Must Christians Be Pacifists

[OldRegular]

Jesus Christ commands the following:

Matthew 5:44

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.

In light of the above Scripture must Christians be pacifists?

I am starting this thread because of the pious indignation shown by some over the water boarding of three Islamic terrorists which yielded information that prevented further attacks like 9/11. These folks have used the above passage to justify their indignation.

 

[historyb]

No, nope and no

 

[Crabtownboy]

I feel there are rare instances when war is justifible. For instance I believe World War II was justifible. The evil of Hitler was so great and the danger from Japan so great that I believe war was the only course of action. We live in a world where a military is, at least for major countries, a necessity. Costa Rica has managed to survive and survive well without a mlitary since the late 1940's. But being a powerful nation, and a nation that says we have higher ideas the US must be very careful in how it uses power. I believe the power should be used in positive ways more than negative ones.

For me discussing war is a completely different topic than discussing torture.

This is, for me, a difficult area to come to definite conclusions about. I, as many here know, do not believe Iraq was justifible in any way. I opposed the war prior to the invasion, I felt Hussain was very bad man. But that is not justifible as a reason to invade a country. If it is, why have we not invaded Zimbabwe, Burma, Libya and a number of other countries that have bad to very bad leaders?

Thanks for starting this thread.

 

[BigBossman]

I believe that Christians don't have to be a doormat for the world to trample over. It is known that pacifists don't fight. Pacifists also tend to let things go more easier than a non-pacifist. Pacifists, in my view, (while not cowardly) do not use their backbone to stand up for their rights or the rights of others.

To say that a Christian must be a pacifist is to say that our nation was wrong for doing what it did when we declared our independece from Britain. What about oppressing religious freedom? If Christians were rounded up & killed, would you not fight to save yourself, your family, or others? Being a Christian means that you have to endure hardships at times, but that doesn't mean allowing others to walk all over you. It means having to stand up for what is right.

II Timothy 2:3 (KJV): "Thou shalt endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ."

 

[Palatka51]

I feel there are rare instances when war is justifible. For instance I believe World War II was justifible. The evil of Hitler was so great and the danger from Japan so great that I believe war was the only course of action. We live in a world where a military is, at least for major countries, a necessity. Costa Rica has managed to survive and survive well without a mlitary since the late 1940's. But being a powerful nation, and a nation that says we have higher ideas the US must be very careful in how it uses power. I believe the power should be used in positive ways more than negative ones.

For me discussing war is a completely different topic than discussing torture.

This is, for me, a difficult area to come to definite conclusions about. I, as many here know, do not believe Iraq was justifible in any way. I opposed the war prior to the invasion, I felt Hussain was very bad man. But that is not justifible as a reason to invade a country. If it is, why have we not invaded Zimbabwe, Burma, Libya and a number of other countries that have bad to very bad leaders?

Thanks for starting this thread.

And yet Saddam Hussein was made in the very same mold. He invaded his neighbors, as Hitler did to Poland and Tojo did to Korea and China. He massacred his own citizenry as did Hitler. He threatened the supply of oil as did Imperial Japan.

 

[Martin Luther]

Jesus Christ commands the following:

Matthew 5:44

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.

In light of the above Scripture must Christians be pacifists?

I am starting this thread because of the pious indignation shown by some over the water boarding of three Islamic terrorists which yielded information that prevented further attacks like 9/11. These folks have used the above passage to justify their indignation.

Yes.........

 

[Magnetic Poles]

And yet Saddam Hussein was made in the very same mold. He invaded his neighbors, as Hitler did to Poland and Tojo did to Korea and China. He massacred his own citizenry as did Hitler. He threatened the supply of oil as did Imperial Japan.

Saddam was neutered. He was contained in a central strip with no fly zones over most of Iraq. Sanctions were in place. He had been driven out of Iraq. He had no WMD. Bottom line, the comparison to Adolph Hitler is a bad one. Hitler was not driven back to Berlin prior to WWII.

 

[Palatka51]

Saddam was neutered. He was contained in a central strip with no fly zones over most of Iraq. Sanctions were in place. He had been driven out of Iraq. He had no WMD. Bottom line, the comparison to Adolph Hitler is a bad one. Hitler was not driven back to Berlin prior to WWII.

I assume you meant to say Kuwait.

And if Hitler had been, he would have been safe to continue the extermination of all Jews and undesirables which a "neutered" Saddam did to Kurds and Shiits with his phantom WMD's.

Nope not a bad comparison at all. Saddam had to go.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

I assume you meant to say Kuwait.

And if Hitler had been, he would have been safe to continue the extermination of all Jews and undesirables which a "neutered" Saddam did to Kurds and Shiits with his phantom WMD's.

Nope not a bad comparison at all. Saddam had to go.

Yes, I meant Kuwait, thank you.

Saddam wasn't a good guy, but the situation wasn't the same as that of 1930s Germany. I also disagree with the premise that the US is the policeman of the world.

 

[OldRegular]

The original OP was as follows [underlined]:

Jesus Christ commands the following:

Matthew 5:44

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.

In light of the above Scripture must Christians be pacifists?

I am starting this thread because of the pious indignation shown by some over the water boarding of three Islamic terrorists which yielded information that prevented further attacks like 9/11. These folks have used the above passage to justify their indignation.

I notice one of the brethern has already justified disobedience to the above passage, but not biblically.

