Can a Christian be a Pacifist?

[jriccitelli]

I believe we should turn the cheek and not resort to violence when confronted with evil, but where do we draw the line?
And can a true Christian ‘ever’ draw the line?
I am not talking about a situation that doesn’t call for force, no matter what situation, if after we have attempted, tried or considered other alternative strategies, it becomes clear it is too dangerous for the defense to safely subdue or divert the aggressor – this is where we begin the question about pacifism (full pacifism).

I have always accepted that I will allow myself to be beat up or killed if no other lives are put at risk. And I have always considered that I might die as a missionary along a road somewhere because I refused to defend myself - that is how I plan to go. This is all fine for our ‘own’ predicaments, but not when 'other' people are in danger.

What I am trying to demonstrate is that; Pacifists may not understand their own position. You can do whatever you want in a situation, but you cannot say a Bible believing Christian is un-biblical for using force, and lethal force in stopping a dangerous attack.
1. You can’t say that a person is not living by ‘Kingdom’ principles when it may be that they need to use deadly force to stop a crime.
2. Nor can you suggest a Christian should not be a soldier or a police officer.
3. You also cannot 'equate' defensive actions and necessary lethal defensive means - with violence.
I highly respect that men and women put their lives at risk daily, not to be our shields, but as professionals who we pay so that we and our neighbors can live in a safer environment. This is a duty a Christian servant should be praised and honored to do.

All day and night thousands of violent criminal arrests are made in towns and countries across this land, what on earth do we think a nation would look like if we did not stop crime and violence?
A theft or assault is not going to stop because they suddenly realize everyone is ‘a human being of equal worth’. If an assailant is not threatened with obvious intent or force they will most likely ‘not’ submit themselves to surrender or arrest. You are not going to persuade a criminal into the back of a patrol car or into a jail cell without a sword in at your side.

[dwilkins]

I think this is the key to your point:

"All day and night thousands of violent criminal arrests are made in towns and countries across this land, what on earth do we think a nation would look like if we did not stop crime and violence?"

It has always seemed disingenuous to me that pacifists or those close to it wallow in the security rough men provide and then criticize them for it.

Doug

[schoel]

While I believe that defensive force is OK, I have issues with the professions of violence

...
2. Nor can you suggest a Christian should not be a soldier or a police officer.
3. You also cannot 'equate' defensive actions and necessary lethal defensive means - with violence.

Regarding soldiers or the police, I can't imaging why the followers of Christ would want to sign up for those "professions" for the following reasons:

1) In both professions, there is an assumption of obedience to the chain of command against all other considerations. Why would any Christian ever agree to that requirement, due to the fact that their allegiance is already attached to Christ?

2) The duties of those "professions" includes violence and killing. While I'm not opposed to defensive force, why would a follower of the Prince of Peace shape your working life around a job with such a high degree of violence?

3) Both jobs are agents of a godless state, required to enforce the whims of such an institution. Why would a Christian want to sign up to serve Babylon?

4) If the early church was emphatically against being a soldier, that fact should give us pause before we consider it a valid option in the 21st century. What were their objections? Could those objections apply to our culture and state?

[Homer]

Seems to me if it would be wrong for a Christian to be a member of a police force, it would also be wrong to call the police when someone is breaking into your home.

[mattrose]

Seems to me if it would be wrong for a Christian to be a member of a police force, it would also be wrong to call the police when someone is breaking into your home.

This is the same point of contention that we had in the other thread. I don't think it logically follows.

The Church has a unique role in the world... to represent the Kingdom of God on earth. There are other institutions on this earth as well. Government is one such institution. Government has a role in this world as well... to limit evil as much as possible in this age.

If I am a member of The Church, it is my job to represent The Kingdom of God (which includes being a peace-maker, not one who resorts to violence). It is also part of my responsibility to recognize other institutions that God has set up for this current age. So I should recognize government... the role that it plays... the job that it does.

In this sense, there is no logical problem with a non-violent person calling the cops.

I think the only reason people don't get this point is b/c we've lost the sense that there are multiple entities through which God works.. in different ways.

[mattrose]

It has always seemed disingenuous to me that pacifists or those close to it wallow in the security rough men provide and then criticize them for it.

Doug

That would be disingenuous, I agree.

