Who don’t what. Put up with the pacifism bs that people are trying to say is Christian?
God forgive them…for they know not what they do… Maybe you should get your bible out. I’m jumping to conclusions here, but correct me if I’m wrong by making the assumption that you’re on the left side of the tracks, ok? And touting that pacifist bs like “jesus was a socialist”.
Did Jesus advocate the use of a sword for self-defense purposes (Luke 22:36-38)?
Jesus is well known for His continued emphasis on love, forgiveness, and “turning the other cheek.” It is therefore surprising to find Jesus advising the disciples to buy a sword in Luke 22:36: “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.” Did Jesus in this verse advocate the use of a sword for self-defense purposes?
This is an issue over which Christians have vehemently disagreed for many centuries. Following is a summary of the two basic views of how Christians have interpreted Jesus on this issue.
THE PATH OF NONRESISTANCE. Christian pacifists believe it is always wrong to injure other humans, no matter what the circumstances. And the same principles supporting pacifism carry over to nonresistance–the belief that any form of self-defense is wrong. This view is usually based on the exemplary life and teachings of Jesus Christ.
According to Christian pacifist John Yoder, Jesus rejected the existing political state of affairs and taught a form of radical nonviolence. Central to Christ’s teaching, Yoder says, is His biblical mandate to “turn the other cheek” when encountering violence (Matthew 5:38-48).
In Yoder’s view, the way to victorious living is to refrain from the game of sociopolitical control. Jesus exposed the futility of the violence engrafted in the present world system by resisting its inclinations even to the point of death. Hence, Christians are to refuse the world’s violent methods and follow their Savior to the cross (Matthew 26:47-52). When Jesus told the disciples to buy a sword (Luke 22:36), pacifists suggest He was only speaking figuratively.
“TURN THE OTHER CHEEK” ALWAYS? It is true that Jesus said to turn the other cheek in Matthew 5:38-42. However, many scholars do not believe pacifism (or nonresistance) is the essential point of His teaching in this passage. These scholars do not believe Jesus was teaching to “turn the other cheek” in virtually all circumstances. Even Christ did not literally turn the other cheek when smitten by a member of the Sanhedrin (see John 18:22-23).
The backdrop to this teaching is that the Jews considered it an insult to be hit in the face, much in the same way that we would interpret someone spitting in our face. Bible scholar R. C. Sproul comments: “What’s interesting in the expression is that Jesus specifically mentions the right side of the face [Matthew 5:39]….If I hit you on your right cheek, the most normal way would be if I did it with the back of my right hand….To the best of our knowledge of the Hebrew language, that expression is a Jewish idiom that describes an insult, similar to the way challenges to duels in the days of King Arthur were made by a backhand slap to the right cheek of your opponent.”
The principle taught in the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5:38-42 would thus seem to be that Christians should not retaliate when insulted or slandered (see also Romans 12:17-21). Such insults do not threaten a Christian’s personal safety. The question of rendering insult for insult, however, is a far cry from defending oneself against a mugger or a rapist.
In terms of following Christ’s example, one must remember that His personal nonresistance at the cross was intertwined with His unique calling. He did not evade His arrest because it was God’s will for Him to fulfill His prophetic role as the redemptive Lamb of God (Matthew 26:52-56). During His ministry, however, He refused to be arrested because God’s timing for His death had not yet come (John 8:59). Thus, Christ’s unique nonresistance during the Passion does not mandate against self-protection.
THE BIBLICAL CASE FOR SELF-DEFENSE. It is noteworthy that the Bible records many accounts of fighting and warfare. The providence of God in war is exemplified by His name YHWH Sabaoth (”The LORD of hosts”–Exodus 12:41). God is portrayed as the omnipotent Warrior-Leader of the Israelites. God, the LORD of hosts, raised up warriors among the Israelites called the shophetim (savior-deliverers). Samson, Deborah, Gideon, and others were anointed by the Spirit of God to conduct war. The New Testament commends Old Testament warriors for their military acts of faith (Hebrews 11:30-40). Moreover, it is significant that although given the opportunity to do so, none of the New Testament saints–nor even Jesus–are ever seen informing a military convert that he needed to resign from his line of work (Matthew 8:5-13; Luke 3:14).
