Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[lareli]

I don't know what my point is in this but just some thoughts or observations I've had when contemplating this topic of violence/non-violence...

Leo Tolstoy was a Russian writer around the late 1800's who wrote a great deal on the subject of Jesus teachings of non violence and the hypocrisy of Christians regarding the teachings. He wrote a lot about how patriotism, nationalism, etc are in direct opposition to the teachings of Jesus in regards to non violence. I've read only one of his books and in it he says that throughout history there has always been a very small number of folks who've  held to the teachings of Jesus when it comes to non violence.. I thought to myself "the elect?" 

I couldn't help but observe that many people who've advocated the principles of non violence have been murdered. Jesus said that if we be like Him we would suffer persecution. The world will hate us. Mlk jr.. Bullet to the head, Ghandi.. One in the gut, JFK.. Done, John Lennin, Bob Marley etc etc etc. I wonder if the early church during the height of its persecution was a bunch of people who might have looked like a hippy movement of folks refusing to be violent? If one Ghandi or one MLK advocating non violence presented such a problem to modern day rulers, I can only imagine what an entire movement of people all spreading the doctrines of non violence would've presented to their rulers.. What a nightmare for a world that relies on violence in order to maintain its authority to have the light of non violence expose it's weakness!

I was listening to a podcast about the early Christian Era and some of the problems it presented to the rulers of those days.. One of the problems being, how to reconcile Jesus' teachings on non violence with fighting wars for the rulers. I couldn't help but to observe that Constantine supposedly claimed to receive a vision in the sky before a significant battle.. The vision was a cross and accompanying the cross were the words 'in this sign you shall conquer' or something like that. Perhaps this was a way to reconcile the early Christian church with the need to have soldiers willing to kill and die for a worldly kingdom and worldly authority.

I don't know. Just thoughts I'd had.

[lilitalienboi16]

Well said and helpful Colin, still in the race at 78 years young.

I appreciate the friends who respect old age for the varied experiences it brings.
I have "adjusted" my views, understanding, opinions of several matters about life that folks who knew me when I was younger may not recognize in me today. Or better said, God has adjusted my understanding.

I mention this because I want to encourage the youth who share in the forum to patiently wait while God does a work in them.  the definition of youths is those who are not on Medicare yet.

Thanks again Colin and all those who contributed their loving thoughts.

I- Bob

Tehee. 

Sometimes I feel like an old soul my self though the Lord has much work yet to be done in me. Truly, when we are weak, He is strong, my recent experiences have confirmed this to me. So I am grateful for the trials and boast in my infirmities.

I am grateful for all you old timers , for all members who contribute, I benefit from these discussions.

[octoberose]

JFK and the principles of nonviolence?  Really? He was probably killed because he was fooling around with the mobsters mistress  or because of the Bay of Pigs . He was also a war hero . And a sex addict. The man was a mess.
 Has anyone talked about Luke 22?
And he said to them, “When I sent you out with no moneybag or knapsack or sandals, did you lack anything?” They said, “Nothing.” 36 He said to them, “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one. 37 For I tell you that this Scripture must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors.’ For what is written about me has its fulfillment.” 38 And they said, “Look, Lord, here are two swords.” And he said to them, “It is enough.”
    Of course I am aware that Jesus healed the soldier after Peter  cut off his ear with the sword ( have you considered Jesus let him do it in the first place?) . But that was so nothing would intervere with Christ accomplishing what he came here to do.  So in Luke 22 he tells them to sell their cloak to buy a sword! You have a sword for protection ! 
  The sum of thy word is truth. We can't leave out the uncomfortable bits. And we all have to do what their measure of faith allows, because if we think something is sinful then for him, it is.  The Bible tells us to take care of our household, so I will be defending my grandchildren by any means necessary. And believe me, my husband would not sit around while I was being attacked. I'm kind of flabbergasted that any of you think that is what is required fron you .  I'm glad my husband is
Willing to give his life for me - and grateful. This is also called laying your life down for someone else- something else that Jesus taught.

[Kat]

Luke 22:36  He said to them, "But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.

