|
| |||||
|
|
|
| ||
PAGE 4 DISCUSSION ON CHRISTIAN NONVIOLENCE
RESPONSE FROM "LD"
Sr./Bible college
I would have to agree with promiselander that our chief objective is not reform, but the spread of the gospel.
I do, however have to disagree with the isogesis of II Cor 10:3-4 to support a pacifist position. Look at the context of these verses and Paul is specifically talking about his own ministry of teaching in the Corinthian church. (v. 5 "Casting down imaginations...bringing into captivity...thoughts.")
I would reiterate that there is a level of distinction between what we do to further God's kingdom (which should always be love and never violence) and what we do as citizens of our country. Otherwise we could go to the extreme that it is not good stewardship to give 30% of our income to the government to do such things as fund abortion, wars, obscene art, etc. Whatever our government chooses to do with its resources and people (including us) is its business, and God raises up and throws down nations pretty regularly for just that reason. That being said, we are under obligation to obey God before we obey men. Thus Paul was killed because the government of his day went so far as to outlaw Christianity, and he continued to obey Christ's command to preach the Gospel. I still remain unconvinced that Christians are supposed to avoid obeying their country in war time, etc. It would seem to me that that would be failing to render to Caesar what is rightfully his-our loyalty. If I were a Christian in Germany in the first half of last century, would I have served in battle? Yes. Would I have slaughtered civilians and Jews, no, and I probably would have lost my life for it. Would I serve as an executioner if I worked in the prison system? Yes, if need be. Murder, which is condemned by the Bible, is clearly defined by Jesus to be a matter of heart attitude, and not all killing is murder. Can Christians serve the interests of their state? I feel an obligation to.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
PROMISELANDER
Nov 02, 2002 7:53:25 pm
Bro. LD,
I have not chosen to use the word pacifist. I take the position that the New Tesament does not condone the use of physical violence or killing by a Christian. Rather, we are taught that Christians are not to be violent or to kill.
Though it is accurate to say that Paul was referring to his ministry in 2 Corinthians, Paul did say that WE Do NOT WAR ACCORDING TO THE FLESH. This statement does not contradict the context, it does not contradict any other of Paul's writings nor does it contradict any other writings of the New Testament. As a matter of fact, it agrees with all of the other passages of the New Testament which tells us that we Christians are not to be violent or to kill.
This passage also agrees with the rest of Scripture in pointing out that spiritual weapons accomplish supernatural things. I for one have no problem understanding this passage to say we can overcome our adversaries and obstacles by doing spiritual battle.
I really would like to discuss the issues you bring up in your post, but I will limit this post to the issue of nonviolence as taught in the New Testament. Remember, I asked for the New Testament apology for violent and killing Christians.
It is not that I don't find your position interesting, even astounding, but you offered no New Testament argument for Christian violence.
Have you ever had anyone teach you the Word or help you in theology and Christian ethics. I would think there should be some older brother or Christian school nearby which could help you direct your zeal.
I am sorry I don't know your name or much about you from your profile, but I do hope we can discuss these things sometime.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
RESPONSE FROM "R"
Nov 02, 2002 9:48:22 pm
Promiselander,
Do you believe that there are no situations in which a Christian can be violent? If your wife or sister was about to be raped would you just stand by? I believe that the Bible teaches that getting revenge is wrong, but stopping a great wrong, such as rape or the mass murder of innocent people, by the use of violence is definitely acceptable.
All of that being said, I definitely respect your views and expect to meet you in heaven someday.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Response from promislander
Nov 02, 2002 9:48:22 pm
Brother R, thank you for your kind words.
In answer to your question, No I do not believe that there is ever a Biblical reason for a Christian to be violent. On the other hand, there is a great chasm between nonviolence and "just standing by." I have had my life threatened many times by some of the most unsavory characters and thought that I had finally reached the end of my journey. God has used different things to deliver me. There is no pat answer for this kind of scenario. But God is the answer. It is a matter of living faith which I exercise and it is the Living God whom I trust.
I hope I never face the hypothetical you suggest and I hope you never face it. But what would I do?
I would release the valve to my pocket sized cannister of Nitrus Oxide (I hope that is laughing gas) and while the would-be-assailant is rolling with laughter I would call the police. Well, if you can have a hypothetical question, why can't I have a hypothetical answer (smile).
So you want the real answer as to what I would do? I don't know what I would do. I know what I would want to do. I know what I have spent a good part of my life preparing to do. I hope I would be alert to God's leading, and that I would act like Jesus or at least like Jesus would wants me to act. I don't know what that might involve.
