PDA

View Full Version : Discussion How can we be meek, and still be MEN?



appletonbill
Jan 2nd 2009, 10:26 PM
I was just wondering. Jesus said blessed are the meek. How can we be men who are meek? I'm sure everyone knows what happens to the meek? I don't know, it just does not make sense to me.

theBelovedDisciple
Jan 2nd 2009, 10:41 PM
I was just wondering. Jesus said blessed are the meek. How can we be men who are meek? I'm sure everyone knows what happens to the meek? I don't know, it just does not make sense to me.
-----------------------------------------------------

Good post and thoughts...

I believe the Scripture in Philippians which describes the 'mind of Christ'... shows us a pattern of meekness and humbleness.... If believers would apply this to their lives.. 'let this mind be in you.. as Paul states...

the opposite of meekness is 'haughtiness and pride'.. when you apply the verses in Phillipians to your life and let the Holy Ghost teach and guide you.. then 'meekness' will shine forth..

One can be 'meek' .. yet still be confindent and bold in their walk with their Redeemer and not only this but walk in the Power of the Holy Ghost.. 'in meekness and humbleness"
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:

Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Vhayes
Jan 2nd 2009, 10:46 PM
Hi Appletonbill-

I just copied this from the Blue Letter Bible - I hope it helps a bit.

By the way, good question!
V
1) mildness of disposition, gentleness of spirit, meekness
Meekness toward God is that disposition of spirit in which we accept His dealings with us as good, and therefore without disputing or resisting. In the OT, the meek are those wholly relying on God rather than their own strength to defend against injustice. Thus, meekness toward evil people means knowing God is permitting the injuries they inflict, that He is using them to purify His elect, and that He will deliver His elect in His time (Isa 41:17, Luk 18:1-8). Gentleness or meekness is the opposite to self-assertiveness and self-interest. It stems from trust in God's goodness and control over the situation. The gentle person is not occupied with self at all. This is a work of the Holy Spirit, not of the human will (Gal 5:23).

appletonbill
Jan 2nd 2009, 11:19 PM
I think what I mean is. When we are with a bunch of other guys, we like to be macho. You know how guys are. I like movies like "The Dark Knight" and "Rambo". Does that mean I can't be blessed because I like stuff like that?

Butch5
Jan 2nd 2009, 11:24 PM
I was just wondering. Jesus said blessed are the meek. How can we be men who are meek? I'm sure everyone knows what happens to the meek? I don't know, it just does not make sense to me.

Jesus was a man and He was meek.

Butch5
Jan 2nd 2009, 11:25 PM
I think what I mean is. When we are with a bunch of other guys, we like to be macho. You know how guys are. I like movies like "The Dark Knight" and "Rambo". Does that mean I can't be blessed because I like stuff like that?

Do you follow the guys, or do you follow Christ?

appletonbill
Jan 2nd 2009, 11:34 PM
Do you follow the guys, or do you follow Christ?

I follow Christ. Let's just say someone attacks you or your loved ones. What are you going to do? Are you going to run, fight or quote scripture?

Butch5
Jan 3rd 2009, 12:50 AM
I follow Christ. Let's just say someone attacks you or your loved ones. What are you going to do? Are you going to run, fight or quote scripture?

Well, Jesus said, turn the other cheek.

Now, could I do that? I can't say. But that is what we are supposed to do.

quiet dove
Jan 3rd 2009, 01:58 AM
I think what I mean is. When we are with a bunch of other guys, we like to be macho. You know how guys are. I like movies like "The Dark Knight" and "Rambo". Does that mean I can't be blessed because I like stuff like that?

I don't think meek equal coward, after all, Jesus, who said be meek, also said preach the Gospel, and it takes courage to completely go against the grain of the world and be a Christian, living according to ways that are in conflict with the world.

There are men who risk their lives every Sunday to walk many miles in far away places to preach the Gospel, is that a coward, hardly, but is that a meek man, probably.

reformedct
Jan 3rd 2009, 02:20 AM
Well, Jesus said, turn the other cheek.

Now, could I do that? I can't say. But that is what we are supposed to do.


If you loved your family members and somoeone attacked them you would do everything in your power to stop them. If someone breaks into my house to kill my family i would kill them. How are you loving them by watching someone beat them to death?? God is against murder, not just killing. If killing was a sin then God commanded all those Israelites to sin when they went to war. It is not a sin to kill justly in protecting your family. It is a sin to murder which is unjust killing

I know it may be hard for some to swallow but killing in and of itself is not a sin. There is a time to kill and a time to heal

appletonbill
Jan 3rd 2009, 03:33 AM
Jesus wasn't always meek. Matthew 21:12

Even though His was righteous anger.

Butch5
Jan 3rd 2009, 04:28 AM
If you loved your family members and somoeone attacked them you would do everything in your power to stop them. If someone breaks into my house to kill my family i would kill them. How are you loving them by watching someone beat them to death?? God is against murder, not just killing. If killing was a sin then God commanded all those Israelites to sin when they went to war. It is not a sin to kill justly in protecting your family. It is a sin to murder which is unjust killing

I know it may be hard for some to swallow but killing in and of itself is not a sin. There is a time to kill and a time to heal

Sorry my friend, but that is not correct. God is the Judge, if He decides to kill that is His right, however Jesus gave us a different command.


Deuteronomy 18:15 ( KJV ) 15The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;


Peter quotes this,


Acts 3:22-23 ( KJV ) 22For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. 23And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.

So Jesus gave us a new law and He said,


Matthew 5:38-42 ( KJV ) 38Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.40And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. 41And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. 42Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

Matthew 5:43-44 ( KJV ) 43Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

Gregg
Jan 3rd 2009, 07:57 AM
I was just wondering. Jesus said blessed are the meek. How can we be men who are meek? I'm sure everyone knows what happens to the meek? I don't know, it just does not make sense to me.

Practice.

Ask God's help in this matter.

It takes more courage and effort to be meek than using the old tools.

I struggle with this more than I would like to. Thanks for the post.

Diggindeeper
Jan 3rd 2009, 09:06 AM
My friend, I hope you are not equating meekness with weakness.

The meek are not weak! Moses was said to be a man of meekness, but he led the entire nation with courage! Great courage.

A person who is meek can be VERY courageous, but he will NEVER retalitate and offer an eye for an eye. Don't you know the meek will someday inherit the earth?

The answer is to be strong in the Lord and the power of his might, be courageous and unfearful. But never strive to get even with anyone.

Colossians 3:12
Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering;

appletonbill
Jan 3rd 2009, 03:32 PM
I do understand how the Lord has changed my life, since I was born again. I used to spend a lot of time in the bars, and when I was younger, I would get in fights, and I was not a very good husband and father. I am able to control my anger much more now. I believe that is what is meant but having a heart of flesh, instead of a heart of stone. Praise the Lord for that.

