|
|||
 |
|||
| Tuesday, May 29, 2007 Obey I want to respond supportively to your article. As a pastor, I have been aware of, and sometimes involved in, situations where the State tries to usurp the Lordship of the Church in America. Of course, your ministry and organization have been at the forefront of this battle, and we appreciate you. I believe Christians ought to obey the government until the government requires something from us that is prohibited by God. In other words, I am a radical to both those who obey the State in all things, without any qualifier, and to those who do not believe in any governmental restraint. I believe that Christians are always called to the high ground between the two low extremes of the world. I was gathering information to share with some people, concerning the condition of secularized America and the plight of the Church in America when I came across your article of 5/9/07, entitled, “Jesus and War.” I braced myself as I started to read, expecting the same old song about killing in the name of God, much as they did in the Old Testament. I expected a misrepresentation of Romans 13 and the, “Render to Caesar” passages of Mt. 22:21, Mk. 12:17 and Lk. 20:25. Needless to say, I was pleasantly surprised to read your approach. I became convinced of non-violence, and Christian peacemaking, around the year 1972. I had gone to an evangelical Bible college, with a Wesleyan/Arminian heritage where some of the professors were Evangelical Friends, and some of the students were also Quaker, I was never convinced by their arguments for peace and non-violence. I truly wanted to align all of my beliefs with the Bible, so it was not my lack of desire for truth, but the lack of Biblical evidence that left me in the my darkness concerning this issue. Within a few years of graduating and entering into the pastoral ministry, I searched out the subject on my own and turned from being a “Christian” hawk to being a New Testament dove. However, my brand of peacemaking or non-violence is not typical pacifism. I believe that the message of Jesus was love, peace, and self-sacrifice. I believe that the Apostles were led by the Holy Spirit to deliver a message of peace and forgiveness. I believe the early church followed the Apostles and Jesus in the doctrine of peacemaking. Though God has given the sword of the Spirit to the Church and has given the assignment to lay down our lives for others, He has given the sword of steel to the State for the express purpose of protecting the righteous and punishing the wicked. I believe that the principles of a “Just war” should be considered and followed by the nations of the world, but Christians are not personally called to spill the blood of their enemies. We Christians are to serve the present age in respect to the issues of grace, but God appointed angels and the State to serve the Church in terms of protection and justice. I also read your response to those who emailed you concerning this subject. I have defended this position for over thirty years and I am familiar with many of the arguments against this wonderful truth. I will continue to pray for you and your worthy work. Yours in Christ, Pastor David Friday, May 25, 2007 Excellent! Very excellent explanation! I could have never put our present "situation" into these, very definitive terms. Thanks for your commentary, always welcome! Sincerely, Mike Monday, May 21, 2007 Ripping Off Tax Payers Are the American people so naive that they can't see the evilness within? Why doesn't the president have to address the issues of the unaccounted contractual money? Do the president's advisors so protect him from the issues that no one brave enough to ask the question gets close enough to ask the question. Signed: Shocked by the silience of the politically outspoken Dangerous Ones It is so good to hear a balanced assessment of the tragedy at Virginia Tech. If legal gurus that defend universities would have it their way, they would be able to discriminate against (or drug) anyone who didn't fit in with their idea of "normal". It is for this reason that I have been a vocal opponent of the President's "No Child Left Behind" plan to identify and treat all young students that exhibit any behavior that irritates ... (aka disrupts) a classroom. Does anyone even remember that the mastermind of Columbine was on anti-depressants at the time of his mass murder spree? I have firsthand knowledge that a university has no problem creating a reason to call a student "unstable" so they can forcibly withdraw him or her and require psychiatrist's report - all for legal rather than safety/security reasons. Yet listen to the official rhetoric: Universities are now trying to make the case that without more legal wiggling room they can't ensure the safety of our college kids from dangerously unstable students for the fear of a lawsuit. Let's be practical. Who decides who is dangerously unstable? What would be the legal advantage for any university if a clear concise set of rules defines what behaviors are off-limits to students and teachers alike? They would then have to then prove their case against someone. But if the laws change so that any "dangerously unstable" person can be removed - then whoever the "DECIDER" is can cherry pick the undesireables all in the name of campus security - and (I'm afraid) in the process miss the really dangerous ones. Survive We will not survive these corrupt-conspiritors politicians-we can all break the law as the illegals do and to get free citizenship--I propose mass anarchy We have no government-only corrupt