Thinking about the gruesome terrors of ISIS and other such groups who resort to 'shock and awe tactics in suppressing others...
It is easy in the wake of such horrific violence to respond with violence. It is the way of the world. It is the way we protect ourselves.
But it is not the way of Jesus. 'He who lives by the sword dies by the sword.' 'Vengeance is mine' says the Lord.
We don't like those verses because they put our lives at risk.
But for the first 3 centuries of the church, despite ISIS type persecution, the church of Christ did not strike back. They turned the other cheek. And rather than be crushed, the church flourished.
But in the 4th Century the church was co-opted by the Roman Empire. In exchange for becoming the state religion, the church embrace the way of the sword. The church sought the protection of Empire rather than the protection of Christ.
Not everyone of course, but enough that most Christians, me included, have lost the capacity to imagine a different response to violence than violence. We subscribe to the notions of 'redemptive violence' and the 'just war' theology of St. Augustine.
We desperately need to recover the imagination and courage to resort to another way. For the demise of Christianity isn't terrorism nor the sword of religious extremism. It comes when Christians abdicate the way of Christ for the sword. In doing so, we acquiesce to not believing in the power of Christ to prevail even if it costs us our lives.
How do we resist evil? Not by placating it. Nor by resorting to the weapons of this world.
We resist evil by standing against principalities and powers. By putting on the whole armour of God.
And by loving our enemies, turning the other cheek, speaking truth to power and declaring Christ's authority over the kingdoms of this world.
The New Testament makes no allowance for any other way. Jesus didn't teach that loving one's enemies, or turning the other cheek or forgiving one's enemies was optional. It is the way of Christ and when we choose some other way, it is no longer the way of Christ.
In all honesty, I wish the way of Jesus did allow for retaliation, that it did allow for an eye for an eye, but it doesn't. Without exception it doesn't.
The overwhelming message of the New Testament is that Love conquers all. That even though we are lambs being lead to slaughter we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. Note that we are conquerors not because we beat down our enemies. We are conquerers even when we die at the hands of our enemies.
What an unbelievably hard message!
No wonder Christianity has so few disciples! But for the few there are, their light can never be snuffed out, and the kingdom they advance is the only kingdom that will remain.
Oatkerexorcist and international aid organiserTop ContributorSORRY I DO NOT JESUS WAS TELLING US TO STAND BY AND LET WOMEN AND CHILDREN BE MURDERED IF THATS THE CASE WHY THEN WE DONT NEED A POLICE FORCE TO CATCH SERIAL KILLERS OR RAPISTS EITHER- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 3 days ago
VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Olanipekun and Oatker:
I appreciate your passion. But show me in Jesus words where he legitimizes the use of violence. You can't, because he doesn't.
This is why his teaching is so radical.
Why does he never justify the use of violence? For the same reason he never legitimizes selfishness. It's in us to begin with! We resort to selfishness and 'an eye for an eye' without his help. It is in our sinful nature.
But we have been redeemed and because we have Jesus teaches that for the redeemed, there is another way; a way which caters neither to greed or violence. It is the way of the cross, the way of self-sacrifice in the face of the world's preoccupation with greed; the way of making peace in the face of a world dominated by violence.
As Christians we don't need to take up the cause of interests that are already well spoken for. The military will respond regardless of what Christians say. Just as the military responded to 9-11 by attacking Iraq despite the protest of many Christians.- Delete
- 3 days ago
Rev. ONew Dawn Outreach MinistriesIf the ISIS\Gboko Haram suddenly enter your church during worship time and set the church ablased and your members were roasted to ashes as been recorded in Nigeria, and several other countries, may be Mr John will understand how we do not dialogue with the devil, the destroyer who come to kill and to destroy, rather Nehemiah method of accomplishing God agenda will be appropriate, we do not spiritualis everything there are categories of enemies let us understand the teaching on the Mount, IsIs are not the enemies of hatred and jealous the type of your brothers and sisters in Christ.- Like (1)
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 3 days ago
GaryColumbus Marriage Counseling, Conference and Seminar Speaker, Relationship CoachJohn Deacon - One simple question. Please answer it directly.
If intruders entered your home, and they began raping and beating your wife and raping and beating your children, would you stop them? And having raped and beaten your wife and all your children, the intruders began to strangle your wife and children, and you had the ability to physically stop the intruders by shooting them, (without harming your wife and children), would you do so? Would you save the lives of your wife and children as they cried out in pain, and humiliation, and fear, looking to you as the 'man of the house' to protect them?
After you have directly answered the question, please explain why you think God wanted you to do what you did (or didn't do).- Like (1)
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 3 days ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Rev. Olajuwon and Gary:
What for us is impossible, is possible with God.
For me to spell out for you how I would respond if ISIS came into our church and started beheading the congregation or would I strike back if my wife and children violated by thugs, I honestly don't know.
Like almost everything Jesus commands of us is impossible, like being born again, or laying down one's life, or selling all one's possessions to provide for the poor, or not fighting back when viciously attacked - the best I can do is speculate. I hope I would be obedient, but based on past behaviour, chances are pretty iffy I'd come through. And if I did come through, it would entirely be due to his Spirit.
If the commands of Christ weren't impossible to obey we wouldn't need his Holy Spirit.
Whether I did obey or not, is not the heart of matter here. The heart of the matter is what did Jesus teach. Just because I find obeying Christ's teaching near impossible doesn't give me the right to deny that he taught what he did.
What I do know, is the history of the first 3 centuries of the Christian Church is the story of communities of Christ followers who didn't fight back, many dying horrible deaths at the hands of people whose evil intent rivalled that of ISIS. So too the history of the Christian Church in China since 1949, which has endured untold persecution and seen exponential growth perhaps higher than any other period in history.
Those who brutally murdered Christians in the early centuries of her history are long gone, forgotten. But the church, most especially the persecuted church, prevails.
In the Civil Rights Movement of the mid 60's one of the more compelling spirituals was 'Down by the Riverside' with the lines:
'I'm goin to lay down my sword and shield down by the riverside and
Study war no more.'
For us to learn the ways of peace requires an even greater ingenuity than learning the ways of war. As back youths were being taught gospel music in the 60's like 'Down by the Riverside' they were also being taught by their churches what to do when attacked by police dogs or what to do when the KKK stands in front of your house with their cross of fire, ready to torch you and your family - gives us some evidence of what the Spirit can do to align vulnerable people with the radical teaching of Jesus.
Am I sympathetic to people who fight back? Of course I am. But is it the way the kingdom of God is either preserved or advanced? No.
'When we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.' God's prescription to combat evil hasn't changed. Leave the vengeance part to him. We are to overcome evil with good.- Delete
- 3 days ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorOne last thought and then I'm done - at least for today.
One of my favourite American theologians is Walter Wink, who in examining the Civil Rights movement and other non-violent responses to Jesus' command to not resist evil observed:
"Even if nonviolent action does not immediately change the heart of the oppressor, it does affect those committed to it.
As Martin Luther King, Jr. attested, it gives them new self-respect, and calls up resources of
strength and courage they did not know they had. To 'those who have power, Jesus' advice to the powerless may seem paltry. But to those whose lifelong pattern has been to cringe, bow, and scrape before their masters, and who have internalized their role as inferiors, this small step is momentous.
It is comparable to the attempt by black charwomen in South Africa to join together in what will be for some of them an almost insuperable step: to begin calling their employers by their first names.
