Is it ever ok to kill our enemies in the name of Jesus?

[PastorFreud]

It would appear that you cannot comprehend that what the Jews might have done during Biblical times and what Christians might have done during the middle ages is irrelevant to this discussion.

Speaking of biased websites.

"Raymond Ibrahim, an American born expert on the Middle East and Islamic affairs claims to have debunked the idea that the Bible is more violent than the Quran, remarking that the Bible describes historical events, whereas the Islamic text is doctrinal, and has “open ended” clauses calling followers to action. ...
Similarly, research surfaced in February by software engineer Tom Anderson who ran the texts of the Quran and The Bible through text analytics software to find out which was the most violent....
He [Anderson] did concede that the results have no bearing on proving whether Islam “is more violent than other religions”, and that Islam, Christianity and Judaism all have further texts which contribute to religious doctrine, but that didn’t stop The Independent and other left wing media outlets such as the Huffington post eagerly reporting on his findings....
“This is to say nothing of the fact that Islamic teaching is hardly limited to the Quran. Volumes of canonical (sahih) Hadith (words and deeds of Muhammad) equally inform Muslim actions. [[…]] As it happens, calls to anti-infidel violence in the Hadith outnumber the Quran’s.”
Mr Anderson [your source] lamely concluded: “I must also reemphasize that this analysis is superficial and the findings are by no means intended to be conclusive."
Link: Popular Left Wing Theory That Bible Is More Violent Than Quran Debunked: 'Context is Everything'/​

Wrong again. Saba said 1.8 billion total Muslims worldwide. She said nothing about number of violent Muslims. I read a study that said radical Islam is increasing. Perhaps you should refrain from making accusations re: my comprehension of sources I refer to.

Contrary to your accusation it is not simply their professed faith. I encountered a Muslim couple in a department store a few day ago. She was covered from head to foot in black. Black material which I could not even see through covered her eyes. I had no feelings one way or the other about him.
.....If I perceived that myself, my family or any helpless person was threatened with imminent violence in my presence I would respond with equal or superior force, irrespective of race, gender, nationality, etc. etc. etc.. And I would do so without any qualms whatsoever. Is that good enough for you?

I do see history as relevant. Silly me.

I apologized for getting the Saba quote wrong before you posted this reply. I said I missed a paragraph and that I was sorry for that.

You think Breitbart is a valid source now?

So you were just promoting imminent violence only? It sure seemed like you were promoting more.

 

[SolomonVII]

I do see history as relevant. Silly me.

....

In the Middle Ages, cows were put on trial.
How relevant is that to where you are at today?
Do you see your own Christian sensibilities and your sense of justice in that kind of historic behavior, at all?

I am not saying that history is not relevant. I am just suggesting that in your previous discussion with your colleague here, what is meant by history is comparing apple with oranges.

 

[Der Alte]

I do see history as relevant. Silly me.

I too think history is relevant ...in a discussion of history. But all history is not relevant to every discussion.

I apologized for getting the Saba quote wrong before you posted this reply. I said I missed a paragraph and that I was sorry for that.

You did say you missed a paragraph but I did not see an apology.

You think Breitbart is a valid source now?

As valid as your sources.

So you were just promoting imminent violence only? It sure seemed like you were promoting more.

To the best of my recollection I have never said anything which could be reasonably interpreted as anything more than responding to imminent violence.

 

[shadowhunter]

As Christians is it ok to kill our enemies ? Jesus told us to turn the other cheek, what if we are called to war or someone is trying to hurt our families?

One may always exercise his natural right to self-defense. But only Christians can exercise the privilege of loving their enemies.

 

[1213]

As Christians is it ok to kill our enemies ? Jesus told us to turn the other cheek, what if we are called to war or someone is trying to hurt our families?

I think going war or killing is never good for disciples of Jesus, because:

Don't seek revenge yourselves, beloved, but give place to God's wrath. For it is written, "Vengeance belongs to me; I will repay, says the Lord." Therefore "If your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him a drink. For in doing so, you will heap coals of fire on his head." Don't be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
Romans 12:19-21

But I think it can be forgiven, if you kill while you are defending somebody else.

 

[BukiRob]

I think going war or killing is never good for disciples of Jesus, because:

Don't seek revenge yourselves, beloved, but give place to God's wrath. For it is written, "Vengeance belongs to me; I will repay, says the Lord." Therefore "If your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him a drink. For in doing so, you will heap coals of fire on his head." Don't be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
Romans 12:19-21

But I think it can be forgiven, if you kill while you are defending somebody else.

Completely, totally out of context.

The soldier is following orders he is not seeking revenge. Additionally the English use of enemy here is a poor choice of word.

I am baffled by some of you... You either believe scripture or you don't.

G-d does not change. He is not a man that he should lie.

On NUMEROUS occasions G-d told Israel to go to war. Were those people sinning? Of course not.

How is this any different?

 

[NeedyFollower]

Well, brother, with all due respect I suggest you tell G-d he is wrong then

Me I will side with what his word has to say on the matter.

Is God a God of rebellion? How is it that the founders of this country disobeyed the very scriptures we now quote? Exactly how did we love, honor and pray for the King ? When our brother Paul exhorts us in Romans to mark those who cause division contrary to the gospel we learned and to avoid them for they serve not the lord Jesus Christ but their own bellies , what would he have done with " Give me liberty or give me death. ? How about , I have but one regret, that I have but one life to lay down for my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ ..actually he said Country. How is it we became unequally yoked with unbelievers ( in Christ ) for the cause of something temporal like a man made country ?
No , we were formed in rebellion which God certainly allowed/caused as He also caused Rome , Egypt , Judas. This experiment which we call democracy is secular. It is not subject to Christ nor can it be. ( Can it love it's enemies ? Can it teach it's women to be discrete, chaste, keepers at home so that the word of God be not blasphemed. ) Does a country care if the word of God is blasphemed ? Jesus said he that is not for me is against me . Is this country for Jesus ?

Many of our founders believed in God or " A God " and so did Cane and those who crucified Jesus the first time , but was their testimony , I die daily that Christ might live .
Did the Holy spirit lead us to send small pox blankets to the Indians ? How about Manifest Destiny? What part of this country did God not already own before man was even a creation? Where in the bible are we given the right to free speech ? Are we not rather encouraged to put our mouth in the dust if there be hope ? In the abundance of words their wanteth not sin. There are many things which we assume to be true but are not from scripture..they are the imaginations of our own hearts and have been taught by humanist, deist, the wealthy and deceived. God and country is not in the bible. You shall love the Lord , thy God and HIM ONLY shall you serve . How many masters can one man have ? We are to be submitted to those in authority ( although we broke that when we went to war against our fellow Christians wearing red coats. ) but it is also true it is better that we obey God and not man. ( We will not kneel before man but the word of God is eternal. )

 

[NeedyFollower]

Completely, totally out of context.

The soldier is following orders he is not seeking revenge. Additionally the English use of enemy here is a poor choice of word.

I am baffled by some of you... You either believe scripture or you don't.

G-d does not change. He is not a man that he should lie.

On NUMEROUS occasions G-d told Israel to go to war. Were those people sinning? Of course not.

How is this any different?

Brother ...I believe you are pouring new wine in an old wine skin. Is there a new and better covenant or not ? Can we mix the two ? What would that look like ? One answer ...I get to hope for grace when I was an enemy of God and once I am saved , I get to go to war against others so I can demonstrate God's love toward them .

 

[BukiRob]

Brother ...I believe you are pouring new wine in an old wine skin. Is there a new and better covenant or not ? Can we mix the two ? What would that look like ? One answer ...I get to hope for grace when I was an enemy of God and once I am saved , I get to go to war against others so I can demonstrate God's love toward them .

First off, every person who has ever been saved or will be saved has been saved by Grace through Faith... Gen 15 shows us that with Abraham.

Secondly, Yeshua walked in LOVE did he not? Didnt he eat with the sinners and tax collectors? Did he not personify everything you say you want? Did he go to war with the lost or did he minster to them and love them?

The only time Yeshua dealt harshly with people were the religious rulers.

Yeshua exemplifies the very Torah as expressed in thought, heart and action.

Many, many well meaning believers are DEEPLY confused and have massive misunderstanding of what the purpose and intent of the Torah is.... Plainly, it is to SHOW US HOW to love G-d with all our hearts, mind and soul and to show us HOW to love our neighbor as ourselves.

Having the Torah written on our hearts and in our minds leads us to walk as Messiah walked.

 

[NeedyFollower]

I believe the Torah ( which Saul/Paul observed in a most strict manner ) was necessary until a new and better covenant was brought forth and written on our hearts in God's own blood. And as a last will and testament is not valid until the testator dies, Christ had to die to make the inheritance and new covenant valid. Nothing wrong with the old covenant if used lawfully but it is only a shadow of the new which was wrought by love ( sacrifice). I will not murder if I am not first angry. I will never commit adultry or other forms of theft or UNLOVE if I do not covet my neighbors wife ...Yes , the new covenant of LOVE is a MUCH MUCH better covenant than the Old . A man MUST be born again ...He MUST ..Not by the will of the flesh , nor of man but by God . Is that not the good news that Abraham longed to see and was glad when he saw Christ Day ?

 

[BukiRob]

I believe the Torah ( which Saul/Paul observed in a most strict manner ) was necessary until a new and better covenant was brought forth and written on our hearts in God's own blood. And as a last will and testament is not valid until the testator dies, Christ had to die to make the inheritance and new covenant valid. Nothing wrong with the old covenant if used lawfully but it is only a shadow of the new which was wrought by love ( sacrifice). I will not murder if I am not first angry. I will never commit adultry or other forms of theft or UNLOVE if I do not covet my neighbors wife ...Yes , the new covenant of LOVE is a MUCH MUCH better covenant than the Old . A man MUST be born again ...He MUST ..Not by the will of the flesh , nor of man but by God . Is that not the good news that Abraham longed to see and was glad when he saw Christ Day ?

The problem is with that line of reasoning is that we have clear evidence that the Apostles AFTER Messiah left continued to observe.

The problem is that you are misrepresenting the Torah. Yeshua was teaching the Torah as G-d intended it. Not merely the letter of the law, but the SPIRIT of the law.

Again, I will challenge you.... Jer 31 is the prophetic revelation of the new covenant.

that is the Torah written on your heart and in your minds.....

Yeshua railed against the Pharisee's whom over centuries had placed their oral tradition ABOVE the Torah.

Yeshua himself stated plainly that he did NOT come to abolish the Torah.

 

[BukiRob]

I believe the Torah ( which Saul/Paul observed in a most strict manner ) was necessary until a new and better covenant was brought forth and written on our hearts in God's own blood. And as a last will and testament is not valid until the testator dies, Christ had to die to make the inheritance and new covenant valid. Nothing wrong with the old covenant if used lawfully but it is only a shadow of the new which was wrought by love ( sacrifice). I will not murder if I am not first angry. I will never commit adultry or other forms of theft or UNLOVE if I do not covet my neighbors wife ...Yes , the new covenant of LOVE is a MUCH MUCH better covenant than the Old . A man MUST be born again ...He MUST ..Not by the will of the flesh , nor of man but by God . Is that not the good news that Abraham longed to see and was glad when he saw Christ Day ?

In Abraham's and before a man HAD to be born again.....

All mankind from Adam to the last is saved by GRACE through FAITH.

Torah has nothing to do with that truth.

Torah is about OBEDIENCE. It is the road map on HOW we are to love G-d with all our hearts, minds and soul. It is HOW we are to love our neighbor as ourselves.

Yeshua said that upon THOSE TWO the entire Torah AND PROPHETS are founded.

scripture from GENESIS TO REVELATION is about those 2 things.

Everone keeps saying "new covenant" but how many covenants were their in the Tanakh? (OT)

5 is the answer. The COVENANT is a progressive revelation.... the covenant in the gospels are the coming to pass of the Jeremiah 31 prophecy being brought into reality.

 

[ldibart]

Completely, totally out of context.

The soldier is following orders he is not seeking revenge. Additionally the English use of enemy here is a poor choice of word.

I am baffled by some of you... You either believe scripture or you don't.

G-d does not change. He is not a man that he should lie.

On NUMEROUS occasions G-d told Israel to go to war. Were those people sinning? Of course not.

How is this any different?

yay we agree lol.

 

[NeedyFollower]

In Abraham's and before a man HAD to be born again.....

All mankind from Adam to the last is saved by GRACE through FAITH.

Torah has nothing to do with that truth.

Torah is about OBEDIENCE. It is the road map on HOW we are to love G-d with all our hearts, minds and soul. It is HOW we are to love our neighbor as ourselves.

Yeshua said that upon THOSE TWO the entire Torah AND PROPHETS are founded.

scripture from GENESIS TO REVELATION is about those 2 things.

Everone keeps saying "new covenant" but how many covenants were their in the Tanakh? (OT)

5 is the answer. The COVENANT is a progressive revelation.... the covenant in the gospels are the coming to pass of the Jeremiah 31 prophecy being brought into reality.

Exactly ...The promise that God will walk among His people and He will speak to them face to face. ( I believe from Ezekiel ) It IS a new covenant and certainly a better one than the one Saul kept , would you not say ? There are those seeking to restablish the old covenant but I am pretty sure that movement is born from our old enemy pride ...trying to speak hebrew and such nonsense when even Christ spoke Aramaic ( and apparently some Greek ) It is much like the 7th day Adventist /vegetarian movement which would shut out the Inuit indians from the gospel who rely on meat. ( Nothing wrong with only keeping one day holy I guess or refraining from marriage or eating meat...as long as it does not replace the sacrafice God made .. I know the Hutterites had some truth ( all things in common, etc. ) and the Amish saw how worldly the mennonites had become but the truly interesting thing is our propensity for "being the ones who are special and have some understanding that others do not ...God save us from that !!

 

[PastorFreud]

In the Middle Ages, cows were put on trial.
How relevant is that to where you are at today?
Do you see your own Christian sensibilities and your sense of justice in that kind of historic behavior, at all?

I am not saying that history is not relevant. I am just suggesting that in your previous discussion with your colleague here, what is meant by history is comparing apple with oranges.

When it comes to religions being corrupted by power, I think that the history is relevant. I've been clear that I'm not being an apologist for Islam. What I am in favor of is recognizing and encouraging those who would reform Islam. These are the same Muslims who condemn their fringe elements. The picture painted in this thread was of an almost irresistible Islam that would completely overrun America were it not for citizens with guns. That seems a bit short sighted. As for cows on trial, I think we can learn from that phase of history that people are sometimes quite disturbed. Unless the cow had it coming.

 

[SolomonVII]

When it comes to religions being corrupted by power, I think that the history is relevant. I've been clear that I'm not being an apologist for Islam. What I am in favor of is recognizing and encouraging those who would reform Islam. These are the same Muslims who condemn their fringe elements. The picture painted in this thread was of an almost irresistible Islam that would completely overrun America were it not for citizens with guns. That seems a bit short sighted. As for cows on trial, I think we can learn from that phase of history that people are sometimes quite disturbed. Unless the cow had it coming.

The argument that you are not addressing about Islam is that jihadism is not the fringe. Wahabbism is the state religion of Saudi Arabia. That is not a fringe. Egypt, the most populous Muslim country in the ME, elects government that are Muslim Brother and Salafi. This is not the fringe. ISIS is what rises to power and takes over territory when the iron fist of Arabic authoritarianism is weakened. This is not the fringe. Iran is a theocracy that supports terrorism and Shia jihadism. This is not the fringe. Hamas, Hizbollah, and any number of groups that take over territory and by force or by election prove themselves not to be the fringe.
This is not the fringe that is the issue.
This is mainstream.

We can all agree with people like Daniel Pipes that the solution to radical Islam is moderate Islam, and support moderate forces in Islam coming to the fore of that religion. Nevertheless, Mohammed is not Jesus. His was the way of the Caesars and Alexander the Great and rule by military junta.
At its core Islam is a very different religion than a Christian's personal relationship with Jesus Christ.
Therefore likening ourselves to people who put cows onto trial in the name of moral equivalence is a meaningless charade.

 

[cephaschew]

As Christians is it ok to kill our enemies ? Jesus told us to turn the other cheek, what if we are called to war or someone is trying to hurt our families?

When we quote it's good that we consider the passage in context especially the part when Jesus being arrested. Doing the right thing at the right time is wisdom, that wisdom can only comes from the Promised Helper. All authorities are given by God also, there are other important issues to consider for eg, justice.. Remember the passage when Jesus cleans up the temple of God? So at the time of arrest, its the time that the Lord has to fulfill the Will of God. Everyone has a role to play in life, there are Christian police, who carry out capital punishments as well. There will be a time that we need to fulfill our roles. If the Knights have not came to Europe's aid, islam would have been dominating the Western world! I believe God also fought for those defenders and especially Israel. I believe it's the intention behind the action that is most vital and doing the right thing at the right time & knowing the perfect will of God in our lives.

 

[Sammy-San]

You bring up an interesting term in "wars of aggression". Very loaded and debatable concept. We are to obey the authorities over us. So, there is significant tension in this.
The first century church's action are not prescriptive nor proscriptive.

What about in a situation like this? Would it be wrong if those parents disobeyed?
Disabled baby's life support machine turned off against the wishes of his parents

 

[Cindy4HIM]

As Christians is it ok to kill our enemies ? Jesus told us to turn the other cheek, what if we are called to war or someone is trying to hurt our families?

I believe there is a difference between "killing" (such as in war, military situations) and "murder". God sent his people into the promised land and instructed his people to take the land...this is military style situation, "killing"...and necessary so that his chosen people were not destroyed or led astray by the false god worship of those people. This is a biblical example (Joshua 1-4); "Prepare your supplies, for within three days you will cross the Jordan River and begin the conquest of the land the Lord your God is ready to hand over to you." Now, murder is without question, wrong...going after people we decide are our enemies because we are at odds with them. No, we are to love our neighbor, even if our neighbor does wrong towards us (turn the other cheek). Military persons serving this country, at war, in war time situations...that is not the same. Of course, my humble opinion..and I use scripture to verify my thoughts. God Bless

 

[NeedyFollower]

I believe there is a difference between "killing" (such as in war, military situations) and "murder". God sent his people into the promised land and instructed his people to take the land...this is military style situation, "killing"...and necessary so that his chosen people were not destroyed or led astray by the false god worship of those people. This is a biblical example (Joshua 1-4); "Prepare your supplies, for within three days you will cross the Jordan River and begin the conquest of the land the Lord your God is ready to hand over to you." Now, murder is without question, wrong...going after people we decide are our enemies because we are at odds with them. No, we are to love our neighbor, even if our neighbor does wrong towards us (turn the other cheek). Military persons serving this country, at war, in war time situations...that is not the same. Of course, my humble opinion..and I use scripture to verify my thoughts. God Bless

I still say we are possibly putting new wine in old wine skins or put another way, we take from the old covenant what we wish and apply it to what is done today although I know of no military campaign in modern times done TRULY in the name AND SPIRIT of Christ Jesus for the purpose of reconciliation. We must not confuse the agenda of nations and countries. If we are going to use arms and war to effect the Kingdom of God, then we should start right here in America . " While we were yet enemies of God, Christ died for the ungodly. " How did God deal with our enmity" By dying for us ...by the good news of reconciliation . By His own blood. Be ye reconciled to God. Ours is the ministry of reconciliation.

Is ISIS an enemy of the gospel ? Yes , they know not what they do. How about Christian parents who have sacrificed the eternal well being of their own children by teaching them to love the world ? Yes , they know not what they do. How about Christians forsaking prayer and service in favor of the amusements of this world ? Yes , as Paul said " They are enemies of the cross of Christ , whose God is their belly , who glory in their shame , who mind earthly things. " So my question is , since we may all be guilty of falling short of the glory of God , at which church should our troops first line up and start killing the enemies of God ?