Short morality question

[Duckybill]

Answer my question. Is the godhead at odds, has God changed?

God cannot change. But He did give us a New Covenant.

Also please answer these. Posting the passage in Hebrews is evasion.

It means God is my Helper.

Was it bad to kill Hitler? Or loving to the Jews he was killing?
Is it bad to kill an intruder? Or loving to your family?

Christians don't kill people, period.

 

[TexUs]

God cannot change. But He did give us a New Covenant.

Funny thing about the word "but"... It negates what you previously said.
So I will ask you again.

Does God change?

A God that ordered people killed, will CHANGE into one that doesn't?
Or is it that the God that ordered people to be killed, exists exactly the same now?

Which one is it?

Christians don't kill people, period.

I think God, King Saul, God, King David, God, and many others would disagree with that statement. Shall I start quoting scripture for you?

 

[Duckybill]

Funny thing about the word "but"... It negates what you previously said.
So I will ask you again.

Does God change?

Do you execute sinners as Moses commanded?

A God that ordered people killed, will CHANGE into one that doesn't?
Or is it that the God that ordered people to be killed, exists exactly the same now?

Which one is it?

It's a New Covenant. Where in the NT did Christians kill anyone?

I think God, King Saul, God, King David, God, and many others would disagree with that statement. Shall I start quoting scripture for you?

Yeah, start in the NT.

 

[TexUs]

I will not answer any of your questions until you're able to answer mine, which I've asked first and still don't have answers to.

Does God change?
Was it bad to kill Hitler? Or loving to the Jews he was killing?
Is it bad to kill an intruder? Or loving to your family?


And FYI, it wasn't Moses' Law, it was God's law.

 

[Duckybill]

I will not answer any of your questions until you're able to answer mine, which I've asked first and still don't have answers to.

Does God change?

No, but He did change the rules. It's called the NT.

[font="tahoma][size="3"]Was it bad to kill Hitler? Or loving to the Jews he was killing?
Is it bad to kill an intruder? Or loving to your family? [/size][/font]

NT Christians were persecuted to the death. There is no NT account where Christians killed anyone.

Romans 12:19-21 (NKJV)
[sup]19 [/sup]Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it is written, "Vengeance is Mine, I will repay," says the Lord. [sup]20 [/sup]Therefore "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; If he is thirsty, give him a drink; For in so doing you will heap coals of fire on his head." [sup]21 [/sup]Do not be overcome by evil, but OVERCOME EVIL WITH GOOD.

[font="tahoma][size="3"]And FYI, it wasn't Moses' Law, it was God's law.[/size][/font]

Hebrews 10:28 (NKJV)
[sup]28 [/sup]Anyone who has rejected MOSES' LAW dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses.

 

[TexUs]

No, but He did change the rules. It's called the NT.

So then this is acknowledgement that God kills. Hence a prior statement that he does not: is wrong (You may or may not have made it but regardless it's coming from someone in your camp, lol)


So it seems to be you have now dropped that argument and are now addressing what he has chosen to apply to US, correct?

NT Christians were persecuted to the death. There is no NT account where Christians killed anyone.

No but there's plenty of evidence from historical sources that the people that lived with Christ killed people.


Let's say I'm falsely convicted of murder. Much like your NT Christians you reference. I'll get the death penalty maybe, there's really no choice in the matter. This is no different than those Christians. You can't go out guns blazin'.


You also need to realize in those days it was more about numbers. A small army going through a town finding Christians will obviously have their will be done regardless if any of them fought back. So OBVIOUSLY, the army's side won.


And as I already pointed out, if the early church was so solid on "Christians don't kill"- you wouldn't have widespread stories of Jesus doing so. It would've been counted as bullshit and left to die, but that's not the case. I can go through a metric crap ton of historical evidences (tombstones that identify allegiance to Christ AND military insignia) all day long. The simple fact is, any argument that the Church wasn't involved in any kind of killing is simply ignorance of history.


The only leg to stand on is the Biblical one.




