Mooseksen laki sallii itsepuolustuksen.
2Moos.22:2
Jos varas tavataan murtautumasta sisälle ja lyödään kuoliaaksi, ei tappaja ole vereen vikapää.
Vaikka Jeesus ei suoraan viitannut 2. Mooseksenkirjan jakeeseen 22:2, jossa kodinpuolustus on oikeutettu, niin silti hänen oppinsa on yhden mukainen Mooseksen lain kanssa ja käy ilmi että Jeesus katsoi kodinpuolustuksen olevan oikein:
Matt.24:43
"jos perheenisäntä tietäisi, millä yövartiolla varas tulee, totta hän valvoisi, eikä sallisi taloonsa murtauduttavan."
Luuk.22:52
"Niinkuin ryöväriä vastaan te olette lähteneet miekat ja seipäät käsissä."
Vaikka edellämainitut kohdat (Matt.24:43 ja Luuk.22:52) ovatkin jossakin mielessä erotettu asiayhteydestä ne viestivät silti siitä että Jeesus hyväksyi kodinpuolustuksen (2Moos.22:2) ja ryövärien ja tappajien ja murhaajien väkivaltaisen kiinnioton. Jos siis Jumala sallii tappaa yöllä kotiin murtautuvan lammasvarkaan, niin kuinka paljon ennemmin hän sallii tappaa kotiin murtautuvan raiskaajan tai murhaajan? Eikö läheisten (lapset, vaimo) henki ja terveys ole arvokkaampi kuin lampaan kohtalo [vrt Matt.12:10-12]?
Raamattu pitää marttyyreina myös niitä jotka kävivät sotaa uskonsa puolesta, kuten Aabraham (Hepr.11:8), Mooses (Hepr.11:23), Gideon, Simson ja Daavid (Hepr.11:32) ja jotka kuolivat sodassa uskonsa puolesta ja jotka uskon kautta tulivat "väkeviksi sodassa" (Hepr.11:34).
* Aabraham varusti pienen armeijan ja oli mukana hyökkäyksessä kaappaajien kimppuun (1Moos.14:14-15)
* Mooses tappoi omilla käsillään lähimmäisensä pahoinpitelijän (Ap.t.7:24, 2Moos.2:11-12). Mooses myös johti Israelin armeijan useisiin sotiin ja kapinaan Faaraota vastaan. Apostolit hyväksyivät Mooseksen teon (Ap.t.7:24).
Kristinuskon Jumala on Sodan(kin) Jumala
Moos. 15:3
"Herra on sotasankari, Herra on hänen nimensä."
5.Moos.20:1 "Jos lähdet sotaan vihollistasi vastaan ja näet hevosia ja sotavaunuja ja sotajoukon, joka on sinua suurempi, niin älä pelkää heitä, sillä Herra, sinun Jumalasi, on sinun kanssasi, hän, joka johdatti sinut Egyptin maasta."
Kristinuskon jumalaa, Aabrahamin, Iisakin ja Jaakobin jumalaa kutsutaan sodan jumalaksi koska sota ja sodan tapahtumien kulku on jumalan käsissä. Sodanlopputulos ei ole sotilaiden ja kenraalien hallinnassa, vaan maailman historian tapahtumat ovat jumalan ohjauksessa.
Saar.9:11
"Taas minä tulin näkemään auringon alla, että ei ole juoksu nopsain vallassa, ei sota urhojen [vallassa]... vaan aika ja kohtalo kohtaa kaikkia."
Room. 9:16
"Niin se ei siis ole sen vallassa, joka tahtoo, eikä sen, joka juoksee, vaan Jumalan, joka on armollinen."
Eikä pelkästään maailmanhistoria ole jumalan kädessä, vaan jumala on säätynyt jokaiselle ihmiselle päivän jona hän kuolee. Kuka kuolee sairauteen, kuka tapetaan, kuka kuolee onnettumuudessa (vain itsemurha on ihmisen omassa kädessä, ja silloinkin vain sen yritys). Kaikkialla läsnäoleva Jumala ottaa vastuun myös kuolemastamme, sillä juuri hän elämän meille antoikin.
5.Moos. 32:39
"I and I alone, am God; no other God is real. I kill and I give life, I wound and I heal, and no one can oppose what do."
--------------------
Excerpts from "The Field Manual of the Free Militia"
1.1.3 Jesus Christ was not a pacifist
Of course, Christ's emphasis on love is sometimes perceived to imply that he was a pacifist who condemned all violence and war. But this is a misunderstanding.
A close look at the Bible will show that Jesus Christ was not a pacifist and will demonstrate that he approved of the justified use of deadly force.
Neither John the Baptist, nor Jesus, nor the apostles condemned soldiering.
"Then some soldiers asked him, 'And what should we do?' He replied, 'Don't exhort money and don't accuse people falsely — be content with your pay'" (Luke 3:14). John the Baptist did not tell soldiers that being soldiers was immoral per se, but simply condemned the abuse of their position as soldiers.
Jesus did not rebuke the centurion for being a soldier, but commended him for the faith that came from his understanding of authority in the military (Matthew 8:5-13; see also Acts 10:1-48).
Jesus Christ both permitted and commanded his followers to be armed.
"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). Now that the apostles had learned the lesson of trusting in God (Luke 10:4), they were to be prepared to defend themselves as they travelled through dangerous areas to take the gospel to the whole world.
"Then Simon Peter, who had a sword, drew it and struck the high priest's servant, cutting off his right ear. Jesus commanded Peter, 'Put your sword away! Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?'" (John 18:10-11). Notice that Jesus allowed Peter to have the sword both before and after this incident. The problem was not that defending someone is wrong; the problem was that it was inappropriate at this time since Jesus wanted to die for our sins (Mark 10:45).
"'Put your sword back in its place,' Jesus said to him, 'for all who draw the sword will die by the sword'" (Matthew 26:52). Again, Jesus did not necessarily condemn using the sword. He told Peter to put it back in its scabbard, not to get rid of it. What Jesus is saying is that anyone who fights risks his life in doing so. This is a matter of fact, not of ethics.
Jesus Christ used just force.
"Jesus entered the temple area and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of money changers and the benches of those selling doves" (Matthew 21:12).
"So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables" (John 2:15).
"When Jesus said, 'I am he,' they drew back and fell to the ground." He used his divine power against aggressors (John 18:6).
Jesus Christ would have been justified in defending himself.
On several occasions Jesus Christ evaded an angry crowd rather than giving in to their intent to kill him (Luke 4:28-30, John 8:58-59, John 10:35-39). It was not yet the time for him to sacrifice himself for the sins of many. When the time did come, and his disciples tried to defend him, Jesus said, "Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels?'" (Matthew 26:53). Jesus was quite capable of taking care of himself if he wanted to be defended. And his statement that he could call on the Father did not only mean that he had the ability to defend himself, but that he was morally justified in doing so as well. He was under no inherent obligation to die, although he and the Father did plan for him to die.
Jesus Christ will someday use deadly force on a wide scale.
All through the Bible we read of the day when Jesus will return to set things straight. At his second coming he will throw the wicked into the fiery furnace (Matthew 13:41-43). He will separate the righteous from the wicked and send the latter into the eternal fire (Matthew 25:41). He will bring destruction upon unbelievers (1 Thessalonians 5:1-3, 2 Thessalonians 1:6-10). He will lay waste to the present heavens and the earth (2 Peter 3:10). And with justice he will judge and make war on the evildoers of the earth (Revelation 19:11-21). This all demonstrates that Jesus is not absolutely opposed to the deadly punishment of wrongdoers. Indeed, there will come a day when he brings it about on a universal scale. But for now, he is delaying his just wrath while giving mankind a chance to repent of their wicked deeds (2 Peter 3:9).
Jesus taught that force was a last resort.
Of course, it is true that violence is not always — indeed rarely — justified. "Jesus said, 'My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place'" (John 18:36). So Christians should not use force to establish or maintain the kingdom of God or impose their religious beliefs on others. But this does not mean that Christians should never use force. Jesus implies that if the situation was different, if his kingdom was an earthly kingdom, then force would be acceptable.
Jesus also said, "Blessed are the peacemakers" (Matthew 5:9) showering that our goal should always be to seek peaceful resolutions if at all possible (see also Romans 12:17-19). Later he said, "But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also" (Matthew 5:39). Slapping the right cheek was not a life-threatening attack, but a personal insult similar to spitting on someone. So Jesus was teaching that we should not resort to force when we face minor personal insults and mistreatment. But he was not condemning self-defense when our very lives are threatened as we have already seen.
Finally, Christ tells us, "But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven" (Matthew 5:44-45). How can we love our enemies and kill them at the same time? Clearly Jesus is saying we should harbor no hatred towards anyone. Our actions should never be motivated by hatred or vengeance but only by justice. Judges can and do justly sentence criminals to prison while having compassion on them. God can and does desire a sinner's repentance as he condemns him forever. So also it is possible and necessary for us to love our mortal enemies, to pray for their souls and seek to change their minds and behavior, even when we are forced to take up arms against them.
1.1.4 Principles of just war
As we have seen, Jesus Christ was not a pacifist and it is sometimes necessary to respond to evil with force. But why and when is force right and when is it wrong? Through the Bible there are several key principles to answer this question.
The right to life. All through the Bible it is assumed that individuals have the right to life. For instance, Exodus 20:13 says, "You shall not murder." The reasons we cannot murder is because God says so. But the reason he says so is because he has given us the right to live. This right to life implies the right to self-defense. If we should not be murdered, then we are justified in preventing someone from killing us. This is shown throughout the Bible.
Capital punishment. For various terrible crimes and sins, only death is a sufficient punishment. God himself instituted capital punishment. "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man" (Genesis 9:6). "Anyone who strikes a man and kill shim shall surely be put to death" (Exodus 21:12). Consistent with the principle of "an eye for an eye" (Exodus 23-25), only a murderer's death can satisfy the demands of justice for murder. Capital punishment is also the just penalty for despising authority (Deuteronomy 17:12), rebellion (Deuteronomy 21:21), and kidnapping (Deuteronomy 24:7). It makes no difference in principle whether an individual, or an army, or political leaders are guilty. If a man is guilty of a capital crime, he should die at the hands of an executioner. If any army is guilty of a wide-scale crime, they too should die, at the hands of an opposing army if necessary. If our leaders are corrupted to the extent of imposing tyranny upon the people, then they should be forcefully overthrown and replaced by a legitimate government.
Resisting tyranny. This idea of resisting tyranny is common in the Bible. Clearly we should not resort to force when mere possessions are at stake. High taxes and the like can be endured and do warrant taking lives. But when leaders are responsible for murder, deny civil liberties, and generally impose a draconian regime upon the people, then we should disobey, resist, and rise up to fight. In Exodus 1:15-22 the king of Egypt ordered that all newborn boys be killed. But the Hebrew midwives did right by disobeying and sparing the innocent babies. As we said previously, the book of Judges is full of accounts of leaders raised up by God for express purpose of delivering Israel from the hands of tyranny. Read about Ehud (Judges 3), Deborah (Judges 4), Gideon (Judges 6- 7), and Samson (Judges 13-16). These people are commended for their faith in the New Testament because they responded to God's calling to fight against tyranny (Hebrews 11:32-34).
Justice not revenge, collective not personal. Paul the apostle wrote, "Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody" (Romans 12:17). We must always be motivated to do what is right. "If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone" (Romans 12:18). By all means we must seek peaceful resolutions. "Do not take revenge my friends" (Romans 12:19). We are not to get even with an evildoer nor are we to take justice into our own hands. But it is not evil or vengeful for people to individually defend themselves or to collectively exact just punishment.
Obeying authority. Since the Bible is the inspired word of God, we must follow its commands and principles. We must take seriously the concept of just war taught explicitly in the Old Testament and implicitly in the New since the Bible is consistent in its moral precepts. Since Jesus was not a pacifist, we cannot say that christians renounce all armed conflict. And while force should be a last resort it is sometimes necessary for self-defense and to resist tyranny.
This leads us to the all important idea of authority. Who is in charge. What must we obey? When is resistance justified? "Then Jesus came to them and said, 'All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me'" (Matthew 28:18). All legitimate authority rests in the Lord Jesus Christ. All earthly authority is therefore derived and limited authority. Christ gives parents the authority to raise children according to his principles (Ephesians 6:1-4). But we have no authority to abuse our children or lead them astray. He gives ordained leaders of the church authority within the church, but they are accountable to Christ (Hebrews 13:17). They also have no authority to abuse or lead astray Christians. Likewise, he gives authority to governments to maintain law and order, not to abuse citizens or to perpetrate evil.
