SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : General Topics : Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi Killed in Bombing Raid

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 Next Page )
PosterThread
IRONMAN
Member



Joined: 2004/6/15
Posts: 1924
IN HEAVENLY PLACES WITH JESUS

 Re:

bro bill
Christ was not earthly minded in the sense Ravenhill is speaking of, in fact Christ came to do the will of His Father which is a purely Heavenly thing and in so doing was of use for God. Being heavenly minded is not being unconcerned with what goes on here on earth but it is to be concerned for the Glory of God and then out of this primary concern that everything else (whatever worldly concerns) is taken care of.

Christ's example was this, He dealt with the issues on earth in the context of only wanting to glorify God the Father by doing His will. This is the same thing we are called to as Christians.


_________________
Farai Bamu

 2006/6/10 20:09Profile









 Re: "We’ll Kill'em all, and let God sort'em out!"


Stever posts:

As Christians, we still have two natures—human nature, inherited from Adam, and God’s nature, that lives within us, in our hearts, where the Holy Spirit dwells.

Why is it so difficult to be glad that a man killer, a mass murder, a terrorist that not only killed his declared enemy, the U.S. Soldier, but also his own people. The man that was not a man of God, but a man like Cain, a man of Satan.

1 John 3:12 “12. Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one (SATAN), and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.

When I was in the service, the following was our understanding of the matter:

[b][color=FF0000]"We’ll Kill'em all, and let God sort'em out!"[/color][/b]

Our first reaction to war is usually one of repugnancy. It entails massive death and destruction from all parties and we can see how this type of "problem solving" is outside of God's perfect will for humanity. However, God's perfect will for humanity was for man to never sin. Since man has a sin nature, it may not be possible to live in a world where wars don't exist. Let's try and unravel what position the Bible takes in respect to Christianity and war.

Before going too far, we need to establish first that the Bible makes a distinction between individual moral responsibility and governmental responsibility. As free moral agents, Paul tells us "See that no one repays another with evil for evil, but always seek after that which is good for one another and for all people." (1 Thess 5:15) Individual Christians should show Christ's love to those who personally wrong them. But this does not mean that if someone physically threatens us we should not fight back. Nor does it imply that we shouldn't use physical force to aid another person being threatened. In such situations it would be a greater sin to stand by and do nothing that to help a person who is in danger.

The same type of responsibility God requires of governments. They are specifically put in a position of power to protect their citizens. Paul shows us this in Romans 13: 3-5 where he writes,

"For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
Note how the Scriptures say that the ruling body "does not bear the sword for nothing."

In other words, governments are to function in a guardian role, both dealing with crime inside its own borders (such as the police) and also any enemy who would attack its citizens from outside (such as our armed forces).

[b][color=0000FF]THIS BRINGS UP ANOTHER CONCEPT THAT IN RECENT YEARS PEOPLE HAVE FORGOTTEN; THAT THERE EXISTS SUCH A THING AS A JUST WAR.[/color][/b]

The Romans passage above is very clear on this point. A government can function as an avenger of God to bring His judgment upon them. The Old Testament is replete with examples of this, but I'd like to look at a more modern situation.

In World War II Hitler was bent on conquest of Europe. He also sought to exterminate the Jewish race from the face of the planet. Those allied against Hitler and his plan were just in fighting him and his armies. To ignore him is morally the same as a police officer who does not try to stop a mugging attempt. There were good reasons, moral reasons to go to war in that instance and it would have been more immoral for the United States not to get involved.

[b][color=0000FF]The question that we must ask, then, is does our current situation fit the criteria for a just war? Is the United States justified in using its considerable military might against Militant Islam, bin Laden and other terrorists? Let's look at what we know already.[/color][/b]

1.The terrorists have attacked United States property and people before in the bombings of our two embassies in Africa and the attack on the USS Cole.

2.They have intentionally killed thousands of innocent civilians for no other purpose than to try and hurt us.

3.There will be a continuing threat of danger to U.S. citizens as it is highly likely the terrorists will try other acts in the future.

Taken together, I believe that it is the God-given responsibility of the United States government to protect all its citizens by declaring war on those who would seek us intentional harm, and FOLLOWING THROUGH WITH IT UNTIL THEY ARE DESTROYED.

I believe that Romans 13 commands the government to not shirk its role of protector and guardian of all those who fall within its care, just as a police officer should not shirk his role of protecting those who fall within his care. To ignore such a dangerous threat to our population would be a bigger sin.

I also would hope that those that have posted here would have the understanding to know that when Christ told the disciples not to use the sword to defend Him, He was fulfilling prophecy by going to the cross, to take care of the sin of the world. Why on earth would he want them to blow it BY KEEPING HIM FROM THE CROSS?

