ARTICLES
Q TALKS
DISCOVER Q
EVENTS
All Q Events
Q Nashville 2014
Q Session | Innovate
Q Cast
RESOURCES
Books
Studies
Bible
Church Leaders
Speaking
PARTICIPATE
Praxis Accelerator
Host Conversations
Church
Business
Education
Social Sector
Arts + Entertainment
Science + Tech
Government
Media
Cities
Gospel
Restorers
Tweet
Government
Should Christians Support the Bombing of Libya?
We Must Fight Oppression, But How?
by
Jonathan Merritt
My theology was shaken this week. Spending time in Thailand and India, I was able to walk through red light districts and peer into the eyes of women who had been shoved into the sex trade as young as 10 years old. Many American Christians love to preach a Christian gospel that promises happiness and health. How does our faith speak to such things?
As I read the sacred Christian scriptures, I’m struck by the unbroken command to defend the marginalized (Isaiah 1:17) and “do justice” (Micah 6:8). I’m swept up by the clear message that God “takes up the cause of the oppressed” (Psalm 146:7). I’m convicted by the teaching that “the righteous care for the justice of the poor” (Proverbs 29:7). It was Jesus himself that declared he had come to “preach good news to the poor … to proclaim freedom for the prisoner” (Luke 4:18). Those who, like Glenn Beck, argue against an ethic of social justice must not read the same Bible I do.
At the same time, the Bible seems to highly exalt peace. Who can ignore Jesus when he stands upon a mountaintop and declares, “Blessed are the peacemakers” (Matthew 5:9)? I question American Christians who support imperialistic philosophies, participate in unnecessary saber-rattling, and endorse wars that will undoubtedly steal the lives of innocents.
And then there is Libya.
This country is ruled by an oppressive tyrant, and yet remarkably the drumbeat of freedom still beats in the hearts of its citizens. As I watched the situation unfold from Asia, cut off from American media, I found myself struggling to answer this question: When a man like Muammar Gaddafi insists on oppressing Libyans and is even willing to kill his own people, how should followers of a peace- and justice-loving Jesus respond? How can we do justice in this situation and still be the peacemakers Jesus asks us to be? The answer is not an easy one.
Today, I support the action taken by the international community and President Obama to hear the cries of innocent Libyans and take military action. Perhaps tomorrow I will question myself. This kind of wrestling with so weighty an issue is exactly what American Christians should be doing, I think. If we do support forceful intervention, we should do so with tears in our eyes.
It is clear that Christians must fight against oppressors and for the oppressed. How to best do that must be worked out among those who bear the name of Christ. We can only hope that the God who loves both justice and peace will grant us wisdom in a time like this when we need it most.
-----
Is the bombing in Libya something Christians should support in your opinion? How can we reconcile justice with peace in the face of oppression?
-----
Editor's Note: This piece was originally published on TheWashingtonPost.com.
Tweet
Comments
Chris McNab
Jonathan - I appreciate the thoughtfulness you put into this issue. My heart also weighs heavy for the Libyan people looking for freedom from the oppressive rule and tyranny of Muammar Gaddafi.
Somehow I found myself thankful so many countries are going in and dropping bombs to bring an end to Gaddafi's injustice. And yet, when I read the scriptures - the teachings of Jesus - I can't seem to any longer reconcile the use of violence even for the purpose of bringing peace. I once was convinced but I am no longer that dropping bombs on people can be an act that follows Jesus' commands to love your enemies, turn the other cheek, do good to those who hate you.
We live in a fallen world. A world that uses "power over" to get their way and sometimes, to bring about justice. In a fallen world violence will occur for evil as well as for the good of society. All kingdoms of the world use violence or the threat of it, whether to keep civility in society or to maintain power and control. But as followers of Jesus, how do we respond to violence or the threat of it? How do we fight for justice for those who are violently oppressed?
When Jesus told us that his kingdom is not of this world, I believe that in this "other kingdom" his followers must "come under" rather than using "power over" others. The church has to separate from the state and reject all forms of violence. Peace to bring about peace - not violence, even in extreme circumstances.