Jesus is known for His teaching on love, compassion, forgiveness, and “not to return evil for evil” But we find Jesus advising the disciples to buy a sword in Luke 22:36: “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.” Jesus told the disciples to buy a sword, and it is clear that Jesus advocated the use of a sword for self-defense purposes. Jesus tells the disciples to buy a sword if he has none vs.38 they showed they had two, he said this is enough. So he is not telling them to arm themselves, lest they trust in man and not God. The “sword” (Greek: maxairan) that is used is a dagger or short sword that was part of the Jews traveler's equipment for protection against robbers and wild animals. A plain reading of the passage indicates that Jesus approved of conditional self-defense. These were small daggers to protect someone from the criminals they would encounter as they traveled, they were used for close combat, for self defense, they were also to use against a wild animal.
When Jesus was being arrested Peter stepped forward to protect him and cut off the ear of the servant (Malchus) of the high priest. We have Jesus reacting, stating that “whoever lives by the sword will die by the sword.”
Some pacifists to prove Jesus rejected the use of weapons quote this verse. Here Jesus is addressing Peter who previously said he was willing to die with him and instead tried to prevent His being arrested. Peter used the sword to accomplish his goal- Jesus’ response -- We are not to live by force or violence, Your life is not to be ruled by a response of force, but by love. There was more to this than Peter could see; the will of God. Peter had pulled the sword out to prevent him from being arrested . Jesus healed the man’s ear and He had Peter put away his sword so he could be arrested, to fulfill God’s plan by his death (John 18:11).
This does not mean that one is forbidden to use force when confronted with another’s life being taken. If Jesus were a pacifist and opposed the use of weapons, He would not have instructed his disciples to own them. They were not to be heavily armed, but sufficiently armed. When Jesus was arrested, he told his disciples he could call on his Father, who would put legions of angels at his disposal to protect and deliver Him. Instead Jesus submitted to the process that would bring Him to His purpose in coming to earth. So it is important to see God’s purpose at the time.
Civil Disobedience
The Bible does give examples of the spiritual law taking precedent over the law of the land, as it is the greater good. In Ex.1:15-22 The midwives disobeyed Pharaoh’s order to kill all the Hebrew baby boys (which was genocide) But the Hebrew midwives Shiprah and Puah “feared God and did not do what the king of Egypt had told them to do and they let the boys live.” As a result “God was kind to the midwives and the people increased and became even more numerous. And because the midwives feared God, he gave them families of their own” (vs. 20-21). If they had obeyed Pharaoh the deliverer of Israel would have been killed. Preserving life takes priority over indiscriminate murder, even if it is by the king of the land.
I Kings 18:4 wicked queen Jezebel “was killing off the LORD'S prophets.” In defiance of her orders the prophet Obadiah “had taken a hundred prophets and hid them in two caves ... and had supplied them with food and water” (v. 4). Although Scripture does not explicitly approve of Obadiah's act, the context and manner of the Bible's presentation implies that God condoned His act because it says he feared the Lord, in other words he obeyed God before he would obey man (vs. 13-15).The law of preservation of life admonishes us to do what is right, this overshadows any law of the land that would do harm.
In Joshua 2:1-14 we see the example of Rahab saving the lives of two Hebrew spies by hiding them from soldiers who were searching for them. She risked her life in lying to protect their lives and lying to the soldiers. The spies had no legal right to be in Jericho, the soldiers had every legal right to apprehend them. The preservation of innocent life always takes priority. God honored Rahab calling it faith, and God promised, “Now the city shall be doomed by the LORD to destruction, it and all who are in it. Only Rahab the harlot shall live, she and all who are with her in the house, because she hid the messengers that we sent.” (.Josh 6:17)And the spies went and rescued all her family and belongings from destruction. We later find her included in the line of the Messiah “Salmon begot Boaz by Rahab, Boaz begot Obed by Ruth, Obed begot Jesse,and Jesse begot David the king” (Matt. 1:5-6). This is attributed to faith, she trusted the spies sent by God and in so doing was trusting God. “By faith the harlot Rahab did not perish with those who did not believe” (Heb 11:31) “Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?” (James 2:25)
2Moos.22:2
Jos varas tavataan murtautumasta sisälle ja lyödään kuoliaaksi, ei tappaja ole vereen vikapää.
