Life and Death, pt. 4
A wonderful question was asked in a comment to part three of this series. How can we obey the command of Jesus to love our enemies if we are willing to kill them?
Another commenter made a valid point: this passage speaks to daily affairs, not to the rare and terrifying moments in which we fear our lives, or those of others around us, are in danger. It is dangerous to take such a teaching and extrapolate it outwards to cover every situation.
However — let’s be fair. There is no question that our Prince of Peace changed the way we are to deal with each other. He has required us to live in peace with others, loving them and serving them to the best of our abilities. Yet, that same Lord took a whip into the temple, told his followers to buy swords on the night he was betrayed, never required Romans or Jews to leave their positions in the army, guard, or militia, and used military terms and imagery, most often in his appearances in the Book of Revelation.
Paul puts it in a very interesting — and enlightening — way in Romans 12 when he says: "Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Do
not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is
written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord." There are several things here worthy of notice.
First — Jesus gives us no room for taking revenge. While revenge makes for a great movie or novel, it has no place in our lives. I confess: if a man violated one of our precious children at Rochester, I would want him punished. If he walked on the charges and taunted her as she walked to school, I would want him dead… but I would have no right to kill him. That would be against secular and religious law. I COULD form a guard to walk with the girl, gather funds for lawyers to get a restraining order against the man, or help the girl and her family relocate, if required. No, none of those things would satisfy the cravings of my heart, but I am not allowed to feed those cravings; my faith tells me that that evil man will one day be in the hands of God. I have seen people forgive their daughter’s attacker and thanked God for them while knowing that I probably didn’t have that in my heart. Admitting that makes me sad; I wish I were a bigger man.
And that is the second thing to notice about Paul’s instructions. He says "if it is possible." There are times and places when it is not possible to live in peace with another person. Then he goes further and says "as much as it lies in you" (or "with you" in some versions). There are some people who can put up with a lot more than others. God knows that. Remember Psalm 139? He knows why we stand up, speak up, and sit down. He formed us in the womb. He knows that some of us have tighter limits than others. His grace covers us.
Now, back to Jesus’ command to love our enemies. We need to remember one more thing about that command: it doesn’t limit our obligation to just our enemies. We are also to love our friends and family. Someone asks "how can you love your enemy and yet raise your hand to them?" I would respond, "How can you love your wife and yet refuse to fight off her attacker? How can you love your neighbor and yet turn a deaf ear to their cries for help?" (or, more hypocritically, call the police when you, yourself, think that serving as a policeman is sinful)
Here is a story I’ve never told before. I will not name the city and I will blur a detail or two for reasons which should be clear. Years ago, when Duncan was around 4, he announced that he needed to go to the bathroom. We were in a crowded mall in the part of a city that wasn’t in immediate danger of going upscale. The bathrooms in this mall were down a long, twisty, dark corridor. They may as well have hung a sign saying "Abandon hope, all ye who enter here."
In the restroom, he had to sit down so I entered the stall with him and waited. That’s when a storm hit. A group of men in gang clothes came in shouting curses and threats. I heard cries of protest as men were shoved into walls, against sinks, etc. A few blows landed, but most of the action seemed to be shoving and threats.
We couldn’t hide there. Eventually, we would be found. I couldn’t take on the whole group — I’m not as good as I used to be and I was never that good to begin with. I had to think quickly. I was licensed to carry concealed weapons in that State (as I am in 31 States today) and had my firearm secured under my jacket. I didn’t want to draw it and, in fact, had no reason to. No one was dying and I didn’t fear for my life. I did, however, fear for the health and safety of my son.
Duncan remained completely unaware of the import of the sounds around him. I spoke, in a voice much louder than necessary: "Are you done, buddy?" He said he was. I asked him to hold my coat while we walked to the sink. He did. We walked out of the stall, me looking at Duncan and talking as if nothing was wrong, while giving a glance to the mirrors above the sink to spot where the gangbangers were. We strolled over to the sink and washed our hands. By the time we were done, the restroom was empty, except for us. Merely having a weapon visible on my hip was enough to stop the threat to us. (in case you wonder, open carry was legal in that State, as it is in nearly half of the US, even though it is rarely done. That means what I did was not considered brandishing a weapon)
I have never drawn a firearm on a human being and I pray that I will be able to say that on the day I meet Jesus. However, if I need to do so out of my love for my family, friends, or the innocent, I pray that I will not fail them. I will not want to resort to violence, and the thought of having to do so makes me shake my head with the weight of such a moral choice. I would rather have bought the gang members lunch and talked to them about their lives, Jesus, and how the world works — or doesn’t. I bear them no ill will. I prayed for them on that day and I pray for them now, fourteen years later. I love them, but I will not allow them to kill others I love if I am able to stop them.
The FBI says that citizens with their own firearms stop between 1 and 2 million crimes from occurring every year in America. That is an amazing statement. Almost none of those citizens has to fire their weapon; it is the possession of it that changes the equation. When a citizen shoots someone else, less than 6% of those shootings are ruled unjustified. Compare that to police shootings where 17% are unjustified (same FBI reports). When a state allows concealed carry by good citizens, their crime rates go down… every time.
