A thread about violence

Christ said that he had come to bring division. (Luke 12:51)He would divide the wheat from the chaff. (Matthew 3:12) I think a major problem with preaching today is that we may tend to preach "unity." ("We are all one...") In the Bible, at least the one I read, this is not what Christ wanted. He wanted to make a distinction- His people and then the world. In the King James Bible, I love the phrase "Peculiar People," it denotes a difference, as if the world would say "Those people are strange..." Even in the Old Testament, Joshua says "Choose for yourselves THIS DAY whom you will serve...... But as for me and my household, we will serve the LORD." (Joshua 24:15) On MT. Carmel, Elijah says this: "How long will yo waver between two opinions? If the LORD is God, then follow Him, but if Baal is God, follow him." (1 Kings 18:20) These statements were standoffish, and powerful. Christ wanted a distinction, a division. The Body of Christ should work together as one, of course, Christ prayed that His Disciples and He be made one. (John 17:6-25) When someone comes under the blood of Christ, they are ingrafted, by grace, into the Body. We are not one with the world, we are strangers passing thru. (1 Peter 1:17; 1 Peter 2:11) We are called to be gracious under persecution, and to go the extra mile, to love our enemies. (Matthew 5)HOWEVER... We are to stand up and standoff. There is God's way, and there is the wrong way. We cannot be at peace with the world when the world is run by Satan and Satan wars with Christ, who runs our body. We are to storm the gates of Hell with the Power of God.War against the devil with the Gospel of Christ. (It is a sword...)take captive for Christ those whothe devil has stolen from him. Like 1 Samuel 30,let's infiltrate the enemy's camp and take back what it has stolen.This is war, an eternal war, and in war, there can be no peace. :-D :-D :-) The devil fights with hate and arrogance; we fight with unconditional love and absolute humility and servanthood.

The Lord Jesus Christ came to bring peace with God, not peace with the world.

James 4:4Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.What do you think of this, Jake?

I think we should clarify what we mean when we use the word "world". There are several shades of meaning to it; I think it will be helpful to keep in mind the distinctions between them. For instance, the word takes on different meaning depending on the context, for instance, "Do not love the world" and "For God so love the world."The former refers to the worldly system which has fallen in the hands of Satan. The latter refers to the people who live on earth. "World" can also mean the earth, the habitat of human beings and other creatures.We are in an impasse here because we fail to make these distinctions.

I do not promote violence or discord. I promote taking a solid stand for the truth. Christ was not violent, but when he had to, he got serious. He showed those who defiled the Gentile area of the Temple that He meant business. I know now that it would have been good for me to elaborate on the statement I made about our weapons. Our weapons are meekness, gentleness, lovingkindness, forgiveness, giving, and they do well to destroy the work of the enemy. When I said "the world" I did not mean the population, I meant the devil's handiwork. I believe the best way to be standoff-ish is to live in absolute love. Absolute love for everyone is as radical as it gets. I am not violent. As a self-aware Christian, I know that his love flows into my actions, thoughts, and words, permeating everything I am and do. That is how I combat this enemy.Please know that I DESPISE violence. I grew up in violence, it tormented my spirit until Christ set me free, with... guess what... a gentle love. Please forgive the vagueness and obvious brashness of my first post and see this as a token of what I really mean. :-) :-D

And then some soldiers came and they were questioning him saying, 'And what about us, what do we do?'" And some would like to have Jesus say...Get out of the military, it's wrong. He said, "Don't take money from anyone by force, don't accuse anyone falsely and be content with your wages." That is without question an implicit affirmation of being a soldier...just be honest, don't rob people because you have the power to do it, because you carry a weapon, don't accuse people falsely because you're on the inside of law enforcement, be content with your pay. I mean, there's an affirmation of the validity of being a soldier, just be a noble one who does what is right to do.You have the same thing in the tenth chapter of Acts where Cornelius was a Roman soldier. He was a centurion which meant he was the leader of a hundred men. It's..it's an Italian battalion which was from Rome. Cornelius was a formidable soldier. He was a devout man, verse 2. He feared God with all his household. He gave many alms to the Jewish people, prayed to God continually. And in verse 22, "Cornelius was a centurion, a righteous and God fearing man, well spoken of by the entire nation of the Jews, divinely directed by a holy angel to send for you to come to his house and hear a message from you," that's referring to Peter. Down in verse 48 he came to be baptized. Here is another implicit, really a commendation of a man who was a righteous Roman soldier.And then if you were to go through the teaching of Jesus you would find similar kind of implicit affirmations. Remember in Matthew 21 Jesus approved about a king who waged war against wicked people, remember that story? Do you remember Jesus said, "Nobody goes to war without counting the cost," do you remember when Peter took out his sword in the garden when they came to arrest Jesus, started to cut his way through the crowd, he cut the ear off the first guy in line who ducked and lost an ear? Peter was going for his throat, you can be sure. Jesus said, "Put your sword back in its sheath." He didn't say, "What are you doing with that thing?" He said, "Just put it back where it belongs." The implicit idea is you have a right to carry it for your self-protection, don't use it like this. In fact, in John 18:36 Jesus actually said, "That it would have been proper for his disciples to defend His Kingdom with swords if it was an earthly kingdom," John 18:36.http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/80-241.htmThis article is long, but very good. Please at least skim it!War can be a good thing today. Self-defense can be very reasonable. Christian cops are right to shoot when the time calls for it and Christian soldiers are respectable and should obey their government and work hard for their masters. We are not a bunch of hippies on dope in this world. There are evil people who are to be punished by God through the world's governments.