I uesd to equate meekness with weakness. Now I know that humility is a big part of the change in me. God made me who I am for a reason. I can be bold, and courageous, without being abusive. In fact, it seems that God has given me a heart for the low in spirit, because God has used me in this area for some time now. Our God, is an awesome God.

Brother Bill

Brother Mark
Jan 3rd 2009, 03:42 PM
I follow Christ. Let's just say someone attacks you or your loved ones. What are you going to do? Are you going to run, fight or quote scripture?

If they attack me, turn the other cheek or run. If they attack those under my authority, I would fight like crazy to protect them. IMO, that is the scriptural response.

Brother Mark
Jan 3rd 2009, 03:44 PM
Jesus wasn't always meek. Matthew 21:12

Even though His was righteous anger.

Meekness doesn't mean weakness. Meekness just means one is in control of his passion. Jesus didn't lose his temper. He controlled it and did exactly what the Father told him to do.

reformedct
Jan 3rd 2009, 05:48 PM
i think people misinterpret turn the other cheek.

Turn the other cheek doesnt mean that if someone is raping your daughter you just standby. We dont personally retaliate to sin against us but we are also called to protect those under our authority, such as our family. Even unbelievers know that it is foolish to just allow someone to attack those that have been given in your hands by God.

Bethany67
Jan 3rd 2009, 06:02 PM
i think people misinterpret turn the other cheek.

Turn the other cheek doesnt mean that if someone is raping your daughter you just standby. We dont personally retaliate to sin against us but we are also called to protect those under our authority, such as our family. Even unbelievers know that it is foolish to just allow someone to attack those that have been given in your hands by God.

If anyone went for my husband or stepkids or someone vulnerable, they'd find me standing in the way trying to stop them. I wouldn't seek to kill them; I'd be trying to stop them causing harm. If Jesus really meant turn the other cheek as total passivity, He wouldn't have stepped in to save the woman caught in adultery; He could've walked away instead of turning their theology against them. He rebuked Peter when he used violence against Malchus, instead of leaving them to get on with it. Retaliation and objection needn't necessarily mean physical violence, but I do believe there is a place for using minimum physical force for protection. And I have to say if any man grabbed hold of me with evil intentions, I would be fighting back physically as a natural instinct. I wouldn't be pondering the theology at that point; I'd be trying to protect myself with a swift knee to the groin or whatever. Been there, done that - a local psychiatric patient got me in a headlock in the street, and I managed to push him and twist away while saying 'No!' very firmly and take to my heels once I was free of him.

reformedct
Jan 3rd 2009, 06:13 PM
If anyone went for my husband or stepkids or someone vulnerable, they'd find me standing in the way trying to stop them. I wouldn't seek to kill them; I'd be trying to stop them causing harm. If Jesus really meant turn the other cheek as total passivity, He wouldn't have stepped in to save the woman caught in adultery; He could've walked away instead of turning their theology against them. He rebuked Peter when he used violence against Malchus, instead of leaving them to get on with it. Retaliation and objection needn't necessarily mean physical violence, but I do believe there is a place for using minimum physical force for protection. And I have to say if any man grabbed hold of me with evil intentions, I would be fighting back physically as a natural instinct. I wouldn't be pondering the theology at that point; I'd be trying to protect myself with a swift knee to the groin or whatever. Been there, done that - a local psychiatric patient got me in a headlock in the street, and I managed to push him and twist away while saying 'No!' very firmly and take to my heels once I was free of him.


Good point. We should always seek to inflict the minimum amount of harm needed to protect.

Butch5
Jan 3rd 2009, 08:15 PM
i think people misinterpret turn the other cheek.

Turn the other cheek doesnt mean that if someone is raping your daughter you just standby. We dont personally retaliate to sin against us but we are also called to protect those under our authority, such as our family. Even unbelievers know that it is foolish to just allow someone to attack those that have been given in your hands by God.

Please define turn the other cheek, Jesus said do not return evil for evil. The question is, in your above description of the daughter, who is protecting her, you or God. If God is able to saved her, why would he need your help?

Butch5
Jan 3rd 2009, 08:18 PM
Good point. We should always seek to inflict the minimum amount of harm needed to protect.

Where did Jesus say that?

reformedct
Jan 3rd 2009, 08:22 PM
Please define turn the other cheek, Jesus said do not return evil for evil. The question is, in your above description of the daughter, who is protecting her, you or God. If God is able to saved her, why would he need your help?


If God could destroy the opposing nations in the OT, why did He need Israel to go to war? Of course God can save her. And sometimes God uses human beings to be His hands and feet. If i walk by an alley and see a girl being raped, and there is no one around to help her, i pray to God that i will have the courage to try to pull that man off of her and even fight him off if that is what is necessary.

There is a difference between repaying evil with evil (revenge) and fighting for what is right. If you were with a group of friends and then a big guy came up and started beating you up, you are telling me that the right thing for your friends to do would be to standby and do absolutley nothing? Wouldnt you at least want them to call the cops? And you know what, when the cops get there they are going to fight that man off of you to help you. If protecting others is a sin why do we even have law enforcement? are police cops in sin for protecting others? We dont fight to get back at people because vengance is the Lords. But we are allowed to fight to protect

as you said turning the other cheek is not returning evil with evil

but protecting the oppressed is not evil.

Just because God can perform a miracle doesnt mean that we dont utilize the natural power we have. God can provide me with money but i still am going to go get a job. God can [rovide me with clothes but i still have to get up and go buy them. God can deliver the oppressed but we still must do what we can to help them using what strength we have. Using strength to help the oppressed is in no way a sin. In fact it is honarable and right

Butch5
Jan 3rd 2009, 08:59 PM
If God could destroy the opposing nations in the OT, why did He need Israel to go to war? Of course God can save her. And sometimes God uses human beings to be His hands and feet. If i walk by an alley and see a girl being raped, and there is no one around to help her, i pray to God that i will have the courage to try to pull that man off of her and even fight him off if that is what is necessary.

There is a difference between repaying evil with evil (revenge) and fighting for what is right. If you were with a group of friends and then a big guy came up and started beating you up, you are telling me that the right thing for your friends to do would be to standby and do absolutley nothing? Wouldnt you at least want them to call the cops? And you know what, when the cops get there they are going to fight that man off of you to help you. If protecting others is a sin why do we even have law enforcement? are police cops in sin for protecting others? We dont fight to get back at people because vengance is the Lords. But we are allowed to fight to protect

as you said turning the other cheek is not returning evil with evil

but protecting the oppressed is not evil.

