jaydam wrote:
Yet the Centurion found great faith in Christ, but was able to serve a nation who's main purpose was world domination.
The story of Cornelius is interesting, as it describes him as a God-fearing, just and upright man working in the Roman army or police, prior to the gospel, but we aren't provided any further information about his life in Christ afterwards. Perhaps he continued in the Roman military with a sound conscience as he followed Christ; perhaps he found that he couldn't continue Roman military activity as a Christian. Who knows?
While it is true that there isn't any indication in the account that leads us to condemn his military job, it is also true that there isn't enough information given to assure us that military service and following Christ are compatible. This doesn't seem like it carries any real weight to answer the question of Christians and the military.
jaydam wrote:
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.
I found it helpful to understand that non-violence is not inaction. Avoiding reciprocal violence doesn't mean that one does nothing. In fact, love demands action in the cases you list above and others, for both the victim and the aggressor. This may mean deflecting the harm onto oneself to protect someone else, physical restraints, etc.
Another helpful approach is to consider that both parties, the victim and the aggressor, are image bearers of Christ. When we love others, including aggressors and people behaving badly, closer to the way God does, we become more creative in our solutions to an issue.
As an example, what if the aggressor in the above scenario was your brother, son or best friend? Sure, you want to stop the evil action, but the aggressor becomes more than a target.
Rather than attempt to have an answer for every scenario, I'm focusing on learning to love everyone like Jesus and trust that His spirit will guide me if I am placed in a situation like that.
jaydam wrote:
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 doubt victims of violence would ever view violence as potentially neutral.
However, you bring up a good point. I don't know. I mitigate this tension by letting the life of Jesus, his teaching and example guide me primarily, before I look to Old covenant passages for guidance.
