Biblical Violence?

[Psalms18_28]

another thing, it is just a building.. do you need it just to reach God?

I know some people love their church buildings because it is beautifully designed. some people do not want to give it up for another religion... There is one church in Israel that had 3 christian dem. sharing the same church. They are about to fight over it now.

If it is the corruption you are concern about, I can understand.. but if it is about people coming in and taking over the church, then maybe it is good for you to leave so you can have a better relationship with the Lord.

[Jerry]

If I cannot organize a swift and violent upheaval with sound authority, I will just speak out against the leadership.

Then you are creating division - and God calls that evil and says it is one of the things He is against!

I didn't say I was going to commit violence, just curious as to whether or not there is ever biblical justification for it.

No, but you certainly left that impression with this statement:

Please pray for us that stand our ground and fight (without violence, for the time being).

Would moving on not be "creating a schisim?"

Where do you get that idea? Creating a schism is stirring up discord. Leaving a church is not doing that - it is in fact doing the opposite.

And if we are not to creat a schism, should we all still be Catholics?

That doesn't even make sense. If you are speaking about the Protestant Reformation - they left the Catholic church, they didn't stay in it to stir up discord.

[ptwild]

Then you are creating division - and God calls that evil and says it is one of the things He is against!

I didn't say I was going to commit violence, just curious as to whether or not there is ever biblical justification for it.

No, but you certainly left that impression with this statement:

Please pray for us that stand our ground and fight (without violence, for the time being).

Would moving on not be "creating a schisim?"

Where do you get that idea? Creating a schism is stirring up discord. Leaving a church is not doing that - it is in fact doing the opposite.

And if we are not to creat a schism, should we all still be Catholics?

That doesn't even make sense. If you are speaking about the Protestant Reformation - they left the Catholic church, they didn't stay in it to stir up discord.

I thought schism meant to "divide" or "separate" or something similar. If not, my mistake. I meant "separate."

I don't think that speaking out agains the leadership is creating division. They are promoting unsound doctrine, therefore they are creating division. I am merely going to keep to sound doctrine. If your pastor started saying "homosexuality is not a sin," would you not tell him he's wrong? Would he not be the one creating the division?

[Amaryllis]

Violence is usually hated by God. I couldn't find a passage where violence would seem acceptable, in almost all verses, violence is spoken of as a negative.
True, in cases of theft and aggression, it would be self-defence or property protection but Christians have no God given reason to start physical attacks just for the sake of it. You can talk to the person and explain your concerns, also you can take other church members who agree with you on your points.

Gen 6: 13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth
Proverbs 10:11 The mouth of a righteous man is a well of life: but violence covereth the mouth of the wicked
Psalms 11:5 The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth
Luke 3:14 And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages

[JerryNumbers]

I thought schism meant to "divide" or "separate" or something similar. If not, my mistake. I meant "separate."

I don't think that speaking out agains the leadership is creating division. They are promoting unsound doctrine, therefore they are creating division. I am merely going to keep to sound doctrine. If your pastor started saying "homosexuality is not a sin," would you not tell him he's wrong? Would he not be the one creating the division?

I left a church once, I had plenty that would have stood with me, but I felt that staying and fighting, {not physically fighting}, even though I had the majority, in the long run would do more damage than if I quietly left. There is no doubt the pastor was out of line, the whole church knew it.

What we need is wisdom to know when to stand, and when to stand down. That has been many years ago, I'm still sure I made the right choice. Plus I'm still friends with the church and its members.

[1Timothy115]

I understand what you are saying. We are even supposed to love our enemies. But I see the Church the same way I do my home. I wouldn't let someone come in and steal my possessions and I don't want to stand by and let someone steal my church. And you are right, I could just leave and go somewhere else. But what do I do if it happens again? How long do I have to just keep leaving and going somewhere else before I say, "No, I'm not leaving. I'm not letting you push me around anymore. This is mine, and your not taking it without a fight"? When do I throw the money changers out?

pt,
Although, your argument is very sincere, look closely at the "but" you're using. It's never a good idea to but heads with God's Word. What would Jesus counsel?

You need to consult the scriptures and I encourage you to look at the gospels of Mt., Mk., Lk., and Jn. See exactly what Christ instructs His followers. What would Jesus do?

I'm a strong believer that, issues in the local church are a result of our eyes being distracted from Christ. When this happens, its time for us to look back toward Him and pray. What is Christ telling you?

I would like to know your reference for the answer to this last question above.

[John81]

Jerry, Mitch and others have already answered well.

There is no justification for violence in the church. The church belongs to God and stands by the Spirit, not by power or might and especially not by ours.

Consider what Scripture says about pride, about anger, wrath, vengence and justice.

We are to walk in the Spirit at all times. Taking up a fight in our flesh is not the right answer.

[JerryNumbers]

Jerry, Mitch and others have already answered well.

There is no justification for violence in the church. The church belongs to God and stands by the Spirit, not by power or might and especially not by ours.

Consider what Scripture says about pride, about anger, wrath, vengence and justice.

We are to walk in the Spirit at all times. Taking up a fight in our flesh is not the right answer.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't feel he was saying violence in church was OK. By using the word fight I think he was saying wait until the next election with hopes the prOBlem will be solved by change in leadership.

A few years back I read of a conservative Baptist Church who had elected a new pastor. Seems he did not answer their questions honestly. Within 6 months the church split up, he was a practicing homosexual who got in by deception, afterwards he brought in several of his buddies and they took over. Those who had been members there for many years had no choice but to leave and start a new church.

I think way to many churches takes choosing a pastor way to lightly and never actually find out what kind of report he has from those who really know him.

[John81]

In a couple posts actual violence was alluded to as in "not yet".

[Psalms18_28]

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't feel he was saying violence in church was OK. By using the word fight I think he was saying wait until the next election with hopes the prOBlem will be solved by change in leadership.

A few years back I read of a conservative Baptist Church who had elected a new pastor. Seems he did not answer their questions honestly. Within 6 months the church split up, he was a practicing homosexual who got in by deception, afterwards he brought in several of his buddies and they took over. Those who had been members there for many years had no choice but to leave and start a new church.

I think way to many churches takes choosing a pastor way to lightly and never actually find out what kind of report he has from those who really know him.

That's how I took it too.

But I couldn't figure out why he mentioned violence and war at first. for a second, I thought he was asking one of those a common question people had about the OT and such.

[JerryNumbers]

ptwild wrote:
" I'm not suggesting or promoting violence as a means of solving this prOBlem (at least not at this point), but would like to know if there is ever a situation where it is a suitable means of resolution."

I suppose some might think he is suggesting violence in overthrowing they their church, but it seems to me he is asking is there a time for such action.

And he asked about this comparing the thought it seems that all Christians support violence if our country is attacked.

If we support violence if our country is attacked, would it not be a double standard if we did not support it when our church is attacked? For surely our church staying in the truth is more important than our country.

I've never thought about it in that way? Something to mediate and study on instead of getting after his case, for he is asking a serious question.

I'm sure, until it happens to your church, and please, I'm not implying that the church belongs to anyone but Christ, I'm just referring to the church you and I attend, we will not know what its like till it happens at our church. once again, I hope I have and use godly wisdom if I ever happen to be under such circumstances.

[Psalms18_28]

ptwild wrote:
" I'm not suggesting or promoting violence as a means of solving this prOBlem (at least not at this point), but would like to know if there is ever a situation where it is a suitable means of resolution."

I suppose some might think he is suggesting violence in overthrowing they their church, but it seems to me he is asking is there a time for such action.

And he asked about this comparing the thought it seems that all Christians support violence if our country is attacked.

If we support violence if our country is attacked, would it not be a double standard if we did not support it when our church is attacked? For surely our church staying in the truth is more important than our country.

I've never thought about it in that way? Something to mediate and study on instead of getting after his case, for he is asking a serious question.

I'm sure, until it happens to your church, and please, I'm not implying that the church belongs to anyone but Christ, I'm just referring to the church you and I attend, we will not know what its like till it happens at our church. once again, I hope I have and use godly wisdom if I ever happen to be under such circumstances.

I know for one thing, if anyone physically attack any church, they will put them in jail. Possible death penalty. Things are done in a orderly way. BUT if there is a violence WAR going on outside of the church, then that's prOBably when some will end up fighting back if they took over churches (think civil war). But we don't need to worry about that, and should not be fighting against the members of the church especially if they are not violence in the first place.We should keep on telling them about Christ and the bible and pray.

although there have been a time where christians had to pack up and leave, and some had secret meetings instead.

[ptwild]

ptwild wrote:
" I'm not suggesting or promoting violence as a means of solving this prOBlem (at least not at this point), but would like to know if there is ever a situation where it is a suitable means of resolution."

I suppose some might think he is suggesting violence in overthrowing they their church, but it seems to me he is asking is there a time for such action.

And he asked about this comparing the thought it seems that all Christians support violence if our country is attacked.

If we support violence if our country is attacked, would it not be a double standard if we did not support it when our church is attacked? For surely our church staying in the truth is more important than our country.

I've never thought about it in that way? Something to mediate and study on instead of getting after his case, for he is asking a serious question.

