Prolife & pacifism

[WatersMoon110]

Pro-life Christians are hypocrites if they are for capital punishment. Likewise, pro-abortionists are hypocrites if they are against the death penalty.

While those few people who believe that all pregnancies should end in abortion might agree with you, those of us who are Pro-Choice disagree.

The Pro-Choice position (as I see it) is that pregnant women should get to control their own bodies and as such should be the person to choose if they are going to carry a given pregnancy to term or not. Likewise, I would agree with allowing "hardcore" criminals the choice between life in jail or capital punishment (since they should also have enough say over their own body to decide), but not make death the only option.

 

[WatersMoon110]

If you are Christian then you are prolife.
If you are Christian you are a pacifist.
If you are not both of these things, then you are not Christian.

And this is why atheists don't get to define Christianity anymore than Christians get to define atheism. *wink*

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Dear Polycarp fan,

You will note that although Christ advises His Apostles to get a sword, He also forbids them to use it, telling them that those who live by the sword die by it.

Nice spin. "Living by the sword" is far different than defending yourself from a thug attacking you and yours. Jesus in the "get some swords" passage in Luke is more than cleaar that the Apostles would be going out among nasty people. "Numbered among transgressors." Doesn't mean you're one of them.

You cannot point to a single Apostle who uses violence in self-defence in the whole of the Acts of the Apostles.

You must not know me. I value the Apostolic testimony to the highest degree. Preaching the Gospel cannot be done by violence. Protecting yourself and others from murderers can be.

I'm thinking Jesus is not stupid.

Christ advises us to turn the other cheek and to love those who hate us - not to pack a gun to shoot those who try to harm us;

Preaching the Gospel and coming home late at night to find a criminal doing what criminals do are two different things. Again, can we just assume that Christians are following a smart God?

. . . if you find His teaching here hard, so do those who are gay;

Gay and being Christian are two different categories. Sex acts do not disqualify a person from "being" a Christian. Only rejecting Christ rejecting repentance and forgiveness does. Right? Same Bible right? I'm getting tired of gay activism permeating every discussion. Why do that here?

. . . my point was that those who think as you do expect gays to obey Christ's commands even though they find it hard, and yet you will not obey Chist's clear words about turning the other cheek.

How do you know that? I do not own guns and I don;t believe in nor do I practice vioelnce. I don't even support death penalty laws. I'd rather have a guilty person in prison for the rest of their lives and then judged by God after they die in prison. I expect "people" that claim that they are Christians to obey Christ. Sex acts are sex acts. There is not one word of support or promotion of same-gender sex acts anywhere in scripture and many places that teach against engaging in it. The same Bible that does not teach to defend Christian preaching and teaching with violence. If you want consistency in the Gospel and Apostolic message you have come to the right place. No gay sex and no vioelnce. Same Bible.

My own Church teaches that those inclined to homosexual acts should desist and live lives of chastity; that is hard, but it is Christ's teaching. My Church also teaches that Christ tells us to turn the other cheek and to love our enemies, and that all human life is sacred, so we should not kill God's children; this is hard, but it is even more clearly Christ's teaching; indeed, He mentions violence far more often than He mentions homosexuality; both are sinful life styles; you condemn the one sin and embrace the other.

I do? Where's your evidence of that? Jesus is more than clear that marriage is man and woman. God is too.

That is your business, but you are not obedient to Christ's law.

Oh really? And how do you get to that verdict? I don't preach vioelnce and I don't encourage people to engage in same-gender sex acts. I'm thinking I'm cool here.

Violence is also not part of the Christian life; repent, give it up, throw your gun away and embrace Christ's teaching rather than that of the culture of death.

Shooting is a sport. Guns prevent violence. You need to do some research. That adage about outlawing guns and only outlaws will own guns is an absolute fact. Why hold decent and honest people to the same standard as you do unrepentant murderers?

The culture of death does not start or stop with the evil of abortion; if it does for you, ask yourself why?

Abortion is murder whether the person is inside his/her mother's body or is 15-years old walking down a street at night and is gunned down by some gangsters. Killing someone who is not doing anything to deserve to be killed is murder. I am opposed to killing people. I am a Christian after all.

You do the usual thing here of saying what would I do in such and such a difficult situation;

Reality is important to me. Like I said, after all I am a Christian. Reality is the ONLY important thing to a Christian.

. . . the answer is that I would not suppose that Christ had never thought about this when He forbade us from meeting violence with violence; neither would I suppose that the Holy Apostles had gone to their deaths without fighting because they forgot their swords.