But I'm wholly against Christians utilizing violence AND I appreciate the security that 'rough' men and women may provide me. I won't criticize them for doing their job well. Just the opposite. I'm glad they are doing so! I can think of no higher non-Christian calling.

[dwilkins]

It has always seemed disingenuous to me that pacifists or those close to it wallow in the security rough men provide and then criticize them for it.

Doug

That would be disingenuous, I agree.

But I wholly against Christians utilizing violence AND I appreciate the security that 'rough' men and women may provide me. I won't criticize them for doing their job well. Just the opposite. I'm glad they are doing so! I can think of no higher non-Christian calling.

Well, that's mighty Pharisaical of you. I'm almost shocked that you would expect others to do your dirty work and then feel that your hands were clean in the matter.

Doug

[dwilkins]

While I believe that defensive force is OK, I have issues with the professions of violence

...
2. Nor can you suggest a Christian should not be a soldier or a police officer.
3. You also cannot 'equate' defensive actions and necessary lethal defensive means - with violence.

Regarding soldiers or the police, I can't imaging why the followers of Christ would want to sign up for those "professions" for the following reasons:

1) In both professions, there is an assumption of obedience to the chain of command against all other considerations. Why would any Christian ever agree to that requirement, due to the fact that their allegiance is already attached to Christ?

2) The duties of those "professions" includes violence and killing. While I'm not opposed to defensive force, why would a follower of the Prince of Peace shape your working life around a job with such a high degree of violence?

3) Both jobs are agents of a godless state, required to enforce the whims of such an institution. Why would a Christian want to sign up to serve Babylon?

4) If the early church was emphatically against being a soldier, that fact should give us pause before we consider it a valid option in the 21st century. What were their objections? Could those objections apply to our culture and state?

It's obvious you haven't spent much time in either environment.

1. In neither the military nor the police are people to follow illegal orders, which in most cases are quite well defined and surprisingly moral.
2. You are closer to having a reasonable point for the military because they tend to use radical amounts of force (though again, they are expected to do so withing rules of engagement and other restricting laws), but in police work there is actually very little force used on a day to day basis.
3. Bringing Babylon into this obviously breaks the seal on eschatology, though I won't go into it unless you really want to. In a democratic nation the force the military and police are using is tightly tied to what the people want, so you'll have to start your criticism there. In some military scenarios, in as much as international bodies are affecting our policy outside of our political control you have something of a point.
4. They were indeed, in the west. But, keep in mind that the church in the Mediterranean basin was the minority of believers in the smaller branch of the church until about 800AD. Our history of the Church of the East isn't nearly as good, so the jury is still out on that one as far as I'm concerned. In any case, during his drive for moral purity to prepare the nation for Christ, John the Baptist was explicit that he didn't expect soldiers who were believers to quit the Roman Army or shirk their duties. In their world pushing back against illegal orders carried a heavier consequence, but could always do that if they pleased.

Doug

[mattrose]

Well, that's mighty Pharisaical of you. I'm almost shocked that you would expect others to do your dirty work and then feel that your hands were clean in the matter.

Doug

I don't expect them to. Nor do I see it as dirty work.

I don't think you understand my position.

God has called His people to be peacemakers in this world... to represent His Kingdom during this fallen age. But God is smart. God knows that this IS a fallen age. And so while His Church is representing and demonstrating kingdom principles (which includes non-violence), He ALSO gifts the planet with the concept of government. This gift of government helps to keep the peace so that, among other things, the church can effectively do its job.

When the new age begins, of course, there will be no need for earthly government. There will be no need for military. There will be no need for police. They are needed only in the fallen conditions of this age. But they are NEEDED in the fallen conditions of this age. That's why God gave them.

Why should I REFUSE to accept God's intelligent decision to provide structure to this fallen age via government, military, and police?

But on the other hand, WHY would I choose to join those entities when I am already playing a different role as a member of the kingdom?

[dwilkins]

I think I understood you pretty clearly. You think it is beneath you to partake in physical violence to solve civilizational problems. Because all people sin, some worse than others, it's mandatory that there is some sort of physical response to criminality sometimes. You don't think you should have to participate in that, but you think other people (sinners) should in order to protect you. I agree with the comment above that this might be less hypocritical if you never called the police, but you said that you didn't think there would be a problem with that. Being willing to use sinners to do sinful things for your benefit is hypocritical in my opinion.

Doug