These three examples amplify what Jesus means in his thesis statement: "Do not violently resist evil (or, one who is evil)."
Instead of the two options ingrained in us by thousands of years of unreflective, brute response: flight or fight, Jesus offers a third way. This new way marks a historic mutation in human development: the revolt against the principle of natural selection.
With Jesus a third way emerges by which evil can be opposed without being mirrored:
JESUS' THIRD WAY
• Seize the moral initiative
• Find a creative alternative to violence
• Assert your own humanity and dignity as a person
• Meet force with ridicule or humour
• Break the cycle of humiliation
• Refuse to submit or to accept the inferior position
• Expose the injustice of the system
• Take control of the power dynamic
• Shame the oppressor into repentance
• Stand your ground
• Make the Powers make decisions for which they are not prepared
• Recognize your own power
• Be willing to suffer rather than retaliate
• Force the oppressor to see you in a new light
• Deprive the oppressor of a situation where a show of force is effective
• Be willing to undergo the penalty of breaking unjust laws
• Die to fear of the old order and its rules"- Delete
- 3 days ago
- Rev. ONew Dawn Outreach MinistriesA super spiritual man like you should answer the questions in the scenario you described, violence took the life of our saviour, even though he can command legions of angels, but for the salvation to be accomplished, violence took the life of John the Baptist too. when violence and destruction enters your household do nothing about it.
- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 3 days ago
- GaryColumbus Marriage Counseling, Conference and Seminar Speaker, Relationship CoachAs expected, John would not directly answer the question. He is a hard-core, radical pacifist, and believes that only pacifists like him are "really" disciples of Jesus. This is the main issue in John's life (if all his posts are an indication of his life). He is truly convinced, and impervious to scripture, facts, reason, common-sense, and other arguments. Based on his ideology, he would not defend his wife, his children, his church, his community, or his country.
You will note that his description of "Jesus' Third Way" is not supported by scripture, but is merely an expression of the ideology he has adopted. There is a very good reason that the pacifist ideology has been rejected by Christians and Jews century after century, all over the world. It's because it is WRONG, and is never taught by God or Jesus WHEN IT COMES TO DEFENDING THE INNOCENT. But pacifists never make this distinction. They reject violence not only in the case self-defense, but in all cases.
And John Deacon's claim that Christians and the Church were pacifist for the first three centuries is a falsehood, and not historically correct. Here is just one weblink:http://www.rightreason.org/2012/did-early-christians-serve-in-the-army/- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 3 days ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Gary:
I'm not a pacifist, I am, militantly non-violent. And as mentioned before I am just as capable of striking back as any of Presidents Bush or Obama. But were I, I would be mirroring some other doctrine than the plain teaching of Christ.
Jesus only taught the way of loving one's enemies, turning the other cheek and praying for those who persecute us. There is nothing in his teaching about retaliation, vengeance or taking up the sword.
I don't mind your taking up your complaint with me, but in fact it is the words of Jesus himself that have you upset. He is alone in history in this teaching, and in doing so set in motion some of the great peacemakers the world has known: St. Francis, Gandhi, Bishop Tutu, Martin Luther King, just to name a few.
Thank you for pointing out that not all Christians in the first 300 years of the church forsook the sword. I stand corrected, although even in the source you sent me, there is the acknowledgement that 'turning the other cheek' was the prevailing response of the first Christians to persecution.
Taking the New Testament as our teacher, there is no record of the first disciples taking up the sword to defend the faith other than Peter's bringing a sword to Gethsemane where Jesus disarmed him.
There are millions of truer disciples to Jesus than I. Pacifists were I one, are no closer to the kingdom than are businesspeople or soldiers. What makes us close to being his disciple is taking up our cross and following him. I think we'd both agree, the cross is not a weapon. If we are carrying a cross we don't a free hand to carry a sword as well.
I really have said enough!
To close, some words from Martin Luther King are helpful given that he too had to articulate the wisdom of non-violence over violence:
"To our most bitter opponents we say: “We shall match your capacity to inflict suffering by our capacity to endure suffering. We shall meet your physical force with soul force.
Do to us what you will, and we shall continue to love you. We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws, because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good.
Throw us in jail, and we shall still love you.
Send your hooded perpetrators of violence into our community at the midnight hour and beat us and leave us half dead, and we shall still love you.
But be ye assured that we will wear you down by our capacity to suffer. One day we shall win freedom, but not only for ourselves. We shall so appeal to your heart and conscience that we shall win you in the process, and our victory will be a double victory."- Delete
- 3 days ago
AlanFounding Director Kingdom Mission, Maesai ThailandTop ContributorJohn, Gandhi was opposing a nation (Britain) which valued human life and for all of its' faults, had a Christian heritage. With ISIS there is nothing to appeal to. Actually, with many among the muslim world there is nothing to appeal to.
Look at the Palestinians and Hamas: they are prepared to sacrifice even their own women and children in their insane hatred of Israel. They vow to never have peace with Israel or us (the Western World). We are not dealing with rational mankind but with demons.
You have doubtlessly read end time scenarios and you'd be aware that ultimately God will come to Israel's aid and destroy her enemies. God is not an irrational pacifist.
Even though there is a Gospel of peace and goodwill towards man, He will not permit His children to be utterly defeated.
Would you stand by and let an aggressor kill, rape or harm your wife and children and merely fight them off with platitudes of love and tolerance or would you do as I and any other caring man would do and do everything you can to protect them? Even if that meant harming your enemy?- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 3 days ago
- Oatkerexorcist and international aid organiserTop Contributorna jesus cursed the fig tree he overturned tables he made a whip and beat the hell out off money lenders he said its better a child molester is thrown in a dam with a millstone around their neck than fall into his hands and you think he would stand back and alow a child to be murdered in front off him or a woman raped
your having a laugh- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 3 days ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Oatker:
I leave it to you to determine whether Jesus cursing the fig or overturning the tables of the money-changers invalidates his teaching about loving one's enemies. His over-turning the tables of the money changers - a deed which no doubt he'd repeat in many of our churches today - I don't think can be equated with 'his beating the hell of the money lenders.' I'm not sure what translation of the Bible you're reading, but it was the tables that were overturned. It was commerce Jesus violated, but the offenders were otherwise unscathed.
As much as many pacifists would have trouble equating Jesus actions as 'loving his enemies', that indeed was what he was doing. No doubt the money-lenders he riled on that occasion were among those who insisted on his being crucified, among those for who Jesus would pray 'Father, forgive them for they know not what they are doing.'
The verse about the millstone is equally misapplied, if only because the judgment is God's against those who offend and not ours. Were the Lord to put in our hands the judgment of all those who offend the innocent, few of us would be alive today. Again, the verse could be applied to 'child molesters', but they are a very small proportion of those Jesus is referring to. The greater proportion are those ministers whose lifestyle betrays the teaching of Jesus and their hypocrisy so grievous that it causes many new to the faith, including children, to turn away from Jesus and never return. Lord help us that those we have offended, haven't been so offended as to turn away from Him.
I have never been in a situation where a woman has been raped before me. So it is hard for me to speculate how I'd respond. I have been in the situation where I have stepped in the middle of a confrontation between a mentally challenged person and the police. I think both parties would agree that my intervention was not passive, but not violent either. It was one of those rare moments of peacemaking that made the sermon on the mount come alive for me.