A Christian cannot fight back against persecution with vioelnce. I pray that if I am confronted by a heinous person demanding that I deny Christ or die, that I would burst into joy, singing and praising my Lord as I was being killed. I kind only imagine what I would do. You do see my nickname don't you?

If you really think Christ's consistent teaching on this is compatible with using violence, then, like those who wiggle when their own sin (be it homosexual or other behaviour) is mentioned, you decide to accept only those parts of the Lord's teaching which suit you.

Fair enough, but there is the text about getting swords when being sent out. You can't wiggle out of that. There is not one supporting word for gay sex. And marriage "for Christians" is immutably man-woman.

[/quote]. . . fair enough, we all do this from time to time - but He calls on us to repent and amend our lives.[/quote]

My consistent message since arriving at Christian Forums dor com.

I am not promoting gay sex, I am pointing out that those who do so use arguments startlingly similar to your own when they seek to deny the clear teaching of the Apostles.

Are saying that this scripture: Then Jesus asked them, "When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?" "Nothing," they answered. He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. It is written: `And he was numbered with the transgressors' ; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment." The disciples said, "See, Lord, here are two swords." "That is enough," he replied. (Luke 22:35-38, NIV)

Isn't in your Bible? I'm not comfortable with the idea that Jesus was setting up a fulfillment of scripture. Why preach peace, and then manipulate events by telling his disciples to get a couple of swords knowing that one of them would hack off some guards ear?

I'm not willing to convict an innocent person for killing some nasty criminal if they absoluetly have to. Otherwise, you have made every policeman a murderer and every soldier a monster.

That's not my Jesus thinking there.

But know beyond doubt, that I agree with you if you are asserting that you cannot preach the Gospel by force or violence. That behavior is as unsupportable as same-gender marriage.

peace,

Anglian

Maranatha.

Polycarp_fan

 

[Anglian]

Dear Polycarp fan,

Thanks for an interesting post; it is good to see more of where you are coming from, and so let us see if we can push this along a little.

I take the point you make about the Lukan passage; but is that not superseded by the fact that when the time comes to use that sword, Christ forbids it, saying those who live by the sword die by it? Moreover, there is no record of any Apostle using that sword in Acts; neither did your distinguished name-bearer resist. Is that hard for us? Yes. Well, that's usually a sign of God's will for us.

God is not 'smart', He is wise beyond our understanding. You are judging by the wisdom of men, but remember what St. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 3:18-20

3:18 Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you seems to be wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise.
3:19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He catches the wise in their own craftiness;
3:20 and again, The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are futile.
.

You are using the wisdom of this world to argue against Christ's firm injunction not to use violence to resist our enemies. He did not use violence to resist, neither did His Holy Apostles, with the single exception of St. Peter, and Christ healed the harm He did.

Yes, it is hard to do what Christ says, and His wisdom does look like folly to prideful man.

How do you turn this:

39 But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.

into a statement that Christ wishes us to resist those who would harm us? What could be clearer? And what clearer evidence do you want of St. Paul's statement quoted above?

By all means, prefer the wisdom of man, and follow his example rather than that of Christ and the Apostles; but do not call it obedience to Matthew 5:39 or to Luke 6:29.

peace,

Anglian

 

[truthshift]

And this is why atheists don't get to define Christianity anymore than Christians get to define atheism. *wink*

How is this not true?

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Dear Polycarp fan,

Thanks for an interesting post; it is good to see more of where you are coming from, and so let us see if we can push this along a little.

I'd rather have you answer me point for point.

I take the point you make about the Lukan passage; but is that not superseded by the fact that when the time comes to use that sword, Christ forbids it, saying those who live by the sword die by it?

Living by the sword is a clear definition of violent people that are criminals. Self-defense is not "living BY the sword." Christian reality is reality in the real world. How much would a woman being assaulted be if you asked her assailant to stop, repent, and go and sin no more? Asl her after she gets out of the hospital (IF she's lucky enough to survive) how wise your view of Christ is?

Moreover, there is no record of any Apostle using that sword in Acts; neither did your distinguished name-bearer resist. Is that hard for us? Yes.

When acting as an Evangelist or witness for Christ, violence is 100% forbidden.

Well, that's usually a sign of God's will for us.

If one is to be a martyr, that is a wonderful thing. Not many are though.

God is not 'smart', He is wise beyond our understanding.

Then why do you think God wants us to let people be slaughtered by evil and violent people? Have you ever "preached" at gansters shooting at each other? Or the parents of the INNOCENT three-year old killed by a stray bullet?

You are judging by the wisdom of men, but remember what St. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 3:18-20

No, rather I am reasoning together with the Lord. He asked.

