Jeremy Myers has some words to say about Gregory Boyd’s and Walter Wink’s view that political power necessarily corrupts, even demonizes, the Church:

Is There Such A Thing As A Just War?

The “Just War” theory was originally developed by Augustine to defend the Empire’s actions of arresting and killing the Donatists, with whom Augustine was having a theological disagreement. He argued that in certain situations, a war is not wrong if it furthers the cause of Christ and advances the Kingdom of God on earth.

He taught that inflicting temporal pain on someone to help them avoid eternal pain was justified. Also, Augustine believed that since God sometimes uses terror for the good of humans (a questionable premise), the church may also use terror for the sake of the gospel (The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power Is Destroying the Church p. 78).

Thanks to Augustine, Christians have been endorsing wars against “Christian enemies” ever since.

But does not the life of Jesus and the truth of the Gospel cry out against this? “Declaring a war just is simply a ruse to rid ourselves of guilt” (Engaging the Powers, p. 225). Such attempts to absolve ourselves from guilt in the murder of others have been around since the very beginning.

The killing of others began in the very first family, when Cain killed Abel.

Why did Cain commit the first murder?

The Bible is rather vague about Cain’s motives, but the root causes appear to be a mixture of jealousy, anger, and the desire for self-advancement. We rightfully condemn Cain for his actions, but when we look at the situation from Cain’s perspective, his murder of Abel was the very first “Just War” in history. Miroslav Volf points out that Cain’s murder of Abel was governed by faultless logic:

Premise 1: “If Abel is who God declared him to be, then I am not who I understand myself to be.” Premise 2: “I am who I understand myself to be.” Premise 3: “I cannot change God’s declaration about Abel.” Conclusion: “Therefore, Abel cannot continue to be” (Miroslav Volf, Exclusion & Embrace, p. 95).

From Cain’s perspective, he had the duty and obligation to protect himself by murdering Abel. If he had admitted that God’s preference for Abel’s sacrifice was correct, then Cain would have had to face his own faults. This he could not do, and so, in self-defense against the moral challenge from his brother, Cain engaged in “Just War” against Abel, and murdered him.

It has been argued that nearly all “Just Wars” in history are of this type. We engage others in a righteous battle, defending our freedoms and liberties, not because the others are necessarily evil and wrong (thought we paint them in this light), but because the only alternative to “Just War” is to admit our own wrongdoing and faults.

And since this is what we will not do, the others must die.

So ultimately, Just War theory is about one thing:

It is either us or them.

There has never been a war in history in which the warriors from both sides did not think their cause was just. In every battle, both sides cry out to their god for victory.

Can we really believe as Christians that since we serve the one true God, our cause is more just than the causes of those we are trying to kill?

Does it not rather seem that if we truly serve the one true God as revealed in Jesus Christ that there would be no cause whatsoever for killing?

When we seek the blood of our enemies, are we not abandoning and forsaking the truth of the shed blood of Jesus, who died for His enemies?

This question boils down to identifying the Biblical definition of justice, and understanding the difference between the God-given domains of Church and State.

The Church advises the state, as Nathan “advised” David. Joseph advised Pharaoh. Daniel advised King Nebuchadnezzar and Mordecai, after repenting, eventually advised Ahasuerus. Justice is a two-edged sword. It involves both vengeance and redemption. To separate one from the other leads to tyranny or anarchy, martial law or lawlessness. The sword of the prophets was the fiery tongue, the God-given Word. The Scriptures make it very clear that the metal swords of these mighty kings were also God-given. [1]

This explains the difference between murder and killing. Hatred is a crime committed within the domain of the Church. It is slain, mortified, by the Word of God. It leads out of this domain into the domain of the State—murder is  a crime punishable by the State, not the Church.

Israel could take up the sword against Canaan because 1) Israel was a Church State, and 2) the Canaanites had broken the “gospel” proclaimed to them by Abraham. This act wasn’t genocide. It was the exercise of the Covenant sanctions. The vengeance carried out under Joshua was a Church-State vengeance. God Himself exercised these same “Church-State” sanctions against Israel through Assyria and Babylon and Rome.