When you consider all of the places Christ advocates against violence, these words of Christ are not to be understood literally, that He would have his disciples furnish themselves with swords at any rate. Note that He also says down in the next verses that 2 were sufficient, which would not be enough for all of them... were some not to protect themselves? It was obvious that they did not yet understand by there reply, but He knew the Spirit would come and give them understanding. Also He forbid Peter from using one a very little time after this, and yes He did allow it to happen as a teaching lesson to the disciples that they were not to use violence under any circumstances.

Mat 26:52  But Jesus said to him, "Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword.

But His meaning in Luke 22 seems to have been that wherever they would go and preach the Gospel they would have many adversaries coming on them with great violence and persecution (most of them died a violent death), so that ordinarily they might seem to stand in need of swords to defend themselves, so this phrase "one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one" is used as an expression (used then, but obviously not a phrase heard today) of the terrible danger they would be exposed to and not that they should use one themselves. Consider that there are absolutely no Scripture of the Apostles ever using a sword for protection or anything as He seems to instruct here, ever. This one scripture certainly does not override all of the many other Scripture where Christ spoke of no violence, not if understood in it's correct meaning.

mercy, peace and love
Kat

[Extol]

36 Yet He said to them, "But now, he who has a purse let him pick it up, likewise a beggar's bag also; and he who has none, let him sell his cloak and buy a sword.
37 For I am saying to you that this which is written must be accomplished in Me: And with the lawless is He reckoned. For that also which concerns Me is having its consummation."

Luke 22:36-37, Concordant Version

As Ray has explained, the word "for" is an important connecting word. It means "because" and it explains the preceding verse. Buy a sword, because I am to be reckoned with the lawless. He was not condoning violence; I think he was doing the opposite. He was saying that by having a sword they would be considered lawless (or "transgressors" as most versions have it.) This would explain why two swords were enough. As Kat point out, two swords would not be sufficient for 11 men. They weren't for fighting; they were just so the prophecy of Isaiah (53:12) could be fulfilled.

[lareli]

JFK and the principles of nonviolence?  Really? He was probably killed because he was fooling around with the mobsters mistress  or because of the Bay of Pigs . He was also a war hero . And a sex addict. The man was a mess.
 Has anyone talked about Luke 22?
And he said to them, “When I sent you out with no moneybag or knapsack or sandals, did you lack anything?” They said, “Nothing.” 36 He said to them, “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one. 37 For I tell you that this Scripture must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors.’ For what is written about me has its fulfillment.” 38 And they said, “Look, Lord, here are two swords.” And he said to them, “It is enough.”
    Of course I am aware that Jesus healed the soldier after Peter  cut off his ear with the sword ( have you considered Jesus let him do it in the first place?) . But that was so nothing would intervere with Christ accomplishing what he came here to do.  So in Luke 22 he tells them to sell their cloak to buy a sword! You have a sword for protection ! 
  The sum of thy word is truth. We can't leave out the uncomfortable bits. And we all have to do what their measure of faith allows, because if we think something is sinful then for him, it is.  The Bible tells us to take care of our household, so I will be defending my grandchildren by any means necessary. And believe me, my husband would not sit around while I was being attacked. I'm kind of flabbergasted that any of you think that is what is required fron you .  I'm glad my husband is
Willing to give his life for me - and grateful. This is also called laying your life down for someone else- something else that Jesus taught.

Great points! All of them.

As far as JFK being a war hero, sex addict, so on and so forth.. It sounds as if we could be describing King David, lol! Neither of which could be considered examples of modern day practitioners of non violence. I mean the office and authority of 'President' or any head-of-state, relies completely on the ability to use violence.. As I've said in another thread, without the threat of violence a law would cease to be a law and would merely be a suggestion.

JFK is a poor example when considering the doctrines of non violence. Actually all of the well known advocates (Ghandi, MLK.. ) missed the point of Jesus teachings as far as Tolstoy wrote. Tolstoy didn't just point out Jesus teaching non violence but also non resistance. He referenced Jesus instructions to "do not resist an evil person". Non resistance to evil. I wonder why Jesus said to not resist an evil person but later said to sell your cloak and buy a sword.. Like you said, the 'sum' of the word.

