Early Christians on Violence

[Just Another User]

So today I'll be trying to show you through many early Christian sources that Non-violence even in the face of death was the universal way on the Early Church. I think it's important to know what our earliest brothers and sisters thought, and I hope this gives you a new outlook. The sources will consist in chronological order from the early 2nd century to the Council of Nicaea's cannons in 325. I shall also briefly add my own comment to each quote too.
​

This is a really, really large post so you can just look at the quotes without the background of the writer and the book/epistle if you want. Good luck!

Ignatius of Antioch:

Epistle to the Ephesians (c.108 AD)

"There is nothing better than peace, in which all warfare of things in heaven and things on earth is abolished"


Ignatius knew and was very close to the Apostle John. He was also appointed by John to be the supervisor of the church in Antioch which was easily the main area of Christianity in the first century. He may have also met other Apostles. Pretty reliable source.


The epistle was written to the Ephesians which were dealing with problems related to Gnostics and their influence in the church.


The context is Christians coming together and meeting up and by doing so crushing the devil.


Mathetes*:


Letter to Diognetus (70-170AD)


"(Christians) love all men, and are persecuted by all... they are dishonoured, and yet in their very dishonour are glorified. They are evil spoken of, and yet are justified; they are reviled, and bless; they are insulted, and repay the insult with honour; they do good yet are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice as if quickened into life."


Though the letter may have been written by someone called Mathetes, the letter is actually anonymous, and we'll probably never know who actually wrote it. Mathetes actually means disciple rather than an actual name.


The letter to Diognetus was a letter written to a man named Diognetus describing him the ways of Christianity and their beliefs.

The context is Mathetes describing the character of early Christians and what they do.

Justin Martyr:


First Apology (c.150 AD)


"we who hated and destroyed one another, and on account of their different manners would not live with men of a different tribe, now, since the coming of Christ, live familiarly with them, and pray for our enemies, and endeavour to persuade those who hate us unjustly to live conformably to the good precepts of Christ"


Justin Martyr was arguably the first Christian apologist and a major influence of the early church.

The First Apology was written by Justin Martyr to the Emperor of Rome at the time Antoninus Pius and is a apologetic defense of Christianity; maybe being the first one; and general description of the lifestyle of philosophy of the faith.


The context of this quote is describing a change into a Christian and telling the reader not to misinterpret the faith.


"For out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. And He shall judge among the nations and shall rebuke many people; and they shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more." Isaiah 2:3-4 And that it did so come to pass, we can convince you"


The first section of that quote is a part of Isaiah which shows people no longer committing violence or learning the ways of war. The early church applied this to Christians and the way in which they should live. This is one of the most popular passages in the Old Testament for the early church.


"We, who were formerly slayers of one another, not only do not make war upon our enemies, but, for the sake of neither lying nor deceiving those who examine us, gladly die confessing Christ"


Again, this is describing the change in character when someone becomes a Christian and becoming selfless rather than self serving.


Dialogue with Trypho (c.160 AD)


"we who were filled with war, and mutual slaughter, and every wickedness, have each through the whole earth changed our warlike weapons — our swords into ploughshares, and our spears into implements of tillage— and we cultivate piety, righteousness, philanthropy, faith, and hope, which we have from the Father Himself through Him who was crucified;"


Dialogue with Trypho was a long discussion between Justin Martyr a Christian and Trypho a Jew. The discussion probably never happened and Trypho probably never existed but was constructed similar to how Greek philosophers would create characters to voice their opinions.


This is an abridged version of Isaiah 2:3-4 and again Justin has used it to show the importance of this prophecy and how Christians no longer used physical weapons but rather spiritual ones.


Athenagoras:


A Plea for the Christians (c.177 AD)


"for we have learned, not only not to return blow for blow, nor to go to law with those who plunder and rob us, but to those who smite us on one side of the face to offer the other side also, and to those who take away our coat to give likewise our cloak."


