Man, does the Church in America, on both sides of the political isle, need to hear this review. I am so thankful for your ministry, heart, and mind for the Lord, Gavin!
“Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either -- but right through every human heart”. - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Great video; several comments. Firstly, on the inspiration to join causes and stand for what you believe: "The mark of the immature man is that he wants to die nobly for a cause, while the mark of the mature man is that he wants to live humbly for one." -J. D. Salinger Secondly, it is very important we judge men (and literature, and everything) in their context, which is well highlighted in this video. Thirdly, I suggest to viewers, if they are interested in topics such as this, reading H. Richard Niebuhr’s book "Christ and Culture" (published 1951) wrestles with different views on how involved the church should be in socio-political and cultural matters. Lastly, as Gavin suggests, rather than only reading or watching content about Bonhoeffer, read his works. "The Cost of Discipleship" is very compelling, as well as his "Ethics". To not do so is like reading only Bible commentaries but not the Bible itself. The Hollywood-ize versions, as much as they can be enjoyed for their thematics, never do full justice to the ideas behind the men and women they depict. Blessings all!
I agree that Niebuhr's "Christ and Culture" is must-reading for the development of Christian worldview in the context of other Christians with different worldviews. Understanding how we approach society and government in different ways explains why some people charge into politics while others stand back.
@SibleySteve Gavin's recommendation in another video "The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion" by Jonathan Haidt is another good read, though less "christian" than Niebuhr.
Dr. Ortlund: a question I think you’d be able to help with is this: what do we do with Bonhoeffer’s heretical statements? Do we consider him a heretic or do we see it as just the context of him going crazy
That same line hit me pretty hard. I'm going from memory, but I think it was, "I made my choice 12 years ago. Even before I fully understood what it meant."
I think this is very well said. I watched this movie recently and was a little concerned when Bonhoeffer's friend insists that pastors should not be involved with violence, and Bonhoeffer seems to just brush him off. Glad to learn he was very careful in how he approached this in real life!
Dscussions like this always remind me of James Russell Lowell's poem written as a protest of the War with Mexico. He was also a staunch abolitionist. This is just the first stanza. I encourage you to read the whole thing. it gives me goosebumps because it is so descriptive of our own times...."and the choice goes by forever." Once to every man and nation Comes the moment to decide, In the strife of truth with falsehood, For the good or evil side; Some great cause, God's new Messiah, Offering each the bloom or blight, And the choice goes by forever Twixt that darkness and that light.
One of the very common critiques of Bonhoeffer I see coming from the right is that he didn't believe in the virgin birth or historical resurrection of Christ. I haven't actually seen specific quotes that back up these claims and I suspect this comes from an overly simplistic reading of Bonhoeffer, but I'd love a video that explores the extent to which this critique is either true or false.
A very useful review! I've already seen the movie and i tend to largely agree with Dr O and certainly appreciate his comments on questions of historical accuracy. And i, as was Dr O, very moved by the movie at times. I got a little verklempt at certain points. Yeah, the movie was very well done, especially coming from a small studio. No huge, flaming Michael Bay moments, but a powerful story of war, courage, and sacrifice that was narritively driven forward in an exciting and moving way with the Christian message always front and center I'm glad that I saw this thoughtful review and glad that I saw the movie. There's a good and very timely message in it.
I didn't realize this movie had been made, but thank you for reminding me about Bonhoeffer. This video struck a chord for me, especially regarding the relationship of church and state, because lately I have been learning about the abortion abolitionist movement. This may be something you would be interesting in looking into as well. It is not, as I initially thought, a movement of radical lunatics. In fact it's entirely based on what you might call theological retrieval. These folks went and looked at what the 1800s slavery abolitionist movement was doing and asked what we can learn from them. There are some explanatory talks by a historian/activist T Russell Hunter. A recent one was entitled "William Wilberforce against the 'Gradual Abolitionists'". I'd be interested to know what you think of his methods.
