Chad:
GOD is a GOD of justice. He brought upon them what they deserved. So how is it that "evil is good" in this case? This comment of yours makes no sense whatsoever.
I'm not trying to say that evil is good. I'm saying that harming someone, even if in self-defense, is overcoming evil with evil, which Paul forbids us to do. Yes, Yahweh has the right to do what He wants, including what we deserve. There are several times in the Bible in which Yahweh says that He will "bring evil upon" someone. So death and destruction, even if done by Yahweh Himself, are still evil things. Yahweh is just in bringing evil upon people; but for now, we are commanded against it.
So where is your response to my question? I answered your question by telling you what Scripture says. Its simple and straightforward. You did not explain why you (and only) think Jesus was bluffing or intimidating in the temple. To be honest, its a useless question. If its not in the Bible, its not important or else GOD would have included it there.
Actually I did respond to that, this was it:
I don't have any direct evidence whatsoever that Jesus didn't hit them, it's just an opinion that I hold based 1) on the fact that the Bible doesn't say whether or not He hit them and 2) on my belief in the doctrine of pacifism.
But you're right, it is a useless question and I shouldn't inject an opinion. I'll just leave it by saying that the Bible does not state whether or not Jesus hit anyone when He cleared the temple.
The problem is not the forums. The problem is you injecting your opinion / view of pacifisim of Jesus.
Other than that one about Jesus clearing the temple I can't think of one opinion that I've put forth yet. Perhaps I was reffering to the Bible and neglected to put up my verses. What other opinions do you think I was making?
Coconut:
Christserf I did respond to your post, the one directly above mine (not unusual for one post to answer another, has nothing to do with impolitesness and common courtesy)
I apologize for the way I put that, I should have been more polite. However, your response was not at all about any of the passages that I brought up. Picture this: If you go to a friend's house for a Bible study and they bring forth a doctrine and four passages to support it, is it more polite to show them that the verses they brought up don't support the doctrine, or that the doctrine doesn't fit with this other verse that you have in mind? And either way, is it at all polite to laugh in their face before you say anything else?
Yes I mocked the "idea", because the "doctrine of pacifism" is not in the Bible, and therefore is hogwash. Do you understand now, or do you want to complain some more that no ones validating your falsehoods?
I am not complaining that you're not validating me, I have no problem with you disputing my claim, I have a problem with your mockery.
As Jesuslovesu said to me: "Your attitude shows lack of respect. Lack of respect shows a lack of charater, lack of charater shows your need to grow more in Christ and that your behavior was less than Christ like in the thread.
Now I myself will always need growth (as well as everyone) Do not try and pass blame either hold yourself accountable and repent for your bold aggressivness in a thread about pacifism.
Please take my words for what they are they are a loving atempt to help you grow
Love in Christ"
Yes, I was rude. I repent. I hope you forgive me. I forgive you, for you also must repent.
Now, to respond to your post about the rod; I don't know of any passage which says that disciplining your children is "evil". Neither have I seen where it says that a master disciplining his student is "evil". Hence, I cannot classify these things as "overcoming evil with evil". Hence, I see nothing wrong with a pastor disciplining a member of his flock.
Christ's Serf
