Mennonites and War

[Bootstrap]

I asked two questions.
#1 - "What should we recommend to the Ukrainians as a response to Putin's invasion?" I think I hear you saying that it's not your place to recommend to the Ukrainians how to respond. If that's what you're saying, it's not an answer to the question, it's a disagreement as to whether the question is appropriate.

#2 - "How can we recommend that the Ukrainians do anything other than what Jesus commands...?" To the extent your comment could possibly be construed as an answer to this question, it seems to say that because the powers that be are ordained of God, we as Christians have no right to expect Christ's commands to apply to Caesar and his minions.

You say if a wife is abused, we shouldn't scold her if she defends herself. You say we shouldn't recommend that she kill her husband, and we shouldn't kill her husband for her, but your answer certainly seems to suggest that we shouldn't criticize her for killing her husband should she choose to do so. That kind of a position is, to me, impossible to square with what Jesus taught. Jesus taught very clearly that we shouldn't defend ourselves with violence, so a wife who kills her husband is directly and willfully violating Jesus' commands, and Jesus said there is no other way to eternal life except by following Him.

I think I was saying these are the wrong questions.
I’m not in a position to make recommendations to the Ukrainian government. That's not my God-given role.
These are not questions that the Bible answers for me. I don't think they lead to biblical clarity.

To be honest, I’m also reminded of Fletcher's situation ethics—e.g. a woman is told that the only way to save her husband’s life is to commit adultery with a prison guard. I don't think that's the right way to understand the morality of adultery. I can say that adultery is wrong without having a good answer to that question. The scenario doesn't actually lead to greater moral clarity. So if you ask me that question, I might not give you a direct answer, I may reframe it. Jesus did that too, when the Pharisees asked him questions.

It seems to me that following Jesus is less about hypotheticals and more about how we live faithfully in the roles we’ve actually been given—as disciples, not generals. As people shaped by the cross, not strategists in Caesar’s court.

But if you believe these are the right questions—then how would you answer them? Show me how they lead to clarity for you.

Would you recommend that the Ukrainian government lay down its arms and... do what, exactly?

Romans 13 tells us this:

For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.

So when Caesar bears the sword in the way described in Romans 13, do you believe he is acting as God’s servant—or not?

Do you believe God uses governments to punish wrongdoers and restrain evil?

And if so, what would you recommend to Caesar?
Would you criticize him for acting in that God-given role?

[JohnH]

So you agree, then, that Hitler and the German Jews were not just two sides of the same coin?

I agree that apples and hammers are not the same kind of thing. A despotic national leader and a subethnic group are not the same thing.

And perhaps you also agree that on October 7th, Hamas and the civilians in the kibbutzim were not just two sides of the same coin?

A political party & military unit of a nation is not the same thing as a group of people who live in a commune.

However, Russia and Ukraine are both nation-states.

[Ken]

So you agree, then, that Hitler and the German Jews were not just two sides of the same coin?

I agree that apples and hammers are not the same kind of thing. A despotic national leader and a subethnic group are not the same thing.

And perhaps you also agree that on October 7th, Hamas and the civilians in the kibbutzim were not just two sides of the same coin?

A political party & military unit of a nation is not the same thing as a group of people who live in a commune.

However, Russia and Ukraine are both nation-states.

Where in the Bible does Jesus make distinctions between national leaders, subethnic groups, political parties, military units, communes, and nation-states when it comes to peacemaking and "wielding the sword" ??

[ken_sylvania]

I asked two questions.
#1 - "What should we recommend to the Ukrainians as a response to Putin's invasion?" I think I hear you saying that it's not your place to recommend to the Ukrainians how to respond. If that's what you're saying, it's not an answer to the question, it's a disagreement as to whether the question is appropriate.

#2 - "How can we recommend that the Ukrainians do anything other than what Jesus commands...?" To the extent your comment could possibly be construed as an answer to this question, it seems to say that because the powers that be are ordained of God, we as Christians have no right to expect Christ's commands to apply to Caesar and his minions.

