Scriptures were written over a period in the neighborhood of a thousand years. In that time the authors bore witness to dramatic changes in the social orders of mankind. The progression from tribalistic societies subject to the agathon and dictates of honor unto the rigid legal codifications of the Romans. The Old Testament rests on both sides of politicization and the New testifies to the advent of nationalism.

In the scheme of things, the vigilante is an anachronism, a holdover from the age of the agathon that survives by some measure under the rule of law. A vigilante is one who functions under the dictates of honor, who believes it is his personal responsibility to right wrongs done against him or those close to him. In recent years Hollywood has undertaken to render the vigilante into the narrow terms of a revenge-seeker, one who indulges the audience's sadism by letting them take part in sensational violence victims bestow upon their late attackers. I'm inclined to use a somewhat broader definition of anyone who answers an offense by throwing out the law of acts on honor, (or 'takes the law into their own hands' as we mistakenly term it).

The consideration of the vigilante in the context of Scriptures came to me a few years ago when I first sat down to read the Book of Judges.

As a classicist, I tend to read Scripture as historical documents as much as holy writ. This is to say that, as I read, part of my mind is thinking about the writer sitting down at his desk and trying to describe an event as he believes it to have happened years or centuries before. That part then works back from the textual account towards the actual event in consideration of how said event would appear to contemporaries.

The question of vigilantism stems from an application of this method to Judges, most all of which raise certain issues. Take the account of Gideon, for instance, Judges, chapter six and eight.

For reasons cyclical and unnecessary to repeat, it came that Israel fell under the rule of the Midianites. Every year as the Israelites brought in their harvests the Midianites and two others would ride in and pillage or destroy these harvests. The effect was to ensure the Israelites remain poor and starving, so that they would not arise as rivals to their power. An angel of the Lord comes to Gideon to call him as a judge. He's to set forth and free Israel from Midian. In order to prove it is the Lord he devises some elaborate tests that are passed. Then he raises an army and sets out to war. The Lord comes to again and tells him he has too many men. A test is undertaking to trim the army to a smaller number. Then this smaller force goes into battle and is victorious, which understandably teed off those who were left behind.

Think about these events appear in empirical terms. Part of why Judges is good for this is how easy it comes. There is no indication that anyone besides Gideon is in communion with the angel of the Lord. The post-battle criticisms from Ephraim suggests further that the communion itself was not common knowledge. Ergo, in the consideration of the contemporary experience one has to remove God from the equation, as, with the exception of Gideon , the contemporaries themselves were not aware of the Lord being involved in the first place.

So what do you have then?

There is a man. He is a member of a vassal state. The vassals are subject to oppression and harassment from the foreign body, due apparently to a war that was lost some years before. This man decides that he has had enough. He goes to his countrymen and begs that they join him in a war against the oppressors. That Israel shake off her yoke and be strong once again. What reasons he gives to them do not survive, but "God is our side again" was either not among his arguments or its presence was something taken for mere rhetoric by his audience. Regardless, an army forms and sets out to make war on the oppressor. At some point after the army stops and camps. The man decides his army is too large. Reasonable given tactics and the fact of hill country. Plausible that he desired the formation of a strike force, to send the main army one way while his smaller body hit the flanks, or some stratagem along those lines. The reason he gave to his soldiers does not survive. Instead we have a story about judging men by how they drink from a stream. The man fights his battle and wins. Some of his people are upset afterwards, but he tells them by these methods God has delivered them of tyranny. They should rejoice the ends instead of dwelling over the means.

What you have here is a vigilante band. This far back in time the Midianites are certainly not a lawful government, given that the very idea of law was still a novelty, but they are the effective rulers of the land. From this that they demand tribute of the Israelites.

Render unto Caesar would seem to suggest that law holds power and should be respected, but if rulers are to be respected why then are judges vindicated for acts that amount to open rebellion? More importantly, how is this message supposed to enmesh with modern times?

A man comes into town with a call to arms. Say he takes a route different from Gideon and decides to let you in on the real reason why. He says he was up on the mountain yestereve whereupon he was visited by an angel of the Lord. The angel said to go down to this place and call the people to war.

