How should we respond to terrorism?

Be vigilant, and be unafraid.

That’s what Bono of U2 says to the people who are now scared to go to concerts because of what happened in Paris. We can pray for protection from our enemies, but there are a few practical things that we can do.

(1) Own a gun. It is the most practical weapon to fight off a terrorist. If you have a gun, you are the first line of defense in a hostile situation. You now have the ability to do something about terrorism, and you have the potential to save more lives now than ever.

(2) Become an activist. Join the NRA. Support our military overseas. Support our police officers (which everyone is loving to hate on right now). The military and the police are our greatest protections against terrorism.

(3) Learn your state. Learn what the gun laws are in your state. Learn what the beliefs of your state’s leaders are. If they are weak on combating terrorism, start a lobby group to make sure proper safety measures are put in place. If they still won’t change, advocate that they be voted out.

(4) Lastly, don’t change your habits. If terrorist attacks cause you to change your lifestyle, then they’ve already won. Don’t give them that. If it’s a matter of safety, then fine. But don’t be afraid to go about doing normal activities.

These may seem like small potatoes, but remember, one voice can start a fire that will spread. William Wilberforce stood all alone for a time while he was fighting slavery, but eventually, more people followed his cause. And now, slavery is nonexistent in the civilized world.

Hope this helps.

@martialartists:disqus summed up everything we can do perfectly. So, I hope my advice is helpful.
1.Trust in God
2.We should pray for the victims’ families and become brave like what Martial Artist said.
3. We can start learning how defend ourselves.
4.Have a weapon with you; so you can protect not only yourself but others as well.

I absolutely love what @martialartists:disqus said and I don’t believe that I can top it but I heard a tip on the radio yesterday that is pretty good. So I thought I would share some simple advice.

1) PRAY! Praying is always a wonderful thing to do anywhere that you are. No matter what time of day it might be. God is always there. Always remember that.

2) This is the tip from the radio. I think it was on Frank Beckmann. The tip was to ALWAYS know where the exits are in ANY building. Your church, the mall, the stadium. WHEREVER. You might never need to know where the exits are but it is good to come prepared. I found this tip very helpful and logical.

I hope these 2 tips will help you in some way, Rachel!

-Clare

Christians need to be firm in what we believe and ready to die for the gospel. We need to know the Word and memorize big chunks of the bible so we can think about and be changed by it. We need to be loving people, which means an attitude of doing what’s best for them even if they kill us for it. We need to obey God no matter the cost. All of this needs to be happening anyway, and terrorism can’t change it. So when the world is crazy, or when things are fine, we keep on the as same we would anyway and God is glorified. God will do what is best so let’s be ready to live or die like that. We’re on a mission that cannot fail, God knows what he’s doing.

this is exactly right! =)

Spoken like a true republican 😉

I actually wrote about this on facebook a few days ago, after seeing a lot of hateful things posted by people who claim to be Christians.

“Dear Christian Brothers and Sisters,

The world is a complicated, scary place right now. We are threatened on many sides. However, we are called to follow Christ’s example, which means to not lash out in fear or hate. Having a political opinion is one thing, but don’t claim you are representing God’s will or displaying Christ-like behavior if you are in open opposition to His teachings. If the only words out of someone’s mouth are words of hate, words that call for death, or words that spit on those that offer charity, then that person does not represent Christ and is actively disobeying Jesus’s own commandments.

How does Jesus expect us to behave in the midst of all this chaos? Read Luke 6.

He would expect us to pray for our enemies. “Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you.” Luke 6:28

He would not expect us to retaliate with violence. “And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloak forbid not to take thy coat also.” Luke 6:29

He would expect us to be charitable. “Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.” Luke 6:30

He would expect us to love. “But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.” Luke 6:35

Jesus lived these commandments in his own life. He sat down to dinner with prostitutes and tax collectors. He ministered to the Samaritans, who were the most hated people-group in his region at that time. He commanded Peter not to raise a sword to the men who had come to arrest him. He forgave those that killed him. He died for those that hated him.

It’s okay to have an opinion that is counter-cultural. It’s okay to want to protect the ones you love. It’s okay to want to advocate for intelligent politics. It’s not okay to hate. The Bible calls us to love, to forgive, and to share God’s forgiveness with the world. In fact, according to the Bible, if you do not love you do not know God.

“Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.” 1 John 4:7-8

Now is the perfect time for Christian’s to display the love of God. Please don’t squander the opportunity, or defile Christ’s name with hate and violence.

Thanks man. I try. 🙂

Thanks Clare!

@martialartists:disqus You’re welcome; your advice is something I can’t top off.

Thanks for the shout out Grace! And same here about the guns. I’m also too young to own one, but my family has them in the house and I am a proficient shooter. And I agree that we need to be willing to lay our lives on the line if necessary, even though we all hope that never comes to pass.

Definitely important what you said.

Yet, when people are killed, we can hate that. God hates injustice & so should we.

Our hearts should break for a hurting world, yet we must boldly love those placed in our lives.

We are the light of the world, and this dark world really needs some light.

Laura,
I love your response! It is so true, and sometimes very hard to implement and remember.

Well said. I read through the all the comments and am laughing about how NRA-supportive, Republican we all are. I’m totally all for 2nd Amendment rights too, it’s just funny in a nice way that there are so many of us with the same veiws on guns etc. here. 😀

Thanks, Clare! I had a really good quiet time this morning with this.