But after the exile, Israel was no longer an autonomous state, and this was by God’s design. Israel herself became the prophetic advisor. She was to be a nation of Nathans. The Church-State commissioned by God, set up under Daniel and decommissioned in AD70/Revelation was a Jew-Gentile one. The Jews could not execute criminals because they were to be a nation of priests. We see the beginnings of this in Ezra, where, all of a sudden, it is not only the genealogies of the priests that matter. By God’s command, they were to submit to their Gentile emperors, and if they did so, they would be exalted into government. [2] They founded synagogues right across the empire, and this bore fruit, as we see in Acts. But again, they desired a king before God’s time and ended up with a new Saul, the Herods. It took Herod and Pilate, Jew and Gentile, to execute Christ. It took Judah and Rome, Land Beast and Sea Beast, to execute the Firstfruits Church (Rev. 14).

The two-edged sword that the Christian Church wields is the gospel, a Good News which includes bad news, excommunication (which, biblically, is simply preaching of the gospel once again to apostates). This became distorted when the distinct roles of Church and State were conflated. The exaltation of the Church under Constantine was an exaltation by God for her faithfulness unto death. [3] However, heresy is never to be considered a crime against the State. The inquisitions were the result of a Church overstepping her prophetic demarcation.

So, it is not ungodly for a Christian nation to take up the sword against Muslim invaders, for instance. The question is whether that cause is just. I’m very thankful for the Crusades, and for WWII. And for the Cold War. Perhaps the wars since are more questionable because the West has systematically and institutionally “excommunicated” Christ, as the Herods did, and as the Roman Church did before the Reformation. The problem is not whether “Christian nations” can “Biblically” exist. The problem is Christian nations excluding Christ, forcing Him to knock on the door via His prophets and apostles to serve Covenant papers like a Nathan. [4]

When Christian Churches, and indeed Christian nations, apostatize, Jesus brings the hordes against them. Most Christians are totally ignorant of the fact that Jesus’ and the apostles’ warnings concerned the end of the Old Covenant in AD70. We can certainly apply these warnings today, but the bloodshed during the siege and destruction in Jerusalem, and indeed right across the entire empire, get overlooked as the actual interpretation. Jesus came again for His own, and poured out the curses of the Mosaic Law for the last time. Jesus and the apostles are portrayed as riding on white horses, with sword-mouths from heaven. That’s the Church power. Unbelieving Judah was being excommunicated from the people of God. And the nations are portrayed with actual swords. That’s State power. [5] Revelation dealt not only with the hateful hearts of the Jews, but with their “State-sponsored” murders of Christians. As in Joshua, Jeshua circumcised the Church, and the “swarms” marched around and circumcised the City-State of Herodian worship. [6] That’s what the Revelation is about—the cutting off of The Circumcision.

As in Canaan, the same sanctions executed upon the pagans-under-Covenant can be executed upon apostate Christians. Only, the Covenant territory is now longer limited to Canaan. Jesus rules the world.

The Gospel is the sword of the Church within its God-given domain, and if the Church is doing its job faithfully, it will be exalted as a prophetic advisor to the State, which will result in the State wielding a just sword within its God-given domain. The Gospel will always have State consequences, and to refuse to wield either sword justly is to hand the culture over to Satan.

The Church doesn’t war against flesh and blood. That is the job of the State. But Word inevitably becomes flesh. We must remember that fathers, pastors and soldiers are men who are willing to die for others in their given domains.

Nathan means “gift.” The flaming sword is a gift from God, whether prophetic or kingly. There is no Biblical debate over whether there should be swords, but whether or not those swords are just. The source of this justice is the cross, the bread and the wine, where men and women are slain and resurrected as wise governors in whatever domain God has given them.

The Words of the prophets always precede the swords of the soldiers. If a Christian nation is waging just war, she herself has been “slain.” But if she is waging an unjust war, it is because she is also waging war upon Christ. [7]

The fact that American troops are forbidden to hand out Bibles in Muslim nations is a dead giveaway. The fact that American troops find themselves hamstrung in conflict by bureaucratic restrictions upon their warfare is also a dead giveaway. A nation that has rejected the Bible understands neither justice nor mercy. When the State ignores the Church, that State is doomed.

