nostr:npub16llpfttm85ltrqc5ggyu5snfq38x6vwhanyrhrddpn43ylt3wdxqa99rf5
I think this is the basis of my non-pacifism.
Discussion
I strongly disagree... And I'd use Romans 13 to do so... I know Romans 13 doesn't mean check your conscience at the door and do all the state says, but I do take it as saying that God allow rulers and he will judge them harshly for doing wrong. The old testament prophets said that repeatedly too.
But say I agreed with the quote, I'd still take the non-violent resistance path. It's statistically proven to be more successful at ushering in a more peaceful political system for a county. Whereas, the chances of civil war breaking out a second time are super high when violence ushers in a new regime.
Fair points. I will still very politely disagree about what Romans 13 says.
Side point to all of this, it’s ironic that Jefferson is the one trying to make statements for obedience to God.
How so?
He was an avid slave owner who profited tremendously off of their pains, raped slaves, etc.
The founding fathers pose troubling moral compasses when you get rid of the patriotic whitewash, especially on a theological level. Much of which revolves around the perversion of imago dei.
So for him to say “resistance to tyrants is obedience to God”, it’s really much more of a culturally/socioeconomically driven statement than a theological one. It’s playing to the same base emotion as Tr*mp coming out and saying “Resisting the Democratic Party is obeying God”. People hear that, agree and never stop to question WHO is saying it, just because they like the guy, don’t like the democrats and they want to be associated with a “obeying god” group.
I’m sure Jefferson would have realized that he could leverage the climate of hating the British and a very puritanical Christianity perspective in a burgeoning state that held questionable positions on what it meant to be obedient. And no one questioned his place to speak as a theological beacon.
Probably more words than you were looking for. Hope it makes sense. Welcome conversation.
(Retreats back into the shadows)
No. That's a very well thought out position and I'd have to agree with most of it on first read and I'd likely agree with all of it after thinking on it some more.
None of the founding fathers hold up under close scrutiny. They all tried to put together something better than anyone had before, and, well, they failed in many ways.
I appreciate that.
Yes, agreed.
I suspect you and I have more similar thoughts about Romans 13 than mainstream interpretations and it's more a matter of nuance in reading.
But if you want a real understanding of how my pacifist stance came from my Bible reading, for me it goes back to what Jesus said in the sermon on the mount. "Love your enemies".... I don't see how one could simultaneously love and kill their enemies. 🤷🏽♀️
If we are to follow Jesus's example... He died while we were still sinners to bring peace between us and God. I don't want to die a violent death, but it could be preferable to dishonouring God and not following in Jesus's footsteps.
It's not hard: you stop them from killing you or your family or friends. If that means you have to kill them, so be it.
Jesus didn't condemn the Centurion who had assuredly killed before in order to become a centurion, and was praised as having great faith.
We are counted abd brothers and sisters of Christ, The King, and as such, we are to wage war on our enemies as is befitting ones who rule with Christ.
That does not mean just to pray at people. Sometimes it means to end them if they are doing evil. Sometimes that is the only way for us to stop them. That may be something you disagree with, but, at one said and will say again: I will not be made a victim if I have the means and ability to defend myself and my loved ones, and yeah, we're supposed to love everyone, but... Ebbed Jesus had his favorite disciple, so that just means it's a matter of degree, not kind.
I'm unlikely to stop at just praying for tyrants to be ended, although I probably make those kinds of prayers more than most people living in comfortable democracies.
Non-violent resistance is not as passive as most make it sound. I just remembered the name of the book that outlays how much more effective non-violence is against tyrants... Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Non violent Conflict by Chen worth and Stephan.
Please don't stop praying for them. They need it more than most.
Non-violent or civil disobedient-type resistance is effective, but, I'm not going to sacrifice my life to that ideal since I don't agree with it when it comes to being a martyr. I'd rather fight and live longer than die passively. 🤷♂️