You are using the wisdom of this world to argue against Christ's firm injunction not to use violence to resist our enemies. He did not use violence to resist, neither did His Holy Apostles, with the single exception of St. Peter, and Christ healed the harm He did.

One isolated incident does not a doctrine make in the defense of people department. You are convicting policmen and soldiers as murderers. YOU are standing in the place of Christ are you not?

Yes, it is hard to do what Christ says, and His wisdom does look like folly to prideful man.

You cannot use vioelnce to spread the Gospel. Why is that so hard for you to grasp?

How do you turn this:

into a statement that Christ wishes us to resist those who would harm us? What could be clearer? And what clearer evidence do you want of St. Paul's statement quoted above?

The Gospel and violence do not mix. They cannot be mixed. A burglar pointing a gun at your children at three in the morning is risking his own life while threatening your family. You ask him to stop, you tell him to stop, you hit him in the head with a bat if he refuses. I'm very OK with how Christ will judge that. If you don;t see things as OK, please, please, never have children.

By all means, prefer the wisdom of man, and follow his example rather than that of Christ and the Apostles; but do not call it obedience to Matthew 5:39 or to Luke 6:29.

I call it common sense. Like Jesus feeding people before preching to them. Logic is what John called Jesus.

peace, Anglian

Let's ask Al Queda what they think about the Gospel and peace?

 

[Polycarp_fan]

How is this not true?

I'm more than happy to let them do as they wilteth.

That way I get to define atheism.

Play fair.

 

[Anglian]

[/size]

I'd rather have you answer me point for point.




Living by the sword is a clear definition of violent people that are criminals. Self-defense is not "living BY the sword." Christian reality is reality in the real world. How much would a woman being assaulted be if you asked her assailant to stop, repent, and go and sin no more? Asl her after she gets out of the hospital (IF she's lucky enough to survive) how wise your view of Christ is?

Why do you confine Christ's statements in Matthew 5:39 and Luke 6:29 to spreading the Gospel? Christ does not do so. His statements are clear; we are not to retaliate with violence when we are attacked; He offers no qualification such as you suggest.

Do you suppose Christ did not anticipate the hard case you suggest nullifies His clear words?

Then why do you think God wants us to let people be slaughtered by evil and violent people?

Because that is what He says in Matthew 5:39 and Luke 6:29.

Have you ever "preached" at gansters shooting at each other? Or the parents of the INNOCENT three-year old killed by a stray bullet?

On the latter, my answer is 'yes' I have; on the former, 'no'. I have, however, been attacked by a Muslim mob; I acted as my Saviour bade me act.



No, rather I am reasoning together with the Lord. He asked.

One isolated incident does not a doctrine make in the defense of people department. You are convicting policmen and soldiers as murderers. YOU are standing in the place of Christ are you not?

No I am simply quoting what Christ says. If they kill, they take human life. In my Church anyone who takes human life is barred from communion.

You cannot use vioelnce to spread the Gospel. Why is that so hard for you to grasp?

Did I say otherwise? It is you who seem to be unable to grasp the simple truth of Christ's words: turn the other cheek.

The Gospel and violence do not mix. They cannot be mixed. A burglar pointing a gun at your children at three in the morning is risking his own life while threatening your family. You ask him to stop, you tell him to stop, you hit him in the head with a bat if he refuses. I'm very OK with how Christ will judge that. If you don;t see things as OK, please, please, never have children.

I am sorry you find Christ's teaching so unpalatable; my children have no such problem. If we are called to die for the Lord, so be it.

I call it common sense. Like Jesus feeding people before preching to them. Logic is what John called Jesus.

No, John called Him the 'Logos' which is not human logic; you prefer the wisdom of this world which is folly to God.

Let's ask Al Queda what they think about the Gospel and peace?

I know what they think as I have dealt with Muslims for longer than AlQaeda has existed. They hold the worldy wisdom you do, that one meets violence with violence; we saw on 9/11 where that led. We see it daily in Iraq and Afghanistan and Israel; violence begets violence. I would not wish to do as AlQaeda does, but as Christ tells us.

peace,

Anglian

 

[Rebekka]

Dear Brothers and Sister in Christ,

On the OBOB Forum I inadvertently upset some of the posters by saying that since the basis for Christian opposition to abortion was the sacredness of human life, it seemed inconsistent that some of those who opposed the killing of babies in the womb seemed to think it OK to kill them once they were born if a military operation (such as the recent one in Syria) ended up needing it. Consistency seems to demand that if, as Christians, we accept 'thou shalt not kill' as the basis for opposing abortion, then by the same token, we accept it as opposing all killing.

