# What would Vader do? Moral bystanding.



## BobVigneault (Nov 12, 2008)

I've been intrigued by the vast variety of responses by board member to stories of attacks on the church.

One of my favorite scenes from the Star Wars story is the conflict we see in Darth Vader as the Emperor is about to kill his son. It's masterful movie making because we don't even see Vader's face and yet you feel what he's feeling.

[video=youtube;4BOQI-LAEzM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BOQI-LAEzM[/video]

I have felt this conflict many times but now I'm praying that the people that make up our fat, bloated and lazy American church will feel the inner struggle. Things are changing in culture and politics and on main street and we just want to eat our big meal, turn over and go back to sleep.

Gary Demar has a lengthy blog post on the topic of "Moral Bystanders" that is worth reading and so I offer the link here.

Here is the concluding quote from the article:



> We’ve become a nation of moral bystanders. Deep down we know certain behaviors are wrong, but we’ve been cajoled into believing that nothing can be said in objection to the new amoral climate. If we do react, we are labeled “intolerant” and “insensitive” to different “lifestyle choices.” Christians are told that they are not being “loving” when they enter an opposing opinion on moral questions. These changes in moral perceptions and attitudes have been stunning. “After the horrendous crime against the World Trade Center towers on September 11, 2001, a young Yale student has this observation: ‘Absent was a general outcry of indignation . . . [M]y generation is uncomfortable assessing, or even asking, whether a moral wrong has taken place.’” Is it any wonder?


----------



## Herald (Nov 12, 2008)

Last evening I was teaching on Jeremiah 7 at church. I spoke about the horrible sins of Judah, the worst being their false worship. They cried out, "Temple of the LORD, temple of the LORD, temple of the LORD!" while coming to worship, all the while reviling the LORD with their practices. There is coming a time in this country when claiming to be a Christian will require living like one. That means making choices and declaring which side you are on. I have a feeling there were one or two people listening to my lesson last evening that voted for the President-Elect, either ignorant of his stand on abortion or indifferent to it. While not making a political statement I've taught the people (in my Jeremiah series) about Judah's horrible sin of offering their children as sacrifices to the pagan god Molech. What Judah did to the newborn we are doing to the unborn! How are we any more righteous than Judah? Of course the answer is that we're not. I challenged them (and myself) to take their faith outside the safety of the church and into the public arena. We know the scripture says that all those who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. Well then, do something worthy to suffer persecution. This is what I challenged them with last night. Naturally that type of challenge takes leadership and a willingness to show the way, and I took some steps that will provide that direction. But this is something we all must do.


----------



## Pergamum (Nov 12, 2008)

*wwdvd*


----------



## BobVigneault (Nov 12, 2008)

Proud to know ya Bill. Good teaching, good application, well done friend.


----------



## smhbbag (Nov 12, 2008)

Bob, do you believe those who recommended more passive responses to attacks on the church are included in these 'moral bystanders'? Or, did the discussion just get you on the topic?


----------



## BobVigneault (Nov 12, 2008)

Shame on you Jeremy, trying to force me beyond my purposely vague and diplomatic introduction.

The questions about appropriate response include two important and distinct criteria. What should the response be and when should we respond. How we respond depends on when we come to the fight.

There is a time to fight and a time to reconcile, a time to attack and a time to negotiate. Everyone needs to have their non negotiable cause - that line that simply must not be crossed. After that it is our duty to fulfill both the positive and negative elements of the sixth commandment. There are no absolutely specific descriptions of response, only spiritual discernment.

The day after president-elect Obama takes office, he is going to use his power of executive order to overturn any strides to maintain pro-dignity and pro-life decisions made in the last few years. President Clinton did the same thing. He will set the tone for his administration. He will rely on the fact that people have become amoral and apathetic.

I heard an Obama follower on the radio this morning, he said, "Whatever he tells me to do, I will do it." I felt a chill.

We can't stand passively as did Adam while Eve eats the fruit over and over and over.


