Monks/Monastics vs Military Might: Is Self-Defense against Perversion Right?

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,560
20,078
41
Earth
✟1,465,885.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Gxg (G²);63615736 said:
So in a time of persecution - or allowance of things like pillaging or rape - he'd be the type who defend those being taken advantage of and be willing to use deadly force to keep people from burning churches....but not the kind who, if caught alone, would choose to fight back.

deadly force? no, he never used deadly force. he usually tried to immobilize as quickly and painlessly as possible, although that did not always work, and he had to put the hurtin on some folks, although that was extremely rare. but you are right that he would not fight back if someone assaulted him. and he was not married so we won't know.
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
deadly force? no, he never used deadly force. he usually tried to immobilize as quickly and painlessly as possible, although that did not always work, and he had to put the hurtin on some folks, although that was extremely rare. .
If you're having to put the hurtin on some folks, rare as it may be, that'd be deadly force if I'm not mistaken - although his style of defense seems akin to Akkido.

but you are right that he would not fight back if someone assaulted him. and he was not married so we won't know
Marriage alters a lot of things..
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
deadly force? no, he never used deadly force. he usually tried to immobilize as quickly and painlessly as possible, although that did not always work, and he had to put the hurtin on some folks, although that was extremely rare. but you are right that he would not fight back if someone assaulted him. and he was not married so we won't know.
I know many seem to still go back to the example of Christ - who was not married - and claim he would never had fought back....but I am curious - in the event that it was the case that he had chosen to marry - if the Lord would ever have fought to protect his children.
 
Upvote 0

isshinwhat

Pro Deo et Patria
Apr 12, 2002
8,338
624
Visit site
✟13,555.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Gxg (G²);63676968 said:
I know many seem to still go back to the example of Christ - who was not married - and claim he would never had fought back....but I am curious - in the event that it was the case that he had chosen to marry - if the Lord would ever have fought to protect his children.

If he physically defended the honor of the Temple, it is not a stretch for me to believe that given the right circumstances he might have physically defended the temple that is any man, woman, or child in whom dwells the Holy Spirit. He is, after all, the same God who struck people down for lying to Peter in Acts.
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
If he physically defended the honor of the Temple, it is not a stretch for me to believe that given the right circumstances he might have physically defended the temple that is any man, woman, or child in whom dwells the Holy Spirit. He is, after all, the same God who struck people down for lying to Peter in Acts.
Never really considered things from that angle before - but it's worth chewing on, as John 2:14-16/John 2 and other instances later ( Matthew 21 ) show the Lord having a willingness to do acts of aggression that impacted others.....and for one man to be able to drive out others after making a whip, that has to be someone no one wanted to mess with.

But if he did that for the Temple when it came to abuse going on, I wonder why it'd be different for those who are the Temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:18-20 /1 Corinthians 3:16-18 2 Corinthians 6:15-17 Revelation 3:11-13 ) when they are abused...
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
If he physically defended the honor of the Temple, it is not a stretch for me to believe that given the right circumstances he might have physically defended the temple that is any man, woman, or child in whom dwells the Holy Spirit. He is, after all, the same God who struck people down for lying to Peter in Acts.

Haven't there been many cases within Orthodoxy where someone was harmed for destroying items in the Church which were made Holy - or times where those seeking to harm others in the Church were violently harmed later - like in Acts 12 with Herod when he persecuted the Church and was later struck dead for it? I remember another sister in the Lord noted the issue to me on what happened to others who were harmed because they didn't respect saints commissioned by the Lord for an assignment....
 
Upvote 0

AV1

Junior Member
Jul 25, 2013
164
14
Michigan
✟15,355.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I have really enjoyed the discussion in this thread about violence, justice, self-defense. This is an area of my faith that I have many questions. For the record, I am not a pacifist, or anything close to the definition of one. Much of this is due to my background, and life experience in dealing with evil men. They operate outside of social norms that preclude responses form the average person, and they count on one's unwillingness to fight back when they prey on people.

I cannot wrap my brain around the idea that it would please God for me to give into, or run from evil. Especially when you consider the entirety of scripture, and not just hand picked verses.

I am actually meeting my priest tonight to go over all of the questions related to this thread.

I will report back with what I am given.
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I have really enjoyed the discussion in this thread about violence, justice, self-defense. .
Glad to know the discussion blessed you and was productive.

This is an area of my faith that I have many questions. For the record, I am not a pacifist, or anything close to the definition of one. Much of this is due to my background, and life experience in dealing with evil men. They operate outside of social norms that preclude responses form the average person, and they count on one's unwillingness to fight back when they prey on people.

I cannot wrap my brain around the idea that it would please God for me to give into, or run from evil. Especially when you consider the entirety of scripture, and not just hand picked verses.
Feeling where you're coming from..
I am actually meeting my priest tonight to go over all of the questions related to this thread.

I will report back with what I am given
Looking forward to seeing the response that your priest says...
 
Upvote 0

AV1

Junior Member
Jul 25, 2013
164
14
Michigan
✟15,355.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Wow, four hours of conversation...feeling much better about things. I took a ton away from the conversation, probably too much for a post, but I will try and highlight the major points.

Point 1.
We are not called to be victims, we are called to love. Jesus was no victim, and chose His fate on the cross to serve a purpose. The choice to be harmed in any confrontation, is one of purpose. Turning the other cheek is no designed to make us endure pain, but rather to shine brightly when we have the opportunity to forgive those things that violate some right or expectation we have as individuals. In other words, there are things worth fighting for and things we should let go. This is often and individual issue according to a persons ability to process the information and outcomes of their decisions. We all walk at different speeds, and have different abilities to influence the outcome of an encounter. Any time you can turn the other cheek, it shows strength if faith...and for those who are dangerous in their physical skills and abilities to visit harm in return...turning your cheek is also and act of mercy, and love.

Point 2.
There is another side to this coin. As an Icon of Christ, we have an obligation to protect the image of God when others do not respect it, either in us, or themselves, and do not take the opportunity to accept the mercy we would extend to them if they abandon their attack. We cannot decide that for them, it is their choice. Acting in defense of ourselves can equally be an act of mercy, because it forces the enemy to reflect on their actions, and hopefully find the error of their ways. This is also love.

Point 3.
As you heal your relationship with God throughout your life, and you gain wisdom, your discernment in action becomes more complete. Your restraint grows, as does your resolve to show mercy and love in the proper form for each given situation. Whether it is protecting yourself, your family, and your Church. As you grow your faith and the Holy Spirits presence in your life, evil knows who you are with more certainty. Sometimes this will lead to more attacks, but also lessens the odds of victory for your enemy, no matter the outcome. Evil knows this, and prefers to attack where it is certain of victory. Evil is lazy in that respect. Its resolve is constant, but its preferred path is that of least resistance. It will attack your human weakness before taking on the presence of God within you.

The moral here? Be strong in faith first, but also strong in physical terms. Be resolute, steadfast, and unafraid. Weaker men will tremble at your feet, and those who ally with evil will have to face you on two fronts, where your victory is always assured on one of them, and will be blessed in the other. "Blessed are the pure of heart, for they will see God."

Some other interesting tidbits I didn't know or had forgotten:

-There are nuns in Kosovo that carry Glocks.
-Many or our Martyrs were warriors before the sacrificed themselves.
-Even in the Old Testament, God gave Israel's enemies opportunities to abandon their wickedness and attacks before He authorized their destruction.
-You only have two cheeks. There is a lesson there as well. Restraint is honorable, but there is a limit to what we are expected to endure without action.

There was so much more we covered, but it was like drinking form a fire hose. The long and short of it is this:

We are not victims, but rather victors...and that has many forms. There is a place for men like me at the table of the Kingdom of God, and I am eternally grateful to my creator for my personality and core of conviction in strength. Part of my role in life is to cultivate the strength of others, and now I can see that. Amen!
 
Upvote 0
Mar 30, 2008
591
206
✟14,124.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Wow, four hours of conversation...feeling much better about things. I took a ton away from the conversation, probably too much for a post, but I will try and highlight the major points.