I'm a fan of military and religious history. The two are often inseparable in history. Relatively speaking... JFK wasn't a typical President. The US has been involved in armed violent conflict in one way or another for about 222 out of its 239 years or roughly %93 of its existence. It's economy, arguably, depends on war and therefore violence. JFK may have been a mess on a personal level but on the world stage, he was an obstacle in the way of a nation which wanted war.

He didn't avoid conflict completely but he did shoot down plans for large scale conflict... Operation Northwoods is one example. It's public record. Not theory but undeniable history. Anyone can read up on it for themselves. The joint chiefs of staff physically put it on paper and signed off on it! Basically the US wanted war with Cuba (Bay of Pigs as you mentioned), but they needed an excuse. The joint chiefs of staff came up with a plan which was rejected by the JFK administration. The plan was to carry out terrorist attacks against America and blame it on the Cubans... They wanted to hijack planes and explode them as well as other attacks, which would give the US the public support it needed for war... This sort of plan of attacking your own country in order to justify war against another country or people is as old as time. Didn't Nero burn his own city and blame it on Christians? Didn't they disguise themselves as Native Americans during the boston tea party?

Anyways the plan was rejected, war with the Soviets was also avoided during JFKs time, as was a Vietnam invasion.. JFK did not want war and his efforts to stonewall plans for war perhaps earned him a bullet to the head ... Or perhaps it was a jealous mobster.. Who knows. It's all very fascinating to me though. Very soon after JFK was out of the way the US was back to her old self and the Vietnam war would be under way. The Gulf of Tonkin incident would be the official reason for war... But years later it was admitted that the Gulf of Tonkin incident never actually happened. The world wants war and she shall have it one way or another. If one wishes to be like Jesus, well you will be in her way and she will hate you and kill you.

[lilitalienboi16]

In agreement with both Kat and Jesse. Consider this verse as well in the support of nonviolence for all who follow Jesus:

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

God bless,
Alex

[John from Kentucky]

Many years ago, in the Worldwide Church of God, we were pacifists and nonviolent, in the midst of the draft for the Vietnam War.

My ex-wife was worried about her safety if we were attacked and wanted to know how I would protect her.  I said, "Honey, I'll take the 1st bullet for you, and the 2nd, and maybe even manage a 3rd bullet.  After that, you're on your own."   She did not appreciate my humor.  Of course, most religious people cannot understand humor.

[indianabob]

JFK has a point,
Most "religious" people can't understand humor. Their great sacrifices in the name of God are way too serious to critique or joke about. (smile)

In my own case I suppose or I hope that I would take the first bullet for my wife, but even if she took a fatal bullet first her worries would be over until the resurrection.
Even though her life on earth would be cut short and I would miss her companionship, it would not be for the reasons that most of the world is concerned. Why, because they don't believe in a resurrection to life once again, they don't see death as a new beginning under the righteous rule of our Lord Jesus.

Besides all of that, God is able to protect us from every eventuality IF that is His righteous will. And if HIS will is that our journey is suspended for a time, why be concerned?  Cast all of your worries on His shoulders and rest in peace.

[octoberose]

Really interesting largeli. It gives me hope that no matter who wins the next election that God will work His will through the weakest of vessels.
   In regards to the subject of this thread  - are you all saying if someone walked into your home and did harm to your family or walked off with your child, that you wouldn't call the police? I know its one of those pesky hypotheticals, but that is sometimes hard to avoid.
   

[lilitalienboi16]

Really interesting largeli. It gives me hope that no matter who wins the next election that God will work His will through the weakest of vessels.
   In regards to the subject of this thread  - are you all saying if someone walked into your home and did harm to your family or walked off with your child, that you wouldn't call the police? I know its one of those pesky hypotheticals, but that is sometimes hard to avoid.
   

Rose,

If you read the thread you would know what scripture and we are saying.

