Posted on 01/07/2020 6:22:37 PM PST by lightman
There’s a schizophrenic Christian Left denunciation of killing Iranian General Qassem Soleimani, claiming it’s“murder” and violates the “teachings of Jesus.” It insists Jesus opposes killing anyone. But then it also tries to mobilize Just War doctrine, which is mainly about when it’s proper to kill people.
The declaration is just latest example of collapse in Christian public policy moral reasoning across the spectrum. Signers include pacifist activist Shane Claiborne, profiled yesterday in The Washington Post, liberal Baptist evangelist Tony Campolo, Rev. William Barber of “Moral Mondays,” Episcopal writer Diana Butler Bass, Emergent Church thinker Brian McLaren, and Kansas pastor/author Brian Zahnd. Interestingly, Jim Wallis of Sojourners isn’t included.
According to their decoration:
Christ himself put it plainly: “You’ve heard it said ‘an eye for an eye’…But I tell you this, love your enemies…” (Matthew 5:38, 44). We believe that when Jesus said we are to love our enemies, at a minimum he meant we shouldn’t kill them. Anytime we rejoice in death, we betray the One who loved his enemies so much he died for them.
So Christianity requires that nobody ever be killed? Here is the pacifist absolutist stance, supported by Claiborne and some but not all other signers. It effectively nullifies all governments, all of which are sustained with lethally armed police and militaries, without which they could not function. Incoherently, most of the signers, including Claiborne, advocate larger, more powerful government, with ever growing coercive power over the details of people’s lives, to implement the ostensible agenda of Jesus, who wants an expansive welfare and regulatory state.
As Jesus did not resist His enemies, preferring death on the cross, so this declaration strongly implies the U.S. government should prefer the death of its people and of other innocents over force against an assailant. Jesus never made this claim on governments, nor certainly did He regard governments as salvific, claiming that authority only for Himself. Of course, Jesus never disputed the vocation of soldiers He met. And certainly Jesus would have favored protecting the assaulted victim, whom the Good Samaritan rescued.
The pacifist Jesus preferred by this declaration is set aside briefly in favor of Just War teaching:
Not all Christians are pacifists and some adhere to the theology of “just war theory” popularized by Augustine in the fourth and fifth century. We invite all Christians to join us in denouncing this recent act of aggression by the Trump Administration.
We recognize that the murder of General Qassem Soleimani not only violates the teachings of Christ, but also violates the core principles of just war doctrine which includes last resort (all other peaceful means have been exhausted), right intention (not just revenge), just cause, proportionality (violence must be proportionate), and competent authority.
There’s no further elaboration, and presumably this ad hoc reference to Just War teaching was to placate the several non pacifist signers like Campolo. Did the U.S. government lack competent authority to strike Soleimani? Was the strike disproportionate to the aggressions of Iran enacted through him? How much more strategic patience should the U.S. have exercised before acting against him? Was the intent not only vengeance but also deterrence? And aren’t states ordained towards some acts of vengeance in pursuit of justice?
Since this declaration isn’t really interested in the Just War teaching, it doesn’t try to answer any of these questions. Sometimes pacifists will deploy Just War in an effort to claim no forceful action can ever perfectly attain its standards, which is actually a rejection of the teaching’s purpose.
Note the declaration condemns killing Soleimani as “murder.” Pacifists essentially believe anyone killed by police or military in pursuit of their duties is “murdered” because no killing is ever morally justified. The declaration doesn’t mention Soleimani‘s or his regime’s many thousands of slain victims, whose sufferings apparently don’t merit concern. Nor does the declaration offer any counsel as to how the USA and others might rebut Iranian aggressions. Only perceived USA misdeed are apparently of concern to them. They lament Soleimani’s death as an “historic act of aggression,” which apparently exceeds all Iranian actions in Iraq, Syria and elsewhere. And they speak repeatedly with certainty on behalf of Jesus:
“Violence does not quell the fires of hostility and hatred, it perpetuates them. This act of violence is a direct confrontation of the core teachings and example of Jesus.”
Presumably Jesus also cares about all the people Soleimani killed and was plotting to kill. Presumably Jesus prefers more than preening political declarations and desires policies that lead to peace and stability for the largest number of people. Presumably Jesus isn’t a big fan of Iranian backed militias that subvert other nations on behalf of the strategic goals of Iran’s theocratic theocracy. But these concerns of Jesus are not the concerns of these Christian Left activists.
These activists condemn “violence,” but if from America. Christian teaching offers no blanket condemnation of violence. It opposes wrongful violence, and distinguishes between aggression and just force. Often such judgments are not easy and require careful thinking. But there’s nothing careful in this declaration.
There are weighty arguments against killing Soleimani. Perhaps his death won’t deter further Iranian aggressions. Perhaps it will further destabilize Iraq. Perhaps the USA is unprepared for Iranian retaliation.
But this declaration singularly lamenting Soleimani’s death isn’t concerned with serious arguments. Sadly, neither is much of today’s Christian political discourse, which prefers trite claims about Jesus and truncated Scripture to substantive debate. How can we do better?
How is letting yourself be killed by someone equated to loving them?
= = =
Hey People - -
Meditate on this^!
Good thing this guy wasn't around in 1939. Am I right, Neville Chamberlain? Up high! Errrrr, down low?
Liberal “Christians” have a bad habit of swapping individual ethics for government ethics, and vice versa.
That’s not an argument. Lots of innocent people also die.
