What is the Christian response to bin Laden’s death?
On Sunday night I was checking Facebook and email one last time before heading for bed. Both my profile and my in-box were lit up with messages saying that President Obama would address the nation at 10:30 p.m. Well . . . so much for an early bedtime.
I ended up watching the speech announcing Osama bin Laden’s death and writing a couple of articles about it. One of the stories summarized reactions that almost immediately started coming in from around the world (see sidebar to Mindy Belz’s Web Extra report).
But the next day I said to myself: Yes, these are the reactions of our politicians and pundits, but what should be the appropriate Christian reaction? As it turns out, this is not so easy a question. The Bible has much to say on the subject, some of it difficult to reconcile. Consider this:
“The authorities are God’s servants, sent for your good. But if you are doing wrong, of course you should be afraid, for they have the power to punish you. They are God’s servants, sent for the very purpose of punishing those who do what is wrong” (Romans 13:4, NLT).
The Psalms, too, have much to say about the punishment of evildoers. In the interest of brevity, here’s just one verse of many:
“At the time I have planned, I will bring justice against the wicked” (Psalm 75:2, NLT).
Governments are established by God. Punishing evil is their job, and we should take satisfaction in our own government’s role in seeing that justice was done. So, given this, there is certainly no reason not to celebrate Osama bin Laden’s death.
On the other hand, we must acknowledge that bin Laden, as violent and reviled as he was, was surely just a man like me. As distasteful as it is to contemplate, none of us is so different from him. Compared to a holy God, my righteousness and bin Laden’s alike are as “filthy rags.” Further, Scripture is clear that we are to love not just our friends, but also to “love our enemies.” God, I’m sure, takes no pleasure in the death of someone who has rejected Him. In fact, he so much as says so here:
“As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! Why will you die, people of Israel?” (Ezekiel 33:11, NIV)
Clarence Darrow once said, “I’ve never wished a man dead, but I have read some obituaries with great pleasure.” Darrow is, as usual, winsome and witty—and completely opposed to Scripture. If God takes no pleasure in bin Laden’s death, should we? I’m guessing not.
So what should our response be? I certainly think we can and should celebrate the excellence, professionalism, and courage of the Navy SEALs who accomplished their mission. I think we should be grateful that an evildoer is now no longer able to do his evil in the world.
But I also think we should be careful not to gloat. We should guard against triumphalism and pride. As a young man, Osama bin Laden drove fast cars and played soccer. There was a time when he was not so different from you and me.
Somewhere along the way pride overtook his life. It became his undoing. He became his own final authority. We should not think that we are immune from these same corrosive effects of pride. If we do, we may come to a time in the future when we find ourselves—both as individuals and as a country—committing the same kinds of monstrous evil that became bin Laden’s undoing.
So can we celebrate that justice was done? Said more bluntly: Can we celebrate Osama bin Laden’s death? I think the answer to that question is yes. But let us remember his ignominious death with grateful and even humble hearts, mindful that but for God’s grace, so go we all.

















Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top71 Comments to “What is the Christian response to bin Laden’s death?”
Not only can we celebrate it, but this teatotaling Baptist will make an exception to his ordinary no booze policy and take a big glass from the grog bowl and drink it right down!!
Report comment to moderator
If in killing this man we averted additional civilian deaths, its all good. But his is a hydra-headed organization. And his successor will be even more security conscious, you can bank on that.
Report comment to moderator
I saw a small range of reaction from friends: from bloodthirsty wishes for revenge on OBL’s body to jumping up and down waving flags to somber thanks that justice was done.
I admit I sighed with relief and thanked God that a form of earthly justice was served in ridding society of a wicked leader. But I also cried with a remorse and embarrassment at the jubilant dancing in the streets of America – I understand people’s relief and joy in victory over evil, but it looked so much like the anti-American street celebrations in the middle east when acts of terror are successfully perpetrated. All that was missing were the “Arab Fireworks” of everyone shooting their rifles into the air.
Report comment to moderator
“Somewhere along the way pride overtook his life.”
You mean like when he was born right?
Report comment to moderator
Lord have mercy.
Report comment to moderator
I recently came across this quote:
“If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being.”