I still have yet to seen you address my other questions. You should know by now, I will not stop asking, until you are able to answer them. Unless, of course, you can't answer because it'd prove my point.


Was it bad to kill Hitler? Or loving to the Jews he was killing?
Is it bad to kill an intruder? Or loving to your family?

Hebrews 10:28 (NKJV)
[sup]28 [/sup]Anyone who has rejected MOSES' LAW dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses.

Are you going on record to say it was Moses' Law and not God's, then? Why, oh, why... If it was not God's, did he condemn people by it?

 

[TexUs]

You come home from a long day of work. Tired, you enter through the garage door into the house. You find a red mess on your kitchen floors, figure it must be ketchup. You follow this mess into the living room and realize it is not a mess, it is your child, barely breathing: dying from multiple knife wounds and a gunshot to the arm.

In the back of the house, toward your bedroom, you hear the sounds of another man: you know what these sounds are: your wife is getting raped.

You run to the back bedroom, and verify your fears. Your wife is severely beaten, your bed is bloody, and the man is on top of her. The intruder's back is turned to you, so involved in his actions, he does not know you are there. You remember a gun in the bathroom just a couple steps back down the hall, and retrieve it, returning to the bedroom. You have a clear shot.

Do you:
1) Allow your wife to continue to be beaten and raped, and risk your child dying from injuries.
2) Kill the intruder, and call 911.

Which one is more loving?

 

[Duckybill]

So then this is acknowledgement that God kills. Hence a prior statement that he does not: is wrong (You may or may not have made it but regardless it's coming from someone in your camp, lol)

God has killed MANY, and He's not finished yet.

Revelation 9:15 (NKJV)
[sup]15 [/sup]So the four angels, who had been prepared for the hour and day and month and year, were released to kill a third of mankind.

So it seems to be you have now dropped that argument and are now addressing what he has chosen to apply to US, correct?

What He does and what He commands us is not the same. That should be obvious.

No but there's plenty of evidence from historical sources that the people that lived with Christ killed people.

History is not Scripture.

Let's say I'm falsely convicted of murder. Much like your NT Christians you reference. I'll get the death penalty maybe, there's really no choice in the matter. This is no different than those Christians. You can't go out guns blazin'. You also need to realize in those days it was more about numbers. A small army going through a town finding Christians will obviously have their will be done regardless if any of them fought back. So OBVIOUSLY, the army's side won.
And as I already pointed out, if the early church was so solid on "Christians don't kill"- you wouldn't have widespread stories of Jesus doing so. It would've been counted as bullshit and left to die, but that's not the case. I can go through a metric crap ton of historical evidences (tombstones that identify allegiance to Christ AND military insignia) all day long. The simple fact is, any argument that the Church wasn't involved in any kind of killing is simply ignorance of history.
The only leg to stand on is the Biblical one.

Jesus let them kill Him, "leaving us an example".

1 Peter 2:21-23 (NKJV)
[sup]21 [/sup]For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps:
[sup]22 [/sup]"Who committed no sin, Nor was deceit found in His mouth"; [sup]23 [/sup]who, when He was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself to Him who judges righteously;

I still have yet to seen you address my other questions. You should know by now, I will not stop asking, until you are able to answer them. Unless, of course, you can't answer because it'd prove my point.
Was it bad to kill Hitler? Or loving to the Jews he was killing?
Is it bad to kill an intruder? Or loving to your family?

It would be sin for a Christian to kill anyone.

Are you going on record to say it was Moses' Law and not God's, then? Why, oh, why... If it was not God's, did he condemn people by it?

I never said it wasn't God's Law. Why are you?

 

[TexUs]

History is not Scripture.

So you're willing to completely ignore tombstones from the first century that identified allegiance to Christ as well as military rank, to maintain your theory that the early church maintained pacifism?


Maybe that one soldier was a rebel, you say? Then if it was such a dishonorable thing, why did his family mark his tombstone with his military rank?


Pacifists vastly overstate their case of the early church.

It would be sin for a Christian to kill anyone.

