Hmmm. I wonder then if you would also refuse to call the police if your family was being attacked. Would you actually call people with guns, you are not supposed to be yoked with?
Let's see if you're consistent on this.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Does Christianity require Pacifism
- Thread starter Earth Wind and Fire
- Start date
- Status
Hmmm. I wonder then if you would also refuse to call the police if your family was being attacked. Would you actually call people with guns, you are not supposed to be yoked with?
Let's see if you're consistent on this.
1689Dave
Well-Known Member
Yes! it is their job to kill. But not the Christian's calling.
By calling them, you're in essence taking part in what they do. There's no way to be a pacifist if you're willing to call in the big guns.
1689Dave
Well-Known Member
God ordained the magistrate to bear the sword. He ordained us to love enemies more than our own lives if it comes down to that.
I agree, but your premise is you can't be loving and shoot someone. By extension you can't be loving and call someone to shoot someone. You're contradicting yourself.
I don't have that restraint as I think it's unloving not to protect my family if the magistrate can't get there in time. I also don't believe we are required to put our enemy above our family and neighbor. Somehow you've come to this conclusion.
1689Dave
Well-Known Member
Jesus said to resist not evil. Do you love him more than you do yourself or family?
Okay, then why would you call the police to resit evil for you?? If you say you can't use a gun because of that command, then you also can't call the police because of that command. Calling the police is resisting evil by definition.
I'm just trying to get you to be consistent.
1689Dave
Well-Known Member
That is God's plan. The magistrate kills enemies. We would rather die first.
No you would't. By your own admission, you would call the police first. You don't practice what you preach.
1689Dave
Well-Known Member
It depends,
“For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.” Romans 13:3–5 (KJV 1900)
You're dodging. You said you'd rather die first, yet also saying you'd call the police to kill your enemy first. You're inconsistent, at best. This verse doesn't speak to that.
Last edited:
We will never know if pacifism works or is a valid defense since it has not been, and never will be tried on a national level.
As subjects of a government, we are to be obedient to those who rule over us. If those in control over us, pacifist Christians, were all pacifist Christians enjoying God's blessings, what would we expect God to do if our nation were under military attack? Would He engage in pacifism and allow us to be annihilated or would He intervene on our part and annihilate our enemy? You see, we will never know.
As subjects of a government, we are to be obedient to those who rule over us. If those in control over us, pacifist Christians, were all pacifist Christians enjoying God's blessings, what would we expect God to do if our nation were under military attack? Would He engage in pacifism and allow us to be annihilated or would He intervene on our part and annihilate our enemy? You see, we will never know.
We know God created the nations and ordained their rulers who are granted the right to use lethal force. And on a personal level, Jesus instructed us to purchase a weapon (Luke 22:36). Between those two, I'd say pacifism is a myth from the Christian perspective.
Perhaps some insight from Richard Rohr would help.
Nonviolence
Walter Wink (1935–2012), with whom I taught at several conferences some years ago, wrote a brilliant book, Jesus and Nonviolence, on a third way between fight and flight. I can see why Jesus calls it “a narrow path,” as it’s not the ego’s default or preferred method. Read on. . . .
There are three general responses to evil: (1) passivity, (2) violent opposition, and (3) the third way of . . . nonviolence articulated by Jesus. Human evolution has conditioned us for only the first two of these responses. . . .
Jesus abhors both passivity and violence as responses to evil. His is a third alternative not even touched by these options. . . .
Jesus’ Third Way bears at its very heart the love of enemies. This is the hardest word to utter in a context of conflict because it can so easily be misunderstood as spinelessness. But it is precisely the message [Martin Luther King, Jr.] made central to his efforts in the polarized circumstances of the American South.
To our most bitter opponents we say: We shall match your capacity to inflict suffering by our capacity to endure suffering. We shall meet your physical force with soul force. Do to us what you will, and we shall continue to love you. We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws, because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. Throw us in jail, and we shall still love you. Bomb our homes and threaten our children, and we shall still love you. Send your hooded perpetrators of violence into our communities at the midnight hour and beat us and leave us half dead, and we shall still love you. But be ye assured that we will wear you down by our capacity to suffer. One day we shall win freedom, but not only for ourselves. We shall so appeal to your heart and conscience that we shall win you in the process, and our victory will be a double victory. [1]
Walter Wink continues:
Love of enemies has, for our time, become the litmus test of authentic Christian faith. Commitment to justice, liberation, or the overthrow of oppression is not enough, for all too often the means used have brought in their wake new injustices and oppressions. Love of enemies is the recognition that the enemy, too, is a child of God. The enemy too believes [they are] in the right, and fears us because we represent a threat against [their] values, lifestyle, or affluence. When we demonize our enemies, calling them names and identifying them with absolute evil, we deny that they have that of God within them that makes transformation possible. Instead, we play God. We write them out of the Book of Life. We conclude that our enemy has drifted beyond the redemptive hand of God. . . .
