• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Featured Nonresistance as Taught in the New Testament is Moral and Good.

Discussion in 'Christian Philosophy & Ethics' started by Bible Highlighter, Nov 19, 2016.

  1. Bible Highlighter

    Bible Highlighter Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul. Supporter

    United States
    I did a thread clean up of all my posts to remove the word "Pacifism" and to replace it with the word "Nonresistance" (and it's variations). I misunderstood the word "pacifism." Pacifism teaches that no war of any kind is justified. In light of this fact, I do not believe in "Pacifism" because it teaches that no war of any kind is justified. For I do believe God sanctioned wars in the Old Testament, and that Christ will return to fight those nations at His Second Coming.

    Now, I do believe in Nonresistance for the New Testament saint (Who lives out their faith here upon this Earth) based on the light of many verses in Scripture. Nonresistance is not acting in resistance or violence in return if you are attacked. Nonresistance is similar to Pacifism in the fact that one does not act violently or seek to go to war to physically harm others, etc. but it is different in the fact that it is not against all forms of war or self defense of any kind. I am of the belief that Christians are to act in a non-violent way here upon this Earth, and that they are not to take up positions of killing others physically.

    An example would be the movie: "Hacksaw Ridge."

    While the Christian may not be against the workings of the army itself (Because they see it as an arm of justice from God), they are commanded personally as Christians to non-violence by the Lord and His followers.
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2019
  2. SPF

    SPF Well-Known Member

    United States
    Did Jesus Teach Pacifism?

    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.

    C.S. Lewis was against pacifism: http://www.cslewis.com/why-im-not-a-pacifist/

    Jesus wasn't a pacifist: Was Jesus a pacifist?

    Jesus is the “prince of peace” (Isaiah 9:6) in that He will one day bring true and lasting peace to the earth. And His message in this world was remarkably non-violent (Matthew 5:38–44). But the Bible is clear that sometimes war is necessary (see Psalm 144:1). And, given some of the Bible’s prophecies of Jesus, it is hard to call Him a pacifist. Revelation 19:15, speaking of Jesus, declares, “Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. ‘He will rule them with an iron scepter.’ He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.” The setting up of Jesus’ millennial kingdom will necessitate violence in the form of a war waged against the forces of the Antichrist. Jesus’ robe will be “dipped in blood” (Revelation 19:13).

    In Jesus’ interaction with the Roman centurion, Jesus received the soldier’s praise, healed his servant, and commended him for his faith (Matthew 8:5–13). What Jesus did not do was tell the centurion to quit the army—for the simple reason that Jesus was not preaching pacifism. John the Baptist also encountered soldiers, and they asked him, “What should we do?” (Luke 3:14). This would have been the perfect opportunity for John to tell them to lay down their arms. But he did not. Rather, John told the soldiers, “Don’t extort money and don’t accuse people falsely—be content with your pay.”

    Good article from CrossWalk:Why Pacifism Isn't the Biblical Response to Terrorism

    It is clearly God’s intent that we strive for peace. Yet, some circumstances warrant the use of force—but under what conditions? Biblical, justifiable war has at least five essential aspects.
    First, the primary purpose is to defend those under attack.

    Proverbs 24:8-12: “Care for those being marched off to slaughter.”
    Second, vengeance is tempered by justice.
    Romans 13:1a, 4: “But if you do that which is evil, be afraid; for he bears not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.”
    Romans 12:19: “Vengeance is mine.”
    Third, there must be a reasonable prospect of victory—of achieving the ends for which the war is fought.
    Luke 14:28-32: “Consider your resources before you go out to fight a war—if you are not in a position to win, negotiate.”
    On April 19, 1952, General Douglas MacArthur stood before a joint session of Congress to deliver his famous farewell address: "...old soldiers never die, they just fade away." His speech, however, is much more than a farewell. It also includes the following thoughts on war and peace: "...It has been said in effect that I was a warmonger. Nothing could be further from the truth. I know war as few other men now living know it, and nothing to me is more revolting. I have long advocated its complete abolition as its very destructiveness on both friend and foe has rendered it useless as a means of settling international disputes. But once war is forced upon us, there is no other alternative than to apply every available means to bring it to a swift end. War's very object is victory, not prolonged indecision. In war there is no substitute for victory."
    Fourth, the motives must be pure.
    James 4:1-3: “Why do you fight? Because you have the wrong motives in your heart..
    Hebrews 4:12: “God Judges The Thoughts And Attitudes Of The Heart.”
    But, our real defense as a nation rests in the spiritual convictions, character, and commitment of our citizenry.
    Psalm 20:7: "Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will remember the name of the Lord our God."
    2 Chronicles 7:14: "If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."
    Fifth, the post-war attitude is one of mercy.
    Matthew 5:7: “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.”
    John Stuart Mill: "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling, which thinks nothing is worth a war, is worse. A man who has nothing which he cares more about than his own personal safety is a miserable creature, and has no chance of being free unless he is made free and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
    Yes, some things are still worth living and dying for.
    Bears still roam the wilderness of our world. May God help us.
  3. SPF