Hopefully, the people of this place would hesitate before taking the man at his word. If the man tried to use rhetoric to further his opinion, to suggest the violence that comes naturally to be what the people should undertake, hopefully they hesitate doubly so, (as indulgence of that violence that comes naturally typically ends in a lynch mob).

Saint Augustine suggested that the way to test preachers of this kind is to weigh their words against the tradition. God being eternal, he is thus unchanging and consequently the new material of the vision should not stand in contradiction to the received wisdom. So the question then: do the Scriptures validate vigilantism or are the results of this empirical reading of Judges merely an anomaly of the period and the hypostasis assumed by the writers?

I would see this as having to go back to the Torah. The Israelites by tribe were given land. The Levites did not have land and thier were cities of Refuge where Judges lived. Vigilatism is not condoned by scripture in the sence of this example. Now it says that if somebody basically loses thier head over a family member maybe being killed if they caught them and killed them they were not held accountable. This being the person who supposedly committed the act would have to flee the aggressor and if he made it to a city of refuge he would be protected and the cases would be heard by the judges. If he was harmed in the city then the one doing the harm would be held accountable.

This is spelled out in the law and it has to be measured by it. Now in the case of The Angel of Yahweh speaking on Yahweh's behalf to a judge or leader to do anything it was the same as if Yahweh said it himself and very likely this was Yahshua who is referred as the Angel of Yahweh, possibly but he takes on the I Am also.

The scripture can not be looked at as something that the writers gave us. It has to be looked at as if Yahweh himself wrote it.otherwise its mans opinion and this is one reason why Yahshua came to fullfill the Law as it was suppose to be. Himself being the unblemished Lamb of Yahweh. Perfect as every word of Scripture is perfect. Thier are mistakes in translation but the Schoolmaster is the Torah and when we do not understand its meaning and if it could of been added then the Torah Law has to be consulted as the validity of anything. Blessings..Miles

scripture validate condone and even encourage vigilantism under the law "an eye for an eye"... extruding the obvious motive of self defense scripture also provide ways to circumvent around it's own scripture..an example of this is The Sixth Commandment"Thou Shalt Not Kill" ......

under scripture mentality it's ok to kill as long one does not murder the one they kill or if God asked them to kill then such killings fall under the category of "Righteous Killings" ......

it doesn't matter if one has a preponderance of evidence or any evidence pertaining to the possible guilt of the person in question or even if the person committed any tort against the condemner ...as long as one believes that they are making a righteous judgment then under scripture they can practically kill anyone they choose and claim they killed under the name of God

an example of this is Jesus teaching to turn the other cheek but yet in his second coming he himself will supposedly come back as some type of Charles Bronson (Death Wish) vigilante swinging the sword of righteous in which under Scripture Law Jesus has full immunity to kill anyone he choose ...in fact he doesn't even have to be Jesus but only have to either believe that he is Jesus or get others to believe he is God or Jesus ...

these are some of the reasons why such beliefs are now considered to be cult mentality and why cults now need governmental approval in the countries in which they are practice before they can be label as being a Religion, this way vigilantism under the disguise of righteous killings under scripture can be halted or at least controlled

in other words if Jesus comes back he has to follow government law not scripture ...

Funches writes:

"If Jesus comes back he has to follow government law not scripture."

Rend unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and God what is God's. This was asked of Him 2,000 years ago, and He answered in beautifully back then.

A few points:

1. Whenever the word "IF" is used in the Bible, it is spoken either by Satan or by one possessed by evil. "If you are the Son of Man, turn these stones into bread."

2. Jesus IS coming back. It is not a matter of "if," but of "when."

3. WHEN He returns, the world will have gone through the rapture. So, the idea of government as we know it would not exist.

