Was Jesus really a pacifist?

[puddleglum]

Jesus is perceived by many as being a pacifist who never practiced or advocated violence of any kind. He commanded us to turn the other cheek when someone hits us and to love everyone, including our enemies. On the basis of these commands some Christians have concluded that a Christian must never engage in any kind of violence. They believe it is wrong for a Christian to serve in the military, even if his country is at war.

If we consider only these teachings of Jesus this seems to be a logical conclusion. But Jesus also did and said some things that are inconsistent with pacifism.

His reaction when he saw what was going on in the temple wasn’t that of a pacifist.

And Jesus entered the temple and drove out all who sold and bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. He said to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer,’ but you make it a den of robbers.�
Matthew 21:12-13 ESV

When he was arrested Peter tried to defend him.

Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it and struck the high priest’s servant and cut off his right ear. (The servant’s name was Malchus.) So Jesus said to Peter, “Put your sword into its sheath; shall I not drink the cup that the Father has given me?�
John 18:10-11 ESV

At first this seems to confirm the belief that Jesus advocated pacifism. He said that Peter was wrong in attacking. But then Jesus told Peter to put his sword back in its sheath. Wouldn’t a true pacifist have told Peter to throw his sword away because he would never need it again?

Earlier he had given his disciples a command that was even more inconsistent with pacifism.

He said to them, “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.�
Luke 22:36 ESV

He not only told Peter to keep his sword but he also said the the disciples who didn’t already have swords should buy them. But what is the point of having a sword if you are commanded to respond to an attacker by turning the other cheek? This appears to be a problem because we misunderstand what Jesus meant by the command.

Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.
Matthew 5:39 ESV

Jesus said that if someone slaps us on the right cheek we are to turn the other cheek. Most people are right handed. If you are facing someone and hit him on the right cheek with your right hand you will hit him with the back of your hand. You might cause some pain but you can’t do any real physical harm.

The purpose in striking someone this way is to insult him and express contempt for him. There have been cultures in which this act would be considered a challenge to a duel. Today it is possible that the person being slapped will try to kill the other without bothering with the formalities of a duel. Jesus has forbidden us to respond in this way. This command does not prohibit us from defending ourselves if someone attacks with the intention of hurting or killing us.

Swords can be used for other reasons beside self defense. Jesus said that one of the two great commandments was to love our neighbor as ourselves. If a neighbor is being attacked love demands that we defend him if possible even if it means hurting or killing the attacker. (I have heard objections to this on the grounds that it isn’t showing love for the attacker, but this is a situation that calls for justice as well as love.)

The things Jesus taught while on earth were only the beginning of his teaching. After he was taken up into Heaven he continued to teach and direct his disciples through the Holy Spirit.

But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.
Acts 1:8 ESV

Acts chapter 10 tells how the Spirit led Peter to preach the gospel to a Gentile named Cornelius.

And while Peter was pondering the vision, the Spirit said to him, “Behold, three men are looking for you. Rise and go down and accompany them without hesitation, for I have sent them.�
Acts 10:19-20 ESV

Peter obeyed and the Holy Spirit came on Cornelius and the people who were with him just at he had come on the Jews earlier.

While Peter was still saying these things, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word. And the believers from among the circumcised who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles. For they were hearing them speaking in tongues and extolling God.

Then Peter declared, “Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?� And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days.
Acts 10:44-48 ESV

Cornelius was not only a Gentile but he was also an officer in the Roman army.

At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion of what was known as the Italian Cohort, a devout man who feared God with all his household, gave alms generously to the people, and prayed continually to God.
Acts 10:1-2 ESV

If Jesus taught pacifism surely Cornelius would have quit his job and found a new occupation when he became a believer but there is no indication that he did anything like this. Chapter 11 of Acts describes the opposition of some believers to the conversion of Cornelius, but their objections were based on the fact that Cornelius was an uncircumcised Gentile, not that he was a Roman soldier.

