Was the cleansing of the Promised Land a foreshadowing of the cleansing of the earth God will accomplish at the Judgment? In both cases, only God's Chosen People will remain alive — and the new heavens and new earth are often spoken of as a return to the Promised Land.

Just thinking out loud …

I believe full well that in most (not all) situations of violence it is easy to discern, “know”, the motivation/intentions of ones heart. Their actions and words portray them very clearly. A man walks up, reveals the action of a handgun from within his pocket and says, “Give me your money or I’ll kill you”; puts it in plain English what his motivation is. A man that breaks into my house after dark and goes straight for me (not to be used out of context but, “how can anyone enter a strong man's house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man? Then he can rob his house.” Matt 12.29) is going after the strong man so that he can have his way with anything and anyone in my house; again plain “English” as to what his intentions are. Back to Jay’s sniper scenario, a man that holds a gun to the heads of children is giving strong indicators as to what his motivations are.

All actions should be done in a manner as if you were doing them for God. I’ve more than likely just stepped into it with that statement but here goes. Remember our discussion on the condition of the heart? I will not rehash all that here but it all applies here. Will everyone know that Christ is the motivation for everything I do? No. But they will see that I am different. I am reluctant to share this story but believe it goes a long way in explaining my stance. To preface it, know this, I am not boasting in myself but in the power of Christ to work even in me. As you are aware my mission in Iraq was security, more specifically security for personnel doing humanitarian projects; infrastructure, potable water systems, landfill management, city parks, and schools for the Greater Baghdad area. During these missions I was in full contact with three Iraqi interpreters. When time and occasion would permit I would discuss our beliefs on a surface level with one interpreter in particular (We will call him Bob for OPSEC purposes – to my knowledge he is the only one still living). Almost daily he got to watch me react to circumstances and interact with people (yet all the while he thought I was Roman Catholic, don’t know where he got that other than that was the only type of “Christian” he had been exposed to). One pivotal day Bob finally asked me what made me so different from all the other soldiers. To this I had only one answer – Jesus Christ. Even though I had to carry out the same tasks and duties of other soldiers and he saw me in some hairy situations he knew there was something different about me. We had yet to really discuss who Jesus really was but apparently my beliefs made me look different from everyone around me because of my actions. I am happy to say that our discussions did get deeper and he happily accepted a Bible (NIV) written in Arabic (which he asked for) so that he could study the Word on his own. To my knowledge though he never accepted Jesus as his Savior, but further discussions indicated he was seriously considering doing so.

Our actions, whether in aggression or in peace, can demonstrate Christ to others. Our actions demonstrate to the world that we are no longer conformed to this world but are being transformed, and it all starts with the condition of our heart. And that transformation can be evidenced even in violent times.

In love,
Steve

In love,
Steve Valentine

I believe that when Paul said, "We were too weak for that," he was referring to what the aggressors had done, not what the Corinthian congregants had done. Paul is saying that he would not use aggression (whether it was literal or not).

That's my understanding of the passage. Study it some more and see what you think.

Grace and peace,
Tim Archer

As far as the bandits being met with Paul’s sword, you are right it would take speculation to come to the conclusion that Paul would defend himself with violence in that specific circumstance. But back up a few verses and it becomes clearer that Paul was not against meeting violence with at least the same amount of aggression, if not a little more in order to prevail in the situation. And here is how I came to this conclusion.

Paul in verse 19 &20 has this to say, “19You gladly put up with fools since you are so wise! 20In fact, you even put up with anyone who enslaves you or exploits you or takes advantage of you or pushes himself forward or slaps you in the face.” Because the Corinthian’s think themselves so wise they have been duped by apostolic pretenders and done so “gladly.” Meaning they put up no resistance to this invasion of their congregation. And this was no peaceful invasion. Note verse 20: enslaves, exploits, pushes, and slaps (in the face) – all are words of physical aggression. First, Katadouloi (enslaving) is used not in the sense as the Judaizers of Galatians 2.4 who sought to enslave the church to Mosaic Law, but in the sense that the intruders were treating them like slaves. The verb used for “exploiting” is katesthio which is commonly used for when an animal catches its pray, it means “to eat up” or “devour.” Also “pushes themselves forward” implies a physical moving of someone else to improve ones standing (noted this can also be done through the ideology of one thinking he is better than someone else so they dismiss the one and push their personal standing ahead of others). And finally, slaps (in the face). The Greek word dero, used for slaps, means to “flay” or “skin”. A very physical connotation is given to this slapping, thus giving the idea that the intruder was slapping them so violently that skin was coming off their face. We see this often in boxing matches, so much force can be produced by the human body that when a fist or hand meets the flesh of another it rips or tears away. Paul has just place the Corinthian church take over in the very physical realm of violence, and yet the Corinthian congregants did nothing to stop this take over.

Now Paul implies how he would have reacted to that very same situation had he been there. I believe he is still using sarcasm when he says “we were too weak for that”, meaning that he was below the Corinthian congregants (Cc). The Cc saw themselves as so wise that they were smart for letting the intruders do this to them and Paul is saying he would not have been as wise as the Cc because he would not have put up with this violent attack. It may very well be speculation on my part, but it is clearly implied that Paul would not leave out the use of violence to rid the church of these strong-arm preachers (much like Christ used a whip to clean the church out once before).

In love,
Steve Valentine

We don't always know for sure and sometimes it's obvious, we can pray for God to lead us in whatever we do.

Does Christ only care about how He is represented when unbelievers are aware of who the believers are? Or should i always act as though i'm representing Christ even if (to my knowledge) no one notices? Do other people have to be aware that i'm doing things in the name of Christ in order for my actions to truly be done in the name of Christ? What actions am i permitted to take not in the name of Christ?

In the Sermon on the Mount, i don't gather that the Roman Soldiers imposing their equipment loads on bystanders cared about those bystanders' theological commitments. Yet Jesus said take the load and go the second mile.

–Guy