Were I among the Christians facing the threat of ISIS, I honestly have no idea how I'd respond. But were I to rely on the words of Jesus and were part of a community that relied on the words of Jesus for direction, we as Christians would meet and discuss strategy much the same way as did the Freedom Riders in the Civil Rights movement. As to what we'd come up is anyone's guess. But being without weapons and nothing to protect us but the power of prayer and God's mercy, some of things we might come up are:
- to pray for those about to kill us
- to realize that we are immortal until God wants to take us home
- that to die at the hands of those given to evil, is to die as Jesus died and glorifies God
As Jesus put it, we are not to fear those who can kill the body, but fear only the One who can kill the body and the soul.- Delete
- 3 days ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Alan:
Were I a better historian a case could probably be made that the British may have been more civil in their dealings with India in the 30's and 40's than ISIS is behaving today. But the command of Jesus to love one's enemies has no condition cause - i.e. love your enemies if they are as well behaved as the British, but turn on them if they are as badly behaved as ISIS. ISIS may be near the bottom of the scale in terms of evil, but no worse than the Klu Klux Klan. At least ISIS, unlike the KKK, don't use the Bible to justify their actions.
As noted in an earlier response, I'm not sure I'm a pacifist. Nor am I sure that Jesus was a pacifist. But I do believe he was militantly non-violent. Turning the other cheek to one's enemy is hardly a passive act. So too praying for your enemies. These are acts of aggression - acts which rely on spiritual weaponry the Lord gives us rather than a gun or a knife or a club.
What acts of aggression I might commit were my wife being attacked, I am in no position to speculate about. I'd hope I'd do what Jesus would do, and if I didn't I'd be seeking as I do many times in the course of the day - his forgiveness; as well as the power to forgive the people who had wronged us.- Delete
- 3 days ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorI woke up this morning thinking something new about this subject that has some bearing on the subject of overcoming one's enemies by love.
Jesus knew from the moment his ministry went public that he had come to die. For three years he was repeatedly threatened and in no instance did he ever threaten back. He knew his hour would come, but until then his mission, though greatly opposed, would continue until he had fulfilled all that his Father had asked of him.
So too the first disciples. They too knew that awaiting each one was 'the hour' when their mission would be finished and their death would glorify God. Stephen knew this when he was stoned to death, James knew this when he was executed, Peter knew this when he was crucified upside down and Paul knew this when he was beheaded.
Each of us in serving God know that ahead of us is 'the hour' and the time between now and then is to be occupied with our doing what God has called us to do. If we don't know that, we need to remind ourselves.
However it is that we are to glorify God in our dying, whether by cancer, by malnutrition, or at the hands of an executioner, 'the hour' is the hour of God's choosing and not a minute too soon.- Delete
- 3 days ago
AlanInterim Minister at Exton Community Baptist ChurchOne of the Nazi leaders, during the final years of World War II, declared, "You can never defeat us because the only way you can defeat us is to become like us and then we will still have won." It is a cautionary word for anyone who feels justified to abandon Love in the face of ISIS or whatever current manifestation of evil rises up.- Unlike
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 3 days ago
- Oatkerexorcist and international aid organiserTop Contributorso what you are saying is all those soldiers airmen that fought and died
defeating the nazis were just like them
THAT IS SHOCKING YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OFF YOURSELF
I HAVE NEVER HERD THE LIKE
were those who died building the japanese railway in malaya like their captors too
what about all those who died and became disabled and still are from the korean war are they
like the north koreans
this is the most disgraceful thing i have ever seen written by a christian an a great slur on our armed services- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 3 days ago
- AlanFounding Director Kingdom Mission, Maesai ThailandTop ContributorAlan, Dietrich Bonhoffer started out thinking like you but ultimately the crimes against humanity by the Nazis, caused him to change his stance and actions. If you and I are prepared to eat the fruits of liberty and democracy then surely we should feel compelled to put our lives on the line against those who would seek to destroy and snatch them from our midst.
Blessings, Alan- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 3 days ago
- AlanInterim Minister at Exton Community Baptist ChurchI completely support the idea of putting my life on the line most prominently for my faith. I have chosen to not participate in the taking of the life of another. In other words, I am willing to die for my faith, but not to kill for it. And, Oatker, I do not accept your putting words into my mouth. What I am saying is that in the 2000 years of church history there have been regular appearances of persons who were willing to die but not to kill. Martin Luther King, Jr., made a similar declaration when he said, "Hatred cannot defeat hatred. Only love can do that." I am certainly not the first to feel this way. . . and I am not ashamed of it.
- Unlike
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 3 days ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Alan:
I love Dietrich Bonhoeffer. I have read and re-read all of his writings, particularly loving his books 'Life Together' and 'The Cost of Discipleship.' His 'Letters from Prison' have profoundly affected my life. His 'Cost of Discipleship' very much influences my understanding and application of the Sermon on the Mount, as evident in prior entries.
I do know that he was part of the plot instigated by his brother in law and others to assassinate Hitler in the early 40's, for which he was imprisoned and ultimately hung 3 weeks before the end of the war in Europe.
Whether his allegiance to those who tried unsuccessfully to assassinate Hitler was more familial than theological, we can only speculate. Being a member of Germany's aristocracy, his family had unique access to the power elite in Germany and from that close proximity felt that were Hitler killed, the deaths of untold millions would be prevented.
In my thinking - and Lord who am I to judge! - Bonhoeffer's break with his theology surrounding Jesus' teaching re: loving one's enemies; is akin to Paul's break with his theology when he submits to animal sacrifice and Old Testament purification rites in Acts 21:18-26; and Abraham's break with his faith when he submits to Sarah's entreaty to sleep with Hagar, rather than wait for the son God had promised.
Most of our disobedience occurs when we lose faith in God's being able to do as promised, when he seems to be moving slower than we think he should or wonder if somehow he's forgotten us.
In his 'Letters from Prison' Bonhoeffer affirms his earlier teaching on the Sermon on the Mount and acknowledges his participation in the plot to overthrow Hitler a contradiction of the same. It is rare in his life that such a contradiction occurs, but name one Christian for whom that contradiction doesn't occur at least once. For me it is at leadt once daily!
Had Bonhoeffer lived long enough to see the great gains made by his friend Gandhi in the years following the war, his faith in the Lord's teaching about 'turning the other cheek' would have been revived. But like many godly Germans who resisted Nazism for their entire adult lives, he had been worn down such that as he confessed 'we have become silent witnesses of evil deeds.'
However one understands Jesus' command to 'resist not evil', it never means to be silent when evil is on the rise. It's how we respond after we've identified it, that matters.- Delete
- 2 days ago
- GaryColumbus Marriage Counseling, Conference and Seminar Speaker, Relationship CoachAlan - yet somehow, we DID defeat the Nazi's, and we DIDN'T become like them. The statement (if it was ever made) was false.
