In an ideal world, each Christian acting as a fully
integrated member of a local church body would study the Scriptures, pray, ask
others for counsel, confer with church leadership, adopt a position consistent
with the local church and act consistently on that position.
Yet ours is not a
perfect world.
We have too many mixed motives, knowledge gaps,
miscommunications, misunderstandings, hidden agendas, inconsistencies, and
emotionally-charged inclinations of the will to ever expect perfection in the
current state. Therefore believers need to take a more realistic approach that
is grounded in the Scriptures, based on the wisdom of Church leadership,
informed by historical precedent, and supported by facts and reason within the
context of the current fallen state of mankind.
The “fallen state” refers to the underlying imperfection that
motivates and constrains all people. No one is entirely virtuous, and even the
most heinous criminal has some good. Christians believe that we live in a world
tarnished by sin. When Adam sinned, we all sinned, and now we are all under the
curse. Our redemption is granted through the finished work of Christ, but not
yet completely fulfilled. Therefore we live in an in-between state; redeemed,
yet not completely; made new and righteous, but still struggling with sin.
Therefore we must assess things as they are, not as we hope
they might be.
Islamic terrorism, gang crime, and mass killings at home and
abroad have renewed the debate over violence.
Pastors, professors, board members, theologians, and
individual believers have been compelled to reconsider the efficacy, utility,
and legitimacy of deadly force
.
Sin – and the evil it causes – is pernicious. It seems
lovely, attractive, compelling, and often the only “right choice.” It is
self-justifying and always distances and distracts creatures from the Creator.
Only a realistic understanding of sin, its effects, and its
hold on humans will permit us to objectively assess our situation and our
options, within the limitations of knowledge and time.
Despite the clear need to discuss hard topics, many prefer
to avoid them and respond in one (or all) of the following ways:
- The question is not applicable: “I will never have to make that choice… I’m not a soldier / policeman / executioner...”
- Discussing this issue is unkind, as it will cause strife: “This is a touchy subject and it only causes fights and we shouldn’t fight…”
- The issue is not important enough compared to a host of other issues that need to be addressed: “Is it really that important? Aren’t there better / more urgent / more effective things to talk about?”
The problem with these responses is that it is “decision-making
by default,” which assumes that ignoring an issue will make it go away. The
corollary implication of default decision-making is the assumption that “others
can deal with it.”[1]
Decision-making by default leads to decisions by others who likely will not have the best interest of you, your family, or your church in mind.
[1]
The default position for most is “I don’t like to fight” and that is a
blessing! But what if only the evil people “like to fight?” What then?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for reading and taking the time to comment! I appreciate your comments and will review and post if appropriate.
thanks again!