Where then shall we stand?

I have been watching the latest presidential primary debates on both sides of the ticket and have been interested in the variety of views on war that have surfaced in regards to America's current state and what each candidate plans to do in response. I have had a number of people ask me my opinion on the matter and decided to draw from a paper I wrote about a year ago after debating two of my classmates who were arguing for the way of pacifism as opposed to warfare as an appropriate Christian response. Here is what I came up with...

Oh yeah, before we start, I just wanted say that I think Ron Paul is the only candidate that I see has his mind wrapped correctly around a solid ideology on American foreign policy.

Just War vs. Pacifism:

How must we respond to the state of our world?

Often times in our lives we come across experiences in this world that do not easily fit into our understanding of the ideal that we hold to as the appropriate way in which this life is to operate. Evil presents itself to us in a number of troublesome ways. We are faced with it on personal fronts, political, financial, legal, and social fronts. We see evil in interpersonal relationships, professional relationships, even international relationships. It is here, at the national level, that we come face to face with the expression of evil that we know as war. War is described in many ways. Webster’s calls it, “an active hostility; conflict; or contest.” No matter how you define war, in the eyes of humans with compassion for their fellow man/woman, war is always a bad thing.

Since the dawning of the human race there has been conflict. Scripture describes what some call an act of war from the first generation of mankind born into this world – a fight between brothers, Cain and Abel. Why is it that our history is marked with such dissension and unrest between its participants? Speaking from a perspective of a Christian world view and theology, the only plausible response seems to be that war came about, and still thrives in our lands today, because of the dark and staining presence of sin in this world. This sin is present in the creation itself, but perhaps is most destructive in its presence within the human heart. It is my conviction, at this point in my life – carrying the weight of the experiences that I have had, that there is a need for, when the circumstances deem it necessary, warfare between nations to exist; provided that the war is the last measure of defense in an interaction between nations with peace as the ultimate goal being pursued.

Due to the reality of warfare in our world, we as Christians are faced with a number of difficult, and yet necessary, questions:

“Which comes first: our patriotic pride or our commitment to God’s word? Is Scripture relevant to contemporary events? Does the Biblical ideal of peace exclude any involvement in, or support of, warfare by the believer? Does God reveal moral standards for entering and prosecuting wars? Can we support our troops, while criticizing our politicians? What is the basis for international law? [And] how will peace between nations ever come?” (Dr. Greg Bahnsen, A Christian View of War)

As Christians, unified by the same Spirit of the same God who is approachable for us by the same Savior Jesus Christ – who is referred to in Holy Scripture as the Prince of Peace, we all, both sides of this debate; seek to live in a world where peace reigns and hatred and warfare no longer abide. Those who oppose the idea of just war (which is the label given to the Christian view of warfare that is not always morally forbidden) represent an approach towards reaching that end of peace by a process and ideology known as pacifism.

C.S. Lewis wrote, during WWII, that “war is very disagreeable.” He wrote that in a context where it was very evident of the reality of evil and aggression. Lewis was able, in this time, to recognize that we may be doing more harm by ignoring or not stopping evil. He said that a society of pacifists would not remain pacifistic for very long.

“Only liberal societies tolerate pacifists. In the liberal society, the number of pacifists will either be large enough to cripple the state as a belligerent, or not. If not, you have done nothing. If it is large enough, then you have handed over the state which does tolerate pacifists to its totalitarian neighbor who does not. Pacifism of this kind is taking the straight road to a world in which there will be no pacifists.”

As noted earlier, both sides of this debate seek the same goal. We both desire to remain true to God’s word and to live in a world that experiences complete peace. The Bible talks of peace throughout both the Old and New Testaments. One portion of scripture that is often used when dealing with this topic (for many reasons) is the Sermon on the Mount. It is here that Jesus calls those “peacemakers” blessed. That terminology is interesting and should be noted as being a description of one taking an active role in pursuing peace.

“Jesus said that those who are peacemakers are blessed – not just peacekeepers, but those who actively seek to unite parties at odds with one another. In the Christian faith, this is best exemplified by Jesus, in whose death we see, in the words of St. Paul, ‘God was in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself’” (Paul Copan, Jesus, Religions, and Just War).

There are three points that I would like to make regarding the approach of pacifism. They are that categorical Christian pacifism is unrealistic, unloving, and unbiblical. I have borrowed these three points from an audio recording of the late Dr. Greg Bahnsen entitled “A Christian View of War.”

First, the notion of true Christian pacifism is unrealistic as an appropriate response to warfare. War arises from sin. We have evidence of its existence here on earth in Scripture from as far back as Cain and Abel. War arises from unsatisfied desires of humans who do not approach God in faith in order to have those needs met. Paul, in Romans 12:18 wrote, “As much as lies within you, be at peace with all men.” Notice he did not say, “Be at peace with all men.” This provision or contingency from Paul shows us that this understanding of the world that we live in was not so naïve as to think that it is always possible to have peace. War is in fact, an inevitable force as we live here in a fallen world. We live in a world governed by men and women, by human beings who are in finite and imperfect. Perfect peace can only come from the perfect Peacemaker and when he returns, we will understand all that must occur in order for peace to exist.

