Christians are not required to be pacifists

Why Christ was killed and how the Christian religion came to be the most influential force on Earth seems to be lost on the "modern" church. The pervading mentality in the church today seems to be that Christ was the consummate pacific hippie whose solitary attribute was kindness. But is this an accurate portrayal of Christ and the religion that bears his appellation? The truth is Jesus was anything but an apathetic pacifist.

It's an existential axiom that many things in life, ideologies in particular, suffer vitiation over time as opposed to sublimation. They dilute, and become less pure, as opposed to becoming more so. The Constitution of the Untied States plainly illustrates this. Over the paltry span on two centuries the Constitution has become perpetually more esoteric, as its principles were obfuscated and forgotten in the collective minds of the populace, until its finer nuances were unintelligible and even its most plain language became the object of debate. It would be foolish to believe that Christianity, being two millennia old, hasn't endured something similar.

In truth we need not speculate if such happened, as the modern church provides us with abundant evidence it has. Walk into a modern church and you often find people utterly indistinguishable from their neo-pagan "secular" counterparts. They have adopted the secular androgyny culture, the men and women dressing alike, and they often enjoy the same debasing activities and entertainment as their atheistic counterparts. They are significantly immersed, and invested in the pagan hegemony beyond the church walls, and bring more of it into the church than they bring Christianity out of it. I couldn't help but begin contemplating many years ago why and how this was occurring. 

It would be intellectually dishonest to dismiss all third party sources as unreliable; to do so would contradict the existence of this very article. Sometimes a new set of eyes can indeed provide new, or at least uncommon insight, into old content. But this reliance upon third party exposition has become excessive to put it mildly, to the point it commonly serves more to obfuscate than elucidate.

The people who call themselves Christians are studying The Bible less and less, and relying more and more on third party filters who aren't merely providing interpretation, but often using a tangential association with Biblical precept as a launchpad to market their own brand(s) of heretical theology. The self-professed faithful are going directly to the source perpetually less, and going to dubious middlemen perpetually more. And this results, as it only can, in vitiation.

People are far too often looking through a prism, through a prism, through a prism of third party Biblical exposition. In order to understand what I mean by that, think back to the exercise our teachers made us do as children, by having all the kids in class sit in a circle. One child was told a phrase to tell to the next, who told it to the next, until it came full circle back to the origin. The phrase, in practice, was supposed to be different than that which was originally disseminated. This was done to to illustrate how gossip, as a result of passing through too many filters, degraded the message. And this is no less true of Biblical precept.

It must be understood that no man now living, nor recently alive, should be viewed as a completely reliable arbiter in these matters. If one wants truth in regard to something the advent of which occurred before their own lifetime, they must seek sources which have propinquity, i.e., they must read history books. If they're looking for the truth in regard to the Christian faith, then before resorting to a third party source, they should first read or at the very least seek corroboration with, The Bible. And when I say The Bible I don't mean part of it, or half of it, but the whole Bible.

The Bible must regain its traditional prominence in the Christian faith.

Opposing tyranny is a deeply Biblical tradition. The liberation of the Hebrews from bondage in Egypt illustrates that God does not condone, and is fundamentally opposed to, tyranny. It's not uncommon for people to cite Romans 13 to argue that Christians are required to submit to authority even if unjust, but they fail to account for the fact that those who govern are no less subject to the laws of God, than those they govern.

"Woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees." - Isa 10:1. 

"Can a corrupt throne be allied with you— a throne that brings on misery by its decrees?" - Psa 94:20. 

Indeed, multiple Biblical figures refused to comply with the established laws of their pagan or immoral rulers, and defiantly resisted the authorities and states under which they lived at God's behest. 

"You must not do as they do in Egypt, where you used to live, and you must not do as they do in the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you. Do not follow their practices. You must obey my laws and be careful to follow my decrees. I am the LORD your God. - Lev 18:3-4. "

Abraham, Moses, David, Azariah, Shadrach, Meshech, Abednego, Daniel, John the Baptist, the Apostles, and Christ himself, are examples of Biblical figures who resisted unjust and/or immoral rulers. These figures also serve to illustrate that God often won't do all the work himself, however, and often requires his followers to be active participants in their own liberation. God will provide guidance, and perhaps even some assistance, but it's ultimately up to God's people to follow through.

