Should Christians be Pacifist?

[Hekuran]

Self defense and of others is not evil.

I agree. But we should be aware that Jesus taught an alternative even to self defence.

‘You have heard that it was said, “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.” But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.
‘You have heard that it was said, “You shall love your neighbour and hate your enemy.” But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous.

Matthew 5:38–45

 

[Hekuran]

"Obviously", what Jesus says in scripture "should" carry more weight than what early christian leaders believed. Its sad that you chose to believe them over scripture.

Jesus said: "turn the other cheek", "love your enemies", "Put your sword back into its place; for all who take the sword will perish by the sword", "Do not resist him who is evil", "overcome evil with good". Even as he was being executed by the Roman occupying forces he said "Forgive them father, they know not what they do". The New Testament letters speak along the same lines.

The early church fathers took these teachings seriously and interpreted them literally, teaching non-violence on all occasions. It cost some of them their lives.

 

[Brad Huber]

Jesus said: "turn the other cheek", "love your enemies", "Put your sword back into its place; for all who take the sword will perish by the sword", "Do not resist him who is evil", "overcome evil with good". Even as he was being executed by the Roman occupying forces he said "Forgive them father, they know not what they do". The New Testament letters speak along the same lines.

The early church fathers took these teachings seriously and interpreted them literally, teaching non-violence on all occasions. It cost some of them their lives.

And you also, only choosing the scriptures you want to believe in and discarding the others. You are welcome to be a sheep, and although I am no wolf, neither am I a sheep. I really dont care what you believe, I speak the truth, and if you choose to not believe it, then believe the truth of your choice, even if its not all correct.

 

[Hekuran]

And you also, only choosing the scriptures you want to believe in and discarding the others. You are welcome to be a sheep, and although I am no wolf, neither am I a sheep. I really dont care what you believe, I speak the truth, and if you choose to not believe it, then believe the truth of your choice, even if its not all correct.

Which sayings of Jesus regarding violence do you think I have discarded?

 

[Brad Huber]

Which sayings of Jesus regarding violence do you think I have discarded?

See post no. 30 in this thread.

 

[Hekuran]

See post no. 30 in this thread.

Got to be honest with you @Brad Huber , that's pretty thin.

It's absolutely clear that when Jesus asked the disciples to carry a sword, he was not sanctioning violence. We know this because Peter used one of those swords in an attack: Jesus rebuked him, and healed the servant.

And on the sermon on the plain Jesus again was not advocating violence, but predicting division. The word "sword" isn't in the greek. "discord" or "division" would be a better translation.

And in the same sermon, Jesus said, "I am sending you out as sheep among wolves."

 

[Brad Huber]

Got to be honest with you @Brad Huber , that's pretty thin.

It's absolutely clear that when Jesus asked the disciples to carry a sword, he was not sanctioning violence. We know this because Peter used one of those swords in an attack: Jesus rebuked him, and healed the servant.

And on the sermon on the plain Jesus again was not advocating violence, but predicting division. The word "sword" isn't in the greek. "discord" or "division" would be a better translation.

And in the same sermon, Jesus said, "I am sending you out as sheep among wolves."

As I said, picking what you choose....

 

[Hekuran]

As I said, picking what you choose....

I think not.

Jesus' teaching and his example, followed by the apostles' teaching and lives, and the testimony of the early church are all consistent with each other in regards to the use of violence.

There is no example of anyone in the New Testament using violence and being commended for it.

 

[Butch5]

I am assuming you are referring to the '300' years before Christianity was legalized in 311 AD?

According to wikipedia the estimates of the number of dead Christians in this period is between 1. WHC Frend estimated that 3,000–3,50 and 2. The historian Min Seok Shin estimates that over 23,500 Christians suffered martyrdom under Diocletian.

The total number of Christians at that time was estimated at between 6-15 million, making 23 500 out of the most conservative number of 6 million, only 0.39% of all Christians. Not even 1%?

Persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

-----------------------

That pretty much destroys the argument that Medic was making. His claim was that Christianity would be wiped out.