So you are saying it's more loving to let Hitler kill millions of people?
And it's more loving to let an intruder beat your family and rape your wife?


Correct? That's what you consider LOVE?

"No, Jesus, I let the intruder rape my wife out of love" -> For some reason I don't think that will fly at the throne.
"No, Jesus, I allowed Hitler to execute, torture, and kill millions of Jews out of love" -> Nor that one.

 

[Duckybill]

So you're willing to completely ignore tombstones from the first century that identified allegiance to Christ as well as military rank, to maintain your theory that the early church maintained pacifism?

My faith is not in tombstones.

Maybe that one soldier was a rebel, you say? Then if it was such a dishonorable thing, why did his family mark his tombstone with his military rank?

Please don't imply things I didn't say.

Pacifists vastly overstate their case of the early church.

There was LOTS of killing by Israel in the OT. None by NT Christians.

So you are saying it's more loving to let Hitler kill millions of people?

It's more loving to obey God. You cannot find any excuse to kill anyone in the NT.

And it's more loving to let an intruder beat your family and rape your wife?

I have God's promises to trust that it won't happen.

Hebrews 13:6 (NKJV)
[sup]6 [/sup]So we may boldly say: "The Lord is my helper; I will not fear. What can man do to me?"

Correct? That's what you consider LOVE?

"No, Jesus, I let the intruder rape my wife out of love" -> For some reason I don't think that will fly at the throne.
"No, Jesus, I allowed Hitler to execute, torture, and kill millions of Jews out of love" -> Nor that one.

If you're afraid to trust in God then you'd better keep your powder dry.

Psalm 91:4 (NKJV)
[sup]4 [/sup]He shall cover you with His feathers, And under His wings you shall take refuge; His truth shall be your shield and buckler.

Psalm 91:10-11 (NKJV)
[sup]10 [/sup]No evil shall befall you, Nor shall any plague come near your dwelling; [sup]11 [/sup]For He shall give His angels charge over you, To keep you in all your ways.

 

[TexUs]

My faith is not in tombstones.

So again, are you denying the existence of these tombstones, then?


Weather or not you believe them is irrelevant. They exist. They're fact.
Oddly enough the argument you just took is used by atheists in regard to the existence of God. Weather or not they believe in him doesn't change the fact he exists. Weather or not you believe these tombstones doesn't change the fact they exist.

None by NT Christians.

Let's look at this logically. None of the early church fathers said a word about war or military involvement. They uttered words about MURDER (personal vengeance). Never about justly killing. I wonder why that is? Apparently, whatever the "working view" of the time was, was understood. This must mean either the early church wholly understood that just killing is OK, or they all stayed away from it. Which was it?


Let us first look at a Biblical example. Luke 3. Did John rebuke the soldiers for being soldiers? Or was the story vastly different?
Soldiers also asked him, “And we, what shall we do?” And he said to them, “Do not extort money from anyone by threats or by false accusation, and be content with your wages.”
We should expect to see a rebuke here, if there was an issue with their profession.


We have tombstones of Christians also with military rank on them in the very early church period. This is sufficient evidence enough to prove you wrong, but I offer it only as one evidence.


Eusebius recorded long listings of Christian soldiers who died for their faith. Why would he record this if the church didn't back it and it would've been a disgrace?


Another major damning piece of evidence for your pacifist position: Armenia. In 300AD, they became the first Christian nation. Several years later, the Roman emperor tried to force them to renounce this. Guess what that first Christian nation did???? They took up arms and defeated the Romans.


Eusebius also recorded stories of the Christian soldiers praying before battle. In once such story, they were thirsty, prayed, and rain came. Now maybe the rain was a coincidence but this doesn't matter... These were devout Christian soldiers praying before they took the lives of their enemies in battle.


Once more, in the Gospel of Thomas, Jesus is striking people dead. This story is clearly fiction however, it's ingrained in popular literature of the time speaks volumes to the fact the early Christians were not pacifist.
We see the same in the Acts of Paul... Christian soldiers. These would not have been circulated and enjoyed if pacifism was a sure thing.




Archeological, Biblical, and Historical evidence is not on your side.

It's more loving to obey God. You cannot find any excuse to kill anyone in the NT.

Answer my question.
Are you saying it's loving to let Hitler kill millions of people in cold blood?

I have God's promises to trust that it won't happen.

I'm sorry but Hebrews 13:6 doesn't assure you that won't happen. It happens EVERY DAY.
Hebrews 13:6 is talking about where our hope lies and that man can't take it away.

If you're afraid to trust in God then you'd better keep your powder dry.

You're honestly reminding me of Aspen, Selene, and Bud02 at this point. You refuse to answer any of the questions I ask.


Do you consider such things as these love?
"No, Jesus, I let the intruder rape my wife out of love" -> For some reason I don't think that will fly at the throne.
"No, Jesus, I allowed Hitler to execute, torture, and kill millions of Jews out of love" -> Nor that one.

 

[TexUs]

Since your historical argument utterly fails, let me turn instead to the Biblical applications.

You seem to have argued that God's actions don't apply to ours (he can do it, we can't). However you seem to have done it within the scope of God the Father.
The first thing I'd like to point out is that it's CHRIST, in Revelation 9, that speaks death to all who oppose him.
Out of His mouth comes 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.


Any argument that Jesus was a pacifist fails on this passage alone.


Onto the question, are we to be pacifist?


During his sermon (love your enemies), we must realize the context of what was going on. Jesus even tells us, "love your neighbor". The problem is many Jews had distorted this and drawn an incorrect conclusion of, "hate your enemies". As we see within this context, he asks the question... Don't even the pagans greet the people they are friends with? Christians that just greet their neighbors are no better than the pagans! So he gives a new command, "Love your enemy".
We're to love those who disagree with us, who have a different faith, who do harm to us.


Self-defense was part of the law (yes, it's right there in Ex 22:2-3). In God's eyes, this means for the SAME ACT (taking a life)- there are differences within that act. The differences are intention. Was it done out of personal vengeance, malice, and premeditation? Or was it done by self-defense, or just action? Weather or not this applies today I really don't see as mattering, either way we gain a glimpse into the mind of God: there are degrees and differences of killing and murdering.
We see self-defense in Luke 22 as well, when Jesus places a higher value on swords than cloaks in what was about to go down, telling his disciples to sell their cloak to acquire a sword, if they could. We later obviously see, when Peter uses it, Jesus telling him to sheath it. But this is no contradiction. Even though they had a right (he told them to) to carry a sword, he was not telling them to fight for him. He was willing to go to the cross. He was giving himself up for his disciple's sakes. Much like a man taking on his attacker to protect his family.
[font="Tahoma] [/font]

 

[Duckybill]

So again, are you denying the existence of these tombstones, then? Weather or not you believe them is irrelevant. They exist. They're fact. Oddly enough the argument you just took is used by atheists in regard to the existence of God. Weather or not they believe in him doesn't change the fact he exists. Weather or not you believe these tombstones doesn't change the fact they exist.

I don't care whether those tombstones exist. It has nothing to do with my faith in the God of the Bible. Nothing.

Let us first look at a Biblical example. Luke 3. Did John rebuke the soldiers for being soldiers? Or was the story vastly different?
Soldiers also asked him, “And we, what shall we do?” And he said to them, “Do not extort money from anyone by threats or by false accusation, and be content with your wages.”
We should expect to see a rebuke here, if there was an issue with their profession.

Can you see soldiers turning the other cheek? Doing good to those who hate them? Overcoming evil with good? If you want Scriptures let me know.

We have tombstones of Christians also with military rank on them in the very early church period. This is sufficient evidence enough to prove you wrong, but I offer it only as one evidence.

So then, everyone who says they are Christians are Christians?

Eusebius recorded long listings of Christian soldiers who died for their faith. Why would he record this if the church didn't back it and it would've been a disgrace?

Still no proof.

Another major damning piece of evidence for your pacifist position: Armenia. In 300AD, they became the first Christian nation. Several years later, the Roman emperor tried to force them to renounce this. Guess what that first Christian nation did???? They took up arms and defeated the Romans. Eusebius also recorded stories of the Christian soldiers praying before battle. In once such story, they were thirsty, prayed, and rain came. Now maybe the rain was a coincidence but this doesn't matter... These were devout Christian soldiers praying before they took the lives of their enemies in battle.

Same argument.

Once more, in the Gospel of Thomas, Jesus is striking people dead. This story is clearly fiction however, it's ingrained in popular literature of the time speaks volumes to the fact the early Christians were not pacifist.

The Gospel of Thomas???

We see the same in the Acts of Paul... Christian soldiers. These would not have been circulated and enjoyed if pacifism was a sure thing.

Scripture please.

Archeological, Biblical, and Historical evidence is not on your side.

Still no proof.

Answer my question. Are you saying it's loving to let Hitler kill millions of people in cold blood?

Romans 13:1 (NKJV)
[sup]1 [/sup]Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For THERE IS NO AUTHORITY EXCEPT FROM GOD, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. [sup]2 [/sup]Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves.

I'm sorry but Hebrews 13:6 doesn't assure you that won't happen. It happens EVERY DAY. Hebrews 13:6 is talking about where our hope lies and that man can't take it away.

God's promises work for those who believe them. I do believe them.
[quote]You're honestly reminding me of Aspen, Selene, and Bud02 at this point. You refuse to answer any of the questions I ask.[/quote]
What haven't I answered?

Do you consider such things as these love? "No, Jesus, I let the intruder rape my wife out of love" -> For some reason I don't think that will fly at the throne.
"No, Jesus, I allowed Hitler to execute, torture, and kill millions of Jews out of love" -> Nor that one.

God helps those who believe in the impossible. God will save one who believes while MILLIONS die. It doesn't sound like God answers your prayers Tex.

Psalm 91:7-11 (NKJV)
[sup]7 [/sup]A thousand may fall at your side, And ten thousand at your right hand; But it shall not come near you.
[sup]8 [/sup]Only with your eyes shall you look, And see the reward of the wicked.
[sup]9 [/sup]Because you have made the Lord, who is my refuge, Even the Most High, your dwelling place,
[sup]10 [/sup]No evil shall befall you, Nor shall any plague come near your dwelling;
[sup]11 [/sup]For He shall give His angels charge over you, To keep you in all your ways.

 

[Duckybill]

Since your historical argument utterly fails, let me turn instead to the Biblical applications.

You seem to have argued that God's actions don't apply to ours (he can do it, we can't). However you seem to have done it within the scope of God the Father.
The first thing I'd like to point out is that it's CHRIST, in Revelation 9, that speaks death to all who oppose him.
Out of His mouth comes 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.


Any argument that Jesus was a pacifist fails on this passage alone.

Doesn't apply. You're talking FUTURE. After Jesus died He resumed doing what God does. Before Jesus died He let them kill Him. "Leaving us an example".

1 Peter 2:21-23 (NKJV)
[sup]21 [/sup]For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps: [sup]22 [/sup]"Who committed no sin, Nor was deceit found in His mouth";[sup] 23 [/sup]who, when He was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself to Him who judges righteously;

Onto the question, are we to be pacifist?


During his sermon (love your enemies), we must realize the context of what was going on. Jesus even tells us, "love your neighbor". The problem is many Jews had distorted this and drawn an incorrect conclusion of, "hate your enemies". As we see within this context, he asks the question... Don't even the pagans greet the people they are friends with? Christians that just greet their neighbors are no better than the pagans! So he gives a new command, "Love your enemy".
We're to love those who disagree with us, who have a different faith, who do harm to us.

Self-defense was part of the law (yes, it's right there in Ex 22:2-3). In God's eyes, this means for the SAME ACT (taking a life)- there are differences within that act. The differences are intention. Was it done out of personal vengeance, malice, and premeditation? Or was it done by self-defense, or just action? Weather or not this applies today I really don't see as mattering, either way we gain a glimpse into the mind of God: there are degrees and differences of killing and murdering.

