Posted on 09/12/2001 10:42:01 AM PDT by realpatriot71
The last 24 hours of been one of shock, horror, and anger for me. I'm sure everyone on the board can identify with this. However, what I struggle with today is, what is the Christian response to this terrible act of evil?
The Christian is not a violent person, yet neither should the Christian allow him/herself to be "walked on". Whenever we see examples of Christ being abused you do not see Him fighting back physically. He defended His position with words, but never with violence (for instance John 18:23). This may not be the best example as Christ had to die - it was "part of the deal". No death no salvation. I also cannot recall a time in any of Paul, Peter, or John's letters where they advocate violence in any form. We are told those who "live by the sword die by the sword". Does this apply only to those who exclusively "live by the sword" or anyone takes up a sword? How far do we go to "turn the other cheek"? Are we not supposed to love and forgive our enemies?
With that said, Romans 13 tells us that Governments are appoited by God to do good, "For he [government] is God's minister to your for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he [government] does not bear the sword in vain; for he [government] is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil" (Rom 13:4). Does this text indicate that it is, in fact, just for us, as a Government, to retaliate in kind?
I'm really interested in comments on this issue.
These gutless bastards owe Caesar big time right now. They can deal with what they owe God on their day of reckoning.
First, one must decide what purpose would be served in retaliating. If it is retribution or revenge, that's one thing. If such punishment (and we're really talking death penalty politics here) is to incapacitate or stop the party from future acts then this is much more consistent.
As many here love to remind us, this nation's government is secular. Were our nation to be governed by christian principles, it perhaps could be illegal to charge interest on loans let alone institute capital punishment.
As a christian, I see deadly force in this framework as necessary to protect the lives of our people, not to exact revenge upon cowards who will burn in hell anyway.
It is time for them to use it.
"To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven... A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war and a time of peace." (Ecc. 4:1, 8).
This is certainly a time where hatred and retribution is not only warrented, not only justified, but required.
We could be pacifists, but that would only invite more terrorists. No, we must strike back, and strike back with every weapon at our disposal. The response must be so spectacular that no one will ever, ever consider doing this here again.
If you are so called, so be it.
But remember, the apostles took up arms to defend Christ when Judas came. One cut off an ear. Yes, Christ disarmed him; it was Christ's time. Christ also violently went after the moneychangers in the Temple and withered a fig tree...
It's hard to translate Christ's message to nation-states. Know though that you're right to practice your religion may depend on your response.
What about Christ at the temple? Kicking people out because they were not following God's law.
Our new enemy is the same - they believe God will "reward" them in paradise as a result of yesterday's actions. Christ, at the temple, confronted "evil" - we owe no less duty in our current circumstance.
I believe that after the attacks yesterday though, those suicide pilots only got to see paradise from afar, for, when ariving in paradise, I'm sure they heard "Depart from me, I know you not" - they are now getting their true reward.
"Oh, let the wickedness of the wicked come to an end
But establish the just;"
Psalm 7:6, 9
Nothing wrong with calling for the destruction of our enemies... of course right now I'm with the "Nuke 'em and let God sort it all out" group.
Suppose we do have a "war" on terrorism.
Suppose also that a certain number of nations agree to participate in the war.
Suppose this coalition guarantees the safety of Israel.
Suppose that war on terrorism is declared a great success?
Suppose that after 3 1/2 years, all hell breaks loose? Sound scary?
The Christian response is to want to see Palestinians killed for celebrating (i.e. just for hating us, not for anything the individual dancers personally did).
The Christian response is to want to kill 100 of somebody for each one killed in DC or NYC (Bin Laden is in Kabul? Nuke Kabul and f--k who else is there).
The Christian response is to morally equate anyone less bloodthirsty than yourself as a friend of the terrorists, and thus an enemy deserving of death.
The Christian response is to prove the size of your testicles by how many Arabs you demand to see dead (NYC taxi drivers included).
The Christian response is to blame "illegals", since these planes were obviously piloted by Mexican busboys.
The Christian response is to say we have to give up some of our freedoms to protect ourselves from terrorists, despite this leaving us vulnerable to our own government (which most of them distrusted 48 hours ago).
The Christian response is to say we shouldn't discuss blame for this going to anybody in our govt or any action our govt took, unless a Democrat can be blamed and the military was not involved.
"...I've blustered out several times today several things I've never thought or uttered before. What am I supposed to do? How can I act? I must act! NO Question, I must act. But what and against whom?
Who & What?
I don't know the who, but I do know what to do: I must be a better human. I must absolutely ensure that I always remain on the high road -- the way to rightness and light and life. But why? Not for me. Not for anything but to know in my heart of hearts that I always -- always -- have the moral authority to utterly destroy in any way required those that would harbor, and more precisely, those that did harbor, the individuals that did this."
Answer: Depends on the century. In the 13th century Christians would do what needed to be done. Some of todays practioners remind me of those whom the poet Dante placed outside the gates of hell-nothing! "...let us go on and think no more of them.."
Only a pure ass would claim to speak for FR in such terms. I will attribute this to a simple lack of judgment on your part. I know the current atmosphere breeds a no small amount of surly discontempt, but please try to be more thoughtful.
Thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.