And if we fail to defend the innocent and defenseless, then we have truly "abandoned love."- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 2 days ago
OlanipekunPersonal Assistant at Foursquare Gospel ChurchEvery one of the Judges/deliverer that God used in the book of Judges were raised to defeat a form of evil force like ISIS, Jephthah, Gideon, Samson, and many that God used for the Israelites were ordinary men who became a vessel for God's use. They raised an army to confront the enemies as the Lord helped them. David had mighty men in 2 Sam 23:8-39, all these are men who stood with David to confront different evils of there time. Let us pray that God will defeat ISIS (a force from the Assyrian empire- Sennacherib) the way he defeated the armies of Sennacherib. May the Lord raise up men and women who are ready to fight ISIS until there is no more soldier of ISIS in Syria, Iraq or any other part of the Middle East. Amen.- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 2 days ago
- Oatkerexorcist and international aid organiserTop Contributorit is disgusting to say those who fought the nazis became nazis
i think this is cowardice trying to defend its self
did not our god help even a boy kill goliath
personally i hope the usa bombs isis to hell and boka haram
it is incredulous to believe that these little cowards would just let peadophiles rape their kids and murder their wives
they are as bad as jehovah witnesses who would let their children die for lack off a transfusion
it says no cowards will enter the kingdom off heaven
not my words but gods
i am glad about that
some people make me feel sick- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 2 days ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Olanipekun:
The days of the Judges are over. For it is the Son of God that all the Old Testament points to and now that he has come and all authority given to him, his triumph over evil is not staked with a sword, but a cross. He died and in his death, he wins.
As morbid as this sounds, the church advances when those called by His name, lay down their lives as Christ did his. To repeat the MLK quote that Alan Selig has posted:
"Hatred cannot defeat hatred. Only love can do that." Or to re-phrase Paul, 'evil can't overcome evil, only goodness can.'
For those of us who derive their life direction from 'what would Jesus do?', Jesus would do what he has asked us to do: 'love our enemies', 'turn the other cheek'. 'pray for those who want to hurt us' and 'not repay evil with evil.'- Delete
- 2 days ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Gary:
If only what you were saying was true.
America has been tainted by Nazism in the emergence of white supremacy and neo-nazi groups responsible for more terrorism on American soil than groups sympathetic to Al Qeada. The growth in the US military expenditure to such extremes that America spends more on defence than the the next five countries combined mirrors that of Germany in the mid 1930's. Were even just 10% of the US military budget directed to the poor, every homeless person in America would be housed and have adequate food and health care.
The means of torture developed by the Gestapo has been replicated in both America and in Russia - so again, we have become more like them than we'd care to admit.
The compliance of the Evangelical German Church to forsake the ways of Jesus for the rule of law and military might has again been replicated in America so again, the Nazi influence has tainted more than we'd like to admit.
Watch most American cinema especially its blockbuster movies and the myth of Nietzsche's superman lives on. We know from the gospels that God is for the weak. But Nazism despises the weak and again that has influenced us far more than we'd admit. We have lost any notion of what courage it takes to be peacemaker and whenever anyone appeals to taking that route, they are ridiculed for being naive. Give us Rambo over Jesus, the AK47 over the cross.- Delete
- 2 days ago
- GaryColumbus Marriage Counseling, Conference and Seminar Speaker, Relationship CoachI'm not sure how best to converse with someone who lives in a parallel universe, politically and historically. I also don't know how to discuss morals with someone who believes Jesus taught that we should absolutely not resort to violence, even as a last resort to prevent our own wives and children from suffering unspeakable depravity at the hands of violent intruders. I just don't see much common ground for discussion. I'll just end with this quote from the article I referenced above, which you said you did read.
"Christians pacifism may have arguments to be made in its favour. I do not think the argument about “turning the other cheek” is a good argument, as I explained recently. What I want people to take away after reading this article, however, is that the historical argument too must be rejected. In its popular form – claiming that the first few centuries of Christian history were pacifist until Constantine – the claim should be laughed out of town as utterly preposterous. It is quickly whittled down by the facts to a very modest claim: We do know of Christian soldiers in the first century, and from that time until about AD 173, none are specifically named as Christian soldiers, which is not historically significant. When Christianity spread more and more among soldiers, some Church Fathers – although very few – spoke out against military service. Their reasons were not always clear, and certainly pacifist concerns are not always at the forefront. And while these few voices were speaking out, Christians continued, just as they had before, to take part in the military as soldiers and officers.
The strong pacifist narrative of early Christian history is simply, emphatically and demonstrably untrue, and I dare say more the product of ideology and wishful thinking than the study of the facts."
Glenn Peoples- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 2 days ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Gary:
I think you have done well to converse with someone whose opinion differs from you.
We can't possibly agree because you think the commands of Jesus: to love our enemies, to turn the other cheek to those who abuse us and to not strike back when we have been stricken are optional rather than mandatory. As I have repeatedly said, they are mandatory regardless of whether we think them possible or not. Just as mandatory as being born again, or believing in his resurrection or taking up one's cross.
When John the Baptist was imprisoned, did Jesus send in the troops? Did he write Caesar to protest the wanton behaviour of the king who had John wrongly put in prison? When Stephen was being stoned to death, did the early Christians form a militia to rescue him?
The most obvious reason as to why the early Christians didn't resort to the sword to rescue their own is because of what they had discovered at the cross, that first Good Friday nearly 2000 years ago.
As the American theologian John Howard Yoder put it in his seminal book 'The Politics of Jesus':
"Here at the cross is the man who loves his enemies, the man whose righteousness is greater than that of the Pharisees, who being rich became poor, who gives his robe to those who took his cloak, who prays for those who despitefully use him. The cross is not a detour or a hurdle on the way to the kingdom, nor is it even the way to the kingdom; IT IS THE KINGDOM COME...
"Jesus was not just a moralist whose teachings had some political implications; he was not primarily a teacher of spirituality whose public ministry unfortunately was seen in a political light; he was not just the sacrificial lamb preparing for his immolation, or a God-Man whose divine status calls us to disregard his humanity. Jesus was, in his divinely mandated (i.e. promised, anointed, messianic) prophethood, priesthood and kingship, the bearer of a new possibility of human, social and therefore political relationships. His baptism is the inauguration and his cross the culmination of that new regime in which his disciples are called to share."
We can't "avoid his call to an ethic marked by a cross, a cross identified as the punishment of a man who threatens society by creating a new kind of community leading a radically new way of life."
When we do as Christ did, we give evidence to the world around us of a new kind of community leading a radically different new way of life. We become the visible evidence of his 'new creation' which reconciles rather than retaliates, forgives rather than seeks retribution, and loves rather than hates those determined to rid this new creation from the earth.
This new creation is stronger than death because its king is stronger than death and obedience to his commands is stronger than death.
So Gary rather than consign me to a parallel universe, remind yourself and your Christian brothers and sisters that we belong to a new creation where to love as Jesus loved is the only thing that matters.- Delete
- 2 days ago
valentine--John and fellow believers
The truth is that ISIS are fighting established authority and the citizenry which includes Christians. They are a force of evil tampering fearlessly with God's creation agenda and trying to cut off people's destiny. One of the reasons for the existence of government is to uphold and reward good while punishing evil. Therefore, the question, seriously, is not about turning the other cheek, it is about the preservation of human progenity which is a non-negotiable duty of God's stewards whom Paul calls AVENGERS in Romans 13:1-4, In otherwords, God has given the government(AVENGER) power to execute wrath on those who practice evil like ISIS.
The above scripture indicates that ISIS should not have the benefit of the other cheek and those who execute judgement on them (including Christians in government) will be doing what is expected of them by God. QED!- Like (1)
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 2 days ago
- Oatkerexorcist and international aid organiserTop Contributorwhat is the difference between a policeman with a gun and a soldier or a civilian protecting his home
in truth nothing
should we get rid off the police
the result would be anarchy
the law off the jungle
the strongest taking all the weakest dieing- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 2 days ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Valentine:
Your use of Romans 13:1-4 is identical to that employed by the German Evangelical Church in the 1930's to justify its obedience to the the 3rd Reich. It is the interpretation that says we are to obey those God puts in authority regardless.