Matthew 5:39 (NKJV)
[sup]39 [/sup]BUT I TELL YOU NOT TO RESIST AN EVIL PERSON. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.

We see self-defense in Luke 22 as well, when Jesus places a higher value on swords than cloaks in what was about to go down, telling his disciples to sell their cloak to acquire a sword, if they could. We later obviously see, when Peter uses it, Jesus telling him to sheath it. But this is no contradiction. Even though they had a right (he told them to) to carry a sword, he was not telling them to fight for him. He was willing to go to the cross. He was giving himself up for his disciple's sakes. Much like a man taking on his attacker to protect his family.

Jesus told them to get swords to fulfill the prophecy. That's why He told them not to use them.

Luke 22:36-37 (NKJV)
[sup]36 [/sup]Then He said to them, "But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one. [sup]37 [/sup]For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me: 'And He was numbered with the transgressors.' For the things concerning Me have an end."

 

[Duckybill]

I'm sorry but Hebrews 13:6 doesn't assure you that won't happen. It happens EVERY DAY.
Hebrews 13:6 is talking about where our hope lies and that man can't take it away.

God's promises are true whether anyone believes them or not.

"The Lord is my Helper".

 

[Foreigner]

I am not sure how the original question morphed into the current discussion but Christians do kill.


I was a born again Christian in the Army and we did indeed kill. Rendering unto Caeser...


"a time to kill and a time to heal, a time to tear down and a time to build" - Ecc. 3:3


As far as God showing up at your doorstep telling you to whack someone, I am not sure why people get so bent out of shape about these silly rhetorical questions.


Not gonna happen.


Or, let me rephase this...


"Have you known or heard of anyone in your life time, your parents lifetime, you grandparents lifetime, who has had God, his angel, etc. etc. show up and tell someone that they are called to murder another individual?


These rhetorical questions do nothing but - as you can see here - divide the body.

 

[Duckybill]

Matthew 5:39 (NKJV)
[sup]39 [/sup]But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.

 

[Foreigner]

Honestly, Ducky, that doesn't really work for a born again Christian in the United States Army stationed in a war zone.

 

[TexUs]

I don't care whether those tombstones exist. It has nothing to do with my faith in the God of the Bible. Nothing.

So then, everyone who says they are Christians are Christians?
Still no proof.

If this would have been an embarrassment to the church, and not what they taught... Why did THE CHURCH record these things? Why would their FAMILY associate military rank if it was an embarrassment to them?


And listen, either intellectually think about this or I won't respond again. "Still no proof" is not answering my question. WHY would the church record this stuff if they were opposed to it?

Can you see soldiers turning the other cheek? Doing good to those who hate them? Overcoming evil with good? If you want Scriptures let me know.

You've never been in the military, have you? Of course not, you're pacifist.


The military helps our enemy all the time. Our soldiers get shot at frequently and it's not a license for personal vengeance like you make it seem. They'll certainly take the fire and make their way to capture these folks, without lethal action, if possible.

Same argument.

So you're going to deny historical fact in order to support your pacifist position? Weather or not you like it, the first Christian nation took up arms and defeated the Romans. Period.

Romans 13:1 (NKJV)

[sup]1 [/sup]Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For THERE IS NO AUTHORITY EXCEPT FROM GOD, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. [sup]2 [/sup]Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves.

Answer. My. Question.
Or are you unable to?


Is it loving to allow Hitler to kill millions of people in cold blood? I don't want a scripture quotation that doesn't answer my question. I want a statement from you. Or are you unable to?

God helps those who believe in the impossible. God will save one who believes while MILLIONS die. It doesn't sound like God answers your prayers Tex.

Again, you didn't answer my question. Are you unable to?


"No, Jesus, I let the intruder rape my wife out of love"
"No, Jesus, I allowed Hitler to execute, torture, and kill millions of Jews out of love"


Are these two actions love?
Or are you unable to answer?