Not much is known about Athenagoras and the original letter may have actually been anonymous but there's internal evidence to suggest that Athenagoras was a platonic or some form of Greek philosopher before becoming a Christian.

A Plea for the Christians was a plea written to the Emperor Marcus Aurelius for justice to be directed to the Christians. The Christians of Athenagoras' day were slandered being called atheists, cannibals, infant killers and performing in incestuous orgies to name a few. The plea was highly popular in the early church.


The context is describing the injustices Christians receive and Athenagoras clearly uses the Sermon on the Mount to construct his point.


"For when they know that we cannot endure even to see a man put to death, though justly; who of them can accuse us of murder or cannibalism?... But we, deeming that to see a man put to death is much the same as killing him, have abjured such spectacles. How, then, when we do not even watch, lest we should contract guilt and pollution, can we put people to death?"


This is describing the higher level of morality Christians have compared to everyone else and answering the objections Christians receive in regard to murder and cannibalism. Christians are supposed to ascend past those of the world in terms of doing good.


Irenaeus of Lyons:


Against Heresies Book 4 (c.180 AD)


"The new covenant that brings back peace and the law that gives life have gone forth over the whole earth, as the prophets said: "For out of Zion will go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem; and he will instruct many people; and they will break down their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks, and they will no longer learn to make war." These people formed their swords and war lances into plowshares,” that is, into instruments used for peaceful purposes. So now, they are unaccustomed to fighting, so when they are struck, they offer also the other cheek."


Irenaeus was the bishop of Lyons during the late 2nd century and traveled all the way from Smyrna his home church which is located in Asia Minor to Southern France. He was close to Polycarp who he in turn was very close to the Apostle John and was appointed by him to be the supervisor of Smyrna.

Against Heresies is the absolute behemoth of a work written by Irenaeus. It's ridiculously large (ten books in fact) and it's exactly what it says on the tin. It's easily the best evidence we have for how early heretics acted and their beliefs.

The context is Irenaeus trying to prove the Marcionites (a heretical Gnostic group) wrong and is again using Isaiah 2:3-4 is show the peaceful lives of the Christians of his age.

Clement of Alexandria:


Exhortation to the Heathen (195 AD)


"And shall not Christ, breathing a strain of peace to the ends of the earth, gather together His own soldiers, the soldiers of peace? Well, by His blood, and by the word, He has gathered the bloodless host of peace, and assigned to them the kingdom of Heaven."


Clement was writing in the late 2nd and early 3rd century and was a major figure in Alexandria. He was instrumental in creating the Alexandrian school of Christians.


Exhortation to the Heathens was Clement of Alexandria's first major work and is Clement trying to convince Pagans to become Christians.


The context of the passage is talking about Jesus leading an army which goal is spiritual conflict not a physical one. There's a contrast between the blood of Jesus being spilled to the soldiers never spilling blood again.


The Instructor Book 1 (198 AD)


"For it is not in war, but in peace, that we are trained. War needs great preparation, and luxury craves profusion; but peace and love, simple and quiet sisters, require no arms nor excessive preparation"


The Instructor was a work created by Clement to teach young or new Christians the way of the faith.


Clement was showing the superiority of the Christian's way of love and peace compared to the world's use of violence and war.


The Instructor Book 3 (198 AD)


"For we are not to delineate the faces of idols, we who are prohibited to cleave to them; nor a sword, nor a bow, following as we do, peace;"


Christians were wondering how they would seal their letters e.g. the picture or object to use. Clement to told them to use a dove or a fish or an anchor. Not to sign with weapons due to Christians never using them and due to Christians always following peace.


Maximus (probably after 205AD)


"Above all, Christians are not allowed to correct with violence the
delinquencies of sin"


Maximus is a sermon that Clement gave as this is one of the fragments that we have remaining.


The passage clearly shows that violence is never acceptable in the eyes of Christians.

 

[Just Another User]

Tertullian:


Apology (197 AD)


"The Christian does no harm even to his foe."