Point 1.
We are not called to be victims, we are called to love. Jesus was no victim, and chose His fate on the cross to serve a purpose. The choice to be harmed in any confrontation, is one of purpose. Turning the other cheek is no designed to make us endure pain, but rather to shine brightly when we have the opportunity to forgive those things that violate some right or expectation we have as individuals. In other words, there are things worth fighting for and things we should let go. This is often and individual issue according to a persons ability to process the information and outcomes of their decisions. We all walk at different speeds, and have different abilities to influence the outcome of an encounter. Any time you can turn the other cheek, it shows strength if faith...and for those who are dangerous in their physical skills and abilities to visit harm in return...turning your cheek is also and act of mercy, and love.

Point 2.
There is another side to this coin. As an Icon of Christ, we have an obligation to protect the image of God when others do not respect it, either in us, or themselves, and do not take the opportunity to accept the mercy we would extend to them if they abandon their attack. We cannot decide that for them, it is their choice. Acting in defense of ourselves can equally be an act of mercy, because it forces the enemy to reflect on their actions, and hopefully find the error of their ways. This is also love.

Point 3.
As you heal your relationship with God throughout your life, and you gain wisdom, your discernment in action becomes more complete. Your restraint grows, as does your resolve to show mercy and love in the proper form for each given situation. Whether it is protecting yourself, your family, and your Church. As you grow your faith and the Holy Spirits presence in your life, evil knows who you are with more certainty. Sometimes this will lead to more attacks, but also lessens the odds of victory for your enemy, no matter the outcome. Evil knows this, and prefers to attack where it is certain of victory. Evil is lazy in that respect. Its resolve is constant, but its preferred path is that of least resistance. It will attack your human weakness before taking on the presence of God within you.

The moral here? Be strong in faith first, but also strong in physical terms. Be resolute, steadfast, and unafraid. Weaker men will tremble at your feet, and those who ally with evil will have to face you on two fronts, where your victory is always assured on one of them, and will be blessed in the other. "Blessed are the pure of heart, for they will see God."

Some other interesting tidbits I didn't know or had forgotten:

-There are nuns in Kosovo that carry Glocks.
-Many or our Martyrs were warriors before the sacrificed themselves.
-Even in the Old Testament, God gave Israel's enemies opportunities to abandon their wickedness and attacks before He authorized their destruction.
-You only have two cheeks. There is a lesson there as well. Restraint is honorable, but there is a limit to what we are expected to endure without action.

There was so much more we covered, but it was like drinking form a fire hose. The long and short of it is this:

We are not victims, but rather victors...and that has many forms. There is a place for men like me at the table of the Kingdom of God, and I am eternally grateful to my creator for my personality and core of conviction in strength. Part of my role in life is to cultivate the strength of others, and now I can see that. Amen!

That's beautiful. Thank you. At first glance, it is where we are in life spiritually, emotionally, as individuals in our walk with Christ. So much more, but that is my initial thought.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Wow, four hours of conversation...feeling much better about things. I took a ton away from the conversation, probably too much for a post, but I will try and highlight the major points.
Those types of conversations are always the most impactful when it seems time goes by extensively and much is taken from it.

Of course, if feeling it's too much to post in ONE post, one can always post in sequence - with the other postings clarifying what was shared in the former.


Point 1.
We are not called to be victims, we are called to love. Jesus was no victim, and chose His fate on the cross to serve a purpose. The choice to be harmed in any confrontation, is one of purpose. Turning the other cheek is no designed to make us endure pain, but rather to shine brightly when we have the opportunity to forgive those things that violate some right or expectation we have as individuals. In other words, there are things worth fighting for and things we should let go. This is often and individual issue according to a persons ability to process the information and outcomes of their decisions. We all walk at different speeds, and have different abilities to influence the outcome of an encounter. Any time you can turn the other cheek, it shows strength if faith...and for those who are dangerous in their physical skills and abilities to visit harm in return...turning your cheek is also and act of mercy, and love
Indeed..

