Dancing In The Blood Of The Slaughtered
BY Herschel Smith
9 years, 5 months ago
Via reader Mack, Richmond-Times Dispatch:
The massacre reminds me of a story that helps shape the core of the Christian message. At the end of his life when Jesus was arrested by the politicians of his time, his lead disciple, Peter, pulled out a concealed weapon and went on a rampage. Immediately, Jesus rebuked him for such a show of violence, told him to put the sword away, healed the wound of the Roman servant Peter attacked, and told his followers in no uncertain terms that “those who live by the sword will die by the sword” (Matthew 26:50-52).
This display of nonviolence — alongside Jesus’ words such as “love your enemies” (Matthew 5:44), “do good to those who persecute you” (Luke 6:27) and “forgive not only seven times but seventy times seven times” (Matthew 18:21-22) — suggests that following Jesus means displaying a courageous, generous, forgiving and nonviolent way of life.
Oh boy, here’s another “Jesus was a Bohemian hippie pacifist flower child” sermon. So the solution isn’t difficult in this case. Jesus is the very one who told them to go get weapons. In Matthew 26:50-52 He is saying that contrary to popular wish, the Holy Spirit persuades men to believe, not force. Of course this differentiates true religion from sex and murder cults like Islam, who believe that saying a few words at the business end of a gun turns them into Muslims.
The Kingdom of God comes by His power, not ours (even if He uses our work as secondary causes of things, the primary mover or primary cause is always the sovereign God of the Bible). This passage of Scripture has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with and isn’t a normative statement on peace, violence, weapons, Biblical self defense or anything else. The pastor needs to go back to school and learn Biblical hermeneutics.
On July 1, 2015 at 2:13 am, ShallNOTBeInfringed Original said:
Actually the only scripture the pastor needs brushing up on us the one about misleading the “least of these” and what it might have to do with the millstone with his name on it. He knows exactly what he is doing and a refresher on Jesus’ specific version of the consequences might help.
On July 1, 2015 at 4:03 pm, Mack said:
Yews, Thou Shall Not Bear False Witness.
On July 1, 2015 at 4:04 pm, Mack said:
Actually, I meant ‘Yes’
On July 1, 2015 at 9:23 am, Blake said:
In reading the Scripture where Jesus tells the disciples that two swords are enough, to me it is very evident that while Jesus knew he had to die on the cross, he also needed his disciples free to able to carry on the work of spreading the Gospel.
Through having arms, the disciples were able escape and live to spread the Good News of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
On July 1, 2015 at 10:59 am, Archer said:
Quite right. This is why He rebuked Peter when Peter drew his sword on the Roman soldiers coming to arrest Jesus. Christ knew His purpose and His place (and Peter’s, too), and it was not for both of them to die “in the field” by Roman soldiers serving a death warrant for killing some of their own.
Rather, Jesus’ place was to die on the cross for the sins of the world, and Peter’s was to spread the Word and the message. For that to happen, both had to be clean and innocent. Thus, Jesus rebuked Peter for drawing his sword.
It makes perfect sense, if we think deeper than the surface layer.
On July 1, 2015 at 11:12 am, Herschel Smith said:
‘Jesus’ place was to die on the cross …’ Exactly. And it is that very thing that ushered in the Kingdom of God, viz. the reign of Jesus. It’s always nice to have commenters fill in the blanks where I left it incomplete.
On July 1, 2015 at 5:03 pm, Backwoods Engineer said:
If you had a “Like” button, I would hit it on this post.