Non-Violence as Taught in the New Testament is Moral and Good.

[Bible Highlighter]

The attacks of September 11 and the resulting war against terrorism have brought to the front once again the question of the Christian view of war. The question is particularly complex because it is hard to see how war can be consistent with the biblical emphasis upon forgiveness and forebearance and love. This emphasis is perhaps most pointed in the Sermon on the Mount, where Jesus says:

You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also. Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you. You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you. (Matthew 5:39-44)

Does Jesus' teaching that we should turn the other cheek and love our enemies mean that it is always wrong to go to war? Should the world have turned the other cheek to Hitler and tried to love him into surrender? When Osama Ben Laden ordered the attack on the World Trade Center, should the U.S. have responded by sending him the Sears Tower as well? Or does Jesus allow a place for both loving our enemies and yet, in certain situations, using force to restrain life-threatening wickedness? What follows are some of the primary reasons we believe that it is right for the military (and Christians who are a part of the military) to engage in wars that have just cause--namely, self-defense, the restraint of life-threatening evil, and the punishment of nations and individuals who have committed unjust acts of war against one's country. This is called the just war theory. We will close by seeking to explain how this fits with the command to turn the other cheek, love our enemies, and not resist him who is evil.

Believers do not play the same role in God's plan as those organizations who are of this world (like the police, and the army, etc.). The police and military are not organizations that are founded upon the Bible and or exclusively seeking to follow Jesus Christ. Nobody has to be a believer in Jesus to be a part of these organizations. These types of organizations in countries over the world will exist until Christ returns, but not all the police, and not all of the army will be saved because they are not followers of Christ.

Jesus said narrow is the way that leads unto life and FEW be there that find it. Does the army and the police sound like they are of the FEW or the many? Think. The believer is called to be separate and holy from the world. Their role in God's plan is different than the role that of the police and army. God uses the police and army as an arm of justice sometimes, but that does not mean that all those within these organizations are going to Heaven.

Pacifism is harmful

Stop saying I believe in Pacifism. I don't believe in Pacifism, but I believe in Non-Violence. So you are falsely accusing me of something I do not believe. These two words may appear to be similar, but they are not the same.

Pacifism is teaching that ALL forms of violence is wrong.
Meaning, that would suggest that a person is against the Old Testament violence, and Jesus violently returning to destroy the nations.

This is wrong! The violence in the OT happened and God approved of it. Jesus will also violently destroy those nations that come up against Him at His 2nd coming.

I am an agent of Non-Violence, and this means to not use violence (or injury) in self defense. I am not against the use of non violent forms of self defense, or methods that seek to not injure or harm the attacker, but yet they can still stop the attacker or at least temporarily incapacitate them so as to escape, and or call for help (by prayer, and or by phone).

Nonresistance:
(noun):

1. group refusal to resort to violence even in defense against violence

Nonresistance | Definition of Nonresistance by Webster's Online Dictionary

However, I have decided to update or use the term to Non-Violence instead. Nonresistance implies that we cannot resist by praying, escaping, hiding, running, or using non-lethal forms of self defense. Therefore, Non-violence would be a more accurate word to use instead - IMHO.

To let someone murder when it is in your power to stop them is completely contrary to our moral sentiments. If a Hitler is on the move and seeking to bind the world in tyranny and destroy entire ethnic groups, it would seem very clearly wrong not to oppose him with force (which sometimes is the only effective method). It is true that war itself is harmful and tragic; but pacifism would result in even more harm to the world because it would give wicked people virtually free reign. We of course must be open to letting the Bible transform our moral sentiments, but this observation should at least cause us to pause and reflect more deeply before concluding that Jesus is intending to teach pacifism.