Thank you so much for bringing out that aspect, Stephanie! I live 5 minutes from a huge state university with lots of internationals, and I see Middle Eastern people just about every day. That is almost what makes fighting terrorism so difficult– it’s not the people, it’s the ideology. And that’s why it’s such a fine line to balance. <3

“Our call to war: to love the captive soul, but rage against the captor.” It is important to realize that even while Jesus hated the sin of the tax collectors and prostitutes and certainly did not join them in it, He had compassion on them because “they were like sheep without a shepherd.” So while there should be no confusion with any sort of ‘noble savage’ spin offs, we need to recognize that we are dealing with the terrible brokenness of a world without Christ. Like you said– we needn’t be best friends with them, but definitely pray with the compassion and love of Christ.

Thank you so much, Laura, for pointing this out. “For we ourselves were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, hated by others and hating one another. But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, He saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to His own mercy….”

Thanks for taking the time to write all this out, @Marie! 🙂 Worldviews are excellent (and a little fascinating in that they affect EVERYTHING else) things to study. It is so key to know the ins and outs of the ideology we are up against if we are to battle it with the ideology of Christ!

Well said!

Marie,

Nowhere in scripture does it encourage the study of evil. It is unnecessary knowledge in our fight for people’s souls. We are to have nothing to do with the evil deeds of darkness, but rather expose them. It is the knowledge of the Word that brings us wisdom. A Christian brother once told me that he didn’t think that it was necessary to taste the garbage to know it is garbage. The Bible tells us to taste of The Lord and see His goodness. It is The Lord and His Word that is our salvation. Time is much better spent and the rewards endless if we place our time and resources there.

The other axis is being totally ignorant of evil. That can be just as bad. But I believe that the knowledge of these religions is shown by what we see them do.

I know of many young people whose hearts changed as they started studying other religious viewpoints. Remember, the devil comes to steal, kill and destroy. Make no provision for the flesh in any activity, whether it be what you read, who you hang with, what you study. The brain is the part of our flesh. Please feed it righteousness and starve it of unrighteousness.

My viewpoint may not agree with other Christians point of view, but I see things as righteous vs evil. It has been that way since the Garden. If one can justify with God’s Word their choices, they should be on a firm foundation.

I will pray for you. Thanks for the question.

In Him,
Jean

Miss Jean (I know you’re older than me, so calling you by your first name alone sounds far too familiar :), I appreciate what you’ve said. There is some truth to it in that our world today is far too quick to dismiss any complaint against Islam’s radical element and shout “Islamophobia” at the slightest hint of caution against Islam.

A friend and I had the pleasure of sharing the gospel with a young Muslim wife in Malawi, Africa, during a missions trip there. Contrary to the Koran, she was not wearing hajib, she had no problem talking to us two Christian young men, and her husband stood right by listening as she questioned us about Jesus and what faith in Him meant.

My point is this: not all Muslims are radicals; in fact, in this particular case, the woman hardly even knew what “muslim” meant. She was simply calling herself by the religion she knew most about. She wasn’t a radical; there was no hatred for the gospel or for us as Christians. She was a simple village woman who had never heard the gospel before.

It would be a debate whether or not proper, Islamic interpretation comes to violence as a proper means to an end (there are plenty of Islamic scholars who would argue both ways), but it’s a debate for men much more learned about the Koran and Arabic than I.

Yes, Muslims are unbelievers. They believe in Jesus as a mere prophet, not as God or Redeemer, they believe in salvation by works granted by a god of fear and war, a false god. Yet they are no more lost than any other lost person. From what I have read from missionaries that have served in Muslim countries (I plan to spend at least a portion of my life in African missions, so relating to Muslims is an important topic to me), relationship and friendship is one of the best ways of making the first step to presenting the gospel to a Muslim. They accept the “false doctrine” Christians teach in a much more friendly, open way from a friend rather than from a stranger.

I think you are right in much of what you said, Miss Jean. I just wanted to offer a slightly different point of view for anyone reading this thread. You’re right; they need our prayers. They also need our love and our witness.

A Christian friend showed us a DVD recently. I don’t have its name at the time of writing but someone might be able to source it off the internet or You tube by searching for videos of interviews of Muslims converted to Christianity or similar. Basically, an American Christian pastor invited three ex-Muslim extremists who had become Christians to give their testimonies. The DVD gave me insight into the Muslim mindset and the motivation for their acts of terrorism.

One of the ex-Muslims described how he had slaughtered a Jew when he was fourteen, and his family had treated him like a hero on his return – because now he could pray 70 other members of his family “into heaven”. According to this ex-Muslim, this is one reason Muslims are extremists.

After returning from an extremist mission, an extremist’s family throws a celebration party over the slaughter of the innocent “unbelievers”.

Another ex-Muslim described how a father beheaded his own teenage daughter in front of all of their neighbours after she allegedly flirted with a teenage friend.

One of the ex-Muslims on the DVD was beaten badly by a mob of Muslims for admitting that he was reading the Bible and his mother approved of the bashing.

According to these ex-Muslims it is really hard for a Muslim to accept that salvation is a free gift through Jesus . They are taught from an early age that salvation must be earned through extreme acts or the prayers of an extremist.

Perhaps the question is not how should we respond to terrorism? But rather, how do we respond to spiritually motivated acts of terrorism by non-Christians?