It is our very inability to love our enemies that throws us into the arms of grace.
Or as I, Richard, like to say, it’s when we come to the end of our own resources that we must draw upon the Infinite Life and Love within us to do what we alone cannot do.
Nonviolence
Walter Wink (1935–2012), with whom I taught at several conferences some years ago, wrote a brilliant book, Jesus and Nonviolence, on a third way between fight and flight. I can see why Jesus calls it “a narrow path,” as it’s not the ego’s default or preferred method. Read on. . . .
There are three general responses to evil: (1) passivity, (2) violent opposition, and (3) the third way of . . . nonviolence articulated by Jesus. Human evolution has conditioned us for only the first two of these responses. . . .
Jesus abhors both passivity and violence as responses to evil. His is a third alternative not even touched by these options. . . .
Jesus’ Third Way bears at its very heart the love of enemies. This is the hardest word to utter in a context of conflict because it can so easily be misunderstood as spinelessness. But it is precisely the message [Martin Luther King, Jr.] made central to his efforts in the polarized circumstances of the American South.
To our most bitter opponents we say: We shall match your capacity to inflict suffering by our capacity to endure suffering. We shall meet your physical force with soul force. Do to us what you will, and we shall continue to love you. We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws, because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. Throw us in jail, and we shall still love you. Bomb our homes and threaten our children, and we shall still love you. Send your hooded perpetrators of violence into our communities at the midnight hour and beat us and leave us half dead, and we shall still love you. But be ye assured that we will wear you down by our capacity to suffer. One day we shall win freedom, but not only for ourselves. We shall so appeal to your heart and conscience that we shall win you in the process, and our victory will be a double victory. [1]
Walter Wink continues:
Love of enemies has, for our time, become the litmus test of authentic Christian faith. Commitment to justice, liberation, or the overthrow of oppression is not enough, for all too often the means used have brought in their wake new injustices and oppressions. Love of enemies is the recognition that the enemy, too, is a child of God. The enemy too believes [they are] in the right, and fears us because we represent a threat against [their] values, lifestyle, or affluence. When we demonize our enemies, calling them names and identifying them with absolute evil, we deny that they have that of God within them that makes transformation possible. Instead, we play God. We write them out of the Book of Life. We conclude that our enemy has drifted beyond the redemptive hand of God. . . .
It is our very inability to love our enemies that throws us into the arms of grace.
Or as I, Richard, like to say, it’s when we come to the end of our own resources that we must draw upon the Infinite Life and Love within us to do what we alone cannot do.
Remember folks, this is not pacifism, it is a different way of looking at an enemy... but I wouldn’t shirk from defending an innocent person from an enemy either.
If he believes humans evolved, he's already got problems and is already going against Jesus.
Mark 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation, God “made them male and female.’
Jesus was not putting together an army for a rebellion, but he did not go so far as to say we couldn't defend ourselves. He specifically commanded Christian groups or families to own a weapon.
Luke 22:36 Then He said to them, “But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.
The balance is not finding some imaginary ground between pacifism and violence, but rather taking Jesus' literally. Own a weapon for self defense. Protect your brothers and family. But, don't stockpile so as to lead a rebellion and overthrow law enforcement or governments. Two is enough (Luke 22:38).
That's the balance.
1689Dave
Well-Known Member
Have you considered how it is better to take a bullet upholding Jesus' words about non resistance of evil, and loving enemies, and to wear the martyr's crown forever? Than to ignore him and kill only to grow old and suffer the pain and sickness of old age?
Handguns or rifles... how bout shotguns?
I think a martyrdom is something some individual Christians are called to do. I think there are times for it. I don't go looking for it, but if it came to me I'd pray for God's grace.
But you're talking about something totally different. You're talking about offering your family and fellow brothers up to be martyred. That's actually cowardice. A righteous man protects the innocent. He does not offer them up to be sacrificed. That's a false religion.
The short sword Jesus spoke about was the weapon of his day. It was akin to a pistol or riffle today. Definitely not enough to overthrow an army, but sufficient to stop the thug trying to kill your family.
- Status