I believe in Non-Violence (in regards to the definition that says to not use violent force in return; This is not referring to how I would stand by and do nothing and not employ non-violent methods to stop someone. But my faith is in God and I ask for his protection, and I pray that the Lord will place me into a circumstance that I am able to practice what He desires of me). I don't believe in Pacifism but in Non-Violence while living out my faith. There is a difference. As for stopping military leaders that are evil: That is what the military is for. God does not call us to join the military to serve his kingdom. Our mission (if we choose to accept it) is to preach the gospel, and teach his commands, etc. Serving in the military and serving Christ as a part of the great commission are two different things. One is spreading the gospel, and the other is doing service for one's country.

Consistent pacifism would have to eliminate the police, not just the military

Again, I am not a Pacifist, but I am an agent of Non-Violence and that means employing no violence in return, but it does not always mean that I stand by and do nothing. Jesus said narrow is the way and FEW be there that find it. This means that the police and military are not on the narrow way or of the FEW (Which is the life and path the believer is on that is different). Believers obeying the Lord is not going to influence the world to do the same. They have their part and role to play, just as the believer has their part and role to play.

Luke 3:14 allows military service
It is significant that John the Baptist did not tell the soldiers to leave the military when they asked him what it meant to repent: "And some soldiers were questioning him, saying, 'And what about us, what shall we do?' And he said to them, 'Do not take money from anyone by force, or accuse anyone falsely, and be content with your wages'" (Luke 3:14). Since it is, therefore, possible to live a godly life and yet be in the military, it must be because engaging in war is not always sinful.

John the Baptist actually told them to leave the military by INDIRECT means. They could not remain in the military for long and do violence to no man. Doing violence to other men is a part of the military.

Luke 3:14 (KJV) says,
“And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages.”

I already posted these points to you before, but you must have not have read them. For you are repeating these same points, that I have already addressed before.

John 18:36 acknowledges the right of the sword to earthly kingdoms
In this passage, Jesus says: "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting, that I might not be delivered up to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm." When Jesus says that if his kingdom were of this world his servants would be fighting, he implies that it is right for kingdoms of this world to fight when the cause is just and circumstances require it. As Christians, we are citizens of "two kingdoms"--our country on earth, and heaven. Jesus shows us that it is never right to fight for the sake of his spiritual kingdom, but that it is right to fight on behalf of earthly kingdoms (when necessary to counter evil and destruction).

This is a complete distortion of what Jesus actually said. Nowhere does Jesus say the words that you have said here. Jesus simply said that if His kingdom was of this world (which would be like the police and military who are organizations that are a part of this world), his servants would fight. Seeing Jesus' kingdom is not of this world, this means we are not to fight like others do.

Romans 13:3-4 grants governments the right to use force to restrain and punish evil
Paul writes: "For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same; for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil."

Nowhere is the believer said to be the higher powers in Romans 13. The higher powers is the one who will punish the believer if they do wrong. Nowhere does Paul say that the believer can join in on taking part with the higher powers. That is something that the text does not say.

Here Paul affirms the government's right to use force in two ways. First, he says that it "does not bear the sword for nothing." Second, he states that government is a "minister of God" when it executes vengeance against evildoers.

God was able to use Assyria as an arm of justice to chastise Israel, but that does not mean Assyria was a nation of God.

Does the right of the sword in this text extend to the case of war? The immediate context does have in mind the use of physical force in regard to a government's own citizens. But by extension this also implies that if one nation commits an act of war against another nation, the offended nation has the right to engage in self-defense and to avenge the wrong. Would it be consistent to say that a nation has a right to restrain and punish evil committed against it by its own citizens, but not to restrain and punish evil committed against it by another nation? The mere fact that the civil offense was committed by another country does not remove their accountability to the country they attacked.

Nowhere does Romans 13, and or 1 Peter 2:13-14 teach that a believer is to join the police or the military. You need to quote the actual verse that supports this view. It simply does not exist.

1 Peter 2:13-4 confirms the teaching of Romans 13:3-4
In 1 Peter 2:13-14, we are taught: "Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right." Once again, the right of governments to punish evil is affirmed.

While we are to submit to the government and it's laws, and or to it's courts in justice, this does not mean we have to join their military, or their police. If a law violates the laws of God's Word, then we are to disobey that law that is unbiblical. For Daniel's friends disobeyed the law to bow down to a statue of the king. So there are exceptions to this rule. If the government forces a person to act violently, the believer has a right to refuse based on adhering to the teachings of Jesus. In fact, one man has done this before. Desmond Doss.

Is it right for a Christian to fight in a war?
Since the Scriptures teach that it is right for a nation to engage in a just war, it follows that it is therefore right for a Christian to fight in such a war. Some have argued that non-Christians may fight in wars but believers may not, but this distinction is not found in Scripture. Scripture teaches that it is not sin for a government to engage in a just war, and there is therefore nothing that forbids Christian from being involved in just wars.

That is blurring the lines. No Scripture says that a believer can fight violently in a war. Jesus rebuked Peter for his use of violence with a sword and said he that lives by the sword shall die by the sword. If things are as you say, then Jesus would have praised Peter's actions instead.

 

[SPF]

I cannot honestly take you seriously if you do not understand the difference between non violent methods used to stop people vs. using violent methods used to stop people.

Well, with all the fallacies you carelessly employ it's all I can do to take anything you say seriously. That and your other fringe religious views (KJV Only) also make it tough. But I'm trying!

You are attempting to blur the lines

Incorrect, I'm attempting to define the lines.

you are simply too far in the camp of using violent force to stop someone. You see that as the best and or only option.

Another incorrect assumption. But by all means keep assuming things. You know what we say about people who assume, right?

In your world: There is no such thing as stopping someone by non-violent means.

If that were the case, I probably would have been in a lot more fights.... Or at least even 1. There's that assuming thing again.

Jesus said narrow is the way that leads unto life and FEW be there that find it. Does the army and the police sound like they are of the FEW or the many? Think. The believer is called to be separate and holy from the world.

It sounds like you're suggesting that people serving in the army and police are not Believers. If you aren't implying that, you should be more careful in what you type.

Serving in the military and serving Christ as a part of the great commission are two different things. One is spreading the gospel, and the other is doing service for one's country.

Sure. In the same way that every single person that isn't in a full-time ministry position is doing two different things. But it doesn't mean they are mutually exclusive. Are you suggesting that if someone is in the military or police that they are incapable of serving Christ and spreading the Gospel?

Nowhere does Romans 13, and or 1 Peter 2:13-14 teach that a believer is to join the police or the military. You need to quote the actual verse that supports this view. It simply does not exist.

Nowhere does Scripture say that snorting cocaine is wrong. You need to quote the actual verse that supports this view.

See what I did there?

At the end of the day, I'll take John Piper's hermeneutics over yours.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

It sounds like you're suggesting that people serving in the army and police are not Believers. If you aren't implying that, you should be more careful in what you type.

I was referring to the organizations and not the individuals.
I already posted to you a movie trailer based on a true story of how a believer in Christ who believed in Non-Violence who served in the military.

Sure. In the same way that every single person that isn't in a full-time ministry position is doing two different things. But it doesn't mean they are mutually exclusive. Are you suggesting that if someone is in the military or police that they are incapable of serving Christ and spreading the Gospel?

I am sure they can, but serving in the military is not in view of the great commission or the teachings in being a disciple of Christ. It is not that they cannot serve, they just cannot employ violence. Remember, John the baptist said do violence to no man. That is tough to do. It takes more courage to do that, then to pick up a gun and fire at one's enemies.

Nowhere does Scripture say that snorting cocaine is wrong. You need to quote the actual verse that supports this view.

You were the one who suggested that a believer can join the military based on Romans 13, and 2 Peter 2:13-14. No verse suggests that they can do so. Jesus said that if his kingdom was of this world, his servants would fight. So this rules out that we can fight in the police and military. Jesus rebuked Peter for taking up his sword and said he that lives by the sword shall die by the sword.