But this I believe, I would want to be nonviolent. This does not mean passive. I would hope to be pro-active in behalf of my loved one and to the glory of God. I would want to be like Jesus. I would want to please Him above all else.
The Bible clearly teaches that we are to trust Him in the most dangerous of situations. We are not to lean on the arm of flesh (Old Testament). There are plenty of verses which tell us to trust Him for our deliverance from all evil. We are not to trust in horses or chariots, but in God.
Though I have not faced this particular situation you mention, I have faced many others which could have ended in either great injury or death. On those occasions I have found God to be more than sufficient.
I have known other believers, some of them sisters in the Lord, who have not resorted to violence when faced with danger (including your scenario) but rather called on Jesus and He miraculously delivered them from the snare of the fowler. These people are folks who had come to an acceptance and understanding of the nonviolent position. They believed that had they acted in the flesh, they would have been dead meat. They were told by police officers that had they done any differently, they would have suffered an attack. On one occasion, the would be assailant was caught later and found to be the perpetrator in several attacks, and rapes.
Bless the Lord O my soul and all that is in me Bless His Holy Name. Jesus never fails. Jesus never fails. Heaven and Earth may pass away, but Jesus never fails.
Now, if a person would rather plan on trusting in thier gun, then go for it. We know that guns have never failed people. People have never been shot with their own guns. People who have talked big about what they would do to some "scum bag" often find themselves wishing they had trusted God instead of themselves or Smith and Wesson.
What I have found is that most of the people who claim that they would do such and such to their attacker or their oppressor are more talk than walk. They criticize me for trusting God and then they fail themselves.
The evidence is in from history and around the world, Trust God.
Oh, by the way, in all of the difficult and threatening situations which my wife and I have been in together, she would rather we trust God also. And when I am not there, she still has the same God keeping her.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Response from "LD"
Senior/Bible college
to promiselander,
I agree fully with your position on trusting God rather than human means of defense in our lives. I also agree that our focus os on spiritual matters, and in that context, the biggest war we face is spiritual and must be met with purely spiritual means. (I would have to point out that the war Paul is referring to in the discussed passage is a spiritual war.)
My only point is that when our nation, or any nation any person happens to be part of, goes to physical war, it is nowhere forbidden for Christians to honor that part of their citizenship responsibilities.
quote:
---------------------------------------------------------
I take the position that the New Tesament does not condone the use of physical violence or killing by a Christian. Rather, we are taught that Christians are not to be violent or to kill.
---------------------------------------------------------
I am just wondering the specifics of where we are taught this as a wide moral principle. Yes, we are not to act in hatred or self-defense or in the name of the church with violence, but governements are mandated to act violently at times when necessary. If we as Christians are in a part of our government system which requires us to help fulfill that role, it is perfectly acceptable to do so. The state is supposed to "bear the sword" and the state is made up of people, even Christians, so when acting on behalf of the state, violence and even killing are not condemned.
There is also the whole issue of God using much by way of human means to cause killing in the Old Testament, so killing is obviously not entirely odious to the nature and character of God. (Samuel hewing Agag in pieces, for example.) I realize that in the OT the church and state, at least in Israel, were very close, but it does serve to illustrate that God nowhere condemns all killing.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Response from promislander
Posted: Nov 04, 2002 7:49:08 pm
Brother L, I do have a response. I hope to have it posted soon. Until then, keep on keeping on.
Promiselander
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Response from "LD"
Sr./Bible College
Nov 04, 2002 11:28:00 pm
I will be looking forward to your response when you have time. Just a few other issues from your previous post. I have been well-schooled in the Bible and Christian ethics from Kindergarten to this my senior year at KCCBS. I have been influenced by many very good and Godly people as well as directly by the Word of God. I strive every day to live according to the principles of God's Word, including the chief one, love. My ideal is that Matthew 5-7 and I Corinthians 13 would describe me perfectly. Until I reach that ideal, I will continue to grow in Christ.
Oh, and every instance where we are told not to kill in the New Testament, the word used is for murder, and has the same root as the word for violent criminal, or murderer. Elsewhere when killing is talked about in a general way, this word is never used. It is unique to commands not to murder.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Response from "K.As."
Bible College graduate
Posted: Nov 04, 2002 11:48:48 pm
I think the reason this is an issue in the first place is because it is NOT SPECIFICALLY addressed in the New Testament. Let me explain. I agree completely that Christians can under no circumstances use violence to try and bring about good. We are not to set up an earthly kingdom or try to reform the world to the point that we create a "heaven on earth" to which Jesus will then return. As far as I have seen, every verse in the New Testament that talks about non-violence and being meek and gentle is referring to one of two things.