Jesus acknowledged the authority of human government. When asked whether it was right to pay taxes to Caesar his response was, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.� We are not only required to pay our taxes, but the choice of Cornelius as the first Gentile convert shows that we may also serve as soldiers in Caesar’s army. Jesus never taught pacifism so there is no reason a person cannot be both a professional soldier and a Christian.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 1 by puddleglum]

pacifist

a. Opposition to war or violence as a means of resolving disputes.

b. Such opposition demonstrated by refusal to participate in military action.

No, while Jesus did instruct his followers to refrain from war and violence, Jesus (as the Archangel Michael) will one day lead the angelic forces in the final war against evil.

Christians however are to love (no kill, or train to kill) their enemies, so combatting in war or supporting war would be incompatible with being a Christian.

[koko]

Catholic writer Thomas Merton addressed this matter many years ago in one of his writings (read it so long ago that I forgot which book it was - but perhaps someone here might know). Though not a pacifist himself, he felt Jesus clearly was one and that it is perfectly consistent with New Testament teachings to be one.

In Luke 3:14 John the Baptist was asked by two soldiers, 'what are we to do?' He said, honor your employment contract with the Romans, be content with your wages, and do harm to no one.

Centurions in those days had 30 year contracts with the Roman authorities. They remained employed by Rome despite now being converted to Christianity. Brother Thomas said history proved that newly converted Roman soldiers did not engage in combat but were assigned constabulary duties. This is why police historically were called "peace officers".


Some people quote Jesus as saying "I did not come to bring peace but to bring a sword". He did say that but the sword was a symbol of the power of the Holy Spirit {Ephesians 6:17} along with other symbolic armaments Christians were to use. Note that not one of them was an actual weapon contrary to pseudo Christian teaching. At no point did he instruct his followers to employ weapons against non-followers. Divine "truth shall be your shield and buckler" ~ Psalm 91:4.

Psalm 81:13-15 tells us that this is true for an entire nation. A message repeated in Deut 28:7; in Isaiah 41:14; in I Samuel 8:20; and in Psalm 27. That same order of protection for an entire nation is promised again in Luke 1:69-75.


"Be not brawlers but show meekness to all men" ~ Titus 3:2.

"Be at peace with all men. "


Thus, contrary to conventional "Christian" teaching, pacifism is genuinely Christian.


If you are in the military today, drop your weapons and demand that you be assigned peaceful constabulary duties just exactly as Roman centurions did. Do NOT go into combat and do not kill or harm anyone. Read your Bible see that this message is accurate and reflects Jesus's true teachings on this subject.

[puddleglum]

[Replying to post 3 by koko]

In Luke 3:14 John the Baptist was asked by two soldiers, 'what are we to do?' He said, honor your employment contract with the Romans, be content with your wages, and do harm to no one.

What translation of the Bible are you using? Here is what the ESV says:

Soldiers also asked him, “And we, what shall we do?� And he said to them, “Do not extort money from anyone by threats or by false accusation, and be content with your wages.�

Here is what the Bible says about the authority of human government.

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer.
(Romans 13:1-4 ESV)

Governments are given the authority to do some things that individuals are not, such as avenge wrongdoing.

[koko]

Hating or killing others is wrong and the punishment for that is eternal death.

Luke 3:14 transcriptions here: http://biblehub.com/luke/3-14.htm



if governments can do no wrong then the slaughter by Romans of Christians in the lion's dens are perfectly justified - not so in my mind

[puddleglum]

[Replying to post 5 by koko]

if governments can do no wrong then the slaughter by Romans of Christians in the lion's dens are perfectly justified - not so in my mind

Governments can do wrong and will be judged by God if they do, but they also have the authority to punish wrongdoing and protect their citizens from attacks by other nations and in order to do this they sometimes have to kill.

In the verse you referred to John didn't tell the soldiers they needed to quit being soldiers.

[koko]

In the verse you referred to John didn't tell the soldiers they needed to quit being soldiers.

As I wrote above he told them to honor the time limit of their contract (one that lasted 30 years). However, they became unarmed constables and were then called "peace officers" according to Thomas Merton.

[puddleglum]

In the verse you referred to John didn't tell the soldiers they needed to quit being soldiers.

As I wrote above he told them to honor the time limit of their contract (one that lasted 30 years). However, they became unarmed constables and were then called "peace officers" according to Thomas Merton.

