It has become somewhat trendy among more liberal Christians to make a comparison between Osama Bin Laden and Paul (as in wrote half the New Testament). The thinking is that, before he became Paul, Saul was a really bad guy and then God changed him and he became the most prolific evangelist of his time and, perhaps, since, and that by killing Bin Laden it may have cut short his opportunity to be converted to following Christ and thus change the world as Paul did.
Let me first say that I am not a war monger. I do not support killing and wish that we could all live together in peace. However, war has always been a part of this sin filled world and death has always been a part of war and, in particular, holy wars have always been especially bloody. This post, however, is about my objection to comparing Bin Laden with Paul. We can discuss what makes a war justifiable another time.
Saul was a religious zealot persecuting a specific religion because of their beliefs that threatened his own. Bin Laden was a terrorist using religion in order to destroy a culture and economic system that threatened his own. I’ll concede that he may have seen himself as a religious zealot, but that is where the comparison ends due to the fact that his target was not a specific religious group, but anyone who disagreed with him. In this, he is much more similar to Hitler that he is to Saul.
Saul was corrected, by God, and shown the error of his ways. He changed his name to Paul and devoted the rest of his life to correcting his error and showing all that he could the truth that he had found. Some may argue that Bin Laden may have changed his ways had it not been for some Navy Seals, but I propose that if God had intended to use Bin Laden in the way He used Paul that God would have protected him from those Seals and he would still be alive.
Truth Be Told, to suppose that the US Government killing Bin Laden messed up God’s plan is to suppose that the US is somehow more powerful than God and diminishes His very essence.
