Blessed Are the Peace Makers

Lets continue discussion about the question of violence and Gods commandments under this topic.

Proverbs 3:31
Do not envy a violent man or choose any of his ways,

Psalm 11:5
The LORD examines the righteous, but the wicked and those who love violence his soul hates.

Matthew 5:43
"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you"

It's easy though to quote scripture and verse to try to tell someone what he or she should do or believe. I have these beliefs that I believe to be right, but I still have a sin nature that expresses itself violently at times. That doesn't make it right.

Also I believe that the ends never justify the means. If good came of a violent act, that doesn't justify it.

In the Kingdom of God everything is different.

As an American I say bomb Iraq and Iran and every other God-forsaken country that doesn't speak American (not really, but you get my point).

As a Christian I have to look at things differently.

In the words of Derek Webb, "My first allegiance is not to a flag, a country or a man, but to a king and a kingdom."

Well said Josh...How would those beliefs affect you and your actions if say criminal had a loaded gun pointed at your wife and baby? Do you consider yourself a pacifist ? Does the scripture you quoted apply to the stated circumstances? To What Hitler did and wanted to do? ...Honest questions.

I've heard the one about the criminal before and will answer it in that at some level I have to trust God that He'll take care of me and my family in that situation and "provide a way of escape"" that doesn't entail my sin. I do believe that if someone broke into my house I would find the strength to "give him my cloak as well." I've thought long and hard about that. I also believe that at some level if I'm influencing my community in the way that I should and perhaps working to eliminate poverty, maybe I wouldn't have to worry so much about thieves breaking in to steal. Just a thought.

As to Hitler (though I'm more familiar with the "terrorists" that we fight today - whom I'll address in a minute) he was able to gain the power that he did in Germany in part because the church of Germany compromised what they believed and gave in to him. It would never have come to that if God's people had done what they were supposed to (mainly stand for truth and righteousness).

As to the terrorists that we fight today, as Americans we're supposed to hate them and "hunt them down." As Christians we agree with them. We have the same problems with America that they do (matt and I have had this discussion in Pizza Hut). They hate us not because we represent freedom or even because we represent Christ. They hate America (the "Christian nation") because we are the country that has legalized gay marriage, we promote homosexuality (maybe not you and me, but watch a little tv and you'll see what I'm talking about) our music is lewd and crude, our movies portray rampant promiscuity and obscenities, our women dress provacatively, we are obsessed as a nation with materialism. We are the whore of babylon.

On an economic scale we waste the most, we spend the most, and we still have an enormous deficit even if G.W.B. says that it's shrinking.

Somebody correct me please if I am wrong.

I'm not saying that they're right to fly planes into our buildings, I'm just saying that we (as Christians) perhaps agree with what the rest of the world thinks about America more than we think. You can call me unpatriotic if you like, but as I said before my first allegiance is to a King. . .

Peace is certainly a noble goal. Most violence is not justified, but I cannot believe that none is. If we seek peace at all costs, we end up unwilling to fight for anything.

I believe that Jesus, on at least one occasion, took matters into his own hands and acted rather violently. One example is when he entered the Temple and saw the people changing money and selling livestock. He "made a scourge of cords, and drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen; and He poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables . . ." (John 2:15)

I'm not really sure, looking at this through our human eyes, that we would say that Jesus had a valid reason for such violence. I mean, there was no violence taking place until he showed up. Perhaps he could have gone to the local authorities and drafted a bill to evict the local loan sharks from the church. But he didn't. He tied some ropes together and started whacking people, overturning tables, and stampeding animals. None of these people were doing any physical harm to anybody, but they were defiling the House of God.

I’ll not say that Christ overreacted or acted inappropriately. His actions were just. His actions were correct. He didn’t stand by passively. He saw evil taking place and took action. I believe that we are called to do the same, whether it be defending the defenseless or standing up when the church is being overrun with crooks.


Regarding the Orwell quote, I love that quote because it challenges me as to what type of person I am going to be. Evil exists. Am I going to take action against it or sleep comfortably in my bed while others take action?


Finally. you make an important point that if the church was doing its part, perhaps we wouldn't have the poverty that we have. However, it would be naive to think that we could eliminate sin by providing a nice house and plenty of food for people. The thief does not steal because he is hungry or because he is poor, but because he is evil. If you give an evil man a house and clothes and food, you've just created a well-fed evil man, not a good man. We sin because we are fallen beings in deep need of Salvation. Until we reach heaven, there will be murderers and rapists and child molesters. If it is within my power, they'll get two to the chest before they harm innocent victims.