Jesus instructed us to love our enemies and pray for our persecutors. But he also made a whip and used it against the money-changers who had infiltrated the temple and were preventing true worship and healing.

Okay, so after reading some of the comments and debates in them, I want to point out that I agree not all Muslims are terrorists/radicals. I live in a country where there are many Muslims; and while I disagree with their beliefs, I still love the people…just because they are a muslim does NOT make them a terrorist…I’m simply directing my comment at the question asked which was about at terrorists. I’m not talking about the non-terrorist Muslims or anything about them…I’m simply talking about terrorists here.

I know! It’s awesome! Thanks.

Hello Ms. Jean,
I’m just wondering, how are we supposed to share the Gospel and the love of Christ with people who are practicing false religions unless we interact and maybe even become friends with them?? I’m not saying we shouldn’t be cautious…I’m just saying it’s often necessary when spreading God’s Word to have a relationship with the people we’re sharing with…

Secondly, I agree Muslims have messed up beliefs, however, I think it is completely healthy to separate the two Muslim categories. They are both wrong in what they believe, but they are in fact different.
It’s similar in design to Christian denominations: Church of Christ, Methodist, Pentecostals, and Baptist are all Christians, but all have slightly differing interpretations of the Bible. The basic underlying beliefs remain the same, but some things we believe differently from one another…
Muslims are Muslims, but their beliefs are different from one another and we can’t look at the whole Islamic religion as one full of haters and people out to get us…Some of them are yes; but others maybe just think they are following “God” and are confused and lost and (like Kate said below me) maybe don’t even know what they believe; they’re just calling themselves a Muslim (just like some Christians)!

So no, we can’t COMPLETELY separate them, but we can’t completely unify them either. They are different from one another entirely. That’s like trying to 100% unify a the Church of Christ denomination with a Pentecostal…(if you’re familiar with the beliefs of those two denominations, you’ll understand my comparison). Both are Christians, but both understand the Scriptures a little differently.

I don’t have many opinions on guns….. but I do know that as an eighth grader I certainly can’t own one, and that my parents don’t ever want one in our house because I have two siblings with disabilities that we would NOT want to have access to a gun.

Maybe learn self-defense instead since you can’t own a gun.

karate for everyone! 😉

Agreed!!

Thank you so much for sharing this personal side of things, @Kate I. I really, really appreciate how you recognize Muslims as individual people– not just one faceless lump. I live 5 minutes from a huge state university with lots of internationals, so I see Muslims all the time. They are definitely people with hearts and souls and feelings just as much as me. It is so important to realize that we are not fighting against a people, but a terrorist ideology.

Wow, this is SUCH a controversial topic. I know a guy online who drives me nuts because any time that I talk with him, he sends “emoji person wearing a turban” + “Eiffel tower emoji” or “random building emoji” = “bomb emoji”. This drives me crazy, because I do not agree with his opinion that all muslims want to kill and need to be punished. I agree completely with Stehanie on how we should be praying for the muslims just the same as we would for any other non-believers. And most importantly, I believe that not all muslims are violent. (This is the debate that I have had more than once with the guy I mentioned above.)

Haha ;P

Then you have made the wise choice! My opinion comes from what I have heard/read/experienced, and I think it is the wise choice to keep guns from the access of people with disabilities. And I didn’t exactly mean that we (as teenagers) should own guns, but we should encourage out parents to for protection, if they don’t already have them. In your family’s case, you still want to be protected. Maybe take a self-defense course as a family. Maybe install a home alarm system. There are other measures you can take besides owning a gun. Owning guns, in my opinion, are just one of the best ways to protect yourself, your family, and your rights. But I understand that others will not share my view. I’m just trying to be helpful.

But thank you for expressing your view as well. 🙂 I always try to be open to these types of discussions.

Thanks! =)

No offense taken. I didn’t tell my age in order to one up anybody on the experience level. The one thing I love about this blog is the intelligence, wisdom and respect shown to others by the younger generation and I so appreciate it. Thanks for your respect. God bless!

Thank you for your reply Ms. Jean! I’m really taking what you say to heart and pondering it because you are older and therefore far wiser than I am.

I’m actually a MK living in Zambia…Granted, I’m very young but my parents have made it their #1 focus to diligently train my brothers and I in God’s Word to be prepared to share the gospel with any and everyone around us. As a young teenage *girl* I have to be extra careful about my surroundings, but we believe the Gospel is for everyone.

I agree with you, we shouldn’t force anything on anyone…and there are some people who are un-receptive to the Gospel; but we never know until we try! There are some people we have tried to share the gospel with and they shut us down time and time again, so we do the only thing we can do for them: pray and try to shine the light of Christ when we are around them.

One person I know (in the U.S.) was a graffiti artist and almost murdered someone and you WOULD guess it to look at him…but he has turned his life around ENTIRELY because someone thought to share the GOspel with him! Ultimately, it was God who changed his heart…not the person of course; but GOd’s tool was that person.

I’m not quick to judge someone by their appearance or even what they do anymore because God can change ANYONE!!! I’m not to judge who the “swine” are. That’s God’s place…My job is to share the Gospel with those around me and ask God for guidance when I’m sharing His truths and in everything else I do.

