A question I'm struggling to answer. Does the practice of my faith justify endangering others ? In spite of my sincere belief in the moral precepts of my faith and the risk of eternal damnation for not abiding by them, I find it hard to justify placing others in harms way. Does my belief give me that permission ? Why should my belief supersede another's safety ? Can I , in good conscience advocate for that action ? It is a very difficult question indeed. But it is a question I ask myself in response to those that demand that action. They correctly point out the teachings of my religion as demonstrated by the parables in the Bible. I should love my neighbor as myself. The basic of Christian teachings scream at me, yet I must, because of that same religion, ask the question. Despite the fact that I have no doubt that my God will provide and protect me I understand you may not be subject to that same assurance. It is the old " trust me " syndrome. I firmly believe I am correct but that isn't the point here. You have an equal right to your belief, or lack of it. I believe you will answer for your lack of faith but that choice is yours to make, I can do nothing but testify. This question has moved to the forefront of my thoughts in these troubling times.
I am keenly aware of the country I was blessed to be born in and live. A country founded on Christian principles, although that is often challenged, but a country that is tolerant and forgiving. This country promises religious freedom and separates the practice of religion from the function of government. In these times we are faced with the decision of government. A government of the people, by the people, for the people as stated by Abraham Lincoln at Gettysburg. The actions taken by both sides in that conflict stare in the face of Christian belief. The decision was made however to defend the union, by that same government, at the cost of many lives. Both sides were fully convinced that God was on their side. Once again this nation is being tested. We must make the decision based on government, not on religious conviction. We the people is not a singularity ! That to me is the key to this whole dilemma. My faith and my religion are my personal business. That is a singularity. The manner in which I choose to exercise that belief is also my singular choice. In this republic the function of government is to act on behalf of the majority. That is the guiding principle. Gaining a majority decision is the stumbling block. Even among the broad group described as " Christians " a majority decision is difficult to attain.
The decisions of government must be based solely on logic and reason. Those decisions may seem contrary to our religion but only at the national level. Each of us are still afforded the opportunity to act as we see fit. Individually we must follow our conscience. I have no right to impose my beliefs upon you. That action can only be done by the majority and even then it is only forced compliance. Even Jesus said, give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and unto God the things that are Gods. Submit to government is the message, your reward is in heaven. That is my belief but not necessarily yours.
This question is on my mind in response to the " Muslim " threat. It is really a terror threat but being perpetrated by a group, or several groups, that purport to be following the Muslim faith. Islam it is called and it's guiding principles, according to their own text, is to kill the infidels. Do all those that practice Islam believe and follow that precept ? Of course not. Not all Christians follow all the teachings in the Bible. There is a definite distinction there as no where in the Bible does it call for the killing of anyone ! It does say there is a time to fight however. Is it unreasonable to be suspicious of anyone claiming to be Muslim ? No, I don't think you can say that it is. Is it unreasonable to take precautions ? Quite the contrary I would say, it would be unreasonable not to. The maximum coverage is done with a large brush. Until the details are known that is the wise decision. But it is this action that has caused quite the rift. The mention of not offering our full and complete confidence in the intentions of those practicing Islam has caused that rift. Those proposing it have been called ungodly and pagan ! If it where a nation that had attacked and killed our citizens would there be such a hesitation ? I highly doubt that. We would be quick to defend, Onward Christian soldiers ! But it is a religion, Islam, that is the perpetrator of these acts. There is no country to defeat. The Bible says to turn the other cheek and I may be willing to do so, but do you have to ?
The fight is not over whose " God " is the better God. The fight is over the method used to gain entry into the everlasting, over what follows death. One ideology versus another. One is compelled by their own text to kill and subjugate anyone that will not profess to follow their God. The other two major ideologies in the world preach the opposite. This is not an opinion but fact. Weakness breeds aggression. That is why we have bullies ! The Christian belief in turning the other cheek is viewed as a weakness to some. We Christians believe it is a strength. It is a strength, but a strength that will preserve our religion not our country. In the book of Ephesians chapter six verse twelve it says, " for we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. " I believe my God will protect me. Will that same God protect the non-believer ? Can we count on God to save us all ?
We are taught that the non believers and those that live a morally corrupt life are doomed, for all eternity, to hell. Therefore the answer has to be no. God has given us all free will to act as we will. If I knowingly and willfully subject you to danger in the name of that God am I not just as bad ? Is it not a moral obligation on my part to shield you from the forces of evil ? Should I just, turn a blind eye and do nothing ? The parable of the good Samaritan is often quoted and the lesson it teaches. Love will overcome prejudice. That is truth. Can I allow others to be killed because of that belief ? I may choose because of my faith to endanger myself but that faith gives me no license to endanger yours.
How many wolves enter the hen house before the slaughter ends ? It is either when all are dead or the appetite of the wolf is satiated. I am commanded to love my neighbors as myself. Not all those neighbors are Christians. Some are Muslims and some have no faith whatsoever. My religion does not say to kill them if they refuse to believe in my form of Christianity. I strive to live in peace. I do not believe it is a sin to protect yourself. I also believe it is a obligation. on my part, to protect others from evil as best as I can. The preferred method is through the teachings of the gospel. If a " radicalized " Muslim where to attack a group of people, and they have on several occasions in recent memory, and I defend others lives, either by killing or being killed am I not hailed as a hero ? A hero sinner ? Which is more heroic ? To die because I failed to act or die because of my actions ? Do I get to decide that for you ? I think not. That is also a matter of faith on my part. But I am talking about matters of government and government policy. The obligation of government is to protect its' citizenry. We the people have the obligation to make that decision. I am left with the question, does the practice of my faith justify endangering you ?
I am keenly aware of the country I was blessed to be born in and live. A country founded on Christian principles, although that is often challenged, but a country that is tolerant and forgiving. This country promises religious freedom and separates the practice of religion from the function of government. In these times we are faced with the decision of government. A government of the people, by the people, for the people as stated by Abraham Lincoln at Gettysburg. The actions taken by both sides in that conflict stare in the face of Christian belief. The decision was made however to defend the union, by that same government, at the cost of many lives. Both sides were fully convinced that God was on their side. Once again this nation is being tested. We must make the decision based on government, not on religious conviction. We the people is not a singularity ! That to me is the key to this whole dilemma. My faith and my religion are my personal business. That is a singularity. The manner in which I choose to exercise that belief is also my singular choice. In this republic the function of government is to act on behalf of the majority. That is the guiding principle. Gaining a majority decision is the stumbling block. Even among the broad group described as " Christians " a majority decision is difficult to attain.
The decisions of government must be based solely on logic and reason. Those decisions may seem contrary to our religion but only at the national level. Each of us are still afforded the opportunity to act as we see fit. Individually we must follow our conscience. I have no right to impose my beliefs upon you. That action can only be done by the majority and even then it is only forced compliance. Even Jesus said, give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and unto God the things that are Gods. Submit to government is the message, your reward is in heaven. That is my belief but not necessarily yours.
This question is on my mind in response to the " Muslim " threat. It is really a terror threat but being perpetrated by a group, or several groups, that purport to be following the Muslim faith. Islam it is called and it's guiding principles, according to their own text, is to kill the infidels. Do all those that practice Islam believe and follow that precept ? Of course not. Not all Christians follow all the teachings in the Bible. There is a definite distinction there as no where in the Bible does it call for the killing of anyone ! It does say there is a time to fight however. Is it unreasonable to be suspicious of anyone claiming to be Muslim ? No, I don't think you can say that it is. Is it unreasonable to take precautions ? Quite the contrary I would say, it would be unreasonable not to. The maximum coverage is done with a large brush. Until the details are known that is the wise decision. But it is this action that has caused quite the rift. The mention of not offering our full and complete confidence in the intentions of those practicing Islam has caused that rift. Those proposing it have been called ungodly and pagan ! If it where a nation that had attacked and killed our citizens would there be such a hesitation ? I highly doubt that. We would be quick to defend, Onward Christian soldiers ! But it is a religion, Islam, that is the perpetrator of these acts. There is no country to defeat. The Bible says to turn the other cheek and I may be willing to do so, but do you have to ?
The fight is not over whose " God " is the better God. The fight is over the method used to gain entry into the everlasting, over what follows death. One ideology versus another. One is compelled by their own text to kill and subjugate anyone that will not profess to follow their God. The other two major ideologies in the world preach the opposite. This is not an opinion but fact. Weakness breeds aggression. That is why we have bullies ! The Christian belief in turning the other cheek is viewed as a weakness to some. We Christians believe it is a strength. It is a strength, but a strength that will preserve our religion not our country. In the book of Ephesians chapter six verse twelve it says, " for we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. " I believe my God will protect me. Will that same God protect the non-believer ? Can we count on God to save us all ?
We are taught that the non believers and those that live a morally corrupt life are doomed, for all eternity, to hell. Therefore the answer has to be no. God has given us all free will to act as we will. If I knowingly and willfully subject you to danger in the name of that God am I not just as bad ? Is it not a moral obligation on my part to shield you from the forces of evil ? Should I just, turn a blind eye and do nothing ? The parable of the good Samaritan is often quoted and the lesson it teaches. Love will overcome prejudice. That is truth. Can I allow others to be killed because of that belief ? I may choose because of my faith to endanger myself but that faith gives me no license to endanger yours.
How many wolves enter the hen house before the slaughter ends ? It is either when all are dead or the appetite of the wolf is satiated. I am commanded to love my neighbors as myself. Not all those neighbors are Christians. Some are Muslims and some have no faith whatsoever. My religion does not say to kill them if they refuse to believe in my form of Christianity. I strive to live in peace. I do not believe it is a sin to protect yourself. I also believe it is a obligation. on my part, to protect others from evil as best as I can. The preferred method is through the teachings of the gospel. If a " radicalized " Muslim where to attack a group of people, and they have on several occasions in recent memory, and I defend others lives, either by killing or being killed am I not hailed as a hero ? A hero sinner ? Which is more heroic ? To die because I failed to act or die because of my actions ? Do I get to decide that for you ? I think not. That is also a matter of faith on my part. But I am talking about matters of government and government policy. The obligation of government is to protect its' citizenry. We the people have the obligation to make that decision. I am left with the question, does the practice of my faith justify endangering you ?
No comments:
Post a Comment