If you think that I mean by 'resist not evil' that we make no attempt to thwart the wheels of injustice, then your concern is justified.
It's the how we thwart injustice that is the issue here. The way of the world is to fight fire with fire, and if possible obliterate the enemy.
But that's the way of Jesus. He calls us to resist by turning the other cheek. He calls us to resist evil by walking aside our captors and win some over in the relationship that ensues. We are to pray for those who persecute us and to love those who are out to destroy us. These are not my words but Christ's and they are irrevocable, they are unconditional, they are the way he lived.
To believe in Christ is to believe his love is more powerful than hatred no matter how well armed and dangerous hatred is.
Greater is he who is in us than all the evil in the world. Greater the cross than the sword. Indeed the sword is no match for the cross. He who brings justice to victory does so not by military might. The cross is his kingdom come.
And so he calls Christians to be the evidence of God's new creation even while fully entrenched in his old creation. We are to be the new humanity, his humanity, the community working by his love in the midst of the old humanity which works by envy, lust, greed, adultery, murder and theft.
The issue that began this conversation was not 'how does the world overcome ISIS?' but 'how do we as Christians overcome ISIS?'
We overcome ISIS the only way Christians has overcome their enemies. 'Though we face death daily and are as lambs being led to slaughter, we are more than conquerors through Him who loves us.'- Delete
- 2 days ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Oatker:
Police would be the first to tell you. They don't rid the world of evil. The best they can do is try to contain it. We appreciate their efforts, but the fight to overturn evil is ultimately in the hands of the good. And the good are those powered by the Spirit to live as Jesus lived.
Only love conquers evil.- Delete
- 2 days ago
- AlanFounding Director Kingdom Mission, Maesai ThailandTop ContributorJohn this may be Old Testament (and I do fully know and understand the message of grace) but there is incident after incident of God sending Israel to war against their enemies. He tells them on occasion to completely destroy every man, woman, child and animal. He sent a flood to wipe out mankind (apart from Noah and family). This is still our God and He is clearly not a pacifist.
Our God made Hell for the fallen angels and later fallen mankind. This is not a pleasant place. Not only does God inflict mankind with death after the fall of Adam but for those who refuse Christ, eternal death and suffering.
God will ultimately strike down the enemies of Israel. Is this the act of a pacifist?
Yes. We know Jesus showed us a preferable way to live but He also showed us that He had come to bring a sword.
The Bible says that Jesus (and by implication the Father and the Holy Spirit) is the same yesterday, today and forever. He also put into the nature of man the instinct to fight for and protect their loved ones. He is not a pacifist and He didn't create us as pacifists in these extreme situations either.
Chamberlain tried to appease Hitler and came unstuck. If we try to appease ISIS, or any other demonically controlled enemy, we will have the same impact as Chamberlain. Yes, it is good and to be expected that we pray but we are also called upon to do something in these situations, such as take up arms when necessary.
One of the greatest threats to the church is the appeasement of other faiths through false institutions like Chrislam. We can never lie in bed with Satan's falsehoods and expect to survive.
Blessings, Alan- Like (1)
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 2 days ago
- AlanFounding Director Kingdom Mission, Maesai ThailandTop ContributorAlan I can appreciate your views re. the taking of life and would similarly find it odious but I believe in my heart that Jesus at times requires us to take a physical stand against the enemies of mankind: in this instance ISIS.
Blessings, Alan J.- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 2 days ago
AndrewResident Priest at St. Marks Church- Badulla"Silence in the face of Evil is itself evil. God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak and not to act is to act" - Deitrich Bonhoeffer. We must pray that somebody acts fast...as we discuss here somebody is massacred over there.- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 1 day ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Andrew:
I couldn't agree more. To quote Dietrich Bonhoeffer again in his remorse over the lack of resistance from the German Evangelical Church to Nazism: 'We have been silent witnesses of evil deeds.'
Light exposes darkness and the works of darkness. So yes - both truth and justice demands the speaking up on behalf of the victims.
But to speak up and expose the works of darkness is not to then employ the works of darkness to overcome it.
To overcome darkness means employing the weapons which bring light - which again are spiritual and not material, based on the superiority of the cross over the sword. The sword of men can never overcome darkness. Only grace and truth can.
We are to overcome darkness the same way Jesus did - to testify against it and then to love as he did, both his enemies and his friends.- Delete
- 1 day ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Alan Jones:
You would be a rare person to fully understand the message of grace. For my appeal that we concede to the tactics Jesus has taught us with regard to confronting our enemies, is totally reliant on grace. It is recognition that the law of Moses is not incapable of making us righteous, it is incapable in enabling us to do as Jesus commands. Only the 'Spirit of life in Christ Jesus can set us free' not only from the law of sin and death but free/empowered to do as Jesus commands.
That's why when Christians argue that we should resort to the sword to defend the faith, we are denying not only what Jesus commanded but the Spirit of Life he has given us who empowers us to love our enemies.
This is good news for which there is no Old Testament equivalent. The Spirit of God was withheld from working within God's people until Christ's death on the cross. Now that Christ has prevailed over sin and death, His Spirit is free to work within his people 'to will and act in order to fulfil his good purpose.' (Philippians 2:13) The role of the Old Testament is to be both schoolmaster and guardian to lead us to Christ (Galatians 3). But now that Christ has come, the New Covenant has been ushered in to stay and the old is vanishing away (Hebrews 8:13)
The command God gave to Joshua and his troops to completely wipe out all his enemies applies to the Old Testament only, when the people of God were identified by geographical borders, ethnic origin and obedience to a law which no one could fulfil.
But now that the people of God are not identified by geographic borders or by ethnicity or by obedience to the law of Moses; and instead are defined by a faith and grace which has no ethnic or geographic boundaries and are empowered by the same Spirit who raised Jesus from the dead, we live differently as Jesus lived differently relying not on the sword but on the Spirit and the cross to prevail.- Delete
- 1 day ago
- Oatkerexorcist and international aid organiserTop ContributorGOD IS NOT A GOD OFF ANARCHY THAT IS S ATAN
THE GOD THAT WANTS CHAOS IS SATAN
OUR GOD IS A GOD OFF LAW AND ORDER
SOMETIMES THIS HAS TO BE ENFORCED- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 1 day ago
- GaryColumbus Marriage Counseling, Conference and Seminar Speaker, Relationship CoachI don't think Jesus' commands are optional. I think you don't understand them, and that you misunderstand them, misapply them, and mis-teach them. And I think that's why you refuse to answer direct questions. Since this is the end of our conversation, I would ask that you not mischaracterize my position again. And just for the sake of your own integrity, answer the questions I asked you.
- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 1 day ago
- AlanInterim Minister at Exton Community Baptist ChurchTo speak, to act, to stand against evil and violence, I agree with these declarations. But as others have said I believe we are called as disciples of Jesus Christ to do this without resorting to violence and killing ourselves. I appreciate the comments offered in this thread, even those with which I disagree.
- Unlike
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 1 day ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Oatker:
If my question had been 'how should governments respond?' I'd concur entirely with your opinion. But my question was addressed to us as Christians, for whom the overcoming of evil is what we do, or at least should be doing. Which we do by overcoming evil with good (Romans 12:21).
Specific to ISIS and Iraq and who is to be enforcer - speaking of this in an entirely geo-political context separate from what Christians are called to do.
ISIS became possible with the US invasion of Iraq. As brutal a dictator as Saddam Hussein was, he kept extremist groups like ISIS in check.
