John's Commentaries

Original Post from Greg of the Ducati List, September 12, 2001:

Hello, I read your post on Ducati.net and thought, as a fellow Christian, I'd ask you a question that has been troubling me recently.

In regards to yesterday's attack, my first reaction was that the US should immediately seek out and destroy all participants, and supporters of terrorist activity, from "soldiers to civilians and their chickens" so to speak.

Then, I realized that I don't really know what God directs us to do in such a situation. Turning to the Bible, I haven't yet found an answer but immediately came upon the directive to "not render evil for evil to any man" (paraphrased since I do not have my Bible with me at this time). This then made me pause to think if I have ever read a passage in the Bible which would indicate that it is acceptable to God to seek out our enemies for destruction and I am reminded of the commandment to love our enemies.

Of course there are many examples of God directing Israel to war against their enemies and while I know this is historical fact, I also realize it demonstrates the spiritual battle that Christ has already won. So back to my question, what passage of the Bible would we, or President Bush and Congress take comfort in that permits us to seek the destruction of our enemies?

Just in case you're wondering, I am as conservative as you can get with all its implications in constitutional rights. Its just that I ant to bring my thoughts and actions into conformity with God's will and I realized that how I would normally react may not be consistent with the Bible.

Thanks in advance for your response,
Greg

My Response to Greg and My Church Family:

Greg,
Welcome to one of the greatest debates of Christendom.

This is not an issue that can be "proof texted" as we would conveniently like it to be. This issue, the question of a just war, must be contemplated from an integrated understanding of all the teaching contained within the Bible. In other words, we must consider all of the teaching of the Bible, in total, and reason from it the will of God. I have yet to find that God is silent on any subject. He may not speak directly about a given topic. But by dissecting and analyzing the topic I can find where God does speak to the corollary issues surrounding it and by combining His commandments and teachings with regard to the corollary issues I can thus attempt to derive His mind with regard to an unspoken issue such as this.

This is not to say that I can't be in error in my reasoning, just that God does have a position and it is up to us to do our best to derive it from His word.

I had hoped to be able to go to some of my favorite web sites and dig up other more learned people's work on this subject and either point you to it or regurgitate it in my own less than brief style. I quickly came to realize that no one likes to publish on this subject because it draws an incredible amount of criticism from both sides of the issue. And because American Christians considered it to be a non-issue. After all, we live in the greatest free society in the history of the world and God likes us and blesses us and will protect us. Won't He?

Well, I guess we just got the wake up call and we as Christians should be the first on the battle line of competing ideas with a clear and concise treatise on justifiable war based upon the wisdom of God as contained in His Word and logically structured in such a way as to be reasonably acceptable even to those who do not submit themselves to the rule of God.

I will layout for you some of the corollary issues to which the Bible unequivocally speaks. I will not proof text them here but you certainly may challenge me scripturally if you so desire. And I will then deal with those issues individually in further discussions, directly from scripture.

The cognitive dissonance experienced by Christians who wrestle with this issue comes from Christ's own teachings to love our enemies, turn the other cheek, not to return evil for evil, and God's Commandment -- "Thou shall not kill." We contrast this with Christ's command to occupy until His return, His mandate to serve and honor God by being a servant to others, to integrate our love for God into all areas of our lives; thus the heart, soul, mind and strength reference in Matthew, and His directive for the strong to righteously protect the poor and the weak.

Much of the dissonance is not due to any inherent contradictions between the words of the Bible but to the modern day meanings that we have attributed to them.

First of all "kill" is more appropriately translated as murder and refers only to the unjust killing of innocents through deliberation and execution. It does not speak at all to the killing of any other creature other than man nor to the justified killing of men who are convicted under the laws of God or to the killing of men who are a threat to the lives of others. Modern day liberal "Christian" theology has bastardized this commandment to the extent that it now refers to the killing of anything -- from a tree to a convicted mass murderer, with the possible exception of an unborn child. We may justifiably kill men who commit murder and those who seek to withhold from a society its inalienable freedoms which are granted by God and which governments are ordained by God to uphold. This should always be the last course of action, sought only after all other avenues have been exhausted.