Secondly, categorical Christian pacifism is unloving, in that this notion of pacifistic peace is not the fullest manifestation of Christian love. To quote Bahnsen, “Peace is not the highest and only value in Christian ethics, though it is a high value. It is not always loving, it is not always just.” Many pacifists will set up some type of false dichotomy where love and justice function in opposition to one another when they are looked at as two different tools for peace. This is a misuse of two characteristics of God – characteristics that are morally good in the eyes of a Christian worldview. Love is not the counter-balance to justice. Love is not more important than justice, nor is justice more important than love – they are equally attributes of God. Bahnsen says, “It is unjust to be unloving and unloving to be unjust.”

Many times the argument is made by pacifists that when a malicious act is done to you, the most loving thing to do is not deal with that injustice. That is simply not the case. A practical example of this would be if your son or daughter, wife or husband, were to be brutally murdered before you. To allow that injustice to stand would not be loving to you and your family – not loving to the victims, which is exactly the call that we have in scripture (to love those and care for those who are persecuted and oppressed).

Third, pacifism, as defined by its total disregard and separation from any act of violence and conflict, is an unbiblical response to warfare. Often the attempt is made to find contradiction between war and the value that we place on Christian faith. They are not contrary to one another. In the 11th chapter of Hebrews we read:

“And what more shall I say? I do not have time to tell about Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, David, Samuel and the prophets, who through faith conquered kingdoms, administered justice, and gained what was promised; who shut the mouths of lions, and quenched the fury of the flames, and escaped the edge of the sword; whose weakness was turned to strength; and who became powerful in battle and routed foreign armies…These were all commended for their faith” (Hebrews 11:32-34, 39a, NIV).

In Ephesians the Christian is described as the Christian “soldier” putting on the armor of God. This analogy would not be used had it not been approved as an appropriate example. (Note: there are not usages of the “Christian bigot, or Christian prostitute” that are held in high esteem as an example for us).

We live in a world that has war and in the midst of it we seek peace. In order for that to occur we need an objective law that can dictate right and just response and action in this life. It is my conviction that we have that in our Holy Scriptures. The danger that we face is people throwing aside the teachings of Scripture in order to make those holy words fit into the way in which their human opinions and preferences see the world. This is a temptation that faces all of mankind, as we all have our biases and we all fall short of living a completely objective life apart from our emotional and experiential influences. It is because of this that we need to rely all the more heavily on the plain teachings of Scripture to find answers to the problems of our world. Quoting Bahnsen, “Violence begets violence and relative morality can never bring an end to war.”

Candidates@Google: Ron Paul

Here is a great place to start!

I Say "Yes" to Dr. No!

So I have decided that I'm going to vote for Dr. Ron Paul in the upcoming presidential primary. In my entire life (all 23 aged years of it) I have never been so impressed and impassioned by a politician as I have by this man. He is known as the “Taxpayer's Best Friend” and “Defender of the Constitution.” Throughout all of his years as a congressman he has never voted to raise taxes and has unswervingly stood up for less government intervention in policy and more of individuals' rights and freedoms.

I can't say that I have been surprised by the responses I get when I ask people, “Who are you voting for in the upcoming election?” Almost universally I am answered with, “Well, I don't really know. I haven't kept up with the candidates. I know that I should care about it, but I don't.” What a slap in the face to the God who gave us the ability to think and act in free agency in this life! The freedoms that are spoken of in our Constitution are God-given and that alone is enough to make them hugely important – worthy enough even for our attention to be turned towards protecting them from time to time.

This apathy towards our rights is no reason for us to be taken off guard though. I mean, we're talking about human rights after all, meaning rights of humans, humans who falter in their attempts to protect their rights much the same as everything else we lay our hands on. Who are we to think that we could actually stand up on our own two feet and defend and uphold a God-given right – a God-created, God-ordained, God-inspired, God-supported, God-granted right? We humans, and due to the politically natured topic of this piece I am referring specifically to those humans who make their home in America, are far too easily tempted by our own greed and laziness to actually uphold something requiring as much discipline and sacrifice as our rights demand.

It saddens me actually to think of the hundreds of thousands, millions even, of men and women from our land who have given up so much in order to serve their country and fellow countrymen. They are the ones who understand that freedom is costly. They have experienced the discipline and sacrifice first hand. And all of us who walk around daily under the blanket of their protection and service throw their efforts to the wayside by arbitrarily voting for the politician with the flashiest ads or most expensive suits rather than becoming involved in the process of actually studying the thoughts and philosophies of the men and women who are running for those offices which will decide how those sacrifices are to be spent.

That is why I got involved in researching the candidates this year and consequently I have been blessed by the discovery of this brilliant man, Ron Paul. Some of the things that stood out to me at first were:

Ron Paul has never voted:

• to raise taxes.
• for an unbalanced budget.
• to raise congressional pay.
• for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
• to increase the power of the executive branch.

