What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Jesus on Non-Violence

Butch5 said:
Drew,

How do you teach and baptize a nation?
Click to expand...
Obviously you cannot baptize a nation but the point is that you still beg the question by assuming that Jesus is only interested in teaching people about how to act as individuals, and not corporately.

This is a very odd position and I do not think you or anyone else has provided an explanation as to why you think that Jesus wants to restrict the scope of His kingdom to how we behave as individuals and not be interested in having us apply His kingdom of God values at the level of our collective behaviour.

Imagine if someone was motivated to adopt pacifism as an individual but is entirely dis-interested in being a voice for pacifism in respect to determining how that person's nation behaves. That would be very strange - if you care about not inflicting violence as an individual, why are you suddenly not interested in playing a role about how your nation behaves? What if your nation were about to engage in an aggressive war - attacking a neighbouring country and killing tens of thousands.

You appear to favour saying nothing in terms of trying to dissuade your nation from such an action.

I cannot see how that makes sense.
 
I knew a guy who had an Amish friend. One day, the Amish kid needed to contact home from town but was not allowed to use the pay phone because the Amish of that time and area were enjoined from using any modern technology by their beliefs.

To this Amish kid, the use of modern, worldly technology was a sin.

He had no problem, however, asking this guy I knew to place the phone call for him, because while the Amish believed the use of technology was a sin, they had no problem asking others to do their sinning for them.

Such is the hypocrisy of pacifism, too.
 
Drew said:
As I have pointed out, Jesus does not explain his follower's passive reaction to His capture in terms like "if my disciples intervened by force to protect me, that might interfere with my destiny to go to the cross.

Instead, he explains their "pacifism" in terms of their membership in a new kingdom.

Are we not members of that same kingdom?
Click to expand...

Are we in a position to fight to keep Christ from going to the cross???

Did Jesus ask the Centurion to leave Rome's army before promising to heal his daughter?

Would Jesus require me to stand idly by and pray while a woman was raped or a man robbed? Would you?

"Lord, send this woman being raped help in her moment of desperate need!"
"Son, why do you think I put you right there at that place and moment in time?"

All that's necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing. --Edmund Burke

Pacifism is a view of the world which requires others to pay any price necessary to maintain the pacifist's sense of moral purity.

Enough said.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Drew said:
I think you are on the right track. I humbly suggest you consider using the argument I have presented (if you have not already heard it) to explain to other believers that Jesus really does connect non-violence to membership in the Kingdom of God. I have never encountered a valid counter-argument to this line of reasoning.
Click to expand...

I think the best "argument" one can make is to tell people to read the words of Jesus and believe them. If people do that then they will reject any doctrine created by men to conform the will of God to the will of the world.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days
 
Drew said:
Obviously you cannot baptize a nation but the point is that you still beg the question by assuming that Jesus is only interested in teaching people about how to act as individuals, and not corporately.
Click to expand...
Drew said:

This is a very odd position and I do not think you or anyone else has provided an explanation as to why you think that Jesus wants to restrict the scope of His kingdom to how we behave as individuals and not be interested in having us apply His kingdom of God values at the level of our collective behaviour.

Imagine if someone was motivated to adopt pacifism as an individual but is entirely dis-interested in being a voice for pacifism in respect to determining how that person's nation behaves. That would be very strange - if you care about not inflicting violence as an individual, why are you suddenly not interested in playing a role about how your nation behaves? What if your nation were about to engage in an aggressive war - attacking a neighbouring country and killing tens of thousands.

You appear to favour saying nothing in terms of trying to dissuade your nation from such an action.

I cannot see how that makes sense.
Click to expand...


Drew,

I'm all for encouraging my nation to adopt pacifism, that's why I'm here talking to Christians, that's why I teach about the early church. However, America is "NOT" my nation. My nation in God's kingdom. I do not have dual citizenship. I am all on board with Jesus. I've said before that the first Christians understood and taught that there were "Two kingdoms" the kingdom of God and the kingdoms of this world. They understood that a person was in one or the other not both. Jesus doesn't want dual citizens, He said, unless a man is willing to forsake all he has he cannot be my disciple. That includes his citizenship in an earthly nation. Paul told the Colossians that God had delivered them out of the power of darkness into the kingdom of His beloved Son. Out of the old earthly kingdom and into the heavenly kingdom. Why do you want to go back and participate in that old kingdom from which you have been delivered? If you're a Christian here in this world you don't have a nation here, you are at war with this world. James said,

4 Adulterers and1 adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God. (Jam 4:4 NKJ)

How is participating in politics not befriending the world?

Additionally, Paul said,
NKJ Romans 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service.
2 And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.(Rom 12:1-2 NKJ)

Politics is probably the one thing above all that identifies this world. Whether it's, dictators, kings, Democracy, Communism, Socialism, whatever, it's all politics and it's an identifying aspect of the world. Paul commands the Roman Christians "not" to be conformed to this world. The Greek word means, "to conform one's self to another's pattern." Is joining in the political system not conforming one's self to the pattern of another?