Vaikka Jeesus ei suoraan viitannut 2. Mooseksenkirjan jakeeseen 22:2, jossa kodinpuolustus on oikeutettu, niin silti hänen oppinsa on yhden mukainen Mooseksen lain kanssa ja käy ilmi että Jeesus katsoi kodinpuolustuksen olevan oikein:
Matt.24:43
"jos perheenisäntä tietäisi, millä yövartiolla varas tulee, totta hän valvoisi, eikä sallisi taloonsa murtauduttavan."
Luuk.22:52
"Niinkuin ryöväriä vastaan te olette lähteneet miekat ja seipäät käsissä."
Vaikka edellämainitut kohdat (Matt.24:43 ja Luuk.22:52) ovatkin jossakin mielessä erotettu asiayhteydestä ne viestivät silti siitä että Jeesus hyväksyi kodinpuolustuksen (2Moos.22:2) ja ryövärien ja tappajien ja murhaajien väkivaltaisen kiinnioton. Jos siis Jumala sallii tappaa yöllä kotiin murtautuvan lammasvarkaan, niin kuinka paljon ennemmin hän sallii tappaa kotiin murtautuvan raiskaajan tai murhaajan? Eikö läheisten (lapset, vaimo) henki ja terveys ole arvokkaampi kuin lampaan kohtalo [vrt Matt.12:10-12]?
Raamattu pitää marttyyreina myös niitä jotka kävivät sotaa uskonsa puolesta, kuten Aabraham (Hepr.11:8), Mooses (Hepr.11:23), Gideon, Simson ja Daavid (Hepr.11:32) ja jotka kuolivat sodassa uskonsa puolesta ja jotka uskon kautta tulivat "väkeviksi sodassa" (Hepr.11:34).
* Aabraham varusti pienen armeijan ja oli mukana hyökkäyksessä kaappaajien kimppuun (1Moos.14:14-15)
* Mooses tappoi omilla käsillään lähimmäisensä pahoinpitelijän (Ap.t.7:24, 2Moos.2:11-12). Mooses myös johti Israelin armeijan useisiin sotiin ja kapinaan Faaraota vastaan. Apostolit hyväksyivät Mooseksen teon (Ap.t.7:24).
Kristinuskon Jumala on Sodan(kin) Jumala
Moos. 15:3
"Herra on sotasankari, Herra on hänen nimensä."
5.Moos.20:1 "Jos lähdet sotaan vihollistasi vastaan ja näet hevosia ja sotavaunuja ja sotajoukon, joka on sinua suurempi, niin älä pelkää heitä, sillä Herra, sinun Jumalasi, on sinun kanssasi, hän, joka johdatti sinut Egyptin maasta."
Kristinuskon jumalaa, Aabrahamin, Iisakin ja Jaakobin jumalaa kutsutaan sodan jumalaksi koska sota ja sodan tapahtumien kulku on jumalan käsissä. Sodanlopputulos ei ole sotilaiden ja kenraalien hallinnassa, vaan maailman historian tapahtumat ovat jumalan ohjauksessa.
Saar.9:11
"Taas minä tulin näkemään auringon alla, että ei ole juoksu nopsain vallassa, ei sota urhojen [vallassa]... vaan aika ja kohtalo kohtaa kaikkia."
Room. 9:16
"Niin se ei siis ole sen vallassa, joka tahtoo, eikä sen, joka juoksee, vaan Jumalan, joka on armollinen."
Eikä pelkästään maailmanhistoria ole jumalan kädessä, vaan jumala on säätynyt jokaiselle ihmiselle päivän jona hän kuolee. Kuka kuolee sairauteen, kuka tapetaan, kuka kuolee onnettumuudessa (vain itsemurha on ihmisen omassa kädessä, ja silloinkin vain sen yritys). Kaikkialla läsnäoleva Jumala ottaa vastuun myös kuolemastamme, sillä juuri hän elämän meille antoikin.
5.Moos. 32:39
"I and I alone, am God; no other God is real. I kill and I give life, I wound and I heal, and no one can oppose what do."