Here in Zambia, after a meeting with some high-schoolers at the ministry we work with, a young man came up to me and was asking me all sorts of questions about God, the Bible, prayer, etc… He asked some TOUGH questions (why does God allow bad things to happen? What is the holy spirit’s role in our life? How do I become a christian?..etc…you can read the story on my blog here: https://meganhensley98.wordpress.com/a-new-brother-in-christ/ if you’re interested). By God’s grace and the diligent training of my parents, I was prepared to answer the questions…though God gave me the words, because sometimes I didn’t know quite how to say something…But God did…I answered all of his questions to the best of my ability trying to do it in a mix of two languages… Afterwards, he wanted to pray with me, and he surrendered his life to Christ that day. I know, as you said, the name “christian” has often been tainted! But month after month I see this young man and every time I see him he brings me a new set of questions he has after reading different parts of the Bible. He also tells me how GOd has been working in his life an how he has been struggling and what he has been learning!

I say all this to say I know sometimes people aren’t as “mature” in their faith…And I know I’m FAR FAR FAR from having all the answers, but I also agree with the passage in Timothy telling us to let no one look down on us because we are young…And even a new believer can share what God has done in their life!! Maybe they won’t have the answers to those deep questions (there was one he asked i didn’t have the answer to either) but they can at least share what they know!!!

My parents have encouraged me in discipling this young man..they are always around when I’m talking to him (I’m never alone with a boy), but they want to encourage me in sharing my faith with others!!

Besides, if God wants to use me, HE’S going to use me no matter my
state…Because ultimately, when I share the Gospel, it’s not even
me..it’s God and the HOly Spirit in me. Without God, I am nothing…so I
can’t take credit for anything good!! It’s all the Lord and it shows His power even more when He uses someone like me who has more faults than strengths and stumbles over her too-many-wrods…=P I cant’ do anything good apart from Christ!

I DO agree with you our silent witness can often be our biggest! I do tend to open my mouth a bit more than I should…anyone who knows me knows that…it’s something I’m working on for sure!!! So I know I’d personally probably be better off using less words in my day-to-day life…But if I am going to speak…and speak a lot, I feel like there is no better subject to discuss than Christ, what he’s done and is doing in my life, and what He can do in the lives of others. I do STRONGLY agree though that a silent witness is indeed a witness; and a strong one at that!

Thank you again for taking the time to reply to me! I greatly appreciate it!

Thanks my friend! =)

I don’t feel I have much to add; Megan, Kate, Taylor, Faith, and everyone else already did a good job. But I have a verse I would like to share:

“I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolateror slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.” 1 Corinthians 5:9-11

(An idolateror is anyone who puts something or someone above God; I feel this should include any religions that are not Christianity.) So, if I understand this verse correctly, it is the people who claim to be Christians, but live in unrepented sin that we should avoid, and the people who do not claim to be Christians but need salvation (which is everyone who is not a true Christian) that we must reach out to.

One thing we should NOT do in response to terrorism is to quote “love your enemies” (Matt. 5:44). It is a misuse of that verse to view it as the Christian response to terrorists. If you want to know the true meaning of that verse within its context, see my paper at the following link: http://www.academia.edu/15326755/The_Meaning_and_Misuse_of_Love_Your_Enemies_in_Matt._5_44

With all due respect, I disagree. Even if we were to disagree on that particular verse, there are still plenty of verses throughout Scripture that command us to love the world and to do good to them that spitefully use you. We don’t need Matt. 5:44 in order to prove that we should love even terrorists. As emulators of Christ who voices His love for all creation, we are to follow in His ways.

Ugh! That’s is just immature [what that guy is doing]. Grace and truth, people! I’m sorry this has stirred up so much controversy here. 🙁

Dear Ms. Jean (I just realized that you´re older than me),

I agree completely with what you say about the confrontation of followers of Islam. If we are to be called Christians, it is imperative that we must share the truth which is message of Christ. It is true that I have had little experience with evangelizing Muslims, however, if we are to share the truth with anyone it is necessary to understand what they believe. If I were to share the gospel with someone who only spoke Spanish, I should at least know a few words in Spanish. In the same way, the apostle Paul himself, in one of my favorite sermons in the Bible, took an idol to “the unknown God” and used that to speak about the true God and his Son´s sacrifice in some of the world´s finest rhetoric.

In my previous comment I did not mean to imply that you were not aware of your own sinfulness. I simply meant that we all are in desperate need of a savior, and we should share as ones who were also in darkness and had others share with us because they saw how flawed our human ideas were and yet, created common basis with us and shared light in a bold, non-passive, voice of truth. Why? Because He loved us first and called us to love others in the same way. I´m sorry that I did not express myself clearly.

Sincerely trying to seek Truth and often stumbling, Laura.

I am with Taylor and Martial Artist below. I’d just like to add that I think your hate for radical Muslims comes from your fear of them. I can say with confidence that we have nothing to fear. Christ has swallowed up death. Death has no sting. If terrorists come to kill you, do you not have faith in the resurrection and power of Christ’s death? I’d rather die and knowing that I spoke to my murderer and telling them of Christ, than live and cursing my enemies and hating them. We are ambassadors of Christ that voice His name in humility and love.