Why Was Jesus killed?

Ask that question and the answer you'll typically get is something along the lines of "To atone for our sins." I'm not asking why Jesus chose to sacrifice himself, though, I'm asking why he was executed. Atonement for sins is the ethereal why. Blasphemy is the technical why. The corporeal why is very different, however, and something often quite abrasive to modern sensibilities in a church that, much like secular political parties, is becoming ever more conspicuously devoted to protecting its members from unpleasant speech and ideas. Even those derived directly from the very thing upon which it's ostensibly based; The Bible.

Jesus was murdered because he insulted people and opposed an immoral and oppressive government.

The Jesus was a "nice guy" heresy is easily refuted with a moment of thought. Who plots to murder someone who goes around hugging people and telling them how wonderful they are? The Pharisees had no insurance policy on Jesus; they stood to gain nothing tangible from assassinating a "nice," indigent manual laborer from some insignificant backwater. So why do it? The Bible provides the answer.

In Matthew 23 Jesus calls the Pharisees "hypocrites" 8 times, "blind" 5 times, "fools" twice, belly crawling reptiles ("snakes" and "vipers") twice, accuses them of extortion and murder, and basically refers to them as dirty sinful (full of "uncleanness" and "iniquity") bastards. In the span of thirty nine verses, just based upon the provided list, Jesus directly insults the Pharisees no less than twenty one times. And not only did Jesus insult the Pharisees, but he more than once did it in public, in front of crowds of people. He routinely publicly humiliated them by evading carefully planned attempts at entrapment. And that's not something they appreciated or let slide.

"But the Pharisees went out and plotted how they might kill Jesus." - Mat 12:14. 

"Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus." - Mar 3:6. 

"The chief priests and the teachers of the law heard this and began looking for a way to kill him, for they feared him, because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching." - Mar 11:18. 

"Every day he was teaching at the temple. But the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the leaders among the people were trying to kill him." - Luk 19:47.

Why was Jesus hated by the Pharisees? Being nice to people and tolerant of their beliefs doesn't make people hate you. He tells us why he was hated. He told people they were evil; i.e., he was impolite and intolerant of other peoples' feelings and beliefs.

"The world [...] hates me because I testify that its works are evil." - Jhn 7:7. 

So Jesus himself refutes the notion of the adored by all buddy Christ in The Bible. ("World" in this verse means "the ungodly multitude; the whole mass of men alienated from God, and therefore hostile to the cause of Christ.") The Apostles followed in his footsteps and were almost all likewise murdered as a result. Simply saying that in a modern church however would be "controversial." Serving to illustrate how far the modern church has deviated from its roots. Jesus and the Apostles, unlike the modern church, weren't motivated by and didn't predicate their success on being liked or popular. 

But in the modern church certain truths about certain Biblical figures simply aren't mentioned, in much the same way many political truths about the Founders are omitted by the administrators of modern government, both blatantly for the purpose of suppressing the realization of the natural implications of those truths. Certain portions of The Bible are simply ignored by people advancing the pacific Christian narrative, in much the same manner that leftists ignore those portions of the Constitution, and those aspects of history that contravene their political beliefs. 

"'We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name,' he said. 'Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man’s blood.' Peter and the other apostles replied: 'We must obey God rather than human beings!' - Act 5:29.

Point out that Christ and the Apostles were revolutionaries that ardently defied their repressive government, and you'll be designated a misguided maverick at best, or an outright un-Christian radical extremist at worst.

Christianity was in no small part advanced and established by the sword.

This is not something for which Christians should be ashamed, and they really need to stop apologizing for it. Virtually all belief systems have done this. Certainly there have been mistakes and abuses, but there have been such in every other culture and system of beliefs as well. The benefits produced by Christianity for humanity far outweigh its followers' failings. The fact is God has commanded his people, in certain instances, to take up the sword. Indeed, without the sword Christianity might have never achieved global prominence.