Outside of the fact thast turning the other cheek was a sign of shaming the people who struck you on the other one, love is a choice...and it varies from situation to situation based on whatever the goal may be.

Point 2.
There is another side to this coin. As an Icon of Christ, we have an obligation to protect the image of God when others do not respect it, either in us, or themselves, and do not take the opportunity to accept the mercy we would extend to them if they abandon their attack. We cannot decide that for them, it is their choice. Acting in defense of ourselves can equally be an act of mercy, because it forces the enemy to reflect on their actions, and hopefully find the error of their ways. This is also love.
I agree - as allowing an enemy to continue in evil as if it is approved of or somehow to be tolerated can be just as evil as doing the evil they do. I've often wondered on how allowing a rapist to continue raping others is really a matter of validating their rape rather than showing it is corrupt by showing the consequences physically and spiritually....as opposed to simply showing the spiritual side in regards to God's judgement.

We see the same dynamics occurring during the history of the U.S. In example, Lynching was done in name (most of the time) to those guilty of crimes - but it occurred frequently in the South THROUGHOUT the 1950-60s...one of the reasons behind the Anti-Lynching movement developing. The case of what occurred to Cleo Wright on January 25, 1942 comes immediately to mind after he was murdered....and the same with Emmett Till in 1955 - as well as Mack Charles Parker, murdered by a white mob in 1959. Of course lynching also included others who were white - many of them often supportative of causes to black America...and other times, they were done to groups such as homosexuals. Lynching in America was very varied - but with the MAJORITY of those who were black/lynched, it was often mob violence on unfounded accusations.

Moreover (and appalingly so), it was frequently noted by many (in the name of Christ) as a justification. Cases of violence/lynching have still yet to be acknowledged when it comes to the history of the slaves...as well as what was experienced by others who were soldiers for the U.S and yet were murdered when they came home due to how U.S Segregation - often enforced by lynching - still occurred and wasn't addressed. Many act as if the extensive amount of lynchings done to blacks were due to others being guilty/proven such as that occurred with racial violence. Many were accused of such things - but they never really were true....particularly as it concerns more than 2,400 African Americans (and many more not even counted) hanged or burned at the stake - with many many lynching victims accused of little more than making "boastful remarks," "insulting a white man" or seeking employment "out of place."

Violence against African Americans has been something in our history which was sustained/maintained in various forms for centuries (from slavery - financially based in many respects to mob violence with things such as RoseWood or the Black WallStreet destruction and other issues ) - AND on a side note, it is sad to consider that many of the things blacks experienced in the negative (i.e. beatings, lynchings, mob violence, etc.) after the Civil-War era (as well as during/before) were also experienced by other groups like Hispanics - showing shared connection in suffering - and for more, one can go to The Law of the Noose: A History of Latino Lynching - Harvard Civil .

As horrendous as that was, many have often said the Biblical response to such attrocities was for believers to simply endure it - in the hopes that the Lord would show others their submission to violence and change...while others were deemed to not be Biblical when they said that they'd either get guns - or that they would choose to defend themselves/their families and their community from such evil.....

Would it have been loving the enemy to allow him to do that unchecked - or confronting him and warning him of what would happen if he continued - including using violence as a means of helping him repent and see the error of his ways.
Point 3.
As you heal your relationship with God throughout your life, and you gain wisdom, your discernment in action becomes more complete. Your restraint grows, as does your resolve to show mercy and love in the proper form for each given situation. Whether it is protecting yourself, your family, and your Church. As you grow your faith and the Holy Spirits presence in your life, evil knows who you are with more certainty. Sometimes this will lead to more attacks, but also lessens the odds of victory for your enemy, no matter the outcome. Evil knows this, and prefers to attack where it is certain of victory. Evil is lazy in that respect. Its resolve is constant, but its preferred path is that of least resistance. It will attack your human weakness before taking on the presence of God within you.
THere's the dynamic of always looking for a way into the soul to corrupt it.

