Christianity and violence

[nobspeople]

Does anything within the bible allow Christians to be violent towards non-Christians?

God demanded purity and strict obedience, and idolatry and blasphemy were punishable by death (Exodus 20:3, 5). Killing unbelievers was actually declared by popes Leo IV and John VIII to be spiritually beneficial for Christian soldiers: Their sins could be erased if they killed in defense of the Church. Even the whole 'wives submit to your husbands' can, and has, been used to justify violence.

Thoughts?

[theophile]

Indicating the possible need for violence is different from proposing actual violence against people.

Well, don't leave us hanging. What exactly is the difference?


Tcg

Ummm, okay. Proposing actual violence would be to say something like "all nazis must be destroyed." It would involve a specific group and an actual call to violent action against them. Indicating the possible need for violence is an abstract, logical extension of a principle. It is saying that violence follows from or is consistent with that principle. That there are scenarios / times when violence is compelled by it.

Does one ultimately lead to the other? Sure, and so we have to be extremely careful with such statements and any resulting judgments. But I haven't taken that step. I haven't issued any actual calls to violence against any specific groups / people. I haven't said, for instance, that nazis are evil and should be destroyed. (Although Nazi Germany is a clear example where I would say that violence was indeed called for. That Christian love compelled action against that relentless regime no different than it did Egypt for its enslavement of people.)

Anyways, I would like nothing more than to sit on the happy, tree-hugging side of Christian love, but to do so would be to pretend that evil doesn't exist, and that there is a fundamental Christian responsibility (based on the principle of Christian love and nothing more) to do something about it.

[JoeyKnothead]

...
Anyways, I would like nothing more than to sit on the happy, tree-hugging side of Christian love, but to do so would be to pretend that evil doesn't exist, and that there is a fundamental Christian responsibility (based on the principle of Christian love and nothing more) to do something about it.

Christian "love" like murdering abortion providers, or stuffing Jews into ovens.

Ya know, the Godly Christian love™!

[theophile]

...
Anyways, I would like nothing more than to sit on the happy, tree-hugging side of Christian love, but to do so would be to pretend that evil doesn't exist, and that there is a fundamental Christian responsibility (based on the principle of Christian love and nothing more) to do something about it.

Christian "love" like murdering abortion providers, or stuffing Jews into ovens.

Ya know, the Godly Christian love™!

Are you trying to make the point that people claim horrific things in the name of Christian love? Okay. So what? People claim horrific things in the name of anything. This doesn't make Christian love wrong. It makes it hard to achieve. It makes it something that can be co-opted for evil. Something that can be twisted into something else that is no longer consistent and that may now itself be evil. Something we may need to be violent against if it starts to relentlessly oppress or destroy life.

This includes ridiculous and horrific notions such as murdering abortion providers and stuffing Jews into ovens. There may be some wild scenario where these are the right thing to do for the sake of life but that is hard to imagine.

[JoeyKnothead]

...
Anyways, I would like nothing more than to sit on the happy, tree-hugging side of Christian love, but to do so would be to pretend that evil doesn't exist, and that there is a fundamental Christian responsibility (based on the principle of Christian love and nothing more) to do something about it.

Christian "love" like murdering abortion providers, or stuffing Jews into ovens.

Ya know, the Godly Christian love™!

Are you trying to make the point that people claim horrific things in the name of Christian love? Okay. So what? People claim horrific things in the name of anything. This doesn't make Christian love wrong. It makes it hard to achieve. It makes it something that can be co-opted for evil. Something that can be twisted into something else that is no longer consistent and that may now itself be evil. Something we may need to be violent against if it starts to relentlessly oppress or destroy life.

This includes ridiculous and horrific notions such as murdering abortion providers and stuffing Jews into ovens. There may be some wild scenario where these are the right thing to do for the sake of life but that is hard to imagine.

My point is, these are actions performed by Christians, and how bout that.

Christian 'love' aint just you carrying on about it.

[1213]

I'm fine with further defining the sword Jesus brings as the word of God. But Jesus is clearly contrasting the ultimate outcome that it brings with peace. ..

I don’t think Jesus said he brings violence or wants his disciples to be violent. But, it is true that he didn’t bring peace to world, because what he said causes much violence from those who hate God and Jesus. But, I think his disciples still can have peace, even if others are violent and persecute.

Peace I leave with you. My peace I give to you; not as the world gives, give I to you. Don't let your heart be troubled, neither let it be fearful.
John 14:27

[brunumb]

I just finished telling you why God is irrelevant to that question. Challenge that with an argument (which you have yet to do). Again, for like the third time, all we need is the Christian principle of love. That principle can be explored, understood, and affirmed irrespective of God or God's existence.

God is essentially irrelevant full stop. All we need is the principle of love. Even the term Christian is irrelevant.

[brunumb]

But, it is true that he didn’t bring peace to world, because what he said causes much violence from those who hate God and Jesus.

Why do you think people hate God and Jesus? What did God and Jesus do to cause such a reaction from people?

[JoeyKnothead]

I just finished telling you why God is irrelevant to that question. Challenge that with an argument (which you have yet to do). Again, for like the third time, all we need is the Christian principle of love. That principle can be explored, understood, and affirmed irrespective of God or God's existence.

God is essentially irrelevant full stop. All we need is the principle of love. Even the term Christian is irrelevant.

I tend to think the use of the term "Christian love" is a not so subtle dig at folks who ain't Christian.

[Purple Knight]

Does anything within the bible allow Christians to be violent towards non-Christians?

Jews, yes. Christians, no. That's unfortunately the simple truth.

[Miles]

[Replying to nobspeople in post #1]

Does anything within the bible allow Christians to be violent towards non-Christians?

Yes. But it requires judgment of evil. And it is only justified if the violence is towards what is evil.

Well, god didn't hesitate in having oxen, sheep, camels, asses, and even human infants killed.

1 Samuel 15:3
"Now go and smite Amalek and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.’

Were they all evil? Of course. They had to have been to deserve such a fate---- "violence is towards what is evil" and all. And obviously once we get rid of all the evil sheep and evil infants in the world life will be much better.

Evil suppresses and destroys life,

But considering that god creates evil, that must be a good thing. Right?

Isaiah 45:7
"I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I am Jehovah, that doeth all these things."

So what a neat little scenario we have on Earth here.

1. God creates people
2. he also creates evil and . . .
3. Imbues infants and suckling, oxen and sheep, camels and asses with it so . . .
4. We have good reason to kill them all.

Quite a guy, this Christian god of yours. A bit puzzling to be sure, but then he can be as illogical as he pleases and still draw a crowd.


.