1) We cannot use carnal weapons(violence) to achieve spiritual victories(i.e. bombing abortion clinics, getting revenge for something done to us personally or to the Church, etc..).
2) We cannot respond to attacks on the Church of God with violence. By this I am referring to the persecution of the saints by Satan through unsaved people. That is what persecution of the Church is really about(Eph. 6:12).
I would disagree with anyone who says that when it is a matter of spiritual persecution(people using violence or other means to attack us as children and disciples of God) that we can resist with violence. I believe that Jesus and the apostles clearly addressed this issue. That is what all of those New Testament verses are about.
However, I see a separate issue which I believe is really what our disagreements are about.
That issue is using physical force to resist people who are bringing pain to others either for personal enjoyment, money, power, or whatever. Such cases would include bullies, robbers, rapists, murderers, or regimes such as the Nazis or Saddam Hussein. I believe this is a seperate issue because it is not SPECIFICALLY about spiritual persecution against the Church or Christians. Instead it is about evil men doing evil things to innocent people who are just simply trying to live their lives.
I hope I have made my thoughts clear. Sometimes I have a hard time putting my thoughts into words.
If our primary purpose is to bring sinners to Christ, how can we stand by and let an evil person kill another unsaved person who might be brought to Christ later on? Is it better not to use violence and let someone be murdered or robber, or raped, etc..), OR to use force if necessary to save that person from physical pain or even eternal *meow*ation? (*meow* is part of the Forum filter) Obviously we should rely on God, but God has also given us common sense which He expects us to use.
If a wild animal attacked you or your family would you simply pray for help, or would you use force against the beast AND pray?!
If I am correct in believing that this is a separate issue, and that the New Testament does not specifically address it, then we are left with Biblical principles and examples with which to apply to the situations I have mentioned.
I have gone too long already so I won't go into those right now. However, I believe those principles support the use of force in such cases.
I guess I got a little verbose myself.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Response from "LD"
Sr./Bible College
Posted: Nov 05, 2002 6:18:18 pm
I looked up every prohibition of killing in the NT and in every place it is a Greek word for murder that is different than every other more general use of the word kill. This word for murder is only used in places where it is prohibited. Other times killing is mentioned, it is a general word for causing death and is not forbidden.
And in reply to promiselander about my training. I have been trained in the Bible and Bible ethics in a good Christian school all my life and am even now in my senior year at KCCBS. I have been under the influence of many godly people, as well as immersed myself in God's Word. The main ethic which the Bible teaches is love, and I am attempting to fashion my life in the image of the love of Christ. Living up to Matthew 5-7 and I Corinthians 13 is my goal in life.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Response from promiselander
Posted: Nov 06, 2002 1:30:27 am
Brother L, I am just getting to know some of y'all and I after offering words of encouragement I saw that you are a student at KCCBS.
Sometimes if we know about each other, it helps us appreciate each other a little more. As I read the various posts in the various Forums, I learn more about you and the others.
I am wanting to continue the Scriptural position on our discussion, but I thought I would offer a little insight as to how I came to my rather unusual position.
I hesitated to post this explanation of my own spiritual journey along these lines because I did not want to bore anyone or seem to take up an excessive amonunt of space. Soooo, if someone really doesn't have the time to read this, I understand. I just wanted to give a little background. So here goes.
Brother L, (if your name was on the margin earlier, I am sorry I did not see it), thank you for your participation in this discussion. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss important issues with others of the faith. I also appreciate that we can disagree agreeably. I am very passionate about my foundational beliefs and will present them without apology. I expect that most others in this forum are the same. I have no problem with this, so don't worry about hurting my feelings (just don't do it (smile)). When it comes to discussing an issue, I certainly do not expect anyone to swallow what I say, but I do hope folks will at least chew on it. Obviously, if it is anti-Christ or anti-Bible (one and the same), then we do not even need to chew on it.
I am not sure how to use the "quote" (if this were being said verbally it would be quote quote unquote) function, such as you used in your previous post. What do I do to use it?
As I said early in this thread,
"The verses which I offer you will not indiviually convince you of this simple but rejected truth. However, I believe there are enough verses and New Testament principles to establish that Christians are called to peace and non violence."
It isn't that the verses aren't convincing, but generally it is nearly impossible to convince someone of something once their mind is made up. This is especially true when a person believes they are totally lined up with the Word of God.
I would like to give the background for my taking this position in this post and then pick up the thread again in the next one.