Hope this helps,
Robert

well that would explain why Jesus spoke in parables and not in direct truth ...that way he could always claim that his "If" was told in metaphor

hopes that helps

it's a belief that when people die they come back as a Ghost or a poltergeist ...this is why religion is the same as a belief in the paranormal

the Rapture will be a way to rid the world of Christianity

Rapture, Rapture, Rapture:

You make me laugh. But, you are way off. Allow me to clarify:

"well that would explain why Jesus spoke in parables and not in direct truth ...that way he could always claim that his "If" was told in metaphor"

Nope, He spoke in parables so that people could understand what he was saying. Realize that He came to Earth because we are so stubborn, we weren't getting the hint of what God was saying (and so, we continued our evil ways). As the people to whom Christ spoke were largely not educated, He had to speak to them in ways they did understand.

"it's a belief that when people die they come back as a Ghost or a poltergeist ...this is why religion is the same as a belief in the paranormal"

Read the Book of Revelation. Christ is come back in his full form, not as some ghost. To lead us into heaven. What an awesome thing that is.

"the Rapture will be a way to rid the world of Christianity."

It is written, "Can Satan cast out Satan?" If Christ is the center of Christianity, and Jesus is the one who will resolve all of this, how can He rid the world of Christianity?

Think about it.
Shiki

logic would dicates that perhaps Jesus would only speak in parables to those that were educated since they would have the education to figure out the meanings

this is why to give the uneducated words riddled in parables would be an attempt at deception or to confuse them as a way to protect himself from any responsibility as to what he said

also the disciples of Jesus were no more educated that the masses but yet he talked to them in direct truth ....

but either way....wouldn't you agree that even the uneducated deserves the direct truth

according to the belief Jesus died on the cross...so if he do come back in full form that classify him as being a Zombie or one of the "Undead" ....again this is another example of why religion is a belief in the paranormal

if the Rapture is to take away Christians....then they will be no Christians here on Earth ... ...also many Christians are trying to claim that Jesus a Man is God ...which provide God a reason to remove them in the battle of good and evil

in the bible the only time a massive amount of people are killed or taken away is because God is displeased with them

Matthew 13:9-23

9, Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

10, And the disciples came, and said unto him,

Why speakest thou unto them in parables?

11, He answered and said unto them,

Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries
of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.

12, For whosoever hath, to him shall be given,
and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not,
from him shall be taken away even that he hath.

13, Therefore speak I to them in parables:
because they seeing see not;
and hearing they hear not,
neither do they understand.

14, And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias,
which saith,
By hearing ye shall hear,
and shall not understand;
and seeing ye shall see,
and shall not perceive:

15, For this people's heart is waxed gross,
and their ears are dull of hearing,
and their eyes they have closed;
lest at any time they should see with their eyes,
and hear with their ears,
and should understand with their heart,
and should be converted, and I should heal them.

16, But blessed are your eyes, for they see:
and your ears, for they hear.

17, For verily I say unto you,
That many prophets and righteous men
have desired to see those things which ye see,
and have not seen them;
and to hear those things which ye hear,
and have not heard them.

18, Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower.

19, When any one heareth the word of the kingdom,
and understandeth it not,
then cometh the wicked one,
and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart.
This is he which received seed by the way side.

20, But he that received the seed into stony places,
the same is he that heareth the word,
and anon with joy receiveth it;

21, Yet hath he not root in himself,
but dureth for a while:
for when tribulation
or persecution ariseth because of the word,
by and by he is offended.

22, He also that received seed among the thorns
is he that heareth the word;
and the care of this world,
and the deceitfulness of riches,
choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.

23, But he that received seed

into the good ground

is he that heareth the word,

and understandeth it;

which also beareth fruit,

and bringeth forth,

some an hundredfold,

some sixty, some thirty.

Exactly!

The rapture removes the believers from the unbelieving group
that is left behind;
The greater mass of people who risked their souls
to prove God a liar.

Very interesting perspective, Funches. However, and this is documented in the Bible, you are incorrect.

"Logic would dicates that perhaps Jesus would only speak in parables to those that were educated since they would have the education to figure out the meanings. this is why to give the uneducated words riddled in parables would be an attempt at deception or to confuse them as a way to protect himself from any responsibility as to what he said"

Most people at the time of Christ were not educated. Education was a privilege for the rich and elite only. Most people worked doing some sort of trade. As an example, Simon Peter was a fisherman, and that is why Jesus said, "Come with me and I will make you fishers of men."

Jesus did speak to the educated and uneducated alike.

"also the disciples of Jesus were no more educated that the masses but yet he talked to them in direct truth .... but either way....wouldn't you agree that even the uneducated deserves the direct truth"

But, what is truth. Jesus said, "I am THE way and THE truth and THE life?" By the way, Judas (treasurer and scholar) and Matthew (tax collector) were educated.

"According to the belief Jesus died on the cross...so if he do come back in full form that classify him as being a Zombie or one of the "Undead" ....again this is another example of why religion is a belief in the paranormal."

What is paranormal? Of or pertaining to the claimed occurrence of an event or perception without scientific explanation, as psychokinesis, extrasensory perception, or other purportedly supernatural phenomena. Now, depending on your viewpoint of science and logic, this may or may not be true from your perspective. However, and I am speaking from my opinion only, logically speaking, Creationism is the most rational explanation of things, and there is a Messiah who is destined to come back at the end of the ages. If you look at the signs of the times, as documented in the Bible, we are in the end days. So, to me, it is rational and logical that Christ will return, and so it is not a paranormal event.

"If the Rapture is to take away Christians....then they will be no Christians here on Earth ... ...also many Christians are trying to claim that Jesus a Man is God ...which provide God a reason to remove them in the battle of good and evil."

Excellent point. There will be Christians after the Rapture, but it is those Christians who are not complete. As an example, let's say i am a Christian, but I have doubts. I would not be taken up in the Rapture. So, yes, even after the Rapture, there will be Christians.

"In the bible the only time a massive amount of people are killed or taken away is because God is displeased with them."

But, God loves us more. In fact, God IS love. He loves us so much that He created a place for those of us who do not want to be with Him. And that place is Hell. And that is why Hell is torment. Because it is devoid of God.

Hope this helps,
Shiki

thanks for the passage....apparently the passage displays exactly why the masses were uneducated ...it was due to Jesus making the decision to keep them uneducated by not revealing the mysteries of Heaven to them and then punish them by speaking in parables.....jeezzzzzz...talking about blaming the victims ....

I guess he learned that from his Father that did the same thing with Adam and Eve and the mysteries of The Tree of Knowledge routine ...God didn't educate Adam and Eve about evil which included disobedience to him as being the ultimate evil... but once those two uneducated sinners disobeyed him he condemn them and the entire human race for being uneducated about disobedience

But that is the whole point. We are NOT condemned. That is why He sent Christ. That is why Christ died for you. yes, for YOU. If you follow Christ, you are going to go to heaven. If you are saved, you are saved. That is it. That's the beauty of grace. None of us deserve it, but all who want it have access to it.

Armageddon is the war between good and evil ...if you take away all the good there will be no good left to fight in the war....which is why the Rapture could be viewed as being a way to depleat the forces of The AntiChrist

according to the belief...The AntiChrist will be a Man that believers claim or believe is God....this is exactly what some Christians believe

No.

funches writes:

"Armageddon is the war between good and evil ...if you take away all the good there will be no good left to fight in the war....which is why the Rapture could be viewed as being a way to depleat the forces of The AntiChrist"

Absolutely not true. In fact, there are going to be many "good" people left behind. An atheist can be a good person, but he is not going to be taken in the Rapture. And there are Christians with doubt who are not going to be taken in the Rapture, even though the Christian may be a good person. In fact, for many who make it out of the Tribulation, that time, although only 7 years, will seem like 7,000 years. But for many, it will be the final wake-up call. If, after all of that, if people are still in denial of Christ (and there will be many), when Christ returns, it will be too late, and they will be thrown into the lake of fire.

"according to the belief...The AntiChrist will be a Man that believers claim or believe is God....this is exactly what some Christians believe"

We agree here. In fact, false prophets are on the rise, which is exactly what Christ predicted as one of the signs of the End Times. Look at Haiti and Japan, and these are the signs of the End Times.

again just because someone is uneducated or uneducated about specific issues doesn't mean that don't deserve the direct Truth ....isn't that what people accuse governments of doing ...so why do askewing from the truth becomes righteous because Jesus does it ...