Pacifism, Jesus said Love your enemies

[scottlittlefield17]

Did not Jesus mean what he said when he said "Love your enemies" and when he said "If my kingdom where of this world then would my servants fight". You can not love your enemies and kill them. Jesus's kingdom is not of this world therefore "Our struggle is not against flesh and blood but against the rulers against the authorities against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms" Ephesians 6:12. Jesus said to do good to those who hate you! How can you do that and then go to war against them? It just is not possible. I would love to hear your arguments against this and will do my best to answer them.

[puddleglum]

Jesus said that we should love our enemies and do good for them. What is one of you enemies is in danger of being murdered and there is no way to protect him except to kill the person attacking him. Wouldn't the command to love require that you kill the attacker?

According to Romans 13:1-7 God has established governments of punish evil and we are to cooperate with them. In verse 4 it says of the ruler "he does not bear the sword in vain." Doesn't the reference to the sword show that governments have the authority to take life by executing criminals and carrying out war against their enemies? When Jesus told us to love our enemies he wasn't speaking to rulers but telling how we should act as individuals in our dealings with other individuals. He told us to render to Caesar what is Caesar's. Wouldn't that include serving in the army to defend your country?

Jesus is often quoted as saying that is someone hits you on one cheek you should turn the other, but what he actually said was, "If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also." (Matt. 5:39, ESV) Most people are right handed so if someone facing you slaps you on the right cheek he will probably be using the back of his hand rather that hitting you with his fist. This seems to indicate a situation in which that person is insulting you rather that trying to physically harm you. Also, in the same passage he said we shouldn't avenge ourselves but he never said we shouldn't defend ourselves. In Luke 22:36 Jesus told his disciples, "Let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one." It is obvious from this that we have a right to defend ourselves even if we must kill to do so.

When Jesus told Pilate that his servants would not fight because his kingdom was not of this world he was speaking of fighting as a means of advancing the kingdom of God. It is wrong to use any kind of force to try to get someone to follow Christ. But the nations of the world have a right and a duty to use force for the suppression of evil.

[scottlittlefield17]

He told us to render to Caesar what is Caesar's. Wouldn't that include serving in the army to defend your country?

He also said we should obey God rather than man. Jesus was talking about taxes, not serving in the amy.

in the same passage he said we shouldn't avenge ourselves but he never said we shouldn't defend ourselves.

I don't see where you get that. He said to "turn the othr cheek". How clear is that? He gives no exceptions.

In Luke 22:36 Jesus told his disciples, "Let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one." It is obvious from this that we have a right to defend ourselves even if we must kill to do so.

He later said that two swords were enough. How is two swords enough for thirteen men? He said "My kingdom is not of this world, otherwise then would my servants fight." to Pilate. He said "do good to those who hate you" how can you do good to someone and blow their brians out? Lets say that I went to Iraq for a tour of duty. Lets also say that we were still in he orginal war against Iraq as a country. Now if I shoot someone what have I done? I have done one of two things. I have either sent a man to hell without another chance to repent, or I have shot my brother in the Lord. How is either justified? God says "It is mine to avenge, I will repay". Yes the government has the right to punish evil. We are not of this world the Bible says. We belong to a heavenly kingdom.

When Jesus told Pilate that his servants would not fight because his kingdom was not of this world he was speaking of fighting as a means of advancing the kingdom of God.

Where do you get that? It says fight, plain and simple.

[MagusYanam]

Jesus said that we should love our enemies and do good for them. What is one of you enemies is in danger of being murdered and there is no way to protect him except to kill the person attacking him. Wouldn't the command to love require that you kill the attacker?

Quite simply put, no. The ethic of Christianity has to be a deontology which marries the means to the ends, rather than a consequentialism which uses one to justify the other. You cannot claim that you love someone and then kill or enslave him. It is better and more in line with Christian praxis to shame the attacker through nonviolent resistance.

According to Romans 13:1-7 God has established governments of punish evil and we are to cooperate with them. In verse 4 it says of the ruler "he does not bear the sword in vain." Doesn't the reference to the sword show that governments have the authority to take life by executing criminals and carrying out war against their enemies?

And yet Jesus was executed - crucified, a punishment reserved only for political enemies - for his nonviolent resistance to the Roman Empire. We are to respect the rule of law as Christians, but our aim should always be toward the nonviolent transformation of society in the image of Christ.

He told us to render to Caesar what is Caesar's. Wouldn't that include serving in the army to defend your country?

Correction: he told the religious authorities and the Herodians who questioned him to pay what they owe to Caesar. And he was speaking specifically in terms of money. The religious authorities and Herod's functionaries owed their positions of economic privilege in society to the indulgence of Rome and to the presence of Roman military in Judaea. Jesus clearly did not mean it as an endorsement of military power or the Empire (as he called them 'hypocrites' before giving them his answer).

Jesus is often quoted as saying that is someone hits you on one cheek you should turn the other, but what he actually said was, "If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also." (Matt. 5:39, ESV) Most people are right handed so if someone facing you slaps you on the right cheek he will probably be using the back of his hand rather that hitting you with his fist. This seems to indicate a situation in which that person is insulting you rather that trying to physically harm you.

That wasn't the early Church's interpretation: the ethic being expressed is still one of nonviolent resistance rather than violence. The ethics of the time made it easier to refrain from using force against physical threats than against insults to one's honour, after all.

Also, in the same passage he said we shouldn't avenge ourselves but he never said we shouldn't defend ourselves.

Jesus also never said anything about homosexual relationships; would that mean ipso facto that he was supporting homosexuality?

In Luke 22:36 Jesus told his disciples, "Let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one." It is obvious from this that we have a right to defend ourselves even if we must kill to do so.

Scott said it best. The disciples who actually went out and bought two swords are being ridiculed in the text; they're too thick to realise that Jesus was merely saying they should be aware that the powers would resist their message.

But the nations of the world have a right and a duty to use force for the suppression of evil.

I'm sorry, but it is the hermeneutic of Empire which motivates that claim. Empires always justify their exercise of power by claiming it is being wielded to suppress an irrational, demonised evil (whether it is 'heathens', 'savages' or 'terrorists'). Christians are called upon to resist such hermeneutics and justifications.