Guest yod Posted April 23, 2007 Share Posted April 23, 2007 There is one aspect of pacifism that I admire but rarely see. That is "peace" Unfortunately most humans are not pacifists so imposing pacifism on a people would be as tyranical as a dictatorship because either way there is no justice. I think we should individually be quick to forgive. If we began to pray for our enemies, there would be a passive attitude by default individually. However, that is not to say that rulers and governments should become passive. We should also be good citizens of our respective nations. If given the option, there is honor in serving the military in any capacity. I have no problem with someone who wishes to serve as a nurse OR with someone who serves as soldier. I don't think there is any contradiction in "loving your neighbor" either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Posted April 23, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 115 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 8,281 Content Per Day: 1.12 Reputation: 249 Days Won: 3 Joined: 03/03/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/30/1955 Share Posted April 23, 2007 Sorry, but you are completely wrong. Being a Pacifist is a VERY, VERY EVIL THING. The Pacifist would sit by while 6,000,000 Jews were gased. The Pacifist would not raise one finger to stop Saddam from murdering the 5,000,000 Iraqis he killed. (edited by moderator) When you are intellectually honest enough to answer your own question about how your Scripture quote was out of context, you will be ready to engage in realistic discussion. Well now, there's a really "Intelligent" response. Sad that that's the best ya got, but it is ever so typical of so many I've read here. I'd wish you a peaceful day, but that would be so 'pacifistic' and I'd hate to do that to you. (edited by moderator) If you will just respond to how the Pacifist would handle Hitler and Saddam, (edited by moderator) Please, by all means, tell us what you'd do with Pol Pot, Hitler, Stalin, Saddam, etc.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricH Posted April 23, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 366 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 10,933 Content Per Day: 1.57 Reputation: 212 Days Won: 1 Joined: 04/21/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted April 23, 2007 Lets avoid attacking each other and using words like "stupid" to describe other's positions. Thanks, the mod team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apothanein kerdos Posted April 23, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 331 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 8,713 Content Per Day: 1.20 Reputation: 21 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted April 23, 2007 First, I am not using "Scare Quotes" (sounds like something from the Wizard of OZ), I'm using quotes to separate Christians who promote war and deride Christians who see things from the side of Peacemaking. The attack on Pacifists, of any sort, began on this thread, I'm merely objecting to it. A square quote is a literary term. It refers to anytime you put quotation marks around a term when describing a person, to show the person doesn't really live up to the term used. Such as, if I were to say Theodor Roosevelt was a "pacifist" because he never went to war as president...it's to show that he really isn't a pacifist, but people call him one regardless. Likewise, by saying that "so called 'Christians' that are for the war" is insinuating that these people aren't really Christians. As to Govermental pacifism, yes you are right, the Bible doesn't address Governmental pacifism (or warmongering) in the New Testament. That's because Christians are called to be separate and apart from the world and the NT isn't concerning itself with Governmental/worldly activities, except to tell Christians to obey the Government fully except where it forces us to disobey the Laws of God. The Bible tells us to be ethically separate from the world in personal matters. It does not ask for ontological separation...which is what it seems you are calling for with Christian pacifism. Likewise, the Bible was addressing how Christians should act under an autocracy and does not deal with Christian responsibility in a Democratic-Republic where, in a certain way, we are part of the government. What do we, as Christians, do in this situation? War is sometimes necessary (I again point to the fact there was no negotiation with Hitler), and as Americans we have the ability to sway the government on going to war. As Christians we should pray for peace...but we must realize this is a fallen world. We can say "trust God" but this is inconsistent with the rest of our lives. We put on our seat belts, we lock the doors to our house, we get jobs to pay for our bills, etc. In other words, to bring about a result we put a lot of effort into it instead of "trusting God." Why then do we do the same with war? Trusting God is not supposed to be a lazy activity, but instead is an activity that requires us to put effort into it, and sometimes our lives. War is unfortunately one of these things. As to your comments about that quote from Tony Campolo, no you did NOT give me 3 or 4 reasons why his quote was wrong, you gave me reasons why you object to his quote based on his personal views, not scriptural or contextual ones. You cited nothing to prove where he was wrong scripturally or contextually. I This is because you chose to ignore what I said. Let me break my comment down for you: As for using Tony Campolo...the man teaches that homosexuality is okay, is a follower of Barth, and says the Bible merely contains the Word of God and isn't the Word of God. You really