Tertullian was a very influence Christian living in Carthage and was alive between the mid 2nd and mid 3rd centuries. Become a Christian in the 190s he became a well-known apologist and has a large library of works ranging from watching sports to baptism.


Apology may be Tertullian's first work and it's defending and describing the Christian faith to heathens.


In this section, Tertullian is describing the merits of Christians compared to those not of the faith.


On Patience (c.200 AD)


"If one attempt to provoke you by manual violence, the monition of the Lord is at hand: To him, He says, who strikes you on the face, turn the other cheek likewise. Let outrageousness be wearied out by your patience"


On patience is exactly what is says. Tertullian helping people becoming more virtuous in respect to patience.


In this section, Tertullian is reminding Christians what to do when someone commits physical violence against you which is remember Jesus' teaching on the Sermon on the Mount.


On Idolatry (c.220 AD)


"But how will a Christian man war, nay, how will he serve even in peace, without a sword, which the Lord has taken away?.. Christ in disarming Peter, unbelted every soldier. No dress is lawful among us, if assigned to any unlawful action"


This part of On Idolatry is covering military service.


Tertullian argues that since Christ took away Peter's sword at Gethsemane that every Christian has their sword taken away. Thus, even against someone who's unlawful, a Christian cannot use the sword.


The Chaplet (c.225 AD)


"Shall it be held lawful to make an occupation of the sword, when the Lord proclaims that he who uses the sword shall perish by the sword? And shall the son of peace take part in the battle when it does not become him even to sue at law?"


The Chaplet is a book on the military. You could use the whole thing to make an argument in favour of non-violence, but I've decided to take this quote.


Tertullian is arguing here how any Christian could lawfully even defend being in the military.


Hippolytus of Rome:


Apostolic Tradition (c.215 AD)

"A soldier of the civil authority must be taught not to kill men and to refuse to do so if he is commanded, and to refuse to take an oath; if he is unwilling to comply, he must be rejected. A military commander or civic magistrate that wears the purple must resign or be rejected. If a catechumen or a believer seeks to become a soldier, they must be rejected, for they have despised God"

Hippolytus of Rome was a 2nd and early 3rd century Christian who lived in Rome. He may have been a disciple of Irenaeus. He was unhappy with the Bishops of Rome ethics and was an antipope in the early 3rd century. By 235 both Pope Pontian and Hippolytus reconciled and the schism ended.

Apostolic tradition were beliefs held by 2nd century church that Hippolytus thought the church in Rome was losing under the Popes of the 3rd century. Apostolic Tradition may therefore contain some of the earliest Christian Church Orders.

Hippolytus shows that joining the military was a sign of an unbeliever and would have to be thrown out the church. Killing too must be ruled out as it made the behaviour of this action/s a despiser of God. Clearly joining the military was against the church wasn't just that you were forced to have oaths or pray to foreign Gods or the Emperor but also the blood you may spill.


Origen:


Letter to Africanus (c.225 AD)


"Who among the believers does not know the words in Isaiah?... For out of Zion shall go forth a law, and a word of the Lord from Jerusalem. He shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people. They shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation; neither shall they learn war any more"


Origen was an Alexandrian based Christian and probably the most influence Christian of the third century. I would dare say he was the smartest figure in all of the early church.


Letter to Africanus is a letter to Sextus Julius Africanus; a close friend to Origen; defending to Greek translations of Daniel.


Here, Origen shows that Isaiah 2:3-4 was universally read by the early church and every Christian thought it applied to Jesus and the Disciples teaching the new way of life. The early church did not commit any violence or warfare because they were children of peace and not spawn of war.


Against Celsus (248 AD)


"Christians could never slay their enemies."


Against Celsus is Origen's magnum opus and probably the most influential apologetic of all time. It actually made Christianity into a respectable academic belief. It was a general refutation of Celsus' work against Christians.


Origen was explaining that Christians could never commit violence and when those commit violence against Christians only increase their numbers.