The moral here? Be strong in faith first, but also strong in physical terms. Be resolute, steadfast, and unafraid. Weaker men will tremble at your feet, and those who ally with evil will have to face you on two fronts, where your victory is always assured on one of them, and will be blessed in the other. "Blessed are the pure of heart, for they will see God."
Good words to remember..
Some other interesting tidbits I didn't know or had forgotten:

-There are nuns in Kosovo that carry Glocks.
-Many or our Martyrs were warriors before the sacrificed themselves.
-Even in the Old Testament, God gave Israel's enemies opportunities to abandon their wickedness and attacks before He authorized their destruction.
-You only have two cheeks. There is a lesson there as well. Restraint is honorable, but there is a limit to what we are expected to endure without action.
Very excellent points - and on the OT, it is noteworthy to see how often the Lord told the Israelites to give the enemy the option of coming over to their side (Joshua 2 an example) before attacks commenced - with those enemies doing brutal actions to others/their own people.

On the nuns in Kosovo, I had NO idea that they carried glocks on them. If you have any information on the issue as it concerns the specific group which does so, please let me know as I'd love to investigate further.
There was so much more we covered, but it was like drinking form a fire hose. The long and short of it is this:

We are not victims, but rather victors...and that has many forms. There is a place for men like me at the table of the Kingdom of God, and I am eternally grateful to my creator for my personality and core of conviction in strength. Part of my role in life is to cultivate the strength of others, and now I can see that. Amen!
Makes sense..
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

inconsequential

goat who dreamed he was a sheep
Mar 28, 2010
1,311
109
✟9,552.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I know that, as much as I despise Nat Turner, if he had simply refrained from killing women and children, he would probably be one of my heroes. Even then, I do note that he generally kept his ire focused on slave-owners and didn't bother poor whites.
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I know that, as much as I despise Nat Turner, if he had simply refrained from killing women and children, he would probably be one of my heroes. Even then, I do note that he generally kept his ire focused on slave-owners and didn't bother poor whites.

Indeed. Nat Turner was a very controversial figure - and yet one I can relate to easily, for when you're fighting for survival, I think there are a lot of things you'd do which others would question...and with Turner, I do wonder how often people ask questions such as "Did the man happen to take out the kids whom he saw to be AGAINST blacks/cheering on what was happening to black children being abused - thinking they'd grow up to do the same as the white adults encouraging it?" .....or questions like "Were the women/children he focused on innocent - or did he see them doing the same things the adults did - and looking at the Bible in the OT where God commanded women/children to be taken out when with the enemies of God (I Samuel 15, the Amalekites and the Midianites and other groups), was his theology influenced by that in the same way that the abuse of slave owners was often based on corrupt views of the scripture?"

The man had already seen - as have others - black women/children taken out...and not justifying it...but I have to say I can understand where he may've been coming from if being told by others it was acceptable in the name of "Biblical Justice" .

There's an excellent read on the issue (concerning how far other slaves went - and how they were both admired as well as hated by many ...even their masters/others supporting slavery who often had both feelings) called Runaway Slaves: Rebels on the Plantation



And with Nat Turner, more was shared on him elsewhere - if interested:
Gxg (G²);62697329 said:
There were many who were experiencing the power of education - Fredrick Douglass being one of them leading the way in that...and others who knew that they were able to come together/create a significant force to be reconked with. Slaves would only choose to remain slaves for so long - and as said earlier, there's a reason others were terrified of others like Nat Turner.








Nat Turner: A Troublesome Property. America's Spartakus.
There's a reason Nat Turner's theology was the way it was (more here, here and here/here/here)....Numerous black slave rebellions and insurrections took place in North America during the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries. There is documentary evidence of more than 250 uprisings or attempted uprisings involving 10 or more slaves. Three of the best known in the United States during the nineteenth century are the revolts by Gabriel Prosser in Virginia in 1800, Denmark Vesey in Charleston, South Carolina in 1822, and Nat Turner in Southampton County, Virginia, in 1831.