Jesus answered, “See to it that no one deceives you. For many will come in My name, claiming, ‘I am the Messiah,’ and will deceive many. You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. These things must happen, but the end is still to come.…
—Matthew 24:4-6
MAGA BIGLY ping!
Brilliant observation! Would make a great tagline, ergo:
Liberal “Christians” swap individual ethics for government ethics, and vice versa.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer is one of my personal heroes.
And you think the Lord didn't arrange that, also?
And they were oblivious, until the flood came and swept them all away. So will it be at the coming of the Son of Man. Two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left.…
—Matthew 24: 39-41
Great post. Thanks for the ping.
God sent out a lot of people with specific order to kill people in war.
“An eye for an eye” was not intended to be foreign policy advice.
Jesus believed in the Old Testament. How many times did God deliver the Israelite from their enemies in war? Jesus would not have forgotten those victories while giving the eye for an eye advice.
Jesus’s teachings were not general but only pertained to God’s Plan. This is my thinking.
Some say Jesus supported taking up Arms:
Luke 22:36
“And He said to them, “But now, the one having a purse, let him take it, and likewise a bag; and the one having no sword, let him sell his cloak and buy one.”
Jesus is instructing his Disciples to acquire Arms. My thinking is this was done as a matter of deterrence, as a matter of self-defense, self-preservation. There is a reason for this. In my thinking Jesus knows our Earthly form will die sooner or later, so acquiring weapons to prolong our date of eventual death is NOT generally important.
What is important is that death be conquered so that we be freed from bondage. The only way for us to know that death was conquered at Calvary is to know God’s Word.
My thinking on Luke 22:36 - this does not mean Jesus is making a general declaration that all should take up Arms for any reason of defense or deterrence.
Jesus is TELLING HIS DISCIPLES to take up Arms, why?
He is NOT telling them to prepare to attack. Remember Peter in the Garden of Gethsemane sliced off the temple guard’s ear and Jesus rebuked Peter and healed the temple guard.
So why was Jesus telling them to acquire weapons?
Obviously for defense but there is something more. Defense of what? If His Disciples will eventually die by whatever means, old age, crucifixion, disease, why was it important they be armed to live longer?
Again, at the time, Jesus will conquer (and did indeed conquer) death and his disciples learned this. Why then was it important they be able to defend themselves and prolong their Earthly lives? Eventually when they were filled with the Holy Spirit after the Pentecost, they jumped at the chance to die for Jesus. After Pentecost, dying didn’t matter anymore.
But when the temple guards came to the Garden of Gethsemane, why wasn’t it Ok for the disciples to die defending Jesus? The Disciples, even if they won or escaped, they would surely be hunted down by the Romans and killed. And Jesus, no matter what, would have been crucified. So what was the point of the Disciples arming themselves?
Because, in my thinking, the spread of God’s Word, and the Word was alive in Jesus, was part of the Plan. And who was to start the process of spreading God’s Word? The Disciples.
The Disciples were armed to deter violence and arrest so that God’s Word would be spread, God’s Plan would be fulfilled.
And why in our America were we given the freedom to arm ourselves? In my thinking, this is also part of God’s Plan.
Romans 13:3-4 is very clear on what the government is supposed to do about those who do evil. Anything the liberals say about this outside of these verses is for the purpose of obfuscation and deceit. President Trump is the ruler in this case and was the revenger as a minister of God.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to [execute] wrath upon him that doeth evil.
A couple of points:
1. Jesus did NOT allow Himself to be so much as touched by an enemy until it was His ordained time to die. On two occasions mobs came to kill him and once He simply walked right through them, apparently making Himself invisible or deluding the mob.
2. No man could kill Jesus Christ. He said it Himself when He said, “I give myself up.” I have a much longer and more complex theory about that if anyone wants to freepmail me, happy to discuss.
3. All that said, there is NO “New Testament God” vs. “Old Testament God.” Same Guy. The God of the Old Testament told the Jews to utterly eradicate cities of their enemies, including Ai and Jericho, and not even to let the animals lives.
Now, where was Jesus when God gave those orders? Check John 1:1.
So if Jesus was there, do you think He was contradicting God’s orders? I say nay nay.
These "Christians" need to read the Book of Revelations. When Jesus returns, it won't be with lollipops and unicorns.
God gives us every chance to turn away from darkness and into His light, but ... there comes a point of no return.
These same chances were available to a monster like Soleimani. At any point during his life, if he had turned and accepted Christ, he would have been forgiven and accepted into the Kingdom.
Instead he was suddenly (and I'm sure quite surprisingly to him) ushered into hell by a hellfire missle.
The consequences of our actions are ours alone, not the Lord's. And the wages of sin are death.
Excellent summary and very orthodox Christology.
Thank you.
And Amen.
Liberals don’t seem to have a problem killing infants,
or committing sodomy.
So why would we listen to them when it concerns protecting the nation or nations.
Christians know that Jesus’ Father killed almost all of the humans He created all at once in a big flood. Why?
Not only that, most know that He will do something similar to kill off most of humanity again, but next time He will do it with fire from the sky. Yikes! Why would He do that?
And we also know that Jesus will then Judge us all and our works to determine our final dispensation/destination. Terminally fatal yikes!!
I think it’s better to act according to those Truths in our own lives each minute and to not be too judgmental when a murderer is killed so that justice may be done and peace may be restored.
Pray for his victims and pray for his soul and Drain the Swamp!
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.