"Only let your manner of life be worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or am absent, I may hear of you that you are standing firm in one spirit, with one mind striving side by side for the faith of the gospel, and not frightened in anything by your opponents. This is a clear sign to them of their destruction, but of your salvation, and that from God." Philippians 1:27-28
This text has had me thinking about an oft-debated topic in my thoughts.
As I stated early on in this blog experiment of mine, I'm not seeking to make this an opinion blog. These are my thoughts. They are not complete or inerrant. They are not absolute truth, even in my heart. Iron sharpens iron. I think It's important to discuss and talk through issues with like-minded people. So these are my thoughts. Let the reader beware.
The section of the passage that has me thinking about fear and courage and whatnot is "not frightened in anything by your opponents." Based on my past experiences, words like 'opponents' and 'destruction' may conjure up some different ideas and images than others. Or perhaps not. Wars and violence do seem to have permeated culture, affecting more than just those who are personally involved.
Anyway, what are the usual lauds and praises that military personnel receive? "You're one of the brave ones." "You're so courageous."
If my thought had a thesis, it would be this: Wars are incepted (is that even a word?), birthed, and driven by fear. If we're speaking about not being frightened, we won't often find it in violent conflicts. How fearless is it to walk everywhere with an automatic weapon? That's more paranoia than a lack of fear.
A few examples to illustrate this point.. Let's say you and I are hanging out, and you are beginning to realize how irritating I am, and you suddenly feel compelled to punch me in the face. So you rear back and deliver a sweeping haymaker punch to my jaw. I can react two ways. With fear, or without. A fear-driven reaction would be to pick myself up off the floor, and dive after you. The punching and grappling would carry on, accomplishing nothing but placing intense animosity between us. A fearless reaction would be to pick myself up off the floor and smile warmly, with a desire to resolve our differences. You would perhaps punch me once more out of frustration, but very soon, my non-violent reaction would be, "A clear sign to them (you) of their destruction."
Along those same lines, Romans 12:19-21reads, "Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head. Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good."
Violence seems to feed on fear. Without the presence of fear, violence runs out of fuel.
The greatest real-life example I know of is the story of the four missionaries in Ecuador in... sometime in the 50's. I'm just speaking from memory here, so it'll be a loose summarization. "Shadow of the Almighty", "Through Gates of Splendor", "Jungle Pilot", and the film, "End of the Spear" are all good resources for this story. They're also dangerously life-altering. Be careful. Jim Elliot has become the most well-known of these missionaries, but all had a blazing passion for spreading the gospel. They had just made contact with a violent, unreached tribe called the Aucas. They were extending a hand of friendship and goodwill, trying to earn the Indians trust and also earn an opportunity to begin a ministry in their community. Bypassing all of the incidents that led to it, these four missionaries were killed by this Indian tribe on one of their first interactions with them. The key point of this story for my purpose, though, is their fearlessness. To my understanding, the missionaries had weapons with them. They were fired in the air when the attack was imminent, with hopes of scaring them with the noise, but they were never leveled on the Indians. They were fearless. Their lives' were not their own. They sought not a long life, but a full one. (oh.. check that out.. somebody should make a blog..) And in an act of even greater courage and fearlessness, the widows and families of these missionaries continued to pursue a ministry to the Aucas. What success in ministry would have been seen if the missionaries killed the Aucas who attacked them? I don't have an answer, but I can assume it wouldn't have been very well received by the Indians. Instead, the widows of these missionaries had a staggering ministry, and many of the indians in that community came to know Christ. Including the Indians who killed the missionaries. And what was agonizing to them, what led to the "defeat" of Satan's power in their lives, was the fearlessness displayed by the four missionaries. I won't get into any more details without the primary sources in front of me, but I think you should understand my point. Read those books. I'll mail you a copy if you give me your address.
Now, in applying this verse to modern wars, things get messy. I think a lot of people would agree with me that, in a missions ministry, using fear and violence is a very, very bad idea. It's obviously a poor way of showing Christ's love and sacrifice to the unreached. But what about governments and wars? Does the same approach have any standing in those circumstances? My answer: I am not sure. From a Christian perspective, should the approaches toward violence be any different? Abraham Kuyper is quoted as saying, "There is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry: 'Mine.'" I'm not sure that we should compartmentalize our different parts of life and society. Which would mean, in my mind, that our fearless love for Christ and for the unsaved should permeate every aspect of our life. Including wars, if you're in the military.
On the other hand, governments are instituted by God and given the authority to combat evil in Romans 13:3-4. "For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer." HOWEVER, Psalm 2:1-3 reads "Why do the nations conspire and the people’s plot in vain? The kings of the earth take their stand and the rulers gather together against the Lord and against his Anointed One. ‘Let us break their chains’, they say, ‘and throw off their fetters.’”
Hmmmmmm.... Any thoughts?
Some brief politics.. Just war theory. Begun back in the days of Cicero, and polished by Augustine and Aquinas, (smart people who lived a long time ago, and a thousand years apart) this has generally been viewed as a way of, well.. keeping war 'just'. Many Christians subscribe to this theory. I'm not sure if the United States ever made this a policy, but they most assuredly do not abide by this theory anymore. (there are 7 clauses in the theory that justify war. Google can tell you what they are.) There is much to say about the current wars, but I don't feel like unpacking that here.
Perhaps there is a time for both.. "A time to love, and a time to hate. A time for war, and a time for peace." Ecclesiastes 3:8
Some wars really make me squirm in my seat, wondering how we justified it and what we were accomplishing. But other wars make me wonder why we didn't act sooner? Although my personal leanings are tilting heavily toward pacifism, I cannot deny all war. Because the Bible does not. Doesn't it seem, though, that our world today fails to look at any alternatives to violent conflict? I don't believe war should be a first option, but a last resort, when all other options have been exhausted.
So, can I bring this back around to my original thought, or have my weeks of scattered thoughts gone too far off track? ...Today is Veteran's Day. Veteran's are courageous. Simple men do superfluous things when faced with violent adversity. But I hope that I would rather give my life trying to save a life, rather than trying to take a life. There may be a difference between my definitions of fearlessness and courage.
There are many, many more thoughts bouncing in my head about this whole issue. I need to do something with them, but this is not the time. I wish this was more polished, but hopefully it stirs some thought.I do draw my thoughts from resources, and if you ever want some good articles or books to read about this, just ask. I also enjoy meaningful conversations.
That is all.
No comments:
Post a Comment