Do you assume that Christians did not have secret meetings during this time? Is that a form of self defense that is allowed? Where would you draw the line? Would Christian men pray and fast whilst their daughters are being raped? Is that Christianity 101?

There is a lot to consider with the persecution of Christians. Jesus for example says in Matt 24:16 '' do not go back to your house, flee!''. Note He does not say, ''go back to your house and lie in bed''.

We're talking about violence here. If you want to call running away self defense so be it. It is allowed.

God would have to do miracles every five seconds to protect us. There would be zero need for 'living by faith'. The early Jews for example, those who saw the red sea part, I doubt they needed much 'faith' in their walk with God. Is this not obvious?

Where does 'relying on God' become testing and tempting God? Would you propose Christians not get vaccinated? (not referring to Covid, that vaccine was rushed ) If your children are ill you would not go to a doctor?

Relying on God IS living by faith. If a person relies on God to keep them safe they are living by faith. Going to a doctor isn't going against the commands of Christ so its's really not relevant.

Many Christians know that God gave them working brains to invent vaccines, hands to defend themselves, eyes to see danger, nose to smell poison, taste-buds to taste rotten food before swallowing. To ignore these realities would be to test God.

That's nonsensical. Especially when the command is to not use violence.

_______________________

As the link in the OP that @MedicBravo posted correctly stated, Christian pacifists have cherry picked a few scriptures. You cannot and must not do that. Scripture corrects scripture.

The devil said ''jump, angels will catch you''. Jesus corrected him by quoting 'more' scripture. If someone is trying to push you off a cliff and God provides a branch that can be used to escape. Must you just ignore it?

God does create a way of escape. Today, in wars, that assistance comes in the form of Christian soldiers in the army defending the woman and children at home from wicked men. Non-Christian men I would think avoid the army. Death is terrible if you believe you only have this life.

Actually, it's those who want to use violence that have cherry picked a few verses. I gave 300 years of Christian history. Going back to my original question regarding those early Christians. I asked if you would contend that they were all wrong, even those taught by the apostles. You didn't answer that question, however, from the ensuing discussion I think I can assume, correctly, that you believe they were all wrong. That would also mean that the apostles were wrong. That's a sketchy place for a Christian to be

I cannot believe we are even debating this topic . I expect a Jehovah's witness to disagree not a protestant Christian.

I can't either. With 300 years of history coming directly from the apostles I would think this would be a no brainer. However, I'm not really that surprised.

On a side note, I'm not a Protestant. My beliefs are based in the early teaching of Christianity, not the Reformation.

 

[Hekuran]

Here's a good and even-handed podcast debate between two very respected Christian thinkers on just war and Christian pacifism. It's 10 years old and an hour long

[Unbelievable?] Classic Replay: War and Peace: is war ever justified or should Christians embrace pacifism? Nigel Biggar and Stanley Hauerwas #unbelievable
Unbelievable? - Classic Replay: War and Peace: is war ever justified or should Christians embrace pacifism? Nigel Biggar and Stanley Hauerwas - Podcast Addict

 

[Butch5]

Butch, you also missed the point. The Bible is the final court of arbitration for any Follower of the Christ.

It should be, but it's often one's interpretation of Scripture, rather than Scripture. Take this subject for instance. You believe the use of violence is allowed. If what I've said is correct, then the Scriptures forbid the use of violence, That would make your authority, your interpretation and not the Scriptures, because your interpretation doesn't align with Scripture.

 

[Butch5]

"Obviously", what Jesus says in scripture "should" carry more weight than what early christian leaders believed. Its sad that you chose to believe them over scripture.

Do you mean the part about not repaying evil for evil? Or maybe the part about turning the other cheek. Or maybe the part where God said, 'thou shalt not kill'. Or maybe Paul's words,

19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Ro 12:19–1 Th 4:6.


The early Christians learned from Jesus and the apostles. So, no one is ignoring Scripture. I would ask you though, why do you put your interpretation of Scripture above Scripture?

 

[Bill Taylor]

Pardon me. It's not trash, it's the teaching of the church fathers.

It is tradition and Scripture teaches against that. Traditions are man made.

 

[Bill Taylor]

I was responding to @Bill Taylor who has been indulging in fantasies about shooting his enemies in the back

Not dreams, serious consideration for one of God's soldiers. There is no Edom/America in End Time Prophecy.

 

[Bill Taylor]

It should be, but it's often one's interpretation of Scripture, rather than Scripture. Take this subject for instance. You believe the use of violence is allowed. If what I've said is correct, then the Scriptures forbid the use of violence, That would make your authority, your interpretation and not the Scriptures, because your interpretation doesn't align with Scripture.

But my guide dwells in my soul/heart and by God's own Word I live or die. All followers of the Christ live for Him alone.

 

[Butch5]

But my guide dwells in my soul/heart and by God's own Word I live or die. All followers of the Christ live for Him alone.

I don't see how your previous statements align with this one

 

[Hekuran]

Not dreams, serious consideration for one of God's soldiers. There is no Edom/America in End Time Prophecy.

Totally the stuff of fantasy. For a start, you live in the most militarily advanced society that has ever existed, so the likelihood of enemy combatants wandering around your neighbourhood is remote to say the least.

More importantly, our Christian discipleship calls us to virtues such as forgiveness, love, self-giving, patience, joy, faithfulness, perseverance. There's no Biblical expectation that Jesus' followers get themselves armed with weapons. Paul said to the Ephesian church:

For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

Paul is very clear about the weapons at the church's disposal: truth, righteousness, the gospel of peace, faith, salvation, the word of God, and prayer.

 

[KingJ]

We're talking about violence here. If you want to call running away self defense so be it. It is allowed.

If violence can be avoided, it should be. In war, most times it can't be. Consider Gaza, do you disagree with what Israel is doing?

Relying on God IS living by faith. If a person relies on God to keep them safe they are living by faith. Going to a doctor isn't going against the commands of Christ so its's really not relevant.

Its good to hear you not against going to doctors like some Christians are. This tells me you are sane and just really against 'violence' .

That's nonsensical. Especially when the command is to not use violence.

Not nonsensical. Its irrelevant as I did not fully grasp your position.

Actually, it's those who want to use violence that have cherry picked a few verses. I gave 300 years of Christian history. Going back to my original question regarding those early Christians. I asked if you would contend that they were all wrong, even those taught by the apostles. You didn't answer that question, however, from the ensuing discussion I think I can assume, correctly, that you believe they were all wrong. That would also mean that the apostles were wrong. That's a sketchy place for a Christian to be

I can't either. With 300 years of history coming directly from the apostles I would think this would be a no brainer. However, I'm not really that surprised.

Correct me if I am wrong. You are not against self defense. Only extreme violence? IE Use self defense as humanely as possible?

If that is your position I agree 100% with you.

 

[Twistie]

Subjective opinion? 300 years of historical fact isn't subjective and it's not opinion. You can reject the facts if you choose to, however, that doesn't make them subjective or opinion. A simple look at the subject in the early church writings will confirm beyond any doubt that they did not use violence. It was one of the most compelling things about Christians, that they would not harm others under any circumstances, period. It's what made their enemies stand up and take notice.

Here is a quote from Cyprian. The battle he refers to is against the forces of darkness.


"But when beaten back as well by the faith as by the vigour of the combined army, he perceived that the soldiers of Christ are now watching, and stand sober and armed for the battle; that they cannot be conquered, but that they can die; and that by this very fact they are invincible, that they do not fear death; that they do not in turn assail their assailants, since it is not lawful for the innocent even to kill the guilty; but that they readily deliver up both their lives and their blood; that since such malice and cruelty rages in the world, they may the more quickly withdraw from the evil and cruel."

To every thing there is a season, and a time for every purpose under the heaven:

2 a time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;

3 a time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;

4 a time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;

5 a time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;

6 a time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away;

7 a time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;

8 a time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace

One must have discernment

 

[Bill Taylor]

I don't see how your previous statements align with this one

I might have been so bold as to falsely assume but not this time. I will mention tat all of the answers are found in prayerful study of the Book.