Is there any common sense on this issue, or is it the feminization or soft headedness of the men of God in these last days?

God bless,

Stever :-D


 2006/6/10 20:51
IRONMAN
Member



Joined: 2004/6/15
Posts: 1924
IN HEAVENLY PLACES WITH JESUS

 Re:

bro Stever
i don't think that anyone has issue with governments (the u.s. gvt included of course) having provision and responsibility to defend the people (Romans 13 makes that plain)i for one have no issue with this. the thing is though God doesn't rejoice at the death of a sinner so i don't see why we should. perhaps i'm foolish, if so let the Lord enlighten me.

as for the war in iraq, i've heard people for and against, some claiming it's just others adamantly saying it is unjust. at the end of the day, God made it so for His own glory for in His Sovereignty nothing is outside His will.

as it pertains to the individual, you wrote:

Quote:
(1 Thess 5:15) Individual Christians should show Christ's love to those who personally wrong them. But this does not mean that if someone physically threatens us we should not fight back. Nor does it imply that we shouldn't use physical force to aid another person being threatened. In such situations it would be a greater sin to stand by and do nothing that to help a person who is in danger.



when Christ was threatened, He did not resist but yielded and let sinful men do whatever they wished. i don't know of any apostle who was martryed who kicked and screamed on the way there, or any other Christian who was executed for that matter. if the threat is for the faith, what's the harm in getting beat up? doesn't the word say we should rejoice when such happens for God's sake because there is a great reward in heaven for enduring such? What's the harm in dying? Satan would have enslaved to him for fear or pain and/or death. but the word says to rejoice for persecution and of dying for the Faith, a crown is reserved in heaven. it's a win-win for us!

if someone is being attacked i agree that we should come to that person's aid.

Quote:
Is there any common sense on this issue, or is it the feminization or soft headedness of the men of God in these last days?



again, i for one am not averse to the government doing what it must, the Lord clearly makes provision for this. However, the rejoicing over the death of any sinner is not right, like bro mike brought up what Christ said, let you repent, ye shall likewise perish. i guess my thing is to highlight that aspect, evil is indeed out there, but it is also within and we can't focus on it out there at the expense of it in us also or we will become like those people out there.

let us fall onour faces and REPENT, REPENT, REPENT before a Holy God or DIE. AMEN.


_________________
Farai Bamu

 2006/6/10 21:11Profile









 Re:

Stever responds to Ironman:

If you were a present day citizen, male or female, of Israel, you would be in the military until the age of 50. It is mandatory. You would also take your weapon home with you each evening.

The reason? To be prepared for war, to defend your Country, your family and yourself, as well as your way of life and right to your land.

Who is this declared enemy of Israel, that wants them driven into the sea and wiped off the earth? It is the same enemy that is fighting against us at this moment---Militant Islam that wants the death of all infidels. Who is an infidel? Jews and Christians first, and then all other Gentiles.

I am way past 50 and would only hope that my Brothers and Sisters in Christ would have the understanding of their need to go to war to defend this country and our way of life, if it ever became necessary and the draft was implemented. Thank God we have a voluntary Military! But some day, we might need many more to help out, and the draft would be necessary then.

What I have seen posted here makes me seriously doubt if todays Christian can be counted on to take up arms and defend His/Her Country. I think that they would all be willing to pray, and fast, but that's it. They would be willing to wait on the Lord for a miracle, but other than that, they would rather go up into the atmosphere in a mushroom cloud rather than take up the sword and take action.

Action that was taken by our forefathers and those before them. Action taken by them in Word War II that has made it possible for all of us in America to speak English, rather than German.

God bless,

Stever :-o

This is truly a sad day from where I sit.

 2006/6/10 21:27
IRONMAN
Member



Joined: 2004/6/15
Posts: 1924
IN HEAVENLY PLACES WITH JESUS

 Re:

bro Stever
if there was a draft (and i am subject to the laws of the land as per scripture)and the Lord required me to sign up, i'd sign up, if He expressly said not to, i wouldn't.

Quote:
What I have seen posted here makes me seriously doubt if todays Christian can be counted on to take up arms and defend His/Her Country. I think that they would all be willing to pray, and fast, but that's it. They would be willing to wait on the Lord for a miracle, but other than that, they would rather go up into the atmosphere in a mushroom cloud rather than take up the sword and take action.



you know, it seems to me (and i may be wrong, if i am, forgive me dear brother) that you don't have much faith in prayer and fasting as a way of achieving victory hence the leaning toward more worldly methods. has God not in past times honoured such? when Jericho was taken, didn't then men of Israel march around it singing to the disdain of it's defenders? i suppose we don't believe much in God's power to trust Him if He were to say "kneel and pray to me" in the face of attackers. is our God that small and weak that we don't trust Him so? if the Lord were to say "fast and pray and wait on a miracle" would we dare disobey what HE asked us in favour of operating our own way? or do you not believe God would grant a victory after being faithful to what He has asked? or does God not do miracles upon request any more?

the enemy has to weapons he uses against us, our sins and fear of death. we are Christians! what is there to fear from death? nothing! for in death the enemy is defeated! he can't hold us hostage via fear any more and the best part is we get to be in heaven! if it so happens to happen that our bodies are vapourized in the process it is of no consequence, we're headed to heaven.