Just because God can perform a miracle doesnt mean that we dont utilize the natural power we have. God can provide me with money but i still am going to go get a job. God can [rovide me with clothes but i still have to get up and go buy them. God can deliver the oppressed but we still must do what we can to help them using what strength we have. Using strength to help the oppressed is in no way a sin. In fact it is honarable and right

Well, they are nice thoughts from a human perspective, however can you show me in Scripture where Jesus authorized the use of force against anyone?

Brother Mark
Jan 3rd 2009, 09:10 PM
Well, they are nice thoughts from a human perspective, however can you show me in Scripture where Jesus authorized the use of force against anyone?

The OT is full of such scriptures. Romans 13. There are plenty of scriptures where God endorses violence against men and by men.

reformedct
Jan 3rd 2009, 09:23 PM
Well, they are nice thoughts from a human perspective, however can you show me in Scripture where Jesus authorized the use of force against anyone?

Butch5

i am not talking from a human perspective. I am looking at the Nature of God as i understand through Scripture. God made a way for me when i was helpless. He fought off the powers of evil by dying on the cross and purchasing my salvation and buying me back from the kingdom of darkness. God fights evil and sometimes uses humans to do his bidding. I dont feel that God would be pleased if i stood by and let others be oppressed if i had power to help them. I am not going to get into a Scripture battle over this. I am just giving my opinion and that is it. You have your interpretation, i have mine, but i am not going to sit here and debate for pages and pages about what the Scripture say exactly because i dont know a whole lot of Scripture off the top of my head

Butch5
Jan 3rd 2009, 11:40 PM
The OT is full of such scriptures. Romans 13. There are plenty of scriptures where God endorses violence against men and by men.

Yes the OT is full of such Scriptures, where in Romans 13 has Christ authorized use of force.

Did you read my previous post?

Deuteronomy 18:15 ( KJV ) 15The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;

How was Jesus a prophet like Moses? He was a lawgiver, just as Moses was.



Peter quotes this,


Acts 3:22-23 ( KJV ) 22For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. 23And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.

So Jesus gave us a new law and He said,


Matthew 5:38-42 ( KJV ) 38Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.40And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. 41And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. 42Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

Matthew 5:43-44 ( KJV ) 43Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

Butch5
Jan 3rd 2009, 11:44 PM
Butch5

i am not talking from a human perspective. I am looking at the Nature of God as i understand through Scripture. God made a way for me when i was helpless. He fought off the powers of evil by dying on the cross and purchasing my salvation and buying me back from the kingdom of darkness. God fights evil and sometimes uses humans to do his bidding. I dont feel that God would be pleased if i stood by and let others be oppressed if i had power to help them. I am not going to get into a Scripture battle over this. I am just giving my opinion and that is it. You have your interpretation, i have mine, but i am not going to sit here and debate for pages and pages about what the Scripture say exactly because i dont know a whole lot of Scripture off the top of my head

Dude, I was responding to appletonbill, when you challenged my position. I did not say anything to you until you replied to my post, if you didn't want to discuss this, why did you respond to my post that was addressed to someone else?

Brother Mark
Jan 3rd 2009, 11:57 PM
Yes the OT is full of such Scriptures, where in Romans 13 has Christ authorized use of force.

The entire scriptures were written by Christ. Romans 13 says that authority is meant to wield the sword and bring the wrath of God against evil men.

He established capital punishment with Noah and has never rescinded it. As an individual, I turn the other cheek. As an authority figure, I fight and bear the sword of the wrath of God upon evil doers. So, if one attacks those under my authority, I fight back. If they only attack me, I turn the other cheek.

Butch5
Jan 4th 2009, 01:07 AM
The entire scriptures were written by Christ. Romans 13 says that authority is meant to wield the sword and bring the wrath of God against evil men.

He established capital punishment with Noah and has never rescinded it. As an individual, I turn the other cheek. As an authority figure, I fight and bear the sword of the wrath of God upon evil doers. So, if one attacks those under my authority, I fight back. If they only attack me, I turn the other cheek.

Where is that in Scripture?

How are you loving you emenies, if you fight back?

Capital punishment may have been established in the OT, that was for the nation of Israel, not the kingdom of God.

John 18:36 ( KJV ) 36Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Brother Mark
Jan 4th 2009, 03:00 PM
Where is that in Scripture?

How are you loving you emenies, if you fight back?

Jesus led Joshua to war in Canaan. Did God love the Canaanites? Yet, he went to war with them. Did God love all those he destroyed in the flood? Yet, he destroyed them.

[quote]Capital punishment may have been established in the OT, that was for the nation of Israel, not the kingdom of God.[quote]

Romans 13, the new testament, says government is to wield the sword as part of the wrath of God. Government is established by God so it can bear the wrath of God upon evil doers.

divaD
Jan 4th 2009, 06:28 PM
If God could destroy the opposing nations in the OT, why did He need Israel to go to war? Of course God can save her. And sometimes God uses human beings to be His hands and feet. If i walk by an alley and see a girl being raped, and there is no one around to help her, i pray to God that i will have the courage to try to pull that man off of her and even fight him off if that is what is necessary.

There is a difference between repaying evil with evil (revenge) and fighting for what is right. If you were with a group of friends and then a big guy came up and started beating you up, you are telling me that the right thing for your friends to do would be to standby and do absolutley nothing? Wouldnt you at least want them to call the cops? And you know what, when the cops get there they are going to fight that man off of you to help you. If protecting others is a sin why do we even have law enforcement? are police cops in sin for protecting others? We dont fight to get back at people because vengance is the Lords. But we are allowed to fight to protect

as you said turning the other cheek is not returning evil with evil

but protecting the oppressed is not evil.

Just because God can perform a miracle doesnt mean that we dont utilize the natural power we have. God can provide me with money but i still am going to go get a job. God can [rovide me with clothes but i still have to get up and go buy them. God can deliver the oppressed but we still must do what we can to help them using what strength we have. Using strength to help the oppressed is in no way a sin. In fact it is honarable and right




Hi reformedct. I agree with your POV. I believe that we have the right and the duty to protect our loved ones from any uncalled for harm.

Any professed Christian that claims they would just idly stand by and watch as their child is assaulted by a child molestor for instance, I would say that same one would be a liar, because if it actually happened, there is no way they wouldn't try to do something, even if it meant killing the perpetrator.

It's only human nature to make all kinds of claims like this, but when faced with these things in reality, we usually find that we really can't back up our claims afterall. We usually do just the opposite of what we claimed we would do.

Yukerboy
Jan 4th 2009, 09:21 PM
Jesus led Joshua to war in Canaan. Did God love the Canaanites? Yet, he went to war with them. Did God love all those he destroyed in the flood? Yet, he destroyed them.

