Violence is incompatible with the christian faith. Jesus was pretty clear about this

Violence is incompatible with the christian faith. Jesus was pretty clear about this.

>You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person.
>Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you
>etc.

When Jesus was threatened with violence by the Roman authorities he told Peter, who had drawn his sword to protect Jesus, to put it back in his sheath. He then voluntarily went into the hands of the Romans who he knew would execute him.

To accept violence, even for self-defense, is to go against the fundamental teachings of christianity, and such a person cannot be called christian.

Other urls found in this thread:

openbible.info/topics/judging
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

what about that time he lost his shit in the temple

A completely different set of circumstances. He was throwing out people who were defiling his spiritual life, not defending his physical life.

so when you "defile spiritual life" you can kill people? cool logic senpai

Loving your enemy and not using violence, under any circumstances, are two completely different things.

Who did Jesus kill in the temple?

you can flip tables

killing is the logical conclusion of permitting ANY violence

your mom is the logical conclusion of my dick

>To accept violence, even for self-defense, is to go against the fundamental teachings of christianity, and such a person cannot be called christian.
This. Except for the death sentence of course.

Where does it say that?

>When Jesus was threatened with violence by the Roman authorities he told Peter, who had drawn his sword to protect Jesus, to put it back in his sheath
>To accept violence, even for self-defense, is to go against the fundamental teachings of christianity
Your reasoning is flawed
Jesus didn't ask Peter to remove his sword for the sake of respecting the christian doctrine or to make an example of peace-loving hippie, he did it because he knew he HAD to die at the hands of the Romans to redeem the sins of mankind. Had he not died on the cross, everything he did would have been for naught

he didn't have to die specifically at the hands of the romans. wasn't it the point that anyone can kill him unhindered?

And whip people. Truly a religion of peace like everything else from the Middle east.

Jesus was also pretty clear when he said he would be back before all his disciples died.

you do know that doesn't really depict Jesus Christ at all, the catholics made that images to worship it. or to see what jesus looks like, well based on them

It's obvious
Learn2morals.

where?

>it's another liberal atheist trying to lecture Christians on their own religion
Which they don't really believe btw, and they think should go away, but they think that you should play by his interpretation of it, which basically amounts to liberal atheism.

He also told him to buy that sword. I'm not even Christian anymore but I think you should stop twisting it for your own political reasons

To begin with, we Christians believe that the God of the OT and Jesus are not two different gods, with two different teachings. The God of the OT forbids murder, which is a personal crime, and a matter of criminal law, but he certainly permits, nay commands, righteous violence. Liberal atheists like OP are the first one to cry and whine about how God is violent, genocidal, etc.

OP gave away that he's a liberal atheist (or a Jew?) when he plays the old liberal atheist card that Jesus was a human teacher and that this and that.

>To accept violence, even for self-defense, is to go against the fundamental teachings of christianity, and such a person cannot be called christian.- 20 posts and 4 image replies shown.
this

It's not even up for debate. The New Testament is essentially a thesis on pacifism.

prove it faggot

Secondly Jesus obviously believed in righteous violence, as in the already cited episode with the merchants. But more importantly he himself will exert righteous violence in the last day, as per bible prophecy.

The turn the other cheek doctrine is meant for other Christians. With regard to unbelievers, make no mistake, there will be vengeance.
Revelation 6:10
>They called out in a loud voice, "How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?"

Revelation 19:13
>He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God

Which echoes Isaiah 63:2-4
> 2 Why are your garments red, like those of one treading the winepress? 3 I have trodden the winepress alone; from the nations no one was with me. I trampled them in my anger and trod them down in my wrath; their blood spattered my garments, and I stained all my clothing. 4 It was for me the day of vengeance; the year for me to redeem had come

Notice that the red in Jesus' robe is NOT his own blood, but from the nations.
>I trampled them in my anger and trod them down in my wrath; their blood spattered my garments, and I stained all my clothing.

The image of Jesus avenging the saints is like that of a man treading the winepress, staining his robe with wine. And it is called a day of vengeance.

So libshits can take your pacifist, hippie Jesus and fuck right off.

...

The earliest image of Jesus is from the Byzantine empire. And it does look that.

IT represents a biblical story
Jesus driving out moneylenders with a whip.

In the gospel. Let me guess:"this generation" means every generation until the end of time.
You sure learned to lie from the jews.

Because people from that area of the world are all Black skinned, flat nosed, Afro'd,big lipped niggers, right?

