• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Was Jesus a pacifist or a pragmatist?

Was Jesus a pacifist or a pragmatist?

  • Pragmatist

    Votes: 4 18.2%

  • Pacifist

    Votes: 4 18.2%

  • I don't know

    Votes: 1 4.5%

  • This poll doesn't reflect my thinking

    Votes: 13 59.1%
  • Total voters
    22
Dawnofhope

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
Jesus appears somewhat different from the founders of other Abrahamic Faiths such as Moses or Muhammad. During His brief 3 1/2 year ministry, Jesus was never engaged in armed conflict unlike Muhammad who defended His people against the assault of the Quraysh tribe. Unlike Moses who killed a man, He never physically harmed anybody.

Jesus never advocated initiating armed conflict against the Romans. This could be due to Him being a pragmatist, in that He recognised it was unwise for the Jewish people to be provoking an enemy who would most likely defeat His people. Alternatively, He may not have believed in armed conflict under any circumstances and so was a pacifist. There may of course be other narratives.

So was Jesus a pacifist or pragmatist? How come?
 
John53

John53

I go leaps and bounds
Premium Member
It's My Birthday!
Jesus was capable of violence. I suspect the merchants and money changers in the temple courtyard would agree.
 
dianaiad

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
adrian009 said:
Jesus appears somewhat different from the founders of other Abrahamic Faiths such as Moses or Muhammad. During His brief 3 1/2 year ministry, Jesus was never engaged in armed conflict unlike Muhammad who defended His people against the assault of the Quraysh tribe. Unlike Moses who killed a man, He never physically harmed anybody.

Jesus never advocated initiating armed conflict against the Romans. This could be due to Him being a pragmatist, in that He recognised it was unwise for the Jewish people to be provoking an enemy who would most likely defeat His people. Alternatively, He may not have believed in armed conflict under any circumstances and so was a pacifist. There may of course be other narratives.

So was Jesus a pacifist or pragmatist? How come?
Click to expand...

Dunno.

Would point out that He DID arm Himself with a whip and did a number on those money changers in the Temple, and He DID tell His disciples to go buy swords.

I would not, given that He is God, say that the first thing (with the whip) was advocating a lack of pacifism on the part of the rest of humanity. After all, the whole idea behind letting God do the punishing and allowing Him to get justice is that God is able to do that.

However, the bit about telling His deciples to go buy swords?

That's a whole 'nuther level of...something. It's not telling them to go out and attack, mind you, but it IS telling them that it is permissible to defend themselves.
 
osgart

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure
Jesus preached radical love while also warning everyone of eternal consequences for their sinful nature. I would say he is the opposite of a pacifist. He expects his followers to lay down their lives for the cause of salvation on his terms. Lambs among wolves spreading his message to all. Jesus was extreme, stern and unwavering in introducing his concept of mercy to the world.
 
Enoch07

Enoch07

It's all a sick freaking joke.
Premium Member
Screenshot_20190610-203849_Samsung Internet.jpg


Its pretty clear Jesus wasn't a total pacifist. He really didn't like the tax man! :p
 
T

Terry Sampson

Well-Known Member
Jeremiah 17:

5 This is what the Lord says:

“Cursed is the one who trusts in man,
who draws strength from mere flesh
and whose heart turns away from the Lord.
6 That person will be like a bush in the wastelands;
they will not see prosperity when it comes.
They will dwell in the parched places of the desert,
in a salt land where no one lives.

7 “But blessed is the one who trusts in the Lord,
whose confidence is in him.
8 They will be like a tree planted by the water
that sends out its roots by the stream.
It does not fear when heat comes;
its leaves are always green.
It has no worries in a year of drought
and never fails to bear fruit.”
 
The Reverend Bob

The Reverend Bob

Fart Machine and Beastmaster
adrian009 said:
Non-violence is my often the best and most pragmatic choice IMHO. That appears to be exactly what Jesus taught (Matthew 5:38-40).
Click to expand...
He is teaching resistance in that verse. He is telling people to resist not to passively take a beating. When you offer them your left side of your face to strike you are telling them to hit you like a man, you are forcing your oppressor to see that you are their equal because they can't give you the back of their hand when you turn your cheek, so they have to hit you open handedly or with their fist. You are basically calling your oppressor "a punk" by taking that action.
 
David T

David T

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
adrian009 said:
Jesus appears somewhat different from the founders of other Abrahamic Faiths such as Moses or Muhammad. During His brief 3 1/2 year ministry, Jesus was never engaged in armed conflict unlike Muhammad who defended His people against the assault of the Quraysh tribe. Unlike Moses who killed a man, He never physically harmed anybody.