Ron Paul has consistently voted:

• against the Iraq war.
• against the Patriot Act.
• against regulating the Internet.
• against the Military Commissions Act.
• against every bill contrary to or prohibited by the U.S. Constitution.

In addition,

• he has never taken a government-paid junket.
• he is not accepting a government-pension.
• he returns a portion of his office budget every year.
• he introduces more useful legislation every year than probably any other member of Congress.
• he is Washington's leading advocate for freedom.
• he was voted the “Taxpayer's Best Friend.”
• he is pro-life, pro-family, and pro-liberty.
• he has a plan for immigration reform.
• he is a proven, dependable conservative who is for smaller government, less spending, less taxation, and more freedom and privacy for the individual.

I urge you to check out www.ronpaul2008.com as well as all of the other candidates' sites to find out more about what is out there and join in the conversation in order to learn all that you can to make a wise and educated decision as you vote for our next president.

Spring Cleaning...

Life is in no way a simple thing. Though I do often wish that it were and even make attempts toward convincing myself and others of that very premise. I suppose that I should insert my famous preface here in order to wash my hands and words of any desire to be connected to that ever repulsive beast that our culture knows as drama. Oh how I hate that word and all that it carries. I in no way am one who enjoys the calamities of life. I prefer a calm and peaceful existence devoid of the mindless chatter and emotional babble that far too often invades my world.

That being said though, I see what I would call an undeniable dramatic tension that exists in this world. This tension has many faces. I wish I had the mind to recall and list all of those facades in neat and concise form here so that you and I could manipulate and conquer them. Sadly, and yet also very gratefully, I have yet to even be introduced to their majority. A few do however stand out fairly fresh and poignant in my mind tonight and I imagine it to be wise for me to process and vent them as they come in bite-size chunks rather than trying to eat the whole elephant all at once.

As I sit here at my desk approaching the one o'clock hour of the early morning I find myself in a rather depressed and somber mood. Now, I am sure that there are many reasons for this. School has just let out another semester and a number of my friends have graduated and traveled away from this small town that I call home. That is an impacting event. It changes my daily environment considerably as I work at the university where those friends studied – consequently it is amazing to me at how quickly the life that we see bustling across campus can shift to an almost dead halt when those people that we call friends (some that we even call enemies) are no longer there. But the emptiness of the campus is not all together what has slowed me down tonight. Honestly, I doubt very seriously that it has had even a healthy fraction of the credit in clouding me so.

I believe that I am simply at a contemplative point where so much has been bouncing around in my weathered and tired brain that the need for a good purging has found its way to the surface. And since I am the only one awake in my house at the moment leaving no one to stop me from writing whatever I like, I am going to dump those heavy thoughts out right here and now. I have heard that it even helps you to sleep if you periodically sweep out all the clutter that our minds tend to collect – we shall see.

One thing, then, that has been on my mind lately is the tension that I see in religious circles. When I hear myself thinking and writing that I chuckle at just how vague a statement it is. I wish I could read the thoughts of those who hear something like that left unqualified to see where they go with it, but for the sake of clarity I'll hone it down. I am talking about the tension between theology and pastoral care. Now, those are two terms that come to mind for me as they are two areas of study in the divinity school that I attend. What I mean by using them is to point out the dichotomy that seems to have arisen between the systematic, intellectual side of thinking about God and the organic, affective side of experiencing God.

I am not sure of the reason for this split, other than the notion that we humans have such a tiny capacity to handle information of such a grand scale as God and therefore find it necessary to compartmentalize our interactions and reflections. I wish that I could say here some wondrous cure for this divide that could bridge the two realms, but I am unfortunately at a loss for such a remedy. None-the-less, the frustrating reality remains and I figure my brief complaining about it will have to suffice for tonight.

Another thing that has been somewhat of a bother to me recently is the conflict that I see people, namely myself, facing as they(we) try to balance the desire (and even need) of being independent and autonomous (to the degree of not being a drain on the world – I in no way mean to imply that its advantageous or even possible for humans to handle life all on their own) with the reality of our being designed for community and reliance on God and others. I find myself to be so very ignorant when it comes to grasping the secrets to such a task. Honestly I feel like a child at points when I think of just how incapable I have become at allowing others to help me – and certainly of asking for such help. One thing that I am convinced of though is this; in spite of the idea that going at this world alone means that you are somehow stronger than the rest of the world, the reality of life is quite the contrary. It seems that it takes an even stronger person (and more honest) to admit that they need help – that they need other people. That can be both a freeing and at the same time a very scary thought.

I do have more floating around up top that I would like to lay out here tonight, but I think that the urge to curl up in the bed just beat the snot out of the poor little urge to vent. So, as it is in this silly and fallen world, and as morally wrong as it is in a Christian ethic, sometimes might seems to make right (or at least it gets to prance around as such).