Somehow when the end came for Dr. George “Mengle” Tiller the setting of his death was altogether appropriate. Tiller had spent his life serving as the high priest in the sanctuary of humanism for decades, bringing murder, death and torture to tens of thousands in his abortuary. In turn, when Tiller was murdered Sunday, God returned him the favor as Tiller was murdered as he stood in God’s house. The irony shouldn’t be lost on us — it seems that even God operates with an eye for an eye ethic.
The first response we should have over the news of the Tiller murder is sympathy, quickly followed by joy. We should have sympathy and compassion for any man who was as gladly captive to sin as Tiller was. We should have sympathy and compassion due to what might have been if this man had not rejected the good life that can only be found in Christ. We should have sympathy and compassion because each of us, except for the grace of God, could have easily spent our lives as George Tillers. Every time I see a wicked man die, I feel a note of sympathy, compassion and pity. George Tiller was made for better things then what George Tiller embraced and the fact that he embraced the demons of unreality should cause all of us to be sympathetic.
But I also know joy. Not the shallow type of joy but a deep resonating joy. I feel joy that no longer will this wicked man slay the judicially innocent. I feel joy because justice, albeit of a rough variety, was visited on someone who so thoroughly opposed a culture of life and who worked so assiduously to spread the culture of death. I know joy because the truth of Scripture that those who take up the sword shall die by the sword is seen as authoritative. I know joy because I know that no longer will Dr. Tiller be sucking out the brains of people, or torturing people with saline or dismembering people in utero. How could a sane person not feel joy at the death of a mass murderer and a terrorist?
Inevitably the questions arise as to how we should view the murderer of such a wicked murderer. A few observations here,
1.) Vigilantism is justice as it is found on the black market. If the State will not use the sword to exercise just justice then the state should not be surprised when justice shows its face as vigilantism on the black market. People will only put up with the State using the sword to protect injustice for so long. Eventually, when the State will not use the sword properly the black market will use it improperly. Whoever the murderer of George Tiller is, the State should be charged as an accessory to the murder of George Tiller just as it was an accessory to all the murders that Tiller committed.
2.) I don’t know who the murderer is but I do know that you can’t kill the King’s policy by killing the King’s executioner. The King pays his executioners a handsome sum. For every George Tiller you kill five more will grow up to replace him in pursuit of all the money that can be made in the executioner business. Still, we must admit that if enough executioners find themselves “Tillered” it is going to make future executioner wannabees think long and hard about going into the executioner business.
3.) There are those who want to be outraged by this murderers act. I can’t bring myself to be outraged. Let’s pretend that instead of in uterine babies being murdered George Tiller was making a career out of the State sanctioned murder of five year old children, or even … let’s say … Jews. Would any of us be outraged and insist that it is not Christian to kill the killer of tens of thousands of five year olds or hundreds of thousands of Jews? I don’t think we would be. Does the fact that we are outraged by the murder of this murderer indicate that perhaps we really don’t see these in uterine victims as human ourselves anymore?
4.) Still, I am Reformed and Reformed people have consistently taught that we bear God’s judgments against us patiently until God raises up other magistrates that we might follow to throw off the yoke of oppression inflicted by the existing reigning magistrates. If each man took the law into his own hands, thus becoming vigilantes, anarchy and civil war would result and this would be a judgment against us even greater than the judgment of ethnocide that we are currently experiencing. If you doubt this visit Beirut.
5.) Scripture is full of examples of God raising up one wicked party to punish a second wicked party while still holding his instrument of punishment responsible for their wickedness. Assyria destroying wicked Israel doesn’t get a pass for its own wickedness. George Tiller spent a life sowing the wind and his life ended by reaping the whirlwind. The murderer of Tiller has now sown his own wind and he likewise shall reap his whirlwind.
If you’ve read this far and are thinking … “this sounds conflicted.” It is only because I am conflicted. I hate abortion and abortionists. While I am sympathetic for the reasons I stated above in the end I shed absolutely no tears over their demise. I completely understand why a person would murder a murderer in order to defend the yet unborn. And yet, I can’t bring myself to justify such anarchy that would be let loose upon us as a people if each man began to do what is right in his own eyes in a frenzied fit of vigilantism.
