Is the Sermon on the Mount for Today?

[MartyF]

How do you get a version out of resist not evil? Or turn the other cheek? Or love your enemies, even if the government calls it treason?

Since it seems like you missed it. I’ll post it again.

The problem is that you are not following Jesus's words. Jesus said turn the other cheek - not if someone murders your mother, let them murder your wife as well. The extreme nature of your interpretation is disturbing. I don't see any words of Jesus interpreting the extreme pacifist reaction to extreme violence which you recommend.

 

[GoodTidings]

“I have been on journeys many times, in dangers from rivers, in dangers from robbers, in dangers from my own countrymen, in dangers from Gentiles, in dangers in the city, in dangers in the wilderness, in dangers at sea, in dangers from false brothers, in hard work and toil, through many sleepless nights, in hunger and thirst, many times without food, in cold and without enough clothing.” 2 Corinthians 11:26–27 (NET)

Doesn't say he was beaten by robbers. And the "dangers" are not expressly described as "violence." Once again, you are reading into the passage, something it doesn't actually say.

 

[GoodTidings]

Let's see it .

The Sermon on the Mount is what you are talking about and what Jesus said about not resisting evil. YOU are saying that is talking about not resisting violence, but that is not what it actually says, nor does that fit the context.

You are, in fact, ignoring the context in order to make the Bible promote pacifism, which does not.

 

[Revmitchell]

Perhaps I missed the moving of goal posts. Would you put the post numbers that you are referring too?

Post # 12

 

[GoodTidings]

No difference. Paul was beaten of robbers but he taught vengeance belongs to the Lord.

Big difference. The Bible doesn't say that Paul was beaten by robbers. YOU said that. You adding something into the text.

Secondly, people like you, who are ignorant of the Word of God and what it teaches, misinterpret and pervert what it means to "love your enemies."

"Loving your enemy" does not mean to let your enemy take advantage of you and to allow him to commit all man of violence against you. That is not loving your enemy at all. It's just stupid to let your family be destroyed at the hands of a murderer/rapist. No sane, intelligent person does that.

"Loving your enemy" refers to treating someone who hates you in a manner that reflects Jesus. But the "enemy" being referenced is someone who has committed a personal wrong. If someone slanders you, you are not to slander them back. If someone gossips about you, you are not do so in kind. You are not take any kind of revenge on those people but rather pray for them. That is what Jesus is talking about.

Any man who would not guard his family from danger is a poor excuse of a man and is also a poor excuse for a Christian and should not have a family.

 

[37818]

This is an important question because Matthew calls the Sermon on the Mount the doctrine of Christ (Matthew 7:28). And John says any who do not have the doctrine of Christ do not have God (2 John 9).

There is also His post resurrection doctrine, ". . . they shall speak with new tongues; . . ." -- Mark 16:17. If the Biblical gift of tongues are yet operational.

But then there is the doctrine of Christ in which one must believe if one is really born from God. 1 John 5:1. 2 John 1:9.

 

[agedman]

Post # 12

How do you get a version out of resist not evil? Or turn the other cheek? Or love your enemies, even if the government calls it treason?

I consider that Dave may answer on his own.

I gave my own thoughts on this thread here:

There is a huge difference between being non-violent, in resisting evil, and restraining evil doers.

I am basically a non-violent person, yet have the understanding of restraining and the techniques/training and authority to restrain children when and if necessary.

I can defend against evil and not be violent either in intent or in physical.

One who engages in violence has the intent to harm, not to restrain, or to resist, but to return some measure of just retribution.

Such retribution is for God to assign, not for me.

I would add that at times the resisting of evil obliges a call to arms, and engagement by nations. That is truly a sadness that believers have and will have to wrestle.

The national hero, Sargent York, struggled with this very issue, and so did Desmond Doss, who came to a different conclusion.

 

[Adonia]

How do you get a version out of resist not evil? Or turn the other cheek? Or love your enemies, even if the government calls it treason?

Different Christian sects have come up with their own doctrines, and yours is but one of many. The Scriptures sometimes says one thing (Jesus said to buy a sword) and then the next thing you know it's turn the other cheek. So which is it? Is there variances in what the Scriptures say? Jesus always preached at the highest level, looking to get the best out of us.

 

[Adonia]

Paul defended himself verbally but never physically with those trying to harm him. Jesus never tried to kill anyone in scripture.

How do you know for sure? Most of what happened wasn't written down, so maybe St. Paul did indeed shove a centurion or a jailer or a highwayman at some point.

