Sermon on the mountain
 

Does Jesus's teaching of non violence in Matthew condemn the state industrial military complex as unjustified?

Should Christian's be conscientious objectors in unjust wars?

Does pledging allegiance to the Republic and participating in it's advantages obligate one to defend it?

How does a Christian establish the Kingdom on earth as it is in heaven?

When will Jesus kingdom be established? when will the wicked be annihilated?

Re: Sermon on the mountain
 

You will be surprised of how many opinion you will find here and anywhere about that.

I notice that in the argumentation, you tend to see the following errors:

1) Lack of understanding what "biblical meekness" is. Many people can't define it right.
2) Erroneously generalizing things without comprehending that the elects are always going to be a tiny minority. For example, "if everybody thinks like you, then" to point out the absurdity of a thought. We have a different calling and we will always be a minority.

Even among those that get point 1 and 2 right, you will find a variety of opinions.

Re: Sermon on the mountain
 

1. Jesus' teaching regarding nonviolence was in reference to interpersonal honour disputes.and a general non-violent disposition. This attitude is reflected throughout the Old Testament as well (eg Psalm 5:6, Nahum 3:1, etc). Yet the same God ordained war under certain circumstances and ordained military/law enforcement (eg Romans 13) and personal bearing of defensive weapons (eg Luke 22:36). So the instruction to be peaceful and nonviolent is NOT a prohibition against either state or personal use of force under certain conditions. The modern military industrial complex is forbidden under other commands of God, especially those that require just, equitable, honest, and RIGHTEOUS government, and forbids lies, deceit, and cronyism.

2. God's law prohibits following a multitude to do evil, which would include a genuinely unjust war. It also commands that anyone who is afraid is exempt (Deut 20:1-8).

3. Christians should not pledge allegiance to a flag (that is a form of idolatry). Christians should be loyal to their nation but not to the point of sinning. The "pledge of allegiance" was written by a socialist as a means of brainwashing children into supporting an unconstitutional post-Lincoln version of America, it is in fact an act of subversion though everyone thinks it's an act of patriotism. Christians are to pay taxes (and tribute) when they are used to support basic civil functions (including keeping the peace).

4. Only God establishes His kingdom, we submit to it and support it and promote it.

5. His kingdom was established at His first coming and continues through today and into eternity. The wicked will be annihilated at the Judgment Day.

God's kingdom is in conflict with wicked man's kingdom. Christ is in the process of subduing His enemies. The war isn't over yet. :thumbsup

Re: Sermon on the mountain
 

Note: technically God's kingdom has always been around. But the "arrival" or coming of the kingdom has to do with the manifestation of the kingdom via voluntary submission to God.

Re: Sermon on the mountain
 

Thanks! I'm reading a book by Tolstoy, "The Kingdom of God Is Within You" and he is making an awesome case for non violent resistance. He inspired Ghandi and Martin Luther King.

I think non violent resistance worked for Ghandi because the British were basically decent people. Whereas, Bonhoeffer abandoned resistance and attempted to assassinate Hitler because Nazism had no respect for life

Re: Sermon on the mountain
 

If we face a marxist takeover of our country, I'm guessing non violent resistance isn't going to work.

Re: Sermon on the mountain
 

Do you think the sermon on the mount is hyperbole?

Re: Sermon on the mountain
 

What part?

Re: Sermon on the mountain
 

Take no thought for tomorrow for instance

Re: Sermon on the mountain
 

There are some elements of hyperbole (the take no thought for tomorrow that you mentioned) but hyperbole is used to make a point, not to counter what is actually said. For example, take no thought for tomorrow doesn't literally mean completely ignore tomorrow and have absolutely zero future expectations or plans. Rather it means don't fret and worry about the future especially in regards to common, temporal, ordinary needs.

Non violent resistance is absolutely critical in the event of a communist takeover. However, non violent resistance is almost never solely enough. It takes all kinds of people, with all kinds of backgrounds, doing all kinds of things. The last thing an anticommunist resistance movement needs is a bunch of infighting.