Was it worth Dividing the Church??

[Sudsy]

And for the record, just because someone or some church identifies as Anabaptist, Church of Christ, Slavic Pentecostal, etc., does not make me think that they are probably born again, following Jesus, still have their candlestick, etc. I won't make that deduction until I have seen what kind of fruit is coming from their lives.

To whoever cares to respond as I am curious as to how far a pacifist Christian regards how God will judge professing believers who were and/or are involved in killings in acts of war.

Have you determined then that those professing believers that participated in wars and killing people in wars and believed they were instruments God used to stop evil, are lost ? Is this a kind of fruit that you believe forfeits one's salvation ?

Some believers understand scripture to say that war is justifiable when it is motivated by a desire for peace, or done in self-defence, or to protect the innocent, and when it is done in a just way. Under these conditions a Christian could go to war as an agent of his country.

I think we can be very wrong in our judgments as fruit inspectors regarding who is saved and who is not. The Matthew 7:15 text regarding fruit inspecting has to do with false prophets. Are all non-pacifist preachers, false prophets and believers on their way to hell if they have and/or are now involved in killing others during war times ?

We can let the word judge:

Galatians 5:21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

I agree with the word which agrees with the Word! If a person wants to call that judging then take the argument with God and what His scripture says.

Notice various scripture versions that omit this word in this verse Gal 5:21 and the following commentary -https://biblehub.com/galatians/5-21.htm

There is considerable doubt as to whether this word ought to stand in the text. It is wanting in the two oldest MSS. and in some other good authorities. Internal considerations may be made to tell either for its omission or for its retention.

But regardless the text covers many areas we seldom talk about - the Amplified reads like this -

Now the practices of the sinful nature are clearly evident: they are sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality (total irresponsibility, lack of self-control),idolatry, sorcery, hostility, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions [that promote heresies],envy, drunkenness, riotous behavior, and other things like these. I warn you beforehand, just as I did previously, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

I'm not saying I believe murders should not be in this list (that is beyond my pay level ) but here is a text Jesus used regarding murder -

“You have heard that it was said to the men of old, ‘You shall not murder,’ and ‘Whoever murders shall be guilty before the court.’ But I say to you that everyone who continues to be angry with his brother or harbors malice against him shall be guilty before the court; and whoever speaks [contemptuously and insultingly] to his brother, ‘Raca (You empty-headed idiot)!’ shall be guilty before the supreme court (Sanhedrin); and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of the fiery hell.

John says -

Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him

.

So scripture regards the sin of murder to go beyond the taking of another person's life. It is an interesting study on what the NT scripture regards as murdering others.

[Wade]

So, you would say by giving more scripture reference that you agree with the scripture that no murderer has eternal life?

[Sudsy]

So, you would say by giving more scripture reference that you agree with the scripture that no murderer has eternal life?

I'm saying that murder according to the NT covers a much broader area than physically killing another person and that all physical killings of other persons are not murders. I don't regard every Christian that engaged in some war and killed another persion to be a murderer and don't believe God does either. God looks on the heart. If I defend my child from being killed by someone and in the defending I kill that person, I don't regard this as murder.

I think the scripture in Galatians 5 is talking about on-going acts of the flesh that if continued can forfeit eternal life. I don't believe it has anything to do with the killing that goes on in wars. I personally believe if a Christian believes God wants them to participate in a war for His greater purposes and where they will likely kill another person, than they should do as they believe they should but do it for reasons and not with any hatred in their heart.

Would I participate ? Only if I prayed about it and believed God wanted me to participate and even then look for ways that I don't need to directly engage in the killing. Some believe as long as they don't do the actual killing but still support the war efforts in some background way that lets then 'off the hook' so to speak. If I believed I should not participate in the killing, I would accept jail time or whatever penalty to not be involved in any way in the warring.

[Ernie]

Jesus said, if my kingdom were of this world THEN would my servants fight. Simple as that. Do not resist evil persons.

[Ernie]

So, it seems he was saying that the Kingdom way of non-resistance is a main drawing of people to follow Christ by the showing of God's love. If this is true, how do we account for the lack of growth in many non-resistant churches aside from their having large families ?

It takes more than non-resistance to draw people towards Christ. But any drawing without nonresistance is going to draw folks into churches who have not yet entered the Kingdom of God.

[Wade]

Jesus said, if my kingdom were of this world THEN would my servants fight. Simple as that. Do not resist evil persons.

Looks like Jesus spoke of a division when He said that. Any division that Jesus spoke of is worth following Him and dividing over.

[temporal1]

Paul and Barnabas

[Ken]

So, it seems he was saying that the Kingdom way of non-resistance is a main drawing of people to follow Christ by the showing of God's love. If this is true, how do we account for the lack of growth in many non-resistant churches aside from their having large families ?

It takes more than non-resistance to draw people towards Christ. But any drawing without nonresistance is going to draw folks into churches who have not yet entered the Kingdom of God.

Nonresistance or pacifism has never represented more than a tiny fraction of Christianity (probably far less than 1%) going all the way back to when the early church became institutionalized with Constantine in the 4th Century and soldiers started wearing crosses.

Look at the example of WW2. In that war the US had legal accommodations that allowed draftees who were opposed to participation in warfare to perform alternative service. Approximately 12,000 draftees performed alternative service during WW2 compared to over 12 million Americans who were drafted. If you do the math, that comes out to about 0.1% of draftees holding strong enough pacifist views to do alternative service. This is from a nation that in the 1940s identified as more than 95% Christian.

[Josh]

So, it seems he was saying that the Kingdom way of non-resistance is a main drawing of people to follow Christ by the showing of God's love. If this is true, how do we account for the lack of growth in many non-resistant churches aside from their having large families ?

It takes more than non-resistance to draw people towards Christ. But any drawing without nonresistance is going to draw folks into churches who have not yet entered the Kingdom of God.

Nonresistance or pacifism has never represented more than a tiny fraction of Christianity (probably far less than 1%) going all the way back to when the early church became institutionalized with Constantine in the 4th Century and soldiers started wearing crosses.

Look at the example of WW2. In that war the US had legal accommodations that allowed draftees who were opposed to participation in warfare to perform alternative service. Approximately 12,000 draftees performed alternative service during WW2 compared to over 12 million Americans who were drafted. If you do the math, that comes out to about 0.1% of draftees holding strong enough pacifist views to do alternative service. This is from a nation that in the 1940s identified as more than 95% Christian.

Yet it was 100% of Christianity from the 1st to the 3rd centuries.

[Ken]

It takes more than non-resistance to draw people towards Christ. But any drawing without nonresistance is going to draw folks into churches who have not yet entered the Kingdom of God.

Nonresistance or pacifism has never represented more than a tiny fraction of Christianity (probably far less than 1%) going all the way back to when the early church became institutionalized with Constantine in the 4th Century and soldiers started wearing crosses.

Look at the example of WW2. In that war the US had legal accommodations that allowed draftees who were opposed to participation in warfare to perform alternative service. Approximately 12,000 draftees performed alternative service during WW2 compared to over 12 million Americans who were drafted. If you do the math, that comes out to about 0.1% of draftees holding strong enough pacifist views to do alternative service. This is from a nation that in the 1940s identified as more than 95% Christian.

Yet it was 100% of Christianity from the 1st to the 3rd centuries.

I don't know about 100%. But my point is that for the last 1700 years or so, nonresistance and pacifism as a defining creed is held by a vanishingly small portion of Christianity. Once is a while, like with the rise of Anabaptism during the Reformation, it might blip up a tiny bit. But it doesn't last.