I was pretty much where you are in my thinking during my Bible college days. Not because I had so learned the Word, but because that was my background and upbringing. I was a typical product of the baby boomer genereation. I was raised to be a Red Blooded American. We had just beaten the Japanese and the Germans and we were king of the hill. This is not said with "tonque in cheek." From a human point of view, America saved the worlds hyde. I was raised on Roy Rogers, Gene Autrey, The Lone Ranger, with a helping of John Wayne. In the 1950's and early 60's I went to all of the War movies and fought the Japanese on the Sands of Iwo Jima with the Fighting Sea Bee's. I flew and sailed with the allies as they hunted down and sank the dreaded Bismark and was there for the Longest Day. The good guys wore white and we were the good guys. We didn't start a fight, but we were ready, willing and able to finish one. (And just in case you are wondering, I was not raised in a holiness or even in a Christian home). I was raised to stand up for myself. I was taught not to start a fight, but if I was brought into one, I was to finish it. If I could not finish it, I should at least give it my best shot. If I did not defend myself, I would not only get whipped by my antagonist, but Daddy would whip me too (and no, Daddy was not an abuser and I hardly ever got in trouble because I got saved at an early age and I was therefore an obedient child).
I did not start fights as a child, but I certainly did finish enough of them. I would suffer a defeat before I would either run away or back down from a conflict. This mentality (which is not altogether wrong) carried over into my adult world as well. I went to Bible college in 1965 while the Viet Nam war was going on. At first I was glad to have my 4D (ministerial deferment) and get on with my life. However, as time passed, and I saw the body bags coming back and I thought of Communism not only killing our men and the many innocents in Viet Nam, I also saw the Red Menace as the enemy to the Church and the Gospel. I saw the US as the good guys who would rescue the oppressed and set the Gospel free in a godless society.
I was raised on the coast of North Carolina, not far from Cherry Point Marine Air Station and Camp Lejeune Marine Base. My Dad had been in the Navy during WWII and my uncle had been with a tank corp during the Korean Conflict. I had every reason in the world to be pro-Navy or pro-Army, but when you live near Marine stations, you do not have the Marine Recruiters view of the Corp, you know the truth. The Marines are known for their toughness, but when I was 14 years old at only 125 #'s body weight, I use to play with the grunts like they were toy soldiers. I had no false impressions of their invulnerability. I had no particular admiratoin for their capablities. However, (don't leave me now), in spite of all of my understanding about the Corp. I was seriously considering joining up and shipping out to Viet Nam to set those poor people free from the darkness of Communism. I would gladly go with a Bible in one hand and an M-16 in the other. I would love my enemy and send him into eternity while I prayed for his poor lost soul. After all, it would be better to kill a few to save the many, right? I prayed hard about going. I prayed often about going. I was ready, willing and able to go, but God did not let me go. I figured that it was because He just wanted me to stay and develope my ministry skills and gifts.
I attended a holiness Bible college which was a total change of experience for me. Though my first six weeks were really terrible, I finally got sanctified and everything changed. I was determined to allow God's Word to be the final authority in my life. Over the next four years I was led into His truth and had to make changes in my pre-conceived ideas about the Bible and Christian living. I dumped my secular/sacred concepts and realized that all of life is sacred. There is no "secular" for the Christian. I accepted the infallibility and inerrancy of the Scriptures and trashed the junk science of the so-called academic community. I accepted the truth and life of Entire Sanctification. I sought God on issues such as eternal security, tongues, healing, spiritual gifts and others. I would imagine that we in this forum would agree pretty much down the line on all of the things just mentioned (if we hold to a Wesleyan-Arminian position).
There were some Quakers who attended our Bible college. I would engage them in discussions about capital punishment and war and self defence. Actually, I didn't need their help on the issue of self defence. Having been Entirely Sanctified, I no longer had a spirit of retaliation and self assertion. My "violent streak" was gone. I would often find myself in situations which threatened my physical well being, but I never even thought of responding violently. (By the way, the thing that finally brought me to full surrender was my anger which would readily display itself in violent reaction to others). In all of my discussions with my Quaker friends (no I didn't stutter), I was never convinced by them to abandom my belief in the responsibility of Christians to support their government in war or executions. I finished my Bible college experience after a massive overhaul of my belief system...I was determined to abandon all that was not consistant with the New Testament. But I had not changed my beliefs about war and execution.
During the second or third year of my pastoral experience, my wife was going to be called for jury duty. Early on I had decided that I would be the best pastor I could be and that I would live my life as close to the New Testament standard as I knew how. I had decided to let God's Word and will determine my beliefs and behavior. Now I was faced with the question of, "What is the Christan response to jury duty?"
I know, maybe that seems like a no-brainer to you, but I did not take anything for granted in my Christian walk and my pastoral responsibilities. I started to search the New Testament concerning my responsibility as a citizen.