--------------------
Excerpts from "The Field Manual of the Free Militia"
1.1.3 Jesus Christ was not a pacifist
Of course, Christ's emphasis on love is sometimes perceived to imply that he was a pacifist who condemned all violence and war. But this is a misunderstanding.
A close look at the Bible will show that Jesus Christ was not a pacifist and will demonstrate that he approved of the justified use of deadly force.
Neither John the Baptist, nor Jesus, nor the apostles condemned soldiering.
"Then some soldiers asked him, 'And what should we do?' He replied, 'Don't exhort money and don't accuse people falsely — be content with your pay'" (Luke 3:14). John the Baptist did not tell soldiers that being soldiers was immoral per se, but simply condemned the abuse of their position as soldiers.
Jesus did not rebuke the centurion for being a soldier, but commended him for the faith that came from his understanding of authority in the military (Matthew 8:5-13; see also Acts 10:1-48).
Jesus Christ both permitted and commanded his followers to be armed.
"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). Now that the apostles had learned the lesson of trusting in God (Luke 10:4), they were to be prepared to defend themselves as they travelled through dangerous areas to take the gospel to the whole world.
"Then Simon Peter, who had a sword, drew it and struck the high priest's servant, cutting off his right ear. Jesus commanded Peter, 'Put your sword away! Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?'" (John 18:10-11). Notice that Jesus allowed Peter to have the sword both before and after this incident. The problem was not that defending someone is wrong; the problem was that it was inappropriate at this time since Jesus wanted to die for our sins (Mark 10:45).
"'Put your sword back in its place,' Jesus said to him, 'for all who draw the sword will die by the sword'" (Matthew 26:52). Again, Jesus did not necessarily condemn using the sword. He told Peter to put it back in its scabbard, not to get rid of it. What Jesus is saying is that anyone who fights risks his life in doing so. This is a matter of fact, not of ethics.
Jesus Christ used just force.
"Jesus entered the temple area and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of money changers and the benches of those selling doves" (Matthew 21:12).
"So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables" (John 2:15).
"When Jesus said, 'I am he,' they drew back and fell to the ground." He used his divine power against aggressors (John 18:6).
Jesus Christ would have been justified in defending himself.
On several occasions Jesus Christ evaded an angry crowd rather than giving in to their intent to kill him (Luke 4:28-30, John 8:58-59, John 10:35-39). It was not yet the time for him to sacrifice himself for the sins of many. When the time did come, and his disciples tried to defend him, Jesus said, "Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels?'" (Matthew 26:53). Jesus was quite capable of taking care of himself if he wanted to be defended. And his statement that he could call on the Father did not only mean that he had the ability to defend himself, but that he was morally justified in doing so as well. He was under no inherent obligation to die, although he and the Father did plan for him to die.
Jesus Christ will someday use deadly force on a wide scale.
All through the Bible we read of the day when Jesus will return to set things straight. At his second coming he will throw the wicked into the fiery furnace (Matthew 13:41-43). He will separate the righteous from the wicked and send the latter into the eternal fire (Matthew 25:41). He will bring destruction upon unbelievers (1 Thessalonians 5:1-3, 2 Thessalonians 1:6-10). He will lay waste to the present heavens and the earth (2 Peter 3:10). And with justice he will judge and make war on the evildoers of the earth (Revelation 19:11-21). This all demonstrates that Jesus is not absolutely opposed to the deadly punishment of wrongdoers. Indeed, there will come a day when he brings it about on a universal scale. But for now, he is delaying his just wrath while giving mankind a chance to repent of their wicked deeds (2 Peter 3:9).
Jesus taught that force was a last resort.
Of course, it is true that violence is not always — indeed rarely — justified. "Jesus said, 'My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place'" (John 18:36). So Christians should not use force to establish or maintain the kingdom of God or impose their religious beliefs on others. But this does not mean that Christians should never use force. Jesus implies that if the situation was different, if his kingdom was an earthly kingdom, then force would be acceptable.
Jesus also said, "Blessed are the peacemakers" (Matthew 5:9) showering that our goal should always be to seek peaceful resolutions if at all possible (see also Romans 12:17-19). Later he said, "But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also" (Matthew 5:39). Slapping the right cheek was not a life-threatening attack, but a personal insult similar to spitting on someone. So Jesus was teaching that we should not resort to force when we face minor personal insults and mistreatment. But he was not condemning self-defense when our very lives are threatened as we have already seen.