We must bear God’s judgments against us until God raises up other magistrates to throw off the yoke of torture and murder of the unborn. We must pray that God would either grant repentance to the wicked or that he would hear the blood of the unborn crying out from the ground for justice and send the unborn lawful relief.
And perhaps in the end we need to tell ourselves that if the wicked desire to destroy their seed … then let them.
I have, in the past, and now again, thought on defending the defenseless, and I still do not think it is wrong. I cannot think it is vigilante justice to enforce God’s law. But I don’t deny that the apostate government will unleash it’s vengeance on those who do their rightful job. If someday, I am old and my wife is gone, I would even think about doing something similar. Maybe. Some poor guy just the other day got thrown in jail or fined for mowing a park, and the town admitted they where short on help, but he got busted anyway.
I have, in the past, and now again, thought on defending the defenseless, and I still do not think it is wrong. I cannot think it is vigilante justice to enforce God’s law. But I don’t deny that the apostate government will unleash it’s vengeance on those who do their rightful job. If someday, I am old and my wife is gone, I would even think about doing something similar. Maybe. Some poor guy just the other day got thrown in jail or fined for mowing a park, and the town admitted they where short on help, but he got busted anyway. I forgot to add, what is the difference between defending an infant from a murderer, and an unborn child?, I cannot see a difference.
It seems to me that a conflicted response might be the proper response. The saints of God should rejoice at the judgments of God. God is glorified in his acts of justice and the saints rejoice when God is glorified. David wrote: “The righteous shall rejoice when he sees the vengeance; He shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked.”
Our delight, however, should be anchored upon the glory of God. Vengeance belongs to the Lord, not the saints, and but by the grace of God we would be numbered among the wicked.
To delight as sinful men in a vindictive or revengeful way would seem to me to be a great sin. Even God states: “For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth” and elsewhere asks: “Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?”
A proper response would appear to be the conflicted one. The righteous desire to the see wicked cut off and to see God glorified in His judgments, yet while the wicked remain on the earth, we pray that God’s grace might lead them to repentance. When the wicked are cut off and God has exectued His holy wrath, the believer can truly say, without vengeance, “Good riddance”
Praise the LORD! What an insightful editorial! Yes, I can truly say that my response has been one of conflict which I have struggled with since first hearing the news of George Tiller’s death. Thank you for putting into words what I (and others) have been feeling.
How does one deal with someone who claims to be a Christian and yet vehemently denies that a child is a child at conception? Moreover, someone who supports and is a vocal proponent about abortions being performed in the manner that Tiller the Killer did?
This person is a member of a SBC church.
“I feel joy because justice, albeit of a rough variety, was visited on someone who so thoroughly opposed a culture of life and who worked so assiduously to spread the culture of death.”
How, exactly, do you spread a “culture of life” by murdering people? This is truly insane. I can’t believe you folks have the audacity to claim Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour. I have no doubt he is truly offended by the terrorism waged by people who have twisted His message.
Oh, and by the way, your comments in point #1 sound strikingly similar to the justifications used for events like 9/11. Tiller’s murder was nothing more than an act of extreme Christian terrorism commited by someone who, like extreme Islamic terrorists, twists the message of their religious figures to justify their heinous crimes. Absolutely disgusting and inhuman.
Biozona,
We really have to establish if a killing done by someone while defending the helpless against murderous aggression is to be constituted murder. It certainly is an open question as to whether this is murder or not. Perhaps we could call it an illegal killing in defense of the helpless against someone with murderous intent.
So, to answer your question, a culture of life is spread when people defend life against those with murderous intent. I could easily ask you how do you spread a “culture of life” by allowing mass murderers to continue to ply their trade without consequence? The notion that mass murderers should be unrequited by law for their actions is what is truly criminally insane. Are you criminally insane Biozona?
Tiller’s life work was nothing more than an act of ongoing extreme humanist terrorism committed by someone who and supported by people who, like extreme Islamic terrorists, will commit jihad against the most helpless in order to see their religion flourish. People like Tiller and people like you who support Tiller are absolutely disgusting and inhumane.
Thanks for visiting Bionza. Please come again and invite all your friends.
“So, to answer your question, a culture of life is spread when people defend life against those with murderous intent”
So, basically, the argument here is, a “culture of life” is spread with murderous intent. Come on. Getting past individual politics, religion, morals & ethics, that statement doesn’t make sense.