God be with you,
Alex

[John from Kentucky]

If the One, True God is your God,

then you do not worry about anything,

like a baby in a mother's arms,

The Great God takes care of His chosen ones,

the righteous live by faith in the Power behind all things.

[Kat]

Really interesting largeli. It gives me hope that no matter who wins the next election that God will work His will through the weakest of vessels.
   In regards to the subject of this thread  - are you all saying if someone walked into your home and did harm to your family or walked off with your child, that you wouldn't call the police? I know its one of those pesky hypotheticals, but that is sometimes hard to avoid.

It's really interesting that some just cannot accept what is being spoken of here... yet it's clear violence is the opposite of love and there are so many Scripture speaking against violence that makes it a primary teaching. Violence is an action that this world uses continually for many reasons, some of which is justifiable by this worlds standards. Believers are not to be like the world, but are now being "conformed to the image of His Son" (Rom 8:29), our minds - the way we think about things must be "renewed" now.

Rom 12:2  And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind,

Eph 4:30  And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.
v. 31  Let all bitterness, wrath, anger, clamor, and evil speaking be put away from you, with all malice.

Christ NEVER used violence for any reason throughout His lifetime or the Scripture would not be true.

Isa 53:9  And they made His grave with the wicked— But with the rich at His death, Because He had done no violence, Nor was any deceit in His mouth.

There was even an incident where Jesus was attacked by an angry crowd, and did He fight back to protect Himself? No, He merely walked away from them.

Luke 4:24  Then He said, "Assuredly, I say to you, no prophet is accepted in his own country.
v. 25  But I tell you truly, many widows were in Israel in the days of Elijah, when the heaven was shut up three years and six months, and there was a great famine throughout all the land;
v. 26  but to none of them was Elijah sent except to Zarephath, in the region of Sidon, to a woman who was a widow.
v. 27  And many lepers were in Israel in the time of Elisha the prophet, and none of them was cleansed except Naaman the Syrian."
v. 28  So all those in the synagogue, when they heard these things, were filled with wrath,
v. 29  and rose up and thrust Him out of the city; and they led Him to the brow of the hill on which their city was built, that they might throw Him down over the cliff.
v. 30  Then passing through the midst of them, He went His way.

There is absolutely no Scripture account that the Apostles resorted to violence for any reason and they certainly would have had plenty of opportunities, because they were beings assaulted all the time. It is interesting that there is not a single accounts of them 'fighting' to protect themselves or those with them, ever... instead they always were peaceable, as Christ was and preached peace, as Christ did. Yes they would flee from danger (Acts 14:6), but never resorted to violence.

1Cor 11:1  Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ.

If Christ's Spirit is in us, then we are being conformed in our minds to be like He was and taught the Apostles to be. It's hard to give up everything, to "deny" yourself, but to be a true follower of Christ that is the cost...

Mat 10:37  He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me.
v. 38  And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me.
v. 39  He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it.

Matt 16:24  Then Jesus said to His disciples, "If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me.

mercy, peace and love
Kat

[octoberose]

Paul says in the ESV translation, II Corinthians 11_ , " 8 And, apart from other things, there is the daily pressure on me of my anxiety for all the churches."  CLV says his "solicitude" for all the churches. I don't believe Paul is sinning when he admits this. Whatever it is he is trying to convey here, he is not trying to  take  control of the situation and not giving it to God, because he knows, "be anxious for nothing."  Cast your cares on Him admits that you have cares and that certainly pertains to me and I venture to say all of the mothers here. And I would think most of you.
 Our dilemma in this post is what we would do to defend the innocent, and perhaps to defend ourselves. I brought up the police question because I think it is disingenuous to call the person with the gun all the while condemning those who would use one . In this society we have our own 'guard dog' a three digit phone call away. This discussion, for me, has to be about the condition of our hearts, a condition of seeking mercy and living peacefully "as much as it pertains to us". The Concordant Literal says this;  To no one render evil for evil, making ideal provision in the sight of all men, 18 if possible that which comes out from yourselves. Being at peace with all mankind,
  I find it very interesting that Paul says If Possible. And that is the question- when is it not possible?
 It is good to wrestle with these things. It is not good to  question the election of your brother or sister while wrestling with it though, and I feel that that is being more than implied a couple of times. Maybe I'm wrong.
 My last point is this: Dying for your faith, being beaten or abused or any way chastised because of who we are in Jesus Christ- well, that comes from following Him. I would not lift a finger to defend myself from being a Christ Follower. I am guilty and they can kill me for it, the way they killed Him.  However, does the new testament tell me I cannot defend myself from anything at all, or that I can only not defend myself because of my faith? Now, there's the question. And some of us have a different conclusion to that question than others.
  I don't have to agree with you on every single point in order to appreciate you, value you, listen and learn from you. And in the end we are all accountable to the same Lord and He will judge.

