Venezuela 2025

[ken_sylvania]

This begs the question of what "morality" is. Without Jesus, "morality" is often defined by whoever is strongest / most powerful ultimately being viewed as the one who gets to decide what "right and wrong" is.

Jesus instead came and told us the meek will inherit the earth - but he also taught us what right and wrong are, and there is a Law higher than man's laws. He also taught us that there is a Judge. You could call it an "international criminal court", if you wish, where all will be tested according to their works.

If we believe Jesus is the source of a higher moral law, then Christians should resist and constrain earthly power rather than justify atrocities and abuses of power.

No, because Jesus said His Kingdom is not of this world. He said that if His Kingdom were of this world, then His servants would fight against the unjust treatment He was receiving.

If we believe Jesus is the source of a higher moral law, then we obey Him and do what He says to do, rather than what seems most logical to us.

[Bootstrap]

No, because Jesus said His Kingdom is not of this world. He said that if His Kingdom were of this world, then His servants would fight against the unjust treatment He was receiving.

If we believe Jesus is the source of a higher moral law, then we obey Him and do what He says to do, rather than what seems most logical to us.

Yes, but we also don’t turn around and shrug, “Well, of course Caesar crucified Jesus. No big deal, that’s just what Caesars do.” We don’t call that morally neutral. Even if Jesus’ kingdom is not of this world, we still recognize that what Caesar did was wrong. The fact that earthly rulers aren’t part of Christ’s kingdom doesn’t mean their actions escape moral judgment.

After all, we constantly make moral judgments about people who aren’t part of our spiritual community, e.g. adulterers, sex traffickers, abusers, exploiters. Our kingdom still says those things are wrong. Rulers don’t get a free pass on basic morality just because their kingdom isn’t the Kingdom of God.

[JohnH]

Suppose we start with this: Killing is really bad. God has given the sword to Caesar, but God also judges Caesar for how he uses the sword. If Caesar murders you or my wife or my neighbor or a citizen of another country, that matters. We are all created in God's image.

It certainly "matters", but it's been well established that the American government often decides to just kill various people and has been doing this for a long time.

Traditional American democracy is built on the belief that no one person can be trusted with unchecked power. That’s why we have checks and balances, not because leaders are angels, but because they are human. Power is safer when it must be shared, persuaded, and constrained. And for that to work, there has to be a moral and legal foundation guiding how force is used.

Is anyone arguing against that? Congress has oversight over the Presidency. Is anyone arguing it doesn't?

Over the weekend, members of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees are saying they need to look into this. Including enough Republicans that it seems reasonably likely to happen. I think that would be good, does anyone disagree? e? Anything that prevents blatant, unnecessary killing is good. If a Congressional investigation accomplishes that, it’s just as worthwhile as improving a police department in any American city. Saving lives is good.

Yes, Congress can look into all kinds of things including classified information (most information about "terrorists" is conveniently classified, limiting transparency, but hey, that's because Congress passed laws saying that that's allowed).

Caesar will never have the same moral code that Jesus taught. Just won't happen. But a Caesar with no moral code at all, a Caesar who kills wantonly and uses fear to force submission ... that's a terrible thing for many people. If we shake our heads and say, "oh well, we never expected Caesar to be Jesus" or justify every behavior by finding some time in history that some Caesar did something horrible, it's a race to the bottom. If our standards change whenever a new Caesar is elected, they are no standards at all.

I find it a real stretch to say the government can't use force against terrorists or drug traffickers. I mean, of all the things to argue for, I don't think calling for drug traffickers to operate in peace and safety (who are the same drug traffickers who make the people around them live in a constant state of fear, and seem to routinely kill people with no consequences for themselves), is really what the gospel is telling Christians they need to advocate for.

I would think, rather, Christians should be advocating for people not to have to live in constant fear of drug cartels.

I understand those who say that speaking truth to Caesar is not our job, but that's precisely what prophets do. Because prophets do not speak only to the righteous. If we encourage everyone to just look the other way, we are telling Caesar he can do whatever he wants. Because Caesar will stretch the boundaries and get away with whatever he can. No matter the consequences for the victims.

If a prophet consistently only speaks truth to Caesar (R) I start to question if the message is prophecy or merely just partisanship.

[ken_sylvania]

So war crimes don’t matter because heaven will sort it out? Why have laws and courts at all then if eternal judgment is the only place where justice happens?

your presumptions and conclusions escape me.

