2 Peter 1:5-8 (NIV) "For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness, love. For if you possess these qualities in increasing measure, they will keep you from being ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ."

Religion is fast becoming the defining characteristic of the post Cold-War era. Ideological boundaries are giving way to religious division. Modern secularism is feeling the pressure of the new global religious resurgence, and opposing religions battle not only against non-religious belief systems, but increasingly conflict with each other in their quest for truth.

The most basic human biological/psychological reaction to a perceived threat is the widely known "fight or flight" instinct, and the current situation has led to a fight-or-flight scenario of global proportions. As much of the world deals with the choice of either striking out or running away, Christians — as is often the case — are called down a different path. Christians have been set free from the necessity of settling for the lower reactions of the flesh. Fight or flight is the first but not the best answer to our threatening times. 

Christians must learn how to stand and be counted. The questions are how to stand, and what Christians can expect to stand against. 

The Fight

Contemporary examples of the visceral impulse to fight are tragically plentiful in a world of terrorism and religious persecution. To take one recent example, ENI Daily News reports the killing of a pastor and four members of a Presbyterian Church in Bangkok during a worship service on July 19th.¹ The attack by Islamic extremists alone adequately demonstrated the violent "fight" reactions of some religious groups in response to today's contentious religious environment. What's more, the attack was not an isolated incident. It occurred in Thailand's Sulawesi province where 2000 people have been killed in violent religious clashes between Christians and Muslims in 2000 and 2001 alone. Provincial officials fear reprisals from the Christian community, which includes militant factions of its own. The dilemma in Sulawesi reveals the downward spiral of religious violence caused by the reaction to strike out.

Violent defenses of one's worldview occur not only between different religious groups, but also between religious groups and secular governments. The French government — the most vocal opponent of the Iraq war — believed itself to be immune to the recent waves of terrorist violence but was proven wrong when two French reporters were recently taken hostage in Iraq by a radical Islamic terror-group. The reason given for the aggression was the secularist edict of the French government banning religiously symbolic clothing (transparently targeting the Islamic head-scarves). The secularist government of France felt the growing pressure (read threat) of a rapidly expanding Muslim demographic; faced with a "fight or flight" choice, it attacked politically with the controversial policy. The Islamic extremists in Iraq (as a result of the globalization of religious/political tension) struck back with the kidnapping of the French journalists, another example of the "eye for an eye" vortex of violence found in the path of the "fight" response.

Christians are by no means immune to the call of human nature to use violence in defense of their faith. The fears of Christian retaliation seen in the Sulawesi province, Catholic-Protestant violence of Northern Ireland, and other Christian failures demonstrate that many religiously infused political conflicts have Christian foundations. Most painfully in historical Christianity stand the Crusades, in which countless thousands were killed as radical "Christian" leaders called on "the faithful" to "free the holy lands" (does this sound familiar?). An effective engagement of today's threatening global-religious environment will require the Church to turn away from — and actively condemn — the path of religious violence.

The Flight

The reflex of flight is sometimes more difficult to perceive. But consider for example the reaction to the terrorist attacks against Spain on March 11, 2004. The religiously-motivated terrorist group was attempting to coerce Spain into removing its troops from Iraq. The Spanish population felt greatly threatened, and in response the electorate shifted its support to a candidate whose platforms embraced "flight" from the situation in Iraq. 

A more discreet variety of the "flight" impulse can also be seen in the United States in the form of relativism. Theological relativism represents the extreme opposite of radical religious violence. Rather than dogmatically proselytizing a worldview's preeminence to the point of violence, relativism makes all worldviews "equally true" (with the subtext almost always being the assumption that religions are all equally untrue). If religious zeal is the search for truth, religious relativism is the belief that there is no absolute truth. A relativistic worldview takes flight from any conflict of worldview; it refuses to take any real stand whatsoever and tries to delegitimize those who do (to include even those who do so peacefully and respectfully). 

Secularism and religious relativism are comfortable bedfellows, creating a worldview where all religions are gutted of their core principles, whitewashed and "made un-threatening" for the a-religious public square. When confronted with the threatening tension of today's global-religious conflict, it becomes tempting to take the path of Pilate, asking, "What is truth?", and then proceeding to act as if there were none.²

The "flight" reaction - whether in the form of retreat into non-engagement and risk-averse isolationism or of relativistic retreat from robust principles -- is a common reaction to the gathering storm over religion in world affairs. But it is unacceptable for Christians that seek to interact with the world while maintaining the integrity of the Good News.

The Stand

The natural reactions of the flesh are not acceptable to Christians. Though it would be temporarily satisfying to lash out in defense and frustration, a Christian's defense does not rely on violence. And, though it would be easier for Christians to enter the conflicted regions of the world with a passive pass-card that reads, "truth is relative," Jesus was clear that he is the Truth.³ The truth must be presented to the world — nuanced, but never abandoned. 