Again, if studying African-American History, one will quiclly recall many of the Slave Revolts that often happened—-with ones like the Nat Turner slave rebellon being amongst the most famous since he was trying to get freedom at all costs…and led a revolt in Virginia on August 21, 1831 that resulted in 56 deaths among their victims, the largest number of white fatalities to occur in one uprising in the antebellum southern United States. And there were others as well - some done by white men who wanted to help the blacks get freedom at all costs....like John Brown's rebellion and the deaths he caused. White abolitionist John Brown had already fought against pro-slavery forces in Kansas for several years when he decided to lead a raid on Harpers Ferry, Virginia (West Virginia was not yet a state). And this raid was a joint attack by former slaves, freed blacks, and white men who had corresponded with slaves on plantations in order to form a general uprising among slaves. It almost succeeded, had it not been for Brown's delay, and hundreds of slaves left their plantations to join Brown's force, and others left their plantations to join Brown in an escape to the mountains. Eventually, due to a tactical error by Brown, their force was quelled. Nonetheless, but directly following this, slave disobedience and the number of runaways increased markedly in Virginia.


Some would say that he was a “terrorist”—and yet, one can understand how he arrived at that point after seeing attrocities like the raping of their families, kidnapping, ruthless whippings and many other evils. We can condemn the man in hindsight—but if in the times, whose side would you be on? Though the slave masters were angry at the loss of life on their side, was it not something they already had a hand in because they already oppressed one group—-and ironically, felt they were the “freedom fighters” because of how they as “Americans” (whites) fought for their independence from Britain?

Regardless, the point is that slavery was something many were realizing would HAVE to be changed at some point before things started to get out of hand further and attempts at suppression would lead to greater problems. Thus, even if slavery continued, it'd lead to other issues.

 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I know that, as much as I despise Nat Turner, if he had simply refrained from killing women and children, he would probably be one of my heroes. Even then, I do note that he generally kept his ire focused on slave-owners and didn't bother poor whites.

Many hate Turner for what he did - and yet no one considers the context he lived in....and amazingly, some have advocated that any violent action on the part of slaves was wrong. In example, it's interesting to see some of the commentaries given by others when it comes to God's view of the South. Some, such as Douglass Wilson (Reformed), have advocated that the Civil War was wrong and that slaves should never have revolted at any point due to the mindset that slavery would've ended gradually without the need for bloodshed:


Obvious is the case that I don't think all things Wilson noted were fully accurate since slavery in the South was nowhere near being in all parts like the slavery of Paul's day - as the entire system was based on kidapping, breaking up families and other evils....and no one who participated in it (including the Founders like Thomas Jefferson) are excused). Some were not for the abuse - but it was like that in many respects...

As it is, many misunderstood the intent behind why Paul even spoke on slavery. Paul had the same issue when it came to subversion.:) The early believers lived in an era where slavery was allowed in the Empire and often abusive...and Paul could have said that he didn't think slavery should exist. But he went for the heart of the issue by saying that both slaves/masters needed to learn to love one another and serve each other faithfully. Although he said a slave should seek his or her freedom if they had the chance (I Corinthians 7), he set it up to where believers could be subversive to the worldly systems of the day by living in such a way that people on the outside would marvel at how believers do things.....and thus, they'd effectively convict/change the hearts of others. Some of it has a pragmatic aspect to it as well, seeing how you can't just write openly that you're against certain things since your mail/letters are investigated and inspected...and in many ways, if the empire supported/thrived on an industry you saw as corrupt, to speak against it could be deadly. Thus, wisdom would dictate to write in such a way as to get your message out without coming out too strongly on it so that people who understood you/had your heart would see where you're coming from.

IMHO, what Paul did actively was a form of social resistance to bad authorities who advocated differently than what he believed...and that's similar to Christ. In a world dominated by Roman rule, Jesus proclaimed an alternative way to live. Instead of living in fear and trusting Rome for their daily bread, Jesus encouraged his followers to live into God’s reign on earth as it is in heaven and trust in God’s provision. He called those living in luxury at the expense of others to give it back to the poor. He encouraged his followers to expose Rome’s oppression through creative acts of nonviolent resistance (such as turning the other cheek or going the extra mile). The same thing seemed to occur even in the U.S when it came to many of the battles behind blacks being able to vote. They fought for the ability to have it, although many saw that even having the freedom to do so would mean little so long as hearts of their oppressors were not changed and they were not convicted....and so for many, more focus went into proclaiming the truth of the Word/loving their enemies. A change happened over time...one battle at a time.

But others read Paul and assumed his stance on slavery was one for advocating/supporting abuse and continual of the system - and that has never been appropriate.

More has been discussed elsewhere on the matter for reference:​
There was an excellent series on the issue from Dr.Henry Louis Gates - as seen should one go online/ check out "Looking for Lincoln -Part 1 - PBS" ( ) and "Looking for Lincoln - Part 2 - PBS" ( ) AND "Henry Louis Gates | Looking for Lincoln | PBS" ( ).

But all of that is noted in light of the issue of Biblical stances we're to take - what would we have done back in that era, in the same way that we question today what we should do when faced with evils done in the name of God and told to submit to it?
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I know that, as much as I despise Nat Turner, if he had simply refrained from killing women and children, he would probably be one of my heroes. .
For his willingness to try and free other slaves, I will always respect Nat Turner - even though I grieve for other actions he engaged in.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

inconsequential

goat who dreamed he was a sheep
Mar 28, 2010
1,311
109
✟9,552.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Gxg (G²);64190828 said:
For his willingness to try and free other slaves, I will always respect Nat Turner - even though I grieve for other actions he engaged in.

Believe me, I can understand the kind of hatred and rage that would drive someone to do the things he did. I guess that's why I find it so repugnant when I see it actually carried out. I suppose, if forced to really look at myself, I am so repulsed by him because I can see much of myself and my own capability for evil in some of the things he did. If he killed them as collaborators or even to spare them from growing into monsters, I can come nearer understanding and sympathizing. But then I think men like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Osama Bin Laden should be stripped naked, shackled and fed alive to starving pigs.
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Believe me, I can understand the kind of hatred and rage that would drive someone to do the things he did. I guess that's why I find it so repugnant when I see it actually carried out. I suppose, if forced to really look at myself, I am so repulsed by him because I can see much of myself and my own capability for evil in some of the things he did. If .
Right there with you - as it's one thing to condemn another for something you feel you could never do ...but entirely another when you stop and realize that you could easily do the same if given the right circumstances/opportunities.

Yesterday, after I attended the Mid-East Festival at St.Elias of Atlanta Antiochian Orthodox Church and was studying the sanctuary I was examining the sanctuary - the places consecrated unto the Lord - and I couldn't help but think how I'd respond if such places were to come under attack by others....and why I don't think I'd be against people seeking to defend things which others would place much work into making as a sanctuary to protect others in the same ways that others who are oppressed would seek to protect their loved ones from harm....like many who suffered when it came to the ways that churches were bombed/harmed by others who thought that the believers would not respond back in aggression to stop the harm happening to them.

The example of how the Coptic believers have responded in light of their own churches being harmed by Islamists (as noted here in #51 ) has been noteworthy to me - and I would love to be there in ability with what they do.....but in truth, I don't think I'd be able to do so nor would I really see the need of doing so in the moment (as I'd probably feel like it was wrong to NOT do something in regards to self-defense).
If he killed them as collaborators or even to spare them from growing into monsters, I can come nearer understanding and sympathizing. But then I think men like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Osama Bin Laden should be stripped naked, shackled and fed alive to starving pigs
Amazing to consider that those you listed have others who support them...looking at us and wondering the same things.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

inconsequential

goat who dreamed he was a sheep
Mar 28, 2010
1,311
109
✟9,552.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Gxg (G²);64192509 said:
Amazing to consider that those you listed have others who support them...looking at us and wondering the same things.

Unlike some of those people's supporters, however, I couldn't chain a toddler to a fence and force her to watch me execute her parents as Syrian rebels did. The fact that she and her family were Shia doesn't justify that to me.
 
Upvote 0