What Does It Mean to Love One’s Enemies?

It is hard enough to love one’s friends and even harder to love others as we love ourselves. But how can we love our enemies? In both the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:43) and the Sermon on the Plain (Luke 6:27), Jesus plainly says, “love your enemies.” 

Why do we have enemies? Are enemies people we harbor enmity against? Probably not in most cases. Why would Jesus’ first followers have had an “enemies list” so that he would have felt the need to urge them to love those on that list?

The answer is clear: our “enemies” are not primarily those we have enmity toward; rather, they are those who have enmity toward us for whatever reason. Note Jesus’ full statement: “pray for those who persecute you.” Those early followers of Jesus were persecuted, but they certainly were not persecutors.

Consider some notable examples of people who loved their enemies. First, of course, is Jesus himself. As he was being executed by the extremely painful means of crucifixion, Jesus uttered this prayer: “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing” (Luke 23:34).

Anabaptists (with whom I have long identified) have great respect for Dirk Willems, the Dutch Anabaptist martyr in 1569. He escaped from prison and was chased by a guard who fell through thin ice during the chase. But Willems turned back and rescued his pursuer—and then was recaptured, tortured, and killed.

Four hundred years later, Martin Luther King, Jr., steadfastly called upon Black people to show love for their enemies, the White people who had often lynched their ancestors for centuries and were still mistreating them in the present. His most well-known book is titled Strength to Love (1963).

I was certainly not a supporter of Charlie Kirk, although I grieved that he was killed. But I remain impressed by what Erika Kirk, Charlie’s wife, said at his memorial service. She forgave the shooter. Unlike the President, she expressed love and forgiveness toward him rather than hatred.

These are widely known examples of people who showed love for their enemies. Most of us, though, will likely never be in such dramatic situations. What does it mean for us to love our enemies?

“Love is more an attitude and action than a feeling.” That is the title of #25 in my book Thirty True Things Everyone Needs to Know Now (2018). In that chapter, I cite John Hick’s explanation regarding the type of love Jesus meant when he commanded us to love our enemies.

The British philosopher writes that love is “to value a person in such ways as actively to seek his or her deepest welfare and fulfillment” (Philosophy of Religion, 1963). Or, as we might say today, love actively seeks the flourishing of all people, including our enemies.

In my above-mentioned book, I also cite how MLK importantly distinguished between liking and loving. King noted in Strength to Love that Jesus did not say, “Like your enemies,” admitting that it is “almost impossible to like some people.” But Jesus’ command was for us to love people whom we don’t like.

So, love of enemies is not sentimental affection, but deliberate goodwill and moral commitment. That is the attitude Jesus calls us to have for those who say hurtful things to/about us or do harmful things to us.

Loving in that way certainly doesn’t mean condoning injurious things that are said or done, to us or to others. We can’t be neutral concerning right and wrong, good and evil. Often, we must “hate” what people do, but love them for who they are, persons created in the image of God.

We could make a long list of people who do things we strongly disapprove of. Many of us have deep dislike for the things the POTUS and his henchmen such as Steven Miller and Russell Vought say and do, and we have the right (and responsibility?) to speak out against them.

But if we are serious about following Jesus’ command that we love our “enemies,” whether they are government officials we dislike, cantankerous neighbors, or whoever, we still must seek their “deepest welfare” and their flourishing. That is both for the well-being of others as well as for ourselves.

Remember, "hate is more harmful to the vessel in which it is stored than to the people on whom it is poured."

Shall We Dance?: Considering an All-inclusive Worldview

This is my third blog post regarding worldviews. On July 30, I wrote (here) about the importance of expanding one’s worldview. The theme of my August 20 post was the sadness of shrinking one’s worldview. In this article, please consider the all-inclusive worldview (my term) presented by Jon Paul Sydnor in his 2024 book, The Great Open Dance: A Progressive Christian Theology.*¹  

You may think it strange, but I never learned to dance. Growing up in a traditional Southern Baptist church, social dancing was frowned upon—and I didn’t have any trouble with that. In the last 20 years, though, I have read three theology books with “Dance” in the title.