But with the US invasion of Iraq, which we now know was instigated by the US on the false pretext of Iraq's having weapons of mass destruction, Iraq's infrastructure as corrupt as it was, was obliterated to the extent that the country can no longer contain radical militant groups like ISIS. The devil that was Saddam Hussein has been replaced by seven demons worse.
When the US or any other superpower exercises jurisdiction beyond its own borders by use of military force, especially on false pretext, the consequences without exception are disastrous. There are destabilized countries throughout the world whose current volatility has more to do with the power games between the big boys among nations, than anything they've done. In Africa and Latin America especially.
Think for one minute of what agonies the peoples of Africa would have been spared, if not for colonialism and the slave trade.
God will judge the nations and we shouldn't be too surprise if His judgments of countries like Canada, Britain and the US may be as severe as any, because of our propensity to exploit rather than to care, and to be bullies rather than friends.- Delete
- 1 day ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Gary:
How do you interpret loving your enemies?
How do you interpret turning the other cheek?
How do you interpret praying for those who persecute you?
How do you interpret that those who take up the sword will die by the sword?
How do you interpret that when John the Baptist was beheaded Jesus didn't intervene?
How do you interpret that when Stephen was being stoned, the Christians didn't assemble a small army to rescue him?
God is our only defence as well as the defender of all who are powerless.
This is what matters. Not what I might do if my wife were attacked.
Our faith and the application of it are based on what Jesus taught, not on what you or I choose to do with it.
Search all of what Jesus said and you will not find a word he said which legitimizes Christians taking vengeance on their enemies, or forming armies to defend themselves. He never gives his followers this option.
Never.
He never took up a weapon to defend himself. So neither do we if we are to follow him. 'Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did.' (1 John 2:6)
The only thing he allows us to carry is a cross, which was the weapon of execution employed against him and through which he overcame all evil. This was his means. And it is ours.
In doing so, God is glorified.- Delete
- 1 day ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorIt is essential to acknowledge the simplicity of Christ's commands when they are simple.
Some are so straightforward, they are as self-evident as 'don't cross the street.'
If Jesus were to tell me not to cross the street and I choose to cross the street, it's not my interpretation of what he asks that is at fault, it is my unwillingness to obey him.
The commands Jesus gives us to:
- not look at a woman lustfully and
- to divorce a woman for reasons other than sexual immorality, and
- to not make vows, and
- to not resist an evil person, and
- to turn the other cheek, and
- to walk a 2nd mile with one's adversary, and
- to give to anyone who asks, and
- to not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from us, and
- to love our enemies and
- pray for those who hate us and
- to be kind to both the unjust and the just,
are as simple for us to understand as being asked not to cross the street.
If we choose not to do those things, the issue is not our interpretation of his commands, it is our unwillingness to obey him.
As anyone who has tried to follow Jesus for more than 20 minutes has discovered, the issue is not how to interpret what he asks of us, the hard part is doing what he asks. If it were easy we wouldn't need His Holy Spirit.
But because his commands are hard, we are inclined to make excuses as though the problem is how we interpret what he is asking us, when in fact the problem is our unwillingness to obey him.
As GK Chesterton observed: "It is not that Christianity has been tried and found wanting, it has been found difficult and left untried."
Let's stop making excuses and hiding behind the smoke screen of 'your interpretation, my interpretation' and let's work at being obedient to his commands, most of all when they're hard.- Delete
- 1 day ago
- GaryColumbus Marriage Counseling, Conference and Seminar Speaker, Relationship CoachVirtually all of Christendom disagrees with you, and almost all of Christendom has disagreed with you for over 1900 years. Somehow, all of Christendom misunderstood Jesus Christ - except you and a few like you. If I thought you would be convinced by scripture, or facts, or reason, or anecdote, or history, or by the teachings of the church fathers, or the pope, or the Reformation Fathers, I might dialogue with you. Since you have convinced me that this is a waste of time, I again graciously decline further interaction. Good bye, and best wishes.
- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 1 day ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Gary:
You're leaving without providing one word from Jesus justifying the use of violence? I'm disappointed but not surprised.
If there was one you would have provided it by now, so I can only assume that in not finding one you've moved on.
Do appreciate your input!
God be with you.
Thanks again!- Delete
- 1 day ago
- AlanFounding Director Kingdom Mission, Maesai ThailandTop ContributorJohn you did not address my contention that if Jesus (plus Father and Holy Spirit) is the same yesterday, today and forever and that He killed His enemies in the past, that He now has no objection to His children today taking up the sword when necessary. (a bit convoluted) The scriptures show very clearly that God is not a pacifist as you suggest.
What do you make of Matthew 10:34 where Jesus says 'Think not that I am come to send peace on the earth: I came not to send peace but a sword.'
or Isaiah 59:19 .....When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the Lord shall lift up a standard against Him. (Remember- Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today and forever..)
What about Revelation 20:7-9 when Satan is loosed and Satan, Gog and Magog come out against God's children and the beloved city (Jerusalem) It says very clearly that FIRE CAME DOWN FROM GOD, OUT OF HEAVEN, AND DEVOURED THEM.!
John this is New Testament loud and clear. Our God is no namby pamby pacifist. He has destroyed and will destroy, the enemies of His people. That is Scripture!
What do you have to say about this please?
Blessings, Alan- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 1 day ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Alan:
The short answer to your question is Romans 12:17-21
Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone.
If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,”says the Lord. On 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.”
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
Wrath, vengeance, judgement is God's business, not ours. 'Do not repay evil for evil' is unconditional. We are to love our enemies regardless of how evil and leave vengeance to the Lord. Needless to say, this principle is repeated throughout the New Testament and captured beautifully in Jesus parable about the wheat and tares. (Matthew 13:24-30)
As to the verse from Matthew 10:34 - what is that principle we learn in Bible school ' "Context, context, context?"
The sword referred to here is hardly the rationale for our taking vengeance. Otherwise it would be rationale for our killing those of our family who have chosen not to believe.
The context for Matthew 10:34 is below:
Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn
“‘a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’
“Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it." Matthew 10:34-39.
The Lord does place a sword that affects familial relations. Our allegiance to him pre-empts everything else: love of family, love of country, love of business. Everything. No relationship we have with anyone is to hold precedent over our obedience and love for him. Any Christian worth his/her salt knows that sword well!
Here again the Lord is emphasizing the priority of the cross over the sword. We find our lives by losing them, most especially when we are losing them on the same basis Jesus lost his, at the hands of our enemies.
So Alan, the New Testament loud and clear is 'love your enemies, don't repay evil with evil, but overcome evil with good.' "Vengeance is mine," says the Lord.
One last comment - the problem people have with pacifism is we dissociate it with heroism. We love Rambo more than we love Gandhi. It is endemic to our culture. The right to bear arms is esteemed higher in our society than the Lord's command to lay our arms aside.
Pacifism as evident in the non-violent movements of the US civil rights movement in the 60's, in Eastern Europe in the late 80's and in South Africa in the 90's - is hardly 'namby, pamby' stuff.
We need other heros than just war heros. There are many peacemaking heros in history, there are many in our time.