You say if a wife is abused, we shouldn't scold her if she defends herself. You say we shouldn't recommend that she kill her husband, and we shouldn't kill her husband for her, but your answer certainly seems to suggest that we shouldn't criticize her for killing her husband should she choose to do so. That kind of a position is, to me, impossible to square with what Jesus taught. Jesus taught very clearly that we shouldn't defend ourselves with violence, so a wife who kills her husband is directly and willfully violating Jesus' commands, and Jesus said there is no other way to eternal life except by following Him.

I think I was saying these are the wrong questions.

Thank you for clarifying. I think it would have been helpful to say that directly instead of claiming that you had answered the questions.

I’m not in a position to make recommendations to the Ukrainian government. That's not my God-given role.
These are not questions that the Bible answers for me. I don't think they lead to biblical clarity.

To be honest, I’m also reminded of Fletcher's situation ethics—e.g. a woman is told that the only way to save her husband’s life is to commit adultery with a prison guard. I don't think that's the right way to understand the morality of adultery. I can say that adultery is wrong without having a good answer to that question. The scenario doesn't actually lead to greater moral clarity. So if you ask me that question, I might not give you a direct answer, I may reframe it. Jesus did that too, when the Pharisees asked him questions.

Sometimes such reframing helps with the moral clarity, sometimes it simply helps elevate a specific point of view and to avoid admitting the truth of an opposing viewpoint. (btw, thanks for the gratuitous comparison, you as Jesus, me as a Pharisee).

It seems to me that following Jesus is less about hypotheticals and more about how we live faithfully in the roles we’ve actually been given—as disciples, not generals. As people shaped by the cross, not strategists in Caesar’s court.

But if you believe these are the right questions—then how would you answer them? Show me how they lead to clarity for you.

Would you recommend that the Ukrainian government lay down its arms and... do what, exactly?

Romans 13 tells us this:

For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.

So when Caesar bears the sword in the way described in Romans 13, do you believe he is acting as God’s servant—or not?

Do you believe God uses governments to punish wrongdoers and restrain evil?

And if so, what would you recommend to Caesar?
Would you criticize him for acting in that God-given role?

I would recommend to Caesar the same as Paul recommended to King Agrippa - He tried to persuade King Agrippa to be a Christian. I would recommend to Putin that he lay aside his position as ruler or president or whatever, and instead use his ill-gotten wealth to try to begin to make amends for all the pain and hurt he has caused. I would recommend to the Russian soldiers that they refuse to fight and kill their fellow humans. I would recommend to the Ukrainian soldiers that they follow the Prince of Peace, who allowed sinful men to mock Him, torture Him, and kill Him. I would recommend to President Zelensky that he repent and believe the Gospel, and turn away from clinging to power as a ruler of this world. I would recommend to President Trump that he repent of his sins, beg God for forgiveness, and practice purity, honesty, holiness and amendment of life.

As far as I am concerned, the refusal to call all men to repentance and holy living is what clouds the issues. Any theory that says it's OK for presidents and governments and policemen to defy Jesus' teachings because God has given them their rules is not a theory that leads to moral clarity. Moral clarity is recognizing that God calls every man to repentance and following Christ, and agreeing with Jesus' teaching that nobody can have eternal life unless they are willing to follow Him.

[JohnH]

Where in the Bible does Jesus make distinctions between national leaders, subethnic groups, political parties, military units, communes, and nation-states when it comes to peacemaking and "wielding the sword" ??

Romans 13?