_________________________________________
[1] See Church and State.
[2] See An Excellent Plan and The Restoration Covenant. I highly recommend James Jordan’s commentary on Daniel, available here.
[3] See A Jew Gets Baptism.
[4] See The Torah in Revelation.
[5] See The Fall of Jerusalem [PDF]
[6] See Circumcision and Apocalypse.
[7] See The Exorcism of Christ.

The devil hates confession. It breaks his power over us. He would rather have us confine ourselves behind the bars of  our own private Sheols than get right with God.

Why is confession so powerful? Because it is judicial. It is an application of the knowledge of good and evil. James Jordan writes:

“…Adam and Eve were supposed to be patient. They were to feed on the Tree of Life, and become gradually built up in wisdom and understanding. Then, when they were strong enough and wise enough, God would let them eat of the Tree of Knowledge, and would invest them with authority.

Adam fell, however, into the “dominion trap.” He assumed that because he was a child of God he was ready to take on mature responsibilities. He was unwilling to wait for the prerogatives of age. He was unwilling to remain passive and wait on the Lord, but instead seized the throne.

God elected to honor man’s decision. Immediately Adam and Eve found out that the devil had lied about wisdom. They had the office, but they lacked the wisdom, the psychological heaviness, to bear it. They were embarrassed. What they had expected to be robes of office — garments they made for themselves —now had to do double duty as a means of concealing their inadequacy. With a sinking feeling in their bellies, they realised that had gotten themselves into a position they could not handle. They did not have wisdom, but now they had to judge.

Right away, God called on them to exercise their new office by evaluating their own actions. “Judge righteous judgment,” said God. Did they do so? No, they called evil good and good evil (Is. 5:20). They did not each blame himself or herself, but they tried to shift the blame to each other and even to God.” [1]

After their sin, the Lord called on the sinners to be judges of their own actions. “Whose side are you on?” They had wanted to be gods, kings, so now they were required to execute judgment. They failed again.

This was the chasm of difference between Saul and David. David’s sins were actually worse than Saul’s, but the aftermath–at least concerning the king’s continued dynasty–was the exact opposite. Peter Leithart writes:

“Modern commentators are wrong to find excuses for Saul; he was plenty good at finding excuses for himself.”[2]

Psalm 51 is David’s confession, but it is also his judgment upon himself. He demonstrated that he no longer had any controversy with God over what he had done. He agreed with the Lord against himself. He and the Lord were two witnesses against the sin of David, and the actions were judicially put to death. The child of David’s sin was made the scapegoat. This was God’s judgment, and it was true and righteous. Regardless of how we feel about it, it was just. [3]

Dominion commanded over Ammon – David stays home

ARK
False Sabbath (Disobedience) – David rebels against his anointing and 
remains in Jerusalem instead of going to “holy war”

…..VEIL
…..False Passover (Union) – David seizes Bathsheba and sleeps with her. 
…..As a false prophet, he tries to cover his sin by calling Uriah home to his
…..wife, breaking his own Nazirite vow (no circumcision of heart – death)

……….ALTAR AND SHOWBREAD
……….False Firstfruits (Betrayal) – As a false priest, David offers Uriah’s
……….blood (the Gentile convert) instead of his own

……………LAMPSTAND
……………True Pentecost (Serpent) – Nathan, as the seven eyes of the Lamb,
……………challenges the deceiver

……….INCENSE ALTAR
……….True Trumpets - David repents and retains the throne

…..SACRIFICES & HIGH PRIEST
…..True Atonement - The son dies in David’s place. David stops 
…..mourning and washes and anoints himself (baptism – resurrection)

SHEKINAH
True Tabernacles - Solomon, the “resurrected” son of Bathsheba,
is born to build God’s house [4]

Dominion achieved over Ammon – David wears Ammon’s crown

God’s Word to David, the story of the beloved lamb slain by the wicked ruler, is the hero of the story. ”True and righteous altogether” is something we should be able to say of our Lord’s judgments even when we are the guilty party. Only after self-examination and the judicial death of our sin can there truly be resurrection life. We can punish ourselves, or we can put ourselves into the hands of a merciful God, as David did more than once (2 Sam. 24) and stop the mouth of the accuser.

