We had rather unusual questions about standing up for our faith should the occasion come when we are asked to worship something or someone other than the God of the Bible.
In the first scenario - would it be ever right to do this?
In the second scenario - would it be ever right to do this if our loved ones are threatened in front of us.
Here, there is the testament of history when Christians were persecuted (e.g. in Roman times, or in medieval Japan). They chose death rather than denial. There is also the present day experience of many of our brothers and sisters throughout the world who have to make precisely these choices as a real experience. They also choose their own death (and that of their loved ones)
We know that Jesus told his disciples in no uncertain terms that loyalty to Him must take precedence over all other things "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple. "(Lk 14:26). There is the example of Daniel and his 3 friends in the Old Testament (Da 3, 6).
What if we merely pretend to bow before another, while professing faith in the true God in our hearts? This is not likely to be right, since doing this will be out of fear of the consequences of standing as a witness to Christ. If we are prepared to compromise here, we will be compromising every time our faith is challenged, so that we never have to bear the cost of our faith.
Is it OK then to flee persecution rather than to stand and get martyred? I think Scripture is sufficiently full of stories of believers fleeing persecution (Ac 8:1), of Paul fleeing death (e.g. Ac 9:24-25) and of Jesus himself avoiding harm until His "hour had come" (Lk 4:28-30). So it is not the embrace of death for Jesus' sake that is needed, but a knowledge of when to flee and when to walk into or stay in danger.+
Kevin brought up the apparent exception given to Naaman in 2 Ki 5, who was permitted to bow down
in the temple of a foreign God. I think the exception was given because Naaman was a convert, rather than an Israelite. His permission would certainly not have applied to a member of the covenant people of God under the law of Moses. His theology was deficient despite his evident sincerity (he wanted to make an altar to the God of Israel on Israelite soil!). His case is found in a narrative passage and cannot be used to justify similar behaviour in us who have the fullness of the covenant promises in Christ.
In the first scenario - would it be ever right to do this?
In the second scenario - would it be ever right to do this if our loved ones are threatened in front of us.
Here, there is the testament of history when Christians were persecuted (e.g. in Roman times, or in medieval Japan). They chose death rather than denial. There is also the present day experience of many of our brothers and sisters throughout the world who have to make precisely these choices as a real experience. They also choose their own death (and that of their loved ones)
We know that Jesus told his disciples in no uncertain terms that loyalty to Him must take precedence over all other things "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple. "(Lk 14:26). There is the example of Daniel and his 3 friends in the Old Testament (Da 3, 6).
What if we merely pretend to bow before another, while professing faith in the true God in our hearts? This is not likely to be right, since doing this will be out of fear of the consequences of standing as a witness to Christ. If we are prepared to compromise here, we will be compromising every time our faith is challenged, so that we never have to bear the cost of our faith.
Is it OK then to flee persecution rather than to stand and get martyred? I think Scripture is sufficiently full of stories of believers fleeing persecution (Ac 8:1), of Paul fleeing death (e.g. Ac 9:24-25) and of Jesus himself avoiding harm until His "hour had come" (Lk 4:28-30). So it is not the embrace of death for Jesus' sake that is needed, but a knowledge of when to flee and when to walk into or stay in danger.+
Kevin brought up the apparent exception given to Naaman in 2 Ki 5, who was permitted to bow down
in the temple of a foreign God. I think the exception was given because Naaman was a convert, rather than an Israelite. His permission would certainly not have applied to a member of the covenant people of God under the law of Moses. His theology was deficient despite his evident sincerity (he wanted to make an altar to the God of Israel on Israelite soil!). His case is found in a narrative passage and cannot be used to justify similar behaviour in us who have the fullness of the covenant promises in Christ.
Comments
Post a Comment