If neither fight nor flight are acceptable, how are Christians to respond to today's globalized religious conflict? I believe the answer starts in 2 Peter 5-8, where the Apostle presents a seven-stage biblical model for balanced Christian engagement in a world of threatening extremes.

…make every effort to add Faith

Peter begins his model with faith. Christians must first and foremost know their own faith "at its deepest and richest best" (the first of IGE's Principles of Engagement). The cornerstone of the Christian stand refutes the flight of relativism and the abandonment of truth. Engagement begins with the integrity of faith.

…and to your faith, Goodness

Religious radicals and violent extremists have little trouble staying firm in their faith, as they pervert it into a justification for violence. Peter's second principle denies that path, calling for Christian responses characterized by goodness. Violence can at times be described as just or necessary (by terrorists it can be considered devout), but it cannot be described as good. An echo of this concept can be heard when Paul calls on believers "not to be overcome by evil, but to overcome evil with good."⁴

…and to goodness, Knowledge

Peter then proceeds by giving a vehicle to develop the callings of faith and goodness. Effective engagement is only possible with knowledge. Ignorance leads to fear and violence. In the case of religion, it allows radical elements to take advantage of a threatening world to "hijack a faith," either leading it to violent 

…and to self-control, Perseverance

Violence is a sign of impatience. A Christian stand must be characterized by perseverance, consistently walking the path prescribed by faith, goodness, knowledge and self-control. In societies -- and a world -- that can sometimes seem to be slowly "going to hell in a hand-basket," Christians must not be those that impatiently attempt to coerce it back to the truth. People of faith, frustrated by systems of secularism or the perceived heresy of their religious opponents, can be tempted to resort to vigilante violence. Peter urges a patient pursuit and presentation of the Truth. 

…and to perseverance, Godliness

Godliness cannot be defined or sought after until goodness and knowledge are firmly melded with faith. A faith not anchored by these traits, or sustained by self-control and perseverance, will slide down the slippery slope that warps godliness until violence is seen as devotion and murder as loyalty. Godliness also requires maintenance of the faith's integrity, a rejection of relativism. Christian Godliness is a defense of the Truth tempered by traits that prevent individuals or factions from using religion as an excuse for unjust uses of force and violence.

…and to godliness, Brotherly Kindness

Christians must not only stand, they must stand together. The sixth characteristic of Peter's model involves relationships within the Church. The Church is described as the Body of Christ, and to succeed the Body must stand united. Brotherly kindness does not imply a uniformity of opinion on all issues, but it does not allow doctrinal disagreements to rip the Church apart. Christians have had a history of infighting that must stop if the Church is to weather this global religious storm.

…and to brotherly kindness Love

The final component of a firm Christian stand is love. While brotherly kindness builds relationships within the Church, understanding and respect cannot stop at the exit doors of the sanctuary. A Christian stand does not extend violence or relativism, but love. 

Ruqaiyyah Waris Maqsood, a convert to Islam, explains how he identifies dangerous religious extremism in Islam and Christianity this way: "I have found that a useful 'rule of thumb' in identifying extremism is to listen out for the word kafir or kuffar (pl) [condemned unbelievers]."⁸ Christians are not called to stand in judgment or condemnation over hated "infidels," rather they are called to love fellow human beings who have the dignity of being created in God's image, and who therefore possess the inalienable right to their own beliefs of what is true. 

…For if you possess these qualities in increasing measure, they will keep you from being ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

A strong faith is the essential foundation of the Christian stand. Peter's holistic model works to protect the integrity of the faith from violent extremism on the one hand, and weak surrender on the other. Love is the essential ingredient that transforms all "others" in this global conflict -- from threatening enemies into lost men and women made in the image of God. While the world chooses between fight and flight, Christians must stand courageously with humility, firmly with understanding, and confidently with compassion.

^1. Ecumenical News International, "Slaying of Indonesian Presbyterian Sparks Religious Violence Fears" [http://www.eni.ch/articles/display.shtml?04-0459].
^2. John 18:37-38 (NIV) — "'You are a king, then!' said Pilate. Jesus answered, "You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.' 'What is truth' Pilate asked. With this he went out again to the Jews and said, 'I find no basis for a charge against him. But it is your custom for me to release to you one prisoner at the time of the Passover. Do you want me to release 'the king of the Jew's?'." Pilate questioned not only whether Jesus' claims were true, but also questioned whether truth existed — not "what is true?" but "what is truth?" Pilate then left the decision up to the Jews, not acknowledging or seeking the truth himself.
^3. John 14:6 (NIV) - "Jesus answered, 'I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me'."
^4. Romans 12:21, paraphrased. 
^5. John 18:10.
^6. Luke 22:54-61.
^7. John 21:15-18.
^8. Ruqaiyyah Waris Maqsood, "Christian Extremism" [www.islamfortoday.com/ruqaiyyah11.htm].