The quote at 19:07 is interesting because it implies that we should follow his advice; however, I ask, did Christ passively watch or did Christ speak out / act? I recall Christ overturning the tables in the Temple; intervening to save a woman caught in adultery, rebuking pharisees and sadducees; calling all men everywhere to repent, etc. Of course this led to Christ being killed by the state, as was Bonhoeffer. I will follow Christ not Bonhoeffer. I have read Bonhoeffer off and on over decades, and what I have decided is that he is just a man, where Jesus Christ is Lord and His example is perfect.
It also seems to go against what Bonhoeffer did. He was resisting evil by protecting Jews, collaborating with the allies and resistance fighters, etc. Preaching that Christ is Lord is resistance to evil.
Great analysis. I was hoping you'd comment on Metaxas' biography of Bonhoeffer, and also why both conservatives and liberals tend to "claim" Bonhoeffer. I'm looking forward to seeing the film.
Reach out to Eric Metaxas. While the film isn’t directly based on his biography, it did inspire it. I think you guys having a discussion about this would be fantastic.
Sometimes it is necessary to stand by our principles when confronted with something new. However, sometimes this confrontation makes us realize that our principles were not rooted in the fullness of reality, and they must be changed. The fact that both of these path can be correct depending upon the details is what makes it so hard.
I have, over the years, the impression that our salvation, Jesus and the cross, does not just depend on trusting Him, but we need to add more. (The German preacher) Am I wrong? I hope so. Thanks
Gavin thank you, very useful. Do you think that Erick Metaxas is making a mistake in dennouncing pastors that are not fighting the political battle as he does?
I’m wondering if Bonhoeffer’s Christianity is more of the WWJD variety? We must do this because it’s what Jesus would have done. WWJD is actually more in line with liberal Christianity, even though it was fashionable among American Evangelicals for a while (like so many fads…”I Found It” and “He Gets Us” being two other examples).
I'm guessing he wouldn't latch onto either of the main sides in our culture war... but I think if he were here today, the Right would especially not like him. Most on the religious right (like Metaxas) don't understand Nazi ideology or practice very well... all of the Nazi's enemies, excepting the Jews, are also currently, the same groups that the american religious right fears and loathes. Not sure what Bonhoeffer would do with that, but if he had survived the war and could be among us, I suspect he'd have some pointed warning/exhortation for the american religious right and their current cult of personality, statist mentality and messianic political machinations in order to get power-over... (Big gov run by our guy! will save America! - for God!)
Ha, yeah, someone's example of ideals get used by later people to manipulate. I have confronted people who manipulate and they usually get offended or, even worse, pretend to be innocent by saying something like, 'I am not manipulating people, I am just propagating what the Bible teaches.' In other words, 'It's not me, it's God.' Well, the Westboro Baptist congregation say exactly the same thing.
I was very worried about the movie when I saw the first trailer. Any retelling of Bonhoeffer's story that doesn't center the gospel is a betrayal of his legacy.
I have a great respect for Bonhoeffer and the confessing church. But I do not believe that his conspiring with others to assassinate Hitler was a godly move. No matter the evil of Hitler, or any other evil, the temptation for believers to use violence to accomplish particular ends is a sign of impatience and lack of trust that everything is in God's hands. Violence is of this wicked age. If believers feel the need to stand up against some social evil, then the path should always be through peace and the use of existing legal norms. For example, in the instance of MLK Jr's actions, the peaceful protests were always in service of bringing to light the tensions between Constitutional protections to which they were appealing and local state laws. It was finally a mix of court cases and national legislation which affirmed that the protesters had been correct all along.
Since the left has demonized Trump as Hitler, I wonder if some wackos will feel inspired by the subtle errors and omissions of this movie, to try to actually be their misconception of Bonhoeffer.
Look forward to listenjng to this. Witness against Hitler - story of Von Moltke is also worth a watch. Back when BBC made good films. ruclips.net/video/uKm0iir46Ys/видео.htmlsi=Bv4yBBoQ2HVM8La0
Bonhoeffer says of historicity of Christ’s tomb, “This is and remains a final stumbling block, which the believer in Christ must learn to live with in one way or another. Empty or not empty, it remains a stumbling block. We cannot be sure of its historicity.” Ibid., 112. I don't know if passages like this are alone convincing, but Bonhoeffer often talks like this, and it's been my impression reading his lectures that he does not believe the events in the Bible were historically true, but only spiritually true. Regardless, God bless you Gavin.
Hey Mr Ortlund I really don’t like the new intro thingy you are doing I don’t think it fits your style and it feels a little jarring and awkward compared to the slow deep lightly edited talking of the rest of the video. I understand the need for a hook to get retention but it’s more important to sell someone on what the video will be like accurately as you may drive away people looking for exactly your style while disappointing people looking for a more fast paced more edited video. Hope this helps!
Weird. I really like the new "preview style". I was thinking that it got a lot of good points out very quickly that preview the rest of the video fairly accurately.
It's because videos start playing when hovered over. That makes the first few seconds the new thumbnail. It's essentially required by RUclips for videos to get any viewing.
Why aren’t you asking “what is a responsible reason to intentionally slaughter another human being?” instead? Clearly that’s the metaquestion you’ve avoided in the past. You’ve gone on and on about how it’s nuanced and difficult or what have you-but is it? Again: The objections to Christian pacifism typically take these forms: "God kills people, so it must be acceptable [good?] for us to kill people sometimes, too." "Pacifism would be terribly impractical and difficult in dangerous circumstances." "God made governments [what kind? Rotary club? The CCP?] for these tasks." "God didn't explicitly tell soldiers in the New Testament not to continue soldiering." (Ie “did God really say…?”) Or simply, "You first." None of these are Christian responses. Why don’t you give up this secular tradition of just war theory as a (de facto) blanket approval of killing? Imagine what a burden would be lifted if you only taught folks to do what they could do in the name of Christ? Bludgeon in the name of Christ? Poison in the name of Christ? Napalm in the name of Christ? Honestly, Gavin, what gives? Edit: Gavin, I trust you’ll read the empty-headed replies and know with an even firmer certainty that there is no rational, Christian, consistent defense of apathy or, worse yet, encouragement for violence.
Justice, protection of your family in the face of attack, to name two - your use of 'slaughter' is a straw man', the question should be can a Christian take a life? Clearly the answer is yes. The Bible is full of instances where it is not only allowed but ordered. How does Jesus change this? That is really the question. You suggest this is a metaquestion but give no evidence that it is.
@@mjphyilJustice begs the question (because obviously I’m arguing that killing is unjust). Violence in defense of family - is that a specifically Christian teaching?
@@mjphyilAgreed. This comment is most certainly a strawman accusation. I’m doubtful if he’s read the entire Bible rather than just snippets. I also love how you pointed out that Christ changes things for God’s people in a myriad of ways.
Gavin you’re a smart guy I love what you do for us prots. But Hitler is not the devil, please do some revisionism on your history. It’s the only thing you get arrested and blackballed for. Ask questions, why? Do some revisionism on what the RED CROSS actually said about that whole situation. Anyways, cheers love as always.
"Revisionism" hooks you with small truths that you hadn't heard before and uses that as an entry point to convince you of enormous inacuraccies that do not logically follow from the small truths. For example, even if you put a construction of Germany's reasons for premptively going to war in 1939 that waters down the level of fault you place on Germany's shoulders, it does not follow that Hitler was anything less than an evil man who engaged in wicked atrocities.
@@JW_______ So was Stalin whom the Allies join up with. You do know the Allies helped to build up Hitler right? There were those who were supporting both sides of the war. Hitler didn't do what he did all by himself. We like to pretend the Allies are the good guys and the Nazis were the bad guys but the war was a lot more messy than that.
@smidlee7747 "Good guys" and "bad guys" certainly are not helpful terms in the complex arena of international relations. Yet, even if all sides are evil, it doesn't follow that Hitler was not evil.
@ was it evil of him to take over germany to destroy all the degeneracy of the country conducted by the same people affecting us today and banished from 109 countries in the past?
@@JW_______ Hitler is not "evil" according to naturalism, materialism, nationalism or relativism. He is only "evil" according to Christianity which teaches we (the carnal man) are more like Hitler and Stalin than we are like God. In order to be more like God we must be born again, born into the family of God. It's important how we justify someone like "Hitler" as being evil.
Everybody we dislike isn't literally Hitler.
And everything isn't about WW2
You're literally Hitler, how dare you.
Right, but there is actually a legitimate comparison to Nazi Germany and the Totalitarian regime of the Left.
Man, does the Church in America, on both sides of the political isle, need to hear this review. I am so thankful for your ministry, heart, and mind for the Lord, Gavin!
“Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either -- but right through every human heart”. - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
@@JW_______ great quote! 👍
Great video; several comments.
Firstly, on the inspiration to join causes and stand for what you believe: "The mark of the immature man is that he wants to die nobly for a cause, while the mark of the mature man is that he wants to live humbly for one." -J. D. Salinger
Secondly, it is very important we judge men (and literature, and everything) in their context, which is well highlighted in this video.
Thirdly, I suggest to viewers, if they are interested in topics such as this, reading H. Richard Niebuhr’s book "Christ and Culture" (published 1951) wrestles with different views on how involved the church should be in socio-political and cultural matters.
Lastly, as Gavin suggests, rather than only reading or watching content about Bonhoeffer, read his works. "The Cost of Discipleship" is very compelling, as well as his "Ethics". To not do so is like reading only Bible commentaries but not the Bible itself. The Hollywood-ize versions, as much as they can be enjoyed for their thematics, never do full justice to the ideas behind the men and women they depict.
Blessings all!
I agree that Niebuhr's "Christ and Culture" is must-reading for the development of Christian worldview in the context of other Christians with different worldviews. Understanding how we approach society and government in different ways explains why some people charge into politics while others stand back.
@SibleySteve Gavin's recommendation in another video "The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion" by Jonathan Haidt is another good read, though less "christian" than Niebuhr.
Dr. Ortlund: a question I think you’d be able to help with is this: what do we do with Bonhoeffer’s heretical statements? Do we consider him a heretic or do we see it as just the context of him going crazy
What heretical statements did he make? Idk much about Bonhoeffer.
what do you take to be his most "heretical" statement?
@ I was told he denied miracles and the virgin birth in his prison letters. Am I mistaken?
@@redeemedzoomer6053surely you have a bunch of examples?!!
i'm seeing he denied the resurrection
I am too early for reading the comments. Welcome to the comment section y'all. Hope to read productive discussions here.
Thank you for being sensible.
I suspect Pastor Bonhoeffer would be displeased by how often his name is “pimped” for some cause. My guess is he would point us to Jesus.
That same line hit me pretty hard. I'm going from memory, but I think it was, "I made my choice 12 years ago. Even before I fully understood what it meant."
Ayyyy first comment! I’m an Ethiopian and love ur channel man, keep it up! I love ur video on the Luther and the Ethiopian orthodox convo
Pastor Ortlund, have you ever seen the film Bonhoeffer: Agent of Grace (2000)? How would you compare it to this current film?
Dietrich Bonhoeffer's little book on Psalms , the Prayer Book of the Bible is a treasure
I think this is very well said. I watched this movie recently and was a little concerned when Bonhoeffer's friend insists that pastors should not be involved with violence, and Bonhoeffer seems to just brush him off. Glad to learn he was very careful in how he approached this in real life!
I’m happy you covered this question. I’ve heard that it has material issues, but I never could find anyone saying why it has material issues.
I liked your caution to avoid the pitfall of doing what is evil under the banner of defeating evil, very thoughtful
Dscussions like this always remind me of James Russell Lowell's poem written as a protest of the War with Mexico. He was also a staunch abolitionist.
This is just the first stanza. I encourage you to read the whole thing. it gives me goosebumps because it is so descriptive of our own times...."and the choice goes by forever."
Once to every man and nation
Comes the moment to decide,
In the strife of truth with falsehood,
For the good or evil side;
Some great cause, God's new Messiah,
Offering each the bloom or blight,
And the choice goes by forever
Twixt that darkness and that light.
One of the very common critiques of Bonhoeffer I see coming from the right is that he didn't believe in the virgin birth or historical resurrection of Christ. I haven't actually seen specific quotes that back up these claims and I suspect this comes from an overly simplistic reading of Bonhoeffer, but I'd love a video that explores the extent to which this critique is either true or false.
This is so helpful and encouraging. Thank you! 🙂
Gavin, I’m asking this as I am watching the video so maybe you will address it, but do you have any thoughts on Eric Metaxas’ book on Bonhoeffer?
This was helpful, thank you.
A sobering exhortation, brother! Thanks you!
A very useful review! I've already seen the movie and i tend to largely agree with Dr O and certainly appreciate his comments on questions of historical accuracy. And i, as was Dr O, very moved by the movie at times. I got a little verklempt at certain points.
Yeah, the movie was very well done, especially coming from a small studio. No huge, flaming Michael Bay moments, but a powerful story of war, courage, and sacrifice that was narritively driven forward in an exciting and moving way with the Christian message always front and center
I'm glad that I saw this thoughtful review and glad that I saw the movie. There's a good and very timely message in it.
Time-stamp
11:34 - Bonhoeffer on the gospel of Jesus Christ
12:00, 12:20 - Bonhoeffer’s other views
15:00 - Bonhoeffer’s arrest
I didn't realize this movie had been made, but thank you for reminding me about Bonhoeffer. This video struck a chord for me, especially regarding the relationship of church and state, because lately I have been learning about the abortion abolitionist movement. This may be something you would be interesting in looking into as well. It is not, as I initially thought, a movement of radical lunatics. In fact it's entirely based on what you might call theological retrieval. These folks went and looked at what the 1800s slavery abolitionist movement was doing and asked what we can learn from them. There are some explanatory talks by a historian/activist T Russell Hunter. A recent one was entitled "William Wilberforce against the 'Gradual Abolitionists'". I'd be interested to know what you think of his methods.
The quote at 19:07 is interesting because it implies that we should follow his advice; however, I ask, did Christ passively watch or did Christ speak out / act? I recall Christ overturning the tables in the Temple; intervening to save a woman caught in adultery, rebuking pharisees and sadducees; calling all men everywhere to repent, etc. Of course this led to Christ being killed by the state, as was Bonhoeffer. I will follow Christ not Bonhoeffer. I have read Bonhoeffer off and on over decades, and what I have decided is that he is just a man, where Jesus Christ is Lord and His example is perfect.
It also seems to go against what Bonhoeffer did. He was resisting evil by protecting Jews, collaborating with the allies and resistance fighters, etc. Preaching that Christ is Lord is resistance to evil.
Great analysis. I was hoping you'd comment on Metaxas' biography of Bonhoeffer, and also why both conservatives and liberals tend to "claim" Bonhoeffer. I'm looking forward to seeing the film.
Look up his family’s response. They have distanced themselves from the book and the movie.
Reach out to Eric Metaxas. While the film isn’t directly based on his biography, it did inspire it. I think you guys having a discussion about this would be fantastic.
Sometimes it is necessary to stand by our principles when confronted with something new. However, sometimes this confrontation makes us realize that our principles were not rooted in the fullness of reality, and they must be changed. The fact that both of these path can be correct depending upon the details is what makes it so hard.
I have, over the years, the impression that our salvation, Jesus and the cross, does not just depend on trusting Him, but we need to add more. (The German preacher) Am I wrong? I hope so. Thanks
“The one thing that is most important is actually within our control: follow Jesus”
@21:45 I disagree with you that the Nazis were unique as in some ways Japanese were even worst. They were so bad the Nazis told them to calm down.
Gavin thank you, very useful. Do you think that Erick Metaxas is making a mistake in dennouncing pastors that are not fighting the political battle as he does?
I’m wondering if Bonhoeffer’s Christianity is more of the WWJD variety? We must do this because it’s what Jesus would have done. WWJD is actually more in line with liberal Christianity, even though it was fashionable among American Evangelicals for a while (like so many fads…”I Found It” and “He Gets Us” being two other examples).
Thoughts on Bonhoeffer's denial of the resurrection?
Maybe you should have on a Germne theologian like Prof. Dr. Christiane Tietz to talk about Bonhoeffer?
Gavin, have you read Richard Weikart on the theology of Bonhoeffer
Perhaps you and Eric Metaxas should get together and hash things out. I was actually impressed with his book, “Letter To The American Church.”
I'm guessing he wouldn't latch onto either of the main sides in our culture war... but I think if he were here today, the Right would especially not like him. Most on the religious right (like Metaxas) don't understand Nazi ideology or practice very well... all of the Nazi's enemies, excepting the Jews, are also currently, the same groups that the american religious right fears and loathes. Not sure what Bonhoeffer would do with that, but if he had survived the war and could be among us, I suspect he'd have some pointed warning/exhortation for the american religious right and their current cult of personality, statist mentality and messianic political machinations in order to get power-over... (Big gov run by our guy! will save America! - for God!)
Ha, yeah, someone's example of ideals get used by later people to manipulate. I have confronted people who manipulate and they usually get offended or, even worse, pretend to be innocent by saying something like, 'I am not manipulating people, I am just propagating what the Bible teaches.' In other words, 'It's not me, it's God.' Well, the Westboro Baptist congregation say exactly the same thing.
the virgin boenhoffer versus the chad graf von galen
He definitely did not
Most important points in this video (for me):
1. The one I disagree with politically isn't Hitler
2. Bonhoeffer is a Neo-Orthodox theologian
I was very worried about the movie when I saw the first trailer. Any retelling of Bonhoeffer's story that doesn't center the gospel is a betrayal of his legacy.
I have a great respect for Bonhoeffer and the confessing church. But I do not believe that his conspiring with others to assassinate Hitler was a godly move. No matter the evil of Hitler, or any other evil, the temptation for believers to use violence to accomplish particular ends is a sign of impatience and lack of trust that everything is in God's hands. Violence is of this wicked age.
If believers feel the need to stand up against some social evil, then the path should always be through peace and the use of existing legal norms. For example, in the instance of MLK Jr's actions, the peaceful protests were always in service of bringing to light the tensions between Constitutional protections to which they were appealing and local state laws. It was finally a mix of court cases and national legislation which affirmed that the protesters had been correct all along.
Since the left has demonized Trump as Hitler, I wonder if some wackos will feel inspired by the subtle errors and omissions of this movie, to try to actually be their misconception of Bonhoeffer.
Look forward to listenjng to this. Witness against Hitler - story of Von Moltke is also worth a watch. Back when BBC made good films.
ruclips.net/video/uKm0iir46Ys/видео.htmlsi=Bv4yBBoQ2HVM8La0
Bonhoeffer was literally a heretic, so yeah, I'd say the film has a big problem (this does not downplay the heroic display of courage)
By the way, it is ABSOLUTELY legitimate to compare Bonhoeffer and the Holocaust to the modern abortion Holocaust
Bonhoeffer denied the resurrection and the virgin birth
Then how can he have been a Christian? These 2 truths are part of ‘the faith’ we need to hold.
And he should be thought of as a revolutionary alone. Even this video verges on the edge of what it is proposing against
please document this claim with a citation
As historically establish-able not the fact they happened, to my memory he saw these events as taken on faith not historical grounds
Bonhoeffer says of historicity of Christ’s tomb, “This is and remains a final stumbling block, which the believer in Christ must learn to live with in one way or another. Empty or not empty, it remains a stumbling block. We cannot be sure of its historicity.” Ibid., 112.
I don't know if passages like this are alone convincing, but Bonhoeffer often talks like this, and it's been my impression reading his lectures that he does not believe the events in the Bible were historically true, but only spiritually true.
Regardless, God bless you Gavin.
Bon Hoffer was a hereticwho rejected the divinity of Jesus, as well as his physical resurrection.
Bonehuffer was a heretic and is burning in hell.
Hey Mr Ortlund I really don’t like the new intro thingy you are doing I don’t think it fits your style and it feels a little jarring and awkward compared to the slow deep lightly edited talking of the rest of the video. I understand the need for a hook to get retention but it’s more important to sell someone on what the video will be like accurately as you may drive away people looking for exactly your style while disappointing people looking for a more fast paced more edited video. Hope this helps!
Weird. I really like the new "preview style". I was thinking that it got a lot of good points out very quickly that preview the rest of the video fairly accurately.
But everyone has their own preferences. Yours aren't less important than mine.
I second this. The preview thing is really annoying.
@@AungusMacgyver Wow. I didn't think I'd be in the minority opinion. Can you help me understand what about the preview opening you don't like?
It's because videos start playing when hovered over. That makes the first few seconds the new thumbnail. It's essentially required by RUclips for videos to get any viewing.
Why aren’t you asking “what is a responsible reason to intentionally slaughter another human being?” instead? Clearly that’s the metaquestion you’ve avoided in the past. You’ve gone on and on about how it’s nuanced and difficult or what have you-but is it?
Again:
The objections to Christian pacifism typically take these forms:
"God kills people, so it must be acceptable [good?] for us to kill people sometimes, too."
"Pacifism would be terribly impractical and difficult in dangerous circumstances."
"God made governments [what kind? Rotary club? The CCP?] for these tasks."
"God didn't explicitly tell soldiers in the New Testament not to continue soldiering." (Ie “did God really say…?”)
Or simply, "You first."
None of these are Christian responses. Why don’t you give up this secular tradition of just war theory as a (de facto) blanket approval of killing? Imagine what a burden would be lifted if you only taught folks to do what they could do in the name of Christ? Bludgeon in the name of Christ? Poison in the name of Christ? Napalm in the name of Christ?
Honestly, Gavin, what gives?
Edit: Gavin, I trust you’ll read the empty-headed replies and know with an even firmer certainty that there is no rational, Christian, consistent defense of apathy or, worse yet, encouragement for violence.
Justice, protection of your family in the face of attack, to name two - your use of 'slaughter' is a straw man', the question should be can a Christian take a life? Clearly the answer is yes. The Bible is full of instances where it is not only allowed but ordered. How does Jesus change this? That is really the question. You suggest this is a metaquestion but give no evidence that it is.
It’s a personal choice since it’s not stated clearly
@@mjphyilImpressive
@@mjphyilJustice begs the question (because obviously I’m arguing that killing is unjust). Violence in defense of family - is that a specifically Christian teaching?
@@mjphyilAgreed. This comment is most certainly a strawman accusation. I’m doubtful if he’s read the entire Bible rather than just snippets. I also love how you pointed out that Christ changes things for God’s people in a myriad of ways.
Gavin you’re a smart guy I love what you do for us prots. But Hitler is not the devil, please do some revisionism on your history. It’s the only thing you get arrested and blackballed for. Ask questions, why? Do some revisionism on what the RED CROSS actually said about that whole situation. Anyways, cheers love as always.
"Revisionism" hooks you with small truths that you hadn't heard before and uses that as an entry point to convince you of enormous inacuraccies that do not logically follow from the small truths. For example, even if you put a construction of Germany's reasons for premptively going to war in 1939 that waters down the level of fault you place on Germany's shoulders, it does not follow that Hitler was anything less than an evil man who engaged in wicked atrocities.
@@JW_______ So was Stalin whom the Allies join up with. You do know the Allies helped to build up Hitler right? There were those who were supporting both sides of the war. Hitler didn't do what he did all by himself.
We like to pretend the Allies are the good guys and the Nazis were the bad guys but the war was a lot more messy than that.
@smidlee7747 "Good guys" and "bad guys" certainly are not helpful terms in the complex arena of international relations. Yet, even if all sides are evil, it doesn't follow that Hitler was not evil.
@ was it evil of him to take over germany to destroy all the degeneracy of the country conducted by the same people affecting us today and banished from 109 countries in the past?
@@JW_______ Hitler is not "evil" according to naturalism, materialism, nationalism or relativism. He is only "evil" according to Christianity which teaches we (the carnal man) are more like Hitler and Stalin than we are like God. In order to be more like God we must be born again, born into the family of God.
It's important how we justify someone like "Hitler" as being evil.
Bonhoeffer is undoubtedly in hell
Not for mere humans to know
Why
What makes you say that?
@@melora-on-harp Maybe because he was a heretic or a traitor to his nation ?