John Lott and Don Kates have both written extensively about this (book titles upon request). The conclusions they came to are backed up by solid research by federal law enforcement agencies and it all boils down to this: good people, well armed, well trained, and with a good sense of moral decency drive down crime by their very presence.
Our weapons are not to be used to spread Christianity, our politics, or to exact revenge. They are not to be used in anger. I remember one trial when a citizen who killed to protect his family was asked by the prosecutor (it was a VERY un-gun-friendly state), "So you admit that you shot to kill?" The man replied, quietly, "No, sir. I shot to live." The case was dismissed.
He loved his enemies, but he also loved his family. Can we take a quick look at that word, "love"? God is love, yet He is the one behind the capital punishment rules in the Bible. He is the one who designed hell, who referred to some people as "brute beasts, born only to be destroyed" and who said that He will love who He loves and hates who He hates. Could it be that "love" means something other than valentines and soft music? He who told us that the greatest love is shown by those who lay down their lives for a friend might have had more in mind than just being nice to everybody. Maybe love is also shown by stopping evil and protecting the innocent.
On 9/11, several our of neighbors came to our house. They knew Duncan and I were shooters (we won contests and the local paper mentioned it). Their husbands and fathers were out of town, trapped in airports without any hope of returning for a week or two. They needed protection and reassurance. One of the women — who had previously called us nuts for owning guns — asked, in a trembling voice, "should I get a gun?" I said, "No, ma’a
m. We’ll take care of you."
To some, that will seem silly or ludicrous or melodramatic. To us, it was love.
August 20th, 2007 at 3:42 pm
Pistol Packing Preacher, great title for a western movie or book, but can you show me where Jesus said we should value our life over another’s to the point of killing. It might be interpreted as trusting a weapon more than God. Or as some have been told in the military “That weapon is your god and protector, love it like your mama”
August 20th, 2007 at 3:52 pm
Laymond, I would refer you back to the discussion of Jesus telling his apostles to be armed that night. There are times that, yes, I value my life more than the life of someone who is trying to take lives.
August 20th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
Patrick, I do believe you stopped short of reveiling the full action of that night. I believe when violence did occur, Jesus said stop, I believe he made the man whole, and ordered no more violence. trust in God to do what must be done. How do we know it is not God’s will, and how do we know our Christian death might not be an example that would save many?
August 20th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
Patrick, I don’t intend to start a discussion on who is right and who is wrong, but I will give my opinion on the sword that Jesus spoke of and his reason for having it. As we see all four gospel writers wrote on this incident, each go into sightly different details of the event. If you read Matthew’s story of the event I believe he gives the reason for the sword. Just because you have a weapon don’t mean you have to use it. Jesus said he didn’t need the sword,he had God. I believe the lesson of the sword was just that, a lesson to the apostles.
August 20th, 2007 at 5:17 pm
Still with you, brother. FYI, from someone watching the dialogue…….I don’t consider one’s faith stronger than another person’s just because they don’t see this topic in the same way. It may just be me, but sometimes I get the feeling that some who believe in pacifism feel they have a deeper or stronger faith than others who don’t see it that way.
DU
August 20th, 2007 at 6:03 pm
Right on, Patrick.
August 20th, 2007 at 7:11 pm
This is sort of “out there,” but years ago I was a high school basketball official in Alabama (and later in Florida) and was sent on more than one occasion to a school light years from civilization and humanity as we know it. When their team lost, they would form a gauntlet through which the officials would have to walk to get out of the gym. We received all kinds of threats and verbal harrassment. Once, during half time, when the home team was behind, the cheerleaders came to our dressing room, did a very banal cheer that concluded with them mooning us and telling us to do something sexually withourselves that is anatomically impossible. More than one official (including myself) had permits to carry concealed weapons. When we left the dressing room, we walked out w/ our weapons in plain view and were left alone. Right or wrong, I felt much less threatened.
August 20th, 2007 at 7:34 pm
I think it is worth mentioning that in John (the only one of the four that mentions a whip) that firstly, it seems that Jesus made the whip while he was in the temple… he did not bring it with intent. And secondly there is not textual evidence that Jesus was using the whip against people, as opposed to the sheep and cattle. Unless I am forgetting my Greek rules. Personally, I have not yet reached a decision on the issue of pacifism.
August 20th, 2007 at 8:55 pm
Phil, I can respect that! I might disagree with you on where Jesus was when he made the whip and on the matter of intent, but you are absolutely correct in stating that there is no evidence that he struck a human being with it.
It must have seemed to others that he was willing to do so, however, in that the temple had a guard; a famous, well trained guard and those men didn’t try to stop Jesus. Either they were all on leave or he was more fearsome in appearance and mighty in purpose than the white surfer dude we usually see in our “Jesus” paintings.
August 20th, 2007 at 9:34 pm
What a great discussion! I guess I’m not the only one who struggles with this. In Matt.5:39 Jesus says not to resist an evil person. Is this also refering to revenge?