Soviet dissident and Nobel laureate Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
I am reminded of Gracia Burnham who said she thought she was a pretty good person until she went through her kidnapping ordeal. She found out that a lot of evil was still in her.
I will rejoice this man can no longer perpetrate his evil, teach it to others or personally kill or torture anyone. At the same time I will remember that, ‘pride goes before a fall”.
Report comment to moderator
Bin Laden was a horrible man, but every life is precious. He has taken so many lives, and we can assume, he planned to take more. He needed to be removed. However, celebrating a his death is not bringing Glory to God. Thanking Jesus for being in control – that’s something to celebrate!
Report comment to moderator
I think that God doesnt’ wish for anyone to perish, but for all to to come to repentance.
With that in mind, there is a sad justice that was done.
I blogged about this to, over at http://www.RedLetterBelievers.com
Report comment to moderator
Dittos 6, 7, and 8!
Report comment to moderator
The verse that came to mind as I watched the celebrations in front of the White House was:
“Do not rejoice when your enemy falls, and do not let your heart be glad when he stumbles.” Prov 24:17
I am relieved but not rejoicing. It had to be done, and God gave governments such as the U.S. the power of the sword to exercise judgment; but it is no excuse to party.
The cancerous tumor has been cut out, but there is a lot of chemotherapy ahead to deal with the cancer cells spread by it.
Report comment to moderator
Every Sunday, in my tradition, I am behooved to celebrate our Lord’s death (no direct analogy with bin Laden implied, please). Jesus was innocent and yet, at that moment, both justice and great mercy was done. I am the beneficiary.
Still, I do so with mixed feelings. On one hand, I am sad over my recognition that my sins nailed Jesus to the cross and I am sad for the pain and loss I put him through. On the other hand, I rejoice eternally over the forgiveness of sin this deed achieved on my behalf and over the accomplishment of God’s plan of redemption. My sadness is borne of human emotion and historical (factual) recognition, but my joy is borne of faith. The faith is more powerful in the end.
The ONLY connection here with the guilty and evil bin Laden is simply (and superficially) that Christians should be experts regarding the experience of mixed feelings. And yes, I have mixed feelings (sorrow and joy) about bin Laden’s death, all without a shred of doubt that it was necessary and good. And we should know that feelings are not the end all for how to please or displease God.
Report comment to moderator
I do rejoice that 9/11 families have a greater measure of closure and some righteous satisfaction.
Report comment to moderator
Like many here, I was relieved and gratified that justice had finally caught up with a man who openly admitted to (and boasted of) killing thousands of innocents. I suspect his ability to do more damage was largely neutralized by being on the run all these years. But now he can never perpetrate another horror again.
That said, I also had mixed feelings and I found the news welcome — but also rather sobering. The celebrations in the streets took me aback a bit and caused me concern. I’d just posted this on the older thread before seeing this new post, but this is basically what I wrote there:
I suppose some of the “celebrations” in the streets (although perhaps more understandable in this instance) reminded me of the cheering crowds that gather at executions.
I am a reluctant supporter of the death penalty. I don’t like it, I believe the ultimate punishment is valid for taking a life (assuming the evidence is of the double eye-witness standard, which could perhaps be substituted for an affirmative DNA match, that the Bible requires).
But to celebrate the event with cheers and signs? It should rather be occasion for us as believers to reflect and to pray. It is a sad occasion any way you look at it. Yes, justice is served, but sending someone to meet God’s judgement is a sobering thing.
The pro-death penalty crowds also tend to be very young, now that I think about it, so maybe there is something there to consider as well.
Frankly, the older I get, the more aware I become of my own long list of offenses against God. So I find it hard to be exactly “cheerful” in a woo-HOO way about another’s death, even one that is lawfully and morally carried out by the civil authorities, even when the person is a “bad” man.
Report comment to moderator
I agree with #10.
18 Lest the LORD see it, and it displease Him,
And He turn away His wrath from him.
Report comment to moderator
I am repeating a post I made elsewhere but it applies here more:
Parties, celebrations and feasts figured into the story of Esther at many points. Celebrating is certainly a part of a godly life. However, they don’t tend to be random and Esther’s story may inform this discussion.
