pacifism for true Jesus' followers.

[JudgeRightly]

Jesus and Paul teach us to forgive.

Jesus teaches the Law to Israel, and in the context of the Law, He says, "Forgive, so that God will forgive you."

Paul teaches Grace to the believers, and in the context of Grace, he says, "Forgive, BECAUSE God has forgiven you."

See the difference?

Both, however, teach that you are to rebuke those who have sinned against you.

The Apostle Paul also makes it clear that vengeance is not for us to do so, it is to be left for God to do.

You did not answer my question. If you were martyred, and were instantly in heaven, with no earthly desires, what would your cry be for the one who killed you:
A) I forgive you!
B) When will this person see justice!

The NC was implemented at the cross. It's in place right now.

Could you give me the exact moment (using scripture) when it was implemented? Can you give us the details of this covenant from that passage?

That's correct, and it's no different than any other nation on planet earth.

Meaning just like every other nation, it has a right to defend itself, and a right to bring criminals to justice.

Correct again, except for the fact that you Darby Followers teach that God still has a plan for the "nation" of Israel in the future.

Darby? Who's Darby?

I follow the teachings of Scripture.

 

[JudgeRightly]

You guys can keep saying this till you're blue in the face, but so far not one of you can provide scripture from Jesus or Paul to back your claims.

Moreover, the words of Jesus and Paul say the exact opposite of what you guys are claiming, and prove you guys wrong.

Actually, the opposite is true, you cannot find one instance of scripture (anywhere in the Bible) where it says that countries should not go to war.

Again, the verses you claim support your position in fact support our position, because they are not directed at governments, they are directed at individuals.

 

[tetelestai]

doesn't that contradict "do not resist an evil person"?

Read the whole passage. Jesus was telling them to longer apply the "an eye for an eye" principle to their lives. "turn the other cheek" is the opposite of "an eye for an eye".

You're still wanting to apply the "an eye for an eye" principle today.

 

[JudgeRightly]

LOL...how the heck was Syria a threat to us? Was Assad planning on invading New York City?

See kgov.com/terror.

 

[tetelestai]

they are not directed at governments, they are directed at individuals.

Nowhere does Jesus or Paul make a distinction between governments and individuals when it comes to forgiveness, vengeance, etc. Since governments are made up of people, basically what you are claiming is that if a Christian holds a government job, it's ok for that Christian to execute a person for committing certain crimes.

Read the history books, Christians using your theory throughout history have killed millions of people.

 

[tetelestai]

See kgov.com/terror.

Show me something that happened in the United States that Assad did to us?

 

[tetelestai]

Jesus teaches the Law to Israel, and in the context of the Law, He says, "Forgive, so that God will forgive you."

Paul teaches Grace to the believers, and in the context of Grace, he says, "Forgive, BECAUSE God has forgiven you."

See the difference?

Um....that's the difference between the OC and the NC.

Both, however, teach that you are to rebuke those who have sinned against you.

Nope.

Neither Jesus or Paul ever said such a thing. Especially Paul, who was a minister of the New Covenant.

You did not answer my question. If you were martyred, and were instantly in heaven, with no earthly desires, what would your cry be for the one who killed you:
A) I forgive you!
B) When will this person see justice!

I did answer, go back and look at my response.

Could you give me the exact moment (using scripture) when it was implemented? Can you give us the details of this covenant from that passage?

(Heb 8:13) By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

In the above, notice that after the NC was made, the OC was still "obsolete and outdated", and would SOON disappear.

Darby? Who's Darby?

I follow the teachings of Scripture.

If you're a Dispensationalist, then you do not follow the teachings of scripture, you follow John Nelson Darby.

 

[ok doser]

Jesus was telling them ...

..."do not resist an evil person"



and you want to violate that by stopping an evil person from committing an evil act?

 

[JudgeRightly]

Again, nowhere in the NT does Jesus or Paul say to use "necessary" violence. They both say the exact opposite.

(Rom 12:19) Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.”

How many times do I have to repeat myself:

NEITHER JESUS NOR PAUL is talking about governmental policy. They are talking about what people should do as individuals.

Every sin, even murder.

People don't go to heaven or hell based on sins.

Actually, if they don't believe in Christ as their Savior, then they go to hell because of their sins. If they did accept Him as their Savior, however, then their sins are forgiven. See how that works?

If they did, everyone would go to hell.

That's why Christ came to die for us.

People go to heaven or hell based on faith in Christ Jesus. Those who have faith in Christ Jesus have eternal life, those who don't go to hell.

Why do they go to hell though? Simply because they don't believe? Seems rather harsh...

Sins have absolutely nothing to do with it. They were ALL paid for at the cross with His blood.

So if sin has nothing to do with it, then what was the point of Christ going to the cross?

Paul is referring to the laws of the Roman Empire.

The Roman Empire was the governing authority through most of the New Testament, just like America's government is the governing authority over us today.

The laws of the Roman Empire were not the Word of God.

You're missing the point. The laws of the Roman Empire was the law of the land. And God tells us to obey authority because it is appointed by God. Paul was affirming the Roman Empire's role as the governing authority, even though it was a wicked government.

Paul said (paraphrasing): "If I committed a crime that is worthy of the death penalty, then I do not object to dying."

Let me ask you something. Did Germany's government during WWII have the right to execute criminals who committed capital crimes?

 

[Lon]

You have been avowing every time when you are asked what Jesus says.

This is the longest time you are still with me.

It may seem that way, but I've stayed with you a few times in threads. It is usually when they get repetitive, that I leave.

I can prove to you how you twist Jesus simple teachings.

Instead of doing that, just share your heart and story over the matter. I will share a couple of my stories and ask you and others about them in thread. I truly would appreciate your thoughts and feedback as well as you sharing your stories about the topic.

It seems that is the problem for you. Your attempt to silence me proves it.

No, not here. This is the thread for it. I was simply asking you to debate the right thing in the right thread.
-Lon

 

[JudgeRightly]

doesn't that contradict "do not resist an evil person"?

Check.
And.
Mate.

 

[tetelestai]

..."do not resist an evil person"



and you want to violate that by stopping an evil person from committing an evil act?

Nope.

You're assuming I'm going to stop the person by using violence.

 

[ok doser]

Nope.

You're assuming I'm going to stop the person by using violence.

i didn't say anything about violence

neither does scripture

 

[tetelestai]

Check.
And.
Mate.

Nope.

Pawn to E8

 

[tetelestai]

i didn't say anything about violence

neither does scripture

Paul tells us that evil can be overcome, but only with good.

(Rom 12:21) Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

So, it is possible to stop someone from murdering another child with "good".

 

[ok doser]

Paul tells us that evil can be overcome, but only with good.

(Rom 12:21) Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

so we can "overcome evil" but we can't "resist evil"?

So, it is possible to stop someone from murdering another child with "good".

how do we use "good" to stop the evil man who murdered these children from murdering more children?

 

[Lon]

LOL...you do know that the UN has a LGBT Czar to oversee the normalization of homosexuality and transgenderism around the world. Should we listen to him too?

Just answering your question. It is the reason.

No. I grew up in the City of Pittsburgh. I've been robbed, mugged, had my home broken into, car stolen, etc.

This isn't pacifism though....

I disagree. Putting the adjective "necessary" in front of violence, doesn't mean it's still not violence.

No, but as with above, you pacifism isn't wholesale, at least on the political spectrum, or it is at least inconsistent. I have a few personal stories too and will bring them up as conversation ensues.

Yep

If you had the means, would you prevent someone from attacking her? (sorry to be personal, that isn't my intent and the whole idea is terrible but this topic touches on this).

Yes

Similar question: Does your God-given duty as father to them, include their protection? I have a pacifist-heart, but I know the answers to these questions. I would not hesitate (except inside) to protect my family. 1 Corinthians 7:32-34 Ephesians 5:25-27 1 Timothy 5:8

 

[JudgeRightly]

Read the whole passage. Jesus was telling them to longer apply the "an eye for an eye" principle to their lives. "turn the other cheek" is the opposite of "an eye for an eye".

You're still wanting to apply the "an eye for an eye" principle today.

No, if you read carefully, you'll notice that nowhere in the entire sermon on the mount did he repeal any laws. He only added clarifications to them.

Fulfilling the law is different than repealing the law.

Nowhere does Jesus or Paul make a distinction between governments and individuals when it comes to forgiveness, vengeance, etc.

Was Paul sent to governments? or was he sent to individuals?

Since governments are made up of people,

Acting as one unit...

basically what you are claiming is that if a Christian holds a government job, it's ok for that Christian to execute a person for committing certain crimes.

Correct, because he is acting under the authority of the government, which was given by God.

However, should that Christian execute someone for committing a crime outside the authority of the government, then he is in the wrong, and should be punished by the government for his actions.

Read the history books, Christians using your theory throughout history have killed millions of people.

For example?

Um....that's the difference between the OC and the NC.

Again, there are only two covenants given in the Bible, neither were given in the New Testament.

[/QUOTE]Nope.

Neither Jesus or Paul ever said such a thing. Especially Paul, who was a minister of the New Covenant.[/QUOTE]

Paul was the minister of Grace.

Go read Genesis 15. That is the giving of the covenant of Grace.

I did answer, go back and look at my response.

I asked what YOU, Tet, would do. I did not ask what Jesus and Paul taught.

So, again, Would you forgive the one who murdered you? or would you cry out for justice?

(Heb 8:13) By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

In the above, notice that after the NC was made, the OC was still "obsolete and outdated", and would SOON disappear.

Tet, before I respond to this I must ask, do you know who the Book of Hebrews was written to?

If you're a Dispensationalist, then you do not follow the teachings of scripture, you follow John Nelson Darby.

I don't even know who that is, so...

I follow what the Bible says.

 

[meshak]

It may seem that way, but I've stayed with you a few times in threads. It is usually when they get repetitive, that I leave.

It becomes respective when you avoid my question or my point. You have done that many times.

Instead of doing that, just share your heart and story over the matter. I will share a couple of my stories and ask you and others about them in thread. I truly would appreciate your thoughts and feedback as well as you sharing your stories about the topic.

\

Thread is not about our doctrine. It is about Jesus' pacifism.

Do you know my purpose of military thread?

here. This is the thread for it. I was simply asking you to debate the right thing in the right thread.

Yes, you were ready to bow out.

 

[meshak]

You guys can keep saying this till you're blue in the face, but so far not one of you can provide scripture from Jesus or Paul to back your claims.

Moreover, the words of Jesus and Paul say the exact opposite of what you guys are claiming, and prove you guys wrong.

Exactly. they have no case whatsoever to justify approving join the military. they know we are telling the truth. They think they can find the loophole to justify their claim.

It is not going to happen because "love your enemy" message is so clear and simple.