Christian Politics: An Ethical Standard of Human Life (pro-life)
“Christian politics” as I stare at that phrase up on my computer screen while trying to catch glimpses of the debates on TV I get the feeling that the idea is an oxymoron. Nevertheless I have decided to do a blog on the subject.
Before I get started, I do want to preface this by saying these are opinions. I will do my best not to lean toward either party or any particular candidate. I do have candidates that I like more than others, but my goal is not to persuade anyone toward anyone. My goal is to discuss values that I believe biblically all Christians should hold. Please read my views carefully and test them for your selves; and by the way, argue against them or for them if you feel the need.
Well, if I’m doing this thing and we all know how good I am at making people mad, I might as well just take on the entire moral majority at once. Christians should believe in an ethical standard of human life. This idea is neither new nor controversial. The right to “life” is even outlined in our Declaration of Independence. Even so, some how, some where, the idea of morality in politics got narrowed down to abortion and gay marriage. I suppose I’ll begin with the easy stuff.
Christians should be Pro-life. This holds true absolutely on the abortion issue. I do not believe that Christians should attack anyone who’s ever had an abortion. That is not the role that Christ called us to, but I do believe we should try and dissuade women from having them. There are too many righteous options and too many couples trying to adopt because they cannot have children. These views lead me to the belief that politicians and leaders should do more to make these options more attractive. This blog is a Pro-life blog though, not an anti-abortion.
Christians should be Pro-life. That means that Christians should be anti-Capitol punishment. There are many very solid very compelling arguments for Capitol punishment. This is an area of disagreement among Christians, even those who oppose abortion. However I do not believe that capitol punishment lines up with ideas like “Vengeance is mine says the Lord” (Romans 12:19-21) or “You without sin throw the first stone” (Luke 8:7). Capitol punishment is also a way of doubting the power of Jesus to restore and redeem, after all, is there any without sin? If I remember right it was a persecutor of Christ who ended up writing the majority of the new testament.
Christians should be Pro-life. That means that Christians should hold all human life to be sacred and treated as such. Psalms tells us that God creates individual life (139:13-14). Everything made by God should be valued as such. Christians also should hold that all life is eternal. (That’s not to say everyone will spend it together) Here’s where it gets messy. If all human life is sacred then so are the lives of murders, unborn children, people living in poverty, people dying of disease, people fighting wars, people whom wars are being fought around, dirt bags, mugs, thugs, riff raff, ruffians, hooligans, and even….Methodists! (Sorry for the Blazing Saddles reference) What I should have included on that list is people who are terrorists. Christians should not be ok with torture in any form, any way, or from any source. Churches are built on the blood of martyrs and Christianity spreads because of perseverance in the face of persecution, not by the sword. It is better for Christians to die for their belief in the love, mercy and abundant grace of Christ as well as our faith in eternal life, than it is to betray that for the sake of mortal life. (Matt 16:24-27)
I will get more into the idea of holding human life sacred on issues of poverty and disease and war later. For now, read what I’ve written, test it and let me know what you think.
3 comments:
Good and interesting post. I will just throw in my two cents worth about the issue, not trying to take away from your view or anything, because this is a complicated area and I have been back and forth on the issue of capital punishment many times.
I don’t agree that Pro-life means we should be anti-capital punishment. The term “Pro-life” is a misnomer. When “Pro-life” is used it does not mean we are for every one’s life or every form of life. It means that we are against the unjust taking of innocent human life. To commit murder is a crime that results from a moral choice, it is not pathological, and therefore the consequence should be penal. Justice means that we punish the guilty. Reform or restoration is irrelevant in the context of justice.
The right to life, just like freedom, can be forfeited when it comes to protecting the innocent. Those rights can’t be absolute. The sacredness and dignity of human life, derived from the fact that humans are created in the image of God, is exactly the reason murder (the unjust taking of human life) is a huge deal and why God established capital punishment in Gen 9 as well as in the Mosaic Law. I do not think the sacredness of human life is a reason why we should not exercise capital punishment against those who don’t value life and make a moral choice to do evil when they could have done otherwise. In the case of an unborn baby, it has not committed a crime that forfeits its right to life; therefore it is unjust to take its life.
In the passage in John 8 (I think you typed Luke 8 by accident), Jesus does not negate capital punishment, he pointed out that this situation didn’t meet the conditions to carry out the capital punishment. The law required at least two witnesses, and the witnesses were the first to throw the stones. There may have not been more than one witness, but if there was the law required both the man and the woman to be punished. For the accusers to be eligible to carry out the punishment they couldn’t be guilty of the same offence. Also, only the Romans had the right pronounce capital punishment in occupied lands. So I think Jesus wasn’t speaking against capital punishment he was just pointing out to the accusers that the stipulations required to pronounce capital punishment had not been met.
In reference to the comment on the “Vengeance is mine” passage in Romans 12, that doesn’t make sense in light of Romans 13 where it is God who ordains governing authorities who bear the sword. “Eye for Eye, Tooth for Tooth” was always meant to be used by governing authorities to enforce good behavior and punish crime. It was never meant to be used by individuals, as a way of revenge. This is why Paul says “do not repay evil with evil.” Individuals should not engage in vengeful retaliations, but leave it to the God ordained authorities to carry out punishment on the unjust.
The New Testament never speaks against capital punishment; in fact it actually assumes it on many occasions. Romans 13, John 8, John 19, 1 Peter 2, Acts 25.
But even though I believe capital punishment is biblical, I think that the practice of capital punishment can be really complicated and is almost a different topic in itself. But there is my opinion for what it’s worth.
Good post Aaron. I agreed with much of what you said, especially concerning abortion and how as Christian's we should value human life, which includes the unborn.
However, like Walk, I do not feel that a "Pro-Life" position should be equated with an anti-Capitol punishment stance. The two are different subjects with completely different situations concerning the individual and human lives involved. There is a difference in the innocence of an unborn child and the guilt of a convicted criminal. I think it's necessary to draw that distinction. While your post was thought provoking, I don't feel that you adequately provided biblical support for an anti-Capitol punishment stance.
I believe Walk provided some good defense for a Capitol punishment view but I would like to do some individual study on his commentary from John 8 before I agree with those arguments.
One last question...(for Vitamin A)
If "pro-life" means that one should be anti-abortion and anti-Capitol punishment, should one also be anti-War? Are not the enemies fought against in war valued in the same way as death-row convicts?
Yeah please do, I was kind of shooting from the hip on that one. But as I remember the scribes and Pharisees were basically trying to trick Jesus. Being "caught" in the act, everyone knew that she was guilty. If Jesus went against the law they would have accused him of violating the law. If he confirmed the sentence of the law then he was not consistent with the character of the Messiah. Then they would probably have handed Jesus over to the Romans for exercising capital punishment without Roman approval. The Jews lost the right to exercise capital punishment while under Rome(for example, the case of Jesus in John 18). It was a trap, but Jesus turned the issue back on the accusers right to carry out the punishment.
Post a Comment