Fair enough. Let me ask it plainly, without presuming anything:

Do you believe it is morally wrong to kill incapacitated survivors clinging to the remains of a destroyed boat? Yes or no?

That’s the question I’m asking.

Yes, it is. Jesus says we should love our enemies, not kill them.

[JohnH]

Perhaps this is the actual question being asked, because:

Do you believe it is morally wrong to kill incapacitated survivors clinging to the remains of a destroyed boat? Yes or no?

Of course everyone here is going to say "yes" (unless we have someone or two who is really not a believer in nonresistance).

But the real question is...

Do you believe it is morally wrong not to take political action against a political force that is suspected that it might be killing incapacitated survivors clinging to the remains of a destroyed boat? Yes or no?

[temporal1]

In this case, Caesar warned and gave plenty of notice he was going after cartels and drug traffickers.
This is not ambush+execute innocents without warning, without crimes+sins doing vast harm, including deaths.

i’m not saying i’m ok with any killing. i’m not.

How about stop drug running? You were warned, stop.

[JohnH]

In this case, Caesar warned and gave plenty of notice he was going after cartels and drug traffickers.
This is not ambush+execute without warning, without crimes+sins doing vast harm, including deaths.

i’m not saying i’m ok with any killing.

How about stop drug running?

Or even showing the same level of concern to those murdered by drug cartels.

Mexico City
—
August 10 was, for many in Mexico, a quiet Sunday like any other. But in Sinaloa – a northwestern state facing the Pacific – it was no ordinary Sunday. That day, 17 homicides were committed: one every 85 minutes.

No threads on MennoNet about that. Interesting, isn't it?

[Bootstrap]

Suppose we start with this: Killing is really bad. God has given the sword to Caesar, but God also judges Caesar for how he uses the sword. If Caesar murders you or my wife or my neighbor or a citizen of another country, that matters. We are all created in God's image.

It certainly "matters", but it's been well established that the American government often decides to just kill various people and has been doing this for a long time.

And it's well established that adulterers will commit adultery, that there is a market to make drug smugglers and sex traffickers wealthy, that by default the rich and powerful take over everything and we wind up with the kinds of relations we see in parts of South America.

What consistent principles should we use to decide how to judge the actions of both Democratic and Republican presidents? I am not asking anyone to go back and prove that they have been consistent with these principles, and I will not put anyone on defense, but I do invite anyone to go back and look at how the treated presidents of both parties on MennoNet and MennoDiscuss over the years. What was the tone of these posts? The intensity? I think it is a helpful exercise. And after comparing, it's helpful to ask if there's one set of rules that can apply to both.

What if some people are hypocritical about these laws? “Hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays to virtue.” Even people who do wrong still feel the need to pretend to be good, and that very pretense acknowledges that goodness is real, desirable, and socially expected. When they no longer need to even pretend ... that's scary. Laws do not go away when someone commits a crime. The law judges the criminal, not the other way around.

[Bootstrap]

But the real question is...

Do you believe it is morally wrong not to take political action against a political force that is suspected that it might be killing incapacitated survivors clinging to the remains of a destroyed boat? Yes or no?

Sure, everyone has the right to say nothing at all about any topic they choose not to engage in.

But when someone objects to people who are angry about that kind of murder ... that's not neutral, that's taking sides.

[temporal1]

In this case, Caesar warned and gave plenty of notice he was going after cartels and drug traffickers.
This is not ambush+execute without warning, without crimes+sins doing vast harm, including deaths.

i’m not saying i’m ok with any killing.

How about stop drug running?

Or even showing the same level of concern to those murdered by drug cartels.

Mexico City
—
August 10 was, for many in Mexico, a quiet Sunday like any other. But in Sinaloa – a northwestern state facing the Pacific – it was no ordinary Sunday. That day, 17 homicides were committed: one every 85 minutes.

No threads on MennoNet about that. Interesting, isn't it?

This has been going on my whole entire life. I don’t think any part of the U.S. is free from the damage. i believe the unknown influence/control in the highest places in the U.S., in the private sector and politics, is staggering. Congress, too.

i believe any attempt to disrupt the evil involved is extremely dangerous business. i pray for anyone willing to try.
i pray for fatalities. i didn’t celebrate the death of osama bin laden.

How about stop drug running? You were warned, stop.