17 Jan 06
Originally posted by whodeyIts hard to say as there is very little accurate historical record.
All of you out there who know something about Jesus. How about it, was he a pacifist?
I believe he existed, but so much of his story has been changed, embellished, exaggerated and simply "made up" by so many different authors (writing hundreds of years after his death) that it is difficult to judge his real character.
17 Jan 06
2 edits
Originally posted by AThousandYoungThat is correct. My point in presenting this post is that their are no pacifists. We all struggle against something whether we realize it or not. Their are different forms of aggretion, however. For example, most people think of Ghandi as a pacifist. Was he? As I recall his struggle was for the indipendence of India was it not? It is true that he forbad physical violence, but he was extremly coersive. He did things like organizing strikes around the country that brought the occupying government to its knees. The occupying government in turn fought back using physical violence, but to no avail. Make no mistake about it, Ghandi's fight was for political freedom. I do not assess the morality of his actions as to whether they be good or bad, I am merely making a point.
I had an aunt who said he was not, and references the time he drove moneylenders out of the Temple with a whip or something.
As far as Christ is concerned, what was his fight? His fight was a spiritual fight. His main concern was doing the will of his father. The verse you mentioned about him driving the money changers out of the temple is an example. Why did he do it? He did it because it was his fathers house and was a house of prayer that had been turned into a place for dishonest merchants to make a profit. His sacrifice was also a form of violence. He laid down his life so that it would be taken violently. He naturaly did not wish to suffer, but did it because it was his fathers will. In turn, he violently gained power over death, hell, and the grave as a result of dying on the cross for us. He had no interest in a political or military struggle. For me, this is something that seems to set him apart from all others who came before him and after him. He did not seek glory and power unto himeself. Nor was he concerned with fighting over earthly treasures or power. Who else can rival him?
- Joined
- 08 Dec 04
- Moves
- 100919
17 Jan 06
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyYou are exactly right...but who is He?
That is correct. My point in presenting this post is that their are no pacifists. We all struggle against something whether we realize it or not. Their are different forms of aggretion, however. For example, most people think of Ghandi as a pacifist. Was he? As I recall his struggle was for the indipendence of India was it not? It is true that he forba . Nor was he concerned with fighting over earthly treasures or power. Who else can rival him?
The godly characteristics of all Old Testament heroes are embodied in Christ, the ultimate hero:
Like Noah, he prepared his life before the storm.
Like Abraham, he obeyed God and went where God led him.
Like Isaac, he willingly accepted the bride provided by his Father.
Like Jacob, he learned obedience through the things that he suffered.
Like Joseph, he kept his heart from bitterness although he was mistreated by those around him.
Like Moses, he was meek before God.
Like Joshua, he was a fearless leader.
Like Othniel, he forsook worldly wealth to deliver God’s people.
Like Ehud, he ignored the fact that the world thought him cursed.
Like Deborah, he did not mind breaking cultural stereotypes.
Like Gideon, he tore down altars of false religion.
Like Jephthah, he had family problems but overcame them.
Like Samson, he was aggressive and sought an occasion against the enemy.
Like Samuel, he kept himself pure when the priests around him were corrupt.
Like David, he started with a small, untrained group but trained them faithfully.
Like Solomon, he grew in wisdom until it was vast.
Like Elijah, he combined his words with power.
Like Job, he was a righteous sufferer.
Like Esther, he concealed his true identity until the proper time.
Like Isaiah, he continually set before the people the future hope.
Like Jeremiah, he was passionate, even weeping for his people.
Like Daniel, he prayed fervently to God.
You are exactly right. Who is like Him?.....No one.
17 Jan 06
Originally posted by whodeyChristians would say that God and Jesus are the same.
All of you out there who know something about Jesus. How about it, was he a pacifist?
This thread shows that Jesus is not a pacifist:
www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=35999
18 Jan 06
Originally posted by STANGYou are right in that God is not a pacifist. Physical violence may be a byproduct of spiritual violence as we see with Jesus chasing out the money changers with a whip. This is not the focus, however. The focus is spiritual warfare. With the nation of Israel taking position of the Holy Land, we see God establishing his people in the land so that the Messiah may spring forth from the nation to save mankind. The goal was not soley for military conquest. It was spiritual in nature. It is also important to note that God takes no pleasure in physical violence. This can be seen in 1 Chronicles 22:8 where David tells Yahweh that he wants to build him a temple. God tells David that he has shed to much blood for him to be a candidate for building the temple. It would be left for his son Solomon to build who would be a man of peace. Note that David did nothing wrong. He defended Israel in battle as was commanded by God. We can see, however, that God viewed his actions as a necessary evil.
Christians would say that God and Jesus are the same.
This thread shows that Jesus is not a pacifist:
www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=35999
18 Jan 06
Originally posted by whodeyYour definition of pacifist being someone who, if they have any aims, uses entirely non-coercive methods to achieve them?
That is correct. My point in presenting this post is that their are no pacifists. We all struggle against something whether we realize it or not. Their are different forms of aggretion, however. For example, most people think of Ghandi as a pacifist. Was he? As I recall his struggle was for the indipendence of India was it not? It is true that he forba ...[text shortened]... . Nor was he concerned with fighting over earthly treasures or power. Who else can rival him?
Would putting moral or intellectual pressure on someone count as coercive?
18 Jan 06
Originally posted by dottewellWhat I am saying is that no one is a pacifist. The entire globe is at war. At times we may not even realize what we are fighting against. I would agree that any venue can be coercive whether it be intellectual or moral. Are you suggesting that I am?
Your definition of pacifist being someone who, if they have any aims, uses entirely non-coercive methods to achieve them?
Would putting moral or intellectual pressure on someone count as coercive?
18 Jan 06
Originally posted by whodeyI'm not sure I see what you mean by "pacifist".
What I am saying is that no one is a pacifist. The entire globe is at war. At times we may not even realize what we are fighting against. I would agree that any venue can be coercive whether it be intellectual or moral. Are you suggesting that I am?
18 Jan 06
Originally posted by dottewellThe traditional definition of pacifist I think is to mean someone who opposses the use of physical violence to resolve disputes. I say that there are other forms of violence that can be used to settle disputes. There is physical, psychological, emotional, and spiritual violence. The example I gave about Ghandi is an example. He is viewed as a pacifist. However, his coersive techniques in liberating India from its occupying government in my opinion was violent. He helped bring them to their knees. They did not just go away because they thought it was the "right" thing to do. They left because they felt forced out.
I'm not sure I see what you mean by "pacifist".
18 Jan 06
Originally posted by Conrau KExactly!!!!!! The verse you are referring to is Matthew 10:34. In it Jesus is not talking about a literal sword. He is saying that he has come to oppose the "status quo". He is talking about spiritual violence. Jesus came to call us to arms spiritually. We need not get to comfortable pleasing the members of our household over pleasing our Lord. He goes on to say that whoever loves those of his or her household more than me is not worthy of me. Jesus then says that we are to take up the cross and follow him. In other words, if your family has a problem with your faith, we are to choose God over them. Our creator comes before those whom God has created. He is not saying that we should forsake our family. He is saying that if our family makes us choose them over Christ, we are to choose Christ.
I recall a passage of Jesus (Gospel of Luke) saying that "he did not come to Earth to make peace but as a sword. To set father against son, mother against daughter"
Doesn't really sound much like a pacifist.