WWJ say about Torture?

This is an article in the editorial section of "New Era Sunday News, December 25, a Lancaster County newspaper."What Would Jesus Say About Torture?"By Bob DavisIn the days following Sept. 11, 2001, I listened to a radio program in which two pundits were asked whether torture might be used by the United States to extract information from detainees to prevent future attacks. I thought that such discussions were a way of dealing with the pain and anger most people in this country were facing. Still, I felt that such discussions were beyond the pale and I was troubled that we would even permit ourselves to talk about such things. More than four years later I realize, to my shame, that I should have spoken up immediately and, with like-minded people, demanded assurances from the administration that such practices would not be tolerated. Assuming that these were largely hypothetical discussions, I said nothing.Even after Abu Ghraib and evidence that cruel, inhuman and degrading practices were being used at Guantanamo, i said little. I signed a few petitions, wrote a few letters and let the matter drop. I assumed that my objections--would be rejected by people outside my faith as quaint, otherworldly and not terribly practical given the "new kind of war" in which the United States was engaged' an epic struggle against an evil at least as great as Hitler.So it is with a great deal of shame that i finally speak. Sadly, what drove me to take a stand in a very public way was many, of those who apparently share my faith tradition, are publicly supporting torture by this country in its global war on terror. National polls indicate that 61 percent of Americans would accept the use of torture in at least some situations. Several weeks ago in this newspaper someone claiming to be a Christian wrote to suggest that Jesus himself would support torture to protect something called "Judeo-Christian values."Shame, Shame on me for being silent for so long. Shame on me for not dropping to my knees to ask foregiveness of God for neglecting my "neighbor," for not praying for my enemy, for accepting that my personal peace and prosperity is being built upon practices that dehumanize a real person for whom Jesus sacrificed so much. But shame, too, on any so-called Christian church that would permit a parishoner to write such things. Shame on the church that seeks peace and security in the might of the United States rather than in the God that it claims is the source of true life, peace and security.Peter told Christians in the first century that they were aliens and strangers. It is time for the followers of Jesus in the United States to acknowledge a couple of important facts: We are aliens here and our allegiance is not with the United States or its policies. Christians are ambassadors of Christ, engaged in the process of calling people everywhere to be reconciled to God."(article to be continued)I too have been silent, shame on me.In ChristJeff

Hi rookie...!It is time for the followers of Jesus in the United States to acknowledge a couple of important facts: We are aliens here and our allegiance is not with the United States or its policies. Christians are ambassadors of Christ, engaged in the process of calling people everywhere to be reconciled to God."I agree that we are pilgrims "passing through" this world. However, I find it quite interesting that alot of "non-political christians" have recently taken very loud political stands against the policies and politics of the United States. These believers loudly denounce the war in Iraq. But where were these same believers for the last 23 years as a holocaust has been performed against the unborn children of this world? Where were the loud voices of these same believers when Christians in Iraq and Iran were brutally tortured and murdered? Where were these same believers as billions of people starved in this world over that last century? Where are the cries against nations that oppress the public worship of Christ by totalitarian regimes in Muslim, Socialist or Communist nations? Where are the cries against attempts at religious oppression in the United States by ultra-liberal extremist groups (like the ACLU, liberal activist judges or Hollywood)? If one is to argue about being "non-political," then why are many believers only loudly "political" when it comes to the current administration? The last administration in the United States (the Clinton Administration) openly supported abortion, homosexuality, and oppression against public displays of religious liberty. Let us not forget that the Clinton Administration also took part in bombings and war -- in Iraq, Bosnia, Haiti and Somalia. But that administration neglected to take action in such places like Rwanda and Darfur -- where genocide was obviously taking place? Of course, torture is always wrong. And of course, war is always a terrible event. But sometimes, war is necessary to insure the peace. Imagine if preemptive war had been carried out against the Taliban and Al Quaeda in Afghanistan by the Clinton Administration folliwng the first attack on the World Trade Center (1993), the attack on the U.S. Embassies in Africa (1999), the Millineum bombing plot on the West Coast of the U.S. (1999/2000) and the attack on the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen (2000). Perhaps if such a preemptive strike had dealt with Al Quaeda, the September 11th attacks, the Madrid attacks, and the UK Subway attacks would have never taken place. Imagine if such action were taken in 1993 following the first attack in NYC. Imagine if the U.S. would have joined WWII before the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor -- and before millions of Jews were killed in concentration camps across Europe. Many lives could have been saved as a result. Remember, such "non-political" activism is a two-way street. Ever so often, a believer writes a post where he seems to somehow feel able to judge the heart of President Bush -- or somehow has the ability to openly question his claim of being a believer. If we truly want to be "pilgrims, aliens and strangers," then make certain that we don't become loudly political at the same time. That might seem somewhat, well, hypocritical. :-)

