This week, we have been addressing the issue of defense
and foreign policy. Specifically, we have been asking the questions “What
should be the policy of the United States when it comes to the issue of national
defense? How should the United States relate to the other nations in the world?
Yesterday, we looked at the reality that the
conversation surrounding national defense and foreign policy can best be
described as emotionally charged and highly divided. At one end of the conversation
when it comes to the issue of national defense and foreign policy are
politicians and others who advocate what is often referred to as a
non-interventionist or isolationist view. Non-interventionists advocate a
foreign policy that is characterized by the absence of interference in the
external affairs of another nation without its consent, or in its internal
affairs with or without its consent. Isolationism advocates that a nations'
interests are best served by keeping the affairs of other countries at a
distance.
On the
other end of the conversation when it comes to the issue of national defense
and foreign policy would be politicians and others who advocate what are often
referred to as interventionist policies. Interventionists advocate for a
foreign policy that is characterized by a proactive engagement in the internal
or external affairs of another nation with or without their consent.
We then
looked at an event from history a statement that was a part of perhaps the most
famous sermon that Jesus ever preached, which we refer to today as the Sermon
on the Mount. We
discovered that the issue that Jesus is addressing here is not self defense.
And the issue that Jesus is addressing is not national defense or foreign
policy. The issue that Jesus is addressing is not between nations. The issue
that Jesus is addressing is between individuals. The issue that Jesus is
addressing here is about being dishonored and disrespected by someone.
The
issue is not about being a pacifist, as many people in the anti-war movement
attempt to use this passage. The issue is about someone’s personal honor being
insulted. Jesus point is that they were not to seek retribution by suing in
court, which was their right under the Law of retribution. Jesus states that
they should accept the personal insult without responding. We see this reality
further reinforced in a section of a letter in the New Testament of the Bible
called the book of Romans. The Apostle Paul, writing to early followers of
Jesus who were apart of the church at Rome, states the following beginning in
Romans 12:17:
Never pay back evil for evil to anyone. Respect what is right in the sight
of all men. If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men.
Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written,
"VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY," says the Lord. "BUT IF YOUR
ENEMY IS HUNGRY, FEED HIM, AND IF HE IS THIRSTY, GIVE HIM A DRINK; FOR IN SO
DOING YOU WILL HEAP BURNING COALS ON HIS HEAD." Do not be overcome by
evil, but overcome evil with good.
Here we see
Paul command followers of Jesus throughout history to never pay back evil for
evil to anyone. In other words, followers of Jesus are not to respond to the
harm or wrong that comes from the evil intentions of others by responding in
like manner. Instead, Paul commands followers of Jesus to respect what is right
in the sight of all men. The word respect here means to give careful thought
and consideration to something.
Paul’s point
here is that we are not to ignore evil; but we are not to respond to evil with
evil. As followers of Jesus, we are to carefully consider our response to the
harm and wrong that comes from the evil intentions of others by doing the noble
and the right thing. In addition, as far as it is possible, as followers of
Jesus, we are to strive to have harmonious relationships with others.
Unfortunately,
the harsh reality is that there are times that no matter what we do, we are
unable to experience harmonious relationships with others. As followers of
Jesus, we are to do all that we can to live in harmony in community with
everyone. And when that does not occur, we are to respond to evil, injustice
and conflict by doing the noble and right thing. And we are to practice this
lifestyle with all men. Notice Paul’s words in these verses: anyone, all men,
all men.
We are to
respond to those around us who are far from God by doing all that we can to
live in harmony in community with them, and then responding by doing the noble
and the right thing when that does not occur. Now a natural question and
objection that arises here is “well Dave, what about justice? What about
justice for those who do harm to me?”
Paul,
anticipating this question, responds by stating that as followers of Jesus, we
are never to take justice into our own hands. Instead, we are to leave room for
God’s right and just response to selfishness, sin, and rebellion. And to back
his point, Paul quotes from a section of a letter that is recorded for us in
our Bibles called the book of Proverbs. Beginning in Proverbs 25:21, we read
that that kindness shown to an enemy will bring shame to him and perhaps lead
to repentance. The writer of proverbs then paints a picture of this repentance
by pointing the members of the church at Rome to an Egyptian ritual where a
guilty person carried a pan of burning coals on his head to indicate his
repentance.
Paul’s point
is that when we respond to the harm and wrong that comes from the evil
intentions of others by doing the noble and the right thing, even to the point
of meeting the pressing and practical needs that they have, we become the
vehicle that God can use to reveal His Son Jesus and bring rescue. And because
of that reality, Paul commanding the members of the church at Rome, and followers
of Jesus throughout history, to not allow the harm and wrong that flows from
the evil intents of others to conquer and defeat us. Instead, we are to conquer
and overcome the harm and wrong of evil by responding in a way that does the
noble and right thing.
Now a
natural question that arises here is “Well Dave, then if that is the case, if
we are never to take justice into our own hands individually, then who will
bring justice. Paul provides the answer to this question in the very next
verse, which we looked at in the very first sermon in this series, beginning in
Romans 13:1:
Every person is to be in subjection to the governing
authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist
are established by God. Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the
ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon
themselves. For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil.
Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have
praise from the same; for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you
do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it
is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices
evil.
As we
discovered in the first sermon in this series, government was designed by God
to represent Him in a way that promotes good for people and punishes the evil
of people. Government was put into place by God as an intermediary, or
representative, of God to promote justice for those who do well and to punish
evil by responding with righteousness and justice to wrongdoing and injustice. A
purpose of government is to create structures that execute swift punishment for
crime so as to be a deterrent to crime.
And as
part of God’s design and responsibility, governments are responsible to defend
their nation from an attack by other nations. However, while it is clear that
governments are to responsible to defend their nations from an attack on their
nation, what is less clear is when a government should become involved in a
military action that does not involve a direct attack on their nation. So, when
should a government engage in military action against another nation when a
direct attack on their nation has not happened? In other words, when should a
nation go to war?
Friday,
we will examine that question…
No comments:
Post a Comment