Where would Jesus go?
I had an opportunity to tour the museum at West Point. As I toured the museum, a sense of sadness came over me. While i have great respect for those are in the military and their brave service, I had this sense of grief come over me because I came to realization that this museum was not only a tribute to people, but to the science of taking human life. There were weapons of every kind, stemming from the early days of warfare until now. It was if killing was being glorified.
If you have visited my blog over the past few months, you will know that Jay Bee has commented a few times on the issue of war. I love him. He is related. He served in Viet Nam. For many, the conflict there was begun under false pretenses. Veterans of the Viet Nam conflict did not receive the welcome that others who had served in other conflicts received. In fact, many were spit on when they returned. Was it their fault they were sent to Viet Nam?
Many would also say that the Iraq conflict started under false pretenses as well. Many will ask, "Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Where are the terrorist links?" I don't want to debate any of that. I think the story of destruction and lives lost speaks for itself.
The anabaptist tradition (Mennonites and Amish sects are among them) holds that Christians must never engage in acts of violence. In fact, I had a conversation with a Mennonite brother recently who asked me, "Is the Salvation Army a 'Peace' Church?" I really could not answer him. I fumbled around for answers. Catholic dogma does suggest that there is cause for a "just war."
Our oldest son was recruited to attend West Point. If he had enrolled in West Point, he probably would have been in the middle of the conflict in Iraq or Afghanistan. Frankly, I am releaved that he did not attend West Point. I would, like many other parents my age, be on pins and needles now.
What ever view you hold on war, politically or theologically, grief must overcome you as you see pictures from the front.
As we look at this question of war, especially as we wonder whether or not the reasons behind the Viet Nam and Iraq conflicts are true, even as our president is out now stumping on a promoting the war in Iraq, I have some questions about all of this. I want a debate on a theological basis, not political. I don't want proof texts, I do want contextual conversation on this issue. Please no pat answers will do here. I don't want to trivialize this issue.
This question has haunted my friend Jay Bee for years. He has never, to his liking had an answer to this question, from many Christians.
Here are the questions he has asked and i want us to consider:
Where would Jesus go? Would Jesus have gone to Viet Nam? For that matter would Jesus have gone to Iraq? We know he was and is there. I think Jay Bee wants to know if Jesus would serve as a soldier.
I know this is a hypothetical question at best. We may not agree on this. I want us to be respectful with each other. I want you to know that I stand with great respect for our military.
I will try to refrain from commenting on your comments. Jay Bee, you need to hold back too. I told you I would ask this for you.
So where would Jesus go?
What do you think?
If you have visited my blog over the past few months, you will know that Jay Bee has commented a few times on the issue of war. I love him. He is related. He served in Viet Nam. For many, the conflict there was begun under false pretenses. Veterans of the Viet Nam conflict did not receive the welcome that others who had served in other conflicts received. In fact, many were spit on when they returned. Was it their fault they were sent to Viet Nam?
Many would also say that the Iraq conflict started under false pretenses as well. Many will ask, "Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Where are the terrorist links?" I don't want to debate any of that. I think the story of destruction and lives lost speaks for itself.
The anabaptist tradition (Mennonites and Amish sects are among them) holds that Christians must never engage in acts of violence. In fact, I had a conversation with a Mennonite brother recently who asked me, "Is the Salvation Army a 'Peace' Church?" I really could not answer him. I fumbled around for answers. Catholic dogma does suggest that there is cause for a "just war."
Our oldest son was recruited to attend West Point. If he had enrolled in West Point, he probably would have been in the middle of the conflict in Iraq or Afghanistan. Frankly, I am releaved that he did not attend West Point. I would, like many other parents my age, be on pins and needles now.
What ever view you hold on war, politically or theologically, grief must overcome you as you see pictures from the front.
As we look at this question of war, especially as we wonder whether or not the reasons behind the Viet Nam and Iraq conflicts are true, even as our president is out now stumping on a promoting the war in Iraq, I have some questions about all of this. I want a debate on a theological basis, not political. I don't want proof texts, I do want contextual conversation on this issue. Please no pat answers will do here. I don't want to trivialize this issue.
This question has haunted my friend Jay Bee for years. He has never, to his liking had an answer to this question, from many Christians.