 

[Adonia]

The national hero, Sargent York, struggled with this very issue, and so did Desmond Doss, who came to a different conclusion.

Two great examples. As for our friend Dave here, I respect his C.O. status during the Vietnam war, but he loses me when he won't defend the weak and helpless with physical force if needed.

 

[Alcott]

Do you think both Jesus and Paul are "in danger of hell fire" because they called people fools? [Matthew 5:22]

Only if you do.

You should have told me before that I am your thought master.

 

[37818]

I know the Dispensationalists believe the Sermon is not for today.

While His teaching was given under the Law, except for that, I do not see how those teachings do not apply today in our church age. ". . . Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God. . Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. . . ." -- Matthew 5:8-9. ". . . Ye are the salt of the earth: . . ." -- Matthew 5:13. ". . . Ye are the light of the world. . . ." -- Matthew 5:14.

 

[Aaron]

I also shunned Military service and registered as a Conscientious Objector. This closed many doors of opportunity and brought family ridicule. But living a life of nonviolence according to the Sermon also meant God would provide all the gentiles seek after as they kill and bludgeon their way up the ladder.

Proverbs 21:3 To do justice and judgment is more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice.

The Lord has been merciful to you despite your errors, not because of them.

 

[Alofa Atu]

Do you think the Sermon is for today?

Not only do I think the sermon is for today (yet what I think doesn't really matter, only what scripture KJB says matters) I think it is for right very now at every present moment (which agrees with what scripture says, and so I "Amen" God's inspired and preserved words).

Mat 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Mat 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

If the texts were not for the disciple of Christ, the very Christian, the echo of God's word, then what use of this:

Mat 6:9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
Mat 6:10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.
Mat 6:11 Give us this day our daily bread.
Mat 6:12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
Mat 6:13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.

Most do not even consider what the temptation or evil in the verse is.

 

[1689Dave]

Proverbs 21:3 To do justice and judgment is more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice.

The Lord has been merciful to you despite your errors, not because of them.

Jesus forbids killing enemies.

 

[1689Dave]

How do you know for sure? Most of what happened wasn't written down, so maybe St. Paul did indeed shove a centurion or a jailer or a highwayman at some point.

Paul lived what he taught. How many times was he beaten and left for dead with no mention of anything more than vocal defense?

 

[1689Dave]

Different Christian sects have come up with their own doctrines, and yours is but one of many. The Scriptures sometimes says one thing (Jesus said to buy a sword) and then the next thing you know it's turn the other cheek. So which is it? Is there variances in what the Scriptures say? Jesus always preached at the highest level, looking to get the best out of us.

Jesus taught non resistance of evil. The two swords got Jesus convicted of being a transgressor. He did not advocate violence.

 

[1689Dave]

Big difference. The Bible doesn't say that Paul was beaten by robbers. YOU said that. You adding something into the text.

Secondly, people like you, who are ignorant of the Word of God and what it teaches, misinterpret and pervert what it means to "love your enemies."

"Loving your enemy" does not mean to let your enemy take advantage of you and to allow him to commit all man of violence against you. That is not loving your enemy at all. It's just stupid to let your family be destroyed at the hands of a murderer/rapist. No sane, intelligent person does that.

"Loving your enemy" refers to treating someone who hates you in a manner that reflects Jesus. But the "enemy" being referenced is someone who has committed a personal wrong. If someone slanders you, you are not to slander them back. If someone gossips about you, you are not do so in kind. You are not take any kind of revenge on those people but rather pray for them. That is what Jesus is talking about.

Any man who would not guard his family from danger is a poor excuse of a man and is also a poor excuse for a Christian and should not have a family.

Paul was robbed and beaten several times. But even if nice robbers only threatened him, it remains, he did not avenge himself but gave it to the Lord to whom vengeance belongs

 

[1689Dave]

The Sermon on the Mount is what you are talking about and what Jesus said about not resisting evil. YOU are saying that is talking about not resisting violence, but that is not what it actually says, nor does that fit the context.

You are, in fact, ignoring the context in order to make the Bible promote pacifism, which does not.

“But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.” Matthew 5:39 (KJV 1900) = physical violence

 

[1689Dave]

Doesn't say he was beaten by robbers. And the "dangers" are not expressly described as "violence." Once again, you are reading into the passage, something it doesn't actually say.

Paul was nonetheless beaten many times. If nice robbers asked him without any threats, it doesn't say, but murder often accompanies robbery to avoid detection. Paul taught non-violence too, turning vengeance over to the Lord.