Do I dare?There was another post on this prior and a bit of vehemence within it but just some wondering out loud. To ask a completely different question, stripping it of it's 'for\\against' constructs... Are there some things that might be better off not being known?1Pe 2:20 For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God. 1Pe 3:17 For it is better, if the will of God be so, that ye suffer for well doing, than for evil doing. Rom 13:4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. What I am appealing to is only that a constant intrusion into how a country goes about to protect itself need not be at the whim of every political pundit, in fact is this not really just more of the same humanism that is so often broached here?It is to advocate nothing by way of "Are you saying then..." No, I am not. But how in the world is a country to protect itself from overt forms of evil and terrorism if the sword is being dulled by politicians with ulterior motives? Maybe a better way to put this is to recall just shortly after 911, if this topic had been raised then it would have been buried in the press. The collective conscience then and what was some sort of a united front against what had transpired only lasted a short while and it was soon back to the tug and pull of interests of the parties, each with it's own particular slants an agendas.Sometimes it just seems the out cry is against all the wrong things. Where this faulty idea of a 'clean war' came about ... humanism. Facts are difficult things to deal with. It's funny, all this could make one think that I was some proponent of war, even if the constant plea is still, neither.Mar 13:7 And when ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars, be ye not troubled: for such things must needs be; but the end shall not be yet. Be ye not troubledSuch things must needs beButThe end shall not be yet. Don't think much of this is really going to be much of a conversation soon, not in comparison to what is coming. Don't think we have seen the smallest part of it yet.

-Brothers,-If your screen starts to heat up, it's my fault. Please forgive me..-Moses didn't tell Joshua to go pick up a sign and demonstrate. He told him, "Be strong and of a good courage" (Deut. 31:6,7 AV). Finally, God Himself told Joshua the same thing (v. 23). I imagine that a soldier in Joshua's army prayed often with a sword at his side. The devil has more than a spiritual presence in the world; his children, taken captive by him to do his will, are waging a mental, emotional, spiritual AND physical war against God's children. We should not use the devil's tactics to do battle against our enemy, but we should not lay down before the enemy and give up..-Yes, I am a retired military man. 4 years in the Marine Corps, 18 years in the Coast Guard. I became a Christian in 1987 while in the CG. I would be the first to say that saving a life is greater by far than taking a life. But now is not the time to surrender to the enemy. Today, we are paying a price for our misuse of "tolerance" and our failure to stand by our convictions..

-Please correct me if I'm reading this wrong, but is this another comparison between our government and Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany??..

Would you support this?Ah, it always comes back to this, doesn't it?Neither still means neither, I don't 'support' anything of this sort brother, where did the idea ever come about that one must do so? (Edit:* Point of clarification here. This has come up in the past, the reference being toward political affiliation and the agendas thereof primarily)step up now, in front of this forum and God and outline why you would be for concentration camps.....that is....if you WOULD be for them......Why? To appease you Neil? Will not be drawn into your straw man. The policies of the Government are not my issues, they may be yours. To point out something is not the same as equating agreement, that seems to be something you must have, "for\\against" a choosing of sides, the very bi-partisanship of the world in it's ways and opinions, it's philosophies and even the church, instead of come out and be separate unto God, would rather get bogged down in the opposite of the sentiment;2Ti 2:4 No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier.2Co 10:4 (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) 2Co 10:5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; Eph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2Co 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