Here are the questions he has asked and i want us to consider:
Where would Jesus go? Would Jesus have gone to Viet Nam? For that matter would Jesus have gone to Iraq? We know he was and is there. I think Jay Bee wants to know if Jesus would serve as a soldier.
I know this is a hypothetical question at best. We may not agree on this. I want us to be respectful with each other. I want you to know that I stand with great respect for our military.
I will try to refrain from commenting on your comments. Jay Bee, you need to hold back too. I told you I would ask this for you.
So where would Jesus go?
What do you think?
posted by Larry at 6:40 AM
26 Comments:
Wow. This is easily the most dangerous and divisive question that you’ve asked so far. But I appreciate your asking it.
I want to say, first of all, that I am also a bit undecided on this whole thing. It seems, as Christians, that we have a responsibility to stand against injustice. And, in the case of ruthless dictators, there’s plenty of injustice to go around. But I’m also not naïve enough to believe that we’re there for the Iraqi people. We’re not. We’re there to protect ourselves and our interests. Still, a ruthless dictator was taken down. So is that enough to allow me to support the war? Sigh. I still don’t know.
What I do know is this. On a much smaller scale, Japan is beginning to buy up the United States. From businesses to real estate, the Japanese have become a huge player in the American market. And Americans resent them for it, especially the unionists who are now forced to work and live according to Japanese standards, standards which are much harsher than U.S. standards. Now look at the Middle East. On a much larger scale, the West (and especially the U.S.) pretty much owns the Middle East. They’ve bought up, not only the worlds largest oil reserves, but they’ve also bought and paid for the leaders of the countries where those oil reserves rest. Imagine with me, if you will, owning the greatest asset in human history, yet still ending up poor. How can that happen? There’s only one way. You got robbed. And that’s how Arabs (etc.) feel. They look around, see what they’re sitting on, yet watch as their family, friends, and themselves still live in poverty. And all of this while Americans continue to get richer and richer. Think of how Americans feel as they watch the Japanese buy up the American market. Now multiply that by a hundred and you’ll have a picture of the resentment that the Middle East feels towards the U.S.
And here’s the point.
The war debate is an important one because it will (hopefully) help us as we make future decisions. But if we dissect this thing, hoping to learn from it, and never step back before the war and ask the question, “why do they hate us so much?”, we’re never going to avoid these kinds of problems in the future. The U.S. is on a massive campaign to touch up its image internationally. And, rightly so. But if we had taken the time, before 911, to treat people better, 911 wouldn’t have happened.
And that’s where the church comes in.
It doesn’t matter whether you’re Republican or Democrat, as a Christian we have a responsibility to hold our leaders accountable. The Bible speaks very little of morality, yet it goes on and on, and on, and on (etc.) about justice. Yet, as the church, we seem to jump at the chance to hold our leaders accountable on morality issues (gay rights, for instance) yet seem to be completely oblivious to the injustices that are taking place. I believe, for many of us, it’s because these injustices line our pockets, in one way or another.
I hope that I have not been disrespectful to the topic Larry. I mean to stay very much on board. But I don’t think you can discuss the war without asking what got us here in the first place.
Chick Yuill once said to me (and others at a table I was sitting at) that if you could convince him that Jesus would have ever picked up a gun to use it, then he might pick one up himself (or something to that effect).
My thought a few weeks later was, "Wait a sec, Jesus doesn't need a gun." (tongue-in-cheek) :)
I think there are two questions we need to answer. The first is whether governments are called to the same "turn the other cheek" standard that Jesus called individuals to.
I, for one, don't know how to answer that question. Render to Ceasar the things that are Ceasar, unless, of course, they violate God's law. So where does that leave us?
C.S. Lewis once delivered a speech entitled, "Why I Am Not A Pacifist". I think the sum of his argument was that until evil is banished from the earth forever, men will grow worse and worse (as Paul said), and that for good men not to wage war against evil men is unthinkable. (Someone else said it a different way, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.")
Now, whether war is ever just in any number of instances - that's a completely different question to whether a certain war is just in a particular instance.