    SPF Well-Known Member

    United States
    I'm not sure if you're married and have children, I would imagine given what you've said that you probably don't. I would recommend that you let your wife know that if someone breaks in you aren't going to do everything you can to protect your family.
  4. FireDragon76

    FireDragon76 En cuanto lo hicisteis a uno de estos mis hermanos Supporter

    United States
    Legal Union (Other)
    I really disagree with Lewis' tone. While he is generally correct, he's grounding his ethics too much in pragmatism, and I'm afraid he himself was influenced a great deal by the notion of warfare as crusading.

    In light of the abuse of the doctrine of just war, I believe we need to give more careful consideration as to how it has been traditionally understood as a restraint on the inherent depravity of war.

    What nonsense. Whoever wrote that simply can't distinguish between spiritual symbolism and reality. Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever. The One who rejected the discourse of violence and power in his earthly life is not about to take it up again.

    True, Jesus was not exactly an Anabaptist in his ethics, but that doesn't mean he approved of warfare.
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2019
  5. yeshuaslavejeff

    yeshuaslavejeff simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

    Historically, for a time, and times (there were exceptions, especially the last hundred years and on this forum recently) , Anabaptists were 'just like' the earlier first century believers and "followed Jesus" likewise. They did not think differently than Jesus, in ethics or otherwise. (when they did, from habits or carry-over thoughts from the old man (the flesh), they daily continually sought to "purify themselves as HE IS PURE", thus daily every day more like Jesus, in complete harmony with Him, in union with Jesus and with the Father in heaven) .
  6. SteveIndy

    SteveIndy IndyWatchman.com Supporter

    United States

    Trying to justify killing your enemy by using the O.T. is not very smart considering the O.T. has been taken out of the equation by Jesus Himself. In Mat. 5 Jesus say five times, "You have heard it said . . . but I say . . ." and in so doing overrides the teachings of Moses. Again in the book of Hebrews 1:1-2 He says "Long ago God spoke to the fathers by the prophets at different times and in different ways. In these last days He has spoken to us by His Son." Again 7:18-19, 22 "So the previous command is annulled because it was weak and unprofitable (for the law perfected nothing) but a better hope is introduced . . . ." "Because of this oath Jesus has also become the guarantee of a better covenant." Again, ". . . He is the mediator of a better covenant which has been established on better promises." Again, "For if the first covenant had been faultless there would have been no occasion for a second one." Again, "By saying a new covenant He has declared that the first is obsolete. And, what is obsolete and growing old is about to pass away." Again, "Therefore He is the mediator of a new covenant. . . ." Again, "Where a will exist the death of the One who made it must be established. For a will is valid only when people die, since it is never in effect while the One who made it is living."

    Now, the example of the N.T. writers and Jesus Himself shows, without exception, that we are to live a life of non-resistance to the evil person. There is not one example of believers in the N.T. nor for the better part of the first 300 years of the Church history of Christians taking up the sword for personal or national defense. The testimony of the Ante-Nicene fathers validate the doctrine of non-resistance to the evil person. It was only after Constantine and Augustine that the Church bowed to the flesh and picked up the sword. So, who do we go to for verification of our doctrine today? To Luther, Zwingli, or Calvin? No, for verification of N.T. truth we will go to Jesus, His Apostles, the first 300 years of Church history, and more recently the Anabaptist who understood the secret of overcoming evil with good. Your doctrine of overcoming evil with more evil cannot work, it only produces more evil.

    One of us is wrong on this subject, but all the proof is on the side of non-resistance.