Prior to His crucifixion, Jesus revealed to His disciples the future hostility they would face and encouraged them to sell their outer garments in order to buy a sword (Luke 22:36-38; cf. 2 Corinthians 11:26-27). Here the “sword” (Greek: maxairan) is a dagger or short sword that belonged to the Jewish traveler’s equipment as protection against robbers and wild animals. A plain reading of the passage indicates that Jesus approved of self-defense.
Self-defense may actually result in one of the greatest examples of human love. Christ Himself said, “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:14). When protecting one’s family or neighbor, a Christian is unselfishly risking his or her life for the sake of others.
Theologians J. P. Moreland and Norman Geisler say that “to permit murder when one could have prevented it is morally wrong. To allow a rape when one could have hindered it is an evil. To watch an act of cruelty to children without trying to intervene is morally inexcusable. In brief, not resisting evil is an evil of omission, and an evil of omission can be just as evil as an evil of commission. Any man who refuses to protect his wife and children against a violent intruder fails them morally.”
Thanks for this fantastic post Cao.These cowards are always quick to run to the New Testament to try and justify their morally bankrupt behavior,but,as you pointed out so eloquently that Jesus wasn’t a pacifist.These people should read Ecclesiastes about their being a time to every person under the sun.Romans 13:8 is another good verse to counter these milkytoast and false arguments that they cloak themselves in.Also,the prophet Ezekiel 3:20 and maybe he may rethink that garbage that has been preached for so many years.I also know that two great world figures held equal contempt for these fools.Winston Churchill,and G.K. Chesterton,and Chesterton really berates these people for the cowards and loatheome creatures they are,in fact,they have caused more wars than anything or anybody.I have never read of any great pacifist in history.I now why.God isn’t against you protecting the weak,he commands that they do,it is weakness such as this he doesn’t like and these people being the moral equivicators that they are,have blood on their hands.Cao,I’m surprised with all your scriptural knowledge that you didn’t become a preacher.:mrgreen::cool:
Romans 13:8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
But loving one another doesn’t mean standing by and allowing atrocities to be committed. “Loving one another” doesn’t mean allowing suicide bombers to kill innocents like the recent death of Danny Wurz in Israel who was just a 16-year old boy who wanted to be a rabbi when he grew up.
I much rather prefer this verse from Romans 13:
Romans 13:12 The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light.
You are so right about Churchill, etc.
Christ said in John 15:13 “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.”
This is why we should not fear dying; this is what the soldiers do every day - put themselves in harm’s way so we can rest in peace at night.
This is also why we should respect and cherish the sacrifices of all those who have laid down their lives for the freedoms so many of us take for granted today.
It’s too bad that so many people don’t get it….but that’s one of the reasons I love to blog about this stuff. So much of what I put down here is a perspective these pansies have never even heard before.
I pray that we will continue to be able to blog about these things and that government regulation won’t step in to squash our voices…
Thanks as always for commenting, Lisa. I love to read what you have to say; your perspective is so refreshing and I always learn from it.
Interesting discussion. Let me see if I could add some understanding to this discussion.
1. God is Immutable. The logical extension of this fact is that anything God set into place throughout history will not violate the nature of God as now revealed in the NT. Therefore
A. The Kinsman Redeemer as set up in Numbers 35:16-33 INSTRUCTS the nation of Israel that if a man kills another, the nearest male relative of the deceased is to go and KILL the murderer. Thus, the concept of absolute nonviolence is foreign to God, and Jesus Christ as Jesus is part of the triune God.
B. In the same way, It was God who killed the Egyptians in the Red Sea (Sea of Reeds). It was God who killed 144,000 Assyrians. I could go on, but you all get the point.