Haman was the dangerous and evil character in the story but when he was finally hanged (on the same gallows he had devised for Mordecai), there was no celebration at that moment over that welcome deed. Mordecai got Haman’s signet ring and ruled over the house of Haman but the fact remained that Haman’s evil schemes were still in the works. So instead of celebrating, Esther wept before the king asking him to take necessary actions to avert the evil schemes of Haman. The letters of Haman had to be officially revoked too. There was work to be done. Apparently, the dangers to Esther’s people were still VERY real. Official acts were needed to give the Jews the right to assemble and to defend their lives.
When this was done, however, Mordecai rejoiced. And there was gladness and joy for the Jews and a feast and a holiday (or more literally, a “good day”).
But there were still enemies to strike down and then Haman’s sons were hanged. Remaining traces of the hateful threats against the Jews were not ignored. The focus remained on securiing their future and finishing the task. After this, however, a great holiday was set for rejoicing, feasting and celebrating the defeat of the threat before them. It is called “Purim.”
Report comment to moderator
I’m starting to believe we’re spending more time thinking about the appropriate Christian response than is merited.
Report comment to moderator
Do not rejoice when your enemy falls,
and let not your heart be glad when he stumbles,
lest the Lord see it and be displeased,
and turn away his anger from him. -Proverbs 24:17-18
We certainly don’t want AQ to reconstitute. Kind of surprised no one yet mentioned this.
Report comment to moderator
Oh, now that I’ve read it carefully, I see it was already mentioned.
Report comment to moderator
Better to stay focused on this ongoing dangerous war against world-wide jihadist terrorists and terrorism. Pray for those fighting this necessary ongoing battle with their lives still in harm’s way.
Report comment to moderator
I have a problem with the US sending operatives into a foreign country with a ‘kill or capture’ order for a foreign national. How would we react if a Russian or Chinese special ops team came and killed a US citizen on our soil? Perhaps they felt the ‘evil American’ cheated them in a business deal. Where do you draw the line – and who draws it? Why don’t we do the same for the Imam’s that are preaching and leading Jihad. Al Sadr comes to mind, they even call his group Sadr’s Army. If he is their military leader as well as their Imam, he’s a legitimate military target. Again, where do we draw the line?
I also have a problem with Guantanimo. We’re holding foreign nationals indefinitely without cause or recourse. They are POWs in an undeclared war that will never terminate. There’s no defined enemy with no possibility of surrender. The detainees should be interegated (agressively) and then returned to the place of their capture. If they continue to engage in acts of aggression against Americans, they may well be killed in the next engagement.
Report comment to moderator
Thanks, Mike.
Report comment to moderator
Every life is most definitely not precious.
Report comment to moderator
Mr. Mike,
If a US citizen had committed an act against of terrorism against Russia, Russia wouldn’t have to send in troops…our government would have aided in the capture and delivery of the terrorist to the Russians.
And if we were harboring a known terrorist, I’d have no problem with Russia attempting to capture him.
Report comment to moderator
#22 – Innocent life is indeed most precious. Thus, bin Laden’s life was morally worthless.
Report comment to moderator
IDAHOMIKE,
No one I know “likes” sending operatives into a foreign country with a ‘kill or capture’ order for a foreign national. Such things can, in many circumstances, be highly wrong. In this case, however, it was right. Context, context, context. And “liking” it has little to do with the moral decision or the justice of it.
If all the circumstances of this case were also as clearly true when a Russian or Chinese special ops team came and killed a US citizen on our soil, then I would support them.
At Guantanimo, we are holding foreign nationals indefinitely WITH cause!!! Where is your head, Mike? Again, context! This war is unconventional and the cowardly nature of those who refuse to define themselves as enemies only adds to the fact that they justly deserve to be detained.
Report comment to moderator
Yeah, but I’m with Mike on Gitmo…interrogate, try, and sentence.
If that sentence is life in prison for war/terrorist crimes so be it. But no sense in just holding them for life.
Report comment to moderator
Just some thoughts…
Well, I don’t agree with celebrating anyone’s death. Celebrating freedom from an oppressor? – Yes, but that he died? – No. Are we better off now that he’s gone? – Maybe. But the chance that another wasn’t trained to take his place is slim to none. Strong beliefs are the thing that fueled his actions, and those beliefs are shared by others.