In 303 the Roman Emperor Diocletian issued a series of edicts stripping Christians of their rights, property, and compelling them to adopt the religious practices of Rome's pagan religions. Many refused and were persecuted and killed. Another Roman aristocrat and Christian convert vying for power in Rome, Constantine, allegedly had a dream in which Christ instructed him to place the Greek initials for Christ on the standards of his army. Constantine would eventually defeat Diocletian in battle, i.e., warfare, i.e., with violence, and would go to become sole ruler of Rome and establish Christianity as the religion of the Roman Empire, paving the way for the Christianization of the civilized western world. In the Basilica of Maxentius a statue of Constantine was placed with the symbol of Christ that had been used on the banner of his soldiers, stating:

"Through this sign of salvation [the initials of Christ], which is the true symbol of goodness, I rescued your city and freed it from the tyrant's yoke."

The point is had this not occurred, and Constantine lost the war for supremacy in Rome, the world as we know it in which Christianity has the most followers globally may not exist.

The Founders were following Biblical and historical precedent.

There is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under the heavens: [...] a time to kill and a time to heal, a time to tear down and a time to build, [...] a time for war and a time for peace. - Ecc 3:1, 3, 8.

The Founders knew The Bible. They attended colleges founded as seminaries. They also knew history and were likewise aware of men like Constantine. Far from their war for Independence being "un-Christian," the Founders viewed themselves as following in the footsteps of their faith's Biblical and historical patriarchs. This is explicitly conveyed in the Seal of the United States proposed by Franklin, (John) Adams, and Jefferson (considered three of the less religious men among the Founders), which depicts the destruction of Pharaoh's army following the parting the Red Sea by Moses, with the inscription around the border reading "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God." 

The Founders weren't deviating from the Biblical paradigm in the war for Independence. They were returning to it.

"The ecclesiastical establishments of Europe, which serve to support tyrannical governments, are not the Christian religion, but abuses and corruptions of it." - Noah Webster, History of the United States, 1832.

God had never intended for his people to be ruled by an Earthly king. Indeed, serving an Earthly autocrat is a form of idolatry, an affront to God's will, and something he takes as a personal insult. After the Hebrews demanded to be ruled like the other (pagan) nations, God had Samuel warn them of the onerous consequences, and the loss of liberty that would result if their wish was granted. But they insisted so God relented and gave them their wish as punishment.

"And the LORD told him: 'Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you. Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will claim as his rights.' Samuel told all the words of the LORD to the people who were asking him for a king. [....] But the people refused to listen to Samuel. 'No!' they said. 'We want a king over us. Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us.'" - 1 Sa 8:7, 8, 9, 10, 19, 20.

The Founders didn't believe that Christians were required to submit to wicked rulers, prohibited from defending themselves, their property, or their liberties, or engaging in violence to that end. Not only were these things not forbidden, they were required by the Christian faith, because the Biblical Deity opposes tyranny and has repeatedly used his followers to combat human manifestations of it.

"Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace– but there is no peace. [...]  Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry, Speech to the Second Virginian Convention, March 23, 1775. 

"Death is more eligible than slavery. A free-born people are not required by the Christian religion of Jesus Christ to submit to tyranny, but may make use of such power as God has given them to recover and support their laws and liberties..." - A unanimous declaration by the men of Marlborough, Massachusetts, 1773.

"When kings, ministers, governors, or legislators, therefore, instead of exercising the powers entrusted to them according to the principles, forms, and propositions stated by the constitution and established by the original compact, prostitute those powers to the purposes of oppression - to destroy instead of preserving the lives, liberties, and properties of the people - they are no longer to be deemed magistrates vested with a sacred character, but become public enemies, and ought to be resisted." - Proclamation of the Great and General Court of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, drafted by John Adams, January 23, 1776.

"We remember his injunction to forgive and love our most injurious enemies. But neither the law of Christianity nor of reason requires us to prostrate our national independence, freedom, prosperity, and honor at the feet of proud, insatiable oppressors. [...] Such a prostration would be treason against the being who gave us our inestimable privileges, civil and religious, as a sacred deposit to be defended and transmitted to posterity. It would be criminal unfaithfulness and treachery to our country, our children, and the whole human race." - Address of the Congressional Ministers of Massachusetts to President John Adams.