When Christ speaks of loving one's enemies he is not commanding that we submit to their evil but instead that we seek the highest good for them both in prayer and in action, that they might come to know the truth that is the saving grace of God through Jesus Christ. When not confronted (sometimes even in war) our enemies may be sentenced to suffer spiritual death that might have otherwise been prevented.

The mandate to turn the other cheek is also a reference to not take action as a result of personal attack but to engage the attacker through a show of God given spiritual strength that defies worldly conduct. At its climax this leads us to justifiable martyrdom through which God is glorified before the world through the faithful testimony of His servants. When this end is not met in giving one's life and there is no laudable objective such as an attempt at saving someone else's life, it is a waste of one's life and with such a person a parallel can be drawn to the foolish servant who wasted the talent that he was given stewardship over. Thus, wide scale pacifism for its own sake is not honoring to God and depending on the circumstances may actually be an exhibition of evil itself.

People often mistakenly draw a corollary from the meekness and submission unto death of Christ himself. In doing so they completely miss the point that Christ's submission was unto God not man and that he submitted despite having the power to decimate every foe in the blink of an eye all for the joy that was obeying His Father and saving those whom His Father had given into His care. If the same could have been achieved through any other means it would have been.

We are not called to save others as Christ did. He has already done that saving work and we would be ineffectual at best. We are called to point others to the Savior as God has gifted us to do as members in the body of Christ which includes self sacrifice where and when it is effective in the furtherance of the Kingdom of God. And let us not forget that the story of Jesus on earth is far from complete. He is coming again and He isn't going to be restrained or meek in His dealings with the evil of this world. So when thinking of Christ as an example of confrontation, one must remember that you have to read the final book to get the whole story.

War in itself is neutral. It is neither good nor bad. The motivating factors of the two sides at war with each other are what makes a war just and good or evil. W.W.II being a prima facie example. The evil intent that motivated the Nazis required an engagement from an equally strong proponent of the good. Had the US not engaged the Nazis and their allies, it would have been complicit in the evil.

God neither condemns nor exalts the act of war. He recognizes it as a natural function of a fallen world engaged in a spiritual battle. He does not glorify those in battle for their victories but He does prize those who seek His council in times of war. The man after His own heart was David -- a full on, in your face warrior.

Christ's directive to occupy utilizes a military term from which can be derived the directions to subdue evil with good, bring God's blessings to all men through the practice of His commands -- by all men, confer civil responsibilities only upon men who are committed to goodness and righteousness, always submit to God and never submit to evil.

To know whether we are acting righteously in the destruction of our enemies we must first know the motives of our enemies. In this case we know that our enemy is committed to the destruction of all within society that can be attributed to the glory of God through the saving work of Jesus Christ. We know that they are committed to the conversion or annihilation of all who oppose them on a governmental or theological basis, as Islam is basically a theocracy.

Under the circumstances our government not only has the right but has the mandate to destroy those who were responsible. Now the extent of that destruction is another matter. Whether to include harboring governments and domestic benefactors in this swath of destruction must be very carefully considered and meted out on the basis of responsibility and continuing threat to the welfare of all people who have been blessed by their Creator with the opportunity to think and worship freely.

May God bless your diligence in seeking His will.

Sincerely,
John A. Showalter

A Response from a Good Friend:

John,
With our very limited knowledge I find it difficult to assume and assert that worship easily gained and free is a blessing. It is quite taken for granted and possibly not a blessing at all. The lukewarm status of the American church which winks at so much sin (consider the movies and TV we watch) is possibly most attributable to a faith the does not require us to "count the costs". God considers the death of His saints a blessed thing. In the marketplace of ideas, American Christendom sometimes considers compassion toward homosexuals as persecution and infringement toward us. This pales in comparison to being sawn asunder or drawn and quartered or burned (although it has often been "Christians" who have done the burning.)