[quote]Capital punishment may have been established in the OT, that was for the nation of Israel, not the kingdom of God.[quote]

Romans 13, the new testament, says government is to wield the sword as part of the wrath of God. Government is established by God so it can bear the wrath of God upon evil doers.

1 Samuel 15:3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.

If the Amalekite's infants were loved, then may I not be blessed with that same love.

Did God love those that were taken away by the flood? I do not find that in Scripture.

I understand that it is mainstream belief to state that God loves all, but it is also not to be found in the Scriptures.

God is love and that is found in Scripture, but can love hate? If He can hate wickedness or a nation even, then I don't find how God cannot hate a person, or even a group of people (which is what a nation is, is it not?)

I am more than willing to accept that God loves those he has had put to death, but I would need to be shown that concept in Scripture.

Brother Mark
Jan 4th 2009, 09:23 PM
I understand that it is mainstream belief to state that God loves all, but it is also not to be found in the Scriptures.

This is a total thread hijack. I suppose you have a purpose in doing it. But for the record, here is a verse that says God loves all.

John 3:16

16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life.
NASB

Now you can go and redefine the word "world" to mean whatever you desire it to mean if you want to. For me, I'll just believe that God loves the world. ;)

reformedct
Jan 4th 2009, 09:26 PM
This is a total thread hijack. I suppose you have a purpose in doing it. But for the record, here is a verse that says God loves all.

John 3:16

16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life.
NASB

Now you can go and redefine the word "world" to mean whatever you desire it to mean if you want to. For me, I'll just believe that God loves the world. ;)

God does love the world but he also hates all who do evil. SO yes He loves the world but at the same time His wrath is upon them unless they repent and come to Christ. God has many attributes besides love, though this attribute is very prominent

Yukerboy
Jan 4th 2009, 09:31 PM
This is a total thread hijack. I suppose you have a purpose in doing it. But for the record, here is a verse that says God loves all.

John 3:16

16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life.
NASB

Now you can go and redefine the word "world" to mean whatever you desire it to mean if you want to. For me, I'll just believe that God loves the world. ;)

You are correct. It is a hijack and I will begin another.

I apologize to the OP.

Butch5
Jan 5th 2009, 12:17 AM
Jesus led Joshua to war in Canaan. Did God love the Canaanites? Yet, he went to war with them. Did God love all those he destroyed in the flood? Yet, he destroyed them.

[quote]Capital punishment may have been established in the OT, that was for the nation of Israel, not the kingdom of God.[quote]

Romans 13, the new testament, says government is to wield the sword as part of the wrath of God. Government is established by God so it can bear the wrath of God upon evil doers.

It doesn't matter what they did in the OT, Jesus said,

Matthew 5:38-48 ( KJV ) 38Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. 41And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. 42Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.



43Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; 45That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. 46For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 47And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? 48Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.



Jesus changed the law.



Regarding Romans 13, yes God institutes governments and they are to wield the sword, however, when Paul made these statement, Christians were not in government, they would not serve in any position that would compromise these teachings of Jesus.

Brother Mark
Jan 5th 2009, 12:27 AM
It doesn't matter what they did in the OT,

Well, there you go. Just throw out 75% of scripture and one can develop any doctrine one wants. BTW, Jesus wrote the OT too.


Jesus said,

Matthew 5:38-48 ( KJV ) 38Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. 41And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. 42Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.



43Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; 45That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. 46For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 47And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? 48Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.





Yep. He said all those things. And when he went to war in the OT, he loved his enemies then too.



Regarding Romans 13, yes God institutes governments and they are to wield the sword, however, when Paul made these statement, Christians were not in government, they would not serve in any position that would compromise these teachings of Jesus.Sure Christians were in government. Did not Jesus himself say of the Centurion "You have great faith"? He was a leader of soldiers and he had GREAT faith. Paul was referring to just such men when he penned Romans 13.

Butch5
Jan 5th 2009, 01:32 AM
[quote=Brother Mark;1930583]Well, there you go. Just throw out 75% of scripture and one can develop any doctrine one wants. BTW, Jesus wrote the OT too.

No one's throwing out Scripture, Jesus changed the law.






Yep. He said all those things. And when he went to war in the OT, he loved his enemies then too.

See above




Sure Christians were in government. Did not Jesus himself say of the Centurion "You have great faith"? He was a leader of soldiers and he had GREAT faith. Paul was referring to just such men when he penned Romans 13.

If the centurion became a Christian, it was after he was already in the Roman army. They did not Join. If you look at the history of the early church you will find that they did not serve in government.

Brother Mark
Jan 5th 2009, 01:43 AM
If the centurion became a Christian, it was after he was already in the Roman army. They did not Join. If you look at the history of the early church you will find that they did not serve in government.

Ah, so now we have gone from "not in government" to "did not join after they were saved". Yet, when the soldiers asked John "What should we do", he did not tell them to get out of the Roman army. Instead, he told them not to extort money.

Anyway, since the centurion soldier had great faith, we can conclude that Romans 13 applies to him. That is doubly true since Romans was written to well, Romans.

God has not changed. He is the same today as he was in the OT. We will see that when Jesus himself leads an army again in Revelations.

Butch5
Jan 5th 2009, 02:54 AM
[quote=Brother Mark;1930672]Ah, so now we have gone from "not in government" to "did not join after they were saved". Yet, when the soldiers asked John "What should we do", he did not tell them to get out of the Roman army. Instead, he told them not to extort money.

If you study the early history you will that one could not get out of the Roman army, to do so was death.

Anyway, since the centurion soldier had great faith, we can conclude that Romans 13 applies to him. That is doubly true since Romans was written to well, Romans.

In the early church, if a person became a christian after they were already in the army, the church made them promise not to kill anyone. If they did they were put out of the church. However, if they did kill someone they were breaking Christ's command.

God has not changed. He is the same today as he was in the OT. We will see that when Jesus himself leads an army again in Revelations.

No, God has not changed, however the kingdom has, and Jesus made it clear how He would have His servants act.

Brother Mark
Jan 5th 2009, 02:58 AM
If you study the early history you will that one could not get out of the Roman army, to do so was death.

So, martyrdom for one's belief is not required if you are a soldier.


In the early church, if a person became a christian after they were already in the army, the church made them promise not to kill anyone. If they did they were put out of the church. However, if they did kill someone they were breaking Christ's command.Perhaps some pacifist churches did this. But John the Baptist did not require the pledge. Jesus did not require it nor did Paul require it.


No, God has not changed, however the kingdom has, and Jesus made it clear how He would have His servants act.And it was also made clear how authority was to act and he didn't discourage soldiers from doing their duty. Though JTB did discourage them from extortion. And Jesus, when he comes in his Kingdom, will rule with a rod of iron and lead an army again.

