On December 4, Jerry Falwell, Jr. (current President of Liberty University) spoke to the students of that institution during a convocation, making some interesting remarks regarding concealed carry and threat of Islamic terrorism. Speaking in the aftermath of the shooting in San Bernardino, California, Falwell said, “I’ve always thought that if more good people had concealed-carry permits, then we could end those Muslims before they walked in.” He went on to say, “Let’s teach them a lesson if they ever show up here.” In response, another well-known pastor/teacher, John Piper, produced a blog post expressing his thorough disapproval of Falwell’s statements, which can be summarized by Piper: “[E]xhorting the lambs to carry concealed weapons with which to shoot the wolves does not advance the counter-cultural, self-sacrificing, soul-saving cause of Christ.” Piper even suggested that Christians who carry concealed might not be providing the best witness: “I think I can say with complete confidence that the identification of Christian security with concealed weapons will cause no one to ask a reason for the hope that is in us.”
How should we evaluate this exchange? First, let me say that in the case of Piper, I believe he handled his response in a Christ-honoring way. Before he published his post (which was on December 22), he communicated several times with Falwell in order to seek clarification and understanding. How wonderful would it be if more believers did this rather than shooting off (no pun intended) from the mouth? Second, I think both of these men have landed on some rather extreme positions that may not be the best responses. In Falwell’s case, his words seem to betray a lack of love toward the enemies of Christians (in this case, Muslim terrorists), which is underscored by his later statement that he would say exactly the same thing if he had it to do over again. If it is true that people who die apart from Christ end up in Hell (and it is), then our response should not be a desire to expedite their arrival but rather to see their destination changed. In Piper’s case, I believe he has conflated all violence against a believer with persecution, which is not the case. It is absolutely true that Scripture teaches, and therefore Christians are held to, a standard of nonviolent response to those who seek to harm them for the sake of their faith (cf. I Peter 2:20-23; Matthew 5:11-12; Matthew 5:38-42; Romans 12:14; Romans 12:16-20; this is not an exhaustive list). Yet we also have a responsibility to defend the innocent, including our families (cf. I Timothy 5:8, where “provide” includes protection; Exodus 22:2-3; Deuteronomy 22:23-27; Nehemiah 4:11-14; Ecclesiastes 4:9-12). To lump it all together is to miss the nuance of Scripture when it speaks on these issues.
As believers, we must expect that persecution against us will come (cf. John 16:33), even if the American experience has been an anomaly in the history of the faith. We must have the same mentality as the early church, who saw this persecution as being counted worthy to suffer for Christ (cf. Acts 5:41; Romans 8:16-17; Philippians 3:10; James 5:10; Philippians 1:29; 2 Corinthians 12:10). Yet we must also protect the innocent and ourselves, when persecution is not the motivating factor for violence. May we prayerfully be able to discern the difference. Just something to think about…
0 Comments