think I should trust His quotation and exegesis of scripture? I was pointing to three examples where Tony is way off in his interpretation about Jesus. All he said was that Christians don't want to hear certain things. He's right, I don't want to hear it from him. I have known children that interpret scripture better than he does. He is a sociologist, not a theologian or a philosopher, and is subsequently highly unqualified in telling Christians what scripture really means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Posted April 24, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 115 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 8,281 Content Per Day: 1.12 Reputation: 249 Days Won: 3 Joined: 03/03/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/30/1955 Share Posted April 24, 2007 Lets avoid attacking each other and using words like "stupid" to describe other's positions. Thanks, the mod team Eric, I think your edits were silly. Pacifism is one view for which no thinking person can possibly have ANY respect whatsoever. And by the way, why did you take away my statement of fact, that HE DIDN'T ANSWER THE OBJECTION I raised? Ordinarily I would have simply answered you by e-mail, but you publicly removed parts of my post, so I think it is appropriate to address it here, at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest yod Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 Has anyone noticed that pacifists seem to enjoy starting trouble? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted April 24, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.93 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted April 24, 2007 as to being a pacifist? I would say that I am a Christian who believes Jesus teaches us to choose the path of Peace whereever and however possible, even unto giving our lives for our fellow man. And I do take exception to Hawk Christians attacking those of us who believe that way. Being a "Pacifist" is not an evil thing, but instead if all men would follow the path of peace, instead of running headlong to war at every drop of the hat and every perceived injustice or threat, there would be far fewer dead innocents in this world. Hello Celtic Warrior - I like your username! ((I'm a bit puzzled by it now, though. )) I have a question - why did not John the Baptist, Jesus, Peter, nor Paul tell any of the Roman soldiers and centurians whom they interracted with to put down their swords? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted April 24, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.93 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted April 24, 2007 Exodus 15 1 Then Moses and the children of Israel sang this song to the Lord, and spoke, saying: "I will sing to the Lord, For He has triumphed gloriously! The horse and its rider He has thrown into the sea! 2 The Lord is my strength and song, And He has become my salvation; He is my God, and I will praise Him; My father's God, and I will exalt Him. 3 The Lord is a man of war; The Lord is His name. 4 Pharaoh's chariots and his army He has cast into the sea; His chosen captains also are drowned in the Red Sea. 5 The depths have covered them; They sank to the bottom like a stone. 6 "Your right hand, O Lord, has become glorious in power; Your right hand, O Lord, has dashed the enemy in pieces. 7 And in the greatness of Your excellence You have overthrown those who rose against You; You sent forth Your wrath; It consumed them like stubble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted April 24, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.93 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted April 24, 2007 A few days ago Henry Broder wrote in Welt am Sonntag, "Europe - your family name is appeasement." It's a phrase you can't get out of your head because it's so terribly true. It can be argues that appeasement is a form of slavery. Appeasing an agressor only allows him to keep abusing you. An appeasing wife to an abusive husband will never be free from being abused. An appeasing store owner to the Mafia will forever have to pay the Mafia whatever the Mafia demands. An appeasing Israel in ancient times sold even the treasuries of the Temple to avoid war. (It's in the books of Kings and Chronicles. Was the Lord pleased by this?) No, appeasement only allows the aggresor the power to do as he wills over you. Appeasing Islam will serve only to grant them authority to subjugate you. Dont believe me? Just watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarletprayers Posted April 24, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 135 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 7,537 Content Per Day: 1.08 Reputation: 157 Days Won: 2 Joined: 04/06/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/29/1956 Share Posted April 24, 2007 A few days ago Henry Broder wrote in Welt am Sonntag, "Europe - your family name is appeasement." It's a phrase you can't get out of your head because it's so terribly true. It can be argues that appeasement is a form of slavery. Appeasing an agressor only allows him to keep abusing you. An appeasing wife to an abusive husband will never be free from being abused. An appeasing store owner to the Mafia will forever have to pay the Mafia whatever the Mafia demands. An appeasing Israel in ancient times sold even the treasuries of the Temple to avoid war. (It's in the books of Kings and Chronicles. Was the Lord pleased by this?) No, appeasement only allows the aggresor the power to do as he wills over you. Appeasing Islam will serve only to grant them authority to subjugate you. Dont believe me? Just watch. Amen Nebula, Amen! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts