shirley
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 114
|
Post by shirley on May 2, 2012 12:08:43 GMT -8
This is something that has troubled me as I have read some of the forum postings. In several forums people have suggested that certain occupations are acceptable to non-Christians, but not for Christians. For example, soldier, policeman, politician, and executioner. I have a problem with this. If a job is honorable or at least necessary, why should it be unacceptable to anybody? Or if a job is not honorable or necessary, why should it be acceptable to anybody? I don't think this standard is a paradox, I think it is hypocrisy.
Anybody want to share their opinion, please?
|
|
|
Post by robin on May 2, 2012 16:42:31 GMT -8
Shirley, you make a great point and I agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by christopher on May 2, 2012 20:11:20 GMT -8
Shirley, can you quote some of the postings that are troubling you?
|
|
shirley
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 114
|
Post by shirley on May 3, 2012 19:46:47 GMT -8
Chris here are some quotes: In conclusion, it is a particular stance of the believer in Jesus not to participate in violence with the intent to harm against another. Others might-- perhaps even should-- fight against another, but followers of Jesus must not. This is the most direct of the statements that say certain occupations are ok for non-Christians, but not for Christians. The others are more implied. I think that it is possible (although sometimes difficult) to be a police officer and an anabaptist. Many cops are peace officers, peace makers, not enforcers. I think that type of policing is more effective. However, it is impossible to participate in the military and uphold this ideal. I firmly believe that to participate in the U.S. modern military is to deny Jesus' teaching to "love your enemy". The same as to be president (although Jimmy Carter tried his best) and many other aspects of the government. I think there is no separation between what we do as followers of Jesus and what we do in our occupation. Unless of course he is saying we should have no police or military or president. The anabaptist would like (often demands) that every cop who becomes a Christian to cease being a cop. But I think it's possible for a Christian to live in both realms, though difficult. I realize Josh is stating a fact, not expressing his opinion. I'm not particularly against the death penalty by nature. But if I had to guess, I'm pretty sure Jesus would be. Think about the practicalities of the death penalty. Nobody should be an executioner for a living. That position simply should not exist. I don't believe a country or state or government should create a job position that nobody would allow our daughter or son or mother to do (obviously I'm a reluctant pacifist as well). I'm not sure if marcus's statement that "Nobody should be an executioner" applies only to people who care what Jesus thinks or absolutely everybody. But since I am not against the death penalty, obviously I believe the job position should exist. Do you get what I'm getting at?
|
|
|
Post by christopher on May 4, 2012 15:55:20 GMT -8
I get what you're getting at.
To be honest, I vacillate on the whole topic of pacifism.
On the one hand, it cannot be denied that God used his own people as instruments of judgment. There was a time (OT) that it was inappropriate and indeed sinful for kingdom people NOT to kill. But Jesus introduced an ethic which he seems to indicate is the "ideal" or the way it should be, which means not resisting an evil man. Of course, in a fully realized Kingdom of Christ, the point is moot.
But since we are mixed world (kingdom people and non), perhaps what others are saying is that there are still instruments of God's judgment (He uses the violent tendencies of the wicked to execute His judgments), but that those instruments shouldn't be Christians because we're called to a different ethic. Not that it's necessarily "ok" for non-Christians to hold jobs that kill others, but that they're unavoidable even if unfortunate.
Still, I don't necessarily think being a cop is contrary to Jesus' teaching as long as deadly force is used only as a means to protect the innocent and only as a last resort.
It's definitely a sticky subject and I can certainly see both sides of the argument.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on May 4, 2012 17:19:17 GMT -8
I once read a fascinating article about a death row warden (?) who was a Christian. It left me coming away with the concept that it was indeed possible to be thoroughly Christian and conduct that job.
shirley wrote:
Agreed.
|
|
shirley
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 114
|
Post by shirley on May 5, 2012 7:54:23 GMT -8
But since we are mixed world (kingdom people and non), perhaps what others are saying is that there are still instruments of God's judgment (He uses the violent tendencies of the wicked to execute His judgments), but that those instruments shouldn't be Christians because we're called to a different ethic. Not that it's necessarily "ok" for non-Christians to hold jobs that kill others, but that they're unavoidable even if unfortunate. Doesn't God desire that all men be saved? Therefore aren't we all called to this different ethic? Some have accepted it, some have not, but I have hard time seeing that God would make job distinctions for those who someday might. Still, I don't necessarily think being a cop is contrary to Jesus' teaching as long as deadly force is used only as a means to protect the innocent and only as a last resort. I agree, I certainly think this would be the ideal with any job that requires taking a persons life. I've been thinking a lot about marcus's comment that executioner was a job . And first of all, I don't disallow my adult child to do anything, but how would I feel if my son decided to work as a prison warden where he was required to execute criminals? Honestly, I hope he would derive no pleasure from pushing the button, but I would love him no less for doing his job. I'm pretty sure when I was 12yrs old and Harriet the Spy was my role model and I wanted to be a CIA agent when I grew up that I realized my job might one day require killing someone. And yes, I was a Christian then. I once read a fascinating article about a death row warden (?) who was a Christian. It left me coming away with the concept that it was indeed possible to be thoroughly Christian and conduct that job. Josh, any chance you could find that article?
|
|
|
Post by stevekimes on May 5, 2012 14:06:55 GMT -8
Of course I hold that some jobs are unacceptable for Christians, but would be okay for non-Christians. In a general ethical camp, a non-Christian can be a drunkard as long as they aren't breaking any laws or hurting anyone. But a Christian shouldn't. A non-Christian can be a homosexual as long as it doesn't hurt anyone, but a Christian shouldn't (of course that could open up another can of worms...).
Basic criteria for Christians includes not being greedy and loving one's enemies. Although Josh and I disagree on this, I cannot in any way reconcile loving one's enemies and killing them. Thus, if a job requires a Christian to act only in accord with a profit motive, that isn't a good job for a Christian. If a job requires one to unquestioningly kill another person because they are a "bad guy" that job isn't good for a Christian.
Of course there are grey areas-- police officers, certainly-- but I think there are a number of jobs that are simply "off limits". A clearer one would be working in a strip club.
|
|
shirley
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 114
|
Post by shirley on May 5, 2012 21:52:39 GMT -8
Thus, if a job requires a Christian to act only in accord with a profit motive, that isn't a good job for a Christian. If a job requires one to unquestioningly kill another person because they are a "bad guy" that job isn't good for a Christian. Don't you think God concerns himself with the non-Christian? Don't you think that if a job is being done solely "for profit motive" and God believes this is wrong that God would feel this is wrong for everyone, whether they have accepted his salvation or not? If indeed "to unquestioningly kill another person" is evil than isn't it equally evil for the un-believer according to God? I could see how one might take this dual view, okay for me but not for them, if they were a non-Christian, someone who didn't believe in these "higher ideals", but I just can't reconcile this idea as a Christian. A clearer one would be working in a strip club. I was hoping someone would go there. I believe my criteria for a job in my initial post was that it was honorable or necessary. I would have a hard time arguing that working in a strip club was honorable or necessary. If you wanted to say bartender, then I think we might have a gray area. I have a friend whom I love who works in the porn industry. I would never defend his job as honorable or necessary. On a personal basis, I believe he is a consenting adult and can do what he wants, but I would not say his job is acceptable for a Christian or a non-Christian. One day he will stand in judgement before God and God have mercy on my soul if he should say my Christian friend Shirley thought it was okay because I did not consider myself a Christian. Anyway, thats how I feel, If someone could adequately answer my questions I could possibly change my mind. Steve, maybe you could address my questions in the first paragraph, since you seem to be the one that feels most strongly about this idea.
|
|
|
Post by stevekimes on May 6, 2012 12:54:19 GMT -8
Of course God concerns himself with the non-Christian. But I think we are all on the same page that we believe both that "faith without works is dead" and "we are saved by grace through faith and not by works."
When I mean that a non-Christian can do something, I mean that we have no right to judge or to control how someone else does something. This is not the kingdom of God, and a non-Christian has not chosen to be a part of the kingdom of God. If they are acting according to what they consider to be right, then who are we to say otherwise? They will not be convinced unless they have the Holy Spirit and they won't have the Holy Spirit until they are in Christ. Paul said, "Who are we to judge the world? We are to judge those who are inside." We could spend a lot of time discussing what Paul meant there, but what I understand it to mean is: We as Christians don't have the right to tell unbelievers how they should live. We can encourage them, but we don't have the right to use power to control them. If a person has the Holy Spirit and is in Christ, then we not only have the right but the responsibility to give them the word of God and to help convince them to follow what is right (Matt 18:15-17; Gal 6:1).
So what will be "honorable" or "necessary" will be different between Christians and non-Christians. Or it should be. And if a non-Christian says that, say, working in the porn industry is "honorable" and "necessary", even though we strongly disagree with that, given their moral basis, we probably can't disagree with them. If a person says about another job, "Perhaps it isn't the most moral job, but I've got to take care of my family," it's a tough position to argue with given this economy and given that they don't have the Holy Spirit to convince them otherwise.
I spend a lot of time convincing non-Christians to do things they otherwise think is pointless. And I spend a lot of time convincing Christians to do what they should do according to the word of God. Let me tell you, it is much better to rely on the Spirit and the word of God than to beat your head against whatever notions of right and wrong a particular non-believer has.
|
|
shirley
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 114
|
Post by shirley on May 9, 2012 11:37:10 GMT -8
When I mean that a non-Christian can do something, I mean that we have no right to judge or to control how someone else does something. This is not the kingdom of God, and a non-Christian has not chosen to be a part of the kingdom of God. If they are acting according to what they consider to be right, then who are we to say otherwise? ... Paul said, "Who are we to judge the world? We are to judge those who are inside." Steve I can totally agree with you on this point. Still, I feel that maybe we are missing each other in our semantics. I think there is a difference in us judging and God judging, and maybe I wasn't clear when I started this thread either. I don't believe it is our place to judge others job choices, when they are not Christian, or when they didn't ask our opinion, but I don't think that means that God doesn't judge job choices. No, we don't play God, but can we use "okay for them, not for us" as a justification for an argument about our Christian world views. Shouldn't we be concerned in our speaking(or writing) about what God is concerned about, or do you believe God makes this distinction too? I guess another way of putting this is, if we are a part of the kingdom of God shouldn't, as much as we have grown in God's life, our political, social, employment, etc.. views reflect this?
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Jul 8, 2012 14:58:44 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Aug 29, 2012 22:01:04 GMT -8
I'm just realizing that this thread kinda never came to a natural conclusion.
A thought that occured to me reading through it again:
I don't think Paul meant (by "not judging the world") that we are not to speak the truth to the world, not to preach righteousness to them, not to judge their actions, etc.. I think he meant we do not condemn the people of this world, we don't pass sentence on them, as we would someone who sinned without repentance in the church.
That said, the effectiveness of our "preaching" to the world is only as good as their cooperation with the Holy Spirit.
|
|
shirley
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 114
|
Post by shirley on Aug 31, 2012 9:10:23 GMT -8
Josh, I would agree with the above statement, but I feel like my main point is being misunderstood or ignored. What does God think, and what does that mean for us when we argue for or against something if we are to have the "mind of Christ". On a personal level, the church I was raised in condemned artists - musicians, writers, actors, etc... - especially Christian ones - because they said, their goal was to make a name for themselves, glorify themselves, and thereby not glorify God. Tough stuff for someone who wanted to be a writer when they grow up. Now, writing and drawing might be considered gifts, but you had to make sure that when you used them, you used them to glorify God, not yourself. For example, there were a number of guys around my age that were/are excellent song writers. They would write a song, teach it to a small group, then introduce it to a larger group. You might even see it on paper with guitar chords, people in their locality, or corner of the U.S. might know who they are, but you will never see their name attached. If they want glory, they are not "in their spirit". That said, most or many of these church members watch secular movies or listen to secular music(though with much discretion), and even perhaps display secular art in their homes. I think this is two-faced. But the point is, they would say, It's okay for the artists who are not Christian because they don't know any better, but its not okay for the ones who are, because (insert excuse) they should be focusing their lives on Christ (Jesus wouldn't do it? etc...). Would anybody here agree with this statement?
I dont. If God thinks being an actor or a writer is an acceptable profession for an atheist than why would he not think it acceptable for one of his own. On the other hand, if God does not think it is acceptable, than I will gladly change my goal for what I want to be when I grow up. (I'm not promoting glorifying yourself, but raise your hand if you have a favorite Christian artist you know by name.)
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Sept 1, 2012 8:51:07 GMT -8
Shirley,
I agree that God doesn't have different standards for professions between Christians and non-Christians. If a job in general is approved by God, it should be theoretically accessable to both Christians and non-Christians.
The only caveat to me is that certain jobs may not be wise for certain people- they may prove to be too tempting toward evil, too much of an occasion for pride or greed or ......
On another note, are you now convinced that it isn't necessarily vainglorious for a artist to attach his name to his work?
|
|
shirley
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 114
|
Post by shirley on Sept 1, 2012 13:19:03 GMT -8
On another note, are you now convinced that it isn't necessarily vainglorious for a artist to attach his name to his work? I am, but recently I've wondered if this isn't mental baggage that I carry that has stopped me from being more proactive about my dreams. Not that I should use that as an excuse. But I know it stopped me from doing stuff years ago when I was in college that could have qualified me for different career paths.
|
|
Watchermike
Intermediate Member
Living for the Lord
Posts: 77
How did you find the Aletheia Forums?: You sent a E-mail (Thank God)
|
Post by Watchermike on Mar 25, 2013 20:19:50 GMT -8
I think taking a job involves knowing the consequences of the job spiritually,physically,and mentally. Where would we be if David didn't kill Goliath? What did God think of David? I don't think he was a soldier at that time but he had to know his consequences. Remember free will? Remember that we will all answer to God in the end? I think if we all took an ethical approach on everything,we would be afraid of leaving our own houses in the fear that God might not approve. So maybe we should lean on our faith in God to make the right choices for ourselves (I am talking about jobs). Just my two cents of course.
|
|