(article continued)"As French sociologist and theologian Jacques Ellul said: The Christian cannot represent or take on the interests of this world; s/he defends the interests of his/her Lord, like any ambassador who represents the interests of his/her state.So, Christian, what are the interests of your sovereign? In the survival of American-style comsumerism? In the continuation of something called "Judeo-Christian value?" In the maintenance at all costs (including torture) of our live? What WOULD Jesus do? Well, what DID Jesus do? First, he gave the Sermon on the Mount in which he told us to love our enemies and pray for them. He told us NOT to worry about tomorrow, about life, about what we would eat or drink or how we would live. He told us that pagans seet the assurances of a certain tomorrow--but that is not what God wanted of us.Second, he gave His life, but not until He Himself bor the torture of His Roman captors. To understand the power of what He did we must recognize that Jesus, in yielding to the Romans, made a powerful political statement about what HIS kingdom, his reign would be like. Many of Jesus' followers expected and wanted Him to seize political power, overthrow the Romans and usher in the just reign of God on earth.Jesus stood before Pilate and said that if he wanted, he could call a legion of angels to bring about this kind of political change. The temptation to seize power through violence was constantly before Jesus throughout His ministry. Before Pilate he made a decision to reject violence. His was to be a kingdom so unlike anything that the world knew that it would reach its fulfillment only in His rejection of this option." Bob Davis is executive director of the Mennonite Central Committee based in Akron.(end of article)In Christ Jeff

To understand the power of what He did we must recognize that Jesus, in yielding to the Romans, made a powerful political statement about what HIS kingdom, his reign would be like.According to Scripture there will come a time when the world will see this "powerful political statemen," once again. And then, like in the first century, there will be Bonhoffer type believers. And the world will hate them for being a living testimony of what they believe. In ChristJeff

A different form of a question, a quick question for Mikewas not meant for you.I am not sure how you would expect me to have taken it any differently...I would ask Jesus about the unrepentant hostility that reeks out of any response you direct towards me. Others have asked me in PM's about this, so.....thats just a suggestion. It really doesn't bother me, but it probably stumbles you a bit.Well, perhaps we are both to blame here Neil, reading past or into things. But you couldn't be more wrong in that assessment of a particular hostility towards you, repentance is a given towards anything of the sort. But to have a particular questioning of the things you post here is to the issue not towards you as a person. I love your zeal brother always have, just some of the political things that get thrust out here and from the sources they come from, the verbal slandering, the hostility of their words, they have to be addressed brother.Regarding the PM's I am not bothered either, but if there was an issue of this assumption, why was it not brought to my attention before? Neil, this does seem to happen often enough even in other postings. Speaking in generalities here. To address one aspect another one gets brought in almost as an aside... To ask a completely different question, stripping it of it's 'for\\against' constructs... Are there some things that might be better off not being known? This question didn't get a response and that's fine, but it was with a preposition there. It just seems often times it is to launch forth with something else and then retort. A bit dubious to not notice the particular hostility contained in these words;step up now, in front of this forum and God and outline why you would be for concentration camps.....that is....if you WOULD be for them......The peculiar thing is that in addressing things they can turn into personal assumptions, that what is being said is in actuality insinuating something else, are we that easily offended?Another question that didn't get addressed from another post here;Please correct me if I'm reading this wrong, but is this another comparison between our government and Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany??..It does appear that way from your response.

Jeff, You posted a lot here. So much it is difficult to say in a few words what should be said….First of all, the early church lived through several despotic rulers and never do we read of any Christians mounting insurrection against these evil men. It was to these rulers Paul told the Roman church to submit to. Nero was no saint. Early Christian rescued babies that were thrown away, risking their own lives in the process. They literally were as sheep among wolves. Dietrich Bonhoffer, if I remember history, was imprisoned for being involved in a plot to assassinate Hitler, not because he was a Christian. Is this not a shameful thing for a Christian to be involved in? Does it not violate Scripture? And do you think God was not aware of the concentration camps? About Bob Davis, executive director of Mennonite Central Committee: MCC has done a lot of good in their past however, they have politicized ‘peace making’ which is obnoxious to the conservative element of the Mennonite Church. They would bend over backwards to assist the enemy but at the same time work hard to discredit their own country’s leadership, in contrast to the Biblical command to honor your leaders. Liberal Mennonites have taken peace-making to a level that smacks of humanism. One time I called the head of the Victim Offenders Reconciliation Program (VORP) with some questions and I was told the program does not focus on evangelism. ( I immediately lost interest in THEM but still think the process has a lot to offer if Jesus is invited into the mix.) And adding insult to injury, they stalled a lllloooonnnnggg time before they came out against abortion. What am I saying? Liberal Mennonites are not inspiring. They have strayed far from their Anabaptist beginnings and are an embarrassment to other Mennonites. ginnyrose

