 |
Taking Every Thought Captive |
 Got Life? Our Ministry Our Beliefs Our Staff Articles What's New? Contact Us Resources Bookstore Search Links
|
What About Retaliation Against Terrorists?For a Reformed response to the terrorist attack of Sept. 11, 2001 click here.Below is my responses to emails I have received concerning the legitimacy of the U.S. war against terrorists. [The following is an email I received from a believer who questioned the U.S. decision to retaliate against the terrorists who were involved in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. What follows is my brief response.] Dear Massimo, Did I get your name right? I just discovered your site today - national day of mourning in Ireland for the attacks on the USA last Tuesday. I signed your guestbook. I want to express my sympathy to you and all Americans. We are praying for you all, especially the friends and relatives of victims and those still alive under the debris. I am horrified however by all this talk of retaliation, and the Senate sanctioning force and calling up reservists etc.. How can a nation with so many evangelical Christians go for this? What about the power of forgiveness? 'Vengeance is mine, I will repay saith the Lord' - that's the King James version I learnt as a child. I am afraid of two things - innocent people, especially those suffering so much already in Afghanistan - being indiscriminately bombed - it's happened before - and an escalation of tit-for-tat attacks which will blow up into outright war with awful consequences. I pray that Christians in the US will stand up for what the Bible says. God bless, [name withheld] [My response] Thank you for your kind note and concern for our nation. I'm glad you are interested in doing what God's Word says. Please tell me how you understand God's Word as it relates to the power He has given to the governing authorities to execute justice on evil doers as found in Romans 13:1-5:
Please note that God calls the civil authorities His ministers. God has ordained them to carry out justice on evil. We must maintain the distinction between church and state. The church does not retaliate when persecuted for the Gospel. But the state not only has the right, but the duty to retaliate. Hope this helps. God bless, Massimo [Below is the response I received from the above email from the lady from Ireland. Please note that my directness with her is based on her unwillingness to submit to the authority of Scripture (i.e. please don't send me an email to tell me I did not show love)].
Dear Massimo, Thank you for your very prompt reply. I’m sorry I did not respond as quickly - I have had to drop everything and get my master’s degree dissertation finished and submitted. I am not convinced by your use of Romans 13:1-7 to justify the US going in and bombing millions of innocent Afghanis. Of course a state must administer justice , but from what I hear in the media, most Americans are going for revenge/retaliation. How about the rest of Romans 13 and Romans 12:17-21, not to mention Luke 17:1 - 4 etc.?! Furthermore, rightly or wrongly, many people in the world think that the attack was justice for wrongs perpetrated by the US. Of course it is not justice to kill 6,000 civilians - that’s exactly why the US should not go and do the same thing, no doubt killing even more people - people who are already suffering from starvation and lack of medical attention. They are suffering already under a regime - the Taliban -that hasn’t read Romans 13:1-7 and found out how a state is supposed to behave. If/when the US does attack, it will then spark off retaliation from people, who at present are condemning the twin towers attack. Apart from the Christian perspective, this is sheer common sense and I hear people who know far more about politics than I do say this on the media every day. Wouldn’t it make more sense to ‘love bomb’ Afghanistan with food, blankets and medical aid. This might turn Afghanis to support the US and make them strong enough to overthrow the Taliban. Wouldn’t US troops be better off at home providing security on internal flights and Greyhound buses? At present, the US is holding the high moral ground (just about!). This will change immediately if they strike. You only have to look at history - e.g. in Ireland in 1916, people spat at the small group who had instigated a rising. It was only British brutality in putting down the rising that swung public opinion and caused the whole country to rise in the War of Independence. Of course it is the duty of the state to administer justice, but there is a difference between justice and revenge. Justice, to my mind, implies moving slowly and carefully, to make sure you have found the culprits and dealing with them only. The haste with which the US sent its military to the East does not fit with this. I am sick over what is happening - I am planning to hand in my British passport over the UK support of the US. I am also planning to protest to the Irish govt. over giving the US support by using Irish airports and air space and will join any group protesting outside the US embassy. The reason I am telling you all this is that I am so disappointed that the millions of evangelical Christian in the US seem to be siding with the avengers. Last night I saw a Baptist pastor (I am a Baptist) on TV with his wife. He has planted 5.000 crosses outside his church and was praising people queuing up to join the military and the rise in patriotism. They even mentioned retaliation. At least the Archbishop of Canterbury has called for today to be a day of prayer for peace justice and reconciliation and for guidance. 9.9.01 I wrote the above on Friday - no need to say that I am sicker than ever with what is happening. It is obviously OK, as far as the US are concerned, to kill innocent people so long as they are not white and do not speak English. However, I am happy to live in a country where many people do not agree and are making their views heard in the media. Ireland is also one of the very few countries where a US president could have come up until now and not been constantly hassled by protests. Just about every family has relatives in the US and people feel closer in very way to America then to the rest of Europe or (most definitely!) to Britain. But I am saddened by the lack of a Christian response. I never thought I’d be identifiying more closely with what Iran(!) is saying then with my brothers and sisters in Christ. Yours in deep sorrow, [name withheld]
Dear ****, You seem very confused in your understanding of God's Word and how to apply it to life in a sinful world. Let me make it very clear to you that America is not a "Christian" nation. We do not have a state religion or state church. The U.S. is not at war with the Afghani people and we are not bombing "millions of innoccent people." We are bombing military targets of an obstinate government that aids terrorism. Why aren't you angry with the terrorists? Why do you lash out against the U.S. government for doing their duty? The government cannot turn the other cheek. To do so would violate God's ordained plan for them. God has not ordained government to be a pacificistic lover of evil doers. I did not say, Bush did not say, but GOD said in His Word that government is "an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil." Government is God's minister and "it does not bear the sword for nothing." You did not really deal with the passage from Rom. 13 I pointed you to. I get the impression that you want to selectively apply God's Word to suit your opinions rather than submit your opinions to the truth of God. Well, here's one more passage of Scripture for you to ignore: "Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right" (1 Pet 2:12-13, NIV). [Below is an email from a minister who responded only to my first response to the lady from Ireland. After his email is my response to him. Are you keeping up with this?] Dear Mr. Lorenzini: I read your response to the person in Ireland regarding the question of retaliation. I must admit that I was at least disappointed and at most incredulous at what you offer as a resonse. Following the logic of what you suggest one must conclude that the United States itself was founded counter to the desire of God -- in that our nation began as a rebel uprising against those who had governing authority at that time. Following the logic of your argument, there should be no effort to oppose any action of our government, as that would be going against what God has established. So abortion may not be challenged as it is allowed by the governing authorities. Your answer lacks in both biblical integrity and theological depth. What about passages in the Bible where God instructs his people to oppose the actions of those in governing authority over them? What about passages (connecting with the question in the letter sent to you) in which God calls upon his people to stand on the side of the suffering and poor, on the side of justice and against injustice. I believe that as those called to take leadership in the Church, we must be extremely careful about what we say and teach. It is a serious and awesome responsibility to seek to proclaim our understanding of what God is speaking to us, the Church and our world. This is a task that must be done with extreme care -- a care which your glib response is in my view lacking. In Christ Rev. *** **** Dear ***, Thanks for taking the time to critique my response concerning retaliation. I'd like to respond to your observations. You wrote, "Following the logic of your argument, there should be no effort to oppose any action of our government, as that would be going against what God has established." I did not say this and do not believe this. There are situations in which it would be right to oppose an ordinance of the government when it clearly violates God's Word. But I was addressing specifically the issue of relatiation (which you are not addressing yourself in your criticism of what I wrote). You wrote further, "Your answer lacks in both biblical integrity and theological depth." I beg to differ with your opinion here. Again you wrote, "What about passages in the Bible where God instructs his people to oppose the actions of those in governing authority over them?" I wish you would have listed those references so they could be addressed individually. Since you did not, I cannot respond to this. Again you wrote, "What about passages (connecting with the question in the letter sent to you) in which God calls upon his people [NOTE: you are confusing church and state here. This is a major flaw in your reasoning.] to stand on the side of the suffering and poor [SO Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban are the suffering and poor? That is who the U.S. is after in case you didn't notice. And the U.S. is doing all they can to protect and feed the suffering Afghani people. Or maybe you didn't notice that either.], on the side of justice and against injustice [Isn't the whole war an effort to stand on the side of justice (remember the people who died on 9/11) and against injustice? Or maybe you think it's okay if Americans die, huh?]." Again you failed to list these passages. But how about the one I have appealed to (Rom. 13)? Doesn't this passage teach us that government is God's minister to protect people and mete out justice? It seems like you are wanting to ignore what this passages teaches. Lastly, you wrote: "I believe that as those called to take leadership in the Church, we must be extremely careful about what we say and teach. It is a serious and awesome responsibility to seek to proclaim our understanding of what God is speaking to us, the Church and our world. This is a task that must be done with extreme care -- a care which your glib response is in my view lacking." I agree that church leaders must be careful. I believe that is what I am attempting to do. My response is not glib, it is direct. The problem is with people like you and the lady from Ireland who don't want to face what Rom. 13 teaches. For your further interest/disappointment/incredulity you can read how she responded to me and my final response to her which follows below. -Massimo
|