[Soloist]

XIII. Of the Office of the Secular Authority
We believe and confess that God has ordained power and authority, and set them to punish the evil, and protect the good, to govern the world, and maintain countries and cities, with their subjects, in good order and regulation; and that we, therefore, may not despise, revile, or resist the same, but must acknowledge and honor them as the ministers of God, and be subject and obedient unto them, yea, ready for all good works, especially in that which is not contrary to the law, will, and commandment of God; also faithfully pay custom, tribute, and taxes, and to render unto them their dues, even also as the Son of God taught and practiced, and commanded His disciples to do; that we, moreover, must constantly and earnestly pray to the Lord for them and their welfare, and for the prosperity of the country, that we may dwell under its protection, earn our livelihood, and lead a quiet, peaceable life, with all godliness and honesty; and, furthermore, that the Lord would recompense unto them, here, and afterwards in eternity, all benefits, liberty, and favor which we enjoy here under their praiseworthy administration.

I think that being advocates of individuals/leaders repenting is appropriate. Expecting their office to act Christlike is unrealistic.

This is directed at anyone, do you agree or disagree with the bolded?

[ken_sylvania]

XIII. Of the Office of the Secular Authority
We believe and confess that God has ordained power and authority, and set them to punish the evil, and protect the good, to govern the world, and maintain countries and cities, with their subjects, in good order and regulation; and that we, therefore, may not despise, revile, or resist the same, but must acknowledge and honor them as the ministers of God, and be subject and obedient unto them, yea, ready for all good works, especially in that which is not contrary to the law, will, and commandment of God; also faithfully pay custom, tribute, and taxes, and to render unto them their dues, even also as the Son of God taught and practiced, and commanded His disciples to do; that we, moreover, must constantly and earnestly pray to the Lord for them and their welfare, and for the prosperity of the country, that we may dwell under its protection, earn our livelihood, and lead a quiet, peaceable life, with all godliness and honesty; and, furthermore, that the Lord would recompense unto them, here, and afterwards in eternity, all benefits, liberty, and favor which we enjoy here under their praiseworthy administration.

I think that being advocates of individuals/leaders repenting is appropriate. Expecting their office to act Christlike is unrealistic.

This is directed at anyone, do you agree or disagree with the bolded?

I think that part goes beyond Scripture and seems very much like asking the Lord for something well beyond anything that He has promised.

[ken_sylvania]

It’s not my job to tell Caesar how to bear the sword. That’s his role, not mine.

Forgive me for being confused, but I thought that you have made it very clear that the way Putin is bearing the sword is evil. If Putin isn't Caesar, who is? Or if Putin is Caesar, are you saying that it's not your job to tell Putin how to bear the sword, but rather it's your job to tell everybody else what's wrong with how Putin is bearing the sword.
That isn't moral clarity - it's moral fog. If we're going to rank participants in war by who was worse and who was better, we have to look to someone or something other than Jesus and His teachings for guidance, because Jesus surely didn't tell us how to do it.

[temporal1]

But I don’t have to step into Caesar’s shoes to do that. And I don't have to say, for instance, that Hitler and the German Jews were just two sides of the same coin. Or that a policeman and a rapist are just two sides of the same coin.

That's not a valid analogy. A better analogy would be Hitler's Germany vs Stalin's Russia. And I think we can agree that both of those actually were two sides of the same coin.

i agree, this is a better analogy.
i’d like to add, a victim can be a victim, or target - not necessarily in perpetuity. no “once a victim, always a victim”.

i question whether Ukraine (along with the Left-West) were innocent victims, Ukraine was targeted, but (i daresay) not white as snow. also, not at all defenseless.

as time has unfolded, Ukraine (with powerful assistance) has taken the position of aggressor with the stated stubborn goal of employing unrestrained violence to defeat. not a perpetual victim.

reports are, both sides have agreed to negotiate, then immediately continued violent aggression. multiple times.
this is untenable for resolution. disheartening to all who care.

your analogy stands.

[Neto]

I asked two questions.
#1 - "What should we recommend to the Ukrainians as a response to Putin's invasion?" I think I hear you saying that it's not your place to recommend to the Ukrainians how to respond. If that's what you're saying, it's not an answer to the question, it's a disagreement as to whether the question is appropriate.

