I've noticed a lot of pacifism sentiments are being expressed in this forum, so I thought I'd challenge them directly here. Jason is one particular advocate, so I'll invite him to dialog and defend his position. I'm actually going to make the argument that pacifism is hateful and one of the worst sins one can commit, so there's quite a contrast between myself and him. To get the ball rolling, I'll quote some of his statements.
This thread actually directs to a different forum on a different website, so I'll cut and paste some of it here so you don't have switch over.
Wasn't able to bring in all over, but this is sufficient to get things going.
Calling on angels instead of guns?:
Regarding protection by angels, this is actually one of the lies that Satan tried to tempt Christ with.
Matt. 4:6 and said to Him, “If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down. For it is written:
“He shall give His angels charge over you,’ and,
‘In their hands they shall bear you up,
Lest you dash your foot against a stone.’ ”
Jesus of course answered,
Matt. 4:7 ...“It is written again, ‘You shall not tempt the LORD your God.’ ”
The implication of this is quite profound. Satan was telling Christ to depend on angels to such an extent that he was tempting Him to do something foolish that would require their assistance. But Christ likened this to testing God—forcing Him to bail you out when you could have bailed yourself out. Christ says this is a sin.
And this to me is the real sin of pacifism, which is never taught in scripture, and often warned about. All ostensible pacifism verses in the new testament actually come from the old testament, and they usually have to do with overlooking insults—turn the other cheek, for example, which I'll touch on shortly.
But when our neighbors and families are in danger, we are obligated out of love to protect them. To be a pacifist at that point is actually an act of hatred. You may think you're loving your enemy, but you're actually hating your neighbors, friends and family, by allowing them to be harmed or worse. I can't imagine a more unloving act than to sit by while your child is harmed or killed, when you could have prevented it with force—even lethal force. Even worse would be to sit around asking angels to bail you out.
Jesus didn't mean a literal sword?:
Now regarding the sword, Jason makes the case that when Jesus told us to sell our cloak and buy one, he was speaking figuratively. He offers no actual evidence of this, but points to other figurative language Jesus used, and the fact that Jesus said turn the other cheek.
Matt. 5:39 But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
Now this is a situation where familiarity with the audience Jesus was addressing can give great insight into what Jesus was saying. In ANE culture, a slap on the cheek was among the most grievous insults you could give. Perhaps today an equivalent might be spitting, but a slap even today is quite insulting. But, really it's just an insult, and Jesus' point. He was pointing men back to principles taught in the old testament.
Prov. 12:16 Fools show their annoyance at once,
but the prudent overlook an insult.
Don't trade insult for insult. Do go tit for tat with people. Be passive in this regard. It's kind of like the corny children's mantra, "sticks and stones….."
The false teaching comes in, though, when people liken this to being passive with violent acts toward you or your neighbors. "If someone punches you in the rib, turn and offer them the other." Or worse, "if someone abuses your child, offer them another." This is not only a perversion of that text, it's downright evil.
Jesus knew exactly what he was doing when he told his disciples to sell garments to acquire defensive weapons. From the very beginning God's men have had to live in a fallen world. Abraham taught hundreds of men in his household to fight with weapons and had the means to rescue Lot when he was kidnapped by Kedorlaomer (one of the early tyrants of the postdiluvian world).
It's also telling that when the disciples showed him that they had literals swords, He offered no rebuke or correction, "Hey, wait, don't you understand I was not being literal. Get rid of those!" He merely said, "it's enough." And interestingly enough, the disciples never got rid of them, as Peter used one to protect his Lord later on (of course Peter did not understand that Christ needed to be crucified at that point).
God says very plainly in his word that violence needs to be punished and we see Him ordaining violence all throughout scripture. Murder is to be punished by death.
Gen. 9:6 “Whoever sheds human blood,
by humans shall their bloodbe shed;
for in the image of God
has God made mankind.
In Romans 13 we see God specifically ordaining the use of the sword to the governments the churches would abide in. In the old testament, Israel possessed its own government, but the church is to function within within other governments, and God specially advocates the use of weapons and lethal force for those governments.
Rom. 13:4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.
Friends, this is not figurative speech. This is the reality that we live in a fallen world, and our loving God knows this and has ordained a means for self-defense, in both the old and new testaments. Self defense isn't always possible, but when it is, good and honorable and loving.
All ostensible pacifism verses in the new testament are also expressed in the old testament, and usually the new testament writers are merely trying to direct people back to principles God has already taught. Nothing has changed in this regard. The idea that we now sit back and trust angels to protect our families is really a lie put forth by the devil in the wilderness.
Heavy I know. It's one thing to disagree with pacifism, and quite another to call it hateful and evil, but that's my conviction. Many have died and suffered innocently because of this doctrine of demons. Looking forward to any responses.