Cyprian of Carthage:


First Epistle of Cyprian (c.250 AD)


"The whole world is wet with mutual blood, and murder, which in the case of an individual is admitted to be a crime, yet is called a virtue when it is committed wholesale. Impunity is claimed for the wicked deeds, not on the plea that they are guiltless, but because the cruelty is perpetrated on a grand scale."


Cyprian was a mid 3rd century Christian who was the bishop of Cyprian in the 250s. He was the leader of the churches in Africa during the Novitan crisis and lead many local councils during the 250s.

The Epistle is a part of a collection of many epistles written by Cyprian during his time as a Christian. The first epistle is addressed to Donatus.


Cyprian's main argument here is that just because violence is committed by a nation doesn't make it morally right since a life is still being extinguished.


Arnobius of Sicca:


Against the Heathen Book 1 (c.303 AD)


"For since we have learned from His teaching and His laws that evil ought not to be requited with evil, that it is better to suffer wrong than to inflict it, that we should rather shed our own blood than stain our hands and our conscience with that of another"


Arnobius was an early 4th century Christian of Berber origin. Not much is really known about him and his only surviving work is Against the Heathens.

Against the Heathens was written during the Diocletian persecution of Christians (303-311AD) and tries to refute those who claim the persecution is the righteous thing to do.


Arnobius here is clearly stating that shedding someone else's blood is always worse than shedding our own. The context here would be that Christians have made the world a better place with their peaceful ways.


Lactantius:


Divine Institutes Book 6 (c.307 AD)


"For how can a man be just who injures, who hates, who despoils, who puts to death? And they who strive to be serviceable to their country do all these things"


Lactantius was an early 4th century Christian and eventually became the tutor and religious advisor the Constantine the Great.


Divine Institutes is an apologetic and also description of Christianity against Pagans. It's Lactantius' greatest work.


Lactantius' argument here is that evil is never right, not matter if it's committed for personal gains or for a country.



The Council of Nicaea (325 AD):


Twelve cannon of the Council (excerpt)


"Those who endured violence and were seen to have resisted, but who afterwards yielded to wickedness, and returned to the army, shall be excommunicated for ten years."


The Council of Nicaea was the coming together of the entire Church in the Roman Empire and after the Arian controversy was finished, 20 cannons were written. The twelve cannon talked about joining the military. If someone rejoined the army, they were excommunicated for ten years meaning they couldn't take communion (which was a weekly meal back then).


Rather than being just one Early Christian this was the view decided on by the entire Christian world with over 300 bishops being present.


Thanks for reading.

 

[Dave-W]

You are giving only one side of the story.

THere were Jewish believers in Jerusalem that fought alongside their Zealot and Pharisee brothers in protecting Jerusalem during the siege. But the siege broke for a period of several weeks when the troops were called down to Egypt and then came back, so the believers followed this:

Luke 21:20
“But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation is near.
21 Then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains, and those who are in the midst of the city must leave, and those who are in the country must not enter.

So they went into the hills around the city. It dealt a severe blow between the Jewish New Covenant community and the traditional Jewish community. Those relationships were just starting to be mended when a man called Bar Kochba rose up and started another revolution to kick Roman occupation out of Jerusalem and Judea. Again the Believers fought along side their Jewish brothers until the leading rabbi of the day declared Bar Kochba to be the Messiah. Unwilling to fight for a false messiah, they left the fight and it was the final nail in the separation of church and synagogue.

 

[Dave-W]

Rather than being just one Early Christian this was the view decided on by the entire Christian world with over 300 bishops being present.

Yes. Over 300 gentile bishops. No Jewish Christians.

 

[Norman70]

Over 300 gentile bishops. No Jewish Christians.

I am out of my depth! I do not understand the term 'Jewish Christian'? Even in those days I thought Jews could become Christians but then they could not remain Jewish? Therefore as Christians they would agree totally that they would become non-resistant to evil.

