"Self-Defense" vs. Pacifism: Theory vs. Practice

I have met many a likable, patriotic Christian who, upon finding out that I am a "pacifist," immediately and in no uncertain terms told me that if his house were ever invaded by a robber who threatened his family, he would
"use self-defense"
"not hesitate to kill, if necessary"
"blow him away"
"splatter the wall with his brains"
and other more colorful phrases. (People trained in the American way of thinking love to try to shock us pacifists with tough-guy language.)

This is good American talk. This is John Wayne and James Cagney.

Unfortunately, it is also Samuel Adams and George Washington.

But is it Jesus? And when you live out this life God has given you, do you want a pat on the back and an "Attaboy!" from Sam Adams and John Wayne, or from some pacifistic wimp who got himself killed before He was 35?

And when you live out your life here in the 21st century, are you even going to get a pat on the back from Sam Adams and George Washington?

Would you, who are not a "pacifist," have any kind of credible argument for why you have not taken up arms against such a Leviathan?

The whole purpose of the Second Amendment was to make sure that a government like the one we have now could never come into existence. The "right to bear arms" had nothing to do with hunters, or self-defense against robbers, muggers, and street gangs. It had to do with defense against the kind of government that creates robbers, muggers and street gangs.

What do modern patriots do? They insult pacifists, immigrants, and the "gooks" in Vietnam. They threaten violence against the innocent, and overlook all institutionalized evil that waves the red, white and blue. The Secular Humanist elite in Washington funnels billions and billions of dollars to pagan dictators across the globe; oppressive regimes that have nothing in common with the ideals of the Founding Fathers. Trillions of dollars have been spent developing ways to kill millions, most of them innocent. American tough-talkers do nothing. Especially if there's a high-paying job in it for them.

I am not advocating violent revolution, as in 1776. I am saying that violent revolution in 1776 led inevitably to violence in the streets in 2003. When you see this connection, then you become a pacifist.

Have you ever wondered why the U.S. Supreme Court building and other famous buildings in Washington D.C. are modeled after pagan temples in ancient Greece? What were the Founders thinking?

Not only did the Founders undercut Biblical Law and Christian Theocracy as it existed in this country since the Mayflower Compact, but the Founders were too easily seduced by Roman Law. At the time of the "Enlightenment," men and nations were throwing out Hebrew-Christian Biblical Law and replacing it with Greco-Roman Law. During the Middle Ages, it was never questioned that theologians and clergymen would have an opinion about the civil laws of the nation. It was always taken for granted that those who were trained in God's law would advise lawmakers on how to conform their legislation to God's juridical Blueprints. It is simply undeniable that religion (that is, Christianity) has in fact had a tremendous impact on law.[1]

But what if the theologians were mistaken?

That possibility should surprise no one. When the Greeks were converted to Christianity, they did not immediately "put to death" the "old man," and the old man promptly brought all of his Roman Law philosophies into the Church, and (when the time was ripe) influenced civil law with his syncretistic thinking. Many pagan political practices were brought into Christian culture after being baptized with the best Biblical proof text that could be mustered.[2]

It will only take a few paragraphs to show you that self-defense, capital punishment, and war are all unBiblical products of Roman Law thinking.

Are you ready to become a pacifist?

A Theonomic Defense of Pacifism

[1] The best resource here is Harold Berman: See Law and Revolution, 1972. Berman was long a professor of law at Harvard Law School.

[2] Those familiar with the work of Cornelius Van Til will nod their heads knowingly at this point. See his A Christian Theory of Knowledge, esp. ch. iv. "The Church Fathers," and ch. v, "From Sovereign Grace to Synergism." We need a book which discusses Christian lawyers in the same way Van Til discusses Christian theologians.