nobody:A minor correction - Luke 3:14 - it was John the Baptist who said, "Don't extort money and don't accuse people falsely--be content with your pay." (However, this does not change your argument).All:I find two strands of thought on the use of violence in scripture. First, the biblical ideal is definitely non-violence and non-resistance. Anyone who takes Jesus' sermon on the mount seriously will have to acknowledge this.Second, there is no indication that being a soldier is inherently immoral - Luke 3:14. There is also endorsement of the authority of the earthly rulers as "agents of God's wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer" who "does not bear the sword for nothing" - Romans 13:4. So God does allow for limited use of force in this present age for law, justice, and order.Ultimately, your personal stand is a matter of conscience.

:-o When I first posted the message, I meant Spiritual Warfare. Apparently I should be more specific. :-P I've got a lot to learn about differing views and the way they are interpreted.God bless.

Hi ChadAh, the group dynamics of emails... It is an entirely different mode of communication. In many ways it combines the worst of all worlds. The ability to react instantly, almost without thought but the permanency of something written in stone. Added to that you have instant communication with a whole world of people that you have never had a chance to make a relationship with.If ever we need to 'bear and forbear' it is with emails. We all rattle each others chains at times without intention (and sometimes with intention. :-D Don't worry about it, we are all learning here.

Jake writes Quakers have no problem with armed police. Somebody has to keep order.Myself, I live in a somewhat dangerous urban neighborhood and keep a heavy walking stick handy to defend my house. I will break the knee caps of anyone who breaks in and threatens my household. (But would not resort to lethal violence.)Hi JakeThis one took me by surprise. I checked a couple of times to make sure you weren't quoting someone else.This makes it sound as though you are in favour of pre-meditated, limited, pre-emptive violence. The Lord's manifesto on the mount was surely not directed to governments but to individuals. If your position is sustainable wouldn't this mean that a government should also allow pre-meditated, limited, pre-emptive violence? And isn't that what the USA would claim it is doing?If you feel responsibility for your household should a government not feel responsibility for its citizens? You say 'someone has to keep order'. Does a bigger brother nation (super-power) have any responsibility to 'keep order'?I know that this is a very delicate and complicated issue but would you imagine the Lord with a heavy walking stick in preparation for an attack on his household?Here's a little bit of info that might interest you. Israel's kings were forbidden to 'multiply horses'. The horse was the equivalent of a tank, a formidable weapon of war particularly when attached to a chariot. They were allowed to have mules which were the equivalent of a 4x4 and a great agricultural tool. So God banned aggressive war preparation but then Israel was God's nation and He was honour bound to defend it as necessary.

Philologos (Ron) says:Here's a little bit of info that might interest you. Israel's kings were forbidden to 'multiply horses'. The horse was the equivalent of a tank, a formidable weapon of war particularly when attached to a chariot. They were allowed to have mules which were the equivalent of a 4x4 and a great agricultural tool. So God banned aggressive war preparation but then Israel was God's nation and He was honour bound to defend it as necessary.I have a problem with this interpretation of Deuteronomy 17:16. The literary context does not seem to me to have any reference to war. I admit I do not know enough of its historical context to ascertain whether "horses" are symbolic of military might (I doubt it though).I find applying Christian ethics in the political arena to be very tricky. The issues are not as clear-cut as it seems. For instance, allowing Hitler to have his way is probably not a good option (I agree with Bonhoeffer on this). On the other hand, dropping the atomic bomb to stop a war was a tough decision (as a Chinese I welcome it; but precious souls would have been lost either way).My thinking on Christian ethics is not mature yet, but I think mere talk of principles often reduce the complexity and dilemma involved in making a moral decision.

I am kinda disturbed that this has gone as far as it has!! Spiritual Warfare!!! Go down, read the original post, pray, then respond. Good grief. I didn't want a debate, I wanted to hopefully get someone's attention about not taking a stand.Perhaps I should edit my title...God bless.

Okay, Jake, I want to be peaceful and gentle, yet this now irritates me. This post is about SPIRITUAL WARFARE!!! So, with all gentleness, I ask you, start your own thread and debate violence or whatever. God bless...Chad Lough