 

[Dave-W]

I am out of my depth! I do not understand the term 'Jewish Christian'? Even in those days I thought Jews could become Christians but then they could not remain Jewish? Therefore as Christians they would agree totally that they would become non-resistant to evil.

Read Eusebius. He was NOT kind to us. The name given was Sect of the Nazoreans.

While he admitted we were doctrinally orthodox, he considered us/them heretics due to their service being VERY Jewish and them keeping the Saturday sabbath and eating only kosher.

Interestingly, “in those days,” James the Just (brother of our Lord) who was head of the Jerusalem church was ALSO head of one of the main schools of Pharisees in Jerusalem. A duality that cost him his life in the mid 60s.

 

[Just Another User]

You are giving only one side of the story.

THere were Jewish believers in Jerusalem that fought alongside their Zealot and Pharisee brothers in protecting Jerusalem during the siege. But the siege broke for a period of several weeks when the troops were called down to Egypt and then came back, so the believers followed this:

Give you give me a source that suggests or outright claims that Christians fought during the Siege of Jerusalem? To the best of my knowledge, it's commonly regarded by historians that the Christians waited out the Romano-Jewish revolt (66-70AD) in Pella and didn't exchange in any fighting whatsoever.

Our early Christian sources like the historian Eusebius and Justin Martyr would be against the theory that Christians fought in the war. In fact, there's some archaeological evidence to support the idea that they fled before the Syrian army even reached Jerusalem but it's debatable.

Do you also mind giving me a source saying that during the Siege that troops were recalled to Egypt when Titus arrived or are you referring to when the Syrian legion for unknown reasons withdrew to the coast?

As soon as Titus arrived in February 70 AD there was no escaping by then and about 500 people were crucified everyday for trying to escape.

So they went into the hills around the city. It dealt a severe blow between the Jewish New Covenant community and the traditional Jewish community. Those relationships were just starting to be mended when a man called Bar Kochba rose up and started another revolution to kick Roman occupation out of Jerusalem and Judea. Again the Believers fought along side their Jewish brothers until the leading rabbi of the day declared Bar Kochba to be the Messiah. Unwilling to fight for a false messiah, they left the fight and it was the final nail in the separation of church and synagogue.

Do you mind giving me a source which suggests that the Jewish followers of Jesus actually supported/ originally fought in the Bar Kokhba revolt? The main source against this would be Justin Martyr writing in the 150-160s and in the general area of the revolt would disagree with this.

Furthermore, It would also appear that even before the revolt in the 130s that the divide between Christians and Jews had already fully happened. Sources like Ignatius of Antioch (c.108 AD) and and the writer of the Epistle of Barnabas (70-130AD due to mentioning the destruction of the temple but not the later revolt) show a complete divide between those who were Jewish and those who were Christians. Since Barnabas focuses heavily on the Christian Jewish divide, we can assume and the very latest that the divide happened around the 130s AD though I would be inclinded to say before the 2nd century.

Furthermore, there's evidence to suggest that Shimon ben Kosiva wasn't the same type of Messiah that Jesus was. Whereas Jesus was considered a Messiah in the spiritualist sense, Shimon ben Kosiva was considered in respects in being a important and strong individual. I don't believe anyone considered Shimon to be the Son of God. He was still given the nickname son of the star I will concede.

 

[Dave-W]

That is because your sources dismissed the Nazoreans as heretics, not true Christians.

The source is stories in the Talmuds, about how Christian Jews that fought with the Jews were not REAL Jews or they would not have abandoned the fight.

 

[Norman70]

Thank you for the recent interesting exchanges here, and shows how historicity can be so important in our understanding of the behaviour of early Christians. Since then mainstream Christianity has gone to the dogs, dare I say!
Well, it has gone to the devil.
I cannot accept that one can be a Jew and a Christian, even in those days. We cannot serve two masters. Anyone, even then, having allegiance to other faiths apart from Jesus, cannot and could not be true Christians, I think.