Finally, Christ tells us, "But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven" (Matthew 5:44-45). How can we love our enemies and kill them at the same time? Clearly Jesus is saying we should harbor no hatred towards anyone. Our actions should never be motivated by hatred or vengeance but only by justice. Judges can and do justly sentence criminals to prison while having compassion on them. God can and does desire a sinner's repentance as he condemns him forever. So also it is possible and necessary for us to love our mortal enemies, to pray for their souls and seek to change their minds and behavior, even when we are forced to take up arms against them.
1.1.4 Principles of just war
As we have seen, Jesus Christ was not a pacifist and it is sometimes necessary to respond to evil with force. But why and when is force right and when is it wrong? Through the Bible there are several key principles to answer this question.
The right to life. All through the Bible it is assumed that individuals have the right to life. For instance, Exodus 20:13 says, "You shall not murder." The reasons we cannot murder is because God says so. But the reason he says so is because he has given us the right to live. This right to life implies the right to self-defense. If we should not be murdered, then we are justified in preventing someone from killing us. This is shown throughout the Bible.
Capital punishment. For various terrible crimes and sins, only death is a sufficient punishment. God himself instituted capital punishment. "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man" (Genesis 9:6). "Anyone who strikes a man and kill shim shall surely be put to death" (Exodus 21:12). Consistent with the principle of "an eye for an eye" (Exodus 23-25), only a murderer's death can satisfy the demands of justice for murder. Capital punishment is also the just penalty for despising authority (Deuteronomy 17:12), rebellion (Deuteronomy 21:21), and kidnapping (Deuteronomy 24:7). It makes no difference in principle whether an individual, or an army, or political leaders are guilty. If a man is guilty of a capital crime, he should die at the hands of an executioner. If any army is guilty of a wide-scale crime, they too should die, at the hands of an opposing army if necessary. If our leaders are corrupted to the extent of imposing tyranny upon the people, then they should be forcefully overthrown and replaced by a legitimate government.
Resisting tyranny. This idea of resisting tyranny is common in the Bible. Clearly we should not resort to force when mere possessions are at stake. High taxes and the like can be endured and do warrant taking lives. But when leaders are responsible for murder, deny civil liberties, and generally impose a draconian regime upon the people, then we should disobey, resist, and rise up to fight. In Exodus 1:15-22 the king of Egypt ordered that all newborn boys be killed. But the Hebrew midwives did right by disobeying and sparing the innocent babies. As we said previously, the book of Judges is full of accounts of leaders raised up by God for express purpose of delivering Israel from the hands of tyranny. Read about Ehud (Judges 3), Deborah (Judges 4), Gideon (Judges 6- 7), and Samson (Judges 13-16). These people are commended for their faith in the New Testament because they responded to God's calling to fight against tyranny (Hebrews 11:32-34).
Justice not revenge, collective not personal. Paul the apostle wrote, "Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody" (Romans 12:17). We must always be motivated to do what is right. "If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone" (Romans 12:18). By all means we must seek peaceful resolutions. "Do not take revenge my friends" (Romans 12:19). We are not to get even with an evildoer nor are we to take justice into our own hands. But it is not evil or vengeful for people to individually defend themselves or to collectively exact just punishment.
Obeying authority. Since the Bible is the inspired word of God, we must follow its commands and principles. We must take seriously the concept of just war taught explicitly in the Old Testament and implicitly in the New since the Bible is consistent in its moral precepts. Since Jesus was not a pacifist, we cannot say that christians renounce all armed conflict. And while force should be a last resort it is sometimes necessary for self-defense and to resist tyranny.
This leads us to the all important idea of authority. Who is in charge. What must we obey? When is resistance justified? "Then Jesus came to them and said, 'All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me'" (Matthew 28:18). All legitimate authority rests in the Lord Jesus Christ. All earthly authority is therefore derived and limited authority. Christ gives parents the authority to raise children according to his principles (Ephesians 6:1-4). But we have no authority to abuse our children or lead them astray. He gives ordained leaders of the church authority within the church, but they are accountable to Christ (Hebrews 13:17). They also have no authority to abuse or lead astray Christians. Likewise, he gives authority to governments to maintain law and order, not to abuse citizens or to perpetrate evil.