August 21st, 2007 at 1:04 am
Lots to think about. It’s great that we can all agree to disagree. Even better that we have the right to share our thoughts and beliefs becasue of where we live: a country founded so each person could worship as they wanted and it was fought for.
I know that I do not own a gun and do not want a gun in the house because of children. I know there are safety precautions but I also know that things happen. I do believe in defending myself and protecting those I love. I teach children to try and resolve things peacefully. Yet I have also taught the girls in my Girl Scout troop where some pressure points are and how to use them if they are grabbed by a stranger. Being a brown belt in TaeKwonDo I know that my skills could not fight off a bullet but I could protect myself. I came to this conclusion of defending myself once when prayfully considering the scripture “Love your neighbor as yourself” and I applied it to the history of abuse I endured and the ways that I was a doormat. I would never treat those I love as a doormat so why should I allow others to mistreat me? There is another verse, I couldn’t find it but I remember reading it the same day as I considered the one above, it says “think of yourself as you should, not to highly….. not too lowly.” Jesus values me and he willingly died for me. Don’t you take a stand for what you value? I believe that he wants me to be at peace with others as long as it is possible. For me that means not to seek to cause problems, learn to let the little stuff go, know what battles are important and work to see others as he sees them. However, there are boundaries that should not be crossed and I will protect those.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:25 am
Though we can’t really know for sure, there could be other sides, and views are held onreasons for the guard to not interfere with Jesus.
One possibility is that they respected him, though John places the scene towards the beginning of Jesus’ ministry (or at least at the beginning of his narrative) the other gospel writers place it after the “triumphal entry”. If the Jews were looking for a warrior-king (true not all that they were looking for, but a part) I’m not sure I would volunteer to fight against my future King, especially if he was going to reinstate the line of David.
Alternatively, the guards could have feared a riot if they had arrested, or interfered with Jesus at this time due to his popularity (though this scene was likely a turning point in his popularity).
Perhaps the guards were not charged with the safety of the merchants in the temple (there is likely some discussion in academic circles about the duties of the guard, though I have not looked into it myself).
On the other hand, the Old Testament is full of God-sanctioned violence, even extermination of entire peoples. Of course, of course on the other hand (if you would permit me three hands)the Old Testament could also be read to support racism, sexism, condemnation of “mixed” couples, death as punishment for a child, along with killing for many different actions: homosexuality, wizardry, incest etc.
I do not think that we would advocate these same punishments for these actions today. Furthermore, I don’t think that
It is difficult to determine whether or not, and in what circumstances, we can be more gracious than the commands given the Israelites in the Old Testament.
I guess I could go back in forth on this for quite a while. Such is life.
I guess part of the reason that I am jumping into this conversation is because I was a little offended by a comment on an earlier post (part 2) that stated that there was no way that someone could read the Bible and come away thinking that God was a pacifist. Perhaps this was not the intent of the commenter, but the way in which it was said seemed to say that “a pacifist is either a non-thinking individual or has never read the Bible”. I would offer that there is a good argument for both sides and these views are held (on both sides) by intelligent, God-fearing and loving people. I think that this issue requires more time and care than perhaps just reading through the Bible.
August 21st, 2007 at 8:30 am
Phil, I certainly meant no offence with my earlier post, and perhaps I came down heavier than I should have. You make some very valid points, and I would never doubt the depth of someone’s faith or intelligence over this issue.
To be sure, Christians should not be seeking violence, it must be a last resort. Also, while the Old Testament is (to me) quite clear on the subject of violence, the New Testament is not (at least on the surface) nearly as clear.
You mention some of the standards from the Old Testament that are different than the standards we hold today. I wrote a post to my blog recently about some distinctions between the Old and New Testaments that I believe are important to understanding these differences. Some of the points I make actually lean towards the pacifist argument.
One such point is that much of the severity of the Old Testament is (I believe) due to the fact that God is setting up an earthly kingdom, whereas in the New Testament He is setting up a spiritual one.
August 23rd, 2007 at 5:19 pm
First, it is one thing to strike another individual in the jaw out of self-defense. It is a completely different issue when we are talking about Christians being involved in the destruction of others through the means of secular political violence for the means of protecting a particular political state and ideology. While I am much more comfortable being willing to use a little violent force to protect myself or someone else from criminal harm, I cannot rationalize Christian involvement in secular political violence when I consider the theological trajectory of scripture. That trajectory culminates in a kingdom call that calls all followers of Jesus to a new life which includes living that new life rather than the old way of life. What does the secular political violence of this old, dying world have to do with the new in-breaking world of God’s kingdom reign? While there are certain passages and situations in scripture that, when separated from the theological trajectory of scripture, could easily lend support to a just-violence ethic, you seem to be starting with these points in order to justify your ethical position. I am offering a link to an article by Keith Stanglin (theology professor at Harding U.) who demonstrates the problem with this approach (Stanglin happens to be a just-war advocate). Here is the link: http://www.harding.edu/thebison/Issue3_07/opinion/htmlFiles/whateverHappenedTtoChristianPacifism.html
Thanks for allowing my to critisize your post. It is done in Christian love, from one brother in Christ to another brother in Christ. May God be glorified by us all as we wrestle with difficult questions and issues.