My pleasure, glad it was beneficial for you! =)

We should trust God, but we should also fight it,
Some of my friends were joking around that if they showed up on isis territory with at t shirt that says Jesus saves all of the Muslims would stop and love Jesus, but that probably will not happen
We should pray for these extremists and their salvation.
But in all of this , we have to remember, in their heads this is what God wants, it is obeying God to them. Their holy book told them to do it. All the killing. I’m not saying it’s right, but we need to understand their mindset.
Most of us will probably not meet Isis face to face, but we still need to remember to share the gospel on our social media ect because we never know how God is going to change their lives, we need to continually be the salt and light so they can see the real followers of the real God.

My big thing is, do we fight? Paul never fought. He ran, but never fought. Then again, they’re not going after just Christians, they are killing people for no reason- all religions aside. I’m stumped.

Amanda and others: In my paper (see link in my original comment), I answer objections brought up so far (like who is the enemy, no exceptions in Jesus saying, and saying means no self-defense) all in the context of the Sermon on the Mount. I encourage you to completely read my paper (instead of guessing what I believe) because it is too much detail to enter in these comments. Then send me feedback via e-mail (my e-mail address is on the cover page) and let me know where you think my exegesis or logic is incorrect.

pray?

Amanda: If you are saying that we take all of Jesus’ sayings from the Sermon on the Mount at face value and in isolation to whatever else he said and not allow any hyperbole or qualification, then do you really believe Jesus wanted people to gouge out their eyes (Matt. 5:29) or cut off their hand (Matt. 5:30) if they sin and that he wanted them to hate their family (Luke 14:26)? If you reply “no, that is not what Jesus meant”, then guess what: You are applying some wisdom and qualifications to what Jesus said and that is what I am saying that you should do to the “love your enemies” saying.

Amanda: When you say “of course He meant those things” you are saying that Jesus wanted people to literally gouge out their eyes and cut off their hand to prevent them from sinning anymore. That is an interesting, but disturbing, view of Jesus because that makes him pretty barbaric and not worth following, in my opinion. I have never heard of any scholar, even liberal or atheist, taking that view of Jesus.

It is interesting that you used my example of “hating”
family (Luke 14:26) to substantiate your point of interpreting Jesus literally instead of using my other examples of the gouging out of eyes (Matt. 5:29) and cutting off of the hand (Matt. 5:30) because I think Matt. 5:29-30 are clearer examples of why we shouldn’t take
those sayings literally. However, even your explanation of Luke 14:26 is not a literal interpretation. You explain
that “hate” means that Jesus “wants us to put Him so far above them [family] that we would be willing to leave them for His sake.” I happen to agree with that interpretation of
Luke 14:26 (which I included in my paper), but notice that it is not a literal interpretation of “hate”. “Hate” means “hate”. So that interpretation you gave does not support your claim that we should take all of Jesus’ sayings literally.

When you state “Why else would He have said them?” it is evident that you are missing a piece of the puzzle in interpreting the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus spoke in hyperbole because it was a common rabbinic tradition to do so. I hinted at this in my paper when I quoted Metzger, a NT scholar: “Along with his contemporaries Jesus delighted in sharp contrasts and extreme tatements—what the rhetorician calls hyperbole and exaggeration.” By
“contemporaries”, Metzger was referring to the rabbinic tradition. You should Google this topic to get more
information, but briefly, rabbis often spoke in extremes to make a point. The point Jesus was making in Matt. 5:29-30
is that one should avoid sin in every possible way and remove items in your life that could cause you to sin. So
Jesus sounded like many other rabbis who said extreme things to reinforce the importance of their teaching. People took these teachings seriously, but knew they were overstatements for effect. That is why you don’t have examples of early Christians who had gouged out their eyes or cut off their hands. They understood that Jesus did not mean this literally.

Other people: If you are reading this comment/reply trail
and can’t find the link to my paper I reference, here is the link:
http://www.academia.edu/15326755/The_Meaning_and_Misuse_of_Love_Your_Enemies_in_Matt._5_44

Amanda: You are correct, Jesus was not a normal rabbi, but he used some rabbinic techniques. Remember that the incarnation means that Jesus was fully God AND fully man. Yes, I believe he had the authority to say what he wanted. However, I have never met anyone like you who believed that Jesus wanted people to literally cut off their hand or gouge out their eyes to prevent them from sinning. Since we are all sinners, explain to me why we don’t have an historical trail of early Christians who gouged out their eyes or cut off their hands? We don’t because early Christians, closest to Jesus, knew that he did not mean that literally. Surely, if your interpretation is correct, then we should have some Christians who did that. Don’t confuse the issue by assuming that everything that Jesus said was hyperbole. That is not what I am saying. You seem to be opposed to New Testament (NT) scholarship on this issue. I just hope that you will not mutilate yourself in this manner thinking that you are following Jesus’ command because you are misinterpreting Jesus. As I stated in my previous response, I do not know of one scholar who takes your view on this. Also, you totally ignored and did not respond to my criticism that you did not interpret Luke 14:26 literally. I don’t think it is worthwhile to continue this conversation via the web since we are getting nowhere. You are just restating your position and ignoring anything I am saying to defend my position, which, BTW, is the consensus among scholars. However, if you want to continue this, I will give you the option of communicating with me via e-mail. My e-mail address is on the cover page of my paper. If you decide not to, then Merry Christmas and good luck in your view of a “literal” interpretation of the NT.