[indianabob]

Friends,

I am reluctant to reply at this late date when so much of value has already been shared. However, I will stick out my neck and accept the correction that may come.

I seem to perceive in some comments an assumption that we on the forum who may be some of the elect if God wills it to be so, have an obligation to measure up to a certain level of faith or to be subject to exclusion from the "body of Christ" in the wedding ceremony.
-
For example if I should find myself lacking enough faith to stand fast and see the power of God in defense of my person and instead find myself taking strong action against an assailant up to the point of exercising lethal force in my own defense or that of some other innocent party, that I am therefore accounted unworthy to remain under grace in the eyes of God.

If that is what some are concerned about, I would say put that concern on the shoulders of our loving Lord Jesus who will in EVERY circumstance advocate for us no matter how lacking in faith we were under such a provocation.

Yes we do have to have faith and we need to feed and refresh it daily, but we are not the Lord Jesus and we have not the faith of Jesus within ourselves to the same measure as was given to him. We have only an earnest, a portion confirming the promise of Father God to His elect. We are weak vessels and God is gracious and knows our frame and desires to forgive us EVERY error and every falling short of the glory that is to come when His work is completed in us at Christ's return.

We have not been taught, "you are my called out ones, so don't you ever make a mistake again or I will cast you away from myself". Rather we have been taught to lay all of our concerns at the feet of our Lord Jesus and be reassured that God will complete a work in us for His own glory. All of our mistakes, all of our sins committed through weakness and fear will be forgiven as soon as we place ourselves at God's mercy and even that is God's work in us.

Of course we should continue to grow in grace and knowledge and in faith especially, but be reminded that God is the one working in us at His own pace and we are not yet perfect in faith.

Kindly offered, Indiana bob

[Kat]

It seems to me that, especially here on the forum where we are posting and representative of the body of Christ to many reading, that we should be united in what we believe and present here.

I have been stressing, which was indicated, what I see in so many Scripture to be a basic principle, no violence... I feel that we should be able to agree on this. Now I'm not saying that we can be perfect without error, that in a situation one might err, but it's not for me to judge what actually happens in somebody private life... but I do feel we need to be united in what is taught in the Scripture. Our attitude should be to accept/agree with Christ's own words, though we all can and do stumble at times, what actually happens in our lives is a matter between us and God.

There are a few Scripture that have comments that are questionable and we are discussing those points, but that should not mean that we continue to disagree on the primary teaching we are discussing. Yes Paul had great concern for the churches/believers that he was getting started and he wanted them very much to be united in the same message he was teaching them.

Php 1:27  Only let your conduct be worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or am absent, I may hear of your affairs, that you stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel,
v. 28  and not in any way terrified by your adversaries, which is to them a proof of perdition, but to you of salvation, and that from God.
v. 29  For to you it has been granted on behalf of Christ, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake,
v. 30  having the same conflict which you saw in me and now hear is in me.

I guess I get very serious when I see many Scripture witnesses on a subject and people seem to be looking for loopholes... forgive me if I am coming on too strong as to cause offence.

mercy, peace and love
Kat

[Jeff]

Kat,

So very well said.

We live in this world that we can't accept but we are here.  God created us in His image but crafted a uniqueness in each of us.

Jesus was not vague with respect to how we should conduct ourselves.

"He who loves his life loses it, and he who hates his life in this world will keep it to life eternal." (John 12:25)

"He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him." (John 14:21)

Galatians 5:22 "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness..."