2. For those who use the life of Christ to promote gov’t pacifism, I urge you to find for me one place where Jesus condemns Caeser for his ongoing wars. There is none. You cannot take the teachings of Jesus and extend them to nation-states
3. Cao argued this point well. Jesus’ life was about His death. His non-violence on His way to the cross was about His sacrifice for all humanity. Applied to us, if I am being struck because of my belief in Jesus, I will accept it. However, if a crackhead comes into my house at three in the morning, he is not choosing me because of my Christianity, but because of my proximity to the crackhead at time of need. And you can bet… he is in for a surprise.
4. Lastly, it is possible to be right in what is being said, but wrong because of how it is said. The message of Jesus has been invalidated just as much by the delivery as by the corruption of the message itself.
My husband has been to Iraq once and is probaly going to have to go back soon. Do I agree with this war, well, yes. If it wasn’t fought on their soil it would be fought on ours. I don’t think people understand that we are in a Holy War. The extreme Muslims don’t care who they hurt they will die for what they believe. Our soilders are protecing our freedom.
Jesus did say No love is grater than this a man who lays down his life for his friends.
The bible also says:Ecclisaties Chapter 3: 1There is a time for everything,and a season for every activity under heaven:
2 a time to be born and a time to die,
a time to plant and a time to uproot,
3 a time to kill and a time to heal,
a time to tear down and a time to build,
4 a time to weep and a time to laugh,
a time to mourn and a time to dance,
5 a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them,
a time to embrace and a time to refrain,
6 a time to search and a time to give up,
a time to keep and a time to throw away,
7 a time to tear and a time to mend,
a time to be silent and a time to speak,
8 a time to love and a time to hate,
a time for war and a time for peace.
December 31st, 2005 at 7:48 am
[…] Go see here. Trackback URL http://joscafe.com/2005/12/31/an-american-soldier/trackback/ […]
December 31st, 2005 at 7:48 am
Thank you for posting this.
January 2nd, 2006 at 4:44 pm
This is simply awesome, Thank you
for sharing this.
Pet
January 23rd, 2006 at 5:03 pm
May God give us the wisdom and understanding to put up with those here who don’t…..
May 14th, 2006 at 6:21 pm
Who don’t what. Put up with the pacifism bs that people are trying to say is Christian?
God forgive them…for they know not what they do… Maybe you should get your bible out. I’m jumping to conclusions here, but correct me if I’m wrong by making the assumption that you’re on the left side of the tracks, ok? And touting that pacifist bs like “jesus was a socialist”.
Did Jesus advocate the use of a sword for self-defense purposes (Luke 22:36-38)?
Jesus is well known for His continued emphasis on love, forgiveness, and “turning the other cheek.” It is therefore surprising to find Jesus advising the disciples to buy a sword in Luke 22:36: “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.” Did Jesus in this verse advocate the use of a sword for self-defense purposes?
This is an issue over which Christians have vehemently disagreed for many centuries. Following is a summary of the two basic views of how Christians have interpreted Jesus on this issue.
THE PATH OF NONRESISTANCE. Christian pacifists believe it is always wrong to injure other humans, no matter what the circumstances. And the same principles supporting pacifism carry over to nonresistance–the belief that any form of self-defense is wrong. This view is usually based on the exemplary life and teachings of Jesus Christ.
According to Christian pacifist John Yoder, Jesus rejected the existing political state of affairs and taught a form of radical nonviolence. Central to Christ’s teaching, Yoder says, is His biblical mandate to “turn the other cheek” when encountering violence (Matthew 5:38-48).
In Yoder’s view, the way to victorious living is to refrain from the game of sociopolitical control. Jesus exposed the futility of the violence engrafted in the present world system by resisting its inclinations even to the point of death. Hence, Christians are to refuse the world’s violent methods and follow their Savior to the cross (Matthew 26:47-52). When Jesus told the disciples to buy a sword (Luke 22:36), pacifists suggest He was only speaking figuratively.
“TURN THE OTHER CHEEK” ALWAYS? It is true that Jesus said to turn the other cheek in Matthew 5:38-42. However, many scholars do not believe pacifism (or nonresistance) is the essential point of His teaching in this passage. These scholars do not believe Jesus was teaching to “turn the other cheek” in virtually all circumstances. Even Christ did not literally turn the other cheek when smitten by a member of the Sanhedrin (see John 18:22-23).