I'm a christian

there is no excuse for violence in the teachings of Christ and many, many explicit commands and lessons on submitting to violence

you're stupid,

no, it's bcoz ur stupid. God's image was never relevant to be saved, it's the Gospel,

But vengeance is for god, not for us. And since we're citing the old testament, a friendly reminder that should your daughter happen to be raped in a town, she is to be stoned to death. Because reasons.

How neojewish of you.

No. You're a liar.

The actual words of Jesus.

Matthew 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

Luke 22:36 Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

Except you're referencing OT Law (which is fulfilled), and I'm referencing 1) prophecy (which is yet to be fulfilled), 2) God's explicit commands for his people to engage in righteous violence, such as in numerous wars, offensive and defensive, that Israel engaged in, which is not of the Mosaic Law, but an express order of God. Your non-point, therefore, falls entirely.

OT and NT gods are the same God, and he has, is and will command his followers from to engage in righteous violence, and will do so himself. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.

More words of Jesus.

Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

Jeremiah 48:10 Cursed be he that doeth the work of the Lord deceitfully, and cursed be he that keepeth back his sword from blood.

he looks like a greek there. every culture that depicts him makes him look like them.

Doesn't the Bible say don't judge? Oh wait. There are several verses in the Bible where we are told to judge.

John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

1 Corinthians 2:15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

1 Corinthians 6:2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?

Liberal atheist BTFO.

Go back to making your Buddhist threads if you want to play religion.

educate yourself you stupid dumbass

try reading the Bible along with it too

>read this book that is not the bible
Again, you're a hypocrite and a two-faced liar, not a Christian. If you sincerely wish to become a Christian someday, you need to backdown, STFU, repent and repudiate this false, liberal atheist that you profess, and profess the gospel of Jesus Christ. Until then, whatever you think or have to say about Christianity is not important.

>educate yourself
>try to read the bible

Kek

>man posting literature from great Christian thinkers that cites scripture and encouraging others to read the Bible is being told that he is not a true Christian by those who defend acts of violence and don't read the Bible
trolling is a bannable offense

Let me try to put it this way. As far as religion is concerned, you and your secular books don't matter. The bible matters.

Here, let me try to put it more schematically:

You, secular authors = not important.
The holy bible = important.

Do you understand the words that I am writing to you? Good. Now that we've settled this, I'll pray for your repentance and conversion.

>secular authors = not important.
>The holy bible = important.
agreed. that's why i only posted a book that presents my argument on scripture for me. It's no different than what you are doing right now.

also, that is why I base my faith on Sola Scriptura :^)

You're still here? No I'm not gonna read a book by your favorite liberal author posing as Christian. Sorry.

how are your posts, which are arguments based form scripture, different from that book which is based on scripture?

the only difference is that your ares on Veeky Forums written by an anonymouse shut-in and Tolstoy's are preserved in the western canon for eternity

I didn't come here to debate. I came to show what the bible says. You're right that my posts have no value of their own (except insofar as they quote scripture). The best thing to do is to just to read the bible. Again repudiate your secular, liberal gospel and get to know the gospel of Christ.

right

in every single one of my posts I have advocated reading the bible, so your posts have had no meaning at all, especially since not a single one of them has quoted scripture or even made an argument based on scripture

Matthew 5:9-10
>“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons[a] of God.

>10 “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus proclaims that those who seek peace and are victims of violence done against God are righteous and blessed. Those who do violence are not

Matthew 5:38-42
>38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ 39 But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic,[h] let him have your cloak as well. 41 And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you.

Jesus explicity states that violence done in self defense is wrong. No man is to seek his own vengeance, no matter how petty or great the offense.

Ephesians 6:5-8
>5 Bondservants,[a] obey your earthly masters[b] with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ, 6 not by the way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but as bondservants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart, 7 rendering service with a good will as to the Lord and not to man, 8 knowing that whatever good anyone does, this he will receive back from the Lord, whether he is a bondservant or is free.

Even those in Slavery are not permitted to rebel. In fact the attitude of servitude to unkind and unjust masters is what is pleasing to God; retribution and revolution done in the name of earthly freedom is not

(cont.)
1 Peter 3

>Suffering for Righteousness' Sake
8 Finally, all of you, have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind. 9 Do not repay evil for evil or reviling for reviling, but on the contrary, bless, for to this you were called, that you may obtain a blessing. 10 For

“Whoever desires to love life
and see good days,
let him keep his tongue from evil
and his lips from speaking deceit;
11 let him turn away from evil and do good;
let him seek peace and pursue it.
12 For the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous,
and his ears are open to their prayer.
But the face of the Lord is against those who do evil.”
13 Now who is there to harm you if you are zealous for what is good? 14 But even if you should suffer for righteousness' sake, you will be blessed. Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, 15 but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, 16 having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame. 17 For it is better to suffer for doing good, if that should be God's will, than for doing evil.