Luke 9:23 And he said to all, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me."

We could quote Scriptures for hours that show how Jesus perceived this world, and how He expected us to live but I think one verse in particular says everything perfectly.

Luke 23:34 "Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots."

[Dave in Tenn]

Rose, I'm not going to draw the line on 'behavior' for anybody.  Of course, it is all a matter of the heart.  It's no 'loop-hole' for me to recognize that what Jesus said applies to ME.  The Sermon on the mount is for ME, if I am to be a disciple.   "If a man strike you on the right cheek" doesn't tell me in black or white what I am to DO if a man strikes somebody else on the right cheek, especially an innocent.

But behavior DOES spring from the heart.  It's how we know what the heck is down in there, despite all of our justifying and intellectualizing. 

There are many 'behaviors' that reveal the heart in this broader discussion, and I'm not talking about the behavior, necessarily, of posting a comment on the forum.  Some people have an 'itchy trigger finger' with a heart that says "Come, ye hordes of evil-doers and I shall slay you in the name of righteousness as an agent of God."  That's Peter before conversion.  Some want to exercise their own 'wrath' and are not content to wait on the Lord, whose 'work' includes the (sometimes reprehensible) earthly powers that He has ordained for our benefit and is not limited to miracles.  Though I certainly agree with Ray when he said, in effect, we don't know what God would have done if we step in front and 'do' ourselves.  Some are so consumed daily by fear of unlikely events that they expose themselves to more likely dangers, both spiritual and natural.

As I've said before, I need at least two reasons to get out of bed in the morning.  I certainly have more than one reason for not 'arming' myself.

This life is as grass.  The life to come is not.  Just me talking here, but I no longer want to live in a world run by and dominated by evil, and evil reactions to evil.  Does anybody really think that those with such a heart will be judging the world in Righteousness?  Yes, Peter drew and used the sword.  Yes, Saul of Tarsus stood by the stoning of Stephen approvingly and ran havoc with zeal on the early church.  Their sins are forgiven, but they did not continue on that way, by the Grace of God.

Still, even if we manage to 'do the right thing' always, if we do it without Love, it is worthless.

         

[lareli]

Really interesting largeli. It gives me hope that no matter who wins the next election that God will work His will through the weakest of vessels.
   In regards to the subject of this thread  - are you all saying if someone walked into your home and did harm to your family or walked off with your child, that you wouldn't call the police? I know its one of those pesky hypotheticals, but that is sometimes hard to avoid.
   

I don't know. I'd do whatever God has predetermined that I'd do should a situation like this come upon me.

I look at this life and all the history of this world as one big parable.. Perhaps made up by billions and trillions of smaller parables. It's all one big story.. It's Gods story though and not mine. History is HIS-story.

In His story there's good guys, bad guys, heroes, villains, victims, oppressors, etc etc etc. all I can do is play the part that He's created me to play.

If someone broke into my house and wanted to harm my wife then perhaps at this point in His-story it would be me who is playing the oppressed victim... orrrr maybe He will want me to be His righteous hand of judgement upon this hypothetical man who's broken into my home and wanting to harm an innocent family... I don't have a gun and I don't want to ever hurt anyone but if God wants to use me as a hammer to smash an evil man who God Himself sent to break into my house so that God could smash this evil man by using me as the hammer, I may do the job enthusiastically! I won't know until it happens. But if He wants to use me as a tool in His hand to punish the wicked man, and then after He's used me as a tool perhaps He may turn next and judge the tool/me well what can I do? God is good and His plans for us are good!

I agree with you that especially as parents it is normal to wonder about situations like these. I would just advise that we continue to wrestle with God more so than just wrestling with the opinions of other people. People are dumb but God is wise.

[Nelson Boils]

I remember my friend:at his house they use to have these security systems but still, his home was broken into and valuables were taken.

The most powerful nation in the world had built a defence they thought was unbreachable but still,the defence was breached.

Weird though,we spend tons of money on building a defence but still our homes are broken into!

Guess that is a defence built in vain!