JJ writes,
I have recently been challenged on my beliefs regarding my “non-pacifism.” According to some we are not even to engage in self defense against a violent enemy if we are to follow the teachings of Christ. They say that “pacism” is not about “doing nothing,” its about fighting evil with what they call “good.” Here is a bit of info for those folks:
First, no Christian, pacifist or not, believes in wanton violence for no reason. Perhaps the way we make our arugments makes it sound like non-pacifists are baseball-bat-wielding thugs, waiting for a chance to whack someone who gives them the wrong look. But let’s be realistic. The arguments for using violence when necessary fall under categories such as:
-Stopping harm to the defenseless
-Otherwise stopping a tyrant
-Use of the death penalty
-“Peace through strength” - using decisive violence to stop ongoing violence (e.g. Hiroshima & Nagasaki)
Second, non-pacifists do take Jesus’ call to be peacemakers (Matthew 5:9) seriously; the difference is that violence is seen as a sometimes-necessary (or sometimes the best) path to peace. No one encourages their kids to fight, or wishes there was more conflict in the world.
So did Jesus teach non-violence? Here are the verses as mentioning war, violence, killing, peace, peacemaking, swords, etc. (This was compiled through actual reading, not a keyword search, and it omits verses that are duplicated in the Synoptics):
Matthew 5:7-9; Matthew 5:21-22; Matthew 5:38-42; Matthew 5:44; Matthew 6:12; Matthew 6:14; Matthew 7:1; Matthew 10:28; Matthew 10:34; Matthew 10:39; Matthew 11:12; Matthew 11:29; Matthew 12:19; Matthew 18:6-9; Matthew 18:22; Matthew 21:12; Matthew 22:39; Matthew 23:23; Matthew 26:52-54; Mark 3:4; Mark 7:21-22; Mark 10:44; Mark 12:9; Luke 1:79; Luke 6:27; Luke 9:54-55; Luke 10:27; Luke 12:45; Luke 19:27; Luke 19:38; Luke 20:16; Luke 22:36; Luke 24:36; John 2:15-16; John 8:1-11; John 14:27; John 16:33; John 18:36; John 20:19,21,26.
Read them for yourself (or do your own search) and see if you can find Jesus saying anything about pacifism. Note that being a “peacemaker” is not something reserved only for pacifists; Ecclesiastes speaks of a time to kill and a time to heal. Following are a few passages used as the basis for the Christian pacifist position (including seeing Jesus as a pacifist). My contention is that Jesus was not a pacifist, as will become clear.
The ultimate and immediate goal of just violence must be peace.
Jesus said in Matthew 5:38-42:
<blockquote>You have heard that it was said, “Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.” But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you. </blockquote>
Eye for an eye refers to revenge. Hopefully we all know that revenge is God’s job, not ours. Pacifism takes issue not only with revenge, but intervention to prevent further violence. The main thrust of this passage is about personal rights. Jesus is saying to give up your perceived rights to dignity, sovereign personal property, and revenge. He tells us to overcome the injustice that the wicked would foist on us with unimaginable kindness and undeserved generosity - the “heaping burning coals” idea.
Jesus made a whip. He drove the commercial operations out of the temple. Do you think he hit anyone with that whip? Let’s just say a pacifist wouldn’t make a whip and use it to forcibly expel people from a building.
Jesus himself explains why violence would be counterproductive to his mission: Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place” (John 18:36). He does not say “I have taught my followers that violence is wrong, and I’m taking a risk to show them a better way.”
One article I came across said that Jesus told Peter to put away his sword, and that proves his nonviolent ethic. Actually, if you read Luke 22, you’ll see that Jesus told them to bring swords (verse 36) - not to defend Jesus, but to defend themselves, presumably. I can’t think of why else he would tell them to bring swords. What would the disciples of a pacifist need swords for?
Wash and make yourselves clean.
Take your evil deeds
out of my sight!
Stop doing wrong,
ISA 1:17 learn to do right!
Seek justice,
encourage the oppressed.
Defend the cause of the fatherless,
plead the case of the widow. Isaiah 1:16-17
Israel was routinely chastised for allowing the poor and weak to be oppressed. Our secular society recognizes the importance of defending the powerless. If this requires violence, should we do it? I think the case for a nonviolent ethic is so weak that it would be absolutely evil to avoid helping those in trouble, even if it involved violence.
Peace is not the absence of conflict, but the resolution of conflict.
*from commentary by Justin at Radical Congruency.
71 Comments
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” John 3:16 