Jesus is known for His teaching on love, compassion, forgiveness, and “not to return evil for evil” But we find Jesus advising the disciples to buy a sword in Luke 22:36: “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.” Jesus told the disciples to buy a sword, and it is clear that Jesus advocated the use of a sword for self-defense purposes. Jesus tells the disciples to buy a sword if he has none vs.38 they showed they had two, he said this is enough. So he is not telling them to arm themselves, lest they trust in man and not God. The “sword” (Greek: maxairan) that is used is a dagger or short sword that was part of the Jews traveler's equipment for protection against robbers and wild animals. A plain reading of the passage indicates that Jesus approved of conditional self-defense. These were small daggers to protect someone from the criminals they would encounter as they traveled, they were used for close combat, for self defense, they were also to use against a wild animal.
When Jesus was being arrested Peter stepped forward to protect him and cut off the ear of the servant (Malchus) of the high priest. We have Jesus reacting, stating that “whoever lives by the sword will die by the sword.”
Some pacifists to prove Jesus rejected the use of weapons quote this verse. Here Jesus is addressing Peter who previously said he was willing to die with him and instead tried to prevent His being arrested. Peter used the sword to accomplish his goal- Jesus’ response -- We are not to live by force or violence, Your life is not to be ruled by a response of force, but by love. There was more to this than Peter could see; the will of God. Peter had pulled the sword out to prevent him from being arrested . Jesus healed the man’s ear and He had Peter put away his sword so he could be arrested, to fulfill God’s plan by his death (John 18:11).
This does not mean that one is forbidden to use force when confronted with another’s life being taken. If Jesus were a pacifist and opposed the use of weapons, He would not have instructed his disciples to own them. They were not to be heavily armed, but sufficiently armed. When Jesus was arrested, he told his disciples he could call on his Father, who would put legions of angels at his disposal to protect and deliver Him. Instead Jesus submitted to the process that would bring Him to His purpose in coming to earth. So it is important to see God’s purpose at the time.
Civil Disobedience
The Bible does give examples of the spiritual law taking precedent over the law of the land, as it is the greater good. In Ex.1:15-22 The midwives disobeyed Pharaoh’s order to kill all the Hebrew baby boys (which was genocide) But the Hebrew midwives Shiprah and Puah “feared God and did not do what the king of Egypt had told them to do and they let the boys live.” As a result “God was kind to the midwives and the people increased and became even more numerous. And because the midwives feared God, he gave them families of their own” (vs. 20-21). If they had obeyed Pharaoh the deliverer of Israel would have been killed. Preserving life takes priority over indiscriminate murder, even if it is by the king of the land.
I Kings 18:4 wicked queen Jezebel “was killing off the LORD'S prophets.” In defiance of her orders the prophet Obadiah “had taken a hundred prophets and hid them in two caves ... and had supplied them with food and water” (v. 4). Although Scripture does not explicitly approve of Obadiah's act, the context and manner of the Bible's presentation implies that God condoned His act because it says he feared the Lord, in other words he obeyed God before he would obey man (vs. 13-15).The law of preservation of life admonishes us to do what is right, this overshadows any law of the land that would do harm.
In Joshua 2:1-14 we see the example of Rahab saving the lives of two Hebrew spies by hiding them from soldiers who were searching for them. She risked her life in lying to protect their lives and lying to the soldiers. The spies had no legal right to be in Jericho, the soldiers had every legal right to apprehend them. The preservation of innocent life always takes priority. God honored Rahab calling it faith, and God promised, “Now the city shall be doomed by the LORD to destruction, it and all who are in it. Only Rahab the harlot shall live, she and all who are with her in the house, because she hid the messengers that we sent.” (.Josh 6:17)And the spies went and rescued all her family and belongings from destruction. We later find her included in the line of the Messiah “Salmon begot Boaz by Rahab, Boaz begot Obed by Ruth, Obed begot Jesse,and Jesse begot David the king” (Matt. 1:5-6). This is attributed to faith, she trusted the spies sent by God and in so doing was trusting God. “By faith the harlot Rahab did not perish with those who did not believe” (Heb 11:31) “Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?” (James 2:25)
Vastaukset 2
Vanhimmat
666
Onko tätä jeesuspropagandaa pakko survoa kaikkialle?