 

[Just Another User]

That is because your sources dismissed the Nazoreans as heretics, not true Christians.

Even if we concede the Eusebius considered the Christians during the Jewish Rebellion/s as heretics why then don't they mention that they fought? Since pacifism was the way during Eusebius' day, wouldn't it be apt to mention their fighting to show another reason to denounce them? Why then does he clearly show that they didn't fight along with the Jews? Unless of course the position that you advocate for lacks nuance.

In reality, Eusebius considered both the Christians living in the area during the Jewish-Roman war of 66-70AD as true Christians and the Christians living in the area during the Bar Kokhba revolt as true Christians. You can read Church History Book 3 and 4 to see this. Furthermore, Eusebius mentions that the first 15 bishops of Jerusalem where of the circumcision. Though he was against this, he still didn't claim that said people weren't Christians. Interesting.

Though the Nazarenes were seen as heretics, this was due to them having a gospel of the Hebrews and rejecting Jesus being the Son of God which they considered came from Greek influences. They existed in the 4th century and not during the Jewish revolts.

The earliest "Jewish" (I say this lightly) sect was the Ebionites. They rejected the virgin birth, only accepted one gospel outside the of the canonical ones and some other things that we would consider heretical.

Though Christians as early as Ignatius (who again I'll stress knew the Apostle John and was appointed to be the supervisor of the main place of Christianity at the time, Antioch) criticised judaizing I can't see how this applies to those in the area between 66-135AD.

The source is stories in the Talmuds, about how Christian Jews that fought with the Jews were not REAL Jews or they would not have abandoned the fight.

Do you mind if you could get the quote?

 

[Dave-W]

Though the Nazarenes were seen as heretics, this was due to them having a gospel of the Hebrews and rejecting Jesus being the Son of God which they considered came from Greek influences. They existed in the 4th century and not during the Jewish revolts.

You are mixing them up with the Ebonites, who were actually heretics. Eusebius agreed that unlike the Ebionites, the Nazarenes were doctrinally orthodox. They believed in a Triune God, with Yeshua (Jesus) being the Son of God and Divine.

And the Nazarenes are even mentioned in the book of Acts so the idea they came later is bogus.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

So today I'll be trying to show you through many early Christian sources that Non-violence even in the face of death was the universal way on the Early Church. I think it's important to know what our earliest brothers and sisters thought, and I hope this gives you a new outlook. The sources will consist in chronological order from the early 2nd century to the Council of Nicaea's cannons in 325. I shall also briefly add my own comment to each quote too.
​

This is a really, really large post so you can just look at the quotes without the background of the writer and the book/epistle if you want. Good luck!

Ignatius of Antioch:

Epistle to the Ephesians (c.108 AD)

"There is nothing better than peace, in which all warfare of things in heaven and things on earth is abolished"


Ignatius knew and was very close to the Apostle John. He was also appointed by John to be the supervisor of the church in Antioch which was easily the main area of Christianity in the first century. He may have also met other Apostles. Pretty reliable source.


The epistle was written to the Ephesians which were dealing with problems related to Gnostics and their influence in the church.


The context is Christians coming together and meeting up and by doing so crushing the devil.


Mathetes*:


Letter to Diognetus (70-170AD)


"(Christians) love all men, and are persecuted by all... they are dishonoured, and yet in their very dishonour are glorified. They are evil spoken of, and yet are justified; they are reviled, and bless; they are insulted, and repay the insult with honour; they do good yet are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice as if quickened into life."


Though the letter may have been written by someone called Mathetes, the letter is actually anonymous, and we'll probably never know who actually wrote it. Mathetes actually means disciple rather than an actual name.


The letter to Diognetus was a letter written to a man named Diognetus describing him the ways of Christianity and their beliefs.

The context is Mathetes describing the character of early Christians and what they do.

