Tag Archives: Politics

All that is necessary is God

16 Replies

I’m wanting to spend some time this week with a much-repeated phrase: “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” We hear that phrase time again, used to justify this action or that one. As I pointed out yesterday, everyone assumes that they are the “good men” and their rivals the “evil.”

I don’t like the saying. I used to. But the more I hear it used and abused, the more I feel a need to analyze it. And under analysis, it just doesn’t hold up.

Even though it probably wasn’t created by Edmund Burke, this saying does seem to have arisen out of ideas that were popular in the 18th and 19th centuries. Man was king. There seemed to be no limit to what men could do. Who needed God? God could be acknowledged as a creator who set in motion a marvelous creation… and nothing more. If anything was going to be accomplished, it would be done by men.

If evil was to be defeated, it would be by good men, unfettered by the need to look to God for approval of their actions.

All of which makes me understand why non-Christians spout such phrases and marvel at the fact that Christians will repeat them. All that is necessary for the defeat of evil is God. It begins and ends there.

Look at the book of Revelation. What would the recipients of that book/letter have thought if someone had come and said, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” I think they’d have said, “Here, read this. It says something different.” They were being called to “do nothing” in the eyes of the world. They were to pray. They were to be faithful. They were to expel false teachings from within their own community, but as far as the evil empire was concerned, they were to do nothing. (which would have drawn the ire of the “all that is necessary” crowd)

For God had promised to take care of evil. Maybe not as quickly as we’d like, hence the cry “How long?”. But it is God who is responsible for stemming the advance of evil. Even when we are called to be help in that, we need to understand that the victory does not hinge on our action. As Mordecai told Esther, “If you keep silent at this time, relief and deliverance will rise for the Jews from another place.” (Esther 4:14) If good men “do nothing,” God will raise up deliverance from another place. It doesn’t depend on us.

All that is necessary for the defeat of evil is God. It begins and ends there.

That’s my first criticism of this saying. It’s godless. We live in a society where saying we trust in God is admired and actually trusting in him is ridiculed. Sadly, that “god-free” attitude has permeated the church, as well.

Let’s make “In God We Trust” more than a phrase stamped on a coin. All that is necessary for the defeat of evil is God. Let’s act like we believe it.

Good men, evil’s triumph, and a spurious quote

8 Replies

Edmund Burke

There is a saying, usually attributed to Edmund Burke, that has been called “the commonest political quote you will find anywhere on the World Wide Web.”* It goes something like this:

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing

It goes “something like this” because the statement exists in many different forms:

  • All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing
  • All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing
  • All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing
  • All that is necessary for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing
  • All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for a few good men to do nothing
  • All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for a few good men to do nothing
  • All that is necessary for the evil to succeed is that good men do nothing

And so on.

It’s rather obviously an apocryphal quote. In fact, you can’t find anything of the sort by Edmund Burke, unless you count the quote: “When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.”(Thoughts on the Cause of Present Discontents) You can find, interestingly enough, his thoughts on maxims in general:

It is an advantage to all narrow wisdom and narrow morals that their maxims have a plausible air; and, on a cursory view, appear equal to first principles. They are light and portable. They are as current as copper coin; and about as valuable. They serve equally the first capacities and the lowest; and they are, at least, as useful to the worst men as to the best. Of this stamp is the cant of not man, but measures; a sort of charm by which many people get loose from every honourable engagement.
(Edmund Burke, “Thoughts on the cause of the present discontents,” 1770. In The Works of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke, edited by Henry Froude, Oxford University Press, 1909, Volume 2, page 83, lines 7 to 16.)

The saying that evil men will triumph if good men do nothing is a good illustration of what Burke is saying. At first blush, it sounds reasonable enough. It’s easy to remember, at least in general terms. It’s general enough that it’s been used as a rallying cry for human movements of all stripes, for almost everyone considers themselves to be “good” and their opponents “evil.” It can be used to justify almost any action as long as the person doing it considers himself good.

I’d like to spend a few days talking about the concept, since I’ve heard it used to promote all sorts of political, social and military action on the part of Christians. Before I begin to analyze what’s being said, I’d like to hear your thoughts on the inactivity of good men and the triumph of evil.

Appendix: Martin Porter offered some helpful suggestions for avoiding bogus quotes:
Principle 1 (for readers)
Whenever you see a quotation given with an author but no source assume that it is probably bogus.
Principle 2 (for readers)
Whenever you see a quotation given with a full source assume that it is probably being misused, unless you find good evidence that the quoter has read it in the source.
Principle 3 (for quoters)
Whenever you make a quotation, give the exact source.
Principle 4 (for quoters)
Only quote from works that you have read.

*This phrase comes from an analysis of the many variations of the Burke quote: http://tartarus.org/~martin/essays/burkequote.html

Biblical interpretation along party lines

18 Replies

Funny how our politics can shape our theology. I wish the opposite were true all of the time, but I can’t help but think that our biblical interpretation often gets molded around our civic ideology.