Butch5
Jan 5th 2009, 03:47 AM
Brother Mark---So, martyrdom for one's belief is not required if you are a soldier.

???


Brother Mark---Perhaps some pacifist churches did this. But John the Baptist did not require the pledge. Jesus did not require it nor did Paul require it.

The early church was pretty much universal on this issue.


Brother Mark---BAnd it was also made clear how authority was to act and he didn't discourage soldiers from doing their duty. Though JTB did discourage them from extortion. And Jesus, when he comes in his Kingdom, will rule with a rod of iron and lead an army again.

Do we make doctrine from what Jesus didn't say or from what He did say?

Brother Mark
Jan 5th 2009, 03:59 AM
???

In other words, a soldier was still required to kill in the army. JTB never told him not to do that.


The early church was pretty much universal on this issue.Scripture is very universal on the issue. And it is not pacifist.


Do we make doctrine from what Jesus didn't say or from what He did say?We take doctrine from it all. When Jesus said in Genesis that if man sheds man blood, then by man will his blood be shed. To Rev. when Jesus himself sheds man's blood again. And in between we have Romans 13 where God calls man again to wield the sword of his wrath against evil doers.

All through the scriptures we see where God is not a pacifist.

Chimon
Jan 5th 2009, 05:09 AM
I would like to point out that God the Father could have blasted away all the people who were hurting Jesus in an instant, and indeed Jesus could have done the same. However, God stood by and watched his son be murdered, and Jesus let his own people torture and kill him. All this was for the sake, not of righteous people or Christians, but for sinners.

I think I would rather let a believer be killed than kill a nonbeliever.

Brother Mark
Jan 5th 2009, 02:00 PM
I would like to point out that God the Father could have blasted away all the people who were hurting Jesus in an instant, and indeed Jesus could have done the same. However, God stood by and watched his son be murdered, and Jesus let his own people torture and kill him. All this was for the sake, not of righteous people or Christians, but for sinners.

I think I would rather let a believer be killed than kill a nonbeliever.

There were many times God intervened to save his son, until the appointed time. Jesus came for a purpose and that purpose was to die on the cross. Before that appointed time, God intervened many times.

The entire OT is full of scripture where God killed to protect. Romans 13 also gives much the same message.

kenrank
Jan 5th 2009, 03:08 PM
Meek as used in Matthew 5- mildness of disposition, gentleness of spirit, meekness

So can you have a mild disposition and a gentleness of spirit, and still be a man? I think that defines a real man!

Peace.
Ken

reformedct
Jan 5th 2009, 05:05 PM
Meek as used in Matthew 5- mildness of disposition, gentleness of spirit, meekness

So can you have a mild disposition and a gentleness of spirit, and still be a man? I think that defines a real man!

Peace.
Ken



Meekness is having the power to hurt but instead exercising righteousness and self-control

Most people will agree with self-defense. Self-defense is a type of fighting that is used to defend and escape and not to kill. So why is it so hard to think that helping someone else defend themselves is ok? We are not called to standby as people are oppressed. We are not to kill if it is not necessary and can be avoided, but if i were a cop, and a guy started shooting into a public crowd i would take him out. I will stand before God just as the rest will and i believe it would be the right thing to do. God is not against capital punishment, in fact he made it up. God is the one who allows government to have power, Just as Jesus said to Pilate that it was God who gave him his authority. If there were no death penalties Christ would have never been crucified. God gives governments the ability to execute righteouss judgement. Why is it so hard to believe that pushing a man assualting a woman off of her is the right thing to do?

However as with everything, you should follow your coniounce and the Holy Spirit and if you dont agree with me then i wont force my doctrine on you.

kenrank
Jan 5th 2009, 05:27 PM
Meekness is having the power to hurt but instead exercising righteousness and self-control

Most people will agree with self-defense. Self-defense is a type of fighting that is used to defend and escape and not to kill. So why is it so hard to think that helping someone else defend themselves is ok? We are not called to standby as people are oppressed. We are not to kill if it is not necessary and can be avoided, but if i were a cop, and a guy started shooting into a public crowd i would take him out. I will stand before God just as the rest will and i believe it would be the right thing to do. God is not against capital punishment, in fact he made it up. God is the one who allows government to have power, Just as Jesus said to Pilate that it was God who gave him his authority. If there were no death penalties Christ would have never been crucified. God gives governments the ability to execute righteouss judgement. Why is it so hard to believe that pushing a man assualting a woman off of her is the right thing to do?

However as with everything, you should follow your coniounce and the Holy Spirit and if you dont agree with me then i wont force my doctrine on you.

mild disposition and a gentleness of spirit,

I think the definition I gave fits your line of reasoning. At the same time reform, I agree with you. If somebody was doing another bodily damage, I would stop them. If they were doing damage that could lead to death, hurt a child in ANY way, or entered my house with the intent to cause hurt, I would do as you said, take them out. I don't believe that contradicts scriptures. We should turn the other cheek, love our enemies...but when our enemy tries to kill me or a family member, hurt my or another children, I have a right to defend myself or them and still be meek in spirit.

Peace.
Ken

theBelovedDisciple
Jan 5th 2009, 05:34 PM
Meek as used in Matthew 5- mildness of disposition, gentleness of spirit, meekness

So can you have a mild disposition and a gentleness of spirit, and still be a man? I think that defines a real man!

Peace.
Ken

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Amen!

Butch5
Jan 6th 2009, 04:32 AM
Brother Mark---In other words, a soldier was still required to kill in the army. JTB never told him not to do that.

Jesus gave us the new Law, not JTB.


Scripture is very universal on the issue. And it is not pacifist.

Then you should have no trouble giving me Scripture where Jesus authorized the use of force

We take doctrine from it all. When Jesus said in Genesis that if man sheds man blood, then by man will his blood be shed. To Rev. when Jesus himself sheds man's blood again. And in between we have Romans 13 where God calls man again to wield the sword of his wrath against evil doers.

All through the scriptures we see where God is not a pacifist.

I never said God was a pacifist. However you are not dealing with the Scripture I posted. How are you loving you enemies when you are attacking them?

I will say it again, please explain how this is wrong. Jesus said,

John 8:23 ( KJV ) 23And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.


John 18:36 ( KJV ) 36Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.


Matthew 5:38-45 ( KJV ) 38Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. 41And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. 42Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.



43Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; 45That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

Christ is not of this world, Christians are not supposed to be of this world, they are not to return evil for evil, they are to love their enemies, why? That you may be the children of your Father in heaven.

