tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28189019.post116402360383902532..comments2023-11-03T11:37:04.473+00:00Comments on nothing new under the sun: Must Christians be pacifists? IIIbyron smithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17938334606675769903noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28189019.post-1164560172050847112006-11-26T16:56:00.000+00:002006-11-26T16:56:00.000+00:00But this leads to absurd conclusions: Christians b...<I>But this leads to absurd conclusions: Christians being free to join armies in different nations and then free to kill each other if the governing authorities of those nations each decide they are God's instrument for punishing the other. (National loyalty above loyalty to the Body of Christ?????) And Christians being free to kill non-Christians instead of dying for them so that they can come Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28189019.post-1164337856128026412006-11-24T03:10:00.000+00:002006-11-24T03:10:00.000+00:00I've been finding this discussion really interesti...I've been finding this discussion really interesting. But I must say, nobody has convinced me of anything yet. <BR/><BR/>First and foremost, although the pacifist position has good exegetical support, I haven't heard any argument to challenge the idea that the state has a God-given responsibility to exercise judgment. (Perhaps the idea that 'the nations are basically outside salvation' is Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28189019.post-1164333152116204802006-11-24T01:52:00.000+00:002006-11-24T01:52:00.000+00:00Incidentally, I didn't realize that there were pen...Incidentally, I didn't realize that there were penalties in other democracies for not voting. That could certainly help voter turnout here in the U.S. There would have to be exceptions for the Amish (most of whom do not vote) and others who had religious objections because the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states in part, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of Michael Westmoreland-White, Ph.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/06343135380354344847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28189019.post-1164328101471086452006-11-24T00:28:00.000+00:002006-11-24T00:28:00.000+00:00The Miner seems to have articulated my major objec...The Miner seems to have articulated my major objections, Andrew--objections I already had to O'Donovan's project. But I want to add an exegetical point. In your second paragraph, you paraphrase Matt. 5 in saying that the Christian must not resist the evildoer (but governments must). But, with Walter Wink and others, I want to challenge the translation of Matt. 5:39 as "do not resist an Michael Westmoreland-White, Ph.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/06343135380354344847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28189019.post-1164318704757172872006-11-23T21:51:00.000+00:002006-11-23T21:51:00.000+00:00it is true that I abstain from compulsory votingJe...<I>it is true that I abstain from compulsory voting</I><BR/><BR/>Jeltzz, I admire your consistency and dedication to the point.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28189019.post-1164289827767453672006-11-23T13:50:00.000+00:002006-11-23T13:50:00.000+00:00I will try and explain my second point in more cla...I will try and explain my second point in more clarity later. As for the issue of voting, it is true that I abstain from compulsory voting and avail myself of the grounds of religious objection to do so.<BR/><BR/>However, I do not think christians should undertake a 'purity-code' approach to this issue - as if, and I think this applies to pacifism across the board, the mere withdrawal of oneself jeltzzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08016160098665044867noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28189019.post-1164284529842130402006-11-23T12:22:00.000+00:002006-11-23T12:22:00.000+00:00I don't think Jeltzz needs to suffer for it, unles...I don't think Jeltzz needs to suffer for it, unless having to respond to the penalty notice counts as suffering. By <A HREF="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/cea1918233/s245.html" REL="nofollow">section 245 of the Electoral Act</A>, "the fact that an elector believes it to be part of his or her religious duty to abstain from voting constitutes a valid and sufficient reason for Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28189019.post-1164263989741737742006-11-23T06:39:00.000+00:002006-11-23T06:39:00.000+00:00Drew - I believe that Jeltzz does indeed renounce ...Drew - I believe that Jeltzz does indeed renounce that partaking and suffers for it each election.byron smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17938334606675769903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28189019.post-1164262634993755762006-11-23T06:17:00.000+00:002006-11-23T06:17:00.000+00:00in Australia at least.in Australia at least.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28189019.post-1164253813994594212006-11-23T03:50:00.000+00:002006-11-23T03:50:00.000+00:00Jeltzz, you partake of 'the sword' and 'governing ...Jeltzz, you partake of 'the sword' and 'governing authorities' when you vote, which you cannot renounce legally...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28189019.post-1164249364395715162006-11-23T02:36:00.000+00:002006-11-23T02:36:00.000+00:00Jeltzz, these are interesting thoughts. I can only...Jeltzz, these are interesting thoughts. I can only recommend you read O'Donovan's work on these issues: The Desire of the Nations and The Ways of Judgment. <BR/><BR/>I'm not sure I understand your second point. <BR/><BR/>Your first point is a key issue and I think I disagree. The question is whether not only the individuals in authority can be converted, but whether the triumph of Christ can Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28189019.post-1164248966688295702006-11-23T02:29:00.000+00:002006-11-23T02:29:00.000+00:00It is possible to articulate the position that sin...It is possible to articulate the position that since ruling authorities are permitted 'the sword', and yet the call of Christians in cross-shaped discipleship is specifically to reject the option of violence, that Christians should forfeit the role of governing authorities. I'm not sure what that would mean if, as at various times, one found oneself in an overwhelmingly christian polis, but then jeltzzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08016160098665044867noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28189019.post-1164248477609551822006-11-23T02:21:00.000+00:002006-11-23T02:21:00.000+00:00Thanks The Miner, but I don't agree that I have sa...Thanks The Miner, but I don't agree that I have said the nations and political authority are excluded from the conquest of Christ. I have simply argued that people in these positions, unlike all other Christians, have a unique responsibility by virtue of their holding political authority. <BR/><BR/>I do not believe that is impossible for President Bush to be a Christian and the commander of the Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28189019.post-1164248284002980182006-11-23T02:18:00.000+00:002006-11-23T02:18:00.000+00:00Well said, Andrew, and certainly, very interesting...Well said, Andrew, and certainly, very interesting!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28189019.post-1164246530945976252006-11-23T01:48:00.000+00:002006-11-23T01:48:00.000+00:00Cheers Andrewe for completing your series!You have...Cheers Andrewe for completing your series!<BR/><BR/>You have basically said it is not possible for a Christian to wield political power by affirming that Christians "must not" use violence, but governments "must". It is a recognized reality among all political theorists that the authority of any government essentially rests on the threat of force. Therefore, so long as Christians must be Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com