Pacifism

[robbyyoung]

does anyone have the right to be a soldier or a policeman?

I would like to suggest the author is asking the wrong question. The right question to ask is under what circumstances God's normal rules of conduct for human beings is inverted. Christians and non-Christians alike should not kill, loot, plunder, or destroy property belonging to others. My question is: Under what circumstances are soldiers exempt from these laws, and when do they have to obey them? How is the solider to know whether he should behave one way, or exactly the opposite?

Hi thrombomodulin,

God's normal rules of conduct for human beings are not inverted. If God uses government, which He established, to exact His purposes of wrath, let's say death, well, He uses human beings to do it, Christians or otherwise. It's not murder, it's death by God's own hand. Unless you find it impossible to serve in these capacities, unable to abide by Galatians 5, you may have a point. But we know from scripture, that IT IS possible to be in civil government and be a Christian.

You use the word "kill" as if you DO NOT know the meaning in it's context to be "Murder"? I'm kindly asking if you know this to be the proper translation?

Galatains 5 is one of many good measures to satisfy the conscience of any Christain during their sojourn here on earth. God rules over the affairs of men and it is through man He blesses and curses. As a Christian, you may find yourself being used as an instrument of blessings or judgement towards mankind by the hand of God. The intent of the heart, only God knows. Our Christian liberty is vast and should be carfully considered.

Sorry, but I have to cut this short for now. God Bless!

[thrombomodulin]

Robby,

You use the word "kill" as if you DO NOT know the meaning in it's context to be "Murder"? I'm kindly asking if you know this to be the proper translation?

I am aware of the difference in meaning between kill and murder. The point I am raising is not a translation issue, but rather one of discerning whether the taking of a persons life (killing) out to be categorized as murder or not murder in any given situation.

God's normal rules of conduct for human beings are not inverted. If God uses government, which He established, to exact His purposes of wrath, let's say death, well, He uses human beings to do it, Christians or otherwise. It's not murder, it's death by God's own hand.

My question remains unanswered: If I act upon some request of the State to take the life of another person, how would I know whether I have merely killed someone or whether I have murdered someone? You do agree that agents of the State sometimes really are guilty of murder - right?

But we know from scripture, that IT IS possible to be in civil government and be a Christian.

I did not deny this proposition.

[robbyyoung]

Hi thrombomodulin,

My response is in "RED".

Robby,

You use the word "kill" as if you DO NOT know the meaning in it's context to be "Murder"? I'm kindly asking if you know this to be the proper translation?

I am aware of the difference in meaning between kill and murder. The point I am raising is not a translation issue, but rather one of discerning whether the taking of a persons life (killing) out to be categorized as murder or not murder in any given situation. I'm sorry, this is a very confusing reply. Killing and Murdering makes ALL THE DIFFERENCE. A provision was even made for someone killing, not murdering, in the Mosaic Law.

God's normal rules of conduct for human beings are not inverted. If God uses government, which He established, to exact His purposes of wrath, let's say death, well, He uses human beings to do it, Christians or otherwise. It's not murder, it's death by God's own hand.

My question remains unanswered: If I act upon some request of the State to take the life of another person, how would I know whether I have merely killed someone or whether I have murdered someone? What? I thought I said we are at liberty to exercise as much "fruit of the Spirit" your conscience deems necessary. If you believe the State is in violation of Godly righteousness, then stand your ground. But if another Christian's conviction says otherwise, he should stand firm. The sin is in the faithlessness in whatever we decide (Rom 14:23). You do agree that agents of the State sometimes really are guilty of murder - right? Sure.

But we know from scripture, that IT IS possible to be in civil government and be a Christian.

I did not deny this proposition.

[thrombomodulin]

You do agree that agents of the State sometimes really are guilty of murder - right? Sure

So your position is that sometimes when the State takes a persons life it is OK, and sometimes it isn't. That's fine. I also hold the opinion that sometimes the taking of a life is acceptable, and sometimes it is a sin. We call the former killing but it is not murder. The later is both killing and murder. See English definitions below.

1kill verb \ˈkil\ : to cause the death of (a person, animal, or plant) : to end the life of (someone or something)
1mur·der: noun \ˈmər-dər\ : the crime of deliberately killing a person

I'm asking your opinion about the criteria by which a Christian should decide whether any given instance of the taking if the life another is, or is not, a murder. Are you affirming by citing Roman 14:23 that there is no objective criteria at all, and that each individuals conscience is their only guide to right/wrong in this area?