I do buy the sort of cliche-esque saying that there is a certain peace that only comes on the other side of war. We're back to military metaphor again, but Revelation does talk about Jesus as the King riding on a white horse and His army fighting against the beast and his armies. There is definitely peace on the other side of that great war. It's just a matter of what you believe that passage is talking about.
So the second question is, "What is your end-times theology?" (Do you believe that the world will keep getting worse and worse and that Jesus will come in and save the day? Or do you believe that the Church (and/or The Salvation Army, as some believe) will "initiate the great final conquest of the Lord Jesus Christ"?)
I think that answering those 2 questions (government vs. individuals; end times theology and our role in its fulfillment) will inform our view on the justness of war. I'm not done wrestling with them yet, so...
Iraq and Viet Nam are certainly debatable. However, it's hard to argue against the classic example of standing up to Hitler.
Would Jesus have been amongst the men of the Greatest Generation? Who can be sure, but I'm sure God wanted Hitler stopped - so would Jesus be a soldier in that particular "just" war? Would he have dodged the draft?
Jesus came at a time when the only significant “politics” He had to engage in was his positions that put Him on the cross, fulfilling His purpose for coming. This was of course, in God's perfect plan and timing. Perhaps Jesus would not have ever had to make that choice as war time would not have been the right time for his coming? (kind of out on a limb on that one, maybe)
Probably the question is instead, what would Jesus have us do about a war (maybe that's what you were after also)? I don't have a lot of insight on that one either. It's probably one of those situations that we'll never really know for sure. I guess individuals have to follow where they feel God is leading on that matter.
Interesting question. Sorry I didn't have much to add.
I was drafted during Viet Nam and trained infantry. Never having fired a gun much before, I learned how to fire everything from a .45 calibre pistol to a shoulder firing missle to take out jets (and the people in them). I could have been a concientous objector, but chose not to. To this day, I'm not certain why. I was not sent to Viet Nam, but would have gone if required.
My nephew-son Michael has just finished a tour in Afghanistan following a tour in Iraq. He's a combat medic. I'm very proud of him.
My nephew Derek serves at West Point in the music forces. I'm very proud of him.
The military is not really much about killing, even in times of war or conflict. Police are not only engaged in armed matters, but largely protection.
I conclude that I don't see a coflict in these personal pictures. I see daily issues that need the presence of Christ.
The families of those who have lost their lives, both Iraqies and others, need the presence of Christ. Death and injury under these circumstances is tragic. I believe God desires to redeem these circumstances.
yes, Jesus would go to these wars -He wouldn't sputter about whether or not they were 'just' or unjust. .He would go because there is so much need for healing in war. . and who better to heal than Jesus? not just soliders would need his touch, but citizens of all ages. He would be a medic, a surgeon, a nurse, a priest. He would be with his people no matter where they went - many of His people have gone to war or been affected or involved in war -- I don't think that wild horses could have kept him away.
maybe i'm simplistic here. . but i don't see any other way to be. I don't feel qualified to dig up any theological or political gold nuggets.
Kathryn, thank you for your comments. I thought the exact same way when I first read this post. Christ would be wherever needed most. He dealt in reality, not ideology. He wouldn't waste time debating "just" vs. "unjust." Where He was needed, He was and is. Would He fire a weapon? -- doubtful -- I see Him standing in front of those at whom the weapon is aimed and taking a bullet for them. Much as He did on the cross. Did He not preach "turn the other cheek?"
Christians who serve in the military, like Michael and Derek, should be applauded. There is a need for Christ in the military just as there is in all other places. Perhaps even more so...they are at the heart of the suffering, just as Christ promises to be near to us in times of suffering and sorrow.
Eddy said "As Christians do we have an obligation to stand up for these people in a physically violent way or do we keep with the idea of not being concern with the things of this earth?" I'm confused, the only way to be concerned with the things of this earth is to be violent? Maybe that is not how you meant it, but that is how it comes across.
I’ve been resisting the urge to respond to Eddy’s comment but, Andi mentioned it, so I’ll respond.
I had the same question that Andi had. Are you (Eddy) suggesting that the only way to deal with an abusive father/husband (for example) is through violence? It seems as though you are.
I’ll admit that my first instinct would be to get physical. It would be my first instinct because wisdom takes time to reflect, while my flesh reacts immediately. So, in the case of an abusive father/husband, my first instinct would be to react physically. But, if I happened to be walking in the Spirit that day (and, therefore, using the Spiritual gift of wisdom), I would have to consider the fact that, even the abuser is redeemable. Hard to accept, I know, but no less true. God wants to redeem that abusive father/husband just as much as he wants to redeem that child/wife. So, if I’m looking at him through Jesus’ eyes, I would want to respond in such a way as to protect the child/wife, but to still show love towards the abuser. This would mean getting the child/wife away from the abuser, in a way that is as least physical as possible, and then show up the next day (and the next, and the next) to visit with the guy and to love him as God has called me to.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Sorry to confuse you Eddy, let me try to be clearer.
If I were walking in the Spirit that day, I would not be violent with the guy in any way. At most, I would restrain the guy from attacking his child/wife. And by “restrain” I mean to literally hold him back. As somebody who has worked with both special needs kids and at risk kids, I can tell you that neither the U.S. or UK governments consider “restraining” to be an act of physical violence or aggression but a means to keep somebody from physically harming themselves or others.
Btw, I read your blog (and these comments) and I’d like to thank you for finally taking the “angriest Christian alive” award from me. Larry and Drew gave it to me a couple of years ago and I’ve been trying to unload it ever since. : )
Eddy,
Interesting points you raise. I don't necessarily disagree with everything.
I would respectfully ask that you refrain from name-calling. That does us no good in the Church. If you want to comment and debate, please do so in a respectful manner. If you choose to continue to hurl verbal assaults, then I would ask that you not comment on this blog again. Your views are welcome not the verbal abuse.
By the way Eddy, you would be surprised to know that I am called by many people one of the most conservative people they know. Go figure?
To everyone,
I do appreciate your attempts to keep this thoughtful and civil. I think this discussion is helpful to the church.
Phil,
You do raise a good point on the whole Revelation interpretation. I think the Kingdom has come and that the Kingdom is spiritual.
Chief,
Understand that I have great respect for the military. I think the question at hand is maybe "How would Jesus serve?" I am not sure I could pull a trigger.
Pete,
I think that Jesus may have engaged in a fair bit more on the political front then you assert. You are right though, it did nail him to the cross.
Heather, Andi and Kathryn,
You all are just too smart for me. Actually, I had never thought about the healing route. Medic? Maybe.
Tim,
I think you hit Jay Bee's question on the head. He is interested in the cause. He wants to know what got us there. I think he is interested in the ethics behind the war and whether those are compatible to the Christian cause.
I think he has a whole different take on WWII and even Afghanistan.
I am not sure anyone has really answered him.
As you all would know from the original post, I am asking this for him.
Jesus just might go to St.Thomas get a sun tan and wait till the world comes to it's senses.
Tim, good golly man did you even answer or try to answer Larry's question? I read your blog a couple of times and I still don't know where you went. I had to quit because my head was spinning much like it used to in College on many an occasion.
I think Jesus would defend those who are unable to defand themselve. He would restrain those who were abusing children if he came across it. I too have had to restrain students as I was a Behavior Disorder teacher in Jr.High. I have been in situations where the level of violence I had to demonstrate was commenserate to the level that was forced upon me.
Is it not more a matter of the heart? I could be as violent has I needed to be but my heart was doing it because I truely cared for the child.
I beleive Jesus would go to Iraq and Viet Nam. I also believe that God looks at the heart of the soldier. These are not men and women who are simply indoctrinated weapons. They have souls. Jesus cares and knows each heart that is on the battlefield.
The individual United States military person is the most compassionate military person in the world. The signs of the times dictate that wars will continue to escalate until His return.
Jesus would go headlong to the front.
“Tim, good golly man did you even answer or try to answer Larry's question?” blue
“Tim, I think you hit Jay Bee's question on the head. He is interested in the cause. He wants to know what got us there. I think he is interested in the ethics behind the war and whether those are compatible to the Christian cause.” Larry
Um yeah blue, I guess I did.
You know, I started off by saying that I was still undecided when it came to the war in Iraq. Now I find it interesting that those who are most gung ho about it also find the need to take shots at those who are not or, who they perceive are not.
