Friday, September 7, 2012

Pacifism and CS Lewis



These are comments to a Mark Tooley post at American Spectator.



Mark30339| 9.5.12 @ 9:38AM

Thanks for pointing us to the article. A follower of Christ would see the crucifixion as an ultimate declaration that God does not do the killing in this world, men do -- and that follower knows Christ is challenging him every day to endure and absorb the violence of other men without propagating more. The original Christians watched as their wives and children joined them in being torn apart by vicious animals -- yet the Christian community did not rise up in a "righteous" armed rebellion. Why is our connection with the crucified and risen Christ so different from theirs?
.
This is a seemingly unbearable challenge, and the choice to resist evil with violence is understandable. But the choice is a serious human failing -- what is far worse, however, is rationalizing the violence as something done righteously in God's name. Dietrich Bonhoeffer believed that he risked his own salvation by joining the effort to kill Hitler and he made no effort sanitize the sin away. His profound appreciation for the darkness of that choice is an example that at least points us in the right direction.

Ryan| 9.5.12 @ 3:28PM

What of when God told the Israelites to kill? Not that it has a ton of modern relevance, but your argument about a pacifistic God - and a nonviolent Jesus - don't always hold water.

Mark30339| 9.6.12 @ 10:55AM

Your question is so valid; one cannot help but wince at the way Israelites portray Yahweh as the commander of their killing. A small consolation is that the Old Testament writers probably harbored some guilt over the violence and tried to sanitize it as God's will. We know that the killing soldiers were considered unclean and required a ritual cleansing period. Perhaps the consciousness of the Hebrew faith communities could only make it that far -- but God keeps pushing them forward. What I know is that when God catches Cain and then David in murder, He does not take their lives. If God really wanted the OT to be last word on who He is, why would He revolutionize our faith with the incarnation, the passion and the resurrection?

Nick| 9.6.12 @ 2:58PM

The Old Testament is intertwined with the New Testament, Mark. You can't have one without the other. The God of the Old Covenant is the same God of the New.
The Old Testament authors were not trying to assuage their guilt by blaming God.
What about the Flood? God killed every man, woman, and child on the planet to keep Noah (and his family) from wickedness & sin. How do you reconcile this fact with your personal view that the New Testament is God's way of setting the record straight?
The 10 Commandments make it clear that there a worse things than dying. Death is not most horrible thing that can happen to a person.
Disobeying God is the worst thing a person can do in this life.

Mark30339| 9.7.12 @ 7:27AM

I wholeheartedly agree that the OT and the NT are intertwined. But it was resolved early on that Christians did not need to be Jews first and did not need to observe the 600+ rules and commands found in the OT. Jesus himself condensed these 600 down to loving God with your all, and loving your neighbor as yourself. Now, regarding the flood:
.
The OT text says that our Creator lamented over what His creation had become and resolved to wipe it out. The Black Sea flood, an epic natural disaster was still fresh in the human psyche and motivates the story. The OT authors have a profound love of God and of His creation and they have a profound dismay for the callous wickedness of men. Putting 2 and 2 together leads to the conclusion that God sent the epic flood to wipe out the wickedness of man and start over. The genius and divine inspiration in the story is the notion that the faith of one man can change everything. It beckons each of us to be a Noah and it testifies to how nature can wash away wickedness. The notion that we have an immature creator who whimsically destroys all he has created in a fit of despair sounds misplaced -- it paints God in the image of man. This human limitation in OT authorship is understandable, and we make note of it because the identity of God is gleaned from an intertwining of Old and New Testaments and a tradition of Judeo/Christian faithful passed down for generations.

Nick| 9.7.12 @ 12:43PM

I made no mention of Christians having to obey the Law of Moses, Mark. My only point was that God is the same in the Old Testament and the New. The fact that Christians are dispensed from certain precepts of the Old Law doesn't mean the O.T. is somehow flawed.
The O.T. authors were inspired by the Holy Spirit as much as the N.T. authors were.
Whether, or not, there ever was a "Black Sea Flood" has nothing to do with the Great Flood recorded in Genesis. The fact that God sent the Flood to save Noah & his family from the wickedness that surrounded them is attested to by Saint Peter, when he says baptism saves like the waters of the Flood (cf. 1 Peter 3:20-21).
It sounds to me like it is you who is trying to paint "God in the image of man."
What about Sodom & Gomorrah? This is another instance of God destroying the wicked, in order to save Lot and his family.
The Levites slay 3,000 after the Golden Calf incident, are made priests, and given the honor of carrying the Ark, Tabernacle, and the Holy Furniture.
Or, what about when Saint Luke tells us, in Acts 5, that God smites Ananias and Sapphira because of their fraud?
There is no "human limitation in OT authorship," as you put it. Again, the ENTIRE Bible was inspired by the Holy Spirit.
God Bless!

