Zach’s Theological Musings

  In a recent post I mentioned an observation that people who have a dishonoring attitude toward their parents often take on, in some sense or another, a “surrogate parent” (or “parents”) to fill the void. As an addendum, I would like to warn against a particularly subtle, deceptive, and destructive way this can happen: when God is put in the position of “replacement parent”.

  Now, make no mistake about it, God definitely is the ultimate, true Father of all who have received and believed in His Son Jesus Christ (John 1:12). But that is just as true for those who have a great relationship with their biological parents as it is for those who have a sour relationship with them. His role as true, eternal Father does not replace the role and respect due to the physical, earthly mother and father He ordained to give to each of us. Receiving His Heavenly Fatherhood only intensifies, rather than diminishes, our responsibility to honor our earthly parents in ways pleasing to Him.

 And [Jesus] said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written,

   “‘This people honors me with their lips,
   but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me,
   teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’

 You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.”

 And he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’ But you say, ‘If a man tells his father or his mother, “Whatever you would have gained from me is Corban”‘ (that is, given to God)—then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother, thus making void the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And many such things you do.” (Mark 7:6-13)

  I think Americans have a hard time wrapping their heads around the above passage. Did Jesus really scold people for “giving money to God” (we could say, “giving to the Lord’s cause”) rather than to their parents? Yes, that is my understanding of this passage. But doesn’t Jesus command us to hate our “own father and mother…” compared to our love and devotion to Him? Yes, absolutely. I will be the first to acknowledge and proclaim that fidelity to God trumps everything else in life (Matt 10:34-39). So if God wanted you to give your money to the temple rather than your parents, then by all means that is what you must and should do. But that’s not the way He wants it. The way He wants us to honor and obey HIM is through honoring our parents, which includes providing for them in their old age. If you wrap a pious explanation around sinful disobedience to God’s command, it remains just as repulsive, in fact more so; not only is your heart far from the Lord, but you have “covered over your tracks” by honoring Him with your lips. This kind of hypocrisy made Jesus quite angry.

  Just as then, so now, the “traditions of men” (e.g. pop-evangelical psychology) reject and make void the commandments of God whenever we (explicitly or implicitly) tell people that it is OK to dishonor their parents because God is now their real Father.

  Christian citizens submit to human governments because God the Great King commands them to. Christian wives submit to their husbands because Christ the Forever Bridegroom commands them to.  Christian children (including adult, grown children!) honor their parents because the Father commands them to. The Lord’s Kingship, Husbandship, and Fatherhood do not undermine our human-to-human responsibilities. Indeed, because I have a Benevolent King I can deal with the wickedness of human leaders, because a woman is so deeply known and pursued by the Lover of her soul she can live with her husband’s shallowness, because our Father in Heaven raises and cares for us in all the right ways we can accept the fact that our parents didn’t.

  When we are not fully satisfied in God, all human relationships go awry because we will inevitably try to extract the infinite satisfaction we were designed for from finite beings. When we are fully satisified in God, then no one can disappoint us because we need nothing from them, the only “need” we have is spread the love, forgiveness, understanding, mercy, grace, and kindness that overflows from us in abundance (Rom 13:8). The image of a “God-shaped vacuum” appears to have come from the following quote by Blaise Pascal:

What else does this craving, and this helplessness, proclaim but that there was once in man a true happiness, of which all that now remains is the empty print and trace? This he tries in vain to fill with everything around him, seeking in things that are not there the help he cannot find in those that are, though none can help, since this infinite abyss can be filled only with an infinite and immutable object; in other words by God himself. [Pascal, Pensees #425]

Our fallen, sinful parents leave a “Father-shaped vacuum” in each of our hearts. When God fills that vacuum we are not freed from the obligation to honor our parents, we are freed to honor them fully, from the heart, regardless of circumstances and without expecting anything in return.

  That abortion is a unspeakably horrific act of murder against the most defenseless of human beings is an obvious moral fact which I have addressed, for example, in: Of Course It’s A Baby and Sonography (see also the entire abortion category on this blog, and don’t miss http://menaretheproblem.info while you’re at it). That the staggering scale of such murders for convenience’s sake makes “Holocaust rhetoric”, if anything, too gentle and mild is an obvious numerical fact which I have addressed, for example, in Postman (see also the numbers at the bottom of my abortion quotes page, all from pro-abortionist sources mind you). Thus when we hear that an abortionist/murderer such as Dr. George Tiller has been killed the natural question is, “Is it right or wrong to murder murderers to stop them from murdering?”, to which I am compelled to answer, at least at this point in my life, “Whew… hmm… that is a very important, very heavy, and very difficult question.”

