What is peace? Is it a lack of conflict? Or is it something more?
If peace is a good thing, it can't be a lack. Good is a fullness and lack of good is evil. Therefore if peace is good, peace must be a fullness of something.
Now, conflict isn't always a bad thing. Sometimes it is necessary to correct a wrong. Therefore peace can't simply be a lack of conflict, if conflict is sometimes good, because a lack of good is evil.
Peace isn't complete when conflict ends. That is only the beginning of peace. Reconciliation requires a rebuilding, work from both parties to restore what was destroyed. Simply saying "we are at peace" because the conflict is over doesn't restore anything. That's a truce, not a peace.
A truce becomes peace when both parties work to rebuild what was lost in the conflict. This can happen in a variety of ways, depending on the conflict, but it absolutely has to be mutual in nature. One party cannot create peace on his or her own.
We should strive to be at peace with everyone. But this is not always possible, as some people will not cooperate with rebuilding. We have to be willing to build peace but also willing to accept truces if peace isn't possible. We cannot force peace, as the use of force would inevitably create conflict, and not always a good kind. We are to have an attitude of peacemaking once conflict is over and resolve ourselves to let go of bitterness and the desire for revenge, as both are antithetical both to truce and to true peace.
What do you think, readers? Am I full of it?
This stuff has just been bouncing around in my head lately as conflict has been a daily thing for me. I want peace in my life, but it seems impossible sometimes because others can be so conflict driven. I am willing to accept that I may be wrong, and their conflicts with me are legitimate and ultimately can build me. Conflict isn't always bad, but peace is supremely better.