Somebody mentioned that Jesus did not step into a political situation when he came to earth and that the only thing he had to focus on was his death on the cross. I was going to let that one go in the interesting of discussion, rather than debate, but now I think I’ll respond.
Jesus did not step into a political situation? The Jews homeland was occupied by the Roman government and its people. The Jews were living under Roman rule and Roman law. At the very moment that Jesus arrive and lived out his life on earth, there were many who wanted a revolution. In fact, there were several who were trying to lead one, and many assumed that that’s exactly what Jesus was there to do. That’s why he had to answer the question, on so many occasions, of where his allegiance lay. People assumed that he had come to lead a revolution. In fact, most people shared the belief that the Messiah would come as a warrior. But Jesus made it clear, on a number of occasions, that that is not what he had come to do.
I’m still undecided about the war, but somebody please tell me what in the world about Jesus’ life would lead you to believe that he would go to war???
I think a few have alluded to this, but I'll say it too: I certainly think Jesus was in Viet Nam, is in Iraq, etc., as the Chief said, in order to redeem those situations. I cannot find anything anywhere, though, that convinces me that Jesus would be carrying and using a weapon.
As much as you wanted to avoid the politics, Larry, they crept in - evidence that sometimes our faith gets contorted by our patriotism. If Jesus was going to spill blood for a "just cause," don't you think we would have seen it in the gospels? My memory takes me to the scene in the olive grove (John 18) when Jesus not only reprimanded Peter for the act of cutting off the high preists servants ear, but healed the man as well. Does this not speak volumes?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Brett,
Thanks for the good thought, "our faith sometimes gets contorted by our patriotism." By the way, I was not even aiming my comments at the US military as some assumed. It was a general question. It is amazing to me that when we are asked to think sometimes our patriotism shoots up defenses.
Tim, I guess I was focused on Larrys' question, "Where would Jesus go?" Don't get me wrong you gave a very nice disertation. I was really tying to figure out in my mind what Jesus would do and would He go. If I misunderstood Larrys' premis and the spirit of the question then please forgive me. But I have to forgo my bias and shortcomings and really seek the mind of Jesus. Would He go?
Maybe I took the question to literally. But still the question remains. I think he would go. I guess my thinking on this is if He is there in Spirit then it seems logical that He would go in person.
we are a fallen race. it's a moot point to be discussing whether or not Jesus would participate in clearly human acts of depravity - which I think violence is regardless of situation. If Jesus were human I would say "I cannot speak for Jesus, I don't really know what he would do in this situation"...however, the character of Jesus, the righteousness of Jesus, the holiness of He who came to save is CLEAR. Is undeniable. He has, as many have said, made a life of showing humans that we can rise above our nature and become like him (not him, but as much like him as our humanity will allow).
I like the thought that Jesus would be a medic. the Great Physician!
I have feelings and thoughts on the disgusting nature of the wars mentioned and why one is more acceptable than another. But the point is, if we are talking about Jesus and what HE would do I think that I know my Savior and he would not take up a weapon of human destruction. I believe he would take up a weapon of 'sin-destruction' as corny as that sounds and fight against the sin of man.
During a draft time he may have been crucified - again. He would not have thought twice of it.
Soldiers, patriots are honorable and upstanding, members of our families. I have the greatest respect for those fighting for our freedoms and trying to protect the weak and oppressed. Many wish we could to more, most think we can do more around the world to help those in need.
Bottom line for me: we are a fallen race. Jesus is holy. Period.
I think on a previous post someone has commented on this exact illustration. At OTE last year Bart Campolo told a painful story of a pastor who was mentoring a young man. I think the story goes is that this kid was caught on the way to kick the crap out of the some kid. It turned out, that the kid he was about to mess with had been for some time interfering with his younger brother. The police would do nothing, and the only defense this kid had was to take matters into his own hands. Was it right? No. Was it right that someone messed with this boy’s brother? NEVER! We should not allow that behaviour to continue; we do have a responsibility to those who are being messed with. (Isaiah 1:17) However Christ is for all peoples. One day I was coming home from a ministry site slating, horrendously ripping apart the band, and those I was with listened to my every word. Once I had finished, which being a mouth was quite a while, Beth turned to me and said, “But they need Jesus too!”
