i had an earlier comment about the justice of war that i wish to address here.
“I do believe, however, that He [God] can use a people group (even those who are not following Him) to work out His plan, somehow.”
absolutely!!!
i agree completely God often uses people to accomplish His justice. there is no doubt in my mind that God is merciful and just, simultaneously. He desires all people return to Him (t’shuvah) but He also will judge those who dont repent. but in regard to His justice, there is a great passage that opened my eyes in regard to the justice of participating in war, etc.
the most famous passage used in defense of military action by christians comes from romans chapter 13. it is the passage about submitting to the rulers, for they are not given the sword in vain to punish the evil-doer, etc. this was the basis of almost all “just war” theories proposed throughout christendom. anyway, i was reading this passage a few months ago and it dawned on me that chapter 13 has to be read in context of the readers of the book of romans and within the context of chapter 12.
first, i realized that the context of this epistle is that it was written to the citizens of rome. so when paul writes this and he speaks of submitting to rulers, he is referring to the roman emperor. in particular at the time of this epistle, paul would have been speaking of emperor nero. wait a second…
you mean nero who killed christians for fun??!!!
yep, paul was saying that we as christians should submit to nero, the lunatic sadist. so if we are to submit even to nero, it is hard to justify wars that are ridding ourselves of tyrants (ie the american revolution among others). how can we submit to them and yet undermine them by violence at the same time?!
anyway, then i proceeded to reexamine the passage. and i realized that chapter 12 is right before chapter 13. now, i know this sounds obvious, but in our bible reading, we tend to think of the chapter breaks as new thoughts. unfortunately, paul wrote it as one letter. there was no break in between the two chapters. and here is what i discovered that paul wrote, just before he speaks about the ruler bearing the sword:
14Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. 15Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. 16Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position.[c] Do not be conceited.
17Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. 18If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,”[d]says the Lord. 20On the contrary: “If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”[e] 21Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
now there is a lot there. but just read it over. here, paul seems to be saying the exact opposite of justified war. instead, he seems to advocate allowing ourselves to be insulted and even killed in order to love our enemies. the most powerful line to me is “do not repay anyone evil for evil…[and then]…do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.”
you see, to me, paul seems to be saying that we are not to use the ways of this world to bring about justice. we are not to resort to violence and oppression in order to resist violence and oppression. instead, paul says, overcome evil with good. i personally cannot see that going to war and killing another person as good means to resolve a disagreement.
i went from seeing this passage as a potential justified war passage to the opposite. instead of promoting violence, paul seems to be disavowing it (for us as followers of Yeshua).
now, back to the original issue…i do believe that God will do justice. i do believe God will use people to bring about this justice (for the most part, sometimes it is natural disaster, etc). but often it has been evil people. and as paul says, its not our place to repay evil. God will avenge. this is the message of romans 12. give room for God’s vengeance.
so do i believe that God used/uses people to enact His justice through warfare? absolutely.
BUT do i think that we, as followers of Yeshua, are to fight our battles through the sword?
i believe that i must leave room for God’s wrath, for vengeance is the LORD’s, He will repay.
Filed under: Christianity, Non-Violence, Religion
Point taken and understood.
So let’s look at the oppression of Antiochous in the days of the Maccabees. The evil king was making it illegal for anyone to worship HaShem and the penalty was death. To be obedient to HaShem was to sign your death certificate, and that of your family as well. The people were being violently attacked for something so simple as reading, let alone having in their possession, a copy of the Scriptures. Young boys were killed and hung naked around their mother’s necks as their mothers were paraded around to their death – just because they were circumcised. So the faithful began to fight back and now we have Hanukkah. It’s worth noting that the only mention of Hanukkah in Scripture is in the Gospels where Yeshua is found at the Temple during Hanukkah and He taught there. It was a significant festival for Him to have taken time to travel the 3 to 5 day journey to Jerusalem in order to celebrate at the Temple. He celebrated something that was rather violent on both sides and could not have taken place had the faithful not stood up and fought back – and won.
If we are being attacked, personally or nationally, do we fight back? Do we protect ourselves or do we lay down and let them kill us?
My pacifist friends say that we should “turn the other cheek” and let them do away with us. They seem to look at the early believers who were fed to lions or crucified or tortured as people who had an opportunity to escape or fight back and chose not to. I don’t buy that. People who were taken into legal custody were the ones who were put to death. Many of these people had no resource to fight against Rome, they were caught. Yet many survived because of the catacombs. How is that letting your light shine before men?
But on another level, do we roll over and play dead when we see our superiors dragging HaShem’s Name through the mud? I mean when some of us left England/Holland for the Americas, were we wrong to flee from an institution that was corrupt? Were we wrong, later on, to fight for our freedom from this institution in order to set up a new one that was to be based on solid Judeo/Christian morals? I don’t know that it was wrong, myself.