#2 - "How can we recommend that the Ukrainians do anything other than what Jesus commands...?" To the extent your comment could possibly be construed as an answer to this question, it seems to say that because the powers that be are ordained of God, we as Christians have no right to expect Christ's commands to apply to Caesar and his minions.

You say if a wife is abused, we shouldn't scold her if she defends herself. You say we shouldn't recommend that she kill her husband, and we shouldn't kill her husband for her, but your answer certainly seems to suggest that we shouldn't criticize her for killing her husband should she choose to do so. That kind of a position is, to me, impossible to square with what Jesus taught. Jesus taught very clearly that we shouldn't defend ourselves with violence, so a wife who kills her husband is directly and willfully violating Jesus' commands, and Jesus said there is no other way to eternal life except by following Him.

I think I was saying these are the wrong questions.

Thank you for clarifying. I think it would have been helpful to say that directly instead of claiming that you had answered the questions.

I’m not in a position to make recommendations to the Ukrainian government. That's not my God-given role.
These are not questions that the Bible answers for me. I don't think they lead to biblical clarity.

To be honest, I’m also reminded of Fletcher's situation ethics—e.g. a woman is told that the only way to save her husband’s life is to commit adultery with a prison guard. I don't think that's the right way to understand the morality of adultery. I can say that adultery is wrong without having a good answer to that question. The scenario doesn't actually lead to greater moral clarity. So if you ask me that question, I might not give you a direct answer, I may reframe it. Jesus did that too, when the Pharisees asked him questions.

Sometimes such reframing helps with the moral clarity, sometimes it simply helps elevate a specific point of view and to avoid admitting the truth of an opposing viewpoint. (btw, thanks for the gratuitous comparison, you as Jesus, me as a Pharisee).

It seems to me that following Jesus is less about hypotheticals and more about how we live faithfully in the roles we’ve actually been given—as disciples, not generals. As people shaped by the cross, not strategists in Caesar’s court.

But if you believe these are the right questions—then how would you answer them? Show me how they lead to clarity for you.

Would you recommend that the Ukrainian government lay down its arms and... do what, exactly?

Romans 13 tells us this:

For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.

So when Caesar bears the sword in the way described in Romans 13, do you believe he is acting as God’s servant—or not?

Do you believe God uses governments to punish wrongdoers and restrain evil?

And if so, what would you recommend to Caesar?
Would you criticize him for acting in that God-given role?

I would recommend to Caesar the same as Paul recommended to King Agrippa - He tried to persuade King Agrippa to be a Christian. I would recommend to Putin that he lay aside his position as ruler or president or whatever, and instead use his ill-gotten wealth to try to begin to make amends for all the pain and hurt he has caused. I would recommend to the Russian soldiers that they refuse to fight and kill their fellow humans. I would recommend to the Ukrainian soldiers that they follow the Prince of Peace, who allowed sinful men to mock Him, torture Him, and kill Him. I would recommend to President Zelensky that he repent and believe the Gospel, and turn away from clinging to power as a ruler of this world. I would recommend to President Trump that he repent of his sins, beg God for forgiveness, and practice purity, honesty, holiness and amendment of life.

As far as I am concerned, the refusal to call all men to repentance and holy living is what clouds the issues. Any theory that says it's OK for presidents and governments and policemen to defy Jesus' teachings because God has given them their rules is not a theory that leads to moral clarity. Moral clarity is recognizing that God calls every man to repentance and following Christ, and agreeing with Jesus' teaching that nobody can have eternal life unless they are willing to follow Him.

I'm curious why you would urge President Zelenskyy to "repent and believe the Gospel, and turn away from clinging to power as a ruler of this world", but not President Trump. (I think that that is good advice for any political leader. The main point of the passage about how to pray for 'kings and rulers" appears to me to be that God desires all humankind to come to repentance, and be saved; that God does not desire that anyone would perish in sin.)