I came to understand that a RESPONSIBLE CHRISTIAN has responsibilities. We can't just obey any authority without question, unless the authority is God Himself. The Church must be obeyed when it is in line with God, parents must be obeyed when in line with God, husbands must be obeyed when in line with God and the government must be obeyed when in line with God. BUT NOT WHEN THEY ARE OUT OF LINE WITH GOD. I do not surrender my will or responsibility to anyone nor do I excuse my own behavior by placing blame on anyone else. I am accountable for my actions and no other entity will answer for my following the wrong way.
In all of my studies I found out more than I had planned, though it was exactly that for which I had bargained. I found out that coming out from among them and being separate meant more than giving up smoking and drinking and bootscooting (I never did smoke or drink anyway). I found out that my own accountability meant that I would live by a different standard that that which is followed by the State. I cannot trust anyone with my soul or my choices.
If you are still with me, you may be asking, "What does this have to do with jury duty?" Well, I pay attention to the world in which I live and I could see that often times, innocent people were found guilty. They were sentenced and sometimes executed because of a mistake made by a jury. Regardless of the excuse, it was possible for a Christian to falsly punish a person, their whole family and even the rest of society because of a mistake in judgment. Too many times the jury was deliberately not given all of the evidence, which would have resulted in a different verdict. I figured, other Christians can do what they want to, but I for one would inform the court of my convictions against killing the innocent and against being used as their tool of injustice. If I could serve without going against my own beliefs, I would serve; if they put me on the jury knowing my position, then that would be their problem. I would serve in the light of the Light I had. Pretty much, my position would exclude me from duty. Our courts are not always that interested in justice anyway.
This line of thinking led me to question the idea of obeying the State in other areas which were against my personal convictions and Bible standards. I decided to see what the New Testament said about Christians and killing for the State. Again I was brought to a 180 turn in my thinking. When studied in the light of It's own teaching, the New Testament makes it perfectly clear that Christians are not to kill in any situation. All of the arguments I am reading and hearing against nonviolence are pretty much the ones I held to myself. But they are not New Testament arguments. They are not even early church arguments. They are cultural and they are religious and erroneously based on Old Testament, but they are not New Testament arguments.
By the way, one of the most important factors in my changing my mind about this issue was my belief in holiness, perfect love, separation from the world. Holiness does not practice uncleanness and then blame the State. Perfect love does not do evil and then blame the State. Separation does not follow the world and then blame the State.
My belief is based on Scripture, but it is supported by reason. Reason does not allow a wicked man to determine whether I will kill an innocent man, whether in uniform or not. Reason does not allow for a wicked man to use anyone to kill the innocent, whether in uniform or not. The absurdity of two Christian men, from two different countries, taking up arms, facing each other and killing each other to satisfy the greed, bloodlust, political pursuits or any other demonically born reason is beyond REASON. When you kill the soldier, you rob his family of a son, a brother, a husband, a father, a grandfather. Even if we claim to do it with a clear heart, we are still a robber and a killer. Our clear conscience does not replace that loved one to his family. Oour clear conscience does not allow the unsaved for whom Jesus died, to hear the gospel and save his soul from hell, our personal attitude does not stop him from dying eternally. And the principle holds, we do not allow others to determine that we will kill any man.
If Christians had always taken this position, there would be no social holiness. Prisons would still be dens of demons, mental hospitals would still be snake pits, slavery would still be torturing men, raping women, dividing families, killing the innocent; children would still be getting abused, women would still be treated as chattel. As a matter of fact, most reforms that have taken place have taken place through Christians who resisted the immorality of the State, and usually through Holiness people who chose to suffer persecution for righteousness rather than enjoy or support the pleasures and easy way of sin. This brand of Christianity doesn't cost very much if you feel it is your responsibility to obey your government except in so-called spiritual areas. By the way, for the follower of Christ, all areas are spiritual and therefore all areas are basically subject to the verses which I offer from the New Testament. Again, I realize we are not called to save society, but holiness cannot sit back and watch people suffer. He that knoweth to do good and does not do it, to him it is sin.
Again, I do not expect my testimony to change your mind, but I thought it might be good to see where I am coming from and how I arrived at my present beliefs.
I realize that this can either open up several different threads or shut off all communications altogether. I am open to either. I am available for email communications if you prefer that.
If you have not searched the Scriptures openly, to allow God's leading into all truth, please don't discount that which many learned and righteous saints have espoused. If I am wrong, you will only have it confirmed in your study.
Thanks again for listening,
Promiselander
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
| Site Tools |
|
|
|
|
|
Verse of the Day |
|
|