Jesus never advocated initiating armed conflict against the Romans. This could be due to Him being a pragmatist, in that He recognised it was unwise for the Jewish people to be provoking an enemy who would most likely defeat His people. Alternatively, He may not have believed in armed conflict under any circumstances and so was a pacifist. There may of course be other narratives.

So was Jesus a pacifist or pragmatist? How come?
Click to expand...
Anarchist.. But not like political anarchists! Little puppies wrapped up in politics.

No one seemd to understand a damn word he was talking about. So says the text. Thus anarchist. Making the comfortable uncomfortable, and making the uncomforted, comforted. When the religion becomes comfortable its no long about the text. Just bs being justified is all.
 
Last edited:
MonkeyFire

MonkeyFire

Well-Known Member
Last edited:
John53

John53

I go leaps and bounds
Premium Member
It's My Birthday!
adrian009 said:
Damage to property and physical assault are different.
Click to expand...

I don't know about that, I had my car vandalised once and while there was no injury to me I felt hurt. Anyway Jesus made himself a whip from cords and drove them from the temple grounds, I think that's physical assault and certainly not the act of a pacifist.
 
MonkeyFire

MonkeyFire

Well-Known Member
dianaiad said:
Dunno.

I would not, given that He is God, say that the first thing (with the whip) was advocating a lack of pacifism on the part of the rest of humanity. After all, the whole idea behind letting God do the punishing and allowing Him to get justice is that God is able to do that.
Click to expand...

God and Heaven cant torment others in order to be morally nirvanic (supreme pleasure).
 
Twilight Hue

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
adrian009 said:
Jesus appears somewhat different from the founders of other Abrahamic Faiths such as Moses or Muhammad. During His brief 3 1/2 year ministry, Jesus was never engaged in armed conflict unlike Muhammad who defended His people against the assault of the Quraysh tribe. Unlike Moses who killed a man, He never physically harmed anybody.

Jesus never advocated initiating armed conflict against the Romans. This could be due to Him being a pragmatist, in that He recognised it was unwise for the Jewish people to be provoking an enemy who would most likely defeat His people. Alternatively, He may not have believed in armed conflict under any circumstances and so was a pacifist. There may of course be other narratives.

So was Jesus a pacifist or pragmatist? How come?
Click to expand...
Well considering that he had armed disciples in the narratives would rule out total pacifism.
 
Dawnofhope

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
dianaiad said:
Dunno.

Would point out that He DID arm Himself with a whip and did a number on those money changers in the Temple, and He DID tell His disciples to go buy swords.

I would not, given that He is God, say that the first thing (with the whip) was advocating a lack of pacifism on the part of the rest of humanity. After all, the whole idea behind letting God do the punishing and allowing Him to get justice is that God is able to do that.

However, the bit about telling His deciples to go buy swords?

That's a whole 'nuther level of...something. It's not telling them to go out and attack, mind you, but it IS telling them that it is permissible to defend themselves.
Click to expand...

The issue of the Divinity of Christ is a separate but related issue (John 1:1-3). While it could be argued Jesus taught non-violence, it is clear that the God of Abraham as recorded in the Hebrew Bible commanded the invasion and colonisation of the land of Canaan, using considerable force and violence towards the lands inhabitants. So while some would argue on the basis of selected verses that Jesus was a pacifist, the God He represented certainly wasn't.
 
Dawnofhope

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
shmogie said:
He believed in self defense, what does that make him ?
Click to expand...

It would make him a pragmatist, not a pacifist.

The Reverend Bob said:
He is teaching resistance in that verse. He is telling people to resist not to passively take a beating. When you offer them your left side of your face to strike you are telling them to hit you like a man, you are forcing your oppressor to see that you are their equal because they can't give you the back of their hand when you turn your cheek, so they have to hit you open handedly or with their fist. You are basically calling your oppressor "a punk" by taking that action.
Click to expand...

I agree there is great power in the act of turning the other cheek.
 
Dawnofhope

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
David T said:
Anarchist.. But not like political anarchists! Little puppies wrapped up in politics.

No one seemd to understand a damn word he was talking about. So says the text. Thus anarchist. Making the comfortable uncomfortable, and making the uncomforted, comforted. When the religion becomes comfortable its no long about the text. Just bs being justified is all.
Click to expand...

He was certainly an anarchist in the sense of being opposed to the prevailing order at that time, whether within Judaism or the Roman Empire. However, anarchists have associations such as lawlessness and being anti-government that wouldn't apply to Jesus. After all, He did say render under Caesar what is due to Caesar (Matthew 22:21).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top