Eagerness to take out some Muslims

Right & Wrong
User avatar
jaydam
Posts: 343
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 8:29 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Eagerness to take out some Muslims

Post by jaydam » Sat Dec 05, 2015 3:17 am

I am disappointed at how many of my friends on Facebook are quick to pickup weapons and be ready to blast a terrorist away.

Whatever happened to loving our enemies?

Then Jerry Falwell Jr. says today, "… I’ve always thought if more good people had concealed carry permits, then we could end those Muslims before they walked in…" Encouraging his students at Liberty University to carry their concealed weapons, he continued on, "Let’s teach them a lesson if they ever show up here," he said.

These words shock my conscience, yet it seems I stand alone in my feelings among my friends.

Am I wrong?

What joy and honor is there in blowing away some poor soul who is lost? Worst yet, being so eager and ready to do it?

Yet my Christian friends express a "bring it on" joy at the chance to take out a bad guy one day if the opportunity presents itself.

I am willing to consider that my previous experience as a violent man and a combat soldier could be preventing me from looking at things impartially, so I'm just opening up the topic for discussion.

Myself, I cannot first feel any joy or honor in the taking of any life, and secondly I don't know at this point if I would be willing to even raise a hand more than stand between a terrorist and his target.

steve7150
Posts: 2597
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: Eagerness to take out some Muslims

Post by steve7150 » Sat Dec 05, 2015 7:35 am

Myself, I cannot first feel any joy or honor in the taking of any life, and secondly I don't know at this point if I would be willing to even raise a hand more than stand between a terrorist and his target.
User avatar
jaydam Posts: 186Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 8:29 pmLocation: Portland, OR







I think folks are tired of hearing about muslim extremists targeting Christians and Jews and are expressing frustration. We all know what Jesus said and what Paul said.
This comes back again to the pacifism discussions we have had and what we would do to defend ourselves and others. Also whether Christians should work for the police or military.

User avatar
mattrose
Posts: 1920
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:28 am
Contact:

Re: Eagerness to take out some Muslims

Post by mattrose » Sat Dec 05, 2015 8:56 am

I am definitely struck by such statements too... even from close friends and family in the faith.

I don't think most Christians have been thoroughly taught in the ways of the Kingdom. They've only been presented with the good news of forgiveness, not the good news of the kingdom. Only Jesus' Kingdom is not of this world, so without knowledge of it... people think only in worldly terms when it comes to such things. From a worldly perspective, it makes a lot of sense to blow away your enemies.

It'd be one thing, perhaps, to favor the American government dealing with Islamic terrorism boldly and directly and decisively.... but to be eager to participate speaks of a lack of faith in Kingdom principles in my opinion.

User avatar
Ian
Posts: 489
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 2:26 am

Re: Eagerness to take out some Muslims

Post by Ian » Sat Dec 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Greg Boyd is also struck by that reaction. Worth a watch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUMU1rQSrmI

User avatar
morbo3000
Posts: 537
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 9:05 pm
Location: Washington State
Contact:

Re: Eagerness to take out some Muslims

Post by morbo3000 » Sat Dec 05, 2015 6:17 pm

I've been concerned for a long time with attitudes _some_ "christians" express when they disagree on volatile issues. This came up on the board awhile back about intolerance of gays, and I made the point then that disagreeing on an issue that has an honest biblical precedent is not hateful. But the attitude toward the person _can_ be hateful. There is a difference. The majority I hear on this board have honest opinions on these issues, including islam.

I generally accepted that the groups I _was_ concerned with, (again, not on this board) were christians, just really wrong.

Until...

A year or so ago, author Rachel Held Evans, a progressive Christian (or "christian" some of you may say) left evangelicalism and joined the episcopal church. Obviously a liberal decision, and connected to her acceptance of gay relationships.

A friend commented on a news thread in Facebook. And I wound up seeing what people were saying. The level of hatred, and venom expressed was appalling. Especially... -especially- because these people all claimed to be Christians. It used to be that someone could troll a message board under a fake name, some people do that here, to hide their identity, and say whatever hateful things they wanted, without consequences. But this is sooo different. People who post hateful things on comment threads, or on their Facebook wall have their identity in plain sight. Speech and behavior so abhorrent, I can no longer consider themselves Christians.

So what are they? In my opinion, a breed of radical Christian fundamentalism has been on the rise, not dissimilar to religious white supremacy, or religious islamic fundamentalism. It is so hard for us to comprehend how people who say the bible is their guide, and Christ their God, that they could say or believe the things they do.

This article describes this. He's not setting out to agree or disagree, with the beliefs he describes of this radical religious right. He's just describing the beliefs of these people, and how it affects their worldview.

It's painful to read. I believe many of the things this article describes. I believe many of them are basic Christianity 101. But the problem is some of them are not. And it's possible to craft a worldview made up of the best and worst parts of a religion, and wind up with a horrible aberration of the religion itself. It's as old as time. Popes did it. Hitler did it. The Irish did it. And now western "christian" religion has done it.

http://www.sklatch.net/thoughtlets/pall.html
When you are a Bear of Very Little Brain, and you Think of Things, you find sometimes that a Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it.
JeffreyLong.net
Jesusna.me
@30thirteen

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Eagerness to take out some Muslims

Post by robbyyoung » Sun Dec 06, 2015 9:14 am

mattrose wrote:I am definitely struck by such statements too... even from close friends and family in the faith.

I don't think most Christians have been thoroughly taught in the ways of the Kingdom. They've only been presented with the good news of forgiveness, not the good news of the kingdom. Only Jesus' Kingdom is not of this world, so without knowledge of it... people think only in worldly terms when it comes to such things. From a worldly perspective, it makes a lot of sense to blow away your enemies.

It'd be one thing, perhaps, to favor the American government dealing with Islamic terrorism boldly and directly and decisively.... but to be eager to participate speaks of a lack of faith in Kingdom principles in my opinion.
Hi Matt,

I appreciate your thoughtful consideration of "The Kingdom" life. It is true, the world would consider it strange to be passive even unto death. However, is it entirely sinful to not be passive against violence personally directed at you or your family? I am reminded of the "if" qualifier by Paul (Romans 12:18) when writing to his audience "If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all". However, Paul does re-emphasize in the following verses that passivity is the preferred model of The Kingdom life. Be that as it may, is it a righteous thing to pray that God avenge The Saints and The Innocent?

Which leads me to your next provocative yet truthful statement, "It'd be one thing, perhaps, to favor the American government dealing with Islamic terrorism boldly and directly and decisively...", consequently, christians who work in government having to deal with their nation's security may indeed find themselves face-to-face with Paul's qualifier in Romans 12:18. All in all, you bought out some very good points, and christians, for the most part, should strive in their everyday life to portray The Kingdom model to the world.

God Bless.

Mal
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 6:43 am

Re: Eagerness to take out some Muslims

Post by Mal » Sun Dec 06, 2015 10:06 am

When we look at the history of what is generally viewed as christianity is it not stained with the blood of those who were considered heretics, rebels and infidels? Although we live in a generation that has enjoyed a respite (seemingly) from such atrocities in the name of Jesus, it is due simply to location. Why does it seem so strange that such events should eventually happen here (USA)? It is easy to act civilized when one is treated civil…
Mal - bad... in the Latin.
For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells;

User avatar
jaydam
Posts: 343
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 8:29 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Eagerness to take out some Muslims

Post by jaydam » Sun Dec 06, 2015 11:33 am

morbo3000 wrote:A year or so ago, author Rachel Held Evans, a progressive Christian (or "christian" some of you may say)...

Speech and behavior so abhorrent, I can no longer consider themselves Christians...

It is so hard for us to comprehend how people who say the bible is their guide, and Christ their God, that they could say or believe the things they do.
I think we are separated in our topics a bit. You do not like the attitude with which people discuss, but I believe I am more referring to the willingness to do physical violence.

That being said, I found these points curious in your post. In short:

You negatively view those who would question Rachel Evans biblical authenticity due to her actions, but yourself draw some outside the Christian circle based upon behavior. I would say both parties, those progressives who violate biblical morality and those conservative who likewise violate the Bible, are equally to be called into question. I would agree with you, not just in regards to the conservatives who speak hate, but to the progressives as well, that it is difficult to understand how they believe the way they do if they claim the Bible to be their guide.

I understand that likely we will agree to disagree as to who is being unbiblical. Although I would suggest both parties, more I would draw your attention to the seeming contradiction I feel your words have to judge one outside the Christian circle while not the other.

User avatar
jaydam
Posts: 343
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 8:29 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Eagerness to take out some Muslims

Post by jaydam » Sun Dec 06, 2015 12:09 pm

robbyyoung wrote:However, is it entirely sinful to not be passive against violence personally directed at you or your family? I am reminded of the "if" qualifier by Paul (Romans 12:18) when writing to his audience "If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all". However, Paul does re-emphasize in the following verses that passivity is the preferred model of The Kingdom life. Be that as it may, is it a righteous thing to pray that God avenge The Saints and The Innocent?
Robby,

I have considered hard this passage, and here are some thoughts I have.

What is peace? I would suggest it is absence of violence or the threat thereof. (This definition would prevent the popular idea of imposed peace through might)

Thus, I would say the consideration of Romans 12:18 is twofold:

First - The Christian is to attempt to prevent the introduction of violence into their relationships. Not just being violent themselves, but heading off violent reactions from others. Therefore, in situations where the Christian could act justly and nonviolently, but it would still cause conflict, I believe the Christian is to defer their rights in as much it does not interfere with their confession of Christ.

However, due to belligerence or any number of other factors, the Christians' deference to others may not always prevent violence. Some people will just be out for blood. In this case, the Christian has been unable to prevent the loss of peace.

This leads to the second consideration:

Secondly - Does Romans 12:18 then allow for the Christian to respond violently once peace has been lost? There are many implications to this, not the least of which is that if this is how Christians walked around, not looking to start something, but being completely willing to finish it, then really it seems they are relying upon the second part of the peace definition above - they really operate under peace through threat of violence. This has typically been America's stance, "We won't start anything, but by God if you do we will end it!"

I don't believe this is the heart of the passage because one can then look at the next verse. If peace is lost, in other words if the other party still gets violent despite your best efforts, don't strike back - let God deal with that. Then the passage goes on to say that our responsibility is to feed and water our enemy, contextually I would context the enemy in this passage is the one who has violated the peace and we want to avenge ourselves against.

I know my Christian friends use this passage as the excuse to ultimately resort to opening a can of whoop - as we used to call it - but I can't see that in its heart because it is followed by the prohibition of vengeance. I believe the subsequent prohibition speaks to what is to happen if peace is lost.

The Christian is to defer and maintain peace as much as possible, and when peace is lost, the Christian is to continue to remain loving even as the target of violence.

Thus, the "IF" in this passage is not there to allow the Christian room to ultimately resort to violence, but is a recognition that despite the Christian's best effort, violence may still break out from the other side, however, it should never come from the Christian's side - ever.

Hopefully these thoughts make some sense. I do not have them all straight in my own head yet.

Singalphile
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: Eagerness to take out some Muslims

Post by Singalphile » Sun Dec 06, 2015 1:43 pm

jaydam wrote:Yet my Christian friends express a "bring it on" joy at the chance to take out a bad guy one day if the opportunity presents itself.
In part, this is probably an expression of the desire to protect the innocent and see justice. Those are not necessarily bad things, but I agree with mattrose; many Christians are probably not reading or hearing good doctrine (i.e., instruction/teaching) about our role.

And some people have different personalities which tempts them to be eager to "take out a bad guy" or "teach them a lesson [about gun control, I guess?]". We each have different temptations after all. I suppose it's not necessarily "fair" that they are tempted that way when others (like myself) are not. They should be gently restored. (But anyone who continues to display or approve of animosity is revealing non-Christian fruit, as does approval and encouragement of any sin.)


Sort of related:

They might quote a sentence or two from the Bible as support. It will be taken out of context. I hear the same said regarding the Koran. A sentence or two from it will be quoted to show that "true" Islam is one way (kill or subjugate all non-Muslims) or the other (peaceful and tolerant). If the former, then someone else will always say that the Bible says the same thing. Context is never given (in what I've seen).
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

Post Reply

Return to “Ethics”