The first of those was Molly Marshall’s 2003 book, Joining the Dance: A Theology of the Spirit. Seven years ago, I read Richard Rohr’s The Divine Dance: The Trinity and Your Transformation (2016). Then this month I finished reading Sydnor’s engaging new book.

These three books are largely, but not wholly, about the Christian concept of the Trinity, and all three authors write about the Greek word perichōrēsis, which I became aware of when reading Marshall’s book.

In 2022 (here), Rohr wrote, “Trinitarian theology says that God is a ‘circular’ rotation (perichoresis) of total outpouring and perfect receiving among three intimate partners.” That “circular rotation” is depicted as “the divine dance” in Rohr’s book noted above.*²

(I am quite sure that such “circular rotation” is quite different from the sexually stimulating social dancing that I have eschewed since my teenage years.)

The “great open dance” views all reality as being fully interrelated. Dance partners are obviously not one; they are separate selves. But they also are not two. Sydnor says the same is true for everything.

In interfaith discussions in Japan, my Japanese Buddhist friends sometimes talked about the term/concept funi (不二), which literally means not two. In his first chapter, Sydnor points out that “'not-two' refers to the unity-in-difference upon which our universe is based.” This is a nondual worldview.*³

Sydnor continues: “Nondualism asserts that all reality is inherently related.” Thus, “nondualism offers intellectual resistance to the false divisions that cause our suffering, implicitly condemning sexism, racism, classism, nationalism, … and every other divisive worldview.”

“The Persons of the Trinity Relate to One Another in a Divine Dance” is the title of one subjection in Sydnor’s first chapter. There he says, “When a skilled couple dances you cannot detect who is leading…. Their movements appear spontaneously generated.”

And so it is with the Trinity: “They [the ‘Persons’ of the Trinity] dance freely, spontaneously, always in relation to one another but never determined by one another, co-originating one another in joyful mutuality.”

This, then, leads to the central theme of the book: “We, being made in the image of God, are made to dance—with God, with one another, and with the cosmos.” This theme forms the basis for a worldview that is deeper and wider than most of us have—or have even thought of.

On this basis, Sydnor elucidates an all-inclusive worldview, one based on the perfect, unconditional, and universal love expressed by the Greek word agapé. Thus he asserts, “God is three persons united through agapic love into one nondual community. God is agapic nonduality.”

Sydnor acknowledges that “people want faith to give them more life, and people want faith to make society more just, and people want faith to grant the world more peace.” He then states that he has “written this book in the conviction that Trinitarian, agapic nondualism can do so.”

In his third chapter, Sydnor cites this foundational Bible verse: “There is one God and Creator of all, who is over all, who works through all and is within all” (Ephesians. 4:6, The Inclusive Bible, 2022). All here means, well, all, and that is the basis for Sydnor’s all-inclusive worldview.

Such a perspective is completely based on agape, “the unconditional, universal love of God for all creation.” These words of Sydnor in the first chapter lead to this statement in the ninth chapter: “What would society look like if its members truly trusted God and enacted the divine love? Certainly, it would be universalist.”

So, shall we dance, joining the great open dance of God and adopting a universal, all-inclusive worldview based on agapic nonduality? Sounds good to me.

_____

*¹ I received a free copy of the e-book edition of Sydnor’s book from Mike Morrell and his Speakeasy website which provides “quality books in exchange for candid reviews.” This post is in partial fulfillment of that promise, but I am also publishing a review of the book on another blogsite (see here).

*² As indicated on the cover of Rohr’s book, it was written “with Mike Morrell.”

*³ Funi is the Japanese translation of the Sanskrit words advaita in Hinduism and advaya in Buddhism. Sydnor is also the co-editor of (the very expensive) book, Nondualism: An Interreligious Exploration (2023) and the founding director of The Nondualism Project (click here to access their attractive website).