I know Christ used violence once, when he overturned the tables in the temple, and had the whip of chords.  I also know that in the O.T., there are passages that give limits to self defense. 

We're called to be peacemakers, that's a given.  But even peacemakers don't have to be stepped upon.

The verse most commonly brandished when arguing a pacifist point is Matt. 5:39. Do not resist evil. Should you be slapped on the right cheek turn to him the other also. While the intent of this is to emphasize a social  obligation, it is most often interpreted as a CIVIC duty that should dictate our behavior in all circumstances. Liberals often use this passage to argue against Capitol punishment. This weak-watered interpretation, taken to it’s logical conclusion, argues for anarchy.  Allowing the “bad guy” to be bad with no consequences for his actions would certainly be ruinous to the local community and ultimately the country. This line of reasoning relegates Jesus to a historical figure along the lines of a messianic Abby Hoffman. 

Do we retaliate with violence when insulted? Hardly not. Should we, as Christians, abandon every possible means for our defense and the defense of our loved ones when threatened with physical violence? That would make us the evil ones, wouldn't it?

@Allen_Oz@xanga - I'd say check out THIS blog by fellow Revelifer SirNickDon, You have to note those swords are never used. In fact, the use of the sword in general is rebuked by Jesus in Matthew 26:52.

@musicaljuggler@xanga - @shanella@xanga - If this is the most violent act of Jesus, and it is clear he harmed no person (turning over tables harms only tables, and a whip is for herding livestock which was in the temple) then it is safe to assume he didn't believe in harming others. If he had harmed people it would be called "The Beating of the Religious in the Temple" but it is not. In regards to the OT restrictions see Matthew 5:38-42.

@bakersdozen2@xanga - This is a heavy passage/teaching. It teaches the seeking of justice through alternative means. It is the encouragement to expose evil and defeat it without practicing evil. The death penalty is another issue, but it's wrong because it seeks revenge and it murders and it goes against Christ's teachings in the Sermon on the Mount (see above comment)

@oordzofrur@xanga - Giving mercy is practicing G-d's justice. I'm not sure why people assume that because one does not use violence they MUST be passive in all situations and forsake defeating injustice. That is not the case. There are ways outside of the violent ones to rescue, to defend and to transform both the oppressed and the opressor.

I beleive the entire bible is important. Assuming I don't is incredibly rude of you. I just think that the Word of G-d, is actually the words of G-d, and also, the Word of G-d (John 1:1) and to not take Jesus at his word is to think more highly of ones opinion or the tradition of evil men than the truth of Christ.

Rev 6:16 doesn't speak of violence from Jesus. It speaks of wrath, which most often is G-d giving people over to their own ways/desires. Check out Rev 13:10 too.

@bakersdozen2@xanga - Excellent!! You took the words right out of my mouth! I was so hoping you would weigh in on this subject with so much good solid truth you have uncovered on this topic.

To the author I would add, If you are more comfortable with asking God to send others to do the "dirty work" of protecting and preserving your health and safety that is fine. I prefer to personally be active in doing what I can to be prepared to handle any situation to protect myself and my family. God has given me the ability to prepare and defend myself and the laws within our country uphold my right to do so, therefore I personally take on that responsibility. And I would (and have) gladly lend[ed] my grandfather, father, husband, son, brother to the defense of this nation, it's people, and the ideals it stands for. That is biblical as well. To abandon justice is to abandon who and what God is!

@trulytaken@xanga - I've never asked G-d to send anyone to do anything dirty for me. Nor would I. Why would I?  Nobody said anything about abandoning justice. Violence is not justice, otherwise people would not desire to act against it. But violence can not be solved with violence, otherwise Jesus would have overthrown Rome's oppressive military forces for the oppressed Israelites. But he did not (even though he had 12 legions of angels at his disposal). The ideals of this country (or any other) are not, in fact, ideal. They fall short of the righteousness of G-d.

I also do what I can to be prepared and able to handle situations. I desire to protect, to defend, to rescue. But I can only do those things so long as they are anchored in the teachings of Christ. That means I can't use a sword unless I want to die by it (in which case, nobody really seems to win because it starts conflict for both parties and then they pick up swords and then their allies pick up swords and so on).

Just because something is legal in your land does not mean Christ endorses it or that you should pursue it.

I think that it is important to make a distinction between scriptures that are referring to defending the faith by means of violence, versus defending life and the innocent from the hands of those who would wish them harm. The bible always has to be read in context. Some of the verses given are out of context with what the author is asking. Keep in mind David was called a man after God's own heart and was a mighty warrior. I believe there is a place for defense of one's self and others.

We are also required to follow the law of the country that we live in and if we are called upon by our country to serve, we are obligated to do so.

@MichaelCavaness@xanga - "required to follow the law of the country that we live in" --- and i might be wrong about this, but i think at least in this country (usa) one can be held culpable for purposefully withholding aid from a person in dire need (in the process of being murdered, etc).

or at least if not, they should be.

i have yet to be convinced that there are "ways outside of the violent ones" that can be used to stop someone who is being stabbed or beaten.

@TheGreatBout@xanga - please give your definition of what constitutes violence. is that anything that impresses any sort of physical force upon a bodily object? pushing? shoving? tripping? smacking? kicking? eyeball-poking? obviously, all forms of using a knife or gun are out, right?

Let me put your peaceful question back to you in this way.

If a child is being raped by her step-father, should she fight back?  What should she do?

If a person walking down the street is attacked, should they turn the other cheek or defend themselves?  What should they do?

I a person had been attacked, and they never caught the attacker...then one day the victim sees the attacker doing the same thing to someone else...should they defend the new victim,  is there an option to use violence or not?  What should they do?

I believe we all want a utopian peaceful existance and I believe we do our best to live out our faith in our deeds.  The conflict that we face in this world is simply a result of the father of lies.  Our conflicts cause us to falter in our walk and understanding of what God wants from us.

I am a Christian,  I have served in the Armed forces and I have experienced violence.  I believe in my heart that the violence was necessary to restore some type of sanity that allowed and facilitated a way for ministry to take place.

Praying for my enemies and giving grace to my enemies does not mean that I allow them to collect money on my steps.  Defending others sometimes, requires a level of voilence.

If not, then how do you explain Sodom and Gamorah?

If some guy molested my sister and I took a baseball bat to his head, pretty sure that'd be okay.

@TheGreatBout@xanga - "otherwise Jesus would have overthrown Rome's oppressive military forces for the oppressed Israelites."

That's quite the jump. Everything God does, as we know, is to try and ensure our success in following His plan. Since He and Christ are on the same page, I think the same could be said about Christ. Is this the reason Christ didn't overthrow Rome? Maybe. Maybe the Jews weren't ready to govern themselves at this point. Maybe Rome was the lesser evil in the world, and another more sinister empire would fill the void they left. Who knows? But to try and say it's because God is vehemently opposed to violence ever makes no sense. When Christ comes again, there's going to be a big fight. War unmatched. And darn it, He's going to win.

@TheGreatBout@xanga - Jesus didn't over throw the Rome empire because that was not what He came for. 

It seems to me if you advocate total nonviolence you then don't believe we should have police officers or a military, or as someone else mentioned if you see your child being raped you must just stand there and watch because the only way you are doing to stop that from happening is to use some sort of force on the rapist.  Also, on top of all of that, I hope none of those people use any kind of force (Ie spankings or grabbing by the arm to steer in another direction, etc.) on your children.

Peace, my ass.