Was Jesus a pacifist as some claim?<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
One\u00a0definition<\/a><\/em>\u00a0of a pacifist might be:<\/p>\n A person who is opposed to war or violence of any kind.<\/em><\/p>\n People who claim that Jesus advocated absolute pacifism will often quote\u00a0Matthew:<\/em><\/p>\n \u201cYou have heard that it was said, \u2018Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.\u2019 But I tell you,\u00a0do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you. Matthew 5:38-42<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n Since I am not a traditional or fundamentalist Christian I do not feel constrained to believe that the Bible is the literal, and inerrant word of God. Just thought I would get that out of the way so no one is confused about where I might be coming from.<\/p>\n If we take the quote above from Matthew literally, \u201cdo not resist an evil person,<\/em>\u201d then the case seems to pretty solid that Jesus was a pacifist who opposed the use of violence in any shape or form. If he did mean that, and if he can be shown to have used physical violence, then the case could also be made that Jesus was a hypocrite. You may remember that Jesus criticized the Pharisees for being hypocrites.<\/p>\n In fact in one his more famous actions Jesus attacked the money changers in the Temple with a corded whip and overturned their tables as depicted in\u00a0John 2:13-15<\/em>:<\/p>\n When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. In the temple courts he found people selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple courts, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. John 2:13-15<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n Jesus goes into the Temple and is greatly angered by what he sees going on. But he does\u00a0not<\/em>\u00a0attack them immediately. He goes out somewhere and gets some cords and makes a whip. That probably took him a little while to do. Then he goes back and creates this famous scene. That shows that although he experienced anger he kept it under control. He didn\u2019t attack them without coming up with a plan and then applying carefully calculated violence to dramatize his outrage at them for polluting a holy place.<\/p>\n Just as surely as the quote from Matthew 5:38 seems to establish Jesus as a pacifist, the quote from John 2 shows he was quite willing to use calculated and controlled violence if necessary. So was Jesus a hypocrite then, saying one thing and doing another? I don\u2019t think so.<\/p>\n I don\u2019t think so for several reasons. I think more than likely Jesus walked a \u201cmiddle way<\/em>\u201d that didn\u2019t claim either extreme as an absolute. I think he would agree with the author of\u00a0Ecclesiastes<\/em> 3:1-8<\/em><\/a>\u00a0in the Old Testament who wrote:<\/p>\n There is a time for everything,<\/em> \u00a0I said earlier that I don\u2019t believe the Bible was inerrant. I am pretty sure that people added to it, and modified some things to suit their understanding.<\/p>\n Consider Matthew 5:38-39 quoted earlier.Jesus says:<\/p>\n You have heard that it was said, \u2018Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.\u2019 39 But I tell you,\u00a0do not resist an evil person.\u00a0If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.<\/em><\/p>\n See the\u00a0\u201cdo not resist an evil person\u201d<\/em>\u00a0in a\u00a0gray\u00a0color above? Do you suppose that was commentary added by a later copyist? I can\u2019t prove that to you but the context invites that conclusion. Why?<\/p>\n Read Matthew 5:38-39 aloud to yourself leaving out the \u201cdo not resist an evil person<\/em>.\u201d Does it sound as good? Does the narrative still flow as if it didn\u2019t need it? Here is what could have happened. You have an early, early copy without the \u201cdo not resist an evil person<\/em>\u201d in the main text. But someone writes in the margin, as an explanation of the Master\u2019s words, \u201cDo not resist an evil person<\/em>.\u201d Just so that the reader understands the context as this person who wrote the commentary believes he understands it.<\/p>\n The following sentence really doesn\u2019t need it: \u201c\u00a0If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.\u201d<\/em>\u00a0 It doesn\u2019t need it because it is not a simple command to be non-violent. A lot more is going on here. In that day and age a master who was right handed might strike a slave with a back handed slap to the right cheek. He would not do the same to a person of his own rank. He would strike him on the left cheek with an open hand (if not a fist).<\/p>\n What Jesus appears to be saying here is, \u201cIf someone slaps you like you are worthless or a slave, then turn the other cheek and invite then to slap you as an equal.<\/em>\u201d Jesus is instructing the person to appeal to the empathy and humanity of the person who strikes you, not giving an absolute black and white command to be non-violent.<\/p>\n Indeed this seems to be the context for the rest of the quote. If a person sues you then give them even more than they ask. If a Roman soldier forces you to carry his pack (a Roman law that Jesus is referring to here) a mile take it another mile. Maybe this will appeal to the soldier as seeing you as another human being, not just a beast of burden.<\/p>\n There is a little more evidence in the Gospel of John where Jesus is questioned by the High Priest:<\/p>\n Meanwhile, the high priest questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching.<\/em> In the above case Jesus does not seem to be following his own advice of turning the other cheek, but instead questions why he is being hit. That\u00a0seems\u00a0a lot\u00a0more rational approach than following an\u00a0uncompromising commandment\u00a0without understanding as many pacifists appear to advocate.<\/p>\n
\nand a season for every activity under the heavens:<\/em>
\na time to be born and a time to die,<\/em>
\na time to plant and a time to uproot,<\/em>
\na time to kill and a time to heal,<\/em>
\na\u00a0time to tear down and a time to build,<\/em>
\na time to weep and a time to laugh,<\/em>
\na time to mourn and a time to dance,<\/em>
\na time to scatter stones and a time to gather them,<\/em>
\na time to embrace and a time to refrain from embracing,<\/em>
\na time to search and a time to give up,<\/em>
\na time to keep and a time to throw away,<\/em>
\na time to tear and a time to mend,<\/em>
\na time to be silent and a time to speak,<\/em>
\na time to love and a time to hate,<\/em>
\na time for war and a time for peace.
\nEcclesiastes 3:1-8<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n
\n\u201cI have spoken openly to the world,\u201d Jesus replied. \u201cI always taught in synagogues or at the temple, where all the Jews come together. I said nothing in secret.\u00a0\u00a0Why question me? Ask those who heard me. Surely they know what I said.\u201d<\/em>
\nWhen Jesus said this, one of the officials nearby slapped him in the face. \u201cIs this the way you answer the high priest?\u201d he demanded.<\/em>
\n\u201cIf I said something wrong,\u201d Jesus replied, \u201ctestify as to what is wrong. But if I spoke the truth, why did you strike me?\u201d John 18:19-23<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n