Confession is a righteous judgment that sets the captive free, with Jesus as the mourned and resurrected son. Through Him, the kingdom we sold is given back to us in the judicial wisdom of Solomon—every time we confess our sin.

__________________________________
[1] See James B. Jordan, The Dominion Trap. I also highly recommend Rich Bledsoe’s essay, On Becoming A True Judge. A wealth of uncommon sense here.

[2] See discussion in Peter J. Leithart, A Son to Me—An Exposition of 1 & 2 Samuel, p. 203-204.

[3] David had failed as mediator, so the Lord intervened. We accuse when He does, and we accuse Him when He doesn’t. See The Go-Betweens.

[4] Notice that again this last step concerns succession.

or Theonomy in the Bible

“…instead of Moses and Aaron challenging the powers that be, we have Herodian preachers crying “Peace, peace” when there is no peace. Nathan is not qualified to confront David because Nathan himself has been sleeping around.”

In his post Christianity as Comprehensive Cultural Tribunal?, timsmartt questions the validity of philosophy’s self-appointed role as an unbiased cultural referee and wonders whether Christianity should take that role:

You must be logged in to see the rest of this post.

Join now for a year for $15!

]]> http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/07/14/church-and-state/feed/ 0 http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/05/20/resurrected-to-witness/ http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/05/20/resurrected-to-witness/#comments Wed, 20 May 2009 03:11:45 +0000 http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/?p=1603 The Purpose of the Restoration Covenant

“The restoration period is the last era of Israel’s history as the people of God and the climactic period of old covenant. The kingdom of God has grown beyond Israel and spread to the nations, who are the God-appointed protectors of His priestly people. Israel’s loss of independence and submission to Gentile powers was not a backward movement in the kingdom program of God. Abraham had been chosen by God so that through him all the nations of the world could be blessed (Gen. 12:3). In the restoration era, this was fulfilled more than at any other time in Israel’s history. Through the dispersion Jews had spread all over the world and they brought with them the knowledge of the true God.

Though Daniel spent most of his life serving the king of Babylon during the time of captivity, he is still a good picture of what the restoration era is about, for he served “Darius the Mede” also. Daniel’s job was that of an advisor, the supreme advisor, to the king of Babylon and then head over the satraps and presidents in the kingdom of Persia (Dan. 6:1-3). Essentially the king intended to designate Daniel as the actual ruler in Persia, as Joseph had been in Egypt: “the king planned to appoint him over the whole kingdom” (Dan. 6:3). This was not a “secular” calling. To advise the king and aid him and the daily affairs of rule was one of the functions of a prophet, as, for example, the prophet Nathan did for David (cf. 2 Sam. 7).

In other words, during the restoration era, Israel as a nation would no longer have civil power, but she was appointed by God to serve as a prophetic witness to the world. It was Israel’s prophetic task to give godly counsel to the leaders of the Babylonian, Persian, Greek, and Roman empires who protected her and, through her position in the empire, spread the knowledge of the true God. The final era of Israel’s history, thus, was a prophetic era in which the word of God went forth more broadly than at any time in Israel’ history.

Her new temple in Jerusalem lacked the glory of the temple of Solomon (cf. Hag. 2:3), but, as was appropriate for a prophetic people in an international age, her real new temple was the “heavenly” temple that was revealed to Ezekiel (40-48). Jews in this era were given a glorious vision of Israel’s worship and its global significance that made explicit the purpose of the tabernacle and temple. Through the worship of the true God, the priestly nation was to bring blessing to all men.”

 

from Introduction to the Bible by Ralph Smith.

]]> http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/05/20/resurrected-to-witness/feed/ 0