The Founders weren't "pacifists" because they knew the patriarchs of The Bible weren't pacifists either.

"Praise be to the LORD my Rock, who trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle." - Psa 144:1.

Founder John Jay, a member of the Continental Congress, the nation's first Supreme Court Chief Justice appointed by George Washington, a co-author of The Federalist, and a President of the American Bible Society expounds upon the Biblical legitimacy of righteous warfare.

That all those wars and fightings are unlawful, which proceed from culpable desires and designs (or in Scripture language from lusts), on the one side or on the other, is too clear to require proof. As to wars of an opposite description, and many such there have been, I believe they are as lawful to the unoffending party in our days, as they were in the days of Abraham. He waged war against and defeated the five kings. He piously dedicated a tenth of the spoils; and, instead of being blamed, was blessed." - to John Murray, October 12, 1816.

This sentiment was not exclusive to Founding era statesmen, but was shared by many clergy of the day as well, and in many cases was derived by the former from the latter. In 1750 the Rev. Jonathon Mayhew, D.D., delivered "A Discourse Concerning Unlimited Submission and Non-Resistance to the Higher Powers." In 1766 the Rev. Charles Chauncey, D.D., delivered a thanksgiving sermon on the repeal of the stamp act. In 1770 the Rev. Samuel Cook, D.D., delivers "Civil Government for the Good of the People." In 1774 the Rev. William Gaden, of Roxbury, delivered "Christian Duty of Resistance to Tyrants; Prepare for War; Appeal to Heaven." In 1775 the Rev. Samuel Langdon, D.D., delivers "Government, Corrupted by Vice, Recovered by Righteousness." In 1778 the Rev. Phillips Paxson, of Chelsea, delivered "Popular Government, the True Spirit of Liberty." Such constituted typical sermonic content among New England clergy.

The first shots of the Revolutionary War killed 8 men in the Minutemen militia on the lawn of Pastor Jonas Clark's church. Clark was harboring two fugitives from British justice, Samuel Adams and John Hancock, and the 8 men killed were members of Clark's congregation; whom Clark had for years inculcated with the precepts of self-defense and inalienable rights through his sermons. The Reverend James Caldwell, pastor of the Presbyterian Church in Elizabethtown, NJ, who fought in the battle of Springfield, is another superb illustration of the fallacy that pacifism is the obligation of American Christians. 

"When the glorious war of our Revolution commenced which resulted in our independence, the Rev. James Caldwell was then pastor of this church. His name and fame are interwoven with the history of his country, and are as dear to the State as to the Church. He became early and deeply interested in the conflict, and devoted all his powers no less to the freedom of his country than to the service of his God. Such was his influence over his people that, with few exceptions, they became one with him in sentiment and feeling; and thenceforward he and they were branded as the rebel parson and parish. To the enemies of his country he was an object of the deepest hatred; and such was their known thirst for his life, that, while preaching the gospel of peace to his people, he was compelled to lay his loaded pistols by his side in the pulpit. 

At the first call to arms, the State offered its brigade for the common defence, and Mr. Caldwell was elected its chaplain. His immense popularity gave him an influence that filled the tories with rage and made his name common as a household word among the British troops. They offered a large reward for his capture. For his personal safety, he went armed. 

So entire was the confidence of the people in his integrity that, when the army became greatly reduced, and both provisions and money were hard to be obtained, he was appointed Assistant Commissary-General. He not only was earnest and eloquent in his pulpit for the cause of his country, but was active and brave in battle. In one of the engagements near Springfield, New Jersey, Mr. Caldwell was in the hottest of the fight, and, seeing the fire of one of the companies slacken for want of wadding, he galloped to the Presbyterian meeting house near by, and, rushing in, ran from pew to pew, filling his arms with hymn-books. Hastening back with these into battle, he scattered them about in every direction, saying, as he pitched one here and another there, 'Now, boys, put Watts into them.'" - Reverend Nicholas Murray, Memorial to Congress for Rev. James Caldwell, 1840. 