The backdrop to this teaching is that the Jews considered it an insult to be hit in the face, much in the same way that we would interpret someone spitting in our face. Bible scholar R. C. Sproul comments: “What’s interesting in the expression is that Jesus specifically mentions the right side of the face [Matthew 5:39]….If I hit you on your right cheek, the most normal way would be if I did it with the back of my right hand….To the best of our knowledge of the Hebrew language, that expression is a Jewish idiom that describes an insult, similar to the way challenges to duels in the days of King Arthur were made by a backhand slap to the right cheek of your opponent.”
The principle taught in the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5:38-42 would thus seem to be that Christians should not retaliate when insulted or slandered (see also Romans 12:17-21). Such insults do not threaten a Christian’s personal safety. The question of rendering insult for insult, however, is a far cry from defending oneself against a mugger or a rapist.
In terms of following Christ’s example, one must remember that His personal nonresistance at the cross was intertwined with His unique calling. He did not evade His arrest because it was God’s will for Him to fulfill His prophetic role as the redemptive Lamb of God (Matthew 26:52-56). During His ministry, however, He refused to be arrested because God’s timing for His death had not yet come (John 8:59). Thus, Christ’s unique nonresistance during the Passion does not mandate against self-protection.
THE BIBLICAL CASE FOR SELF-DEFENSE. It is noteworthy that the Bible records many accounts of fighting and warfare. The providence of God in war is exemplified by His name YHWH Sabaoth (”The LORD of hosts”–Exodus 12:41). God is portrayed as the omnipotent Warrior-Leader of the Israelites. God, the LORD of hosts, raised up warriors among the Israelites called the shophetim (savior-deliverers). Samson, Deborah, Gideon, and others were anointed by the Spirit of God to conduct war. The New Testament commends Old Testament warriors for their military acts of faith (Hebrews 11:30-40). Moreover, it is significant that although given the opportunity to do so, none of the New Testament saints–nor even Jesus–are ever seen informing a military convert that he needed to resign from his line of work (Matthew 8:5-13; Luke 3:14).
Prior to His crucifixion, Jesus revealed to His disciples the future hostility they would face and encouraged them to sell their outer garments in order to buy a sword (Luke 22:36-38; cf. 2 Corinthians 11:26-27). Here the “sword” (Greek: maxairan) is a dagger or short sword that belonged to the Jewish traveler’s equipment as protection against robbers and wild animals. A plain reading of the passage indicates that Jesus approved of self-defense.
Self-defense may actually result in one of the greatest examples of human love. Christ Himself said, “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:14). When protecting one’s family or neighbor, a Christian is unselfishly risking his or her life for the sake of others.
Theologians J. P. Moreland and Norman Geisler say that “to permit murder when one could have prevented it is morally wrong. To allow a rape when one could have hindered it is an evil. To watch an act of cruelty to children without trying to intervene is morally inexcusable. In brief, not resisting evil is an evil of omission, and an evil of omission can be just as evil as an evil of commission. Any man who refuses to protect his wife and children against a violent intruder fails them morally.”
May 14th, 2006 at 10:01 pm
Thanks for this fantastic post Cao.These cowards are always quick to run to the New Testament to try and justify their morally bankrupt behavior,but,as you pointed out so eloquently that Jesus wasn’t a pacifist.These people should read Ecclesiastes about their being a time to every person under the sun.Romans 13:8 is another good verse to counter these milkytoast and false arguments that they cloak themselves in.Also,the prophet Ezekiel 3:20 and maybe he may rethink that garbage that has been preached for so many years.I also know that two great world figures held equal contempt for these fools.Winston Churchill,and G.K. Chesterton,and Chesterton really berates these people for the cowards and loatheome creatures they are,in fact,they have caused more wars than anything or anybody.I have never read of any great pacifist in history.I now why.God isn’t against you protecting the weak,he commands that they do,it is weakness such as this he doesn’t like and these people being the moral equivicators that they are,have blood on their hands.Cao,I’m surprised with all your scriptural knowledge that you didn’t become a preacher.:mrgreen::cool:
May 15th, 2006 at 5:54 am
Romans 13:8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
But loving one another doesn’t mean standing by and allowing atrocities to be committed. “Loving one another” doesn’t mean allowing suicide bombers to kill innocents like the recent death of Danny Wurz in Israel who was just a 16-year old boy who wanted to be a rabbi when he grew up.
