We’ve seen that human solutions are never as good as divine ones. We’ve seen that evil rulers and nations are sometimes agents of God to bring about a greater good. We’ve seen that God’s timetable for dealing with evil often spans decades and centuries.
So let’s tie some of this together. What are the sorts of things that make us forego “Sermon on the Mount” responses in favor of violent responses? It’s usually things like:
- Said dictator/country/terrorist is so evil that we must act
- Said situation is so urgent that we must act
- Military action will solve this situation permanently
Problem is, none of that squares with what we see in the Bible. God and God alone takes care of evil. He often uses other evil people to do it. (which is something to consider when we choose to step into that role!)
God takes care of things on his own time. Part of faith is being willing to wait on the Lord, rather than rush ahead to human solutions.
And our solutions are never as good as God’s solutions. Our wars “solve” one problem and create a new one. World War II was won by working with Communist leaders, which led to the Cold War. The Cold War was fought by arming Muslim extremists against the Soviets, which led to Al Qaida and other terrorist groups. And so on.
What if Christians tried doing things God’s way instead of man’s way? It’s at least worth a try.
“What if Christians tried doing things God’s way” If you mean using someone else to do your killing, I believe most Christians do it that way.
No, Laymond, most Christians think killing (done by them or others) is somehow Christian and is somehow theirs.
I don’t have any killing to be done.
Brother Tim, Please show me where in the bible God promised to fight our physical battles, What do you think happened when those walls of Jerico came tumbling down? We all are the arm of either good or bad, we need to be certian we are the arm of good, and that can only be determined by the word of God/ bible. God knew we were going to have to fight and die, we have to choose whether we fight for Jesus or the prince of this world. but fight we must.
When Jesus overturned the money changers tables and drove out them out with a whip, was that “the Sermon on the Mount way?” or the “violent responses way?”
How many moneychangers did he kill? How many were injured? There were Roman soldiers stationed literally at the wall of the temple; any true violence would have brought an arrest. (See Acts 21) There was no arrest.
Overturning a few tables is NOT justification for violence.
Laymond,
Of course we fight
“For though we walk in the flesh, we are not waging war according to the flesh. For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but have divine power to destroy strongholds.” (2 Corinthians 10:3–4)
We have to choose whether to fight with God’s weapons or man’s weapons. If you want to fight for Jesus, you won’t do it with weapons of the flesh.
Grace and peace,
Tim
Don’t come into my house with a gun and depend on me waiting for God to take it from you, because I won’t. I would ask for the ability to do it myself. “give me the strength, and opportunity”
I’ve lived it, Laymond. Have you? I’ve been on the wrong end of a gun twice, once at home (3 home invaders, about 45 minutes in our home), once at work.
So even though personal self defense is a completely different topic, I can tell you I’m not afraid to trust God in any circumstance.
Well, I don’t want to get into a pi—-g contest, but I am not unfamiliar with gunfire, or hand to hand combat.
Laymond,
I’m just saying that I’ve been in the situation you described, and I’m perfectly willing to let God handle that situation, as well as the ones I’m describing in today’s blog post.
Grace and peace,
Tim
The bible says that Jesus drove ALL of them out of the temple with a whip that he made himself. This most certainly WAS a violent response. Later, Jesus made sure that his followers were armed.
He drove the animals with a whip: “so he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle” (John 2:16)
Had he struck anyone, he could have been arrested. Would have been arrested. You couldn’t just walk into the temple and start whipping people. This most certainly WAS NOT a violent response, at least not in terms of physical violence.
As for the armed disciples, that one deserves a bit of study. I’ve laid out some of my thoughts here: http://www.timothyarcher.com/kitchen/if-you-dont-have-a-sword…/
I can’t read the original hebrew version or anything like that…. just a “top level” reading in English
“And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the tables”. NOBODY lets you just peacefully pour their money on the floor.
I guess there is no persuading you that this was violent, but try this at your next church meeting and see if you get arrested. ;-)
Top level reading in English? Try a Greek interlinear if you want to get at what the original says.
But let’s stop chasing rabbits. None of Jesus followers in the first century nor in the centuries to follow appealed to this example to justify violence. Can we both agree that they were closer to this incident than we are?
We have an incident that twentieth century minds see as violent, yet ancient minds didn’t. We have a man who taught a non-violent path, we have his followers that lived out that path for centuries. And we have modern day readers looking for excuses to do anything but follow that difficult path.
Well I certainly do agree that Jesus taught us to love one another and to follow a path of peace…. we can definitely agree on that.