America is a nice place to live, but i'm sure we'd all agree (or at least i hope so anyway) that heaven is nicer. if our Lord were to say to me "take up arms" i'd do it and be right there with you (if you can keep up, i'm half your age...but then again there is something to said about old age...treachery :-P )if He told me not to, you'd be on your own.


_________________
Farai Bamu

 2006/6/10 22:26Profile
ChrisJD
Member



Joined: 2006/2/11
Posts: 2895
Philadelphia PA

 Re:

Hi everyone. A few comment from different responses...

RoaringLamb, no offence at all brother, none at all :-D

Quote:
it is always best to seek Love as love edifies, while knowledge puffs up.



Yeah and amen brother. I also thought the refrence to the passage from Isaiah was appropriate and also brings to mind

Quote:
Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will remember the name of the Lord our God.



Compton, I think you expressed alot of what I was thinking about the blogs for instance. Also..

Quote:
they choose to tear down their own flag rather then simply lift up a higher banner.



I really appreciated the way you put this in particular. As I was looking up the refrence to the psalm above, I noticed this verse which seems to fit nicely

Quote:
We will rejoice in thy salvation, and in the name of our God we will set up our banners:



Ironman,

Quote:
nothing we can bring to the table is sufficient in anywise.



Do we really believe it though brother? Or maybe just in the really 'tough' things, so we think?

I am wondering though if the yeilding you mentioned is not directly connected to the revealtion of God's love for us, as in they both work by and through each other?

Tears_of_joy, I believe you are correct about him being from Romania(almost certain) and the communists as he discusses this in the messages. And thank you for the recommendations also, will definitely check these out!


_________________
Christopher Joel Dandrow

 2006/6/11 0:05Profile
IRONMAN
Member



Joined: 2004/6/15
Posts: 1924
IN HEAVENLY PLACES WITH JESUS

 Re:

bro Chris

Quote:
Do we really believe it though brother? Or maybe just in the really 'tough' things, so we think?



well maybe just in the tough things/times but we must come to realize that this insufficiency applies across the board.

Quote:
I am wondering though if the yeilding you mentioned is not directly connected to the revealtion of God's love for us, as in they both work by and through each other?



and i think this is key too, unless these things are revealed to us from the very throne of God (by whatever means), there is no way of coming to such realizations. however once the Lord has put the revelation out there, we have a responsibility (i think anyway) to go before God, have Him reveal to us if the revelation is of Him, if so then we are to govern ourselves accordingly. if not we are liable before Him without excuse.

just got through listening to Joesph Tson speak and it was most powerful. there is much he speaks of which is possible only after one dies to self. there is no way one can endure the sufferings he has unless one has no regard/consciousness of self and if has only regard/consciousness of God such that persecution and death for the gospel are not things to be fearful of, but to be embraced.

may the Lord do with us as He will. AMEN.


_________________
Farai Bamu

 2006/6/11 0:25Profile
crsschk
Member



Joined: 2003/6/11
Posts: 9192
Santa Clara, CA

 Re: Wars, wars and rumors of wars

Hi Stever,

I don't think the perception here is as much as you have stated. It seems at best that those who are not particularly rejoicing over this and are addressing that aspect need not be cast in this light.

But, I do hear you and agree there is much confusion over the ideas of war, defending and so forth. I have never understood pacifism as derived from what the Lord either taught or expressed throughout scripture. It would be pure presumption having never served in the military to make anything other than observations based on that. I think you are right in that there is much more emotion tied to all this than just to look at things as they in fact are.

Quote:
Is there any common sense on this issue, or is it the feminization or soft headedness of the men of God in these last days?



I think there is and must mention again that I found the earlier article posted about this idea of 'feministic' qualities of the Lord absurdly out of place, it had the ring of a humanistic philosopher attempting to explain aspects of Jesus from his fallible mind. Not to belabor the point, but it seems statements like that contribute more to the misunderstanding than help to clarify them. It just furthers the soft headedness in my opinion.