There has never been a time in history where they aren't more desperately needed than in ours!- Delete
- 1 day ago
- Oatkerexorcist and international aid organiserTop ContributorNA SORRY BOMB ISIS TO HELL
THIS EVIL WANTS WIPING OFF THE EARTH IN FACT ALL ISLAM DOES- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 17 hours ago
JimEquipping Believers at Independent MinistriesWith every persecution comes an opportunity to advance the kingdom of God. Thousands of Muslims refugees in camps are open to learning about Jesus and a God that gives life and loves us verses one that destroys, kills, and imposes terror - One problem - There are not enough workers. Pray the Lord of the Harvest to send workers (volunteers are accepted.)- Unlike
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 16 hours ago
- AlanFounding Director Kingdom Mission, Maesai ThailandTop ContributorJohn, I am Australian, not American. Ironically as a nation who have been spectacular on the battlefield in many conflicts (considering the smallness of our population) our two greatest heroes are a man called Simpson of Gallipoli fame (World War 1) and Edward (Weary) Dunlop, a prisoner of the Japanese on the Burma Railway in WW 2.Both of these men were medical men, active in saving the lives of many others.
John, I do not overlook the heroic exploits of the Gandhis of this world and can salute them, along with you but you must bear in mind who they were opposing. Gandhi would have known the British propensity for not taking innocent life. The Christian roots of America, U.K. and Commonwealth countries shaped our nations to be largely merciful to the innocent. But in ISIS, Hamas, Hezbollah etc. we are not dealing with a similar mindset. These people are proven to destroy their own children for their cause, let alone yours or mine.
John, you addressed the point I made in Matthew, but how do you rationalise the one I quoted from Revelation? God will destroy the enemies of Israel and His children, with balls of fire from Heaven. That is future tense, not past. Our God is a warrior not a pacifist.
Blessings,
Alan- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 14 hours ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Oatker:
Reading your latest entry reminded of a passage from Luke 9:51-56
Now it came to pass, when the time had come for Him to be received up, that He steadfastly set His face to go to Jerusalem, and sent messengers before His face. And as they went, they entered a village of the Samaritans, to prepare for Him. 53 But they did not receive Him, because His face was set for the journey to Jerusalem. 54 And when His disciples James and John saw this, they said, “Lord, do You want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them, just as Elijah did?”
But He turned and rebuked them, and said, “You do not know what manner of spirit you are of. For the Son of Man did not come to destroy men’s lives but to save them."- Delete
- 14 hours ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Alan:
Let God be the avenger, not us. Isn't that what the passage from Romans 12:19-21 commands of us?
Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it is written, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,” says the Lord.
Therefore
“If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
If he is thirsty, give him a drink;
For in so doing you will heap coals of fire on his head.”
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.- Delete
- 14 hours ago
- AlanFounding Director Kingdom Mission, Maesai ThailandTop ContributorWell then, clearly God is an avenger. That means a call to arms could not be construed as something against His nature.
On a personal level, I agree with you, that God wants us at peace with those around us and we are called upon to love those who do inconvenient things towards us personally. But, I believe you are ignoring the larger picture where armies come against our nations or gangs of killers, we are to stand against them in a righteous battle, as God Himself has done in the past and as scripture says He will again do in the future.
Blessings, Alan- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 14 hours ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Alan:
God is the Avenger, but we can't assume what form his revenge with take. He avenged the stoning of Stephen by converting Stephen's chief and venomous adversary, Saul.
It is not out of the realm of possibility that a Saul is currently within the ranks of ISIS.
ISIS as bad they, are no more evil than the KKK has been and look what converts have emerged from their ranks.
Our interpretations of the Revelation probably differ as much as our interpretation of what Jesus means by 'loving our enemies.' That is a separate discussion.
I would argue that in the Revelation, there is no reference to God's people killing anyone. The destruction of evil and the revelation of God's Holy City are entirely God's doing. We have no part in it but to be faithful and to worship the Lion of Judah who is the Lamb slain. The ones who are spoken of as overcoming in the Revelation overcome not by their use of the sword but 'by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, and they did not love their lives to the death.' Revelation 12:10,11
It is a mystery that the One who is 'the death of death and hell's destruction' is the Lamb slain. I would argue that the means by which the Living One gains the keys of death and hell, i.e. the cross, is the means by which he will overcome all evil. Death is swallowed up by the Living One.
As Paul writes:
So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written: “Death is swallowed up in victory."
O Death, where is your sting?
O Hades, where is your victory?” 1 Corinthians 15:54,55
If we overcome evil by doing good (Romans 12:21) is it not possible that the ultimate destruction of evil is its being swallowed up by goodness in the victory of Christ, the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world?- Delete
- 57 minutes ago
- valentine--John
I strongly disagree with your comment regarding my use of Roman 13: 1-4 to justify government action against ISIS. Can you tell me what criteria Paul is using in these verses to enlighten us as to which governments may be considered as legitimate or not?
Now, back to the issue that began this conversation, namely 'how do we as Christians overcome ISIS?' not 'how does the world overcome ISIS?'
According to you, we overcome ISIS the only way Christians overcome their enemies, which is by accepting to face death daily as lambs being led to the slaughter, and being 'more than conquerors through Him who loves us.'
First of all, the distinction you seek to make between Christian believers and non believers is artificial. We both share the same physical environment, breathe the same air and drink the same water and even join the same police force and military. We share the same problem of survival under the threat of ISIS. Common problems call for common solution, hence my evocation of the role of government.
You can see why I have to disagree with you on this point - the only way Christians overcome their enemies is not by volunteering their throats to be slashed so they can become martyrs. God has a purpose for each of His children and a destiny that they must fulfil, which in turn affects many other destinies. We have the responsibility to discern the intentions of our enemies and to cooperate with God to make His expectations, and not those of our enemies materialise. Starting from Jesus in His infancy, His family had to remove Him from the sight of the Herods. When He grew older, the religious leaders wanted to ambush and kill Him prematurely, What did he do? Stay there and turn the other cheek? No, He slipped away from their evil hands until it was time for Him to lay down His life for us.Until the time of His immolation, Jesus went about praying, teaching, preaching and healing thereby expanding the Kingdom of God.His destiny could have been compromised, and ours by implication, had His enemies been allowed to carry out their enterprise.
The lesson to learn here is that, except God has specifically made it clear to you as a Christian that He wants you to die(presumably by beheading) in the hands of ISIS, He expects you to seek protection from your government or others when forces of evil put your life on their radar (Jesus' family escaped to Egypt). That was the wisdom of God. One of the most powerful weapons in the hand of the Christian is warfare prayers. Rather than wait to turn the other cheek, christians need to use these to dethrone the invisible hosts of darkness leading ISIS.
Again, this is where Paul's admonition comes into context. When we pray for governments, God can use the rulers to inflict vengeance on the wicked, which in this case is ISIS. I believe this to be the intention and will of God - a just Judge who is angry with the wicked EVERYDAY! Psalm 7:11.He is the same, yesterday and forever.Hebrews 13:8.
My suggestion, therefore, is that rather than callously hang around to cheaply hand their lives over to a ruthless enemy, who wants to mess with God's programme on His people's destiny in life, Christians ought to take sensible measures such as praying strategically which includes asking God to strengthen the protecting government forces, and also to send His own army of warriors (He has them all over the world) to cut off the enemy, and by so doing,frustrate his devices so that his hand cannot carry out his plan. Job 5:17.