For Coptic Christians, of whom I am one, this is so accepted that the vehemence of the opposition on OBOB rather took me aback.

I guess pacifism is not a very popular option for most, but how is killing people, born or unborn, compatible with following the word of God. Christ told us to love those who hate us and to turn the other cheek.

I'd be interested in hearing the views of those who are Christians and yet find it perfectly compatible with their Faith that it should be necessary to kill people in the name of 'freedom' or 'democracy'.

As I say, I'm really just trying to understand this point of view. Any thoughts?

peace,

Anglian

I am pro-life because of "thou shalt not kill", which includes being anti-abortion, anti-death penalty, anti-euthanasia and anti-war (among other things). I don't understand why certain so-called pro-life christians pick and choose what life they want to protect, either.

 

[Rebekka]

The Pro-Choice position (as I see it) is that pregnant women should get to control their own bodies and as such should be the person to choose if they are going to carry a given pregnancy to term or not. Likewise, I would agree with allowing "hardcore" criminals the choice between life in jail or capital punishment (since they should also have enough say over their own body to decide), but not make death the only option.

Wow - that's an interesting view.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Why do you confine Christ's statements in Matthew 5:39 and Luke 6:29 to spreading the Gospel? Christ does not do so. His statements are clear; we are not to retaliate with violence when we are attacked; He offers no qualification such as you suggest.

Do you suppose Christ did not anticipate the hard case you suggest nullifies His clear words?

Jesus lived in the real world as we do. We are not to retaliate against violence meted out to preaching the Gospel.


Because that is what He says in Matthew 5:39[/quote]

Matt: 5: 43"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Violence and the Christian life do not mix. Though, it seems that you are ignoring the reality that there needs to be a ploice force and an army for defense against evil and vioelnt people. Even a Christians should be a good soldier.

and Luke 6:29.

Ditto Luke 6

On the latter, my answer is 'yes' I have; on the former, 'no'. I have, however, been attacked by a Muslim mob; I acted as my Saviour bade me act.

And I praise Jesus for your witness. May the Lord bless your witness.

No I am simply quoting what Christ says. If they kill, they take human life. In my Church anyone who takes human life is barred from communion.

Why are violating the Gospel? Anyone that has repented or is innocent in the way they have taken a human life is open for fellowship.

Did I say otherwise? It is you who seem to be unable to grasp the simple truth of Christ's words: turn the other cheek.

When it comes to apathy getting others killed, I'll take my chances with our Lord at my individual judgment. If I shoot and kill a rapist or child molester in the act, I am not even going to repent for that. I just don;t think God is that dense. I'm sorry, I worship a living God.

I am sorry you find Christ's teaching so unpalatable; my children have no such problem. If we are called to die for the Lord, so be it.

If we are called to die for the Lord what a day to rejoice. A ten-year old girl walking home from the YWCA, does not deserve to be killed for just being a little girl. I am very comfortable with our differing views on justice and peace.

No, John called Him the 'Logos' which is not human logic; you prefer the wisdom of this world which is folly to God.

I guess that went over your head. Logos and Logic are the same. Do your research. Logos, pure logic, pure God. Everything comes from the Logos. Just as John describes.

I know what they think as I have dealt with Muslims for longer than AlQaeda has existed. They hold the worldy wisdom you do, that one meets violence with violence; we saw on 9/11 where that led.

You are judging me wrongly. I fully believe that love and nonviolence is the ONLY thing that can change a terrorist into a peaceful person. I own no guns, and I am at war with noone.

We see it daily in Iraq and Afghanistan and Israel; violence begets violence. I would not wish to do as AlQaeda does, but as Christ tells us.

As I am doing.

peace,

Anglian

How?

 

[AmericanChristian91]

Christians should never find killing, murder, the death penalty, military combat, any aggression, or anything of the like to be justifiable in any situation. It's very clear in the Bible as to what God wants. He wants you turning the other cheek to the murderers in society to the guy who cut you off last week. And, for obvious reasons, no killing is allowed because it clearly states "Thou shalt not kill".

Why are you at page 3 of the debate? I thought the path (though narrow) was clear for theists.

If you are Christian then you are prolife.
If you are Christian you are a pacifist.
If you are not both of these things, then you are not Christian.

So im not a christian? Im Prolife but im not a Pacifist. And i still believe that one of the Commandments is "Thou Shall not Murder" instead of "Thou shall not kill". Am i not allowed to kill an animal? I also believe in a Just War and see no problem in killing in self defence and killing armed enemies who are bent on killing you (could be considered Self Defence).