Mark30339| 9.7.12 @ 10:42PM

Excellent points. S&G were already on a path of destruction; the story is about how far God goes to change that destiny. Moses perceived God to be offended and ordered a slaughter to unify his community by terror, perhaps a standard response to insurrection in the day. God has pushed mankind forward to ever more enlightened standards ever since. Ananias and his wife died when confronted with their deceit -- for each of us, our days on this earth are numbered and our moment of passing may be in the midst of grace or sin or probably both. Mercy should be the presumptive outcome for Ananias given what Jesus teaches; if the message is that God kills sinners we should be experiencing a whole lot more sudden deaths.
.
Nick, I accept your discord with my view that the blood lust attributed to Yahweh in the OT is authored by a faithful but limited human consciousness not ready for the revelatory notions of incarnation, redemptive suffering and resurrection. God started this creation 13 billion years ago, I hardly think His consciousness and maturity is the item showing growth as we progress from Genesis to Revelation. Our precious Jesus is preserved in the crucifix as the piercing symbol showing that God shares in our suffering to such an extent that He can make suffering itself holy. Like nothing else, the crucifix tells us that God doesn't do the killing in this world, MEN DO.

Harry the Horrible| 9.5.12 @ 10:37AM

Apparently he also missed the part where Christ instructed his followers to sell their cloaks and buy swords.
He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”
—Luke 22:36, NIV
I don't have much use for pacifists.

Mark30339| 9.5.12 @ 1:40PM

Dave Williams comments below about Christians having a velvet glove over their iron fists -- HtH, you certainly aid the metaphor. But with your reference to Lk 22:36 it appears that nuance and metaphor are as useful to you as pacifists. Perhaps you welcome and embrace our Lord's words about living and dying by the sword (Mt 26:52). In another life, you might have joined the Crusaders' slaughter of every man, woman and child living in the city of Jerusalem. Do you seek a license for violence, or a relationship with the risen Christ?

Harry the Horrible| 9.5.12 @ 2:18PM

I might have. Don't think I would have, but I might have. After all, God didn't have any problems with Jericho.
BTW, we all die, so dying by the sword isn't a problem.
I sure as heck wouldn't let Moslems murder and/or enslave me and mine. Remember, the Crusades were a defensive war.


Paul A'Barge | 9.5.12 @ 5:42PM

Hauerwas insists there are "nonviolent alternatives" to defend against "unjust attack," without saying what they are
This is what the pacifists always do: demand alternatives but never offering any.
And do you know why? Because the specifics will not work. And in fact not only will the specifics not work, the specifics of pacifism are ludicrous on their face. You can dismiss them out of hand.
I have no time for braying ninnies like Hauerwas. Why do you?

Thom| 9.5.12 @ 7:43PM

Their "nonviolent alternatives" sound something like this, "I pray he runs out of bullets before he gets to me...."Amen

Mark30339| 9.6.12 @ 11:23AM

My what smug declarations. The next time you confirm your 98.6 body temperature, perhaps you will thank God that you weren't vaporized by US/Soviet thermo-nuclear conflict. We all owe a debt to the poise, dignity and sacrifice of the non-violent resistance movement counseled by Pope John Paul II. Their non-violent example won over rank and file soldiers who refused to intervene and the Soviet iron turned to rust. See also, Gandhi, MLK and Chile.


Thom| 9.5.12 @ 7:42PM

If early Christians were to have emulated Christ’s life and early demises then the Church of Christ would have died out in his time simply because all those that followed his example would have been killed by the Romans or local governments friendly to the Romans or simply ceased to exist because they didn’t “reproduce”. We know 1900 years later, those “pacifists” didn’t emulate Christ’s life in the later part and the first part is kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy like you find with Jim Jones and alike. Everywhere you find “sheeple” like this you find them living in the shadows of shepherds that protect them from themselves…
If ever were there a place on this earth that needed what these “pacifists” preach it is the Middle East and I don’t see ships full of these people immigrating there and living the life they say is required to be “Christian”. Christians are fleeing the Middle East because they know how the story ends….

Mark30339| 9.6.12 @ 11:37AM

Remind me again, which of the early Christian armed rebellions won over the Roman Empire? And explain what lethal weapons were used by Christians to prevail over Emperor Julian the Apostate when he tried to restore pagan worship.

No comments:

Post a Comment