I'm sure, until it happens to your church, and please, I'm not implying that the church belongs to anyone but Christ, I'm just referring to the church you and I attend, we will not know what its like till it happens at our church. once again, I hope I have and use godly wisdom if I ever happen to be under such circumstances.

This is what I meant. Although I would consider actual physical violence if it was in accordance with sound doctrine (i.e. protect the church as we protect our country), I don't believe it is. I am praying about this but my inclination is to stay and "fight" to take back the church in a peaceful and diplomatic way.

[rancher824]

Actually, you are in the wrong to seek to overthrow the leadership of your church. It is up to you to move on, not create a schism. You can't be godly and cause a church split.

If your church votes in the leadership and it is up for a vote and you vote against the current leadership, that is one thing. But it does not sound as if that is your situation.

I have heard this before, Bro Jerry, but I will have to disagree. Though I do agree we should not use violence to settle a dispute (for example to try to cause bodily harm upon a leader to force him to leave) I do believe that the laymen of the church have the right, no the OBligation to stand up if they see their pastor for example is actualy a wolf in sheeps clothing. (Matt 7:15) The New Testament was not written to the pastorite or clergy, it was written to the believers (the new testament church). Though we are to show our pastors the most respect we can possibly show them, we are not their sheep! We belong the the great shepherd. If we can clearly see that the shepherd is leading us to the still waters, and the undershepherd is leading us to the raiging river, are we to just walk away and let the other sheep of our fold go and dround??

Let's take a quick look at 1 timothy 5.
1Ti 5:1 Rebuke not an elder, but intreat him as a father; and the younger men as brethren;
Hear we find one of the first verses those who say that if you are in the right on doctrine, you are still wrong to stand against a church leader (pastor, or elder). What does the verse say? Don't rebuke him, but show respect as you would your father. He is leading you in the ways of God. He has given his life to the Lord. He is a faithful man. Show him all respect. (There is disagreement as to whether verse 1 is actualy talking about an elder/pastor or an older man in the church. but we do turn to elder/pastor in verse 17)

The apostle then turns and tells us we are to show proper respect for the ladies. He then goes into widows and how they are treated. How that a man who does not take care of his widowed family member is worse than an infedel. But then I want us to pick back up with verse 17.
1Ti 5:17 Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.
1Ti 5:18 For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.
1Ti 5:19 Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.
"The elders that rule well". How are they to be treated?? Double honor. As much respect as you can possibly show them. They are following God, so we should follow them. Don't muzzle the ox and labourer is worthy of his reward. We should do all we can to support him. Even if we must put ourselves out to do so, we need to support him as much as possible. Then verse 19. "Receive not an accusation". That is where he stops right??? Never receive any statement against the leadership of your church. No wait he says something more. But before two or three witnesses. Now what does that mean?? Could it mean that if more than one knows about the pastor having a herrasy that he can be approached. No it couldn't be, or else you would be causing discord by trying to get the bretheren to rise up against the leader (and FOR the Shepherd I might add). That brings me to a question, If a "man of God" stands before the people and teaches the lies of the devil and a young unlearned man stands up and shows from God's precious word the truth, who has sowed the seeds of discord? Are we not held together by the truth of God's word and His promises. Is it not sowing discord to push people away from God. Then a verse that I have never heard used in such a discusion by those who say that if the church is sound but the pastor is bad you should leave rather than stir trouble. Verse 19 for context and verse 20.

1Ti 5:19 Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.
1Ti 5:20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.

That does not sound like the laymen of the church have no right to stand against a sinful pastor. Those who decide to take on the doctrines of the devil, the things that in all reality divide, are dividing the church. They are planting the seed of discord. They are pulling the church away from God. And what does the apostle say should be done?? Run away so not to divide? No the dividing has already been done!! The sinful pastor has divided the church from God!! Paul says rebuke. Tell what he has done wrong. But only in his office so as not to "hurt the work by putting questions in the weak ones minds", right. Wrong!! Rebuke before all. Make it a public thing. Not going from house to house gossiping. But get up, in front of the church, and lay it on the line. Pastor says ______ and the Bible says ______, and we (the local New Testament Church) need to decide whether to follow pastor, of God. If in removing the pastor half the church leave, 1Jn 2:19 says "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us." If the majority stands for pastor against the word of God, we then have no bussiness with them and should move on to a place God can use us.

[Jerry]

There is a difference between church discipline of the pastor - which starts out privately, and may go publically, if the whole church is willing to get a new pastor - and causing division within a service. If the pastor has been approached Biblically, but the pastor won't repent, and the church won't seek a new pastor, then someone is in the wrong to stir up public discord - and it is then up to that person to leave and find a Biblical church.