grasp the complex world of institutions and power relationships. Jesus cannot simply be dismissed as someone who did not recognize the necessity of power, nor can his view be that of an apocalyptic enthusiast who believed that the world was fated to end. By examining the Gospel of Luke Yoder argues we can see allusions to the Jubilee and its demands for social justice for the poor. Yoder traces a pattern in the bible in which "God will Fight For Us" after the reign of King David, and he points out successful instances of non-violent resistance to the Romans in Jesus' time.

Such are Yoder's views. However sympathetic one may be to pacifism, Yoder's argument is clearly flawed. His work contains two flaws that are common to books of this type. First, his historical knowledge is limited. Second, he fails to fully appreciate opposing passages in the bibles.

Let's look at the historical problems. (1) Much of Yoder's discussion of Jesus is based on the idea that there was a revolutionary Zealot movement contemporary with him. Therefore, Jesus' view of power can be seen as a principled pacifist rejection of their violent tactics. Unfortunately for Yoder's argument it is clear that there was no such movement. One can see this clearly in volume three of John Meier's A Marginal Jew. The "Zealot" in Simon Zealot is an adjective, the faction per se did not arise for another three decades until the Great Jewish rebellion. (2) Yoder has to defend the "Haustafalen" passages where Saint Paul states "Wives, be subject to your husbands...Children, obey your parents, etc..." This passage has historically been viewed as an apology for misogyny and slavery. In defense Yoder argues that these passages were unprecedented in viewing slaves and women as moral agents, and in counselling husbands to love their wives. Yoder is wrong: slaves were commonly viewed as moral agents (i.e. Seneca) and stoics such as the first century Musonious Rufus supported mutual love between spouses.

Now on to the problem of tendentiousness. (1) Yoder's book concentrates on the Gospel of Luke. There is only cursory discussion of why he uses this Gospel, when it is generally believed that Mark is the earliest one. Yoder completely ignores the whole problem of Jesus scholarship, trying to find out what he said as opposed to what the gospel writers composed four to seven decades after his death. (2) Yoder discusses the Jubilee and power. But what about the demons Jesus cast out, or the miracles he performed? What about the statements in which Jesus said the Kingdom of God is now amongst us, and its final triumph within our lifetimes? (3) In the chapter "God will Fight for Us," Yoder argues for a tradition that after King David, God, not men will fight Israel's battles for her. But what about Jehu's coup against Jezebel, or the execution of Athaliah and Haman, or the struggles of the Maccabees? (4) Yoder consistently ignores or downplays the eschatological view of the early church. Consider his long discussion of Romans, chapter 13, which he argues is not a blank cheque for state power. But he ignores Romans 13:11-12: "...for now is our salvatio nearer than we believed. The night is far spent, the day is at hand..." How can one build a politics on the bedrock of people who believed the world was going to end? There may be a good case for pacifism and rejecting power. But Yoder does not provide it and it is not clear that it can be based on the New Testament.

In The Politics of Jesus, John H. Yoder argues that mainline ethicists have falsely assumed that the Jesus in the gospels fails to present us with a normative social ethic. In his careful study of the gospel of Luke and other scriptures; Yoder shows us that Jesus not only showed us a social ethic, but also that Jesus' ethic was accepted as normative by the early church. In this book, Yoder touches on topics such as peace and justice, Government authority, Paul and subordination, as well as Revelation and an Eschatological theology. Yoder convincingly argues that the Power of God is given as gift, through cross and resurrection, and that the 'handles of history' are not controlled in a cause and effect relationship as is often assumed by so-called 'realist' theologies.
Jesus, the slain Lamb, has conquered... him let us follow.
A truly magnificient account of faithful theology.

If I had only one work of twentieth-century theology to read, this would be it (with apologies to everyone from Barth to Brueggemann to Bonhoeffer). In the aftermath of September 11, pacifism has been reviled in the public secular discourse like never before. Most Christian leaders from across the theological spectrum have endorsed one form or another of the "Just War Theory" of Augustine, Aquinas, and Calvin.

No one makes the case for the radical, total non-violence of the Christian message better than John Howard Yoder. Though he wrote many books after this one, this is by far the best place to start. Yoder's familiarity with Scripture is magisterial, and the gentle yet firm way he responds to his Catholic and Reformed critics is convincing and exciting. Most timely of all, he devotes an entire chapter to deconstructing traditional Christian interpretations of Romans 13:1-7, the passages most often cited by just war theorists to defend the use of violence by the state. Anyone who believes it is possible for a Christian to bear arms and follow Christ must respond to Yoder's analysis.

Though Yoder was a Mennonite (and though I am an Episcopalian by affiliation, I am an anabaptist in my heart), his work is catholic, orthodox, and accessible to all Christians. Yoder's death in 1997 marked the passing of the man whom I believe may well be regarded as the most important theologian of our time. As even good Christians "rally round the flag" and join in the cries for "just war" and "retributive justice", Yoder's work has never been more important as a vital theological corrective.

This book presented opposing viewponts on capital punishment from two prominent Biblical theologians. While I did not agree with either theologian on all points, this somewhat overly scholarly debate did help me reexamine my own beliefs and determine why I believe what I believe.

Dr. House argued that capital punishment is not only condoned but also commanded by God in the Old Testament, and he used New Testament passages to affirm those commands were universal and unchanging. His arguments relied heavily on his interpretion of Genesis 9 (the Noachian Covenant) as a universal mandate establishing God's relationship to man, and man's relationship to each other. Unfortunately, I felt he took the "easy" way out by claiming that the entire Mosaic Law had been invalidated by Christ and therefore was not relevant to his case. I think a more fair analysis would have been to divide the Mosaic Laws into moral, religous, and legal subcomponents and deal with each separately.

Dr. Yoder used a standard "Christ-transforming-culture" argument to assert that God's acceptance of capital punishment has changed from Biblical times to today. The themes of Christ's teachings have helped evolve modern culture past the need for retribution-based systems of punishment (i.e., some Scriptures have to be interpreted in terms of the cultural bias of its authors). Yoder explains away the Noachian Covenant as a reflection of an obsolete era and basis his arguments primarily on John 8, where Jesus pardons an alduteress about to be stoned to death.

I really enjoyed seeing this contemporary issue discussed from Scriptural postions. Both men made interesting arguments, but I felt Dr. Yoder did not respect or believe in the infallibility of Scripture and tried to use secular sources (modern psychology and social science) to bend his interpretations.

This is the best place to begin if you are not familiar with Yoder. My only gripe with the book is that it is bit too technical for anyone not trained in theology. But again, definitely easier to read than "Politics of Jesus."

Higly recommended!

How can we explain a 2,000-year history of a church that calls Jesus the Lord, but does not follow him in his teaching and example of absolute nonviolence? John Howard Yoder invested his lifetime in answering that question--his best-known single work is The Politics of Jesus (1973). In The Priestly Kingdom, Yoder's essays address the 1,700-year-old heresy of obeying Caesar rather than Jesus when Caesar calls Christians to war. Although out-of-print, the essays on Constantinianism and Civil Religion are must reading for those who want to develop a consistent ethic of Christian nonviolent discipleship.