  I must say I certainly don’t resonate with the majority of the American Christian pro-life movement that is so quick to stand up and unequivocally condemn the murder of an abortionist/murderer. Whoa, whoa, whoa, wait, “hold on”, I want to scream. If we really believe in our own rhetoric, for example that a 9/11-scale slaughter is happening on our own (American) soil every single day, and if we applaud the soliders who go out to engage in bloody warfare following just one single 9/11 tragedy, then isn’t it at least worth considering the possibility that lethal force is justified to stop the actions of a determined, ongoing baby-killer? I think so. I really don’t want to make unfair blanket accusations about people’s motives, but I’ll just say that my impression from the writings of some such Christian leaders is that they are more interested in avoiding a public outcry than they are in grappling with the difficult issues and standing for the truth.

  On the other hand, I’ve read some of the writings of people who have been arrested for anti-abortionist violence (e.g. at the Army of God website) and I certainly don’t resonate with a lot of what they say either. What I hear coming from many of them is a rebellious attitude toward government in general. I really don’t want to make unfair blanket accusations about people’s motives, but I’ll just say that my impression from the writings of some such people is that what they really want most is to vent a lot of pent-up anger and “stick it” to the US government, and that killing an “abortion doctor” (oxymoron) is one way they can feel justified about doing so. But from a Biblical Christian perspective, it seems to me that the governments that Jesus (e.g. Luke 20:19-26), Paul (e.g. Romans 13), and Peter (e.g. 1 Peter 2) commanded submission to were entirely wicked themselves. A submissive attitude toward human authority is not contingent on the worthiness of that authority. We put ourselves under them because in doing so we are directly and indirectly submitting to God (see, e.g., how David treated wicked King Saul with respect as “God’s Anointed” until God saw fit to remove Saul from the throne and from the land of the living).

  Human life. Made in the image of God. The baby, the mother, the father, the abortionist, and the abortionist killer. Whew. To take a human life is a massive thing. For that reason I don’t think you’ll ever find me shouting and waving a banner that says, “Kill the abortionists! Kill the abortionists!” At the same time, and for the very same reason, I don’t think you’ll ever find me affirming James Dobson, Al Mohler, or the many other “pro-life Christians” in their categorical condemnation of those who murder murderers regardless of the thought process and motivations that such a person might have.

  There are just such weighty Biblical issues on both sides of the question: to murder (ongoing, determined) murderers or not to? It seems to me that many doctoral dissertations in Biblical ethics could struggle over the issue for hundreds of pages and not reach definitive resolution. Presently, I can only offer a mere sampling of the issues:

• The idea of an “inalienable right to life” bestowed by the Creator smells more of Jeffersonian-Americo-deist philosopy than it does Biblical theology. Ever since the Fall of our father Adam, man only has a right to death (Gen 3, etc.). Babies have no right to life, nor do abortion doctors have any right to life. But then, just as mere men don’t have the right to life, they neither have the right to kill. Wouldn’t it be nice if everything was so simple and straightforward as to say that no human being should ever be the agent of another human being’s demise. But wait! There is more nuance to the Biblical picture because…
• While the sixth of the ten commandments is, “Thou shalt not kill”, the same Jewish Scriptures command the armies of Israel to slaughter the Canaanites, and command communities to execute certain classes of criminals. While Jesus said, “Love your enemies”, “Turn the other cheek”, and “Those who live by the sword will die by the sword”, the same Christian Scriptures also teach that governing authorities “do not bear the sword for nothing”. It seems that the reconciliation of these various principles is that killing is not an individual prerogative but a responsibility (in the form of war or capital punishment) of societies, and in particular “God’s appointed” leaders of societies (which, to add to the tension, includes a great many very, very evil men—see Daniel 4). So we could be tempted to say that while those guilty of involvement in the abortion process deserve to be executed, it is only the government that has God-given authority to do so. That line of thinking might prompt us to go no further than seeking legal venues to make the consequences of abortion the same as the consequences for involvement in any other murder. Indeed, I am personally convinced that: 1) in a just society abortionists should be executed, yet 2) in a society as unjust as ours it is sinful and wrong for an individual to murder an abortionist/murderer with vigilante motives—that is, as punishment for previous crimes committed, no matter how horrible, that the government has failed to prosecute. But unfortunately the issue at hand is too complicated to stop there because…
• “Professional” abortionists/murderers are almost certainly determined to return to their gory crimes day after day after day. In fact many of them will proudly state their intention to continue providing their “services”. Now, it is one thing to try to take justice for past crimes into your own hands; it is another matter to respond when you see someone walking in a wholesale, brazen, committed, ongoing occupation of baby slaughter. Which brings us to…
• At least in the Old Testament, it seems that “self defense”, including defense of the larger “self” of your family and your people, at least in some cases (e.g. Ex 22:2), is not only a right but in fact the obligation of a godly man. There is nothing honorable about a man who cowers in the closet and calls the police on a cell phone while an intruder hacks at his kids with an axe and rapes his wife. In the urgency of the moment it is his responsiblity to act forcefully. Or take a different scenario. A black boy is being led away to be lynched. There is no point in calling 911 because the Klansmen in white hoods are themselves the local police officers. What do you do? Though the extent of the similarities between the above scenario and the modern abortion scene are debatable, I would argue that the similarities are quite significant. But in any case, the main point is that one must grapple with a passage like:
• “If you are slack in the day of distress,
  Your strength is limited. Deliver those who are being taken away to death,
  And those who are staggering to slaughter, Oh hold them back.
  If you say, “See, we did not know this,”
  Does He not consider it who weighs the hearts?
  And does He not know it who keeps your soul?
  And will He not render to man according to his work?” (Prov 24:10-12)
• Yes, if you murder you are accountable for the blood on your hands. But (don’t miss the weightiness of this) it also seems, at least in the Jewish theocracy of the Old Testament, that if a community fails to deal properly with a murder then the blood the murderer shed is on their hands (e.g. Deut 21:1-9). Could it be that those of us who merely “sign petitions” and offer up lukewarm, half-hearted prayers while thousands of our defenseless neighbors are being LED TO SLAUGHTER,… that we actually have MORE blood on our hands, in God’s eyes, than those who have killed an abortionist in a desperate attempt to stop him?
• In other words, Biblically, only blood can remove blood stains (compare Rev. 7:14)! Which brings us to a right and fitting Climax, to the Person and the place on whom and on which we must continually fix our eyes: Jesus and His cross. Though more issues could be raised, our picture will only be clearly focused to the extent that Jesus Himself is at the center.