What I don’t agree with is your assumption that you somehow know that “God’s will” is that we not engage in a particular war. Why would God tell YOU his will? Seems like he would tell President Obama his will, … and maybe he has!
Who would have guessed that it was God’s will for Jesus to be crucified? Yet our salvation depends on it so I assume that God did in fact intend for Jesus to be crucified… the startlingly violent death of his own son was God’s will!
And as for waiting for God to use evil people to take care of other evil people…. I believe God is often waiting for GOOD PEOPLE to get up and take care of things. Following your logic we should only hire evil people to be policemen in case they have to use violence to subordinate someone.
Regardless of your reply, you may have the last word on this topic, OK?
P.S. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do a blog on 12/21/12. The Vatican has just issued a note saying that it will NOT be the end of the world on that day, but didn’t explain how they knew that. What say you? Is the end of the Mayan Calendar the end of the world?
Kevin,
I’m against participation in all wars, not just one particular one. The human reasoning that leads us to fight is always flawed. If Christians weren’t called to fight against the Roman empire, how can we think that we are called to do differently? That was an extremely evil empire. There were 10 periods of intense persecution of Christians under the Romans. God announced judgment upon them. Yet he NEVER told his people to rise up and fight against them.
As for the Mayans, it helps to remember that THEY never said anything about the world coming to an end. I’ve read some good articles by Mexican scholars. I’ll see if they’re in English or Spanish.
Grace and peace,
Tim
Tim, why do you think the Christians were advised to not confront the Roman army in battle.?
Do you think it was because it would be an unchristian act, or because it would be the end of Christianity. Have you ever read about this small skermish called “The Crusades”, surely no true christians were involved there. Surely the Pope said “NO”
Laymond, I guess God wasn’t powerful enough to use the Christians to defeat the Romans. That’s the only reason they wouldn’t have fought. If they’d had a more powerful God, THEN they would have ignored Jesus’ teachings about loving your enemy, turning the other cheek, not resisting evil, etc.
Mat 4:6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in [their] hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
Mat 4:7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.
Tim, you certainly stirred stirred up some coals with this blog. It seems to me that there are adequate OT references to support sword swinging and letting God do it all. When God brought in the Chaldeans, as he had promised Habakkuk and Jeremiah, the faithful children of God were not involved in killing, but there were other battles in which they were commanded to kill every one and everything. Saul lost the kingdom for not killing.
The issue seems to be hearing God listening to his voice, his call. When do we need to sit back and let God do his thing, and when is he calling us to step in, in step with him? Our natural urge seems to be to step in to defend ourselves and our rights, more Declaration of Independence than dependence on God. God seems to have an agenda that is very different from mans. Especially since Jesus’ death and resurrection, he seems to call his people to suffer and die. Our blood seems to be more powerful than their swords.
There is strong biblical evidence of the wrath of God, and we are commanded to get angry, but then we are to get rid of it quickly and without sinning (Eph. 4:26-32). The biblical text only says once that Jesus got angry, Mark 10:34, and it wasn’t about what anyone was doing to him. A couple of other times he looked with anger or seemed to show anger, as with emptying the temple, but when he would seem to have had the most reason to get angry, he was the most peaceful and accepting.
I find it hard to imagining Jesus packing iron. He made sure the disciples had a sword, but then he condemned Peter when he used it. Jesus’ solution seems to be to give his life to end sin, evil and violence. Eye for eye is an improvement over head for eye, but it still leads to more violence, blindness, and simmering resentment than does turning the other cheek. There is a strong tradition of martyrs dying willingly, and that seems to have fortified the Kingdom. We are currently gaining fame for arming ourselves, and I fear it could lead to the church being as discredited as it was by the crusades.
In the heat of the moment it is easier to act than it is to listen.
Jay,
It’s hard to find examples of God’s people waging divinely sanctioned war outside of the context of the Promised Land. That is, it was either for:
(a) Reaching the Promised Land and/or punishing those that impeded them from doing so;
(b) Conquering the land that God had given them;
(c) Protecting and/or purifying that land.
God’s people were not sent out as a regional police force to punish the wicked nations around them.
I heartily agree.
Grace and peace,
Tim
Mat 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
Tim, read Rev. 19-11 thru, 19-21 this does not sound like a peace maker to me. If this was not speaking of the :Crusades” it sure sounded like it.
Tim, tell me that you would not intervene in a shooting (if you had the way) as the one on TV right now in Newtown Ct grade school, where 18 young students and 8 adults were killed- tell me you would wait on God to intervene. while the body count rose to more and more. at what point in the count would you think it proper to shoot the killer. one victim or maybe it would take 100 or only if the killer came for you. when?