In Yancey’s “What’s so amazing about grace?” he talks about various times in history when we have neglected people of grace. He tells countless stories of times when grace has been applied. We always want to see that people are given justice! I’m not saying let them away with it; I don’t really know what to say about it, I think this fits in my gray area; it’s very confusing. We will be taken for a ride if we let them away with it, innocents will be hurt, but what value to we place on the attackers? Are they nothing? Do they not deserve Christ? Truth is no, they don’t, but either do we. With what authority do we condemn them?
Larry, I have no idea! You sure know how to pick ‘em!
After reading what most everybody has said, I am still a little confused because we can say that of course Jesus wouldn't take on a weapon of destruction but in the same breath praise soldiers who do. Of course we all respect our soliders, but are we in some sense putting them down because they have made the choice to defend our freedom to even have this conversation.
I believe for the most part our country is trying to make the world a safer place and in the end you never know, could we see The Salvation Army open in Irag. Would Jesus be happy with that?
Josh,
I think the question is was Viet Nam or Iraq really defending freedom? Particularly, was it defending our freedom. I think that really may be the question that Jay Bee is asking.
I am not sure he is anti-military. I think he has questions about these two conflicts and the reasons why we got into them. Therein lies his question.
Never being a soldier myself I don't understand exactly how JayBee feels and why he is questioning these conflicts at this point in his life.
What I draw comfort from is knowing that God means all things for good. And as I said before, we are human, our leaders now and our leaders back then, were human and made decisions that are not perfect. We may have gone to war for reasons political, personal, or otherwise not agreeable with many. We may not be in Iraq defending America, are we there to liberate? Was that the original intention? Maybe maybe not...
For me personally, its hard to try to find reason in other people's decisions. Decisions that will and do affect us directly.
To respond to Josh, I absolutely praise our soldiers for standing up for America, and for standing up for those in need around the world. And I absolutely believe that our perfect savior would not pick up a weapon and physically destroy another human. No way.
thanks hil.
thanks to all for your comments and thoughtful approach. i am not sure i have an answer for Jay Bee either. i wish there is a definitive answer. i guess we will know in heaven. my gut tells me though that Jesus would not pick up a weapon to kill someone. I think He would promote non-violence at every opportunity.
Hmmm. I agree with Tim. This is the most dangerous and divisive question. I wasn't going to comment, because I only came upon it today (Friday 31) and there is so much that has been said already.
One comment I don't agree with is Josh saying 'I believe for the most part our country is trying to make the world a safer place'. I'm sorry, I just don't see this in the Iraq situation. I believe that the politicians, on the most part, have exposed their soldiers to a no-win situation. I don't think that it was the safety of the world that was at the root of the Iraq invasion. That is another debate.
Having said that, I think that there is confusion over support for the politicians vs support for the troops. The troops go where they are sent, not always because they believe it is the right place to be. There has been debate in our country about whether our troops should be in Afghanistan or not. Whenever their presence is questioned people are accused of not supporting the troops, but this is not the case. They are still supported. It is the sensibility of the decision makers that is being questioned. This is similar with the situation in Iraq. Protesting against the war is not protesting against the soldiers. It is proteating against those who sent them there in the first place and questioning the need to be there.
The question of 'Where would Jesus go?' is a really hard one. It is difficult to put Jesus in the context of the Iraq war. Jesus said 'Love God, love your neighbour as yourself'. How do we do this in this situation. There are so many innocent lives that have been lost. Where is Jesus' command in all of that? The people of Jesus' day were looking for a Messiah to take the Romans out by military force, like the kings of old. Jesus didn't do that and left a lot of people disappointed and confused. This leads me to believe that he wouldn't have taken up arms against anyone, at any time. In WWII people on both sides prayed and believed that God was on their side. I don't think God takes sides. This doesn't mean that Jesus isn't in the midst of this situation. I just don't believe he is on one side against the other. When he came he didn't call people to arms, but instead said, "The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."
wc53,
Thanks for your comment. Welcome and visit often
What would Jesus do?
He would preach, teach and heal (Matthew 4:23; 9:35).
He would go about doing good, delivering those oppressed of the devil (Acts 10:38)
He wouldn't need a gun, that's a kicker!
Thanks for the discussion, this does help the church!
Post a Comment
<< Home