I know this is a subject that we won’t be able to fully hash out nor fully reconcile in our time. But I’m still, again, very glad you brought this up.
When Messiah returns, what’s happening? A war. Peace only reigns when He is ruling from Jerusalem – a new Jerusalem. “And the Sprout of David Your servant, quickly cause to flourish, and exalt His power with Your Salvation (Yeshua) because for Your Salvation (Yeshua) we hope all day long.”
I think that we are naive to think that we can bring about peace on the earth when the Prince of evil still rules the air. I know it is a noble thing to strive for and it is good, it is what is best. But I believe that as long as there are those who are strongly against HaShem and those who refuse to submit to Him that there will be no peace. Once the Price of Peace reigns we will have peace for a time, then again we will have peace.
So, let me ask – if someone begins to attack the US (and today it would probably be a jihad), do you think we should defend ourselves? Even though it means killing those who do not recognize or know our Master? There is nothing in Scripture that goes against defending yourself when the need arises, that I can remember. I agree that we don’t need to be attacking based on religious beliefs, that we shouldn’t even consider such things. But what about Hussein? Were we wrong to go in and remove him? Bin Laden? These were political events, not religious events, on our behalf. They are viewed as religious attacks from the other side, but from our perspective they were purely political.
I feel that these situations were correct because I don’t believe that we are to stand by and do nothing when a bully is attacking and oppressing the weak and helpless. I believe that is a Scriptural principle. We are not to allow the weak, helpless, orphan or widow to be mistreated. So what, then, are we to do? To stand up for them and defend them may require a fight, and the fight may lead to death. But would that not be a natural consequence for the choices that the oppressor has made? Or are we to sit back on our haunches and wait for a lightning strike from heaven? I know that if He can use a donkey and a false prophet to make a point that He can use anything. But often nothing happens. Do we just sit by and let Nero kill all of us? Hussein? Stalin?
Yes, He will repay. If not in our day, at judgment. But He will repay us as well for our lack of justice and righteousness. Hence the conundrum.
~ Lisa
p.s. Sorry for being rather scattered in my thoughts today. I’m doing end-of-the-year bookkeeping and my brain is going to mush right now…
Peter,
An excellent analysis of Romans, but one of the things that is crucial (lexically) to the “just war” debate is the difference between “defense” and “vengeance.” God does say “Vengeance is mine,” and God the Son does say “turn the other cheek.” However, we are NOT called to present our back to our enemy’s daggers. Defense is viable and biblical, and war for the sake of defense (i.e. preventing a more disastrous war, removing a violent dictator, promotoing justice, etc.) is what theologians like Calvin and Luther justified.
Again, that was on a national level, and to my knowledge, they did not discuss the individual’s role in that, so you probably know more than I.
brad
thanks for the comment. yeah, i understand that to be calvin and luther’s position. and i understand why some people interpret Scripture thus. i just dont personally agree. i dont believe that defense is defensible. i will get into that more later, however.
and of course, i think you are right that this has much more to do with the national role than the individual.
later
peter
[...] January 8, 2008 Posted by PB and J in christianity, non-violence, religion. trackback in my last post about non-violence i received a couple comments that i want to address an important issue that was [...]
“i don’t believe that defense is defensible.”
Gotcha. I’d be really interested in hearing you get into that. It’s easy to see that played out in the Christians martyred and slaughtered by Nero, but… I don’t know… I can’t imagine a father allowing his family to be taken knowing their fate in that situation… stuff like that. *shrugs* I look forward to it.
“and of course, i think you are right that this has much more to do with the national role than the individual.”
And that is a huge issue with the debate over whether Chaplain’s should be allowed to bear arms in guerilla warfare such as this. It has been interesting so far. I got to be one of about a dozen chaplain’s engaged in an ethics debate on just that subject. Fascinating stuff.
brad
i look fwd to more discussion when i get a chance to formulate my thoughts on defensibility.
peter
Sweet.
BTW, how’s life?
[...] January 12, 2008 Posted by PB and J in christiainity, non-violence, religion. trackback in my last post about non-violence, i had some good comments about defense of [...]
brad
things are pretty good. we are almost settled in to the house, etc. work is going well and classes will hopefully be starting for me soon. we are going to new city fellowship in south city. really great place. how are things going for yall? did yall end up moving out to lafayette square?
peter
Sounds awesome, bro. We’ve heard good things about that plant. It’s near S. Grand, right?
And things are going really well for us. We just found a new tenant for our current condo, and put a deposit on an apartment 4 blocks west of Lafayette Square. So yeah, we’re pretty stoked, and will be moving that first weekend of spring break.
What classes r u taking?
sweet…i am taking ref and mod church history and teaching myself hebrew to test out…i am trying to take it slow because i am still getting settled in the job and whatnot. as funds become more available, i will be taking more Lord willing…
sounds great about yall moving. yeah, we are living right next to tower grove park on S Grand. its great. we really like the area and the plant.
peace
peter