So to say that the world is ‘safer’ now that he is dead, which is a claim being made by several folks in political circles, is a tad naive.
My concern is over a trend I see in our Churches over all, where many of us seem to have forgotten that God’s will (That none would perish) and ours are supposed to be coming into agreement and if God is not celebrating Osama’s death, why would we? The higher perspective from His point of view mourns the loss of every soul. Does that mean we don’t defend ourselves against attack? No, but what happens in our hearts when we do, matters. I believe David held onto his spiritual authority and showed his quality by refusing to rejoice at Saul’s death. Different situation- same challenge; The New Covenant calls for a different response internally when an enemy dies.
I don’t thinks it’s wrong to be relieved when a dangerous leader is no longer able to carry out dark plans, but rejoicing over death is contrary to God’s character and while none of us are ‘there’ yet, we can try to be.
I don’t think that’s ‘politically correct’, in fact, it’s not very popular in Christian circles at all, but like many of you, I don’t really care about being PC
Report comment to moderator
How is relieved different than rejoicing?
Being relieved makes one thankful that there is no longer a threat.
Rejoicing is being thankful as well, maybe very thankful, but I don’t see why there is that much difference.
Is there honestly any difference if an enemy is captured or killed? Does he not stumble or fall in both cases?
Why are we measuring our ability to rejoice on the measure of how far one falls in the end?
Report comment to moderator
The story is told of Scottish pastor Robert Murray M’Cheyne who was walking with another pastor friend who said his previous Sunday sermon was on “The wicked shall be cast into hell.” M’Cheyne replied, “Did you preach it with tears in your eyes?”
Ken Bland
Report comment to moderator
I thought some of you may be interested in Jim Wallis’ response
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-wallis/how-should-we-respond-to-bin-laden-death_b_856548.html
Donna J — couldn’t agree more — well put
Report comment to moderator
Joel Mark,
Yes, I know my thoughts on this issue are not consistent with the majority of conservatives. Again I say, where do you draw the line – and who draws it? Why aren’t we going after the radical Imams? These are the military and spiritual leaders of the radicals. If we are going after the ‘bad guys’ – let’s go get ‘em.
Seems to me that we’re fighting with the same tactics as we did in Vietnam – very half-heartedly.
Right now our strategy is very much geared towards creating a stronger enemy.
Since we went in and killed him, we should have cremated him and added his ashes to some pig feed. We should have done whatever we could with his remains to convince his followers that they don’t really want to go down his path. We need to use their religion against them.
Report comment to moderator
I have a little bit of a problem with the way they did this, but I also have a problem with Pakistan. I don’t believe they were ignorant of who was in that compound.
We had a piece of artwork in chambers done by the wife of one of the law clerks. It was a Bible passage in Hebrew (and translated) from Micah: “Justice, justice, thou shalt pursue.”
There’s no doubt in my mind that bin Laden was guilty, not just WTC I and II, but the other attacks, too. He was given an opportunity to surrender. He didn’t take it.
Report comment to moderator
I posted on the other thread, go to Freedom Watch and listen to Andy Napolitano explain why this was illegal and unconstitutional.
Report comment to moderator
We are told that the death penalty is to be used by the Lord to remove or “cut off” evil from society.
Evidence is that OBL was unrepentantly deserving of death, so it seems that sending him to the Lord’s judgement was societies’ only real option to remove his evil from our midst.
I think that’s a good thing because OBL will certainly receive the justice he deserves and we won’t spend the remainder of his life dealing with him in our courts.
Report comment to moderator
I don’t really disagree with you, Rondu, but it does set a precedent. We’ve crossed a line. Not that Osama didn’t cross it first.
Report comment to moderator
Joel,
While I agree with your earlier comments, your comment in 24 leaves me scratching my head.
I have no doubt that OBL is an evil man and that justice was effected by his early demise. But it’s a stretch to say he’s morally worthless. He’s still an image-bearer of the Triune God. In fact, that’s what makes his cruelty worthy of judgment.
Further, Christ alone is innocent. The rest of us are dead in our trespasses apart from the grace of God in Christ. To the extent that any of us is innocent, we innocent only because Christ’s innocence has been imputed to us by by our Father.
Report comment to moderator
Paul states that the govt wields the sword as a “servant of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil”.
Rom 13:4 And that’s about where I’m at. I have no problem with this.
The Pundits can say what they will about the legality of it, but I think you need to keep a few things in mind. I have no problem with the way it was done because if we think about it, some things become obvious. Some in high places in Pakistan knew where Osama was, to suggest otherwise is silly. Pakistan knew of the operation to get him as well. We’ve paid Pakistan billions to help search for Osama and company. They finally after years, had no choice once the US located Osama. That close to Pakistani security forces, military, and police facilities, explosions, gunfire, helicopters and all will not go unnoticed for the 33 minutes this took. Yet there was no response against the so-called invaders.
Pakistan maybe didn’t help, but they allowed it to happen. But this is only done because it also puts them in the position of possibly setting off a civil war if they appeared to cooperate. Their citizenry, like most of the Middle East, is a powder keg looking for a match. If the govt of Pakistan does anything but throw a fit, whine about soveriegnty, and condemning the US, they risk lighting that match. Better to just blame the west, and let the anger be directed outward at us, than inward at the govt. Half of Pakistan, it’s military, and govt support people like Osama. They are nuclear equipped. Best to go the route that maintains control by the present govt, than in the hands of the extremist. Let the US take the blame and we really are better off. Since we got Osama, I can live with one less Mid East hot spot. If Pakistan playing dumb keeps the peace, oh well.
Report comment to moderator
Wasn’t it Mark Twain who stated “I’ve never wished a man dead, but I have read some obituaries with great pleasure.” ?
Report comment to moderator
Rejoicing at the death of Osama bin Laden is equivalent to rejoicing at the death of George Tiller who, by the way, is responsible for the deaths of many more innocent people than bin Laden.
Report comment to moderator
“What is the Christian response to bin Laden’s death?”
From a religious point of view I see a man who faces judgement. Humans are all equal when it comes to death. It is the ultimate reality. Bin Laden finally realizes the truth. It is sad how few people realize the truth until they are dead.
From a political point of view I see a nation that is fast becoming like our enemies, because we won’t admit who or what the enemy is. It is politically incorrect and lethal to tell Muslims the truth or to speak the truth about Islam.
And now America has become a nation of assassins. The US government has released assassins into at least 72 countries around the world who have killed hundreds if not thousands. The American people now rejoice when a man is assassinated. Obama is seeking to remove many of our civil liberties, to track our cell phones, to read our emails, to grope us at airports. All this because we won’t admit that our grandmothers aren’t the enemy, Islam is.
Report comment to moderator
I think it is also important to remember that the President’s Oath of Office states that he is to defend the Constitution of the United States – - not to defend the PEOPLE of the United States. It seems that, in today’s climate, we forget this important point. Our Constitution defines a small federal gov’t that should not be large enough to protect the citizenry on a day-to-day basis. You can not have a ‘Free’ society and a ‘Safe’ society. Freedom and safety have are inversely related. As one goes up, the other must diminish. The federal gov’t has used the concept of ensuring our safety to escape its Constitutional bounds. Look at the federal agencies that have been created to ensure our safety. The costs can always increase because you can never reach ‘100% Safety’ – so the gov’t will continue to grow – -
Report comment to moderator
Will add that I am a strong believer in federal gov’t’s role in National Security – but that is significantly different than ensuring the safety of the citizenry.
Report comment to moderator
The death of evil brings rejoicing to our streets. A man, Osama Bin Laden, shot dead for his role as the mastermind architect behind the Al-Qaida network that brought its Jihad, its war against the infidel, to America and killed thousands of innocent people. So we rejoice. Justice has been meted out, finally, though many perhaps thought the day would never come, and therefore the justice once hoped for and longed for was forgotten by most.
Rejoicing, over the justice brought to one man, who, had a very significant impact on the lives of several thousand people indeed, but relatively little direct impact on my life and the lives of most Americans.
My life was affected by the life and actions of OBL, half a world away, but not impacted. It was inconvenienced more than anything else. The few times I travel I endure longer lines at the airports and perhaps there are other areas that could be linked to Al-Qaida’s existence. But impacted? Impacted is more serious. Those who had death enter their realms by OBL were impacted.
