What was Jesus like?

davewhite04 said:
I don't think the vanquishing of Satan is in the gospels :)
Click to expand...

It is mentioned in the NT though,

Hebrews 2:14 (KJV):

"Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same;
that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;"

In the last 100 years or so, it's been called the 'Christus Victor' theory of the atonement. It might have been the majority view among the early church fathers for the first thousand years of Christianity and something like it remains mainstream theology in Eastern Orthodoxy today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christus_Victor

https://www.theopedia.com/christus-victor
 
Last edited:
davewhite04 said:
His actions show what type of person he was:

Matthew 21:12

And Jesus entered the temple and drove out all those who were buying and selling in the temple, and overturned the tables of the den.”

You can argue about what is meant to be taking literally or not, but the fact is he acted violently, he wasn't a pacifist. When he did act violently, he was doing so righteously.
Click to expand...
Violence against tables? He was resisting the Roman occupation and corruption of his religion. It looks like civil disobedience.
 
DaveC426913 said:
He cited a single example of Jesus saying he brought a sword. You can't infer from that that Kapyong was implying Jesus is violent a lot.
Click to expand...
"Jesus said he brought violence, not peace."

"I have not come to bring peace, but a sword."

Saying, "I have a dog, not a cat," is pretty clear, even if you only say it once.
 
[QUOTE="Yazata, post: 3561161, member: 98441"
that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;"[/QUOTE]

I don't take Paul seriously and just stick with the gospels I'm not surprised he said it, but how can he be vanquished if he is spoken about in revelations?
 
davewhite04 said:
The point is is that was Jesus a pacifist? I think not.
Click to expand...

But a literal God absolutely is passive. Non-violence is the moral, happiness is the gem, equanimity is the sword of words.

Would you agree the bible is conflicted on the topic of non-violence? Jesus defiantly offered non-resistance which is totally passive. Hate is the seven headed dragon who gives his power to a second beast called "No-Love" in revelation.
 
davewhite04 said:
Pacifism is opposition to war or violence of any kind.
Click to expand...

Imo non-violence is opposed to violence. Being passive means one does not hate, but can rely of the assailants own suffering. All of hell will suffer and go to naught on its own all you need is to be passive to it.

If there were no violence there wouldn't even be a non-violence... It would just be a no and it would go away too... To a passive mind.
 
Last edited:
davewhite04 said:
Pacifism is opposition to war or violence of any kind.
Click to expand...
Low levels of violence are permitted. Technically, a sit-in that requires police to move you encourages a form of violence. The civil rights march over the Edmund Pettus Bridge was going to result in violence, and the brave marchers suspected that ahead of time. They could have avoided violence if they wanted to.
 
It seems to me the central contention of this thread revolves around this:

Post 17 Jesus is the embodiment of pacifism
Post 18 Jesus said the opposite: 'I bring not peace but a sword'
Post 20 Jesus entered the temple and drove out all those who were buying and selling in the temple, and overturned the tables of the den.
Post 21 (18) is one act in a lifetime; you can't generalize it
Post 27 look at all of the highlights of Jesus' life, the violent ones are a small minority. It's dishonest to characterize Him overall as violent.

It seems to me that the error lies in the last half of (27): "It's dishonest to characterize Him overall as violent."

AFAICT, no one did. Mostly, they're simply saying that (17) is not true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top