How do you know this is true? There is nothing in the Bible to show it.

[koko]

As I wrote above he told them to honor the time limit of their contract (one that lasted 30 years). However, they became unarmed constables and were then called "peace officers" according to Thomas Merton.

How do you know this is true? There is nothing in the Bible to show it.

It does say 'make peace with ALL men'. Nowhere are we told to engage in military combat.

The many centurions who converted to Christianity did not intervene when their fellow Christians were thrown into the lion's den. That sure says a lot.

[theStudent]

Jesus is perceived by many as being a pacifist who never practiced or advocated violence of any kind. He commanded us to turn the other cheek when someone hits us and to love everyone, including our enemies. On the basis of these commands some Christians have concluded that a Christian must never engage in any kind of violence. They believe it is wrong for a Christian to serve in the military, even if his country is at war.

If we consider only these teachings of Jesus this seems to be a logical conclusion. But Jesus also did and said some things that are inconsistent with pacifism.

His reaction when he saw what was going on in the temple wasn’t that of a pacifist.

And Jesus entered the temple and drove out all who sold and bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. He said to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer,’ but you make it a den of robbers.�
Matthew 21:12-13 ESV

When he was arrested Peter tried to defend him.

Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it and struck the high priest’s servant and cut off his right ear. (The servant’s name was Malchus.) So Jesus said to Peter, “Put your sword into its sheath; shall I not drink the cup that the Father has given me?�
John 18:10-11 ESV

At first this seems to confirm the belief that Jesus advocated pacifism. He said that Peter was wrong in attacking. But then Jesus told Peter to put his sword back in its sheath. Wouldn’t a true pacifist have told Peter to throw his sword away because he would never need it again?

Earlier he had given his disciples a command that was even more inconsistent with pacifism.

He said to them, “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.�
Luke 22:36 ESV

He not only told Peter to keep his sword but he also said the the disciples who didn’t already have swords should buy them. But what is the point of having a sword if you are commanded to respond to an attacker by turning the other cheek? This appears to be a problem because we misunderstand what Jesus meant by the command.

Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.
Matthew 5:39 ESV

Jesus said that if someone slaps us on the right cheek we are to turn the other cheek. Most people are right handed. If you are facing someone and hit him on the right cheek with your right hand you will hit him with the back of your hand. You might cause some pain but you can’t do any real physical harm.

The purpose in striking someone this way is to insult him and express contempt for him. There have been cultures in which this act would be considered a challenge to a duel. Today it is possible that the person being slapped will try to kill the other without bothering with the formalities of a duel. Jesus has forbidden us to respond in this way. This command does not prohibit us from defending ourselves if someone attacks with the intention of hurting or killing us.

Swords can be used for other reasons beside self defense. Jesus said that one of the two great commandments was to love our neighbor as ourselves. If a neighbor is being attacked love demands that we defend him if possible even if it means hurting or killing the attacker. (I have heard objections to this on the grounds that it isn’t showing love for the attacker, but this is a situation that calls for justice as well as love.)

The things Jesus taught while on earth were only the beginning of his teaching. After he was taken up into Heaven he continued to teach and direct his disciples through the Holy Spirit.

But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.
Acts 1:8 ESV

Acts chapter 10 tells how the Spirit led Peter to preach the gospel to a Gentile named Cornelius.

And while Peter was pondering the vision, the Spirit said to him, “Behold, three men are looking for you. Rise and go down and accompany them without hesitation, for I have sent them.�
Acts 10:19-20 ESV

Peter obeyed and the Holy Spirit came on Cornelius and the people who were with him just at he had come on the Jews earlier.

While Peter was still saying these things, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word. And the believers from among the circumcised who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles. For they were hearing them speaking in tongues and extolling God.

Then Peter declared, “Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?� And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days.
Acts 10:44-48 ESV

Cornelius was not only a Gentile but he was also an officer in the Roman army.