Romans 12:17-21
>Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. 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.” To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

Paul reaffirms that no violence is to be performed by Christians in order to stop or prevent persecution, or for personal retribution or defense

I want to see a single verse in the new testament that affirms that self defense and violence done in the name to preserve Christendom is permitted

I see that you are not only stubborn, but lazy, because you didn't read the thread.

No, Christianity is not the liberal religion that you would like it to be. Try it with Buddhism.

post the bible or shut the fuck up

Already did.

i will go through and refute these step by step using other scripture
as another user said, justice is not to be carried out by men. stated in scripture herethose revelation verses are bout the Lord crushing his own enemies. Neither are for followers of Christ to kill or commit acts of violence in his name. From reading these verses alone, we can see that harsh punishment exists for those tho attack God, but those punishments come from God himself and not Man.

>I
again, Jesus is the sword wielder. Not Man.
>Luke 22
38 And they said, “Look, Lord, here are two swords.” And he said to them, “It is enough.”

Jesus Prays on the Mount of Olives
39 And he came out and went, as was his custom, to the Mount of Olives, and the disciples followed him. 40 And when he came to the place, he said to them, “Pray that you may not enter into temptation.” 41 And he withdrew from them about a stone's throw, and knelt down and prayed,

...
47 While he was still speaking, there came a crowd, and the man called Judas, one of the twelve, was leading them. He drew near to Jesus to kiss him, 48 but Jesus said to him, “Judas, would you betray the Son of Man with a kiss?” 49 And when those who were around him saw what would follow, they said, “Lord, shall we strike with the sword?” 50 And one of them struck the servant[h] of the high priest and cut off his right ear. 51 But Jesus said, “No more of this!” And he touched his ear and healed him.

Jesus tells his disciples to stand guard with swords while he prays. When they use the swords to attack the guards, Jesus tells them to stop. Obviously Jesus here does not permit violence to be carried out by man

>Luke 19
it's a parable. This is not a commandment from Jesus to his followers
>Jeremiah
old testament, does not apply to Christians
>inb4 fulfilled not erased!
fulfilled so that the old law is not abolished, but not applicable. It is still the word of God but no longer active law.
Acts 10:13-15
>13 And there came a voice to him: “Rise, Peter; kill and eat.” 14 But Peter said, “By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean.” 15 And the voice came to him again a second time, “What God has made clean, do not call common.”

not a single verse there permits violence. not a one.

openbible.info/topics/judging

The thing with christianity is that it is a reversed religion, what people who know what they are doing worship is the christian hell, as the heaven is just a trap for the deceived, this is done so because they are evil and want to hide what they worship while fooling others into the weakening lie.

Jesus does not need our help to kill all of his enemies.

He will do it all by himself. Maybe he'll let the angels in on the action. I have to figure Michael is champing at the bit for a good fight.

>i will go through and refute these step by step using other scripture
Thank you admiting this.

As I said before the liberal atheists, when they try to pose as Christians, in professing their lies and man-made doctrines, they will attempt to quote scripture against scripture, and pin the God of the OT against the God of the NT, in the hope that, in the confusion that inssues, not the truth, but the lie will prevail. Christians, however, believe that

>All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness 2 Timothy 3:16

And that God
>does not change like shifting shadows James 1:17

And

>I the Lord do not change Malachi 3:6

I wouldn't go so far as you do. Paul admonished the Corinthian church for standing there and getting slapped.

2 Corinthians 11
For you gladly tolerate fools, since you are so wise. In fact, you even put up with anyone who enslaves you or exploits you or takes advantage of you or exalts himself or strikes you in the face. To my shame I concede that we were too weak for that!

Let every man be convinced in his heart that what he does, he does for the Lord. After all, the Lord left behind ways in which soldiers should act, and soldiers literally live by the sword.

Thus speaks the reprobate mind, the mind completely occluded by the evil one.

>17 And the city and all that is within it shall be devoted to the Lord for destruction Joshua 6:17
>16 But uin the cities of these peoples that the Lord your God is giving you for an inheritance, you shall save alive nothing that breathes, 17 but vyou shall devote them to complete destruction,1 the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites, as the Lord your God has commanded, Deuteronomy 20:16–17
And so on and so forth. It would be tedious to quote all verses in scripture that God commands righteous violence.