Justin Martyr:


First Apology (c.150 AD)


"we who hated and destroyed one another, and on account of their different manners would not live with men of a different tribe, now, since the coming of Christ, live familiarly with them, and pray for our enemies, and endeavour to persuade those who hate us unjustly to live conformably to the good precepts of Christ"


Justin Martyr was arguably the first Christian apologist and a major influence of the early church.

The First Apology was written by Justin Martyr to the Emperor of Rome at the time Antoninus Pius and is a apologetic defense of Christianity; maybe being the first one; and general description of the lifestyle of philosophy of the faith.


The context of this quote is describing a change into a Christian and telling the reader not to misinterpret the faith.


"For out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. And He shall judge among the nations and shall rebuke many people; and they shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more." Isaiah 2:3-4 And that it did so come to pass, we can convince you"


The first section of that quote is a part of Isaiah which shows people no longer committing violence or learning the ways of war. The early church applied this to Christians and the way in which they should live. This is one of the most popular passages in the Old Testament for the early church.


"We, who were formerly slayers of one another, not only do not make war upon our enemies, but, for the sake of neither lying nor deceiving those who examine us, gladly die confessing Christ"


Again, this is describing the change in character when someone becomes a Christian and becoming selfless rather than self serving.


Dialogue with Trypho (c.160 AD)


"we who were filled with war, and mutual slaughter, and every wickedness, have each through the whole earth changed our warlike weapons — our swords into ploughshares, and our spears into implements of tillage— and we cultivate piety, righteousness, philanthropy, faith, and hope, which we have from the Father Himself through Him who was crucified;"


Dialogue with Trypho was a long discussion between Justin Martyr a Christian and Trypho a Jew. The discussion probably never happened and Trypho probably never existed but was constructed similar to how Greek philosophers would create characters to voice their opinions.


This is an abridged version of Isaiah 2:3-4 and again Justin has used it to show the importance of this prophecy and how Christians no longer used physical weapons but rather spiritual ones.


Athenagoras:


A Plea for the Christians (c.177 AD)


"for we have learned, not only not to return blow for blow, nor to go to law with those who plunder and rob us, but to those who smite us on one side of the face to offer the other side also, and to those who take away our coat to give likewise our cloak."


Not much is known about Athenagoras and the original letter may have actually been anonymous but there's internal evidence to suggest that Athenagoras was a platonic or some form of Greek philosopher before becoming a Christian.

A Plea for the Christians was a plea written to the Emperor Marcus Aurelius for justice to be directed to the Christians. The Christians of Athenagoras' day were slandered being called atheists, cannibals, infant killers and performing in incestuous orgies to name a few. The plea was highly popular in the early church.


The context is describing the injustices Christians receive and Athenagoras clearly uses the Sermon on the Mount to construct his point.


"For when they know that we cannot endure even to see a man put to death, though justly; who of them can accuse us of murder or cannibalism?... But we, deeming that to see a man put to death is much the same as killing him, have abjured such spectacles. How, then, when we do not even watch, lest we should contract guilt and pollution, can we put people to death?"


This is describing the higher level of morality Christians have compared to everyone else and answering the objections Christians receive in regard to murder and cannibalism. Christians are supposed to ascend past those of the world in terms of doing good.


Irenaeus of Lyons:


Against Heresies Book 4 (c.180 AD)


"The new covenant that brings back peace and the law that gives life have gone forth over the whole earth, as the prophets said: "For out of Zion will go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem; and he will instruct many people; and they will break down their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks, and they will no longer learn to make war." These people formed their swords and war lances into plowshares,” that is, into instruments used for peaceful purposes. So now, they are unaccustomed to fighting, so when they are struck, they offer also the other cheek."


Irenaeus was the bishop of Lyons during the late 2nd century and traveled all the way from Smyrna his home church which is located in Asia Minor to Southern France. He was close to Polycarp who he in turn was very close to the Apostle John and was appointed by him to be the supervisor of Smyrna.

Against Heresies is the absolute behemoth of a work written by Irenaeus. It's ridiculously large (ten books in fact) and it's exactly what it says on the tin. It's easily the best evidence we have for how early heretics acted and their beliefs.

