Theresa Miller wrote:
> Can you help me understand something? I am convinced that if all
> Christians truly embraced the full meaning of the Gospels and followed
> Jesus' example of nonviolence that we would not resort to killing and
> waging war to solve the world's problems or to rid the world of
> tyranny and terrorism. Whenever I mention the fact that Jesus never
> condoned violence, never resorted to using it, was always telling
> people to forgive and love their enemies, someone inevitably brings up
> the Gospel stories of when Jesus drove the moneychangers out of the
> Temple. As one of my correspondents put it, "even he recognized that
> there are times when that is the only languge understood by those he
> spoke to, and he was willing to speak in that language." I see this
> event as Jesus using nonviolent, direct action to bring attention to
> an unjust system, but others see it as an occasion when even Jesus,
> who was perfect, eventually got fed up, ran out of patience, lost his
> temper and resorted to violently rampaging through the Temple, using
> the whip on people to get his point across.
>
>
>
> My question is does this one incident justify war? Does this really
> mean that there are times when we have no other choice but to invade
> other countries and wage wars in order to rid the world of tyrants and
> despots and that God understands, even though hundreds, thousands or
> millions of innocent people get killed, why we had to do it. Is that
> really true?
I've found this talk by Eberhard Arnold enlightening on this subject:
http://www.bruderhof.com/articles/ea/AgainstBloodshed.htm
|