I never really feared that OBL might someday have such an impact on me or on my family, yet I rejoice over his demise. The impact of my own life decisions as they relate to God, would bring, deservedly, a far more terrible justice. One which I should fear. My revolt against God was a far more egregious act than OBL’s war against America, and deservers infinitely more justice.
How easy it is for us to think that the day will never come when justice will be meted out for all men, perfect justice, terrible justice, Holy justice. How little do we hope for, and long for, the perfect justice of God to be manifest in all its glory. How much more should we rejoice, who have had pending justice from a holy God looming over our lives, served on another in our stead?
Justice, served by man is brief. Justice served by God is not, it is eternal. Justice served by man is often flawed. Justice served by God is perfect, never flawed.
Bin-Laden was able to hide for quite some time, he was not able to escape. We too can hide for our whole lives, but we will never escape, unless we go to the righteous Judge and accept His judgment, poured out on His Son.
This is cause for rejoicing, like no other!
Report comment to moderator
The pagan government that Paul defers to in Romans 13 was not made up of representatives chosen by a Christian population — so Americans do not get off the hook that easy. It is embarrassing that this author does not reconcile the words of Jesus in Matthew 5 commanding us not to respond to evil with violence, His admonition in Matthew 26 about living and dying by the sword — and His all-in embodiment of nonviolence by enduring crucifixion without calling on followers and angels to confront militarily. If the Navy seal kill teams are somehow necessary, then the Christian response to their use should be a sense of shame and profound remorse over the bloodshed.
Report comment to moderator
Uh, sorry Mark, but look around you. Our govt wasn’t elected by a Christian population either. To say we are still a “Christian Nation” is to ignore the obvious. Most voters aren’t Christian in todays USA. Jesus in Matt 5 is speaking to the individual, not about the govt doing it. Rom 13 speaks to govt, and the individuals response to it. It clearly assigns this job to the governing authorities. I’m not at all embarassed. Since you seem to know so much, I’m surprised you missed this distinction. Perhaps you, in your infinite wisdom, can explain why you think I’m wrong. But if snarky little comments to people who disagree with your interpretation are the best you have, just go with it. The Christian thing to do would be to lovingly point out the errors in my thinking, not ridiculing them. Something about flies and honey or vinegar comes to mind. But what do I know.
Report comment to moderator
And Matt 26 also is to the individual, it makes no mention of the sword justly wielded by the governing authorities. Jesus told him to put the sword away, that He could call upon the Father for protection if needed. But it wasn’t because His death was part of the plan, the sword was unnecessary in this case. A fight would have delayed His perfect plan. Not at all the same as when dealing with terrorists who want to kill you.
Report comment to moderator
I find it interesting that no one quotes Luke 22:36, “He (Jesus) 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.’”
It is important to make a distinction between the role of government and individuals in these verses.
This was said to individuals. We know Jesus does not want anyone coerced to believe in Him (nor can they be). Nevertheless, there is a reason He told his disciples to now obtain swords. Since Peter lopped off the ear of one of those arresting Jesus and Jesus rebuked him, we know this order was not given for the time of Jesus’s arrest. We can assume that later Christians are allowed self-defense, however. I don’t think the verse itself relates to what happened to Bin Laden, but I don’t think some of the other verses do either.
Report comment to moderator
Another point regarding ‘who draws the line under which this type of action can be justified’, in some countries, importing / distributing Bibles is against the law. As I understand it, importing / distributing Bibles is a form of sedition. How would we react if a country sent a hit team to America to exercise justice against an American for importing Bibles to their country?
Report comment to moderator
#24 Joel Mark must not be aware that his religion tells us that no one is innocent and all are sinners.
Report comment to moderator
And yet again, Bob Dylan has nothing to contribute to the conversation. And his singing is still awful.
And yes, I know, now I’m being snarky too.
Report comment to moderator
The government responded here. It does not have to obey Matthew 5.
Report comment to moderator
Our government since its inception has no been a Christian government. AJ is right.
Now, if you want to make a constitutional argument against what was done, that would make sense. Going into sovereign nations and killing people — well, it ain’t in the Constitution, ya know?
Report comment to moderator
At post 47 KI notes the passage in Luke 22 about the prospect of needing a sword, but when the disciples say they have two Jesus says “It is enough.” So one interpretation is that the entire group of disciples is entitled to 2 swords — I suggest we give them both to The Real AJ for safekeeping. The scholarly interpretation is that Jesus is using exaggeration to warn his followers that they are about to face enormous challenges about their faith and their very existence — it was time to fortify themselves. This interpretation comes from William Barclay and he expressly disavows this passage as an endorsement for armed resistance.
On the issue of group vs individual, I assert that the admonitions against violence in Matthew apply to both. Blessed John Paul II, a key person in the nonviolent disintegration of the Iron Curtain, said this in his 1991 encyclical letter Centesimus Annus: “No, never again war, which destroys the lives of innocent people, teaches how to kill, throws into upheaval even the lives of those who do the killing and leaves behind a trail of resentment and hatred, thus making it all the more difficult to find a just solution of the very problems which provoked the war.”
I am not asking Christians to advocate for immediate unilateral disarmament of the US military, I am asking them to acknowledge that even if they conclude that America’s resort to kill squads is a necessary evil, that these squads are a serious human failing and there should be sincere remorse for resorting to them and for the resulting bloodshed.
The fact that WorldMag seemingly whistles past the graveyard by not mentioning our Lord’s nonviolence directives, is likewise a serious failing.
Report comment to moderator
Kill squads are extra-judicial. Have you heard of due process?
We KNOW the Leftys have ignored it since their Messiah has.
Report comment to moderator
Why didn’t just drug him and kidnap him?
Report comment to moderator
We know God took the shedding of blood very seriously. It was the reason stated for David not being the one to build the temple. Yet, the Israelites were told to do the killing.
I have no problem having remorse over the need for any killing. Sometimes the police also have to kill someone and it is always a sad thing. All war is sad, but sometimes it is necessary. Of course, that is getting far away from the original point.
The mention of selling your cloak for a sword if you don’t have one is very strong language since a cloak is very necessary. Jesus could have used lots of other things rather than a sword. A sword was for protection and the disciples would need it. Indeed they did and Paul even appeals to Rome for it–using the government to the extent he could.
To assume that there is only one ’scholarly’ interpretation and it is Barclay’s is a matter of opinion, of course.
Report comment to moderator
39. George Tiller did not claim to be a baby murder and he was not condemned as such by the congress of the United States. I do believe George Tiller was a mass murderer and though I condemn the man who assassinated Tiller I was more relieved that he would not be murdering babies anymore that I am relieved that a hideaway Bin Laden is finally finished.
Mark Lev “Whoever takes a human life shall surely be put to death.” While I will grant you that Radical Islam will never surrender, Perhaps moderate Islam might reject and marginalize them and then POW could be released.
NJ Lawyer. I admit have not looked at your constitutional arguments but I am wondering if there aren’t arguments that it is constitutionally relevant that the military set out to capture those who have murdered thousands of Americans and has stated that it is his purpose to continue to do so. Would not that fit “provide for the common defense.”
Report comment to moderator
The one line that really stood out to me was “Governments are created by God”. I’m sorry, but “Huh?”. Governments are created by people- with all there foibles,prejudices and corruption, as well as their altruism and wisdom.
And is the Chinese government, or the Pakistani government created by the same God?
And I am going to stretch right out and say that the Bible was written by people also; not only do we have the problem of translation and interpretion, but also of the possibility (probability?) of corruption of the original message by people in power at various times, who wanted the Bible to condone or reflect their agenda. I cannot see how this cannot be the case.
I think we know in our hearts what parts of the scriptures ring true. When Jesus said “Turn the other cheek”, there was no “except when” attached. When he said “Love your enemies”, I don’t think he meant “Celebrate when they are shot, along with their family members”.I do not mean we should not take steps to stop attacks on the innocent, and I am not personally developed enough to say I wouldn’t kill in self defence, but the nationwide and worldwide “celebration” that’s going on right now is beyond that, and frankly disturbing.
This is just one more bloody step in a road to hell for all of us,all over the world, when we are seen to be dancing on his grave. I think it brings us down to the level of those we think we are in opposition to, when crowds gather carrying posters of his head on the torch of the Statue of Liberty, dripping blood.
It’s terrifying, and saddening for me personally.
What is wrong with us??
Do we really think we can “kill the baddy”?
The baddy is IN us. As this kind of display of bloodlust clearly demonstrates.
Islam is not the enemy- what are we? Children??
True Islam preaches love and righteousness, just as Christianity does. And Christianity has been used as a platform for heinous acts in the past as well (the crusades, witch hunts to name a couple), but does that mean Christianity causes evil? Of course not. Evil people do- of all religions and creeds.
We are waging wars over religion, when each major religion preaches THE SAME THING- treat each other with respect and love, and do right by your fellow human beings. All of them- not just other Christians.
God help us.
Report comment to moderator
There’s no world wide celebration — just the continuing of the MSM of building up something positive for Obama to run on. Thankfully, it’s early enough that people will go back to their what have you done for me lately mentality and remember the economy when their next set of bills is due.
Report comment to moderator
In reference to #58: ARGENTALEX, you would be surprised at the absence of corruption and changes in the BIBLE from the very earliest manuscripts. God truly has done an amazing thing. Look into it.
Report comment to moderator
Oh bruddah. Not another “the Bible was written by people” rant.
Report comment to moderator
Yup. Afraid so.
But thanks #59- I’d really like to. Any pointers for places to start?
Cheers:)
Report comment to moderator
Sorry- # 60!
Report comment to moderator
I think your article was very well said, brother, and I agree with you. Your thoughts align with the truth as revealed in the Holy Scriptures! Thank God for you and the insight He has given you!
Report comment to moderator
Excellent article! I’ve been in numerous discussions with people, Christian and secular. I’ve been grieved to hear the vast majority are happy and some even say they would have pulled the trigger (Christians too).
I believe that Christians should praise/thank the Lord, that justice was served yet grieve that a soul was probably condemned to eternity in Hades. Celebrations and joy is not within me.
Report comment to moderator
ARGENTALEX: How about The New Testament Documents: Are they Reliable by F.F. Bruce. OR…How We Got The Bible by Neil R. Lightfoot?
Report comment to moderator
Or “Forged” or “Misquoting Jesus,” by Bart Ehrman …. oh wait, reality doesn’t fit the agenda here.
Report comment to moderator
52, 54 … NJLawyer takes the side of a mass-murdering terrorist over America.
There’s nothing unconstitutional about carrying out operations in a declared war. Her hatred of Obama is so deep she’s actually taking the side of bin Laden’s supporters in order to oppose Obama.
Report comment to moderator
“What is the Christian response to bin Laden’s death?”
Gratitude to the soldiers and special-ops and all those who have taken up the task to stop him. I am also grateful that we took our Saddam in Iraq which sucked in the dirtiest and greediest Al Qaida operatives of all, some of which were captured in Iraq and then gave up some of the vital info that helped us get bin Laden–who was sending thugs to Iraq to destroy that nation and kill the innocent. The Al Qaida – Iraq connection is firm, not because Saddam is bin Laden or because he worked with bin Laden–they did not. I don’t think bin Laden and Saddam necessarily had any connection. But Al Qaida and Iraq surely did.
Report comment to moderator
Conan – Bart knows that Jesus was misquoted, how? Or that anything was forged, how? Give me his argument in a nutshell.
Report comment to moderator
By comparing textual variants and realizing that they’re not the same, or by simply reading an account closely.
But here’s a couple of examples:
Ehrman explains that the words “and fasting” don’t appear in older manuscripts; they were added later, literally put into Jesus’s mouth, by scribes who held fasting as an important part of their own practice.
Ehrman also notes that in John 5, the story of the man who couldn’t get healed in the waters of a pool, the oldest manuscripts we have offer no explanation of why the man wanted to enter the waters. In those manuscripts, Jesus asks the man if he wants to be healed and he replies, in what seems like a nonsequitor, that he can’t get into the water in time. Only later manuscripts include what now shows up as vv. 3-4, the mention of how an angel would occasionally disturb the waters and they would take on healing powers for a short time.
These do not seem like significant changes, perhaps, but they — and the dozens and dozens of other examples Ehrman musters — cast serious doubt on the common evangelical belief that the Bible is inerrant and perfect, and raise the question of how you can be sure anything in it is as the original authors intended.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDmag.com's Community section to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!