Marcus Aurelius ([info]jamahu) wrote,

Nonresistance

Once again Bible Study tonight was very fruitful... Toward the end I brought up some of my beliefs as a Mennonite in a world where we have the realities of things like the war in Iraq, and government encroaching on religious freedom. It was very helpful to me to actually state my beliefs, and they came much more fluently than I expected. Doubt I can express myself as well again, but here are some of the points that I brought up:
One of the things that we discussed before is how to justify the Biblical passage about submitting to authority with the pronounced anti-Christian governments we see around the world even today; my thinking on that is that when the government orders something that I can't faithfully comply to, perhaps I am called not to compromise my morals but to accept the punishment that is given for breaking those laws. I guess that's the whole idea behind conscienciously objecting to something, at least in my mind: don't do it, but be willing to accept the consequences that your actions may bring. Yeah, that's a tough thing to really be willing to do, but God never called us to a life of comfort, and never promised to make the way easy for those who follow him. There are plenty of references to the trials that we can expect to face because of our faith. The beauty of it, though, is that "our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all."
Brandon's question was: what if I were placed in a situation where I was face to face with one of the Republican Guard in Iraq, and it was either I kill him or he would kill me? Put in that situation, I hope I would allow him to kill me, because I have faith in the fact that death isn't the end; I have the hope of meeting Christ in heaven after I die, so the prospect of being killed shouldn't be the defining point of my decision-making. Jesus took away the sting of death, we should no longer have to fear it. Faced with the option of either dying or killing another, the best option for any Christian should be to die, because they know without a doubt that after their death they will be with God. In killing someone else, though, you could be taking from them forever that possibility. Can we really be so selfish as to rob another of eternal glory simply to give ourselves a few more days of scratching out a living here on earth?

  • Post a new comment

    Error

  • 11 comments

Anonymous

September 27 2005, 02:30:34 UTC 6 years ago

Great comments!

I think the more compelling question on killing is one relating to third parties. What about you kill the Republican guard or he kills 300 babies? I think your analysis on the question before you was 100% correct. To tip my hand on the babies hypo I think there are some biblical arguments on both sides of that one.

Great analysis on the submission, MLK is right there with you and so am I. Reminds me a lot of the late Popes brilliant writings on the importance of suffering in a Christian Life. Also a sermon I heard recently about how christians are called to transform suffering. Jesus transformed suffering from satans tool to God's. We should strive to do the same.

[info]1101010

September 27 2005, 03:13:01 UTC 6 years ago

Well, here's something i've been wondering about... Given your nonresistant, non-violent beliefs, what do you think about our current warlord-in-chief? I mean, he's against abortion, which i assume is a plus for you. He at least tries to act like he's representing religious people (although, religion taking the deepest hold on the poorest people [you know, the freeloaders that need to suck it up, get a third job, and pay more taxes or take less services so his rich buddies can have their lower capital gains taxes, etc], he's more likely to be doing religious people more harm than good overall... if only they could see that, but i digress). And certainly he's always saying something that makes my own atheist blood boil, so i assume a lot of Christians (at least the ones who think separation of church and state means we won't ever specify a denomination for our state religion) like that.
But still, he basically went and started a war in Iraq because he felt like it, or maybe he wanted to finish his daddy's job, or maybe he just wanted to feel "big". Whatever the reason, i think it would be hard to argue that President Bush did not start the Iraq war.
So how does that sit with the fundamentalist but nonviolent (and therefore non-mainstream in this country) crowd? Specifically yourself if you consider yourself to fall into those categories.

[info]jamahu

September 28 2005, 01:46:12 UTC 6 years ago

Wow, hmm... I definitely have no idea how the "crowd" views him, as I don't talk politics with people too often, and I think that tends to be the way of a lot of Mennonites.
Bush's stance against abortion is definitely his strongest point with me. As for the war, I continue to try to work out my view on it. I think at this point why it was started has been beaten into the ground, because the reality is that it's here... So the concern should be what's best from this point on. Logistically I think it makes sense that we can't just pull everybody out right away, because who knows what kind of chaos would happen. There's probably a better way to handle how things are going, just because there almost always is, but it's not an issue I've studied. I personally can't justify having any part in the war effort, but I respect those people who feel called to it, and admire the courage and bravery they show.

So I guess what can be gleaned from this, in the introspective way of the INFJ that I am, is that I form my viewpoints on a personal level, and base my thoughts and actions on what I see from that perspective... and I have trouble looking at the big picture and forming concrete opinions on those issues. Those types of issues are usually kinda hazy inside the Jamahu brain.

And I have no idea whether that answers your question or not.

[info]1101010

September 28 2005, 03:37:53 UTC 6 years ago

Well, it sort of answers the question. The real question was what you thought of Bush, given his propensity toward starting wars. I think maybe when you say "Bush's stance against abortion is definitely his strongest point with me" that you are saying you aren't really rah-rah on him and maybe like me you wished for better choices in the last few elections. But i could be getting that completely wrong.

[info]dawn_moon

September 27 2005, 04:17:40 UTC 6 years ago

Wow! Long reply!

Your post has made me think a lot about this. Jesus never advocated violence, and he never lashed out at people--only their acts. Yet, God seems to okay the violence in the Old Testament as necessary for his kingdom. That got me thinking that, well, if all Christians were to give themselves up in a war, then there would be none left to spread God's Word. Then again, the Christians survived through Nero, and they didn't do that through warfare. Also, perhaps if more of us actually lived as Christians, then there would be less warfare and more Christians to spread around. Plus, if God wants Christianity to spread, then, simply put, he will keep it from dying out, which he has done through the numerous reformations and other religious leaders and the transformation of people. Therefore, my deduction is that, in the first mentioned situation, it would be right not to fight.

Now, don't get me wrong. I have no problem killing zombies. None whatsoever.

[info]ten4ruthie

September 27 2005, 19:22:34 UTC 6 years ago

Re: Wow! Long reply!

I wish I could post myself laughing as I was surpised by the last sentence of your post! =)

Anonymous

September 27 2005, 18:58:30 UTC 6 years ago

You know I've used the exact same point about kill or be killed myself several times, but I have to wonder what would I do if it wasn't just me I was protecting, but my family or other innocent people. By the way this is Jeremy Sheffel, you should e-mail me sometime or something I haven't talked to you in a long time, bet you didn't know I read your journal. Well anyway maybe you can clear up some nonresistance questions for me.

Anonymous

September 27 2005, 19:34:58 UTC 6 years ago

What is it with the anonymous posting? Don't you want us to read your journal? Or do you not want to admit that you don't have one - you who anonymously reads other people's? =)

Sincerely,
the anonymous one who has gone by titles such as:
rhoda, huther, geez louise, wifey, ladybug, sister woof, salty slug...
(the rhoda one actually gets much worse - i can't hear it without thinking "rhoda floda in the commoda" - say it out loud - i've been called that...) =)

Anonymous

September 27 2005, 20:06:40 UTC 6 years ago

Hey, at least this one told me who he is... I'm still wondering about comment number one.
However, wouldn't you now be... Vuthth? I don't even know how to pronounce that. Vuthth Roie. Wow.

[info]jamahu

September 27 2005, 20:07:21 UTC 6 years ago

Oh no, it's an epidemic! Even I'm doing it!

[info]hicapoo

September 29 2005, 02:01:21 UTC 6 years ago

Very well presented, Marcus. I am quite glad you are more certain of your feelings on the matter. I am stuck somewhere in between and only leaning a bit more toward the appeal of complete nonresistance.
Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Facebook Twitter More login options
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…