Bogus Peace Versus Reconciliation

Octavian, the adopted son of Julius Caesar, was a successful leader. In 31 B.C., he led the army that defeated Mark Antony at the Battle of Actium. The Roman senate gave him the name Augustus (Revered One), and he was celebrated as Rome’s imperial savior, the incarnation of divine good news for the whole world. Under his leadership, the pax Romana spread far and wide—“peace” was established and reinforced through intimidation, subjugation, and brutality, including crucifixion.

Augustus and his successors ruled an empire that included disparate people groups with various languages and cultures. These diverse groups were held together by political power, pragmatism, and propaganda. It was an era of peace (defined as orderly coexistence) without reconciliation.

A few decades after Augustus, on the extreme edge of the Roman empire, a different kind of leader was born. This leader “existed in the form of God” but “emptied himself,” “humbled himself,” and took the “form of a slave” (Phil. 2:6-8). This leader drew a sharp contrast between leaders like Augustus, “who lorded over” their followers, and the leaders in his kingdom, who became servants (Luke 22:24-26). This leader died a scandalous death on a Roman cross.

The life and death of Jesus triggered a movement that turned the world upside down (Acts 17:6). This dynamic movement was based on the conviction that the crucified one offered reconciliation and peace—not the bogus pax Romana of Augustus, but the authentic shalom of the King of kings. This movement promised peace through reconciliation.

Paul, one of the leaders of the movement, put it this way: “In Christ, God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them” (2 Cor. 5:19). Because of Christ, “the dividing wall of hostility” has been torn down (Eph. 2:14). In Christ, there is a new reality (2 Cor. 5:17), a new humanity (Eph. 2:15), God’s poems (Eph. 2:10), a distinctive people called to the ministry of reconciliation.

Paul’s lofty rhetoric was tested by harsh realities, including violent opposition in Iconium (Acts 14:5), conflicts between leaders in Philippi (Phil. 4:2), a confrontation with Peter in Antioch (Gal. 1:8), meddlesome widows in Ephesus (1 Tim. 5:13), multiple factions in Corinth (1 Cor. 1:12), religious show-offs in Colossae (Col. 2:16-23). The list could go on. Through it all, Paul stayed on message, the message of reconciliation.

Sadly, subsequent generations of Christians have not always stayed on message. We have battled each other. In vain attempts to extend our empires, we have embraced the tactics of Augustus and ignored the pattern of Jesus. We are divided, and our witness is compromised.

Therefore, it is time, once again, to repent, refocus, and recapture the ministry and message of reconciliation. With this in mind, I offer the following points:

(1) Reconciliation means radical relational transformation. The goal of reconciliation is not orderly coexistence, but shalom.

(2) Reconciliation is a gift. God took the initiative. He paid the price. “He is our peace” (Eph. 2:14).

(3) Reconciliation is a mandate. Every Christian, every day, is called to this mission.

(4) Reconciliation requires humility and sacrificial love, particularly towards those who oppose us (Rom. 12:16-20).

In other words, we must imitate our leader, the Reconciler, Jesus Christ (Phil. 2:5).