However, if the above passage is strictly interpreted, as these brethern have in the case of water boarding, does the Christian have any recourse but to be a complete pacifist, like some of the Mennonites, even if their lives or the lives of their families are threatened? Is there any Scripture that would allow anything other than complete pacifism?

 

[Palatka51]

I also disagree with the premise that the US is the policeman of the world.

As do I. However that is the role that our civil servants got us into.

Let me ask you this, How do we not become Isolationist if we avoid any of these global situations?

Personally I think that we should close all US bases and build a wall at the Mexican and Canadian boarders............ NOT!!!

If we want international trade and commerce we must have a military presence for protection of the transportation of goods. We learned that lesson when we had to deal with the Barbary Coast war in Thomas Jefferson's Presidency.

Saddam threatened the flow of oil. Like it or not, no oil would be far more cataclysmic than a Hussein less Iraq.

 

[Palatka51]

The original OP was as follows [underlined]:

Jesus Christ commands the following:

Matthew 5:44

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.

In light of the above Scripture must Christians be pacifists?

I am starting this thread because of the pious indignation shown by some over the water boarding of three Islamic terrorists which yielded information that prevented further attacks like 9/11. These folks have used the above passage to justify their indignation.

I notice one of the brethern has already justified disobedience to the above passage, but not biblically.

However, if the above passage is strictly interpreted, as these brethern have in the case of water boarding, does the Christian have any recourse but to be a complete pacifist, like some of the Mennonites, even if their lives or the lives of their families are threatened? Is there any Scripture that would allow anything other than complete pacifism?

1 Timothy 5:8
8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.

I think this verse fits. It would be neglectful for a nation to not protect it's own and the same can be said for one's own family.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

As do I. However that is the role that our civil servants got us into.

Let me ask you this, How do we not become Isolationist if we avoid any of these global situations?

Great question. It is not an easy one to answer. I believe the answer has to lie in not going to either extreme...isolationism or the forceful imposition of our will on others. It is a delicate line to walk indeed.

If we want international trade and commerce we must have a military presence for protection of the transportation of goods. We learned that lesson when we had to deal with the Barbary Coast war in Thomas Jefferson's Presidency.

Yes, but protecting the free movement of cargo is a far cry from invasion of a sovereign nation. As in Jefferson's day, we are again dealing with piracy on the high seas, and must be forceful in our response and with a strong deterrent. Ultimately by promoting liberty and economic prosperity worldwide, we eliminate the appeal of such criminal activities. However, it is not an easy task.

Saddam threatened the flow of oil. Like it or not, no oil would be far more cataclysmic than a Hussein less Iraq.

So you agree that oil was a major reason for the war. However, I believe it was also to enrich Bush & Cheney's buddies at Haliburton, KBR, and other energy firms with no bid contracts to line their pockets with taxpayer dollars. If you doubt such nefarious activities occur, just look at how Enron manipulated the availability of electricity to California to fill its own coffers.

 

[OldRegular]

Posted by Palatka51

1 Timothy 5:8
8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.

I think this verse fits. It would be neglectful for a nation to not protect it's own and the same can be said for one's own family.

I have thought of that same passage in connection with this debate. Also the passage:

Matthew 22:21
They say unto Him, Caesar's. Then saith He unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesars and to God the things that are God's

 

[Palatka51]

So you agree that oil was a major reason for the war.

I agree that it was one of many components that led us to war.

However, I believe it was also to enrich Bush & Cheney's buddies at Haliburton, KBR, and other energy firms with no bid contracts to line their pockets with taxpayer dollars. If you doubt such nefarious activities occur, just look at how Enron manipulated the availability of electricity to California to fill its own coffers.

Enron has no bearing on this subject and if that is your belief you are entitled to what ever you want to believe. We want facts Maggy, and only the facts. Not conjecture. If your belief pans out, then you'll find me in the soup with you, until then give us what we know to be true.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

I agree that it was one of many components that led us to war.

Enron has no bearing on this subject and if that is your belief you are entitled to what ever you want to believe. We want facts Maggy, and only the facts. Not conjecture. If your belief pans out, then you'll find me in the soup with you, until then give us what we know to be true.

"Lord, you gave them eyes, yet they cannot see. And neither can Superman, through lead" - Lex Luthor

 

[Palatka51]

So, no facts then. hm, You know something Maggy? If you could lay out the facts of the accusation regarding Cheney, Haliburton et,al you would win a Pulitzer. Go for it man, lay it all out on the table.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

So, no facts then. hm, You know something Maggy? If you could lay out the facts of the accusation regarding Cheney, Haliburton et,al you would win a Pulitzer. Go for it man, lay it all out on the table.

The facts are evident unless one has been asleep. Cheney ran the company. He got himself appointed to be Dubya's puppeteer. All of a sudden, the administration lies us into an invasion, and guess who gets the no-bid government contracts? If there is no impropriety, it sure does have the appearance of conflict of interest, dontcha think? And Enron is relevant, as it demonstrates how the corporate buddies of BushCo resorted to illegal acts for self enrichment. It establishes a pattern of behavior amongst this corrupt cartel and criminal executives in Houston. As they say in Texas, "Biddness as usual."

 

[just-want-peace]

'Tis such a shame; this thread was going great until the last half of post #13.

Pity!!!

 

[moscott]

Here's your answer:thumbs:

http://www.hoshuha.com/articles/pacifism.html