I'll post on just war and the terrorists soon.

Okay, so a few of you guys have already heard this story and Trey was there but I would like to give this narrative and then pose a question.
A few months back my wife and I were a the House of Blues to see a MuteMath show. At this particular show there were a lot of people that we knew from church including a pastor. While a couple of the opening bands were playing, Faith and the pastors' wife Christina walked out to go grab a bite to eat. On the way out , a guy stuck his hand up my wifes dress. Faith just looked at him in shock and then continued out. When she got back , she told me what happened and I asked her if she had seen the guy since or if she could spot him in the crowd. She couldn't . At the end of the show we stood outside and she pointed the guy out as he exited. I along with my good friend Chet followed he , his brother and a friend into the bar next door and I confronted him. Chet will vouch that I calmly looked him in the eye , stated his transgression and told him that I took issue with his conduct. He denied that it happened . Long story short, we walked outside , Faith confirmed that it was him . I told him that he could apologize or else. The pastor grabbed me and his friend grabbed him and in the end I just walked away from it. I left with a guilty concience for not having protected my wife and the realization that there are few gentlemen out there that will own up to doing wrong.
My feelings are , that it is my right and my duty to defend and protect my wife , period... My intention was to thrash the guy soundly for his violation if he didn't repent(repent? stupid I know). Next time I thrash first and then listen to the apology and then walk away with a clear concience.
So the question is, What would you have done ?

Guys. First, sorry I fell off the bandwagon with this. No excuse, I just suck. Now, with that out of the way, here we go.

This whole idea has been on my mind since I saw the film 'The Kingdom' about two weeks ago. Usually, I can really go for a good 'shoot 'em up' movie, but I left the movie theater feeling less than enthusiastic. Sure it was very well done film, and it would have been easy to walk out of the theater and say "Great! The goods guys won and the bad guys lost." However, for some reason, I keened in on the humanity of everyone on the screen. Now, am I saying that there should be no justice for those who commit acts of terrorism, certainly not. All I am saying is that at times we tend to loose sight of the humanity of those we fight.

Just the other day I was having lunch with a friend at work. He was saying how we need to just drop a nuke on Iran, Iraq, and North Korea and be done with the whole thing. Here is the sad thing. When we remove the humanity of those in countries or regions that we are 'fighting', it is easy to follow that bellwether like a flock of mindless sheep. But if we step back and remind ourselves that those whom we have reduces to less than human are actually people with lives, people with kids that they have great hopes for, people that Christ died for, everything changes.

I guess that this isn't a direct response to how we should respond to truly 'evil men' as much as it a thought about the dehumanization of people for the sake of supporting our own ideals.

Nicely put Adam. It's much easier to think of our enemies as evil monsters instead of as human beings made by God in His image.

In response to Zach's story and following question, I probably would've kicked his ass. Even upon reading your story I have this urge to come help you hunt him down and make him pay.

But I'm not sure if that's the right response. In fact, I have a sneaking suspicion that it isn't.

I'll continue this thought later, but for now I have to go.

Well said Adam, and you're right ; It's easy to demonize a people that are half a world away , people that can be terribly extreme in they're reaction to Western christianity, people that have a problem with our liberal morality( as Josh has stated previously ) . Unfortunately its usually the deeply entrenched Right-winged Republicans that we christians associate pretty closely with that are leading the charge to make the Middle East one Giant Glass bowl. Another Holy War ? ( the Crusades anyone? ) History has a way of repeating itself. What lessons are there to learn?....
More later , I gotta go

I spoke to my wife about this issue. You have to understand that she is ex-Mennonite on both sides as far back as they go. Her father was drafted during one of the ways and because of his religious beliefs served in a non-combatant role in a hospital.

I asked her what she thought about this whole issue of violence and defending one's wife's honor.

She said that in cases like zach's there is extra grace.

I think that means that you can just beat the crap out of the guy.

My wife says that I'm misquoting her, but I think I have expressed the spirit of what she was trying to say.

So, Jesus said he didn't come bring peace, but a sword. (He also said blessed are the peacemakers.) He said that the violent take the Kingdom by force. (He also said that in order to save your life, you must lose it, and then there's that turning the other cheek stuff.) He said you have to hate your father, mother, brother, and sisters. (He also said love one another.) Was Jesus just confused? How can we say “What would Jesus do?” when it seems his words were so contradictory?

The only example of real violence I can think of that involves Jesus was when he took to the money changers in the temple with a whip, knocked over their tables, and chased them out. I love this description: “No doubt the disciples tossed and turned a long, sleepless night that evening; it must have been terribly disconcerting to witness Jesus unhinged, throwing furniture, screaming at the top of his lungs, and flinging money into the air.” But why did he do it? What was he being violent AGAINST? Whatever it was, we have to assume that his anger and violence were justified. This is Jesus we're talking about, after all.

But notice that when Jesus had the perfect opportunity to defend HIMSELF (his own life and honor, so to speak), he didn't do a thing. Where was that whip he fashioned in the temple? One of his disciples used a sword to cut of an ear. Jesus healed it. He didn't defend himself to Pilate. He didn't say a word.

I don't know if I'm going to leave this post with any answers. I remember when Zach told me that story at his house long ago being a little uncomfortable with his response. (Granted, I'm not married... I certainly took that into account.) And don't get me wrong, Faith is one of my favorite people in the world, and the idea of some scumbag copping a feel in a bar disgusts and angers me in a way I really can't express. But do we get to choose when we turn the other cheek (only when we feel like it)? To lose our life? What, in the eternal scheme of things, would beating that guy to a pulp accomplish? Is it safe to take vengeance out of the hands of God when he clearly says it belongs to him? (Zach, hope you'll still be my friend and really see my heart in this... I honestly don't know what I would do in your shoes in that situation. I'm just thinking aloud.)

So, what would Jesus do?
"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you." Matthew 5:43

I'm going to jump in on Diana's comment to Josh about "extra grace" in Zach's situation with Faith.
What did she mean?
Now allow me to ask you gents some relevant questions.
Where did we get our ideas about a woman's honor or a man's duty when his wife is molested or, where we should take a christian woman? Is what "any man would do" what we aught to do? Do you want to be "any man"?
What would Jesus do? The answer to that question is influenced by how well we know Jesus. We do know that our Lord did only those things that He heard and saw of the Father. Are we being led dy the Holy Spirit?
Timeout! I've got more I'd like to share but I'm losing it. I got started early enough but several lengthy phone calls ( it's my birthday ) have set me back. To be cont....

Good point, Mr Wilson. I too was thinking about where we get our chivalric ideas of protecting a woman's honor. My ideas of it come from some medieval code of honor or something. You know, knights of the round table stuff. It may go back further than that, but I'm inclined to think that we can't trace it back to Jesus.

Speaking of chivalry, I'm at this moment watching "The Prisoner of Zenda" starring Stewart Granger who's real name was James Stewart but at the time Jimmy Stewart was already a movie star so he changed his name so as to avoid confusion.
I know that as a christian , my code of honor , my principles , my motives Are to be a result of my walk with Jesus. You guys raise valid questions which I will attempt to answer after some searching.
If this puts it in a different light , let me say this ; The way I wanted the whole confrontation with that fellow to play out was , I would confront, He would confess and then repent , we could then part ways in peace. He didn't confess, he didn't repent which in my eyes compounded the offence. The physical punishment that was to come next got interrupted by a pastor who tried to reason with me by stating the obvious fact , that the guy, his brother and his friend were all bigger and better built than I , and that I would probably lose anyhow. My arguement then as now was, I don't choose my fights based on a presumed or intended outcome. My fights will be determined by the merit of values involved . That fellow did not value or appreciate my wifes personal space and allowed his primal and degenerate urges to effect him to the point of physically assaulting my wife. You may argue a christians right to "personal space", so be it . As stated before, I will continue my search for the truth with the help of you guys. And when I find that Truth I will bask in the freedom that it brings , absorb and apply it by the Grace of God. Until then I hold it as my duty and my privilege to defend "the weaker vessel" ......as physically as the situation dictates

they weren't better built, zach, just bigger built. . .

It probably clear that I think Zach was correct in expressing his displeasure regarding the cowardly pervert's misconduct.

I know that we as modern-day Christians have pretty much dismissed the Old Testament as irrelevant (a mistake, I'll argue), but in regard to our code of honor, it definitely predates Jesus. In Genesis 34, Jacob's daughter Dinah gets violated (although it almost seems as if she consented), so two of his sons kill every male in the city, then they plunder the city, taking the women and children. Now, the way they're deceptive in the way they do it, but their only reason is that one guy dishonored their sister. For better or worse, the code clearly existed back then.

I don't know whether this is an example to be followed or a caution. The Bible doesn't really provide a lot of commentary, and I don't think that Zach should have killed the guy. I will argue that defending others is a principle that Scripture supports, especially when we're talking about those who can't defend themselves. I don't believe that Christ ever meant for us to stand by idly and let evil men have their way with the innocent in the name of loving our neighbors.

What would you do if you saw a couple of guys raping a woman? You wouldn't trust God to save her. You would forget about your bodily safety and you would go and help her, using violence if necessary. You wouldn't turn the other cheek (or expect her to).

Oh yeah, I asked my wife about the situation with Faith, and she said if some guy did that to her she'd kick his a** herself.

Well guys, as I have read through this recent post, I am impressed. First, there seems to be no shortage of Biblical references. It seems that all the bases have been covered there, so I won't attempt to just throw out scripture. However, this thought just keeps running through my head... "Who is the weaker vessel?"

Wait a minute before you crucify me for my liberal theology. I am not at all challenging the male/female family structure. However I think that Will and Bob bring up a great point. Why is it that we (guys) feel like we are exempt of what Jesus teaches us in scripture? Why do we feel that we are justified in our Gladiator-like rhetoric ("Father to a murdered son, husband to a murdered wife, and I shall have my vengance in either this life or the next") just because we are ticked off. Honestly, I would want to kick the guys butt too, but why do I think that is OK? Am I being the weaker vessel because I can't continue to walk out my faith when my family is offended?

Now, as for Matt's point, where do we step in? Of course, I am sure that each and every one of us would rush in with no regard for our own safety to protect both our loved one or stranger from bodily harm. I know that we are all just heros waiting to happen. However, in Zach's case, what was he truly protecting. Sorry guys, but I am trying to take an outsiders view with no bias whatsoever. I know we are talking about your Zach's wife, but honestly, what harm was done? Wow, my head is spinning. Let me rephrase that... what harm was done that requires the return of bodily harm. Without being there, here is where I think the harm was done. It was devaluing to Faith as a women and as a wife and it was insulting to Zach as her husband. Did this man need to be confronted?... ABSOLUTELY! However, does his lack of repentance merit our taking justice into our own hand? Could you imagine the type of religion that we would have in Christianity if every time we were offered repentance and denied it we got our butt kicked by God.

Well, all that said, here is the bottom line. I know that in Zach's exact situation, I would have the same urge. However, playing it out over and over with you guys causes me to think that my first response isn't always the right response. Are we men enough to constantly protect, confront, and offer opportunity for repentance without allowing our pride to take over?

Nicely put Adam. I think that it is true that often our first response is to offer bodily harm in return for a wrong.

In response to Matt's reference of Simeon and Levi's response to their sister's rape, the Bible does have some commentary.

Firstly, their father, Jacob, when he hears of their killing of every male in the city, condemns it, though it seems at the time from fear of retribution (Gen 34).

However, at the end of his life Jacob mentions this again when the time comes for him to bless his children (Gen 49). He says (and I quote from the NIV verses 5-7)

"Simeon and Levi are brothers -
their swords are weapons of violence.
Let me not enter into their council,
let me not join their assembly,
for they have killed men in their anger
and hamstrung oxen as they pleased.
Cursed be their anger, so fierce,
and their fury, so cruel!
I will scatter them in Jacob
and disperse them in Israel"

Those are some of the last words he speaks to them, a rather strong condemnation of their actions. And that's Old Testament stuff.

Thanks for bringing this extra commentary to light. It certainly portrays the mortality of the men of the bible. Sometimes we can just assume that if they did it in the bible then it must be OK, but Jacob clearly calls his boys out for their conduct.

Just getting to these old posts. Wow Zach, I think I would have done the same thing. If I may play the devil's advocate, if what the Guido did to Faith does not deserve bodily harm then what does it deserve? Could Zach have gone find his little sister or mother and done the same thing , of course not.

I think I would have walked up to him, quoted some Samuel L and then choke slammed him: "There's a passage I got memorized. Ezekiel 25:17. The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness. For he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you."