“I could easily ask you how do you spread a “culture of life” by allowing mass murderers to continue to ply their trade without consequence?”
You could ask that, if you want. However, the phrase “culture of life” is yours. I don’t use that phrase and I only responded to your use of it, which to me seems extremely hypocritical.
I’m not a religious scholar and would never claim to be one. However, I do recall the Bible states “Thou shalt not kill” and I don’t recall an exception being made for when an individual may think it’s really, really necessary. I also believe Jesus Christ taught people to treat others as they would be treated themselves. You can go back to Tiller if you want, but all that does is allow you to ignore and deflect attention from your own poor behavior and horrible thoughts and ideas.
With all that said, I didn’t expect my comments to get posted, so I respect the fact you’re willing to discuss this with someone who doesn’t necessarily agree with you.
I still think Tiller’s murder is no better or different than any other kind of terrorism. I have no doubt Jesus Christ would not approve.
Bizona,
Bret
No, you twisted what I wrote.
This is what I wrote,
“So, to answer your question, a culture of life is spread when people defend life against those with murderous intent”
If you can’t see the difference between your paraphrase of what I said and what I said I’m afraid I can’t be of much help to you.
Bret had earlier written
“I could easily ask you how do you spread a “culture of life” by allowing mass murderers to continue to ply their trade without consequence?”
Bret responds,
Again, if you can’t see the difference between a killing a man who had killed 60,000 helpless human beings and that same man being killed by someone as an act of protection for the future lives he would snuff out then I can’t help you in unraveling your warped sense of hypocritical.
You’re correct. You are not a biblical scholar. The bible does make allowances for killing that isn’t murder. For example,
If a thief is found breaking in and is struck so that he dies, there shall be no bloodguilt for him.
Now if God does not count it to be murder to kill in defense of ones property how much less is it murder to kill in defense of the helpless?
So you see, you must charge God’s words with horrible thoughts and ideas since I am only echoing the words of Scripture.
Now, having said all that I clearly made the case in the piece I wrote that I think it is unwise to be visiting death upon Abortion doctors. I stand by what I said in that article.
I’m always interested in setting forth Biblical truth to someone who is not a religious scholar.
Again, if you can’t see the difference between killing an enemy combatant who has killed 60,000 babies and a terrorist who flies large planes into tall buildings I don’t suppose I can say anything to convince you to the contrary.
With all due respect, I am not the one here with a warped “sense of hypocritical.” You call yourself a Christian, but this all flies right in the face of what Christ taught. Sounds like phony Christianity, to me.
At any rate, while you rejoice in violence and death and hide behind God to justify it, I’ll hope for a better world.
I wanted to add one more thing about the comparison I made yesterday and then I’m gone. No need to go ’round in circles indefinitely…
Anyway, the argument you are using is the same exact argument Muslim fundamentalists use to justify the violence and destruction they strive to bring on Westerners. You say you are defending the defenseless; they say the same thing. You say it is okay to kill a doctor who has participated in killing innocents. A Muslim fundamentalist may consider the killing of a poor Afghan child or pregnant woman by an American bomb in the same light. Frankly, I can’t blame them for that. However, I can’t support the idea that the best response is to kill more people. Aside from the violence factor, it just doesn’t help the cause at all. The vast majority of rational people reject such methods.
But I guess the cycle of violence is bound to continue forever when religious leaders use their religion to condemn the violence of others while using the same religion to justify their own violence.
Bret,
My professor thinks Tiller was a saint, and I’m guessing it because of an article Salon wrote about him here: http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/feature/2009/06/01/late_term_abortion/
Apparently we are to believe that all Tiller ever did was abort the so-called difficult cases, yet his abortion record remains closed by the Kansas Supreme Court. Convenient.
Huh…so what I expected to happen has happened. It just took a couple exchanges. I know I said I was done here, but I just had to see how up-front you are with your readers. I have comments waiting for approval that are older than the most recent comment posted. So, as I originally suspected, you won’t post the comments that disagree with you and shoot down your warped sense of justice (again, I’m borrowing from you and modifying your “warped sense of hypocritical” comment), but you will post the ones who agree with you. Apparently, you’ll make an exception for the first few, but when you realize you can’t hang and your arguments don’t hold water with rational-thinking people, you just go into ignore mode. I waited for a while to try to give you the benefit of the doubt, but no dice. That’s typical. Oh well, at least you were willing to try at first. I guess you just got worried that I was making more sense than you. Ah, well, it’s your nasty hate-filled blog, not mine.