leaders. --DC Tuesday, May 15, 2007 Jesus Thanks John for your article on what did Jesus teach about christians using violence to defend themselves.What a breath of fresh air!!! Time after time the Israelites were delivered militarily when they trusted God.As individual believers we need to walk away from fear of violence and also trust in God as our defender.To me fear is our biggest enemy and we need to deal with it honestly thru his promises to us.If we would die we are not surrounded by hellish virgins but surrounded by incredible peace, joy, and the approving and loving face of the allmighty GOD!!!! Blessings to you. Keep the Faith. --Don School Censorship These occurred in government schools, and, as a taxpayer, I object. Private schools can make their own rules, and students and parents who object to the rules in a school can go, taking their money, to a different school. Don't think for one minute that the lip service on the part of the Bush administration is having a positive affect, because it isn't. I wrote an essay on this very topic, called "How the Bush Administration is Destroying our Country and Damaging the Christian Church", please see here. --Alice Lillie Friday, May 11, 2007 Clear and Concise Thank you for writing so clearly and concisely on this topic. I have wondered for a great long time why this topic hasn't been brought forward more often and more forcefully than it is. What you have written about has been in my heart since the beginning of this "war", and I am sick and tired of the "good (war mongering) christians" ruining the name and reputations of the christians who believe as you (and I) do. I have read several of your articles over the past couple years, and have enjoyed them. You write ... straight from the heart, but not without going through the head first. Keep 'em coming. --Barry Political Means I agree with Mr Whitehead. When Christians turn from Christ's example and attempt to use political means they give up the very power God wishes us to have, and the only power that works. --Randy Christians "Walter Wink in The Powers That Be (1998), "no Christian author to our knowledge approved of Christian participation in battle." This, of course, changed in the third century when the church was institutionalized and became an integral part of the warring Roman Empire." I agree with much of your article, but the above comment is clearly in error. In the reign of Marcus Aurelius there was already at least one legion of Romans that were Christian. He mentions that in a battle with the Sarmatians and Germans (I think it was) his troops were dying of thirst and that a legion, later referred to as the "Thundering Legion" knelt on the ground and prayed for rain as was their (Christian) practice. It rained and the Romans were victorious. The third century reference I assume refers to the Edict of Milan, proclaimed by Constantine and Licinius in the fourth century; A.D. 313 if I remember correctly. All the Edict does is allow anyone to practice any religion he wishes, it in no way establishes a religion. It is frequently contended that Constantine established the Catholic Church. Constantine was never anything more than a catechumen and was baptized on his death bed by Eusebius of Nicomedia; an Arian bishop. Eusebius of Caesarea or Eusebius Pamphili chronicles all this in his book Ecclesiastical History. It is a book well worth reading if you haven't, and fairly short too. --Chris Stance on War and the President I have become more and more convinced that you do not look to the whole of scriptures with your views on war and the president. You have been anti - President Bush for a number of years now. The God of the Bible is not a pacifist God. This same God of whom Jesus is a member of the trinity told Israel to completely anihilate whole groups of people such as the Amalekites. Would you also have sat still during World War II when evil men tried to anihilate the Jewish Race from the face of the earth. We were attacked by Japan and Germany subsequently declared war on us. Using your logic from the teachings of Jesus, you would have us believe that Jesus would have let this continue without our getting involved. The world would have been saying Seig Heil at this time. Likewise we were attacked by Muslim extremists on 9/11. These extremists have been receiving support from a number of Middle East countries. Due to the sinful nature of man it is sometimes necessary to go to war. As Christians, we do not take war lightly but many of us believe there are appropriate reasons for going to war among those are going after those who would destroy our country. This is why the Christian right does not stand with you. --Nathan Great Article I'm referring to your latest article at LRC; it's a shame that you'll spend eternity in Hell for writing it. All sarcasm aside, there are those who would actually believe that. For instance, log onto the Rapture Ready website; check out their message board, if you can stand it. I used to post there; I finally stopped, as they continued to delete my links. Oh; if God indeed wanted George W Bush to become President, did he also want Bill Clinton & Jimmy Carter to become President, as well? I've often wondered about that. --James Thursday, May 10, 2007 Jesus (Peace be Upon Him) and War An interesting story and one that I believe.You are one wise man in a sea of ignorant men. May Almighty God guide you to the Ultimate Truth. --Saeed The Lord told the Children of Israel when they wanted a King that their sons would have to be soldiers and it would cost them. Yes, if we would serve the Lord, He would fight our battles for us like He did Israel as long as they trusted completely in Him. But we are America and We will do it opurselves. We even have no use for God. WE have kicked Him out of school and off the court house grounds. We have decided as a nation that we do not need God. Who made that decision? You and I did when we voted for Bush and others like him. But we must win this war or Goliath will come here to taunt us. --Clarence Contradictions Jesus also said to turn plowshares into swords. The bible is full of contradictions like an eye for an eye. --Sherry Sword John, How do you reconcile Luke 22:36? Where Jesus was telling his disciples to sell their garments and buy a sword? Your article was good, but wasn't balanced (I believe it should hve included this), because the implication here in this verse is for them to protect themselves, you are correct though in that Jesus never ever advocated violence. I believe this war we're in is wrong, because you don't go to war to obtain political objectives or anything else, but war IS justified if we are defending ourselves, just as a Christian, I would defend my home. Blessings, Pastor Jim Fighting I was raised a Quaker. The pastor of the church I attended swore in Richard Nixon as president of the United States. I also raised my hand promising to defend the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic and through a series of events I found myself unexpectedly in Vietnam one day - I had just 24 hours notice that I was going to DaNang. I have no idea how these things work but somehow the teachings of Jesus rubbed off on me even though I don't remember paying any attention to them in my youth. I resolved that I would personally do no killing but would die instead. Indeed, I prayed to die as quickly as possible. Older and wiser I get it better now. I believe Jesus told us there is nothing worth fighting for down here but there is everything worth fighting and even dying for where he came from. --Jack As It Is Today Great article John, In your article you quoted Martin Luther King...I've got another King quote: "I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed... without having first spoke clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today: my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of the hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent." Martin Luther King True then (40 years ago) as it is today. --Zo Your Fine Article Thanks for illuminating the apostasy inherent in claiming Christ supports "bomb thy neighbor." The same war crowd also must claim there is a Death Penalty Jesus. I sometimes wonder if the bloodthirsty cult which now occupies certain houses of worship has parallel to what happened to the German Lutheran Church in the 1930's. --Gregory Pleasure Your article was a pleasure to read. I have to contrast it with this. -- Susan Pacifism Jesus did not teach pacifism. He told the soldiers who asked Him what to do that they do their job honestly and be content with their pay and not take bribes or do injustice to those who live under the color of their authority. Never did He or any epistle writer even hint at the idea that "soldiers" should "quit." Yes, those who live by the sword will die by the sword. If you weren't such an idiot, you would have noticed that the Muslims are the ones living by the sword. The non-Muslims of the world are just trying to defend themselves from the aggressive sword wielding Muslim murderers. --James Jesus and Swords: John W. Whitehead Responds Liberal Our Pastor is notoriously Liberal and at the Palm Sunday Anticipatory Mass last night I was astounded by the readings of the scripture having the following: And he said to them, "When I sent you forth without purse or wallet or sandals, did you lack anything?" And they said, "Nothing." Then he said to them, "But now, let him who has a purse take it, and likewise a wallet; and let him who has no sword sell his tunic and buy one. For I say unto you that this which is written must be fulfilled in me, 'And he was reckoned among the wicked." For that which concerns me is at its end." And they said, "Lord, behold, here are two swords." And he said to them, "Enough." --Luke 22: 35-38 I had to look it up when I got home. What this text means (confirmed by the annotations in two versions of the Bible I have at home) is that after they are left by Christ the Apostles must be prepared to meet all sorts of hardships, dangers and trials using both spiritual and real weapons. So Christ didn't say that turning the other cheek in all cases was a good thing. It is further recommendation that the faithful should be prepared to defend themselves in the face of threats. A faith whose followers don't defend themselves won't have followers for very long. There are people who question where Peter got the sword he used on the servant to cut off his ear, well that explains where Peter's sword came from. --M. Freedom Defence of life is ones last choice. For if there were no one to stand for justice with a sword. Noone who lives and loves peace, would be a live today! Jesus was God. He came to take away the sins of the World because He knew ugly evil people would never allow peace to reign in this World. Because of GREED and hatred towards Him! Yes it's true.You'll die by the sword if you control others with it(The Sword)(eg FREEDOM OF CHOICE TO LIVE BY GODS LAWS). But not if you love your Lord jesus and defend innocent life with it. There's a difference of living by the sword aggressively! And living with the sword in defence of