Where in is is there authorization for violence?

reformedct
Jan 6th 2009, 06:40 PM
Jesus gave us the new Law, not JTB.



Then you should have no trouble giving me Scripture where Jesus authorized the use of force

We take doctrine from it all. When Jesus said in Genesis that if man sheds man blood, then by man will his blood be shed. To Rev. when Jesus himself sheds man's blood again. And in between we have Romans 13 where God calls man again to wield the sword of his wrath against evil doers.

All through the scriptures we see where God is not a pacifist.

I never said God was a pacifist. However you are not dealing with the Scripture I posted. How are you loving you enemies when you are attacking them?

I will say it again, please explain how this is wrong. Jesus said,

John 8:23 ( KJV ) 23And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.


John 18:36 ( KJV ) 36Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.


Matthew 5:38-45 ( KJV ) 38Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. 41And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. 42Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.



43Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; 45That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.


Christ is not of this world, Christians are not supposed to be of this world, they are not to return evil for evil, they are to love their enemies, why? That you may be the children of your Father in heaven.

Where in is is there authorization for violence?


There is a righteouss "violence" and an unrighteouss "violence"

do you think Jesus "non violently" flipped tables and cracked a whip?


If you and i walked into a church

and i saw people selling all kinds of bogus merchandise to take advantage of Gods people

and i started flipping their tables, taking off my belt and whipping it around until all those fools ran out

i bet you would look at me and say i had sinned

thats exactly what Jesus did. If you saw Jesus do that today you would probably think in your mind that He was sinning

Brother Mark
Jan 6th 2009, 07:10 PM
Jesus gave us the new Law, not JTB.

Jesus inspired JTB. His (JTB) words are recorded because they are scriptural.


Then you should have no trouble giving me Scripture where Jesus authorized the use of force

Sure. The OT. The words of Paul in Romans 13, as inspired by Christ. The words of JTB, as inspired by Christ.

Of course, when Jesus went into the temple, he used violence to cleanse it.

Then there is the part in Revelation when Jesus again leads an army, just as he did in Jeremiah.


All through the scriptures we see where God is not a pacifist.

Correct. And Jesus and God are identical in nature. They are the same. Jesus is not a pacifist either.


I never said God was a pacifist. However you are not dealing with the Scripture I posted. How are you loving you enemies when you are attacking them?

In the same way God loves his enemies when he destroyed the world in Noah's day. Or how he loved the Canaanites when he destroyed them.

Butch5
Jan 6th 2009, 09:30 PM
There is a righteouss "violence" and an unrighteouss "violence"

do you think Jesus "non violently" flipped tables and cracked a whip?


If you and i walked into a church

and i saw people selling all kinds of bogus merchandise to take advantage of Gods people

and i started flipping their tables, taking off my belt and whipping it around until all those fools ran out

i bet you would look at me and say i had sinned

thats exactly what Jesus did. If you saw Jesus do that today you would probably think in your mind that He was sinning

Where did Jesus authorize us to use violence? Answer that question and my argument is moot.

Butch5
Jan 6th 2009, 09:43 PM
Brother Mark---Jesus inspired JTB. His (JTB) words are recorded because they are scriptural.

Your point is? No matter what JTB said, Jesus did not authorize Christians to us violence.




Brother Mark---Sure. The OT. The words of Paul in Romans 13, as inspired by Christ. The words of JTB, as inspired by Christ.

How about some Scripture.


Brother Mark---Of course, when Jesus went into the temple, he used violence to cleanse it.


Did He harm people?

Also I never said that Jesus couldn't use violence, I said He did not authorize us to do so.


Brother Mark---Then there is the part in Revelation when Jesus again leads an army, just as he did in Jeremiah.


Again, I never said that Jesus couldn't use violence, I said He did not authorize us to do so.



Brother Mark---Correct. And Jesus and God are identical in nature. They are the same. Jesus is not a pacifist either.

Again, I never said that Jesus couldn't use violence, I said He did not authorize us to do so.



Brother Mark---In the same way God loves his enemies when he destroyed the world in Noah's day. Or how he loved the Canaanites when he destroyed them.

Again, I never said that Jesus couldn't use violence, I said He did not authorize us to do so.

kenrank
Jan 6th 2009, 09:49 PM
There are many things in practice today that were not authorized by Yahushua, but many do them anyway. As for violence, he did not say we can't defend outselves either. So because he didn't say it, should I stand back and watch a child be abused? Should I stand back while somebody enters my house with a gun to hurt my wife, my children?

If I am taken because of my faith, I will not fight. But if somebody does something un-natural to say my 9 year old girl, he better get right with God before I get to him.

Peace.
Ken

Butch5
Jan 6th 2009, 10:27 PM
There are many things in practice today that were not authorized by Yahushua, but many do them anyway. As for violence, he did not say we can't defend outselves either. So because he didn't say it, should I stand back and watch a child be abused? Should I stand back while somebody enters my house with a gun to hurt my wife, my children?

If I am taken because of my faith, I will not fight. But if somebody does something un-natural to say my 9 year old girl, he better get right with God before I get to him.

Peace.
Ken

Well, that is how most people feel, I myself said I don't know that I could stand by. However, if you do a study of this and look at the early church you will see that this is how they understood Jesus teachings on the subject. We can argue all day long, but there is no Authorization from Christ to Christians to use violence, and we do have a command not to.

divaD
Jan 6th 2009, 11:04 PM
Well, that is how most people feel, I myself said I don't know that I could stand by. However, if you do a study of this and
look at the early church you will see that this is how they understood Jesus teachings on the subject.


There is a huge difference in being attacked and persecuted for your beliefs, as opposed to someone unwarrantly atttacking you or your loved ones for no other reason than pure evil in order to inflict harm. My point is, we can't confuse the two.

If someone is attacking and raping one's wife, daughter, etc, I seriously doubt that they're doing it because they don't agree with their religious beliefs.

When the Bible says that we are to turn the other cheek, this is speaking of us individually, personally. The Bible is not telling us, that if someone is punching one of our loved ones on the right side of the face for whatever reason, that we should also make sure they punch them on the other side also. We don't have the right to make descisions like that for others, but we do have the right to defend them, by doing whatever is necessarry.

Brother Mark
Jan 6th 2009, 11:26 PM
Again, I never said that Jesus couldn't use violence, I said He did not authorize us to do so.

Sure he did. He did it in Romans 13 and throughout the OT. Now, if you insist on using only the gospels, I suppose I could ask where John 3:16 talks about hell. But then, that would be limiting what Jesus actually said through all his prophets.

Romans 13 authorizes the use of the sword against evil doers.

reformedct
Jan 6th 2009, 11:32 PM
Where did Jesus authorize us to use violence? Answer that question and my argument is moot.

You are kind of being silly. If Jesus never sinned, and Jesus got aggressive and used force, it is not a sin to be aggresive. Its not a matter of

DID HE AUTHORIZE IT?? Thats silly. Did Jesus authorize us to do cartwheels? DId Jesus authorize us to blow bubbles? that is a silly argument. Jesus never sinned so being aggressive and using force is not always a sin.

Your argument of did He authorize it is not necessary if HE DID IT AND HE NEVER SINNED. aRE you telling ME that somethings are a sin for us but not for Jesus?


Its very simple. Is being aggressive and using force a sin. No. Not in and of itself. What else is there to argue?

Its right there in your face in what Jesus has done. Anything Jesus did besides calling Himself God is OK for us because He never sinned. If its not a sin why do we need authorization to do something that is not a sin?

Butch5
Jan 7th 2009, 07:58 PM
You are kind of being silly. If Jesus never sinned, and Jesus got aggressive and used force, it is not a sin to be aggresive. Its not a matter of

DID HE AUTHORIZE IT?? Thats silly. Did Jesus authorize us to do cartwheels? DId Jesus authorize us to blow bubbles? that is a silly argument. Jesus never sinned so being aggressive and using force is not always a sin.

Your argument of did He authorize it is not necessary if HE DID IT AND HE NEVER SINNED. aRE you telling ME that somethings are a sin for us but not for Jesus?


Its very simple. Is being aggressive and using force a sin. No. Not in and of itself. What else is there to argue?

Its right there in your face in what Jesus has done. Anything Jesus did besides calling Himself God is OK for us because He never sinned. If its not a sin why do we need authorization to do something that is not a sin?

I notice there is no mention in your post of my other question.

Did Jesus harm anyone?

I didn't say it was a sin to go beat up a tree. I asked where are Christians authorized by Christ to use force against another person?

Butch5
Jan 7th 2009, 08:02 PM
Sure he did. He did it in Romans 13 and throughout the OT. Now, if you insist on using only the gospels, I suppose I could ask where John 3:16 talks about hell. But then, that would be limiting what Jesus actually said through all his prophets.

Romans 13 authorizes the use of the sword against evil doers.

There is no point in continuing the discussion if you are not going to address the Scriptures that I posted.


Romans 13:1-6 ( KJV ) 1Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 6For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are Godís ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.

What Christians do you know that have been ordained by God to execute judgment?

Butch5
Jan 7th 2009, 08:15 PM
There is a huge difference in being attacked and persecuted for your beliefs, as opposed to someone unwarrantly atttacking you or your loved ones for no other reason than pure evil in order to inflict harm. My point is, we can't confuse the two.

If someone is attacking and raping one's wife, daughter, etc, I seriously doubt that they're doing it because they don't agree with their religious beliefs.

When the Bible says that we are to turn the other cheek, this is speaking of us individually, personally. The Bible is not telling us, that if someone is punching one of our loved ones on the right side of the face for whatever reason, that we should also make sure they punch them on the other side also. We don't have the right to make descisions like that for others, but we do have the right to defend them, by doing whatever is necessarry.

What kind of evil did Jesus exempt from His statement,


Matthew 5:38-39 ( KJV ) 38Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Paul and Peter say the same things,

Romans 12:17 ( KJV ) 17Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.


1 Thessalonians 5:15 ( KJV ) 15See that none render evil for evil unto any man; but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves, and to all men.


1 Peter 3:9 ( KJV ) 9Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing.

I don't see any exceptions.

divaD
Jan 7th 2009, 08:54 PM
What kind of evil did Jesus exempt from His statement,


Matthew 5:38-39 ( KJV ) 38Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Paul and Peter say the same things,

Romans 12:17 ( KJV ) 17Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.


1 Thessalonians 5:15 ( KJV ) 15See that none render evil for evil unto any man; but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves, and to all men.


1 Peter 3:9 ( KJV ) 9Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing.

I don't see any exceptions.




But is the aiding of a helpless victim being evil? It would seem to be evil if one didn't try to help.

Let me try to give 2 examples. Some thug robs and beats up your defensless 90 yr old grandmother. You find out who it was. You go looking for this thug in order to teach him a lesson. This would be repaying evil for evil.

2nd example. A thug is robbing and beating up your 90 yr old grandmother literally right in front of your eyes. You do whatever is necessary in order to aid your grandmother, even if you have to inflict your own violence in order to help your grandmother. Or you just simply remain meek and watch as your grandmother is being beaten. And as a result, she dies from her injuries.

Seriously, which would be evil? Saving your grandmother's life, or remaining meek while your grandmother is literally being beaten to death? Which scenerio do you feel would be harder to answer for, come judgment day? And which scenerio do you feel you would lose the most sleep over, if it were to actually happen?


I'm just trying to get you to be honest with yourself, that's all. I simply believe there is a difference in defending someone, as opposed to getting even with someone.

Brother Mark
Jan 7th 2009, 09:03 PM
I notice there is no mention in your post of my other question.

Did Jesus harm anyone?

In Rev he will. In Joshua he did.


I didn't say it was a sin to go beat up a tree. I asked where are Christians authorized by Christ to use force against another person?

Throughout the OT and Romans 13 and Revelations.

Brother Mark
Jan 7th 2009, 09:05 PM
There is no point in continuing the discussion if you are not going to address the Scriptures that I posted.

The scriptures you post are only concerning how an individual is to act and not about authority. It was against the law to murder in the OT but that didn't keep men from going to war.


Romans 13:1-6 ( KJV ) 1Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 6For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are Godís ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.

What Christians do you know that have been ordained by God to execute judgment?

Anyone called to be in government. That's the purpose of Government. Daniel was called. Joseph was called to be in government. The three hebrew children were called. Esther was called, kind of, to be involved in government.

Butch5
Jan 7th 2009, 09:19 PM
Brother Mark---The scriptures you post are only concerning how an individual is to act and not about authority. It was against the law to murder in the OT but that didn't keep men from going to war.

Are authorities not made up of individuals?




Brother Mark---Anyone called to be in government. That's the purpose of Government. Daniel was called. Joseph was called to be in government. The three hebrew children were called. Esther was called, kind of, to be involved in government.

You keep going to the OT, Jesus changed that.

Butch5
Jan 7th 2009, 09:21 PM
Brother Mark---In Rev he will. In Joshua he did.

Where in the temple?




Brother Mark---Throughout the OT and Romans 13 and Revelations.

Coould you provide a specific reference?

Brother Mark
Jan 7th 2009, 09:24 PM
Are authorities not made up of individuals?

Of course they are. However, as an individual, we don't have the right nor responsibility to act. However, as an authority, we are commanded to act. Why? Because authority is meant to act for the benefit of others. God's character has never changed.