Darn, a debate, and I missed it. 😉 Just saying, most evangelical pastors/teachers agree that Jesus didn’t want us to literally mutilate ourselves. My pastor says that self-mutilation is not the answer to sin problems. Other than that I’ve totally agreed with what you’ve said about loving your enemies lol =)

Hmm? I didn’t see him put you down…did I miss something? #JoshCantKeepHisBigMouthShutSorry =P

Amen:) You’re so on point with that comment! We undermine the work of God in human hearts when we say that there is no redemption for these terrorists.

Amanda: At your request, I’ll try the replies at this web site a little longer to see if they are productive. If others read them, then you are right, they are better than just e-mails between us. On the other hand, my comments run extremely long and I don’t know if there is a limit on the number of words.

I can see how you could take what I last replied as a “put down”. I guess it was a put down, in a sense, because I just don’t know how to reach common ground with someone who says that what Jesus said and meant in Matt. 5:29-30 is that we should literally gouge out our eyes and cut off our hands to prevent us from sinning. That is barbaric and is on the level of what ISIS would do to people they capture. I think your comment “Obviously your ideas are not the consensus among all scholars!” was a reference to my repeated comment that no scholar (even liberal or atheist) believed that Jesus thought people should literally do these mutilations. I still believe that.

Based on your last response, I think we are using words differently. When I use “literal”, I mean what is commonly meant by that word, i.e. “taking words in their usual or most basic sense without metaphor or allegory.” So when I refer to a literal interpretation of Matt. 5:29-30, I mean that Jesus said and meant that we should literally gouge out our eyes and chop off our hands to prevent sinning. You kept replying that Jesus “said what He meant and meant what He said”.
So I thought you believed in this literal interpretation as I have defined it, and I couldn’t understand why you believed that. You now say “Now I understand a little better what Jesus meant, and He probably didn’t want us to actually mutilate our bodies.” I’m happy that we are finally in agreement on this point.

However, I think we still disagree about the use of the words “literal” in reference to Matt. 5:29-30. You state in your last
response: “Jesus meant what He said and said what He meant. The first article does a great job explaining this.”
I looked at that article (http://escapetoreality.org/2011/04/07/chop-off-your-hand/) In that article, Paul Ellis expresses his belief that Jesus did not use hyperbole. He states: “Jesus never exaggerated. Preachers sometimes exaggerate to make a point but Jesus always meant what He said and said what He meant. He is Truth personified.” It seems like you follow Ellis and think that exaggeration/hyperbole is lying and beneath what Jesus would do. I don’t take that viewpoint. I follow the many scholars who believe that Jesus, esp. in the Sermon on the Mount, used effectively the rabbinic technique of hyperbole. He wasn’t lying by using that technique because people knew the rabbis did not mean it literally. However, if you object to the word “hyperbole”, then use the phrase “figurative language” to describe the language in Matt. 5:29-30. Hyperbole is a type of figurative language. The point is that Jesus did not intend for the sayings of gouging out eyes and chopping off hands to be taken literally. In this article, Ellis seems to be saying that Jesus wants his Mat. 5:29-30 saying to be taken literally (because Jesus is teaching the high demands of the law) and also to be taken figuratively
(because he is also teaching the grace of salvation through Jesus’ sacrificial work). I think the law vs. grace tension
is in the Sermon on the Mount, but I personally wouldn’t try to explain it by trying to have it both ways, i.e. literal and non-literal meanings of Jesus’ sayings, because that is confusing and contradictory. “Literal” is mutually exclusive of “figurative” by definition. Figurative means “departing from a literal use of words”. So one cannot say that you can interpret a verse in the Bible (or any statement for that matter) literally and figuratively at the same time.

The authors of your second link (http://www.preachtheword.com/sermon/sotm07.shtml) and your third link (http://brandonsdesk.com/2015/02/28/youve-got-questions-tearing-out-our-eyes-and-cutting-off-our-hands-matt-529-30/) argue for a non-literal, figurative interpretation of Matt. 5:29-30. I agree with that.

Regarding “hating” of family, you listed some links and said “I would say that this is still a literal interpretation of Jesus’ words. He was serious. We are to love Him infinitely more than anyone or anything else.” But “literal” does not mean
“serious”. As defined earlier, it means “taking words in their usual or most basic sense without metaphor or allegory.” Here is the verse in question: “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person
cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26). The word in
question is “hate”. So a literal interpretation of that verse is that we are to really and actually hate these people listed, including ourselves. I agree with your interpretation that “we are to love Jesus infinitely more than anyone or anything else.” but that is not a literal interpretation of that verse. The three links you list make that point. Therefore, my point is that one must interpret that verse as hyperbole, or “figuratively” if you prefer that term, just like Matt. 5:29-30.

You state “We have strayed from the point a bit. We
were talking about whether ‘love your enemies’ applies to terrorists, but you brought up the hatred of family and self-mutilation.” You actually started this string of replies
with your comment beginning with “Another thing I wanted to point out was that the people you quoted [in my paper] appeared to think Jesus tends to exaggerate when He taught or gave commands…..”