  Personally, I feel, at least for now, I cannot resolve the ethics of murdering murderers to my own satisfaction by attempting a systematic harmonization of the many, many, immensely significant, Biblical principles which must come in to play if one seeks to be faithful to the full counsel of God’s revealed will in Scripture. But on a practical level, looking to the Truth and Life Himself does give me some clarity in how I might move forward.

  Jesus conquered by dying. Any angry pagan can pick up a gun. Mohammed was quite adept at wielding the sword. It takes the Spirit of Christ to pick up a cross.

  On the one hand, perhaps killing abortionists is justified. I for one will certainly be slow to judge someone who is zealous to defend defenseless human life. Though I have yet to see it, I can hypothetically imagine someone fighting the abortion Holocaust in the ethically burdened and heavily constrained-”I don’t know if this is really best but is the best I know how to do”-spirit of Bonhoeffer; and I for one would want to publicly stand in solidarity with such a brother.

  However, even if such actions may be justified, it seems to me that there is a more uniquely Christian way that should be pursued with even more wholehearted zeal than the octane that drives someone to commit homicide. What if we who know abortion to be “murder” refrained from the possibility of murdering an abortionist/murderer and instead murdered our own greedy, gluttonous self and its lifestyle in order to ensure that, at the very least, no person in our country could EVER claim financial motivation for killing a baby? What if the “pro-life” community guaranteed all expenses would be paid for any pregancy in our nation? (I’m not talking about socialized medicine, but in any case I would plead with any self-ascribed Christian Republicans to value life infinitely more than any economic philosophies.) How about if presented abortion clinics with an offer that for every woman they referred away to a crisis pregnancy center, we would pay them TWICE the money they would get for performing an abortion? Essentially the offer is, “Here take ALL of our money, ALL of our property, ALL of our possessions (we don’t need them), and let the babies live. Please!?!” (Again, what I’m talking about isn’t socialism, but it is not Republicanism either. It is about something far more important than the entire political system, which is raw Christ-following without watering down His life-overturning First and Second Greatest Commandments!) Sounds like a fabulous trade to me! Oh yes, I know that such a plan leaves open enormous doors for us to be taken advantage of. Fine. Let your gift be abused and misused. That’s what Jesus has done for us.

Zach Harris
Longmont, CO

  I sent out the following message to our family’s prayer list in April 2008:

---

  A little internet research just turned up an interesting factoid. The combined American casualties in World Wars I and II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Civil War, the Revolutionary War, the Mexican-American War (of 1846-1848), the first Gulf War, and the War of 1812 are estimated to be 1,372,678 [1]. Almost exactly the same number of Americans were killed by abortion in the year 1996 alone (est. 1,370,000 deaths, see [2])!

  Gosh, there’s lot of interesting stuff on the internet isn’t there?

  Hmm, I could really use a snack. Hope we’ve still got some of that peanut butter and banana bread left.

  Hey, Happy Easter everybody! The weather sure has been nice out here in Longmont.

Zach

PS

[1] Wikipedia contributors, “United States casualties of war,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_casualties_of_war&oldid=294166076 (accessed June 3, 2009).

[2] Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States, Guttmacher Institute.

---

  One friend responded to this message telling me that when he read it he was disgusted by my transition from the first part of the message to the second. I told him I was delighted to hear of his disgust. That was precisely the intention. In our contemporary TV age, we have become far too accustomed to allowing our minds to transition from heavy, life-and-death matters to triviality in literally a flash (e.g. the flash of the screen cutting from world news to a commercial break).  For more on the dangers of flippancy, see my post And Now This! But please, when all is said and done, forget everything else I’ve said and remember the 1.37 million. Remember the 1.37 million, remember the 9 wars including two world wars, and let the enormity of the abortion Holocaust sink in!!!