You keep going to the OT, Jesus changed that.

No he didn't. That's why he will come again and lead an army in Revelation. If he changed it, he would come bringing peace instead of war. ;)

When Jesus came the first time, he came with the purpose of dying on the cross. He would not be distracted from that purpose and calling. There are many callings in life. We all should learn to turn the other cheek when we are offended. Then, when government takes up arms in a righteous war, we should take up arms as commanded. That's what Jesus will do in Revelation and it's what he did in Joshua and what he commanded in Romans 13.

Butch5
Jan 7th 2009, 09:35 PM
But is the aiding of a helpless victim being evil? It would seem to be evil if one didn't try to help.

Let me try to give 2 examples. Some thug robs and beats up your defensless 90 yr old grandmother. You find out who it was. You go looking for this thug in order to teach him a lesson. This would be repaying evil for evil.

2nd example. A thug is robbing and beating up your 90 yr old grandmother literally right in front of your eyes. You do whatever is necessary in order to aid your grandmother, even if you have to inflict your own violence in order to help your grandmother. Or you just simply remain meek and watch as your grandmother is being beaten. And as a result, she dies from her injuries.

Seriously, which would be evil? Saving your grandmother's life, or remaining meek while your grandmother is literally being beaten to death? Which scenerio do you feel would be harder to answer for, come judgment day? And which scenerio do you feel you would lose the most sleep over, if it were to actually happen?


I'm just trying to get you to be honest with yourself, that's all. I simply believe there is a difference in defending someone, as opposed to getting even with someone.

I've already said that I don't know that I could do that. However that we are discussing what the Scriptures say. When the disciples were beaten in Acts, they didn't try to protect each other. Paul was stoned with the disciples right there and there is no record of them doing anything. When Peter took up the sword to protect Jesus, Jesus rebuked him. I realize this doesn't prove my position but I think the lack of any recorded protection does speak to the issue. The early church was pretty much unanimous on this issue also.

I think it comes down to this, who is protecting our loved ones, us or God?

Butch5
Jan 7th 2009, 09:47 PM
Brother Mark---Of course they are. However, as an individual, we don't have the right nor responsibility to act. However, as an authority, we are commanded to act. Why? Because authority is meant to act for the benefit of others. God's character has never changed.

How then, does the Christian who is told to turn the other cheek, administer the sword? Jesus said my kingdom is not of this world, therefore Christians are not to be of this world. What does the kingdom of light have to do with the kingdom of darkness? Why is God going to put Christians in an earthly government (kingdom of darkness) to break His commands? We are of another kingdom, we are sojourners in this world. Does a sojourner, take elective office in a country that is not his own, does he administer justice on behalf of a country that is not his own? we are not of this kingdom, it should have no hold on us



Brother Mark---No he didn't. That's why he will come again and lead an army in Revelation. If he changed it, he would come bringing peace instead of war. ;)

When Jesus came the first time, he came with the purpose of dying on the cross. He would not be distracted from that purpose and calling. There are many callings in life. We all should learn to turn the other cheek when we are offended. Then, when government takes up arms in a righteous war, we should take up arms as commanded. That's what Jesus will do in Revelation and it's what he did in Joshua and what he commanded in Romans 13.


"But I say to you"

Just war???

Brother Mark
Jan 7th 2009, 09:51 PM
How then, does the Christian who is told to turn the other cheek, administer the sword? Jesus said my kingdom is not of this world, therefore Christians are not to be of this world. What does the kingdom of light have to do with the kingdom of darkness? Why is God going to put Christians in an earthly government (kingdom of darkness) to break His commands? We are of another kingdom, we are sojourners in this world. Does a sojourner, take elective office in a country that is not his own, does he administer justice on behalf of a country that is not his own? we are not of this kingdom, it should have no hold on us

Simple. A man hits a police officer off duty, he turns the other cheek. When the police officer is on duty he uses that authority to wield the sword. Because when a man hits a police officer, he is now hitting at the authority behind the police officer. The cop is meant to protect society at large and wield the sword.

That's why JTB never told one soldier (nor did Jesus) to get out of the army. They served a purpose.


"But I say to you"

Just war???

Sure. Was Joshua just in his conquest of Canaan? Indeed he was. Was David just in killing Goliath? You betcha. Will the war in Rev be just? Oh yea, at least for those on Jesus side.

Gregg
Jan 9th 2009, 02:12 PM
But is the aiding of a helpless victim being evil? It would seem to be evil if one didn't try to help.

Let me try to give 2 examples. Some thug robs and beats up your defensless 90 yr old grandmother. You find out who it was. You go looking for this thug in order to teach him a lesson. This would be repaying evil for evil.

2nd example. A thug is robbing and beating up your 90 yr old grandmother literally right in front of your eyes. You do whatever is necessary in order to aid your grandmother, even if you have to inflict your own violence in order to help your grandmother. Or you just simply remain meek and watch as your grandmother is being beaten. And as a result, she dies from her injuries.

Seriously, which would be evil? Saving your grandmother's life, or remaining meek while your grandmother is literally being beaten to death? Which scenerio do you feel would be harder to answer for, come judgment day? And which scenerio do you feel you would lose the most sleep over, if it were to actually happen?


I'm just trying to get you to be honest with yourself, that's all. I simply believe there is a difference in defending someone, as opposed to getting even with someone.

I would be tempted by #1 but would probably go to the police.

In #2 I would hit the the bad guy as hard as I could with whatever was handy. If God wanted him alive, it would not kill him. If I did kill him I am pretty sure I might have some guilt issues to deal with. I have no reason to think that I would not talk to God about this, and no reason to believe that I would not be forgiven.

typo
Jan 9th 2009, 04:35 PM
I was just wondering. Jesus said blessed are the meek. How can we be men who are meek? I'm sure everyone knows what happens to the meek? I don't know, it just does not make sense to me.
Interesting discussions in this thread.

Returning to the topic of the OP, I think the modern concept of the word meek has changed from the time of the original translation.

Here is an example of meek as originally conceived.
A wild horse that has been broken to ride is also called "meeked" even today in some circles. He is now gentle and subservient.
If you meek a wild horse he is still the same powerful horse but now that power is available for use by the owner.

What is true of a horse that is meek and does the will of his owner is also true of a man that is meek and does the will of his owner.
.

Yukerboy
Jan 10th 2009, 01:05 AM
Which then begs the question, if God can prevent evil and He doesn't, then isn't God evil? Which of course the answer is God is good.

This is why I keep hollering about God causing evil to fulfill His purposes. His purposes are good and thus, even when we may feel something is evil, the end result is good, for God foreordained it to happen.