The other day, someone passed on a writing supposedly by David Barton. In this piece, the author says that he feels that the Bible teaches us to respect the office of the President, but not the President himself.

I disagree. I haven’t fully agreed with any president since I was old enough to realize how the world works. If you’ve read this blog much, you probably realize that I’m neither a political activist nor a believer in the theory that America is God’s new chosen people. But I believe that the principle of respect toward rulers is taught in the Bible. Yes, I know that Jesus called Herod a fox and the Old Testament prophets could be pretty hard on the kings they spoke with. But there are some pretty clear New Testament passages that talk about honoring the king and respecting authorities.

Some brothers in Cuba were angered when prayers were offered for Fidel Castro at a national preachers conference. I wasn’t present, but I agree with the principle. We are to pray for leaders, pray that there be peace so that we may go about the task of proclaiming the kingdom of God.

I don’t think we can say, “I don’t like what this man is doing, so I’m free to not respect him.” When Paul and Peter taught the need to honor the authorities, they were talking about the pagan Roman rulers, men like Nero.

The article that I read offered no textual evidence as to why Christians should feel free to disregard the command to honor those in power. Political reasons were offered, of course. But it’s a dangerous thing to start down the road of ignoring what the Bible says just because we don’t like it.

A time to mourn

2 Replies

As Ecclesiastes says, There is “a time to weep and a time to laugh, a time to mourn and a time to dance.” This is a time to mourn. 38 people were killed when a helicopter was downed in Afghanistan on Saturday. Not 30. Not 22. 38 people. We don’t just count the Navy SEALs nor the U.S. servicemen. The loss was just as great for all involved.

It’s tempting to use this moment for political purposes. If you favor withdrawing troops from Afghanistan, this proves your point. If you oppose withdrawing troops from Afghanistan, this proves your point. If you support the President, this proves your point. If you oppose the President, this proves your point.

But this is a time to mourn, not to politick. I posted a comment on Facebook yesterday (in a group), and I now think that it was mistimed. There are points to be made, but this isn’t the moment. This is a time to mourn.

It’s only natural, I guess, that we in the U.S. should relate to this death more than the recent killings in Norway. Had these been servicemen from the base here in Abilene, I would probably feel it even more. But I can’t help but think that citizens of the kingdom of heaven should mourn all deaths, not just the passing of those geographically or ideologically close to us.

I would ask that, if you feel pain today, that you remember that pain when you hear of other deaths, of suicide bombs and drone strikes. Even if they aren’t Americans, even if they aren’t specially trained soldiers, we should feel the pain of each and every loss. May those days also be a time to mourn.

Maybe the early Christians were right after all

14 Replies

Photo by Ove Tøpfer; from Stock Xchange

Excellent discussion yesterday. I’m always hoping for a little push back. That helps me sharpen my thinking and test my ideas.

I want to try and further explore yesterday’s topics, based on some of the discussion:

  1. There are real limitations to saying, “I don’t see _____ in the New Testament.” I do recognize that. But I expect what we do today to at least fall in line with what is in the Bible, to not run counter to the examples there (Francis Chan has an interesting video that talks about this). And if we feel the need to circumvent some biblical teaching, I’d like at least a hint that early Christians saw it the same way. There is a prohibition of eating certain things in Acts 15, yet we have several passages that seem to say that all foods are lawful for us. That’s the sort of thing I’m looking for.
  2. Our situation is different today, with Christians representing such a large percentage of the population of many nations. Does that change how we view God’s teachings? I’m asking as much as anything. I’m wrestling through that one. Here are some thoughts:
    1. As Christians, we are called to give primary loyalty to the Kingdom of God. Even as a Roman citizen, I don’t get a picture of Paul looking to promote the interests of Rome. If Christians come to “power” within a certain country, their actions should be guided not just by what is best for that country, but by what is best for the world in general. That would be a political nightmare here in the United States.
    2. As Christians, we are to live by Christian principles at all times. Imagine what that would look like in governing a country. When negotiating with other countries, we would look to serve them, trying to meet their needs. We would return all land that we have taken from other countries, be it through war, be it through intimidation. Wars would be limited, if not eliminated. There is no way a Christian nation would be in a constant state of war for 70 years.
    3. To some degree, our governments are set up to rival much of what God does. Like the men of Babel, humans today look to band together and make a name for themselves, looking to find in one another what they should be seeking from God. I’m still trying to work out in my head how Christians can effectively be a part of that. I haven’t figured it out.
    4. Even where our situation differs, our dependence on God can’t change. We can’t put our trust in horses and chariots. We need to find the courage to imitate the Christians in Acts 12, despite the scorn and ridicule of brothers who choose not to do so. We need to be willing to let nations rise and fall when necessary, to trust God even when He raises up an Assyria or a Babylon to do His will. We need to be willing to honor Caesar even when Caesar is evil. Honor, but not worship.

OK, them’s my thoughts. I’m sure today the good ideas will be in the comments, as they were yesterday.