Scenario:

Im near an enemy soldier armed with a Rifle and i am near him armed with a Rifle to. Should i kill this man? After all he is bent on killing me since i am his enemy. And if i let him live he would kill me then can go on killing my fellow soldiers. And im sure the enemy soldier is thinking the same thing. In War you try to kill more Soldiers on the opposing side then they do of you.

Murder is wrong, it says so in the bible, not only that but it is a crime in this country. But there is no wrong in fighting to defend yourself or your country (i draw the line in shooting unarmed civilians, thats wrong).

Like i said before, all murder is killing but not all killing is murder.

There is somewhere in the Bible when Jesus has a talk with a Roman Soldier. Did he tell this soldier that it is wrong to kill and that he should stop being a soldier before he becomes a christian? No. Also somewhere in the bible Jesus tells his disciples to bring swords (forgot the chapter).

Also about the term "turn the other cheek". I believe Jesus ment when someone insults you should not be bothered by them and turn the other cheek and ignore them. I heard back in the Bible times it was an insult to slap the right cheek i believe (could be wrong). But i dont believe that Jesus ment by the term "Turn the other cheek" that we are not allowed to defend ourselves when we are physically attacked. I dont think God wants me to just stand there while a person injures me or even kills me. However i believe you should just turn the other cheek if someone verbally attacks you.

If im older and if i have Children, if a robber breaks into my house and threatens my children, and if i have a gun, hes a dead man. I really dont think Jesus would want me to just stand there and do nothing while the people i love are threatened by someone else.

 

[Anglian]

Dear Polycarp fan,

Again, I am in your debt for an interesting post; thank you.

One of the few areas where we disagree is that for me Christ's words about turning the other cheek apply in all circumstances, not simply when we are preaching the Gospel. That you, like many Christians hold that one can kill in self-defence or in defence of another is not a surprise; it is probably a majority view amongst Christians; but I cannot find that Our Lord, or the Apostles agreed.

Even though Our Lord mentioned swords, He did not sanction their use. This is His wisdom; that it looks like folly to man proves St. Paul correct.

Let us separate out, for a moment, private self-defence from what might be called organised self-defence - that is the armed forces. No one can drop a bomb without knowing it will kill the innocent as well as whoever the 'guilty' might be. The irony of a Christian who opposes abortion and euthanasia dropping a bomb that may kill the unborn and the aged needs no underlining. Yet in his private capacity he opposes the state's approval of abortion, whilst in his professional capacity, he aborts many unborn. Is that Christ's way? from what you have said I can see you think not; but in that case is armed force justified?

It is not for us to say one life is innocent and another guilty; we do not give life; we are not to take it away. Jesus did indeed live in the real world; He did not use armed force. His disciples lived in the real world; not did they. What is the point you wish to make about Christ and the real world? There is no record in Acts of His Apostles resorting to force to defend themselves; neither did St. Polycarp. All lived in the real world. All followed Christ's teaching.

It is a hard teaching; which of His teachings are the easy ones? We are to turn from the carnal man; we are not to hold onto this world and its values. As sinners, we want to hold onto this world and its values; we want to fight back. That is why He tells us to turn the other cheek. Peace will come when we obey His word and cease substituting our logic for His.

I respect your position, but it is not one that I can align with the Gospel message. We must both do as our consciences bid us. But to go back to the OP, to be prolife is to be prolife - all life, not just the lives we know; not just 'innocent' lives; where, after all, is the righteous man?

peace,

Anglian

 

[WatersMoon110]

How is this not true?

The Bible in no way overtly condemns abortion. In fact, Exodus 21:22-25 could be interpreted to say that in the Bible, unborn humans are not worth as much born humans.

Exodus 21:22-25:
"And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise."

The punishment (in Jewish law) for killing an unborn human is a fine, the punishment for just injuring a woman is a similar wound. I certainly feel that this shows that the author(s) of the Bible did not consider unborn humans to be the same as born humans.

I think that Christianity makes no statements, on way or the other, about abortion. I think that it is something that individual Christians come to their own conclusions on, often based on their interpretations of the Bible, or their Church's opinions on the matter (or both).

Why do you say that Christians must be both Pro-Life and a pacifist to be a Christian? I'm pretty sure that one must only be a follower of Jesus the Christ to be a Christian, and He only spoke on one of those matters (that we know of, of course).

Really, though, I don't think it is for anyone to say that someone else is or isn't a Christian. We all probably have our own ideas about what it takes to be one, but, I feel, only each individual person can decide for themself if they are a "Christian" or not.