Sister Ginnyrose wrote:Dietrich Bonhoffer, if I remember history, was imprisoned for being involved in a plot to assassinate Hitler, not because he was a Christian. Is this not a shameful thing for a Christian to be involved in? Does it not violate Scripture? And do you think God was not aware of the concentration camps? I am sorry for my lack of care in labeling Bonhoffer as someone to emulate. I did not think of his efforts concerning Hitler. I used Bonhoffer at the moment to hold up my brother Neil. He is passionate for His Lord, but in retrospect I have not thought things through in the light of Scripture. Please forgive me.Liberal Mennonites are not inspiring. They have strayed far from their Anabaptist beginnings and are an embarrassment to other Mennonites. Again, I did not know of the background of this individual or organization. I found this article in a very conservative newspaper for Lancaster County PA where we are moving to this summer. With this said, what about the words of the article? What about what was said of the power of the politics of His kingdom? What about the idea of torture? Has anyone yet commented on the focus of this article? In love Jeff

What about the idea of torture? Has anyone yet commented on the focus of this article? Hi Jeff,Guess I am perhaps just gullible enough to see if I cannot eat past my foot up to the shinbone...The earlier attempt and often enough is, to somehow distinguish between the way things are and the way things ought to be. From there on out it gets more difficult by way of what ought the Christian's response be.Guessing that the obvious isn't enough sometimes, apologize, not attempting to be cute here, but is torture wrong? Need it be said? Do we get down into the minutiae? What I was appealing to in posing the question of "Are there some things that ought to be kept from us?" in that way is both that there will be these things in time of war irregardless of what we think is the 'right or wrong' of it and even the suggestion that it may be needed... Up to the knee now...Think ginnyrose touched on this by way of appealing to scripture, alluding to something broadly first off;First of all, the early church lived through several despotic rulers and never do we read of any Christians mounting insurrection against these evil men. It was to these rulers Paul told the Roman church to submit to. Nero was no saint. Early Christian rescued babies that were thrown away, risking their own lives in the process. They literally were as sheep among wolves. Think this as well as the other issues of Christians going to war, the whole pacifist argument or it's opposite 'just war'. These things find to me anyway, incomplete answers, I often just don't know.This is a bit disjointed I realize. Going back to;"Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ. No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier." 2Ti 2:3-4We can have a vast array of opinions about many things, political and otherwise. Personally and with great difficulty I can understand that there is a need for some rather unpleasant means of extracting out information from those who would resist giving it up of their own free will... How's that for a dodge? Am I really saying this?... Of course I don't agree with it, but that is besides the point.Surely it would be a better course of preaching the Gospel unto repentance to them but that likelihood doesn't seem to be much of an alternative.Having said all that, would I 'support' this? This is what I was appealing to earlier, the 'neither' of it. It just is. "Within limit's" comes to mind, but again why is it that there is a need for the Christian to force an opinion on it? We have a totally different war to fight, with completely different weapons, why the entanglement with the affairs of this life?If it must be said, what of those others in the Hall of Faith, that second half there;"Others suffered mocking and flogging, and even chains and imprisonment. They were stoned, they were sawn in two, they were killed with the sword. They went about in skins of sheep and goats, destitute, afflicted, mistreated-- of whom the world was not worthy--wandering about in deserts and mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth. And all these, though commended through their faith, did not receive what was promised, since God had provided something better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect."Heb 11:36-40 There is the persecuted amongst us even now. What of their ungodly torture for simply being Christian? Compare that with the minds bent on destroying ... again, hate to do the compare and contrast thing, but this is indeed fact, brutal as it is.Wish I could recall just where it was, but a message from Art Katz really brought out the rather overlooked reality that is present in scripture. The sacrifices in the Old Testament. The blood and gut's of it all. He even appealed to his own soft hearted and heartbreaking reality of his beloved dog, if I remember it correctly was either diseased or had attacked someone and he had to kill him. I may be off on that point but recall that his dogs death and to any animal lover, pet owner, it is just like losing a member of ones family. But the point he was referring to was the 'seemingly' wastefulness and even perhaps the, hold on here now, thought, that God sees this flesh He created in a completely different light than we do. Surely He does hold it in less esteem than we do, having punished us all with death and therefore decay and has already spoken that no flesh will glory in His sight. Am bound to do a lousy job of recalling all this but will give what my impressions were. One is that a great deal of all this rather unpleasant reality is for our sake. Why is it that we find these things repulsive, just as a reaction? The other is that there is just going to be some reality that we must face. Are we activists? Is that what we are called to? Again would appeal to how the issue brought forth here by Jeff comes to the fore. Humanism. Are we to appeal along those lines when we don't find this happening in scripture? What is more important to God, the natural or the Spiritual? Too 'heavenly minded'? To be super extra redundant, It is NOT to say anything to the issue of should we not seek to lessen human suffering, should we not be compassionate ... The argument may well present it's self as a difficult one depending on the circumstances. How did Jim Elliot end up? With a spear in his head ... The original question asked was "What would Jesus say about torture?"One response was;"Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me. Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee? Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do? Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me. Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? Joh 21:18-23Tradition has it, on a cross, upside down.