I've asked about Paul's words in 2 Cor 6, please address this. How can one be in secular government seeking to institute laws that unbelievers are also trying to institute without being unequally yoked with those unbelievers? The believer and the unbeliever working together for a common goal, how is that not being equally yoked?
 
Stormcrow said:
Are we in a position to fight to keep Christ from going to the cross???

Did Jesus ask the Centurion to leave Rome's army before promising to heal his daughter?

Would Jesus require me to stand idly by and pray while a woman was raped or a man robbed? Would you?

"Lord, send this woman being raped help in her moment of desperate need!"
"Son, why do you think I put you right there at that place and moment in time?"

All that's necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing. --Edmund Burke

Pacifism is a view of the world which requires others to pay any price necessary to maintain the pacifist's sense of moral purity.

Enough said.
Click to expand...

Are you more capable of saving someone in danger than God is?

Does God need help to save a person in danger?

What's your position on prayer? I've seen Christians who don't seem to think much of it when it comes to this issue, what is you opinion?
 
Stormcrow said:
I knew a guy who had an Amish friend. One day, the Amish kid needed to contact home from town but was not allowed to use the pay phone because the Amish of that time and area were enjoined from using any modern technology by their beliefs.

To this Amish kid, the use of modern, worldly technology was a sin.

He had no problem, however, asking this guy I knew to place the phone call for him, because while the Amish believed the use of technology was a sin, they had no problem asking others to do their sinning for them.

Such is the hypocrisy of pacifism, too.
Click to expand...

Hypocrasy? It's not hypocrasy when God puts people there for that purpose. The Scriptures are clear that God has put governments inot place to rule over people.
 
…It's like the joke about the man who has been notified that his house is going to be flooded and he needs to get out of the house. He says no I don't have to, God is going to take care of me. Then the flood starts to rise and a sheriff comes along and tells him to get out. The man says no, God is going to save me. So, the floods continue to rise, and he climbs on top of the house. A boat comes along and he's told to climb into the boat. He says, no, no , God is going to save me. Finally, a helicopter comes along and they lower the net to rescue him. The man says, no, no, God is going to save me! Well, the man drowns and goes to heaven. When he gets to heaven he says to God, "why didn't you save me?" God says, "I sent the sheriff, I sent a boat, I sent a helicopter, what more did you want me to do?"


God did not have to have Noah build an ark but He did... God did not need to have Samson kill those bad guys... Nor did He have to use David the kid to kill Goliath .

Ki 17:21 And he stretched himself upon the child three times, and cried unto the LORD, and said, O LORD my God, I pray thee, let this child's soul come into him again.

Here again we see God's use of man for man....

We know God used a donkey a beam of light.... spit, mud, Peter's shadow the list goes on....
 
Are you more capable of saving someone in danger than God is?

Does God need help to save a person in danger?
Click to expand...

Wow! Simply unbelievable! :nono2

God works through people!!! The epitome of that statement is revealed in Jesus Christ Himself, in whom "the fullness of the Godhead dwelt BODILY!"

People are either part of a problem or part of the solution! When people pray for help...GOD SENDS PEOPLE!

You are either the cause of a problem in someone's life or the answer to that person's prayer because that's how God has chosen to work: through flawed, imperfect people because that's how His strength and glory is revealed: THROUGH OUR WEAKNESS!!!

IF THAT WERE NOT THE CASE, WHY DID GOD BOTHER PUTTING A SINGLE, HUMAN SOUL ON THIS PLANET AT ALL?!?!?

If that were not the case, what is your purpose here?!?

:chin
 
Stormcrow said:
Wow! Simply unbelievable! :nono2

God works through people!!! The epitome of that statement is revealed in Jesus Christ Himself, in whom "the fullness of the Godhead dwelt BODILY!"

People are either part of a problem or part of the solution! When people pray for help...GOD SENDS PEOPLE!

You are either the cause of a problem in someone's life or the answer to that person's prayer because that's how God has chosen to work: through flawed, imperfect people because that's how His strength and glory is revealed: THROUGH OUR WEAKNESS!!!

IF THAT WERE NOT THE CASE, WHY DID GOD BOTHER PUTTING A SINGLE, HUMAN SOUL ON THIS PLANET AT ALL?!?!?

If that were not the case, what is your purpose here?!?

:chin
Click to expand...


It's not about working through people. When God commands that something not be done, He doesn't expect the Christian to go ahead and do it. Paul said do no avenge yourselves to the Corinthians. Surely God isn't going to have Christians do what He's commanded them not to do through the apostle.
 
The Scriptures are clear that God has put governments inot place to rule over people.
Click to expand...

And who rules over governments??? And who is part of the body of the head who does so????????

Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life? So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church? 1 Corinthians 6:2-4 (NASB)

I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren, but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers? 1 Corinthians 6:5-6 (NASB)

Paul was chiding the Corinthians precisely because they were not involved in civil government!!! In other words he was saying, "Do you appoint (elect) them (unbelievers) as judges who are not part of Christ's body?"

And he asks them point blank: is there not one of you competent - as a member of the church - to sit as a judge in court over others?!?!?

My wife gave me a book yesterday and I immediately began reading it, not because I needed to know the material in it (I already do) but because I was excited to see that someone else finally "gets it."

It's called, "America's Providential History" by Dr. Mark Beliles and Stephen K. McDowell, and it addresses, in part, a very pertinent question every Christian should answer:

What would American culture look like if every single Christian in this country believed God put them here, 'til death, to institute the will of God here "on earth as it is in heaven?"

Because futurism has led Christians - and the world - to believe Christ is returning soon, Christians believe there is no need to be involved in changing the world for the better, since it's all going to be destroyed anyway!

And because those who are most qualified - by the Spirit of God to save it - have withdrawn from it, the consequences are the cultural rot and governmental corruption everyone suffers under!

The idea that God will take care of all this when He has put the Spirit of Christ - who is Lord over all - in the church to do it is an absolute, immoral abrogation of our responsibilities as citizens of His kingdom here on earth!

The question isn't whether Christians should be cops, judges, lawmakers, or soldiers: it's why don't more Christians feel the need to serve the way our founding fathers did, who put their very lives on the line to bring forth a nation built upon the very Christian principles that motivated them?

What would this nation and world look like if we had more men like Ben Franklin and George Washington and fewer men like Jimmy Swaggert and Jim Bakker??? :chin
 
Stormcrow said:
And who rules over governments??? And who is part of the body of the head who does so????????
Click to expand...
Stormcrow said:

Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life? So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church? 1 Corinthians 6:2-4 (NASB)

I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren, but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers? 1 Corinthians 6:5-6 (NASB)

Paul was chiding the Corinthians precisely because they were not involved in civil government!!! In other words he was saying, "Do you appoint (elect) them (unbelievers) as judges who are not part of Christ's body?"

And he asks them point blank: is there not one of you competent - as a member of the church - to sit as a judge in court over others?!?!?

My wife gave me a book yesterday and I immediately began reading it, not because I needed to know the material in it (I already do) but because I was excited to see that someone else finally "gets it."

It's called, "America's Providential History" by Dr. Mark Beliles and Stephen K. McDowell, and it addresses, in part, a very pertinent question every Christian should answer:

What would American culture look like if every single Christian in this country believed God put them here, 'til death, to institute the will of God here "on earth as it is in heaven?"

Because futurism has led Christians - and the world - to believe Christ is returning soon, Christians believe there is no need to be involved in changing the world for the better, since it's all going to be destroyed anyway!

And because those who are most qualified - by the Spirit of God to save it - have withdrawn from it, the consequences are the cultural rot and governmental corruption everyone suffers under!

The idea that God will take care of all this when He has put the Spirit of Christ - who is Lord over all - in the church to do it is an absolute, immoral abrogation of our responsibilities as citizens of His kingdom here on earth!

The question isn't whether Christians should be cops, judges, lawmakers, or soldiers: it's why don't more Christians feel the need to serve the way our founding fathers did, who put their very lives on the line to bring forth a nation built upon the very Christian principles that motivated them?

What would this nation and world look like if we had more men like Ben Franklin and George Washington and fewer men like Jimmy Swaggert and Jim Bakker???
Click to expand...


It doesn't matter what the book says, church history is opposed to what you've said. Regarding futurism church history is against you, I've asked you before where we can find Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the like. If this is the kingdom as you suggest where are all of those old saints, surely we should be able to find at least one. Why do animals still kill one another? Isaiah said the lion would lay with the lamb. Where are the historical accounts of Jesus' return to earth? I could on but I doubt you can supply answer to these. Thus we do look for His return.

Who is the head? It is Christ and He didn't give commands for Christians to participate in government. If you think the founding fathers sought to create a Christian nation I'd suggest you have another look at history. If you had more men like Ben Franklin and George Washington you wouldn't have a Christian nation.

History also shows that Christians didn't participate in Government for the first 300 years. They got that teaching from somewhere, the apostles.

 
Grazer said:
I agree. Many times I've been struggling with things in my life and God has used friends to help me through it. The same could be applied to the worlds issues (apologies if I've misunderstood the point)
Click to expand...

Nope. You pretty much nailed it. :thumbsup
 
Who is the head? It is Christ and He didn't give commands for Christians to participate in government. If you think the founding fathers sought to create a Christian nation I'd suggest you have another look at history. If you had more men like Ben Franklin and George Washington you wouldn't have a Christian nation.
Click to expand...

Liberal revisionist history is a lie straight from the pit of hell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top