The context is Irenaeus trying to prove the Marcionites (a heretical Gnostic group) wrong and is again using Isaiah 2:3-4 is show the peaceful lives of the Christians of his age.

Clement of Alexandria:


Exhortation to the Heathen (195 AD)


"And shall not Christ, breathing a strain of peace to the ends of the earth, gather together His own soldiers, the soldiers of peace? Well, by His blood, and by the word, He has gathered the bloodless host of peace, and assigned to them the kingdom of Heaven."


Clement was writing in the late 2nd and early 3rd century and was a major figure in Alexandria. He was instrumental in creating the Alexandrian school of Christians.


Exhortation to the Heathens was Clement of Alexandria's first major work and is Clement trying to convince Pagans to become Christians.


The context of the passage is talking about Jesus leading an army which goal is spiritual conflict not a physical one. There's a contrast between the blood of Jesus being spilled to the soldiers never spilling blood again.


The Instructor Book 1 (198 AD)


"For it is not in war, but in peace, that we are trained. War needs great preparation, and luxury craves profusion; but peace and love, simple and quiet sisters, require no arms nor excessive preparation"


The Instructor was a work created by Clement to teach young or new Christians the way of the faith.


Clement was showing the superiority of the Christian's way of love and peace compared to the world's use of violence and war.


The Instructor Book 3 (198 AD)


"For we are not to delineate the faces of idols, we who are prohibited to cleave to them; nor a sword, nor a bow, following as we do, peace;"


Christians were wondering how they would seal their letters e.g. the picture or object to use. Clement to told them to use a dove or a fish or an anchor. Not to sign with weapons due to Christians never using them and due to Christians always following peace.


Maximus (probably after 205AD)


"Above all, Christians are not allowed to correct with violence the
delinquencies of sin"


Maximus is a sermon that Clement gave as this is one of the fragments that we have remaining.


The passage clearly shows that violence is never acceptable in the eyes of Christians.

You may be interested in this thread here (If you have not seen it):

Pacifism as Taught in the New Testament is Moral and Good.

It is my exhaustive Biblical Defense on Pacifism or Non-Violence under the New Covenant.

 

[Just Another User]

You are mixing them up with the Ebonites, who were actually heretics. Eusebius agreed that unlike the Ebionites, the Nazarenes were doctrinally orthodox. They believed in a Triune God, with Yeshua (Jesus) being the Son of God and Divine.

My bad. The Nazarenes did believe in the Virgin Birth and that Jesus was the Son of God. My apologies. Nevertheless, the Nazarenes did have a gospel called the "Gospel of the Hebrews" (or the Gospel of the Nazarenes since they may not have been the same) Furthermore, there's evidence to suggest that they didn't believe in Paul's letters either.

And the Nazarenes are even mentioned in the book of Acts so the idea they came later is bogus.

Christians were called Nazarenes primarily by Jews for example Acts 24:5 but there wasn't a sect of Nazarenes until the 4th century based on early christian sources.

NAZARENES - JewishEncyclopedia.com

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Yes. Over 300 gentile bishops. No Jewish Christians.

We don't know they were all Gentiles. Most likely the majority were but you cannot condemn the Church for that nor can you say for certain there were no Jewish members in the Church. We actually do see Jewish followers pop up in the history. Be it Melito or Jerome's Hebrew teacher.

Still, why does that speak against the fathers of Nicaea, many of whom suffered in the Diocletian persecutions and many of whom were Godly men, educated in the scripture? Since Gentiles have always outnumbered the Jews and the Gospel was opened up to the Gentiles this isn't really a problem. Or it becomes a problem of a different sort. Jews are welcome to Christ, it's that historically they have for the most part rejected him.

If you believe in a different Church, tell us where they were and during the council. What were they doing to respond to Arianism? Where were they during the Diocletian persecutions?

 

[LW97Nils]

Similar stance that MLK would hold also.