Moving on.
This is something that has been a musing for quite some time. It has come up here any number of times in the past in various forms and understandings. I have a great admiration for the Quakers as saints and others who feel it best to withdraw from forms of violence as war, etc. But I do not think it is as easy as just to camp on "turning the other check" as the be all end all, nor do I believe it was ever intended to be what it has become characterized as.

What it amounts to is a forcing into "camp's" of one mindset or the other, for or against and I know I have harped on this before but is there not a [i]neither[/i] in this? That is what I meant by non-pulsed as well as intimating Jesus' reaction to these matters of war, soldiers, commanders and so on. To look through all His dealings in these matters, it is indeed strange that anyone could misconstrue His words or His intentions, generally speaking the ideas that have been fostered by men as belonging to Him just are not to be found.

What I do mean by 'neither' is only that there is an understanding of the 'sides' and that I do not feel any compulsion to lend particular support to any extreme, especially when it is of a political nature. We have had some rather heated and incredibly ugly discussions here on these matters in the past, where the emotions and\or politics leave it difficult to just take an honest look at it from the scriptures.

Stever, I will match you for longevity, make that loquacity here. Had pulled a lot of the reply to follow together earlier and waited... I am not really fond of expressing things that I don't really know about by experience, it is just what I have looked at and mused on for awhile. I do have the utmost respect and understanding of not only our American military but any military that is set to rule and defend it's people justly. As Sparks stated by way of Paul; "[i]There would be no need for law if there was no lawlessness.[/i]" How that cut's across everything. To the headline here that started this original post under discussion, I would only add that I am glad, but not rejoicing.





_________________
Mike Balog

 2006/6/11 0:31Profile









 Re:

Stever responds to IRONMAN:

You misunderstand the intent of this thread. I am very much a man of prayer and fasting, and waiting on the Lord. I am a spirit filled, baptised in the Holy Ghost Christian believer that witnesses to the lost, lays hands on the sick, and loves the Lord.

My position on this thread has been to provide balance.

We all live in America, and you have finally taken a position on your response to the my concern.

Specifically IRONMAN posted:

"bro Stever
if there was a draft (and i am subject to the laws of the land as per scripture)and the Lord required me to sign up, i'd sign up, if He expressly said not to, i wouldn't. "

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

What troubles me about your response is that IRONMAN HAS posted before on another thread that CHRIST HAS TOLD HIM that he will not be part of the rapture, but stay here and go through the Tribulation in order to witness to the lost.

We have to test the "Spirit" that talks to us. Like I have said many times. Why is that? Because Satan still has access to our minds, as well as our flesh (inflated ego,pride, cowardice), as well as Satan's demons, as well as the Holy Spirit that lives within our heart.

1 John 4

1. Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
xxxxxxxxxxx

Stever continues:

In regards to your (IRONMAN) going through the Tribulation, or any other believer, I offer the following from God's word:

1 Cor 15:51-53
" 51. Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall ALL be changed,
In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

Please note, it did not say SOME would be changed, but ALL.

2 Thes 2:1 gives us more insight:
2 Thessalonians 2

1. Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Please note, Paul is talking to the believers at Thessalonica and he mentions OUR gathering together unto him---not some, not all BUT IRONMAN, but the entire Church.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

So, how do we test the Spirit that talks to us? We check it out against God's Word.

That is what I find lacking in many, many Christians today--Spiritual Discernment.

Romans offers us understanding in that it tells us that God is the one that sets up Governments, and that he is right in the middle of what takes place on this earth.

Right now, we are involved in a righteous war.

How do I know that? Because we have been attacked by Militant Islam that wants to kill all of the Jews and Christians (Jews 1st, then the Christians, unless we convert to Islam), and then they want to kill all of the Gentiles in the rest of the world (unless they convert to Islam). God does not have to tell anyone if they should be part of this war or not. The common sense that he gave us tells us that!

We also live in a Nation that elects politicans to represent them- we live in a Republic. We also live in a nation with a military that was created to defend us. If you or I get "drafted" into the service, we don't have to have a direct revelation from God almighty to go, or not to go. We have a duty as a citizen of this country to serve. We do not have a "standing army" like China, or Russia, or other countries. We have a military made up of American citizens. Presently it is a totally voluntary force. However, during major wars (Civil War, World War 1, World War II, and Vietnam) the Government imposes a "draft". The difference between us and other nations is that we are a military made up of America Citizens, that after the conflict go back to their occupations and their lives.

It is an honor to live in this country, and an honor to serve.


Romans 13

1. Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
2. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
3. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4. For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 6. For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
7. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
8. Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. 9. For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 10. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. 11. And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed. 12. The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light. 13. Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying. 14. But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lust


This is how we test the "Spirit" that talks to us, and it has already spoken loud and clear!
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

God bless,

Stever :-)

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
x






Quote:

IRONMAN wrote:
bro Stever
if there was a draft (and i am subject to the laws of the land as per scripture)and the Lord required me to sign up, i'd sign up, if He expressly said not to, i wouldn't.

Quote:
What I have seen posted here makes me seriously doubt if todays Christian can be counted on to take up arms and defend His/Her Country. I think that they would all be willing to pray, and fast, but that's it. They would be willing to wait on the Lord for a miracle, but other than that, they would rather go up into the atmosphere in a mushroom cloud rather than take up the sword and take action.



you know, it seems to me (and i may be wrong, if i am, forgive me dear brother) that you don't have much faith in prayer and fasting as a way of achieving victory hence the leaning toward more worldly methods. has God not in past times honoured such? when Jericho was taken, didn't then men of Israel march around it singing to the disdain of it's defenders? i suppose we don't believe much in God's power to trust Him if He were to say "kneel and pray to me" in the face of attackers. is our God that small and weak that we don't trust Him so? if the Lord were to say "fast and pray and wait on a miracle" would we dare disobey what HE asked us in favour of operating our own way? or do you not believe God would grant a victory after being faithful to what He has asked? or does God not do miracles upon request any more?

the enemy has to weapons he uses against us, our sins and fear of death. we are Christians! what is there to fear from death? nothing! for in death the enemy is defeated! he can't hold us hostage via fear any more and the best part is we get to be in heaven! if it so happens to happen that our bodies are vapourized in the process it is of no consequence, we're headed to heaven.

America is a nice place to live, but i'm sure we'd all agree (or at least i hope so anyway) that heaven is nicer. if our Lord were to say to me "take up arms" i'd do it and be right there with you (if you can keep up, i'm half your age...but then again there is something to said about old age...treachery :-P )if He told me not to, you'd be on your own.

 2006/6/11 0:37
crsschk
Member



Joined: 2003/6/11
Posts: 9192
Santa Clara, CA

 Of war, enemies, pacifiism, defending

This realm is something that has been something of a peculiarity in all the misunderstanding and confusion as it applies to the Christian. It seems that often it has been overblown to mean something entirely different than what was intended, both as fact, that is, as things are and that which is either to be defended or not defended as the saint is concerned.

[b]Pacify
PACIFY[/b], v.t. [L., peace, and to make.]

1. To appease, as wrath or other violent passion or appetite; to calm; to still; to quiet; to allay agitation or excitement; as, to pacify a man when angry, or to pacify his wrath or rage; the word being applied both to the person and to the passion. So we say, to pacify hunger, to pacify importunate demands.

2. To restore peace to; to tranquilize; as, to pacify countries in contention.

[b]Pacifism

pac·i·fism[/b] (păs'ə-fĭz'əm)
n.

1. The belief that disputes between nations should and can be settled peacefully.

2.

A. Opposition to war or violence as a means of resolving disputes.

B. Such opposition demonstrated by refusal to participate in military action.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Before launching out here, the purpose is to just get a scriptural and honest perspective. What has always struck me sideways is this idea that the Lord Jesus was of such a mind as to oppose all violence, war, soldiers, defending ones self, on and on until He has become in our parlance a 'pacifist'. This could not be further from the truth. To be sure of being clear of what is [i]not[/i] being said, the starting point here is not one of being either crowed into or 'supporting' anything as the want is often to do, in other words, "Are you saying then that you believe...?"
No, that this may be forgotten at the onset along with the politics of our day for whatever reasons the hubris is. Rather than to add commentary alongside commentary am hopeful that some examples might draw out the matter on their own, will save my thoughts towards the end.

[b]Lam 3:30 - He giveth his cheek to him that smiteth him[/b],.... Either to God that afflicts him, and patiently bears it; see Isa_9:13; or rather to men. To be smitten on the cheek is always reckoned a very great affront; to turn the cheek to an injurious man is to give him an opportunity and leave to smite, and signifies the taking of it patiently, and agrees both with our Lord's advice and example, Mat_5:39;

[b]Mat 5:39 - But I say unto you, that ye resist not evil[/b],.... This is not to be understood of any sort of evil, not of the evil of sin, of bad actions, and false doctrines, which are to be opposed; nor of the evil one, Satan, who is to be resisted; but of an evil man, an injurious one, who has done us an injury. We must not render evil for evil, or repay him in the same way; see Jam_5:6. Not but that a man may lawfully defend himself, and endeavour to secure himself from injuries; and may appear to the civil magistrate for redress of grievances; but he is not to make use of private revenge. As if a man should pluck out one of his eyes, he must not in revenge pluck out one of his; or should he strike out one of his teeth, he must not use him in the same manner; but patiently bear the affront, or seek for satisfaction in another way.

[b]But whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also[/b]: which is to be understood comparatively, rather than seek revenge, and is directly contrary to the Jewish canons, which require, in such a case, a pecuniary fine (g).

"He that strikes his neighbour (which Maimonides explains, he that strikes his neighbour with his hand shut, about the neck) he shall give him a "sela", or "shekel": R. Judah says, in the name of R. Jose the Galilean, one pound: if he smite him (i.e. as Maimonides says, if he smite him with his double fist upon the face; or, as Bartenora, with the palm of his hand, לחיי, "on the cheek", which is a greater reproach) he shall give him two hundred "zuzim"; and if he does it with the back of his hand, four hundred "zuzim".''

R. Isaac Sangari (h) manifestly refers to this passage of Christ's, when he says to the king he is conversing with,

"I perceive that thou up braidest us with poverty and want; but in them the great men of other nations glory: for they do not glory but in him, who said, "Whosoever smiteth thee thy right cheek, turn to him the left; and whosoever taketh away thy coat, give him thy cloak".''

(g) Misn. Bava Kama, c. 8. sect. 6. Vid. Maimon. & Bartenora in ib. (h) Sepher Cosri, Orat. 1. Sign. 113. fol. 56. 1.

John Gill

[b]Mat 5:39 -
Resist not evil[/b] - Or, the evil person. So, I am fully persuaded, τω πονηρω ought to be translated. Our Lord’s meaning is, “Do not repel one outrage by another.” He that does so makes himself precisely what the other is, a wicked person.

[b]Turn to him the other also[/b] - That is, rather than avenge thyself, be ready to suffer patiently a repetition of the same injury. But these exhortations belong to those principally who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake. Let such leave the judgment of their cause to Him for whose sake they suffer. The Jews always thought that every outrage should be resented; and thus the spirit of hatred and strife was fostered.

Adam Clarke


[b]Mat 5:38-41 -
An eye for an eye[/b] ... - This command is found in Exo_21:24; Lev_24:20, and Deu_19:21. In these places it was given as a rule to regulate the decisions of judges. They were to take eye for eye, and tooth for tooth, and to inflict burning for burning. As a judicial rule it is not unjust. Christ finds no fault with the rule as applied to magistrates, and does not take upon himself to repeal it. But instead of confining it to magistrates, the Jews had extended it to private conduct, and made it the rule by which to take revenge. They considered themselves justified by this rule to inflict the same injury on others that they had received. Our Saviour remonstrates against this. He declares that the law had no reference to private revenge, that it was given only to regulate the magistrate, and that their private conduct was to be governed by different principles.

The general principle which he laid down was, that we are not to resist evil; that is, as it is in the Greek, nor to set ourselves against an evil person who is injuring us. But even this general direction is not to be pressed too strictly. Christ did not intend to teach that we are to see our families murdered, or be murdered ourselves; rather than to make resistance. The law of nature, and all laws, human and divine, justify self-defense when life is in danger. It cannot surely be the intention to teach that a father should sit by coolly and see his family butchered by savages, and not be allowed to defend them. Neither natural nor revealed religion ever did, or ever can, inculcate this doctrine. Our Saviour immediately explains what he means by it. Had he intended to refer it to a case where life is in danger, he would most surely have mentioned it. Such a case was far more worthy of statement than those which he did mention.

A doctrine so unusual, so unlike all that the world had believed. and that the best people had acted on, deserved to be formally stated. Instead of doing this, however, he confines himself to smaller matters, to things of comparatively trivial interest, and says that in these we had better take wrong than to enter into strife and lawsuits. The first case is where we are smitten on the cheek. Rather than contend and fight, we should take it patiently, and turn the other cheek. This does not, however, prevent our remonstrating firmly yet mildly on the injustice of the thing, and insisting that justice should be done us, as is evident from the example of the Saviour himself. See Joh_18:23. {[i]Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me?[/i]} The second evil mentioned is where a man is litigious and determined to take all the advantage the law can give him, following us with vexatious and expensive lawsuits. Our Saviour directs us, rather than to imitate him rather than to contend with a revengeful spirit in courts of justice to take a trifling injury, and yield to him. This is merely a question about property, and not about conscience and life.

[b]Coat[/b] - The Jews wore two principal garments, an interior and an exterior. The interior, here called the “coat,” or the tunic, was made commonly of linen, and encircled the whole body, extending down to the knees. Sometimes beneath this garment, as in the case of the priests, there was another garment corresponding to pantaloons. The coat, or tunic, was extended to the neck. and had long or short sleeves. Over this was commonly worn an upper garment, here called “cloak,” or mantle. It was made commonly nearly square, of different sizes, 5 or 6 cubits long and as many broad, and was wrapped around the body, and was thrown off when labor was performed. If, said Christ, an adversary wished to obtain, at law, one of these garments, rather than contend with him let him have the other also. A reference to various articles of apparel occurs frequently in the New Testament, and it is desirable to have a correct view of the ancient mode of dress. in order to a proper understanding of the Bible. The Asiatic modes of dress are nearly the same from age to age, and hence it is not difficult to illustrate the passages where such a reference occurs. The ordinary dress consisted of the inner garment, the outer garment, the girdle (belt), and the sandals. In regard to the sandals, see the notes at Mat_3:11.

In the girdle (belt) was the place of the pouch Mat_10:9, and to it the sword and dirk were commonly attached. Compare 2Sa_20:8. In modern times the pistols are also fastened to the belt. It is the usual place for the handkerchief, smoking materials, inkhorn, and, in general, the implements of one’s profession. The belt served to confine the loose-flowing robe or outer garment to the body. It held the garment when it was tucked up, as it was usually in walking or in labor. Hence, “to gird up the loins” became a significant figurative expression, denoting readiness for service, activity, labor, and watchfulness; and “to loosen the loins” denoted the giving way to repose and indolence, 2Ki_4:29; Job_38:3; Isa_5:27; Luk_12:35; Joh_21:7.

[b]Whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile[/b] - The word translated “shall compel” is of Persian origin. Post-offices were then unknown. In order that the royal commands might be delivered with safety and despatch in different parts of the empire, Cyrus stationed horsemen at proper intervals on all the great public highways. One of those delivered the message to another, and intelligence was thus rapidly and safely communicated. These heralds were permitted to compel any person, or to press any horse, boat, ship, or other vehicle that they might need for the quick transmission of the king’s commandments. It was to this custom that our Saviour refers. Rather, says he, than resist a public authority requiring your attendance and aid for a certain distance, go peaceably twice the distance.
[b]A mile[/b] - A Roman mile was 1,000 paces.
[b]Twain[/b] - Two.

Albert Barnes

[b]Mat 5:44 - But I say unto you, love your enemies,....[/b] That is, as the Apostle Paul may be thought to interpret the words of Christ, Rom_12:20. "If thine enemy hunger, feed him: if he thirst, give him drink": unless our Lord should be supposed rather to regard the internal affection of the mind; since outward expressions of love, by words and works, are urged in the following exhortations: the actions of a man may be hated, and just indignation be expressed against them, and yet his person be loved, tenderness be used to him, and pity shown him: all men, even enemies, are to be loved with a natural love, as men; though they cannot be loved with a spiritual affection, as brethren in Christ: and in natural affection there are degrees, according to the relation and circumstances that persons stand in to one another.

[b]Bless them that curse you[/b]: when wicked men curse you, as Shimei cursed David, do not "render evil for evil, or railing for railing, but contrariwise, blessing"; give good words, use kind language, mild and soft expressions; such as may either win upon them, or put them to shame and silence: "bless, and curse not"; the latter belongs to them, the former to you; "let them curse, but bless thou": curses better fit their mouths, and blessings thine. Blessing here, does not signify praising them, for that would be sinful, which is sometimes the sense of the word; nor wishing, or praying for a blessing on them, which is right and good; but this is mentioned afterwards, as distinct from blessing; wherefore, it is better to understand it of a sweet and engaging address unto, and behaviour and conduct towards such, whose mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.

[b]Do good to them that hate you[/b]; such as hate you in their hearts, and discover their hatred by their actions; do not make returns in the same way, but on the contrary, do them all the good you can; perform all the kind offices that lie in your power; let them partake of your bounty and liberality; if poor, feed, clothe, and supply them, as you are able, with the necessaries of life; and give them wholesome advice for the good of their souls: by "so doing", you will "heap coals of fire on their heads"; of enemies, make them friends; engage their affections to you, and you may be happy instruments in doing them good, both in soul and body:

[b]and pray for them that despitefully use you and persecute you.[/b] What Christ here commands and advises to, he himself did; for as he hung upon the cross, he prayed for his crucifiers, who were then using him in the most despiteful, as well as cruel manner; saying, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do": and in this he has left us an example, that we should tread in his steps; and here in he was quickly followed by his holy martyr Stephen; who, whilst he was being stoned, prayed for his persecutors and murderers, saying, "Lord, lay not this sin to their charge". This breathes out the true spirit of Christianity, and is peculiar to it. The whole of this is directly opposite to the tenets of the Jews, particularly the Scribes and Pharisees; who allowed of revenge, and keeping anger against any person that had done them an injury, as has been observed: and which were also the sentiments of the Karaites, or Scripturarians, another sect among them who kept to the letter of the Scriptures, and rejected the traditions of the elders, which the Pharisees held: but in this they agreed with them,

"that it was right to do good to their friends, and to forgive them that asked pardon of them; but to such men who rendered evil, and did not return to do well, that they might receive forgiveness, אינו אסור לנקום ולנטור מהם, "it is not forbidden to revenge, and to keep anger against them" (s).''