For more of a different perspective and some parallels to the mention of Art's take on the sacrificial system in contrast with the natural, the spiritual; Apostolic Service: Priestliness

Neil,In doing a search on the web about Dietrich Bonhoeffer, I frequently come upon the statement about him being involved in a conspiracy to killed Hitler. It is true he was a Luthern clergyman, a pacifist, and a prolific writer. He also was helpful in saving the lives of Jews. As a person of Jewish heritage, I suspect you find my opinion of Mr. Bonhoeffer unsettling. Neil, when we all appear before the Great White throne judgement it will not matter one twit what good we have done, how many lives we have saved from extermination, what will matter is how much we loved Jesus and how obedient we have been to Him! Neil, please do not think for one minute it has only been the Jewish people who have suffered at the hands of persecutors. Many Anabaptists - which is my heritage - were killed/tortured for their faith, killed by Catholics, then Lutherns and other reformers. Now just in recent years the descendents of these persecutors invited the descendents of these Anabaptists to a meeting in which they apologized for their acts of violence done to them hundreds of years ago.Now fast forward to the USA. During WWI Mennonite and Amish boys were tortured by the USA military for refusing to participate in their program. The USA has a checkered history in doing this to their own citizens, peace-loving people these were.Jeff, the question about the original article has a lot to commend itself, but since I know where it is coming from, I suspect his agenda. Now about torture: No where do we read in the New Testement where Jesus condoned torture. It violates every law that deals with love. I cringe when I read how any govenments will use it for any reason. The methods they use to extract information from the enemy is shameful, especially if they use females to do it. Now the larger question comes up: can a Christian engage in warfare or be a part of the military? Then the Hitler question comes up....but does that change Jesus' teaching to love your enemies? No. Jesus knew about Nero, Hitler, et al when that commandment was given. Another important question: how do we rescue people who are being "led to the slaughter" without killing anyone or conspiring to kill anyone? I suggest one will need to walk close to the LORD and be obedient to the Holy Spirit and not take things in your own hands. The early church did this when they rescued babies that were thrown out to die; during the reformation (1500s) many Catholics, Lutherns, et al risked their lives and limbs to assist the persecuted; during WWII many gentiles risked their lives to save the Jews. In most of these cases, no one was killing or conspiring to kill...they were intent on saving the lives of people who were being hunted down for extermination. ginnyrose