We are told that our men and women go out to war giving their lives - for us! And they do. But they also go to take lives. And this is where we as Jesus followers must differ. Jesus came and showed us how to live and then willingly bled for us - to his death. We to must be willing to bleed for the poor and oppressed, even if it costs us our lives.
The most comprehensive teaching series on this topic that I have heard can be found here:
http://www.themeetinghouse.ca.
It is called Inglorious Pastors. Click on Teaching, scroll down to 2010 and click on Inglorious Pastors.
Jonathan Merritt
Chris,
You raise an interesting question. Is it ever right to do wrong to right? Or to put it in more Q-esque terms, "Can we utilize fallenness to bring about restoration?" My inner pragmatist, like yours, rejoiced when I realized we'd joined others in this bombing. And yet, I recognize that Christianity is not an end-justifies-the-means kind of faith.
And then there is the issue of pastors, which you brought up at the end. In a messy situation like this, how do you think pastors should respond? Should they pick sides? Should they avoid the topic?
Jm
Kurt Willems
Brief thoughts... Christians are called to never bear the sword... not even for defending the innocent. Jesus makes this clear and so does Paul. I would say that Christians should not "support" the bombing of Libya, but should pray for peace and be willing to give themselves for others. The problem is a confusion in categories. I am convinced that Christians are NEVER called to join the military. We do not have the right to "take vengence" or "bear the sword" but this is for the pagan state. God delegates his authority to the state only for the purposes of "punishing evil doers." But notice the odd thing in our nation. Christians are called never to use violence, God allows the state to use it on some occasions, but we have Christians in the military. Therefore, I think that it is certainly wrong for Christians to be dropping bombs on Libya, but am not certain if this qualifies as a state justified use of force or not. Sorry to be so scattered but hopefully my main thoughts came through. For all of my ideas, check out my Nonviolence 101 series:
http://www.thepangeablog.com/category/nonviolence-101-series/
RIchard Laribee
I've been reading Leo Tolstoy's, "The Kingdom of God is Among You." He makes a powerful argument for nonviolence, even in the face of evil, even to protect the oppressed, based on Jesus' teaching in Matthew 5.39.
While I'm not sure that I'm entirely convinced, I've been struck with the power of Tolstoy's and others' arguments... and how they have been ignored rather than faced. I do believe the question is more difficult than we usually admit, and that we fail to give it sufficient, prayerful attention.
JR Rozko
Thanks for your article Jonathan - appreciate that you are willing to enter into an emotionally-charged issue like this w/ the humility of a wrestling-one. Without wading too far into the debate of viloence/non-violence, there was one line that struck me and I feel compelled to comment on. You said,
"It is clear that Christians must fight against oppressors and for the oppressed."
I get your heart on this, but I wonder if you, after considering the theology behind it, would stand by it. Following Jesus, it seems to me that the "fight" for Christians is not against oppressors, but against sin and brokenness in all its forms. Ours must always be the battle to see people freed, the oppressed as well as the oppressor, from the disastrous consequences of sin, however it manifests itself. This, I think, is the "glory" (is that is an appropriate word here) of the Cross. Jesus conquers the powers of sin and evil, not for the oppressed against the oppressor, but for humanity against Satan and all forces of violence and evil. If this is the case, then the use of violence, even if we find ways to justify it (and indeed we may), can never be seen as an intrinsically good solution to the ways in which sin manifests itself.
Jonathan Merritt
JR,
When I said "fight" I did not mean that in the sense of violent resistance. In hindsight, another word might have been more appropriate (advocate?). Thanks for pointing this out.
As far as my statement and your contention that Christians should fight sin and brokenness and "not against oppressors," I'd simply consider the way that God relates to oppressors. Psalm 72 says God "will break the oppressor in pieces." Psalm 107 says he "redeems from the hand of the oppressor." Isaiah 9 says the Messiah will "break the rod of the oppressor" and Zechariah says he will force the oppressor out of Israel's camp forever. I don't know that "fighting" against sin/brokenness and "fighting" against oppression/oppressors are mutually exclusive. The overwhelming preponderance of the Biblical witness seems to indicate that God's posture opposes the oppressor and those who claim to follow him should too. What do you think? Agree or disagree?
Jm
Dylan Yosick
Thank you Jonathan for writing this article. It raises difficult questions for Christians and the use of violence. Personally I have always struggled with the issue and still do not know where I stand. I would lean more toward the use of non-violence as Christians. However, how do we reconcile the violence that God sanctioned for Israel to commit against other nations for his own purposes?
It's easy to see how the N.T. advocates non violence and peace but how can you mesh that with what we see in the O.T.?
Dylan Yosick
Thank you Jonathan for writing this article. It raises difficult questions for Christians and the use of violence. Personally I have always struggled with the issue and still do not know where I stand. I would lean more toward the use of non-violence as Christians. However, how do we reconcile the violence that God sanctioned for Israel to commit against other nations for his own purposes?
It's easy to see how the N.T. advocates non violence and peace but how can you mesh that with what we see in the O.T.?
Martyn Mayfield
Thank you for your humble and open view of this VERY difficult situation and topic. It is refreshing to hear from a fellow pilgrim rather than an arrived expert. As a fellow pilgrim I would like to submit my opinion.
Many Americans equate democracy and political freedoms as a Christian issue. During the time of Jesus there was an oppressive Roman government, but Jesus, for the most part, ignored that situation in favor of a new kingdom that can exist within, beyond and above any form of human government.
I work and live in China, and have for the past 12+ years, and have had plenty of opportunity to think about these situations and how Christ's church, as an agent of God's kingdom, can not just exist, but thrive.
The need is not for political democracy, the need is for the kingdom of God. Now, the question becomes, "How can the people of God bring the deeds and words of the gospel to the people within nations we consider to have oppressive governments or leaders?"
Blessings
Marcus Whitfield
Thank you for your honest and poignant article. War, violence and the other pieces interlaced here are not topics often spoken on from the pulpit, so I wonder myself how American pastors would respond.
As for the question of whether it is ever right to do wrong to do right - can there be a black and white answer? In World War II, Hitler and the Third Reich murdered millions. Had the Allied Forces not intervened, how many more would have died? Were those American Christians, British Christians, etc. in err for their actions?
Making a blanket statement that Christians should abstain from violence is a difficult one, because although I feel the same at times, I am like you Jonathan, tomorrow another Hitler may rise and how could we stand back?
Jonathan Merritt
Dylan,
I've often wondered if we ought to rely on progressive revelation to answer the OT/NT tension. What do you think? Do we need to square the NT with the OT or do we see the NT as the new iteration of what God was up to in the OT?
Jm
Jonathan Merritt
Good thinking, Marcus. The difficult thing about peace, justice and really following Jesus in general is that our theological assertions have to be tested in the real world. The Hitler question is one that plagues me also.
JR Rozko
Jonathan,
In response to your response to me above, like any other reference from the OT, or the NT for that matter, Jesus, in my view, is the final arbiter of how we do our interpretation.
So indeed, God "breaks the oppressor to pieces, redeems from the hand of the oppressor, breaks the rod of the oppressor, and forces the oppressor out of Israel's camp forever," and he does all of this in and through Jesus. There is no "other way" that God does these things besides, in the first place, in Jesus as Messiah, and in the second, through the embodied witness of Jesus' followers. To be sure, God opposes the oppressor, but this opposition, with Jesus as our model (and he is of course more), has finally in view not the oppressor per se, but the fractured state of the world and humanity that results in anyone being an oppressor in the first place. The nature of that opposition ought always then to be that of Jesus.
Aaron Brown
I appreciate many of the responses; they have been very insightful.
Its difficult to reconcile this issue, especially when we see Hell on earth and we desire for Heaven/Peace on earth to fully come and free us of destructive people such as Hitler, Gaddafi, Bin Laden, etc.
Romans 13: 4-5 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience..
My thought is that it seems that God has instituted even rulers over rulers for instance like the UN and Superpowers such as America and Great Britain who can call out dictators like Gaadafi and say, "You're wrong and we will stop you for being oppressive." God has ordained these Superpowers to pour out his punishment on those who do evil. Therefore, there may not be a conflict between Christians bringing change through the teachings of Christ and the government policies that are in place.
What are some thoughts on this idea?
Tony Carey
I think the issue is much bigger than the bombing Libya. What were we all doing for the last thirty years about Libya. What are we doing about China and the gross civil rights abuses. A huge proportion of the goods we buy are manufactured in countries where people (often Christians) are abused, imprisoned, tortured and killed. We in the west support tyrants because we need there resources and we rarely complain until situations like that in Libya blow up and demand a comment.
Imagine if we refused to buy Saudi Oil, Chinese exports, goods manufactured in sweet shops. First we would not be able to sustain the quality of life we are accustomed to, and second we might choose a whole new way of living. A dream? Maybe.
T.Jenkins
Matthew 11:12
From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and the violent take it by force.
Jerry Miner
Having just watched the documentary on Bonhoeffer and reading some of his thoughts, I think we can learn how just difficult these situations are and how much our faith is shaped as we wrestled with these questions. Bonhoeffer wanted very much to be a pacifist, but found himself under the tyranny of Hitler. We can learn much from his wrestlings.
I may be more concerned with a Christ followers who feels they have the right answer to questions like these, than the many who struggle to find an answer.
Blessings to all of you who wrestle.
Jonathan Merritt
T.Jenkins: Not sure I follow...
Cliff Johnson
Jonathan,
Indeed it is a complex issue with difficult answers. But you've unnecessarily complicated your article by an incorrect statement about Glenn Beck. Glenn did not in any way argue against an ethic of social justice...I personally heard his comments numerous times on his show and that's not what he said. And based on his frequent on-air comments, he does read from the same Bible you do. What he was arguing against was when churches allow our Government to dictate to them about when, to whom, and how social justice should be carried out. And with that, I think we should agree with him. He specifically stated numerous times that if you as an individual feel God calling you to take some action in the name of Jesus, then do it. But not when a church is dictated to by the Government.
Carl Medearis
Great question/discussion. We can view such a discussion from the viewpoint of modern real politik, or from history, or from the Old Testament or the New. Or...all of the above.
I'd say that the modern and immediate pragmatic view would be for America to do what it's doing (with UN, Arab League, African Union and NATO support).
History of American intervention in such situations would not bode well. Our track record of supporting an insurgency over the current regime hasn't gone to plan in almost all cases (don't want to list those all here, but I'm guessing we'd all agree to some level that this is true).
So that leaves us with the Old and New Testaments as a grid for interpreting such crisis and the intervention of nations and/or of Christians.
And I read the Old through the New (doesn't negate the Old, but simply reads it though the lens of Christ).
That leaves us bombing Libyans or rescuing other Libyans (through bombing). And...can we justify that through the lens of Jesus. As well-intentioned as I assume we are, it just doesn't seem possible.
carl
JCK3
Some thoughtful ideas have been expressed with a true sense of humility which I take as the mark of sincere followers of Christ. To that I offer this; JM is co-mingling two seperate idea's ahead of the central question he asks us to consider.
The first idea at the opening speaks to what we more commonly know as "social justice." The communial or collective actions of a society that either promotes freedom or repress's it. This "ethic" as JM puts it, I submitt, is a mutually exclusive concept to "Just War."
Since Augustine (Hippo) and Thomas Aquinas many Christian minds, along with others, have considered this idea..."Bellum isutum."
Just War Theory as a framework to consider the question JM has put to us...Ought, "should" we support the bombing in Libya? In a JWT framework I believe a thoughtful Christian, sensative to the Holy Spirit can support such action. At the same time I would not think less of brother/sister who having considering the specifics of the crisis in Libya and JWT did not support the present action.
I am going to digress here. It is no small thing to consider the specifics of this situation, for it matters....the "truth and spirit" resides in the details. I submitt that Christians are called to know the"Truth" of things and discern the "Spirit." (see Schaeffer)
So, as you may decide to investigate JWT and it's application to the present question, I suggest considering these details;
The situation in Libya started with peacefull demonstrations of the civilian public
Those who oppose Khadafi are largely civillian and have no substantial means of defense
At any time each side may choose to stop violent action (free will)
US/UN have attempted diplomacy-non violent resolution
US/UN bombings are aimed at military equipment, not civilan targets...taking away Khadafi's ability to use leathal force against non-military targets
This last point is particulary important....Jus In Bello
JCK3
Vaughan
Aaron Brown's comments are spot on. There must be a distinction between the legitimate actions of a police force (eg the UN), and the interpersonal dealings that you and I have with our neighbours.
If I am an employee of the NYPD, as a Christian I am obliged to enforce the law, even if it means pulling the trigger on my lawfully issued weapon. I operate according to well laid down procedures, I am trained and I am obedient to authority.
As a member of my local community, if my neighbour insults me, I have no mandate to retaliate, however I do have the obligation to call 999 if this neighbour is threatening/causing harm to my family or to other neighbours.
As Christians, we have every responsibility and authority to confront bullys, and oppressors, and perpetrators of injustice.
Vaughan
Cameron Lucas
I read a quote by a Bible College proffessor just last night and I think it applies here:
"So what is pacifism? It is the uncompromising realization that we as humans are incapable of bringing about justice through violent retaliation. Hence, we relinquish all such acts to God in his sovereign and eschatological plan of judgment, justice, and mercy."
(The whole post can be found at:
http://markmoore.org/330/2008/09/pacifism-is-not-passivism.html
)
Johnny Chan
Here is my humble idea and suggestion.
Just as Paul has reminded us in 1 cor 2:15-16, we are spiritual. Therefore, we should not just look at the issue from the political perspective or social perspective; we have to look at it from the spiritual perspective. Jesus and Paul did not overthrow the Roman government, instead, they taught us to love. Physically, Jesus healed the sick and fed the hungry, and spiritually, he casted out demons and eventually died on the cross and rose again. He was dealing the oppressive situation from the spiritual perspective.
Since Christ has victory over death and sin already, what we can do now spiritually is to pray for the binding of the evil power behind. And physically we should discuss how to help those who are suffering in Libya. We should leave the use of any other force to the earthly governments that can only deal with political issue.
meleahsteelman
Hello everyone. I didn't have time to read through each post. So, I'm sorry if anyone has already addressed this issue. I am curious what others think about America's leaders motives behind making the decisions of going to war or endorsing force in different countries. Personally, I tend to err on the side of peaceful protest.
While I appreciate everyone's personal views on how our behaviors should imitate Christ. I am curious as to others thoughts about why our nation chooses to use force with some countries and not others. Specifically, we seem to have national interest in countries in the Middle East and have invaded on the pretense of national safety and many times on issues of ending dictatorships with horrible histories of inhumanities.
However, we seem to ignore other countries like the DRCongo, Uganda, Rwanda, etc. Can anyone shed more light on the differences? I was a bit surprised with my very close friends, both of whom are American (Christian) Petroleum Engineers in Oman told me that--yes, we invade Middle Eastern countries because of oil. They stated that it was an issue of our national security. This left me feeling a bit confused. Any other clarity from a Christian perspective? Should these national decisions play a role on our daily personal dialogue with others and how we choose to cast our vote at election time?
william
Its interesting to see the differing believes and opinions in the interpretation of Gods word. But one thing is sure, our God is a God of love. Whom does not approve violent or killings of innocent or sinners including babies, toddlers or woman.
If only christ loving people would just learn more and understand how Libyan people were actually fairing during Ghadafi time, rather than reading from a western angle, western media or western propaganda with western government objectives. It will shade greater lights of whats really going on.
The are lots of materials other than youtube to see what kind of genocide created by western bombing and the rebels in Libya.
May God's hand be upon Libya.
benina
if you had witnessed how Gaddafi regime was abusing people there would be no question whether to support the freedom fighters. Please buy a copy of the book at website
www.voices4libya.com
because all profit from sales goes to support the Libyan children affected by the fighting.Thanks to everybody who supported Libya during 2011
Comments are now closed
ALSO BY JONATHAN MERRITT
What Skyscrapers Tell Us...About Us
Cities
Rebranding Atheism
Social Sector
When Art Offends
Arts + Entertainment
ALSO IN GOVERNMENT
Social Engagements
by Jim Wallis
Four Faces of Global Christianity
by Q Ideas
The Sanctity of Human Life
by David P. Gushee