Why I Don't Believe in World Peace

Rick Warren's endorsement of McGrath's book Heresy (see last post), in light of his recent inter-faith bridging efforts with his mega-church's P.E.A.C.E. Plan strikes me as no coincidence. There's no sense in Muslims, Jews, Christians (and heretics alike) killing each other. I think we can all agree that we should try as best we can to work together and live harmoniously, respecting one another.  As a result, we want to have some neutral ground from which to come to the table and talk it out.  But there are couple major problems that stress the need for caution lest we fall into the trap of revising the gospel:

1. The problem is that despite our similarities, we have radical divergence of opinion as to how "World Peace" should be carried out.  Sharia and Christianity don't mix.  Period.  Certain forms of government (like democracy) do not port easily to certain faiths.  It is all well and good to establish "common ground" but this may be tantamount to compromise for more than one religion.  I remain unconvinced that many faiths, including Christianity, have not had to water down their convictions in order to start playing politics on a grand scale.  It's one thing for a politician to make sensible compromises to lead a country.  It is entirely another for an entire faith group to submit itself to a government which will only tolerate a particular (watered down) form of its theology.

Corollary:  If differences between religions are watered down to accomodate a single geo-political objective, we not only lose the uniqueness of said religions, but we then run into the problem of perpetuating the one thing we all have in common: evil.  World peace becomes essentially a code word for PAX ROMANA; there's peace because there's nobody who can have individual beliefs anymore without appearing as a virus in the system.  We tar these individuals as "bigots" "racists" "sexists" "Islamophobes" "homophobes" "anti-Semites" "heretics" "fundamentalists" "infidels"...and they are criminalized for having unpopular opinions that 'rock the boat'.  But of course, the extermination of dissent is not peace.  


2. There is no such thing as a neutral unbeliever.  Part of my love for a Muslim or Jew or Hindu would include being honest with him, where required, about his status before God.  He is not "saved" and he is not going to heaven and furthermore he is a child of the devil on the road to hell.  I owe him that much to tell him that he is in the same place I was before I trusted Christ as Saviour.  This deeply offensive message, as you can imagine (or as you are foaming at the mouth with rage about at this very minute or scoffing with indifference), does not lend itself easily to inter-faith dialogue writ large. I do not think this radical honesty annihilates dialogue, I believe it should actually strengthen it; but there will remain those who will only fume with rage.

The reason for this is that this is not an ideology of man we are talking about, this is the Word of God, and man's rebellion against it is far deeper than any issue-driven pet-peeve.  The continual witness of Scripture is that Christians will meet with hate, threats, imprisonment, torture, death, attempted extermination and so on.  I don't know what your eschatology is like, but our relative hey-day in the free west will not last forever.  The writing is on the wall.


I don't believe in World Peace.  It is a myth, and not a neutral one.  It's a lie.  We are not good.  We don't get along.  We never will.  Jesus calls me to be a peacemaker and perfect: I have done my best and I try, but I have failed at both and will continue to.  I am responsible to continue struggling; but beware the utopian myth-makers.

Tyranny & Delusion

Tyranny is vicious, twisted and deluded as it is deceitful. Tyranny often attempts to force adherence from its subjects by conceptually replacing the higher with the lower; but by means of using the conceptual name of the higher for the sake of the lower. In English what's meant here is that tyranny always involves a selfishness, which is the lower concept, but this is disguised with the good of the many or at worst, the spiritual, the Divine. It appears to offer what you need or want, or will create the need or want that it can fulfil (like a cult).

You will encounter various types of tyrants in life; not just political ones. We may have been or may still be tyrants ourselves. It can be ideological, relational, physical, emotional...and so on.

It is the mark of a deluded person that he or she does not see it possible or reasonable that he or she could be deluded. But what really makes tyranny, evil & delusion so maddening and darkly comical is that it always whines longest and loudest about tyranny, evil & delusion. These are the first people to complain, point the finger and loudly accuse; especially when they do it against those who are trying to solve the problem. Those who make accusations of fear mongering, control, manipulation and coercion often follow the same crude rule of "He who smelled it dealt it".

But the truly different thing about tyranny as opposed to common delusion is its aggressive nature. Tyranny happens when a person, either by self-delusion or by knowing selfishness, exploits others or even self for the sake of something falsely considered to be valuable. Tactically speaking, this plays out by misleading others into also misplacing their sense of value.

The tyrant, for example, may believe that money, power, fame, sex, family, religion, ideology or the glory of some perceived atheistic society or religious utopia are the ultimate values for which he or everyone else including him, or everyone but him for the sake of him, must buy into. So, the tyrant embarks on a process of reeducation, convincing his family, or nation, or church, or even himself that the things which his delusion values are supremely valuable and are worth giving up things that most of us would consider inalienable rights.

You might think it strange that I say that we can tyrannize ourselves, but like I said, tyranny isn't just about that Persian guy you learned about from the 300 Spartans or about even something physically present or corporeal. We can be enslaved to many things that aren't even people.

It's okay to give up your "inalienable rights". It's okay to die for something, or give up yourself for somebody else, in fact it can be downright heroic. You just have to do a little searching about what's really valuable in life. If you value the wrong things or the right things even in the wrong order, you will be exploited by someone or something. If you value nothing, you'll be impoverished (and a liar I'd say). Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

Like it or not, everyone has a master. There are good masters and bad masters. I'm hedging my bets that the best master is first the one that loves you before himself and his projects or ideas. I think that is a model for following inasmuch as it is leading. I think it is the difference between a Lord and a Tyrant.