Okay, carry on…you may return to hiding behind your religion to avoid taking responsibility for your heinous ideas.
Bizona,
1.) I both rejoice and am saddened by the death of the wicked. I am saddened because even the wicked are made in the image of God and to see the wicked die without turning to Christ is sad. I rejoice over the death of the wicked because they are no longer live in defiance of the mercy and grace of God. I rejoice in the death of the wicked because they no longer live to injure others. How could I not rejoice over the death of Tiller any more then I would rejoice over the death of any mass murderer?
2.) With the death of Tiller we are one step towards the better world you hope for.
3.) That rational people wouldn’t rejoice at the killing of a mass murderer is evident that they aren’t so rational.
4.) Whether you like it or not violence often does serve as a means to end violence. In WW II violence was successfully used to stop violence. This kind of thing happens all the time and often does end up stopping violence. Indeed, even on a basic level, when I spank my child for hitting their playmate I am using violence to stop violence.
5.) I quit our exchanges because you said you were going away and as it is my blog I get the last word. Don’t fool yourself Charding by thinking that somehow you’ve gotten the upper hand in this discussion. You haven’t even made me work up a sweat.
You are one of the most hate filled people I’ve ever read. You are hate filled because you are willing to allow mass murderers unmitigated license to continue to pursue their mass murder. You are hate filled because you think that violence lovers will just quit their violence against others without opposition.
By the way Charding … when you post your first and last name I will post your next comment. As long as you keep hiding behind anonymity while launching pejoratives you will not be posted.
With all due respect, I am not hate-filled. I am truly saddened by this dangerous misuse of religion. Just because I disagree with your ideas and the way you go about attempting to justify them doesn’t mean I hate you. I don’t know you past this issue and you may otherwise be a wonderful person. I don’t base my opinions of people on single issues. And frankly, judging from your tone regarding the topic, regarding people who disagree with you and the fact you just broke the stated protocol of your website, it is you who truly seems filled with hatred and this also saddens me.
You are correct in that I said I was done. I really was, but I did check once in a while to see if any of your posters ahd responded to me. I did that out of respect because I feel if someone speaks to you, you should have the respect and courtesy to respond. On the other hand, I realized we were just going to go in circles and I didn’t feel the need to waste your time or mine. I’m sure you are busy and so a I. The only reason I posted again is that because you thought I wasn’t paying attention, I wouldn’t notice. I just wanted you to know I had noticed.
As far as “hiding,” I promise you I’m not, though I don’t know if you’ll believe me…probably not. I use ‘bizona’ here because it is the screenname I use everywhere on the internet. It’s a matter of consistency for me and I’ve offered my name in plenty of other places. However, since you yourself use a screename, I really don’t see what the problem is or why you want my first AND last name, unless you want to try to find me for some reason. The screenname wasn’t a problem before and now suddenly it is. Furthermore, that last paragraph almost seems as though a threat has been implied and, frankly, considering the tone of your blog and the attitudes of you and most of the posters here, why should I be so foolish as to do that? Especially when you’ve just given everyone info that explicitly states it will NOT be displayed (this is what I ment earlier when I stated you broke the stated protocol of your own website). Really, why do you need my full name all of a sudden? Maybe you’re hoping I also get “Tillered”…I’d like to think not, but I really don’t know.
Let’s be truly honest here…my “pejoratives” are far less and fewer than yours.
Finally, regarding point #5, you are absolutely correct there…you DO have the upper hand in the conversation. However, it’s only because it is your blog, as you point out. As for not making you break a sweat, please know that is mutual and, also, thank you. That one made me chuckle and while I absolutely do not agree with you on this issue, I appreciate anyone who can make me laugh. 🙂
I sincerely hope you have a good day and the source of that goodness is peaceful and nonviolent.
And since you already broke the stated protocol of your own website…
C. Harding
you are not God to decide who lives and
who dies so even if let’s say he killed those
babyes, It’s not our call to make. We can put him in prison for the rest of his life, but in no way murder him