It is not unusual for the anti-war and pacifist types to try to claim the Bible, especially the teachings of Jesus Christ, support and back them in their viewpoint. An example of this showed up in a comment posted by a reader of an article titled:
Pacifism: A Refuge of the Simple Minded
that appeared at Human Events.com,
The comments read as follows…
> “When Jesus does come back, I hope you have the balls to stand up to Him and tell Him that everything that He taught was "morally abhorant, and has no place in a civilized society". He DID say turn the other cheek, and a few other things as well, like love thine enemy, and about how to forgive is Divine. How can you call Pacifist names and say that they are lazy, when what they believe are the very principles that Jesus taught. I think you guys need to put down the guns and read more of the Bible, the words that Jesus gave us and you will find that He taught that weapons were the handiwork of the Devil, and when one of His Diciples injured one of His captors on the night He was taken, He healed him, not fought back, right?”
I had to reply to this poorly though out response, which was not only filled with misinterpretations and misapplications of the teachings of Jesus Christ, but it also referenced quotes and deas that are quite simply not even found in the Bible, but are stated as if they were..
What follows is my reply (comments in red added for clarity) to that readers comment.
* * * * * *
> “When Jesus does come back, I hope you have the balls to stand up to Him and tell Him that everything that He taught was "morally abhorant, and has no place in a civilized society".
I do not know where you get that anything that has been written (in the article or by others who posted comments) says that any of us believe that what Jesus taught is morally abhorrent. We do not. Let me point out a few things about what you wrote.
> “When Jesus does come back…”
When Jesus comes back, HE will not be doing so as a pacifist, but rather HE will be returning with a sword, with which he will smite the nations (Revelation 19:15).
> “He DID say turn the other cheek…”
He was referring to a slap on the cheek, which is not a threatening or deadly blow. It is a challenge, and we are not to respond to simple challenges as though they, in and of, themselves have inflicted any real harm.
> “and a few other things as well, like love thine enemy”
The fact that we are to love our enemies only means that we do nothing more to them than is required to stop them from doing us harm. We are not to take vengeance upon our enemy once they have been defeated. It unnecessary for us to do so, GOD will do it, and HE will do a better job of avenging the innocent than we can anyway. (Romans 12:19)
It also means that if an enemy is in need, we should be willing to offer assistance in meeting that needs. Doing so will emphasize to the enemy that being our friend is less burdensome than being our enemy. (Romans 12:20)
Note: As history has proven, the United States of America has always been ready, willing and able to aid anyone, friend or foe, in times of catastrophe and great need. And that we have been right there at the end of any military conflict to give aid and assistance in rebuilding the infrastructure of virtually every enemy we have defeated.
> “and about how to forgive is Divine”
Sorry Pamela, that is not in the scriptures. It is actually a quote from Alexander Pope “To err is human, to forgive divine”. It should also be noted that to forgive an unrepentant enemy will have much the same results as throwing a rock straight up. Unless you take steps to avoid it, the enemy like the rock, is going to come back and hit you squarely on your head.
> “How can you call Pacifist names and say that they are lazy, when what they believe are the very principles that Jesus taught.”
What they believe has little or nothing to do with what Jesus taught. Jesus specifically said that he did not come to bring peace, but a sword. (Matthew 10: 34)
There is also the fact that despite interacting with more than one soldier during his earthly life, Jesus never told a single one of them to leave military service, or not to fight against his nation’s enemies. Rather he blessed them in one way or another. See Matthew 8:5 to 13 for example.
It is also a fact that Jesus sent Peter to a soldier, or more precisely a centurion, named Cornelius who along with those of his household became the very first gentiles to accept Jesus as his Lord and savior. That’s right, God blessed a soldier, an armed fighting man by making him and his family the proof that salvation was for all GOD fearing men and women, and not just for the children of Israel. (Acts 10:1)
> “I think you guys need to put down the guns and read more of the Bible, the words that Jesus gave us…”
Actually I would be willing to say, with little fear of being proven wrong, that many gun owners who are ready to stand and fight evil doers, from the thug in the ally to the islamo-fascist on the battlefield, probably read, study and know their Bible better than you do.
> ”and you will find that He taught that weapons were the handiwork of the Devil,”
Thus proving my point as nowhere in the scriptures does it say, and never did Jesus say, that weapons are the handiwork of the Devil. In fact, it was Jesus who made sure that HIS disciples would be armed, knowing that He was about to be taken away from them. (Luke 22:36 & 38) Note that it is probable that the followers of our LORD would also have been taken right there and then, and would have been executed as quickly as Jesus was, had they not been armed.
> “and when one of His Diciples injured one of His captors on the night He was taken, He healed him, not fought back,
HE stopped Peter, and did not personally fight back because HE knew that it was time for HIM to be taken and soon crucified in our place. Had HE not allowed HIMSELF to be taken, had HE instead chosen to used the sword that HE will wield on the day of HIS return, (or had HE called upon the legions of angles at HIS disposal to protect and defend HIM) we would have no escape from the just consequences of our sins. (Matthew 26:52 - 54)
> “right?”
Uhmmm, No obviously not.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Liberal hacks often reach for the Bible when it suits them to do so. Most lib-socialists are faithless anyway, so when they *do* cite the Bible, it's usually to try and discredit it in some way. These same wipes will conveniently skip over the strict guidance about homosexuality and hedonism. What possible harm does a Cross mounted on a hillside do? What is it about the Ten Commandments that frightens these liberals so? For the answers to these and other exciting questions, let's just leave them in power for another generation and when we're living under totalitarian rule, we'll find out, won't we? :)
ReplyDelete> "What possible harm does a Cross mounted on a hillside do? What is it about the Ten Commandments that frightens these liberals so?"
ReplyDeleteThe answer to that is actually not that difficult. First one must realize that there are two types of atheist. The fool (The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. - Psalms 53:1), and the liar (Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? - 1st John 2:22)
Foolishness is the basis of all of unreasonable fear, and fear leads to unwarranted hatred.
The liars on the other hand, actually know in their hearts that GOD “is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him” (Hebrews 11:6b). They also understand the corollary to that, which is that it is “the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom” (2nd Timothy 4:1b). And since they have selected to go their own way, rather than the way that GOD has set out in HIS word, anything that reminds them that they must ultimately stand before HIM, and be judged by HIM, fills their hearts with fear. And as I have already pointed out, fear leads to hatred.