Please, let us be wise.- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 56 minutes ago
Rev.SheriffPastor and founderVery simple steps 1. America should stop selling weapons and stand up for what is right irrespective of who is involve, 2. The christians should stand up to what they preach and not hidding under the old testment and stop supporting wrong doing by identity. let Israel give Palestains their freedom AND lets see their excuse 3. The church should start praying and talk less. the bible was not given to us for destruction but for the edification of the body of Christ. Jesus came to unite the world with the father for us to destory ourselves in the name of religion, I see religious war coming up sooner than you think. The build up of ISIS is becoming a religious war and what is happen in Israel is one of them.- Like
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 48 minutes ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Sheriff:
I love your 3 simple steps and concur with them entirely.
Not sure what your concluding two sentences mean.
Could you explain?- Delete
- 20 minutes ago
- VP at Deacon Insurance Agencies LimitedTop ContributorDear Valentine:
You have provided a well articulated refutation of my arguments.
If I understand you correctly, you are insisting that within the Christian's arsenal is not only to petition for God's intervention but the intervention of governments as well - as Martin Luther King petitioned to the US government in addition to leading his non-violent troops into places like Selma and Birmingham.
Fair enough. I'd concur entirely with your point.
But using the Dr. King example, had the US government responded to his request by offering to arm members of the civil rights movement rather than to offer them 'federal' protection, do you think Dr. King would have acquiesced?
I don't think so.
In my opinion he would have chosen to continue his non-violent protest regardless of whether he and his followers had the protection of federal troops.
Which lies at the heart of my argument.
How do we as Christians respond regardless of whether we are protected or not? Jesus could have sought the protection of a heavenly troop, but he knew that to bring about his kingdom, his only means was the cross.
However, we are not called to be fools..
Had we all accepted the stance of love and not the sword in W.W.2 we would all be talking with German and Japanese accents and suppressing all of the values we cherish.
It is too simplistic (I believe) to do nothing when our women, children and faith are being assaulted by an enemy who will not submit to reason. The main enemy of life as we know it is the Muslim World. (I understand there are many non violent and well intentioned among them but their voices are not being heard.)
How will Jesus react to the armies of Russia and Islam who will come against Israel (and in the not too distant future)? If I read things correctly God will destroy the enemies of Israel. Does that sound passive to you? It certainly doesn't sound passive to me.
When Nehemiah rebuilt the walls of Jerusalem, with the ancestors of ISIS hovering around, it was with a trowel in one hand and a sword in the other.
Blessings, Alan
The Bible has a verdict on the type of behaviour being displayed by ISIS. It is found in Romans 13: 1- 4.
'Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.'
Jesus turned the other cheek at His trial but only because it was to an established authority. And He correctly said that if the authority had not been given to the government of the day, He Jesus would have called on the angels to return fire for fire!
Then the important question is who is responsible to meet out this justice? No, doubt it is God, but HOW? Can we draw lessons from the book of Amos. God wanted justice to roll like a river (Amos 5:24), but how did he meet out justice. He chose and used many nations to meet out the justice of God. That did not however spare them from their own injustices, but He used them. Which nation God would chose in this context of ISIS?
- Like (1)
- Reply privately
- Flag as inappropriate
- 3 days ago
Andrew D. likes thisWhere I am coming from is this. The rationale for fighting ISIS using cruise missiles or drones makes sense for countries with the resources to respond in that manner. But it is not what Jesus taught.
You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbour and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. Matthew 5:38-45
Paul concurred:
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. Romans 12:21
My point is - the weapons of war do nothing to eliminate terrorism anymore than the war of drugs has eliminated the drug trade. Bombs may disperse terrorists, they don't eliminate them. Every terrorist killed causes at least several more to be born among his friends and family.
The teaching of Jesus couldn't be more clear. Those who live by the sword die by the sword, however they justify their use of it.
The way of Jesus is not the way of the sword and every time as Christians we rationalize the use of it, we are resorting to a wisdom which something other than what Jesus taught.
God calls us to employ spiritual weaponry rather than drones which rely on a) our loving our enemies the way Christ did and b) that vengeance is the Lord's.
Does that make us stand out as crazy were we to make this appeal to the general public? Absolutely. Our society is so enamoured with vengeance and military power we are too intimidated to repeat what Jesus taught. Moses taught an eye for an eye as did Mohammed. But Jesus never did. In a time which it would have been most appropriate for him to teach that. Jesus said, 'BUT I SAY TO YOU...' words that are unique not only to his time, but to all time.
Had the early Christians relied on the sword, Saul would have never become the apostle Paul.
If we are faithful to the message of Christ, we must speak it regardless of how impractical it seems. As noted earlier, there are enough voices calling for military action. There aren't enough voices warning us as did Jesus, that the way of sword will only lead to more deaths.
What will dismantle ISIS is the very thing that dismantled Saul - the persecuted praying for their persecutors, giving evidence of a power stronger than death.
The early church relied on something which seems foolish to us:
The blood of her martyrs is the seed of the church.
As the church father Tertullian wrote:
“Kill us, torture us, condemn us, grind us to dust; your injustice is the proof that we are innocent...
Nor does your cruelty, however exquisite, avail you; it is rather a temptation to us. The oftener we are mown down by you, the more in number we grow; the blood of Christians is seed.”
I am sympathetic to your solution but it is the opposite of what Jesus taught.
How can either of us lay claim to being faithful stewards of Christ's words, if we teach something other than what he taught?
BRO
WHEN JESUS TALKED ABOUT HELPING YOUR ENEMY HE WAS TALKING ABOUT FELLOW JEWS TO JEWS AND SAMARITANS NOT A HOSTILE RACE ATTACKING
RAPING MURDERING YOUR FAMILY INVADERS OFF THE LAND
FATHER GOD IS THE SAME GOD WHO IN THE OLD TESTAMENT DEFEATED ISRAELS ENEMIES THAT IS OUR GOD TODAY
As much as I would love to 2nd guess history - it is futile.
Had the Jews resisted Hitler the way India under Gandhi resisted the British, maybe the Holocaust would have been thwarted.
Turning the other cheek takes courage. It means looking into the face of your oppressor and offering him your other cheek as a testament to your conviction that love prevails.
We have so little evidence of this tactic being employed in history. But when it is employed - in India with Gandhi, in the US South with Martin Luther King, in Poland in the early 1980's, in Ireland in the late 80's and in South Africa in the late 80's and early 90's - the results are spectacular.
As Christians we are to be peacemakers because those who are for war are many - including sadly, many bible-believing Christians.
Wars are like earthquakes - they will happen. 'Such are the beginning of birth pangs' as Jesus put it.
What I am saying is that the will of Jesus is what he taught, which we are to love our enemies. As one of the early Christians wrote: 'when Jesus disarmed Peter, he disarmed all Christians.'
The weapons of our warfare are different than the world's. They are the only weapons Christ would have us use.
The Sermon on the Mount is not race specific. Jesus taught what he did in the time when many of his fellow Jews were being crucified. It applied to all one's enemies regardless of whether they were Jewish or Roman.
The law of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth ended with Jesus on the cross. The law of hating one's enemies ended with Jesus on the cross. The notion of God's kingdom advancing by military might ended with Jesus on the cross.
Our faith only works by love. When we resort to other measures, military or otherwise it cease to be the faith God calls us to.
Your point regarding Jesus and the whip is a good one. But it is a stretch to say it justifies the use of violence.
It does illustrate what righteous indignation looks like - which can be scary and should be. But in terms of inflicting either physical or mortal wound, there is no indication of either in this story. As the Apostle Peter wrote:
"When he was insulted, he did not reply with insults. When he suffered, he did not threaten revenge. Instead he entrusted himself to the one who judges justly."