I much rather prefer this verse from Romans 13:
Romans 13:12 The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light.
You are so right about Churchill, etc.
Christ said in John 15:13 “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.”
This is why we should not fear dying; this is what the soldiers do every day - put themselves in harm’s way so we can rest in peace at night.
This is also why we should respect and cherish the sacrifices of all those who have laid down their lives for the freedoms so many of us take for granted today.
It’s too bad that so many people don’t get it….but that’s one of the reasons I love to blog about this stuff. So much of what I put down here is a perspective these pansies have never even heard before.
I pray that we will continue to be able to blog about these things and that government regulation won’t step in to squash our voices…
Thanks as always for commenting, Lisa. I love to read what you have to say; your perspective is so refreshing and I always learn from it.
May 24th, 2006 at 5:29 pm
Hmmmm.
Interesting discussion. Let me see if I could add some understanding to this discussion.
1. God is Immutable. The logical extension of this fact is that anything God set into place throughout history will not violate the nature of God as now revealed in the NT. Therefore
A. The Kinsman Redeemer as set up in Numbers 35:16-33 INSTRUCTS the nation of Israel that if a man kills another, the nearest male relative of the deceased is to go and KILL the murderer. Thus, the concept of absolute nonviolence is foreign to God, and Jesus Christ as Jesus is part of the triune God.
B. In the same way, It was God who killed the Egyptians in the Red Sea (Sea of Reeds). It was God who killed 144,000 Assyrians. I could go on, but you all get the point.
2. For those who use the life of Christ to promote gov’t pacifism, I urge you to find for me one place where Jesus condemns Caeser for his ongoing wars. There is none. You cannot take the teachings of Jesus and extend them to nation-states
3. Cao argued this point well. Jesus’ life was about His death. His non-violence on His way to the cross was about His sacrifice for all humanity. Applied to us, if I am being struck because of my belief in Jesus, I will accept it. However, if a crackhead comes into my house at three in the morning, he is not choosing me because of my Christianity, but because of my proximity to the crackhead at time of need. And you can bet… he is in for a surprise.
4. Lastly, it is possible to be right in what is being said, but wrong because of how it is said. The message of Jesus has been invalidated just as much by the delivery as by the corruption of the message itself.
May 24th, 2006 at 6:22 pm
Not entirely sure I understand what you meant in #4. The rest I entirely agree with, Christian.
Please extrapolate what you meant when you said
“the message of Jesus has been invalidated just as much by the delivery as by the corruption of the message itself.”
April 12th, 2007 at 12:09 pm
My husband has been to Iraq once and is probaly going to have to go back soon. Do I agree with this war, well, yes. If it wasn’t fought on their soil it would be fought on ours. I don’t think people understand that we are in a Holy War. The extreme Muslims don’t care who they hurt they will die for what they believe. Our soilders are protecing our freedom.
Jesus did say No love is grater than this a man who lays down his life for his friends.
The bible also says:Ecclisaties Chapter 3: 1There is a time for everything,and a season for every activity under heaven:
2 a time to be born and a time to die,
a time to plant and a time to uproot,
3 a time to kill and a time to heal,
a time to tear down and a time to build,
4 a time to weep and a time to laugh,
a time to mourn and a time to dance,
5 a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them,
a time to embrace and a time to refrain,
6 a time to search and a time to give up,
a time to keep and a time to throw away,
7 a time to tear and a time to mend,
a time to be silent and a time to speak,
8 a time to love and a time to hate,
a time for war and a time for peace.
April 12th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
Love the song, awsome powerpoint!
November 13th, 2007 at 2:20 am
Thanks for sharing this,I found a Flash movie of If I Die before You Wake at http://www.flashdemo.net/gallery/wake/index.htm
Hope you will enjoy it as well.