Jonah Goldberg: ‘Violence solves all sorts of problems’

Daily Caller ^ | 5/17/12 | Michelle Fields

[Nachum]

Washington - National Review Online editor Jonah Goldberg spoke Wednesday about how “violence solves all sorts of problems” and argued against the critique that Jesus was a pacifist. (Snip) “A lot of people think we get this idea [that violence solves nothing] from Jesus,” Goldberg said. “This is one of the things they love: ‘You hypocritical conservatives, you think violence is a solution — you call yourself a Christian, you’re not.’ Jesus told his followers to carry swords. Unless he had some sort of theory that fell out of in the Apocrypha that these were just great big kabob skewers,

[Puckster]

And Jesus did not know that he was speaking to a soldier when he told him to do no murder and be satisfied with his wages?

[Mountain Mary]

My favorte is this one, “I came not to bring peace but a sword”

How ‘bout “Praise the Lord but pass the ammunition”.

[Kozak]

Yeah. Some loser at a demonstration had a “War is Never the Answer” sign. I engaged him, and pointed out it depends on the question. Ask Napoleon, Hitler, Tojo or Lee if war isn’t the answer. Left the idiot literally speechless.

[Jewbacca]

“Unlike Islam, we don’t use the Sword to spread it.”

This century, you mean.

(I am a fan of Christians, but don’t kid yourself that Christianity was not spread at the point of a sword and gun.)

[Sudetenland]

I think He would have been comfortable with the John Wayne philosophy--"I won't be wronged. I won't be insulted. I won't be laid a-hand on. I don't do these things to other people, and I require the same from them." :)

[Theoria]

Of course.

[mdmathis6]

Theoretical of course....since I saw nothing in that scripture that supports Jesus issuing that warning over concerns over the temple guards.

[dfwgator]

I like the Patrick Swayze approach in “Roadhouse”....”Be nice...until it’s time to not be nice.”

[ArrogantBustard]

It solved the original Ozymandius ... and countless other similar folks before him.

[Hostage]

You have a misunderstanding of the word ‘violent’.

Jesus was not violent and never espoused it period.

Actions which you call ‘violent’ were not violent. Cleaning the Temple of money changers was ‘cleaning’ the Temple and not an act of violence against the violators of the Temple rules. He was enforcing the rules not advocating physical bodily harm.

To stretch Jesus’ actions of defense and enforcement into acts of ‘violence’ is hysterical and false.

You also have a misunderstanding of the
biblical terms translated to ‘sword’.

The word ‘sword’ came from two different words having different meanings. One is a metaphor and was used to denote ‘the Word of God’.

“And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword [machaira] of the Spirit, which is the word of God” (Ephesians 6:17)

This link can help you sort out your confusion:

http://amberneve.newsvine.com/_news/2009/08/14/3153148-the-two-swords-of-revelation-introduction

[Kartographer]

But we should if need be use the sword to defend it and to defend those that can’t defend themselves.

[Carriage Hill]

I love my Barrett 82A1 .50 BMG!

[Hostage]

Then why did He say to grab the swords on their way to the garden?

The swords were taken as a warning against violence, purely for defensive purposes for the disciples, certainly not to protect Himself. The only persons that could threaten violence in this setting were the Temple guards.

[Jeff Chandler]

If someone is raping your wife, asking him to please stop is not as effective as a .45 caliber bullet traveling at his face at 1041 feet per second

Oh, now you've gone and done it. Pretty soon some Freeper is going to make the case for the .357 Magnum, then the 10mm guys will chime in, then the .40 faction will be heard, and eventually some goof will offer the opinion that a .22LR round is all you need.

This is going to be a long thread.

[Hostage]

> My favorte is this one, “I came not to bring peace but a sword”

The word ‘sword’ in this case is a metaphor for the ‘Word of God’.

“Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.” Ephesians 6:17

[varyouga]

Yep, losers that think they're smart and special by parroting feel-good slogans. Most of them are just doing it to get easy stupid chicks anyway…

You only have to open your eyes to see that violence is sometimes the ONLY answer.

This country and modern representative government only exists BECAUSE of violent uprising. Before the American Revolution, it was punishable to even question a monarch's absolute authority. For centuries, all of western civilization was controlled by a handful of inter-marrying families and absolute power was handed down by birth. Then America happened and everyone else soon followed.

If all the people in history followed the rules and were nonviolent, we would all still be subjects of an absolute monarchy with 99% living in ignorance and TRUE poverty. We would still likely be living in a pre-industrial world.

[Sudetenland]

LOL! "Roadhouse," a guilty pleasure. It's a cheesy, predictable, chick-flick, but I still like it.

Yeah, that motto will work too.

[JustSayNoToNannies]

I think He would have been comfortable with the John Wayne philosophy--"I won't be wronged. I won't be insulted. I won't be laid a-hand on. I don't do these things to other people, and I require the same from them." :)

"But I say to you not to resist evil: but if one strike thee on thy right cheek, turn to him also the other" - Matthew 5:39

[ctdonath2]

Were the “purse and scrip”, mentioned in the same breath as the “sword” reference, also a matter of interacting with Temple guards?
For that matter, where in that section are “Temple guards” referred to? I’m not seeing it.

That verse brackets one at the beginning of His ministry, where He tells them to give up those things and put their full faith and needs in him, right down to giving up money and bags to carry stuff. Then, here at the end of His ministry, He directs them to take those items back up again - and includes swords as a new item in the list.

Note too that a couple disciples already had swords in their immediate possession, so one may presume they were carrying ‘em about for a while and He was fully away of the fact (both in omniscient knowledge and in the mundane fact it’s hard to keep a >2-foot razor blade hidden for very long when you’re living in a hot climate and not carrying much else to conceal it). His response to “here, we have two” wasn’t “huh? what? WHY? get rid of ‘em already!” (nor was it “nice start, now all of you arm yourselves to the teeth”). Nor, when used for defense or thereafter, did He direct them to get rid of the things.

BTW: don’t forget He beat the snot out of those selling things in the Temple, and when asked about defending himself opined that he had a legion of angels at His command (implication was He wasn’t going to have them sung into compliance).

[Sudetenland]

I just knew that some humorless, self-appointed Bible-cop would show up to take issue with my comment. Get a life.