It is indeed said (t) of their former holy men, חסידים, "Hasideans", which some have thought to be the same with the "Essenes", and a sort of Christians; however, were a better sort of Jews; that these

"heard their reproach, but did not return it; and not only so, but they pardoned him that reproached them, and forgave him.''

And it is reported of these men, that they used to pray to God to pardon and forgive all that disturbed them. But the Pharisees, whom Christ had to do with, and against whom he inveighs, were men of another complexion.

(s) R. Eliahu in Adderet, c. 3. apud Trigland. de Sect. Karaeorum, c. 10. p. 166, 167. (t) Maimon. Hilch. Talmud Tora. c. 7. sect. 13.

John Gill

Luk 22:36 [i]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.[/i] Luk 22:38 [i] And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.[/i]

[b]Luk 22:36 -
But now[/b] - The Saviour says the times are changed. “Before,” he sent them out only for a little time. They were in their own country. Their journeys would be short, and there was no need that they should make preparation for a long absence, or for encountering great dangers. But “now” they were to go into the wide world, among strangers, trials, dangers, and wants. And as the time was near; as he was about to die; as these dangers pressed on, it was proper that they should make provision for what was before them.

[b]A purse[/b] - See the notes at Mat_10:9. He intimates that they should “now” take money, as it would be necessary to provide for their wants in traveling.
Scrip - See the notes at Mat_10:10.

[b]And he that hath no sword[/b] - There has been much difficulty in understanding why Jesus directed his disciples to arm themselves, as if it was his purpose to make a defense. It is certain that the spirit of his religion is against the use of the sword, and that it was not his purpose to defend himself against Judas. But it should be remembered that these directions about the purse, the scrip, and the sword were not made with reference to his “being taken” in the garden, but with reference “to their future life.” The time of the trial in Gethsemane was just at hand; nor was there “time” then, if no other reason existed, to go and make the purchase. It altogether refers to their future life. They were going into the midst of dangers. The country was infested with robbers and wild beasts. It was customary to go armed. He tells them of those dangers - of the necessity of being prepared in the usual way to meet them. This, then, is not to be considered as a specific, positive “command” to procure a sword, but an intimation that great dangers were before them; that their manner of life would be changed, and that they would need the provisions “appropriate to that kind of life.” The “common” preparation for that manner of life consisted in money, provisions, and arms; and he foretells them of that manner of life by giving them directions commonly understood to be appropriate to it. It amounts, then, to a “prediction” that they would soon leave the places which they had been accustomed to, and go into scenes of poverty, want, and danger, where they would feel the necessity of money, provisions, and the means of defense. All, therefore, that the passage justifies is:

1. That it is proper for people to provide beforehand for their wants, and for ministers and missionaries as well as any others.

2. That self-defense is lawful.
Men encompassed with danger may lawfully “defend” their lives. It does not prove that it is lawful to make “offensive” war on a nation or an individual.

[b]Luk 22:38[/b] -
[b]Are two swords[/b] - The Galileans, it is said, often went armed. The Essenes did so also. The reason was that the country was full of robbers and wild beasts, and it was necessary to carry, in their travels, some means of defense. It seems that the disciples followed the customs of the country, and had with them some means of defense, though they had but two swords among the twelve.

[b]It is enough[/b] - It is difficult to understand this. Some suppose that it is spoken “ironically;” as if he had said, “You are bravely armed indeed, with two swords among twelve men, and to meet such a host!” Others, that he meant to reprove them for understanding him “literally,” as if he meant that they were then to procure swords for “immediate” battle. As if he had said, “This is absurd, or a perversion of my meaning. I did not intend this, but merely to foretell you of impending dangers after my death.” It is to be observed that he did not say “the two swords are enough,” but “it is enough;” perhaps meaning simply, enough has been said. Other matters press on, and you will yet understand what I mean.

Albert Barnes
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Already a picture can be formed of intention and [i]application[/i] as it were. The largest part of the understanding centering around the ideal of taking revenge, not defense as if there was to be none and certainly not of loving our enemies as a matter of course, generalities of a certain pacifism towards war that must be fought.

Next up, war, soldiers, commanders, what Jesus thought and expressed towards it all.






_________________
Mike Balog

 2006/6/11 0:42Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy