Was Jesus a pacifist?

If this very simple principle were borne in mind, it would remove a quantity of misunderstanding, and save a vast amount of unintelligent discussion. No doubt it is thoroughly wrong for the church of God to go to war. No one can read the New Testament, with a mind free from bias, and not see this. We are positively commanded to love our enemies, to do good to them that hate us, and to pray for them that despitefully use us. "Put up again thy sword into his place; for all they that take the sword, shall perish with the sword." And again, in another gospel, "Then said Jesus to Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father has given me, shall I not drink it?" Again, our Lord says to Pilate, "My kingdom is not of this world; if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight" — it would be perfectly consistent for them so to do — … "But now is my kingdom not from hence" — and therefore it would be wholly out of character utterly inconsistent, thoroughly wrong for them to fight.

Now the bed-rock principle for the Lord's kingdom is SELF-SACRIFICING LOVE (Matt. 18). Note well the record of the Lord's arrest in the garden in Matthew's Gospel, the Gospel of the King. Peter believed that the hour had come in which to strike a blow for the Lord, but he was rebuked for having thoughts so contrary to the spirit of his Master. Jesus said, "Put up again thy sword into his place: for all who take the sword shall perish by the sword (chap. 26:52). That saying was not addressed to the world in general, nor did it refer to nations quarrelling one with another, it was addressed to the thought in the hearts of His disciples, that His kingdom was to be established by the sword. Others of the Lord's people have had the same thought since that memorable night, and have perished by the sword as the Lord said they would, Zwingle of Switzerland being an example.

It has always been a vexed question with the children of God, how far the required obedience to the powers that be authorises or excuses taking up the sword in the service of the Government. “Thou shalt not kill” has been, and still is, thank God, quite enough to decide many a simple soul, who is determined, like the apostles, to obey God rather than man. “Love your enemies” is evidently incompatible with slaying them. The principle to be followed is clear, but difficulties always arise as to the way in which one is to put the principle into practice, as to when and where one is to refuse to handle the sword or the gun, particularly in those countries where every able man is de facto a soldier.

Some have thought to excuse military service on the ground of what God allowed, and even commanded, in Old Testament times. Such persons, therefore, put forward the old at the expense of the new Testament, and in their souls consequently lose the power of both. Others, again, have sought to prove that a soldier is not responsible for his acts when he obeys his commanding officer. God will judge every one justly; but any Christian who weighs the words of the Lord Jesus can surely not hesitate for a moment as to what is his Lord’s mind upon the matter. “My kingdom is not of this world; if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews.” (John 18:36.) Never was there a more worthy, a more just cause to fight for than at that moment; but the Lord refuses it entirely on the ground of strangership to this world. If a Christian fights now it is to uphold the glory of the world that crucified his Lord; and it is a virtual denial of that word which tells us that our citizenship is in heaven. (Phil. 3:20.)

Some Christians have tried to compromise matters by going through the usual military exercises, in the hope that some way of escape will be found in the day of actual warfare, even going so far as to fire into the air instead of at the foe, when in battle. Thus they take the sword and hope not to use it; they would maintain their status in the world on the one hand, and virtually refuse to pay the price which the world imposes for the status it has accorded them. This has always a very ugly appearance, and is fairly branded as cowardice, if nothing worse, and is surely a deep dishonour done to our blessed Lord.

204 The Lord receives it with the calmness of One who, now in the path of obedience, had perfectly bowed to His Father's will. "Friend, wherefore art thou come?" For indeed, when He warned His disciples, He might have gone away, for it was dark, but for that He had not come. He could have had twelve legions of angels; but how then should the scriptures be fulfilled that thus it must be? It was now, having gone through all with His Father as to His path, a settled thing, not His feeling about it, but the divine path itself. It must be: scripture, the true revealed mind of God, had pointed out that path. What a testimony to scripture and its authority! In that greatest and lonely hour, that stands out from all and has none like it, it sufficed. How then should the scripture be fulfilled that thus it must be? It was by that the Lord conquered in the wilderness, by that He was as to authority determined in this moment in which He gave up all to glorify God and atone for our sins. It is to be remarked here that there is no healing of the servant which we know was wrought; another subject is set forth by the Spirit here, the obedient and submissive victim. He was going as a lamb to the slaughter. This was His place. He ever perfectly obedient, He was learning obedience by the things that He suffered; and that path is ours: human violence and human weapons in the Christian will meet with human weapons and stronger ones in the world; submission to God's will and the cross, is the path marked out for God's glory, as the world is - a wondrous lesson but a blessed one.

Our Lord comes next to the case of any practical injury that may be done us. It is not that it is wrong for a man to punish according to the injury that has been inflicted upon another. "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth" is perfectly righteous; but our Lord intimates that we ought to be much more than righteous, we ought to be gracious; and He presses this as the climax of this part of the discourse. First, He had strengthened the righteousness of the law, extended its depths, and put aside its license; now He goes further. He shows that there is a principle in His own ways and life which teaches the Christian that he is not to seek retaliation. "But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." It is clear the Lord has no reference here to what governments have to do. The New Testament is written for the Christian, for that which has a separate existence and a peculiar calling in the midst of earthly systems and peoples. It belongs to those who are heavenly while they are walking upon earth. We become such by the reception of Christ, and to such the Lord says, "Resist not evil; but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." Personal injury is meant here. The evil done may be ever so undeserved, but it has to be overcome with good. Show that you are willing to take even more for Christ's sake. "And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also." There the law is evoked: that is, a man lays a claim, perhaps falsely, to one part of your clothing, and if he will "sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also." Here it seems not exactly a man appealing to the law, but the public officers themselves. "And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain." The great principle our Lord marks in this — whether it is human violence, or the law ever so hardly or wrongly applied, — that while, according to the law, you might go one step, according to the gospel you would go two. Grace does twice as much as the law, whatever may be the point in hand. It was never intended in anywise to supplant obligations or to lower responsibilities, but, on the contrary, to give power and force to everything that is righteous in the sight of God. The law might say, "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth;" here there is not only the endurance of that which is positively wrong, but grace that gives more than is asked. "The law was given by Moses; but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." And this is one way of practically showing how far we value grace. It is not a question of the mere letter of our Lord's words. If you were to limit it merely to a blow on the face it would be a very poor thing; but the word of Christ is that which conveys to me the spirit that pleases God, and gives me the reality of grace. And grace is not the vindication of self nor the punishment of a wrong, but the endurance of evil and the triumph of good over it. Christ is speaking of what a Christian has to put up with from the world through which he passes. He is to receive tribulation as the discipline which God sees to be good for his soul; the great spectacle before men and angels — that there are men on this earth who are allowed and rejoice to suffer for Christ, because they have learned to give up their own will, to sacrifice their own rights, and to suffer wrongfully, looking onward to the day when the Lord will own whatever has been their sorrow for His sake, and when all evil shall be judged most solemnly at His appearing and kingdom.

(5) The Lord now takes up the necessary principle of law, to contrast it with that non-resistance of evil which He enjoins upon His disciples. The righteousness of the law of course remains righteousness, but it does not require of any that they should exact for personal wrongs. There is no supposition of the abrogation of law or of its penalties. The government of the world is not in question, but the path of disciples in it. Where they are bound by the law, they are bound, and have no privileges. They are bound, too, to sustain it in its general working, as ordained of God for good. Within these limits there is still abundant room for such practice as is here enjoined. We may still turn the left cheek to him that smites the right, or let the man that sues us have the cloak as well as the coat which he has fraudulently gained: for that is clearly within our rights. If the cause were that of another, we should have no right of this kind, nor to aid men generally in escape from justice or in slighting it. The Lord could never lay down a general rule that His people should allow lawlessness, or identify themselves with indifference to the rights of others. He speaks only of what is personal to oneself, ― "smite thee," "sue thee," "compel thee:" and here the law itself would recognize one's liberty.

The purging of the temple is closely connected with the marriage and miracle of Cana. When He comes again the Father's house, the temple, will be cleansed. "Yea every pot in Jerusalem shall be holiness unto the Lord of hosts... and in that day there shall be no more the Canaanite (which means translated: merchantman) in the house of the Lord of hosts." (Zechariah 14:21). This is the first cleansing of the temple, mentioned exclusively by John. The synoptic Gospels report the cleansing which occurred at the close of His ministry. He manifested in it His authority as the Son of God, and Psalm 69:9 was fulfilled in His action. (The whole transaction is a remarkable one, as exhibiting our Lord using more physical exertion, and energetic bodily action, than we see Him using at any other period of His ministry. A word, a touch, or the reaching-forth of a hand, are the ordinary limits of His actions. Here we see Him doing no less than four things:-- (1) Making the scourge;--(2) Driving out the animals;--(3) Pouring out on the ground the changers' money;--(4) Overthrowing the tables. On no occasion do we find Him showing such strong outward marks of indignation, as at the sight of the profanation of the temple. Remembering that the whole transaction is a striking type of what Christ will do at His second coming, we may get some idea of the deep meaning of that remarkable expression, "The wrath of the Lamb." (Revelation 6:16)--Expository Thoughts on John.))

If a nation acted upon Christian principles it could not strike back when stricken; it would possess neither battleships nor sword to strike back with, and it does not require a very keen intellect to discern what the result of such a policy would be in the world as it is. It is possible for the individual Christian to willingly and joyfully carry out these precepts, but for a nation it is impossible, for, as we have said, Christianity is an individual and not a national matter. In the present state of the world force is necessary for the maintenance of authority and of the measure of righteousness which is maintained, whether internationally or nationally. The policeman, magistrate, army and navy are indispensable, and these are permitted of God, and so far have His sanction, for the punishment of evildoers, and for His people's sake. But these would not be necessary if the kingdoms of this world were the Lord's kingdoms.

When arraigned before Pilate the Lord said, “IF MY KINGDOM WERE OF THIS WORLD, THEN WOULD MY SERVANTS FIGHT” (John 18:36). And that statement from the lips of Eternal Truth should be sufficient to show how great is the gulf that lies between the kingdoms of this world and His kingdom who was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and who forbade the valiant Peter to draw the sword on His behalf. To the kingdoms of this world war is an unhappy necessity. They have been founded mainly by blood; they maintain their place in the sun, and hold what they possess mainly by the power of the sword; and they will go down to an ignominious and terrible destruction together in one last, frenzied struggle for the mastery of the world, and thus shall it be that room shall be made for the kingdom of the Lord, which kingdom shall be established according to inflexible righteousness, and so shall universal peace prevail. Thus it is written in the sure word of prophecy, and for this the Christian waits.

Take, again, a peremptory call on a Christian to fight the battles of his country. If he knows his calling, can he join Christ's name with such unholy strife? If right for one side, it is right for another, or the Christian becomes a judge instead of a pilgrim, and the name of the Lord would be thus compromised by brethren on opposite sides, each bound to imbrue their hands in one another's blood, each instruments of hurrying to perdition souls ripening in sins. Is this of Christ? Is it of grace? It may suit the flesh and the world; but it is in vain to plead the Word of God to justify a Christian's finding himself engaged in such work. Will any one dare to call human butchery, at the command of the powers that be, Christ's service? The true reason, why people fail to see here is, either a fleshly mind or an unworthy shrinking from the consequences. They prefer to kill another to please the world, rather than to be killed themselves to please Christ. But they should not ask or expect Christian sympathy with their unbelief or worldly-mindedness. To sympathise, with such is to share their failure in testimony to Christ. To deplore the thing while doing it does not mend matters, but is rather an unwitting testimony of our own lips against our own ways.

The Lord Jesus took the scourge of small cords and drove them all out of the temple, for "the wisdom that is from above is first pure then peaceable." First pure. There is no such thing as peace at any price, in the word of God. Holiness and peace — what God has joined together let not man put asunder.