At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion of what was known as the Italian Cohort, a devout man who feared God with all his household, gave alms generously to the people, and prayed continually to God.
Acts 10:1-2 ESV

If Jesus taught pacifism surely Cornelius would have quit his job and found a new occupation when he became a believer but there is no indication that he did anything like this. Chapter 11 of Acts describes the opposition of some believers to the conversion of Cornelius, but their objections were based on the fact that Cornelius was an uncircumcised Gentile, not that he was a Roman soldier.

Jesus acknowledged the authority of human government. When asked whether it was right to pay taxes to Caesar his response was, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.� We are not only required to pay our taxes, but the choice of Cornelius as the first Gentile convert shows that we may also serve as soldiers in Caesar’s army. Jesus never taught pacifism so there is no reason a person cannot be both a professional soldier and a Christian.

This is an interesting post.
Only recently did I have a discussion on some of these very things.

Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Some persons reason, that this may not necessarily refer to a physical slap, but to an action, that might be carried out to cause provocations.
How they arrive at that conclusion, is by reasoning that hardly would Jesus want anyone to literally open themselves to harm, if they can get away from the situation.
For example, if someone suddenly strikes at you with a bat, and proceeded to follow through in an attempt to maim you, you might try to get away, or shield yourself from harm.
In the same way as if someone attacks you with a knife, you might try to get out of harm's way, or prevent the attacker from successfully killing you.
That doesn't encourage violence.
Jesus ran, when they took up stones to throw at him, and when they tried to throw him off the cliff.
So, they have come to the conclusion that Jesus was teaching against retaliating when provoked, but rather be peaceable.
I tend to agree with that.

At first this seems to confirm the belief that Jesus advocated pacifism. He said that Peter was wrong in attacking. But then Jesus told Peter to put his sword back in its sheath. Wouldn’t a true pacifist have told Peter to throw his sword away because he would never need it again?

Earlier he had given his disciples a command that was even more inconsistent with pacifism.

He said to them, “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.�
Luke 22:36 ESV

He not only told Peter to keep his sword but he also said the the disciples who didn’t already have swords should buy them. But what is the point of having a sword if you are commanded to respond to an attacker by turning the other cheek? This appears to be a problem because we misunderstand what Jesus meant by the command.

It is the understanding of some that there are a number of possible reasons why Jesus gave his disciples the command to carry swords.
The obvious reason why they were not given them, would be to cause harm to others.
However, the possibilities are:
1. Their travel may have put them in danger of wild animals.
2. They may have needed to clear shrubbery for paths, during their journeys.
Some suggest that they might have had to defend themselves against highwaymen. But we really have no way of being sure of this.

And Jesus entered the temple and drove out all who sold and bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. He said to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer,’ but you make it a den of robbers.�
Matthew 21:12-13 ESV

Jesus war rightly incensed at the wrong practice of those in his father's house.
The Bible makes a distinction between anger that is out of control, or that causes one to sin, and anger that does not cause one to sin.
Eph. 4:26 Be angry and do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger,

He commanded us to turn the other cheek when someone hits us and to love everyone, including our enemies.

Jesus as you said, really advocated peace and love.
We can see that clearly in what are called the beatitudes.

Cornelius was not only a Gentile but he was also an officer in the Roman army.

At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion of what was known as the Italian Cohort, a devout man who feared God with all his household, gave alms generously to the people, and prayed continually to God.
Acts 10:1-2 ESV

If Jesus taught pacifism surely Cornelius would have quit his job and found a new occupation when he became a believer but there is no indication that he did anything like this. Chapter 11 of Acts describes the opposition of some believers to the conversion of Cornelius, but their objections were based on the fact that Cornelius was an uncircumcised Gentile, not that he was a Roman soldier.

It is evident from the book of acts that any who were baptized, and received holy spirit, gave up their former life, so we don't have to wonder if Cornelius did that.
Acts 2:
41 So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls.
42 And they devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.

The things Jesus taught while on earth were only the beginning of his teaching. After he was taken up into Heaven he continued to teach and direct his disciples through the Holy Spirit.

But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.
Acts 1:8 ESV

I like that point you are making,

teach and direct his disciples through the Holy Spirit.

It reminds me of what is said in Romans 10:13-15
Really, how can they do it unless directed.

Interesting post.