Very well-argued and presented. Thank you for methodically deconstructing the un-biblical and un-traditional canard that Christ was a pacifist. C.S. Lewis has a wonderful essay called "Why I Am Not a Pacifist". One of his arguments against the idea that "turn the other cheek" means to never use violence goes something like this: "Does anyone suppose that our Lord's hearers understood Him to mean that if a homicidal maniac, attempting to murder a third party, tried to knock me out of the way, I must stand aside and let him get his victim?"
I’ve never quite understood pacifism from the Church, but had Christian parents tell me to try to settle things with words whenever possible, never throw the first punch, but resort to violence when needed. This was how I always felt. Thank you for your writing.
When I was 16, the teacher who was instructing our small group on weightlifting pointed out that meek was a Greek word originally. To define it, he said “picture a Greek wrestler, cradling an infant.” Power, used to protect and nurture.
Peacemaker is the prerequisite for peacekeeping.
The passage where Christ tells his disciples to sell their cloaks and purchase swords has troubled me for some time. I’ve seen it used many times as justification for an armed populace (which I have NO objection to), but I don’t think that’s what it is.
I think it was a moment of doubt.
Consider that this happened during the Last Supper. Jesus of Nazareth knows what’s meant to happen. But for the sacrifice to have meaning, Jesus has to have all the capacities and weaknesses of a normal man. He rose above them, that was part of the lesson. But could any man contemplate a literally excruciating death without a moment of doubt? “Can I go through with this?” He recovers quickly; “‘We have two swords.’ ‘Then that is enough’”. And then on to the Garden of Gethsemane.
And when the soldiers came for him, and his disciple cut off one of their ears with the sword that he’d just purchased, Christ cried out to stop. And healed the soldier’s wound. Because the mission was endangered. His disciples were allowed to go freely, as they were needed to, and Jesus Christ allowed himself to be sacrificed to atone for the sins of mankind.
The fundamental point that runs through the gospels: Christians are supposed to set a far higher standard for themselves than for society as a whole. Many of these pacifist passages are admonitions against imposing Christian standards of behavior through the might of the state. We who believe that we will be rewarded in the afterlife need to be better people than those who don't believe in such rewards.
If a person does good just to be good. that person is more deserving of heavenly reward than the person who does good because he knows that Jesus is looking.
So Christians should let the naughty be naughty to some degree. But when the naughty start hurting the young and the weak, throwing some stones becomes more merciful than forgiving.
A slap on the cheek is a blow to one's pride--not a physical attack that can do permanent harm. It doesn't threaten your life, liberty or property--or that which belongs to a neighbor.
As somebody raised by Christian pacifists who built an entire doctrine around "meekness" and "turn the other cheek," I am convinced that their pacifism was based more on human teaching and their own lazy cowardice than anything Jesus said or did.
Not only did the Lord tell his disciples to grab a sword, He told them to carry a staff, which is a weapon that's easier to use without training than a sword.
Very well-argued and presented. Thank you for methodically deconstructing the un-biblical and un-traditional canard that Christ was a pacifist. C.S. Lewis has a wonderful essay called "Why I Am Not a Pacifist". One of his arguments against the idea that "turn the other cheek" means to never use violence goes something like this: "Does anyone suppose that our Lord's hearers understood Him to mean that if a homicidal maniac, attempting to murder a third party, tried to knock me out of the way, I must stand aside and let him get his victim?"
I’ve never quite understood pacifism from the Church, but had Christian parents tell me to try to settle things with words whenever possible, never throw the first punch, but resort to violence when needed. This was how I always felt. Thank you for your writing.
When I was 16, the teacher who was instructing our small group on weightlifting pointed out that meek was a Greek word originally. To define it, he said “picture a Greek wrestler, cradling an infant.” Power, used to protect and nurture.
Peacemaker is the prerequisite for peacekeeping.
The passage where Christ tells his disciples to sell their cloaks and purchase swords has troubled me for some time. I’ve seen it used many times as justification for an armed populace (which I have NO objection to), but I don’t think that’s what it is.
I think it was a moment of doubt.
Consider that this happened during the Last Supper. Jesus of Nazareth knows what’s meant to happen. But for the sacrifice to have meaning, Jesus has to have all the capacities and weaknesses of a normal man. He rose above them, that was part of the lesson. But could any man contemplate a literally excruciating death without a moment of doubt? “Can I go through with this?” He recovers quickly; “‘We have two swords.’ ‘Then that is enough’”. And then on to the Garden of Gethsemane.
And when the soldiers came for him, and his disciple cut off one of their ears with the sword that he’d just purchased, Christ cried out to stop. And healed the soldier’s wound. Because the mission was endangered. His disciples were allowed to go freely, as they were needed to, and Jesus Christ allowed himself to be sacrificed to atone for the sins of mankind.
The fundamental point that runs through the gospels: Christians are supposed to set a far higher standard for themselves than for society as a whole. Many of these pacifist passages are admonitions against imposing Christian standards of behavior through the might of the state. We who believe that we will be rewarded in the afterlife need to be better people than those who don't believe in such rewards.
If a person does good just to be good. that person is more deserving of heavenly reward than the person who does good because he knows that Jesus is looking.
So Christians should let the naughty be naughty to some degree. But when the naughty start hurting the young and the weak, throwing some stones becomes more merciful than forgiving.
Or so I interpret things.
Or as I recently posted, hosting a Drag Queen Story Time is worse than a Joe Camel Story Time. Nicotine addiction is easier to reverse than the effects of puberty blockers. https://rulesforreactionaries.substack.com/p/some-dangerous-thoughts
I was raised in a cult, so I can tell you one thing for sure.
Hard pacifism makes men easier to dominate.
See the arguments at the beginning of “The Heretics of St. Possenti” for further discussion. I believe the author was named Nelson.
I really enjoyed this, and look forward to reading your book. Thank you!
Matthew 10:34-
“Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword."
A slap on the cheek is a blow to one's pride--not a physical attack that can do permanent harm. It doesn't threaten your life, liberty or property--or that which belongs to a neighbor.
As somebody raised by Christian pacifists who built an entire doctrine around "meekness" and "turn the other cheek," I am convinced that their pacifism was based more on human teaching and their own lazy cowardice than anything Jesus said or did.
Excellent read my brother in Christ. I also talk about this topic in my book. Glad I found your publication. God bless!
Not only did the Lord tell his disciples to grab a sword, He told them to carry a staff, which is a weapon that's easier to use without training than a sword.