Doesn't apply. You're talking FUTURE.

Ahhh so the God that died for us is a different God that'll exist in the future?
I'm sorry but that flies in the face of factual Biblical evidence. God is the same as he was yesterday as he is today, and tomorrow.


The "future" Jesus is the same Jesus as today.


Jesus will speak death to the MAJORITY OF PEOPLE.
It's justly killing the majority of people that's ever lived.


If you can't live with that, then that's your problem.

1 Peter 2:21-23 (NKJV)
[sup]21 [/sup]For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps: [sup]22 [/sup]"Who committed no sin, Nor was deceit found in His mouth";[sup] 23 [/sup]who, when He was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself to Him who judges righteously;

Was the point of the cross to demonstrate Pacifism or was it an example of patient suffering in the face of injustice?
Romans 3:25-26 blows your argument of this sky-high. The cross was a matter of righteousness and JUSTICE of God! It leads to the destruction and judgement of sin... The cross was hardly an act of pacifism.
The cross was justice UPHELD, it was not justice WITHHELD. Your argument severely fails here.


The cross was never intended to be the sole comprehensive model for dealing with civil justice.

Matthew 5:39 (NKJV)
[sup]39 [/sup]BUT I TELL YOU NOT TO RESIST AN EVIL PERSON. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.

[/font]
Context.
He said he did not eliminate the smallest letter of the Law. That law, which provided FOR resisting evil, AND the punishment OF evil, including capital punishment by the people.
To take this out of context statement at literal face value here would be a contradiction. That's a no-no. So what's it say?

Well, he quotes an OT law regarding the punishment should equal the severity of the crime (eye for eye). Why was this OT principle in effect and what did it do? Well, it curbed crime. When someone realized taking a life would mean their own death: it prevented the crimes!
The second purpose, and this is key... was to prevent excessive punishment because of PERSONAL VENGEANCE. If all that was done is someone stole $10 from you, he was to be punished by paying you $10 back. You could not give him a death sentence over stealing $10.
So the eye for eye law was just (punishment matches the crime) AND merciful (no excessive punishment).


What's this mean? IN NO WAY was the OT law that Jesus was quoting EVER used for people taking the law into their own hands. So you're assumption regarding this text is fatally flawed from the start. We must look at the context and understand the law Jesus was quoting: Pacifists don't make that effort.


Now what happened to this law? The Pharisees perverted it from prevention of personal vengeance, INTO personal vengeance! Like Jesus spent tons of his time doing, he was correcting the perversion of his law. Remember, his law was not bad- the people were bad. His entire point with this message was about PERSONAL VENGEANCE. He was correcting the perversion and not saying his law was in error, he was saying the perversion of it was.


Jesus was NOT establishing legal code. He was NOT saying we sit by and let evil prevail. He is NOT saying we sit by and let abuse occur. He IS saying when we suffer wrong, we should do so without a need to resort to personal vengeance. Both Jesus (John 18:22-23) and Paul (Acts 23:1-5) didn't LITERALLY turn the other cheek. This should alone tell us your interpretation is different than that of theirs. The entire point was, again, personal vengeance.

Jesus told them to get swords to fulfill the prophecy. That's why He told them not to use them.

Luke 22:36-37 (NKJV)
[sup]36 [/sup]Then He said to them, "But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one. [sup]37 [/sup]For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me: 'And He was numbered with the transgressors.' For the things concerning Me have an end."

You do realize Christ never gave a command that arming and defending themselves were bad, don't you? In fact the entire story of the garden suggests just the opposite.

God's promises are true whether anyone believes them or not.

"The Lord is my Helper".

Hebrews 13:6 doesn't say bad won't befall us. That flies in the face of the entire gospel message and even more than that, the text doesn't even say it.

 

[Duckybill]

Honestly, Ducky, that doesn't really work for a born again Christian in the United States Army stationed in a war zone.

You couldn't have refused to kill people?