Clergy of more than one denomination were supporters of American Independence, and the British specifically targeted members of their denominations and their churches for retaliation, turning the latter into stables, burning them, etc. Both the Reverend Caldwell above and his wife were killed, and his house and church burned, by British forces and Tories. 

It should go without saying that it's in the interests of Christianity's enemies to convince its adherents that pacifism is a Christian duty. A church full of pacifists won't be an obstacle to the Marxist left's subversion of America's institutions. They won't defy or depose a totalitarian state. They'll do what hyper-effeminate pacifists do and obsequiously accept their abuse at the hands of their enemies. And unfortunately the left has been highly successful in propagating this heretical mentality throughout the modern church.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people. - Declaration of Independence. 

It's no coincidence the liturgy of modern churches overtly suppresses masculinity. The modern church has been nigh completely re-purposed toward inducing socio-political languor in its congregants. If the left can't abolish theism altogether, it will at least suppress resistance to their agenda from the Christian right, by assiduously feminizing men through inculcation of the belief that defying unjust rulers and/or resisting an oppressive state is disobedience to God. One can defeat a stronger opponent if that opponent refuses to fight, and facilitating that agenda seems to be one of the most conspicuous goals of the modern church.

The truth is Christians are not required to be apolitical or indefatigably submissive. Indeed, this sentiment is the opposite of what the Founders believed and animated their separation from Britain.

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude, than the animating contest of freedom—go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams, Speech delivered at the State House in Philadelphia, August 1, 1776.

When elements hostile to Christianity gain a foothold, or worse ascend to prominence in a society established upon Christianity, it places all Christianity and liberty derived from such in jeopardy.

"I met with wealthy New Englanders who abandoned the country in which they were born in order to lay the foundations of Christianity and of freedom on the banks of the Missouri or in the prairies of Illinois. Thus religious zeal is perpetually warmed in the United States by the fires of patriotism. These men do not act exclusively from a consideration of a future life; eternity is only one motive of their devotion to the cause. If you converse with these missionaries of Christian civilization, you will be surprised to hear them speak so often of the goods of this world, and to meet a politician where you expected to find a priest. They will tell you that 'all the American republics are collectively involved with each other; if the republics of the West were to fall into anarchy, or to be mastered by a despot, the republican institutions which now flourish upon the shores of the Atlantic Ocean would be in great peril. It is therefore our interest that the new states should be religious, in order that they may permit us to remain free.'" - Alexis de Tocqueville, Principal Causes Which Tend To Maintain The Democratic Republic In The United States.

If Christian liberty is to be saved, it's imperative that the American church return to its theological roots, both Biblical and civic. Christians must not only be knowledgeable of and active in politics, but must maintain prominence in the political aspect of life, lest Christian liberty and religion have no defenders in government and be left entirely at the mercy of apostatic elements to constrain and uproot uncontested.  

"Christians should endeavor to understand, and should take suitable interest in the subject of civil government. It is neither remote from them, nor too unholy to occupy their attention. From the mere contests of faction they may, indeed, stand aloof; but surely, that which attracted the attention of an inspired apostle is not beneath the study of the most spiritually minded of the followers of Christ. They should study the subject, moreover; for without this, they cannot with becoming high intelligence perform their own duty respecting it. [....] The ambassador of Christ should keep close to the footsteps of his Master and of his inspired followers, and rising above the transient conflicts and unworthy behests of party, should essay to exhibit and illustrate the entire subject of governmental arrangements and polity, in a manner becoming an exalted moral institution — so as to bring a revenue of glory to Christ the Supreme Lawgiver. [....] So far then is it from being true that the Christian is to disregard the movements of society, or even what relates to matters of civil regimen, and human rights and liberty, that the very opposite is a truth, and a most important one. The Christian should, of all men, regard things like these with a constant and active interest. So his Bible teaches him - for its pages abound in directions bearing immediately upon them." - Pastor James M. Willson, 1853.