[jriccitelli]

(But we know from scripture, that IT IS possible to be in civil government and be a Christian) I did not deny this proposition. (thomb, 7:37am)

You have by implication, you can’t join a uniformed service or armed force and then later say “I can’t do this” They have oaths to perform the duties of their position. Of course you have the ability to make a personal choice in a situation, but there is no situation in armed forces where you don’t shoot ‘because’ you’re a pacifist.

“… how would I know whether I have merely killed someone or whether I have murdered someone?” (thomb, 7:37am)
I'm asking your opinion about the criteria by which a Christian should decide whether any given instance of the taking if the life another is, or is not, a murder. (thomb, 10:32am)

I would think the answer is: one person is the aggressor, and the other the defendant or victim.
God calls us to discern between right and wrong, one is right, the other is wrong.
“So give Your servant an understanding heart to judge Your people to discern between good and evil” (1 Kings 3:9)
Listen to Me, you who know righteousness, A people in whose heart is My law’ (Isaiah 51:7)
But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil’ (Hebrews 5:13)

how can a soldier obey Jesus and perform his duties? (Schoel)

“… like any job, we want to do our job with all our might and be the best. Still in the military you can be an influence for: good moral, strong courage, discipline, wisdom, camaraderie, friendship, and prayer with other soldiers” Do what influences the best outcome, if you are an officer you try and minimize casualties on either side with Godly wisdom well planned strategy, good soldiers always try to ‘minimize’ killing and or destruction (it can cause more effort, loss and problems), you ‘try’ to take prisoners, but this is not always possible, and sometimes impossible in war.

Has the military in the USA become an idol, usurping the place of God in many people's hearts? (Schoel)

I can’t say I have seen such a thing, but I understand what your saying. I know of guys in military who make it their life, some who take it way over the top, but that’s not the norm. If a Christian does so then he is not very Christ focused. Do Americans on the right idolize military? Good to ask ourselves that, but has any country? In the USA our military can ‘symbolically’ stand for freedom. But idolize is different than a symbol or belief, we believe the US symbolizes freedom (this does not mean 'everything' or anything the US or its politics do symbolize or manifest real freedom). In fact this is why so much emphasis is put on 'remembering' the patriotic symbolism, and historic origins of the US military, without such there would be no USA. A fly by of Air Force jets, or the passing of the flag 'remind us' the reason, respect and security armed forces have given us.

So JR, would you kill an aggressor without a qualm, in order to protect the innocent? But if it were illegal to do so, would you refrain from killing the aggressor without a qualm, and let him attack the innocent? (Paidion)

I wouldn’t say without a qualm, I have said as a 'last' resort.
I meant illegal to own a gun. If it were actually illegal to own a gun, then I would still own one.
If it were actually ‘illegal to kill in someone’s defense’ then I would disobey that law and hold to the higher law and a sense of right and wrong that tells me I have a right to defend myself and others from serious threats. and kill if necessary to stop a hostile person (has there ever been a country or a law ever, where it is illegal to defend yourself?)

[thrombomodulin]

(But we know from scripture, that IT IS possible to be in civil government and be a Christian) I did not deny this proposition. (thomb, 7:37am)

You have by implication, you can’t join a uniformed service or armed force and then later say “I can’t do this” They have oaths to perform the duties of their position. Of course you have the ability to make a personal choice in a situation, but there is no situation in armed forces where you don’t shoot ‘because’ you’re a pacifist.

Rather, It reveals the foolishness of making a rash vow.

“… how would I know whether I have merely killed someone or whether I have murdered someone?” (thomb, 7:37am)
I'm asking your opinion about the criteria by which a Christian should decide whether any given instance of the taking if the life another is, or is not, a murder. (thomb, 10:32am)

I would think the answer is: one person is the aggressor, and the other the defendant or victim.
God calls us to discern between right and wrong, one is right, the other is wrong.
“So give Your servant an understanding heart to judge Your people to discern between good and evil” (1 Kings 3:9)
Listen to Me, you who know righteousness, A people in whose heart is My law’ (Isaiah 51:7)
But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil’ (Hebrews 5:13)

Yes, God has called us to discern right and wrong. This thread is an excellent opportunity to do so. How do you know whom is a victim and whom is the aggressor? Would you affirm that the aggressor must have committed some crime to be categorized as such? What crimes merit the death penalty? Does not being an active solider usually involve following orders to kill or attempt to kill enemy soldiers who have committed no such crime?

Edit to add: Consider the example case I gave above about Indiana alcohol sales on Sunday. While this example doesn't involve a solider and death, it makes for a useful example of defining what the State and its agents are, or are not, authorized by God to do. If a police officer arrests one who buys alcohol on Sunday, whom do you see as the aggressor and whom the victim? Why?

[jaydam]

Your current state is exactly where I'm currently at, although I completely distrust the state and its military to be honest and capable of detecting the right thing to do. Therefore, I'm already convinced that government or military involvement will make any situation worse.

Yet the Centurion found great faith in Christ, but was able to serve a nation who's main purpose was world domination.

Additionally, I'm wrestling with the question as to if violence is ever redeemable. Here is a good article to read on that : http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shane-cla ... 95889.html. Also see Greg Boyd's website Reknew.org and search on "non-violence" for a lot of good information.

Be encouraged...you are asking fantastic questions that get to the heart of the Gospel. May we both find Jesus in our answers.

Dave

If I am walking down the street at night and hear a woman being raped in the alley, is my love to the bad person more important to my love for the victim? I do believe that I should stop the rape, to the point of killing the rapist if he makes the choice to escalate the encounter to that level.

As stated in my original post, my problem is the slope this takes me down, as I struggle with where the rape prevention stops. Do I support a military action to prevent the rebels in Africa who are raping women by the scores there? And then do I support the military infliction of a style of government there which I believe lends itself best to a rape free society?

At what level am I no longer willing to support the things conducive to stopping rape?

Obviously rape being one example of a violent crime with a victim, but not the only example I could use. I could just as easily talk about walking at night and hearing somebody getting mugged in the alley.

Edit: I would also add that I don't believe we "redeem" violence, as not all violence can be called wrong in the first place. God inflicted violence against Israel to bring them back to him. This violence is just and purposeful, not needing to be redeemed. Therefore, it does not seem violence must be only wrong, and must be redeemed. Violence would appear to be a neutral act.

I do find it interesting that when Peter cut off the slaves ear at Jesus' arrest, this shows:

1. Jesus walked with a sword carrier

2. Jesus' response was not to rebuke the violence (although Jesus states a seemingly neutral saying about the sword and those who depend upon it - which many turn into a negative), but Jesus' response was to rebuke the timing and attempt to prevent what must happen.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[schoel]

how can a soldier obey Jesus and perform his duties? (Schoel)

“… like any job, we want to do our job with all our might and be the best. Still in the military you can be an influence for: good moral, strong courage, discipline, wisdom, camaraderie, friendship, and prayer with other soldiers” Do what influences the best outcome, if you are an officer you try and minimize casualties on either side with Godly wisdom well planned strategy, good soldiers always try to ‘minimize’ killing and or destruction (it can cause more effort, loss and problems), you ‘try’ to take prisoners, but this is not always possible, and sometimes impossible in war.

You have truncated my question and removed the main point of it.
Here is the complete text of the question I posted:

How does a follower of Jesus who is a soldier resolve the tension with Jesus' statement to "Love your enemies" (Matt 5:43-48)? Since it is the job of a soldier to fight, kill and destroy the enemies of the government for whom he/she is employed (or provide support services to accomplish that task), how can a soldier obey Jesus and perform his duties?

The question was meant to call into question whether a Christian, called to love his/her enemies, should sign up for a job/career where killing or harming an enemy is a core duty. The statement by Jesus IS NOT "Love your enemies, by minimizing how much you harm or kill them". In fact, the example Jesus left for us regarding our response to enemies is self-sacrificial love where he sacrificed His life willingly, though he had the resources to fight back.

Has the military in the USA become an idol, usurping the place of God in many people's hearts? (Schoel)

I can’t say I have seen such a thing, but I understand what your saying. I know of guys in military who make it their life, some who take it way over the top, but that’s not the norm. If a Christian does so then he is not very Christ focused. Do Americans on the right idolize military? Good to ask ourselves that, but has any country? In the USA our military can ‘symbolically’ stand for freedom. But idolize is different than a symbol or belief, we believe the US symbolizes freedom (this does not mean 'everything' or anything the US or its politics do symbolize or manifest real freedom). In fact this is why so much emphasis is put on 'remembering' the patriotic symbolism, and historic origins of the US military, without such there would be no USA. A fly by of Air Force jets, or the passing of the flag 'remind us' the reason, respect and security armed forces have given us.

The idolization of the US military to which I refer revolves:
- unquestioning support of the US military, regardless of its questionable activities
- trust in our military "to keep us safe" instead of reliance on God
- churches flag-waving and extravagant recognition of the military during meetings

These above 3 reasons make me think that idolatry is a better description than recognition or honor. It is also helpful to understand the similarities between this behavior today in the US and the behavior of many in the German church during the Nazi era. Why is the former acceptable while the latter worthy of condemnation?
IMHO, followers of Jesus should maintain an attitude of skepticism toward anything regarding military.

[jriccitelli]

The question was meant to call into question whether a Christian, called to love his/her enemies, should sign up for a job/career where killing or harming an enemy is a core duty. The statement by Jesus IS NOT "Love your enemies... (Schoel)

Dont sign up if your set on being a pacifist.
That is your definition of the verse, laying down my life protecting and or defending others is how i understand the verse. personal protection or vengence is not to be regarded as a priority for a christian, goodness is a priority. When a situation arises where someones safety is at risk it is 'love for the oppressed' victim or innocent that may override the aggressor, love protects, if love does not protect and care for others, then i dont know how you could demonstrate love at all.
Jesus said love your enemies, he did not say let them kill you and everyone around you for my sake. love them, but dont allow violence to run rampant, you cannot have a society without the sword, any society. I have a hard time believing some believe there could be any major civilization without armed security and punishment.

... Jesus left for us regarding our response to enemies is self-sacrificial love where he sacrificed His life willingly (Schoel)

But remember Jesus also left the disciples with; sell your cloak and buy a knife (not can opener). Jesus was the lamb of God, we are not called to be The sacrificial lambs of God. Jesus fulfilled his purpose, Jesus is coming back and He is not laying down to die the second time. He will trod out the wine press.

How do you know whom is a victim and whom is the aggressor? (Thomb)

During a crime this is usually pretty obvious. Sometimes it is clearly obvious. Even after the fact it is still sometimes obvious, say a drunk driving on the wrong side of the street, or a man walking into a building with a bomb. After the fact, a trial will have to be done, and we have laws that state the punishments. We have to have laws, and without penalties there are no laws. And like i said before, no bad guy is even going to get into the back of a patrol car unless you have armed force telling him to do so (i know i'm not if i don't want to)
You dont 'have to' use your weapon, but it gives the aggressor something to contemplate before making his next move.

i was thinking about three Turkish Christians who were brutally mutillated, after inviting 10 or so muslims to thier office. I think i would have layed my sword or gun out in the open for them to see and contemplate, they 'don't know' if we will pick it up, that is what the sword was for with the disciples, see and contemplate.

[thrombomodulin]

During a crime this is usually pretty obvious. Sometimes it is clearly obvious. Even after the fact it is still sometimes obvious, say a drunk driving on the wrong side of the street, or a man walking into a building with a bomb.

There is a rather short list of crimes that are violations of God's law (e.g. murder), and violations of those may perhaps be punishable by other men. This is a topic worth addressing, but to proceed in an orderly way it is not the first topic should be addressed.

Instead, I would like to begin with analysis of the vast majority of State laws and punishments doesn't fit into that category. I provided the example of alcohol sales on Sunday in Indiana. Is it righteous or wicked for Caesar to create any such arbitrary rule and punish people for breaking it? My opinion is that Caesar is engaging in a wicked act by doing so, and those who help assist Caesar participate in that (whether they are following orders or not). Do you agree or disagree, and why?

After the fact, a trial will have to be done, and we have laws that state the punishments.

Right. But, you see, I am calling into question the topic of which laws are valid and legitimate objects of enforcement. It is one thing to say Caesar can punish law breakers, it is quite another claim to say Caesar can create law.

As far as soldiers are concerned, the main topic of this thread, they do not hold trials. The laws of the United States don't apply in a foreign country, does it? When US soldiers are overseas "doing their job", what crimes is it that they punishing that you see as being worthy of death?