The God that commanded the destruction of the Cannanites, and many others, is the same God that says to love your enemies.
>>I the Lord do not change Malachi 3:6
How so? Because the commandments to turn the other cheek, etc., are meant for other Christians, not unbelievers.

I never said that the Lord has changed or that Scripture wasn't God breathed

just that your citations were misleading at best and outright decietful at worst

>Because the commandments to turn the other cheek, etc., are meant for other Christians, not unbelievers.
how can you possibly believe this

it's written in the exact same chapter that it is explicitly for those who persecute you

You're both off, really.

You have to understand that Jesus was teaching the Law, during the time of the Law, as the New Covenant had not yet been established. The New Covenant was established at his death, and the resurrection provides proof that it is effective.

Prior to the New Covenant, mankind was following the gospel of satan: Eat the fruit, know good and evil, and be like God. So God gave Moses the Law in order to show what level of perfection a man must attain just in order to not be a law breaker. That level is humanly impossible; nobody was ever found righteous under the Law.

So after Jesus dismantled the pharisee's form of Judaism, forged in captivity in Babylon, he turned to other things that one must also do in order to be like God. Keep the law perfectly. Do all good deeds possible. Turn the other cheek. Go the extra mile. Give the thief your cloak too. Be in no man's debt. Have no man hold anything against you.

If the first bit, the following of the Law was impossible, this last bit was even more impossible. Imagine everyone who holds something against you, and imagine trying to reconcile yourself with literally everyone you have ever been in contact with. Or who was affected by any of your actions.

No, the Sermon on the Mount was a shock speech given to people who thought they had developed a lifestyle to prevent them from violating the Law of Moses, and Jesus tore it down completely.

Thus enraged they plotted to murder their own God, not even recognizing him for who he was.

The Sermon on the Mount is not a Christian primer. It heaps on to the Law further good acts one must do to "be like God".

>Matthew 5:9-10
It does not profess non-violence. Joshua was as much a peacemaker as any servant of God. You, because of your liberal atheist bias, and your non-belief, confuse secular peace with the true peace that is in Christ Jesus. For Jesus is called the prince of piece (Isaiah 9:6), and our peace (Ephesians 2:13), etc.
>10 “Blessed are those who are persecuted
Again it does not profess non-violence. Rather it says Christians should be bold in the face of persecution.
>Matthew 5:38-42
Meant for other Christians.
>Ephesians 6:5-8
Servants obviously shouldn't rebel against their masters because this is an unjust cause. It is a moral and civil issue, not even a theological one (although theology is the basis of morality.

I appreciate what you're doing brother. Theology is my weak area so I have learned quite a few things from your posts.

The Sermon on the Mount is the perfection and essence of the Law. If everyone were to follow the Law perfectly it would amount to living according to the principles taught in the sermon. It is the way God intended humans to live, the way of the saint, and of the redeemed man after the resurrection. But those that are not in Christ will not be resurrected, but will be thrown in the fire. In other words it is meant only for Christians.

I disagree with this only in the idea that man is not supposed to be like Christ in those ways

you are right in the way that God's law is not possible to be followed by any man and no man by their own strength is righteous, but man must continue day in and day out to read and meditate scripture to be more like Christ. Man does not gain righteousness through acting like God, but man falters in his attempt to please him and is made clean by God's forgiveness and mercy through Jesus Christ
>In other words it is meant only for Christians.
how can you possibly be more wrong
he says to love your enemies and pray for them. Are these enemies other Christians as well?

you are a liar and deciever

The only thing you need to know is how much Jesus loves you, and how proud he is of you. Everything else flows from that.

Said the reprobate.
>Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Matthew 7:19

Follow through with your first thought. It is the way men must live.

But men cannot live that way. Nobody. People cannot even follow their own rules for living perfectly, rules they made up themselves.

Ergo, men are broken and in need of the mercy of God, being unable to live up to the requirements of being righteous and holy on our own.

The Holy Spirit's job is to transform men saved into the image of God.

Man's job is to make sure he's saved and has the Holy Spirit in him, resurrecting him to eternal life and transforming him into the image of Jesus.

>le Reddit emoji
Out

Not even close to the truth.

Jesus said that someone listening to him right then and there would not die until he saw Jesus descend from heaven in glory.

Everyone's eyes went to John. Why? I don't know. Maybe Jesus looked at John too. Peter instantly gets offended and asks Jesus why he isn't the one who gets this honor. And John picks up the rumor that he cannot die. But that's not what Jesus said; Jesus never said one of them would never die. Just that one of them would see him descend in glory before he died.

They all knew it was John. The bible makes it clear it was John. Peter was admonished by Jesus to play his own role, not John's.

So here's John, the last living apostle, and Rome tries to boil him in oil, but fails. John cannot die until x happens. So failing to kill John, Rome banishes John to the island of Patmos, where John lives out his days.

One day the Spirit takes John into the third heaven and shows him our future. John sees Jesus descending from heaven in glory at the second coming, and then is transported back to write about it. It is written, by John, in the Revelation of Jesus Christ.

What may add to your confusion is the Christian ideal to always live every day as though Jesus is coming back today. Christians have been doing this for almost 2000 years.

Because whether by death or by rapture, one day every believer will take his last breath on earth, open his eyes, and see his Lord smiling at him.

>Ergo, men are broken and in need of the mercy of God, being unable to live up to the requirements of being righteous and holy on our own.
Indeed the ideal of the sermon on the mount can only be lived by resurrected Christians. Atheist liberals, on the one hand, don't believe in the resurrection and want to build paradise here on earth. Secular utopian ideologies, such communism, anarchism, is the result of fallen man trying to defy God's plans and bring heaven down to earth.

agreed 100%

>is the result
are* the result

>is the result of fallen man trying to defy God's plans and bring heaven down to earth.
Not on God's terms but on their own terms.

By glorified Christians, yes.

People get confused and think that Christians have the power to live out the rest of their lives in a sin free state.

If that were true, the greatest of us, the saved Christians, Paul, would have been able to do this.

He was not, and lamented about it frequently.

I have no more power to live a sinfree life now that I am saved than before when I was not. I just live differently now. I live by the guidance of the Holy Spirit in me, not by some attempt to make and keep rules. If men could do this, they already had the rules to keep before Jesus was tortured to death.

He must have been tortured to death for a reason.

agreed 100%

How odd that agreement unsettles me more than hostile disagreement.

Gonna have to pray about that.

God bless.

Jesus also said if you have a cloak and not a sword you sell your cloak to buy a sword. AND WHAT DO YOU DO WITH A SWORD? BE NOICE?

>>You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person.
Resist in this case is "anthistemi", meaning "do not resist by legal means." Christ was not saying "never resist anyone," rather, he was dealing with a misconception at the time of exodus 21:24-25. The wording of Matthew chapter 5 is very important. After the beatitudes Christ says "17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." before proceeding to talk about various parts of the law. Every time He says "you have heard it was said" not "it is written." This choice of words is explicit, for Christ is not changing the law. Instead He's dealing with the interpretation of the people at the time, what is "said," not what is "written." At the time, peopke used exodus 21:24-25 to demand harsh punishments as retribution for being wronged, as these verses were instructions for jewish ""magistrates"".
This fact is what makes the choice of anthistemi of the utmost importance. Christ is explicitly dealing with retribution through "legal means," which was what exodus was being abused in. Christ wasn't saying "never resist," for that would abolish the law, and Christ's preface makes clear that's not His goal at all, instead He was undoing perversions of scripture.
With this knowledge, we can come to know that Christ was not advocating for the most extreme pacfisim, but instead for kindness. He was more saying "if some one wrongs you, don't pervert scripture to sue their ass off," not "if someone's going to kill you, just let it happen man."
(1/2)

>>Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you
This does not contradict forms of justified violence. If this was islam, where "crucifixion" of apostates and all forms of violence is encouraged, then you'd have a point. But Christ's call for love doesn't mean you can't act in self defense, or fight evil (like waging war against bloodthirsty regimes), rather, this means that in any such act, you must always still be loving. This would be more indicative of a code of honor (don't kill if you have other options, always be merciful, never respond in unequal ways, no torture, etc.) than a complete denial of all violence.
>>etc.
Not an argument. Actually show more passages or just leave the ones you have.

So is Christ a killer? No, of course not, as Christians we are called to love everyone, even our enemies. But this is not a prohibition of violence, rather it severly restricts what violence you can do, and frankly for the better, as it would have prevented most of the atrocities committed in the last couple of centuries.

You use the sword to hold somebody up and take their cloak. Now you have both.

Kek.
Thanks for this post. Where do you get this from? And are you going to seminary or just amateur theologian?

>Where do you get this from?
Various different books and such. R. T. France was the one from whom my understanding of the he true meaning of the greek comes from.
>And are you going to seminary or just amateur theologian?
Amateur theologian, though I do have quite a few preists as relatives, and know quite a few seminarians since I go to the biggest Catholic University in the USA.