----------



## smhbbag (Nov 12, 2008)

> Shame on you Jeremy, trying to force me beyond my purposely vague and diplomatic introduction.



Sorry, after this post that vague diplomacy may resume 



> The questions about appropriate response include two important and distinct criteria. What should the response be and when should we respond. How we respond depends on when we come to the fight.
> 
> There is a time to fight and a time to reconcile, a time to attack and a time to negotiate. Everyone needs to have their non negotiable cause - that line that simply must not be crossed. After that it is our duty to fulfill both the positive and negative elements of the sixth commandment. There are no absolutely specific descriptions of response, only spiritual discernment.
> 
> ...



Agreed on all points, except to add that we must have much, much more than one non-negotiable cause. Scripture gives us many, and I'm sure you agree.


----------



## he beholds (Nov 12, 2008)

I have often wondered if an appropriate response to abortion would be something akin to civil war. Would it be a just war if we were to take up arms against the government who allows one group of people to legally murder another (I know that murder is not legal, and killing is, but I maintain that this is legal murder and not killing)? I have recently started to think that it is only right to take up arms against the gov't if they FORCE us to sin, not just if they allow it. Rome was a terrible gov't, and Paul's advice to Christians there was not fight it. So barring violence, what else is there? 
What I'd most like to see is a national TV debate on abortion. Have the best from each side fight it out. What we need on the pro-life side is someone who is as passionate for the not-yet-born as Ron Paul is for liberty in general--someone who is less concerned with being popular than he is about educating the masses. No one does this. Even politicians who claim to be pro-life NEVER attempt to reach the others by explaining WHY they are pro-life. I'm starting to believe that no one in Washington is truly concerned about the rights of the not-yet-born. And since we elect people to govern, we must conclude that Washington is pretty in touch with the desires of culture, since they do get voted in. What can we do??


----------



## BobVigneault (Nov 12, 2008)

It's not the time to take up arms but it is time to fight fire with fire. If they use grass roots mobilization then we do the same. If they call their representatives then we do the same. I don't believe that the law written on the hearts of men has been completely suppressed. We can awake the sleeping conscience of the lazy brained American.

We must educate!!!!! People are content to feel and are losing the ability to think. This last election proved that.


----------



## Thomas2007 (Nov 12, 2008)

he beholds said:


> I have often wondered if an appropriate response to abortion would be something akin to civil war. Would it be a just war if we were to take up arms against the government who allows one group of people to legally murder another (I know that murder is not legal, and killing is, but I maintain that this is legal murder and not killing)? I have recently started to think that it is only right to take up arms against the gov't if they FORCE us to sin, not just if they allow it. Rome was a terrible gov't, and Paul's advice to Christians there was not fight it. So barring violence, what else is there?
> What I'd most like to see is a national TV debate on abortion. Have the best from each side fight it out. What we need on the pro-life side is someone who is as passionate for the not-yet-born as Ron Paul is for liberty in general--someone who is less concerned with being popular than he is about educating the masses. No one does this. Even politicians who claim to be pro-life NEVER attempt to reach the others by explaining WHY they are pro-life. I'm starting to believe that no one in Washington is truly concerned about the rights of the not-yet-born. And since we elect people to govern, we must conclude that Washington is pretty in touch with the desires of culture, since they do get voted in. What can we do??



Jessica,

I would suggest you read, "The Rights of Magistrates Over Their Subjects" by Theodore Beza. I believe it will provide a framework for you to understand the Reformed Protestant perspective in regards to the questions you ask.

One of the biggest problems we have as Americans is that most people will not exercise their Rights. There is a risk in doing so, so most people accept privileges that appear to be their Rights but are not, then they whine about their lack of courage when the tide turns against them and their privileges become restricted in contradiction to what they believe are their Rights. Because of that this people will never take up arms against a tyrant, even if the times or circumstances may arise which would necessitate it. Such an action requires a people with much more character than we have as a people.

Cordially,

Thomas


----------