America is capitalist/materialist not Christian. Biblical Christianity appears to be something far different. Already I have heard Christians suggesting that God is punishing us for our sociopolitical mores. Trust me, His displeasure must be great when Pharisaic Christians full of gluttony, greed and arrogance have the audacity to pray for "deliverance" from the homosexual onslaught. Where is God's scale showing which sins transcend others? Those prayers should be, "God give me the love that I cannot muster in myself for these whose sins are more obvious but no less than my own."

Would I fight? I would defend my family. Jesus acknowledged that a house cannot be taken if the master is there to guard it. Is it time to defend against terrorists. Probably, but it will take great minds and wisdom than I have to determine so outright. If you believe our sworn enemies are the State of Islam, I salute you and urge you to not tarry or move to the left or the right from what God would have us do to the sworn enemies of His people. I believe that was attempted during the Crusades. Better yet, perhaps being "aliens" ourselves, we could show hospitality to our aliens and strangers as was commanded in Israel. We are not of this world, but go to a better place... maybe sooner than later.

My Response to My Good Friend:

Thank you for thoughtfully considering what I wrote and for specifically disagreeing in a decidedly Christian and civil manner. I thank God that you are actively involved in thinking about what matters most in God's economy and that you have provided additional insight into the minds of those who make up His Church.

It is obvious that I take exception with a number of issues in your letter even though I can understand where such thoughts might be derived scripturally I don't find them to be unequivocally defined. My perceptions, although covered by sin and general human fallibility, do nonetheless derive equally from scripture and my best understanding of it. I do not purport to be in any way superior in knowledge, judgment or wisdom with regard to what I have written. These are my thoughts as I perceive the mind of God from His word.

I also must admit to a certain amount of prejudice toward the idea of engaging in battle those who have committed such atrocities. I pray that God will give me His wisdom and peace to seek what is truly right and not what is simply expedient or humanly fulfilling. I continue to labor over the issues of justice, mercy and responsibility in considering how we as His people should serve His purposes in this fallen world in which we now live.

With regard to the history of America, I find far more of a Christian underpinning than many would assess given the present revisions of American history that now promote themselves as facts. Could our constitution even be interpreted from any worldview other than that of a Christian? I am not one who sees this country as God's own chosen land. But it has undeniably been used as a force for good more often than not since its inception and has been likewise blessed or cursed, depending on your perception of grace.

I will grant that what is now worshipped in America is an abomination to the one true God and that we as Christian/Americans regularly distort, deride and decimate the very image of God that we claim to exclusively display for the edification of the unwashed masses.

We, and I am admittedly chief in this regard, are certainly pharisaical in nature. And even in my own self-incrimination I cannot escape being entrapped in my own self-congratulatory emotions for being so forthright in my indictment of myself. Suffice it to say that I am a forgiven sinner, but a sinner just the same and that perfection has yet to come down from heaven since Christ's ascendance.

Our charge is to occupy. Not to remain in the shadows ascribing to God's latency the responsibility for our own inaction in blessing others through the knowledge of truth that comes by His Word. We can "love" others to death and often have through misguided programs of social reformation that have masqueraded as "Christianity" over the last 200 years of church history. The same can be said for the zealots that have done unforgivable evil in the name of God, be they self proclaimed Christians, Jews or Muslims.

One can call himself a poached egg that does not make him one. Similarly, Calling one's self a Christian does not make it so. To ascribe to the Church the evil done by self professed Christians who exhibit a wholesale denial of Christian virtues is disingenuous slander at best and I'm sure was not your intent. Yet many do use such statements as a defense for not being actively involved in the engagement of our culture as both Christians and citizens of the state. Like it or not, we do have duel citizenship.

I wholly support your right, as an American, to abstain from involvement in the political process and all acts of war, which may be attributable to it. Such an action is allowable but is not mandated nor spiritually superior to the actions of fellow Christians who seek to live out their responsibilities in the protection of the citizenry of their country.


I take no offense to your commentary and I wish that my comments would be received in kind. May God continue to bless us both as we struggle against the human condition to ascertain and exhibit His will in our lives.

Your brother in Christ,
John