05/03/19 ADDRESSING ERRONEOUS TEACHING BY THOSE WHO FOLLOW CONSTANTINIAN "CHRISTIANITY"

05/03/19 ADDRESSING ERRONEOUS TEACHING BY THOSE WHO FOLLOW CONSTANTINIAN "CHRISTIANITY"
(I have improved the document with several edits. It says the same, but I added and made spelling correction.)

Here are supposed Biblical arguments for Christians taking up arms to kill their enemies. I have heard these arguments given by some really intelligent and learned people. I am sad for them that they have adopted a position that is not Biblical, then try to justify their position by twisting Scripture.

#1 We are mistakenly told to observe Old Testament directives for making war and follow the record of violent actions taken by the people of God (Israel, David, Moses, Judges).

RESPONSE
This has nothing to do with New Testament behavioral standards, anymore than offering the blood of bulls and goats or the dietary laws.

God does not have an earthly kingdom in the New Testament times, as He did in the Old Testament times. The kingdom of God preached in the New Testament is without borders. The kingdom of God in the New Testament is a spiritual kingdom, not a geographical, economic, militaristic, political kingdom.

Jesus said,
John 18:36
"36 Jesus 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."

Paul said,
Romans 14:17
17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

#2 We are falsely told that Jesus directed His disciples to arm themselves for physical battle and/or self defense when attacked by robbers.

Luke 22:35-38
35 And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing.
36 Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
37 For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end.
38 And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.

RESPONSE
No No No. While it is true that Jesus told His disciples to take a sword with them on their upcoming ministry journey, it is not true that He told them to take the "sword" as a weapon to be used against any man. This passage reveals Jesus telling His disciples how to prepare for the hardships of survival in the inhospitable regions they would be taking the gospel.

In fact, Jesus reproved Peter on the one occasion that His disciple actually used a sword against another human being. Peter pulled his blade and cut off the ear of the servant in the Garden, at the time of Jesus' arrest. Jesus reproved Peter for his action and condemned the principle of violence among His followers. Jesus reproved Peter, healed the wounded servant, and set the standard for His followers by saying that those who live by the sword will die by the sword.

By the way, notice that there is no New Testament record of a Christian ever taking up arms against any other person from that time. Whenever any Christian (or Christian community) was attacked or threatened, they either died in sacrificial submission, used the power and authority of the law or fled for their lives.

The disciples did need to have a "sword," a cutting implement for protecting them from wild animals, for killing and slaughtering animals for food and pelts, for chopping wood. These men were going into the wild country. They did not have American Express and they were not going to be staying at the Holiday Inn.

There is no record of Christians (apostles or otherwise) ever using their swords as weapons against any other human being. With the great accounts of Christian adventure in the New Testament, you would think that at least one account should be recorded of Christians killing or resisting armed enemies, whether highwaymen or hostile religious forces or foreign resistance fighters. NEVER did it happen, because the early Church did not mistake the need for using a sword for survival against the natural elements with using a sword in carnal battle with human beings, ever.

#3 We are also told that Christians were in the Roman military, therefore (they argue, based on John the Baptist's response to a question asked by a soldier) it must have been God's will for men to take up war weapons to fight for their country

Luke 3:9-15
9 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: every tree therefore which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
10 And the people asked him, saying, What shall we do then?
11 He answereth and saith unto them, He that hath two coats, let him impart to him that hath none; and he that hath meat, let him do likewise.
12 Then came also publicans to be baptized, and said unto him, Master, what shall we do?
13 And he said unto them, Exact no more than that which is appointed you.
14 And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages.
15 And as the people were in expectation, and all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ, or not;

RESPONSE
WRONG AGAIN.
Two things we recognize in this passage. One of those who came to John, was a soldier, asking what he should do, in order to not be cast off by God.

Being in the military did not necessarily mean that the solder was primarily a warrior. There were engineers and other professions employed by the Roman Army. Remember, they built roads, walls, aqueducts and other infrastructure. They policed the highways and did other civil service. This is seen in modern military organizations today. American soldiers not only build infrastructure, they build social, educational, political, civil, economic foundations and feed the hungry, transport needy people.

Regardless of the soldier's fighting responsibility, he was moved to ask what he should do. But notice, there is no indication that he was given directives to take anyone's life. And there was no directive to obey orders which required violence.

IN FACT, John (even prior to the words of Jesus and the apostles) told the soldier, DO VIOLENCE TO NO MAN. This passage is often twisted and turned to mean something other than what it says. But it says,
"14 And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man..."

John the Baptizer did not have the knowledge and wisdom of Christ, but his answer was consistent with the teachings of Jesus and the apostles on this subject. Remember, this was not a period of time when being a peacemaker was admired or advised. John's words were remarkable and revolutionary.

#4 I knew I had another point to address, but I forgot it, because it is so absurd. I think the first points are absurd, but this one is maybe the most absurd. Of course, I realize why people make the mistakes concerning these passages. It is based on the Constantinian influence on the formal churches in the past, starting with Rome and following through to the Reformation Church theology.

RESPONSE
The Fourth Scripture references come from the book of Revelation and of course they are part of the end times (Tribulation) scenario. Several passages refer to Jesus going to war with the dragon and the kings of the earth.

The reason this is an absurd application of the passages to the idea of Christians taking up arms is because the events in the Book of Revelation do not take place during the Church age. The mistake in interpretation is because the belief in the literal fulfillment of Revelation is denied by various groups.

Yes, Jesus will lead His armies in victory over His enemies. Jesus will make war with the dragon. Jesus will reign as King in Jerusalem, over the entire world. Jesus will rule the world with a rod of iron. Jesus will defeat His final enemies and destroy the world with fire. BUT THAT IS NOT NOW. It has nothing to do with the war that Christians are fighting today.

CONCLUSION
Along with the misrepresentation of these passages, the followers of Constantine have been misled by the misuse of these passages, as well as with the false belief that the actions of the Roman Church or the Lutheran Church or the Church of England or any other Constantinian influenced group, set the standard of Christian view and practice concerning war and violence.

I did not include the many passages of the New Testament which are against Christian violence. That will be on another occasion. This document simply addressed the use of New Testament passages that are purported to advance the false narrative that the New Testament approves of Christian violence.

YES, God has made provision for protecting the righteous and punishing the wicked, but God has assigned that duty to the State, not the Church or His children, who are called to be PEACE MAKERS.