peace. --Tim The Second Amendment The amendment, in referring to "bearing arms" does not name "Guns" as the arms to be borne in defense of freedom. I thought about Paul's statement to "put on the whole armor of God", which of course did not mean to wear a breastplate and go around hacking people. I found it interesting that in the "incorporation" of the first 8 amendments under the 14th, the second is continually ignored. Could it be that the Supreme Court, by incorporating the 2nd amendment, would have to recognize the full implications of that amendment and provide equality or parity of the states to the federal government? Assuming that all the priviledges and immunities apply under 14th amendment incorporation, the "spirit of equality" would force the feds to "arm" the states with full capabilities to allow for free and independent citizens. Those "arms would include the First amendment, right to trial by jury, otherwise known as "due process", and a public education system that taught school children how to practice full equality before the federal government. Perhaps they might even teach that right to trial by jury came from Paul's teaching in 1 Corinthians chapter 6. --Ralph Excellent Article I agree entirely with the sentiments expressed in your article "Jesus and War". However, I am curious as to your views on self-defense. As someone who carries a concealed handgun while working the graveyard shift alone, and someone who has been held at gunpoint, I have a sober appreciation of this violent world we live in, well beyond most people my age who tend to think I'm a little nuts (I'm 22). While I would not offer resistance if, say, the state began actively persecuting Christians, I feel conflicted about how a Christian should respond to violence. For example, I would be loathe to use my weapon against someone trying to kill me (though I know I can and would pull the trigger if it came down to it) however I obtained a concelaed permit with protecting others in mind. Recent history is enough to show us how important it is for responsible citizens to do this. Is violence therefore a justified means to an end in limited cases? It really confuses me because for two millenia, believers have willingly gone to their deaths along with family and friends. "Do not resist evil men" springs to mind quite often.... I guess what I'm asking is, where do Christians draw the line between non-violence and resistance in the interest of self defense? I also have always thought it was interesting that Peter had a sword in the first place. Jesus was certainly aware that he possessed it prior to his arrest...He seemed to be placing emphasis on the fact that Peter was interfearing with God's plan. --Chris Bush Wars When the Bush wars began and for that matter all wars that I am old (64 yrs old) enough to personally know about, including drug wars, smoking wars, environmental wars, etc., I have constantly said to my friends, who seemed to not understand what I was trying to say--two wrongs never make a right. --Joseph Thought Provoking This is a good, thought-provoking commentary. I agree that Jesus ushered in a kingdom not of this world and that He was committed to non-violence amongst his ministry's disciples when confronted with people trying to harm Him. But I also think that God does not want us to just stand by while anti-Christian forces are trying to completely destroy us as a nation. Certainly diplomacy and all kinds of peacemaking skills should be employed first and foremost when facing national problems, but if the other parties in question absolutely refuse common sense and/or are unreasonably antagonistic towards us to the point of desiring total annihilation for our countrymen and our democratic culture, what else is left but to engage in "just war"? What are some sound, viable alternatives that haven't already been tried? Also, I think the main reason that President Bush vetoed that bill was because there was lots of pork stuffed in with it, if I'm not mistaken. --Lucy G. Wednesday, May 09, 2007 War and Jesus John, Jesus wasn’t attacking war. It was what Israel thought they could do with war. Just saying that war is the issue is to be simplistic though it seems a logical interpretation of what he was saying. Jesus was dealing with a society that was looking for a military victory over Rome, the current Pharoah, to restore the kingdom to Israel led by the coming messiah. He was also dealing with being vetted by the various pressure groups’ litmus tests who had their own aspirations and agenda for that victory. They all were expecting a sudden deliverance. The Parable of the Sower wasn’t good news for a nation under tremendous distress. Slow growing seed when you are in pain now isn’t good news in their mindset. It was the concept that God would bring in HIS KINGDOM BY the sword they anticipated. Remember that this old military mindset could easily be justified by their history. Remember, too, that in spite of all Jesus had said about the nature of His Kingdom, the last question of his disciples was, “Will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” They knew they had been in spiritual exile and were awaiting deliverance. Right relationship with God had in the past equaled peace and prosperity and sovereignty in The Land. The Passover was an ancient religious feast rife with political and military overtones in Jesus’ day. That obscured what Jesus was attempting to teach but He understood that He was Himself the sower. Jesus’ whole ministry needs to be put into his historical context and not interpreted by our own current events. This opens to us much more depth of understanding what Jesus really said. For example, it was in the Temple grounds where war with Rome was fomenting: “You have made this a den of brigands” (i.e. holy warriors). It was too be a “house of prayer for all nations” but war against Rome was on their mind. On the crosses were two brigands and Jesus: representing Israel’s kingdom aspirations and God’s way to peace. Jesus message throughout his ministry was that God’s kingdom would not come by the military or asserting one’s self, etc. It would come through absorbing the worse the world could inflict upon Him and still forgiving. All His disciples would be called to follow Jesus’ example. Remember, too, Jesus said, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.” ( Luke 22:36) How can that be squared with passivism? To war or not to war was not the question. It wasn’t about man’s kingdoms. It was about God’s kingdom. To summarize, Jesus wasn’t talking about war against terrorism however you define it. He was speaking against using terrorism (a long time method of Jewish war: e.g. Judas Maccabeus) or war for bringing in His kingdom. I hope this helps clarify another perspective on Jesus and war. --Bob Agreement --Marcia Battle I just read your article on Jesus and War. It seems that you believe that a Christian should not involve himself in battle. I do not believe that scripture teaches us that. Yes we are to pray for our enemies, but if our enemy comes at us with a sword, I don't believe that we are to stand there an let him cut our head off. Jesus did tell his disciples to arm themselves: Luke 22:35-36 "And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing. Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." Surely this was not just for ornamentation. All through the Old Testament God used the sword to defend Israel. We were forewarned by Jesus that we would face battles, physical battles and that we were to defend ourselves: Matthew 11:12 "And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force." Your logic would have us setting down and letting the likes of Hitler walk all over us. Even today with the Islamofacist doing everything they can to destroy the Western way of life we should stand up against them with all the military might we have and utterly destroy them. Being a Christian is not being a pacifist, it is the exact opposite. You are in the army of God and that army fights, more in the spirit than in the flesh, but we do have to fight in the flesh. --Pastor Allah How do you handle the Old Testament where God commanded his people Israel to go into the land and destroy the enemies of God? Remember the terrorist are instruments of Satan. Jesus' mission was to change the hearts of man toward God. These islamist want nothing to do with peace or the realities of what God is all about. Allah is not God. --Jim A Christian Nation I read your commentary herein. I can't argue with the teachings of Jesus on violence. But how do you suggest that we, a "Christian" nation, respond when we are attacked as we were on 9/11? --Joe Onslaught Good reading, but to what extent and just how do we in the West protect ourselves against the very violent, even insane, onslaught by terrorists acting under the "color" of Islam? --John Thursday, May 03, 2007 Primary Reason Yes, the world IS in a handbasket and it is certainly on the way to Hell. Primary reason? A steady march in social engineering and liberalism mixed with 1960 "peacenik" attitudes. --Romney Anxious Thank you, John. We ARE stamping out creativity, spontaneity, and individuality! Why is everybody so anxious to call the cops? If there is a shooting, yes...call the cops. But, a person can't even get pissed off anymore! Anger is a lot healthier than conforming to the extent of being submissive and obedient. And this is EXACTLY what the "authorities" want us to be - submissive and obedient. It sickens me. --Ron Our Story To add to the list of the absurd. I live in a village of about 2,000. A little after Columbine and the initiations of zero-tolerance policies, my 10-year-old was walking home from school and told a friend of a dream he had in which the school was buried in concrete and there was a fire and no one could get out. The crosswalk lady heard him talking and reported him to the school. The next day my husband and I were called in to the Principal's office and were told that our son was to go and see a psychiatrist or he would be expelled indefinitely. He was 10 years old and an honor roll student.....Needless to say the psychiatrist said the whole situation was ridiculous and "exhonerated" our son.... Since Columbine, we have definitely become a country of fear and overreaction. Perhaps a better look at what has changed since we were kids that is causing all this. I'll vote for overmedicating our children.... --Debby P. |
Archive June 2004July 2004 August 2004 September 2004 October 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 February 2005 March 2005 April 2005 May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009 February 2009 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 June 2009 July 2009 August 2009 September 2009 October 2009 November 2009 December 2009 January 2010
|
||
 |
|||
| The Rutherford Institute P.O. Box
7482 Charlottesville, VA 22906-7482 Phone :: 434.978.3888 (8:30 AM - 5:00 PM Eastern) | Fax :: 434.978.1789 General Inquiries:: staff@rutherford.org | Legal Assistance:: tristaff@rutherford.org Technical comments :: webmaster@rutherford.org ©2007 The Rutherford Institute | Privacy Info |
|||