You state: “Jesus did not exaggerate. He wants us to
love our enemies, literally. And He doesn’t just mean annoying people–He means enemies.” You misread my
paper. The point I made about hyperbole was in reference to the inconsistency in the method that pacifists use for
Sermon on the Mount ethics. I said the claim made by many pacifists that because Jesus did not state any qualifications or exceptions in his command to “love your enemies,” then there are no qualifications or exceptions fails to understand Jesus’ method of teaching. I then cited Matt. 5:29-30 as an example of how a pacifist would not take that literally. The following are the main points I made about “love your enemies” in Matt. 5:44: (1) primary meaning applied to the Roman occupation of Palestine in 1st century. (2) any application of that verse for today should use some qualifications and wisdom, e.g. it doesn’t mean to not kill someone (terrorist or anyone else) trying to kill you or other innocent people if you have a chance to kill them. In other
words, I disagree with the pacifists who say that even self-defense is prohibited by this verse. (3) there is an application of this verse for today for enemies who are not trying to kill us.

For anyone else reading my reply: Do not try to judge my paper based on the content of these replies. Please read it for yourself posted here: http://www.academia.edu/15326755/The_Meaning_and_Misuse_of_Love_Your_Enemies_in_Matt._5_44

Amanda: I’ll first comment on the following two comments
of yours:
1. “You don’t need to keep arguing about the cutting off body parts, because I just told you I agree with you on that.”
2. “Your paragraphs about literal vs. figurative were a bit dizzying for me; I didn’t quite follow all that, but let’s talk about the truth rather than getting hung up on the name we use for our method of interpreting it. Apparently I don’t
take everything completely literally.”
My response:
Correct terminology matters quite a bit when discussing the Bible. If you pick up any book on biblical hermeneutics
(interpretation), you will see a discussion of literal vs. figurative meaning. This is not just a personal matter of
“getting hung up on the name” and we can call it what we want because if you enter discussions about the Bible then you must use the correct terminology or you will end up not understanding the other person. When we started the replies back and forth, I thought you were familiar with this terminology. That is why it took many replies back and
forth for me to realize that you were not using “literal
interpretation” correctly. I recommend checking a book out of the library on biblical hermeneutics and reading it to see what I mean.

Regarding your comment: ” I must not be a pacifist, because I certainly disagree with the claim that we shouldn’t defend ourselves against terrorists. You can’t lump me together with people who say that. As I said earlier in our discussion, there is a difference between loving someone and sitting and letting them kill you!”

My response:
I did not think I was lumping you with pacifists. I was just summarizing the main points in my paper relating to the “love your enemies” saying.

Regarding your comment: ” Sure, Jesus may have used figures of speech from time to time, but He didn’t exaggerate–when I say exaggerate or hyperbole, I’m talking about making something sound bigger than it actually is, like telling us we should love our neighbors and enemies but setting it up more as an ideal than a real command.” I respond as
follows:
1. Hyperbole means “exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.” I think Jesus did use hyperbole in Matt. 5:29-30 & Luke 14:26 per my previous posts. I said there that you can use the word “figurative” if you want. But in any case, those verses should not be taken literally.
2. I mentioned in my previous post that I did not apply hyperbole to the “love your enemies” saying (Matt. 5:44) in my paper.
3. I did say that the “love your enemies” saying in the context of Matt. 5:43-48 was presented as an ideal ethic or goal in its context. I think my exegesis of that context in my paper substantiates my claim.

Regarding your comments: “Perhaps I did misread part of your paper, but I see you listed enemies as: People with whom you work who treat you bad or are difficult to work with; Your boss who makes your life miserable; Your neighbor who disrupts your life – e.g. her dog barks constantly And I don’t think that was everyone who Jesus was talking about. If you think He meant Romans occupying Palestine, weren’t they enemies who wanted to kill and
conquer?” I have this to say:
1. Those are just examples under the category of personal enemies who are not trying to kill you. Yes, there are many
more examples.
2. The primary application of “love your enemies” was to the Roman occupation. As the detail in the link to Wink (in Works cited) shows, it was a way for the Jews to react nonviolently to the Romans. Jesus did not want to argue for armed resistance because the Jews would have been slaughtered. Therefore, the examples of how they turned the other cheek, walked the extra mile, and gave the undergarment were ways to show their human dignity to the Romans. We in the US are not under an oppressive government like Rome. The terrorists that attack us are not part of our government. Therefore, it is a totally different situation today.

Regarding your comment ” If you are speaking the truth, speak the truth in love. That’s a command from the Bible too. You don’t need to put anyone down even if they do think they’re supposed to cut off their hands or gouge their
eyes out.” I respond as follows:

1. I partially disagree. Someone who goes to that extreme of saying that Jesus wants us to practice body mutilation should be corrected without sugar-coating it. I agree with you on general doctrinal issues not of that magnitude.
2. Read all of the biblical passages in my paper in which Jesus and Paul condemned or cursed the enemy in the harshest language.

I never said anything against condemning what our enemies do. Of course we should do that. I’m saying we should love them because Jesus told us to.

Yes, we should correct people who think those things, but there is a difference between sugar coating it and saying it lovingly. You are doing neither, in my opinion. We shouldn’t sugar coat things, but we do not need to put people down. I don’t understand why you disagree, but oh well. I forgive you for not being the nicest all the time because I have a hard time controlling myself too. It is hard to be gentle when you are convinced someone is in the wrong! I’m trying to show God’s love to you too, though I don’t consider you an enemy but a brother.

Our situation is different, but you avoided my question of whether the Romans wanted to kill and conquer the Jews. If so, then if He meant they should love the Romans, He meant we should love people who try to kill us.

We aren’t under an oppressive government, but we could be soon. Why does it matter if it comes from the government or somewhere else?

I am leaving for Uganda, East Africa on a mission trip in two days, so we should wrap this up. Clearly you are convinced that I am wrong and I am convinced that you have a few things wrong. We will find out on the other side. Meanwhile, I love the members of ISIS, and you hate them.

Amanda:

Regarding your comment: “I love the members of ISIS, and you hate them.”

My reply: What actions of “love” do you/would you show to ISIS? If you say that you would pray for them that they will stop the killing of innocent people, then I do that now. Since you say that you are not a pacifist, then I think you would kill an ISIS member (if you could) to defend yourself and other innocent people if an ISIS member started shooting people with an assault weapon. (In the pacifist’s mind, doing that would NOT be showing love for them.) So I would be interested in a list of ways you show love for ISIS. You may be surprised that I would agree with some, like prayer.

Regarding your comment: “Yes, we should correct people who think those things, but there is a difference between
sugar coating it and saying it lovingly. You are doing neither, in my opinion. We shouldn’t sugar coat things, but we do not need to put people down. I don’t understand why you disagree, but oh well. I forgive you for not being the
nicest all the time because I have a hard time controlling myself too. It is hard to be gentle when you are convinced someone is in the wrong! I’m trying to show God’s love to you too, though I don’t consider you an enemy but a brother.”

My reply: When you first starting commenting that you take what Jesus said in Matt. 5:29-30 (gouge out eye, cut off hand) “literally”, I did think that was a barbaric view of Jesus and even on the level of something that ISIS would do to
the people they capture. I even stated that in a response. So my rhetoric was harsh because I thought that was a view of Christ which would definitely turn people away from Christianity, and I wanted to quickly correct that view. I guess I could have been nicer in my wording. So I apologize for that. But in my view, this was not one of the many Christian
doctrines that people can discuss lovingly but not divide over because it affects the kind of ethics Jesus taught and what kind of person He was. As I commented in one of my replies, if Jesus meant that stuff literally, then I don’t think He is worth following because I know I won’t gouge out my eye or cut off my hand and wouldn’t encourage others to do so. My rhetoric escalated when you said that you didn’t believe in that bodily mutilation either but you still took Jesus’ words literally. I then did not know what you were saying. Finally, after many replies back and forth, I realized that you were not using the words “literal interpretation” correctly. So I think I now understand your position and hope you now understand that Matt. 5:29-30 should not be taken literally but figuratively. I personally still prefer the term “hyperbole” to describe this type of figurative language. By the way, find any book on biblical hermeneutics and look at the Bible verses that the author cites for examples of hyperbole. I will bet one will be Matt. 5:29-30. Also, I don’t consider you to be an enemy
either.

Regarding your comment: “Our situation is different, but you avoided my question of whether the Romans wanted to kill and conquer the Jews. If so, then if He meant they should love the Romans, He meant we should love people who try to kill us.”

My reply: The examples Jesus gave (turn other cheek, go extra mile, give garment) were examples of how the Jews could prevent the Romans from trying to kill them while they lived under Roman occupation. If they did something different in these examples (like striking back when they were slapped or refusing to go extra mile), then the Romans would have probably killed them. So to your point, there situation was showing acts of love to people who could kill them. Remember that the Jews linked the loving or helping enemies with action, per Ex. 23:4-5 & Prov. 25:21-22 that I mention in my paper. But notice that Jesus did not specifically address self-defense in the Sermon on the Mount. For example, what if a Roman still tried to kill a Jew even though the Jew took steps to prevent it? Would Jesus want the Jew to stand by and let himself and his family to be killed without attempting to stop it? One can only guess. Of course, the pacifist would say “yes because this is showing love.” But I would think that Jesus would want the Jew to apply some wisdom in that situation as I explained in my paper.

Regarding your comment: “We aren’t under an oppressive government, but we could be soon. Why does it matter if it comes from the government or somewhere else?”

My reply: It mattered to the Jews because if they mounted an armed resistance to the Romans, then they would have been
slaughtered. There were Jewish groups at that time who wanted Jesus to lead a revolt against Rome, but instead, Jesus described in the Sermon on the Mount (SM), how the Jews can live under Roman occupation and still love their enemy. As I stated in my paper, one has to make a case for applying the SM ethics today. There may be some SM principles to use under repressive governments today (like North Korea), but I wouldn’t want to state that dogmatically.

As I said at the beginning of our discussion, I think our main difference is our definition of “love.” You seem to think that when we say we should love terrorists we mean we are pacifists and don’t think we should fight back. When I say we need to love them, I mean we need to recognize them as fellow human beings, created in the image of God, who need Jesus just as desperately as we do. I mean we need to see them as lost souls who need to be reached, and we should pray for their salvation. Perhaps we didn’t disagree after all.

Yes, I can see that’s who you were talking to. I would still disagree with your original statement that saying “love your enemies” with regard to terrorists is a misuse of the verse. We do need to love them, as you just agreed.

I see. You probably should have explained that in your original comment. You still could edit it. You saw how it came across to me–it can seriously be misread the way you worded it.

Well, I’m flying out tomorrow, so let’s finish up here.

Many people would not click on your link, much less thoroughly read that long paper.

I disagree that “it is a misuse of that verse to view it as the Christian response to terrorists.” That statement assumes that everyone who says we should love them is saying we shouldn’t fight them back.

…thanks?