Jesus Christ Did Not Believe In Tolerance And Peace, But The Punishment Of Evil Doers And Evil People

By Theodore Shoebat

Jesus Christ did not believe in tolerance and peace, but the punishment of evil doers and evil people.
I never accepted the modern perception of Christianity, as a sort of peace loving religion. Christ Himself said:

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. –Matthew 10:34

Christ is “The LORD strong and mighty, the LORD mighty in battle.” (Psalm 24:8)

The Divine Law strikes, and the heretics scatter, like wolves without a head. Now is the hour of darkness, now is the hour of the savages and their leader the wicked one, “given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them” (Revelation 13:7)

But with the hour of persecution, comes the time for the shepherds who, worshiping the Eternal Shepherd, strikes the lion and the bear to rescue one sheep, and then slays the mighty hunter who defies “the armies of the living God” (1 Samuel 17:26).

The Two Swords, the Spiritual and the Temporal, lie in the hands of the Church, and yet they remaine unused, rusted and ignored by indifferent hearts. These are the Swords of the Church Militant, who rises, confronts, and destroys the bastions of darkness that advance against the Kingdom of Heaven.

When the Holy Sepulchre and holy places of pilgrimage were tainted and desecrated by the Muslim heathen, tell me, did Christians stay still, and say amongst themselves, “We must accept that Christian lands are now belong under the law of Islam. We as Christians should condemn what they are doing, but we must not wish harm on anyone or be militant, because we are under the New Covenant, and Christ never declared war on anyone”?


They engrained into their hearts the words of our Lord when He declared, “If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. (Matthew 16:24) They placed the holy sign of the most glorious Cross onto their chests, took up swords shaped as crosses, for as Christ defeated the devil with the cross so does His warriors defeat the sons of Belial with the Cross, and shook the earth with the ascending and roaring cries of, “God wills it!”

They struck the heathen, restored the holy churches and the sacred sites on which God Himself touched with heavenly hands, and purged the lands of pagan taint.

And who are these people today, who say that such actions are “not Christ-like” but ravenous hirelings who wish to profit off the treasures of Heaven, while telling the sheep to endure the sharp fangs of lingering wolves?

These same hirelings repeat, like an injured crow, that we are no longer under the Law, that we are under a New Covenant and not the Covenant under Moses, and that therefore this means that no longer should the Church wield the sword against her enemies, that no longer should government enact laws to punish those who preach evil ideologies and doctrines, and those partake in homosexuality and other deviancies.

People who say such things are enemies of the Church, and are the reason as to why the sodomites are advancing themselves over civilization; why the Muslims have infiltrated the government, and why other false and destructive ideologies have succeeded in gaining the license to murder unborn infants. It is because of Christians who allow freedom of religion and idea, that these ideologies have had the suffrage to influence the government.

Yet to these same conniving deceivers, whose mouths never cease in gushing forth heretical bile, Christians are the only people who should not influence law. If a Christian suggests that the death penalty for homosexuality would be beneficial, and in accordance to God’s Law, he is mocked and berated, and told that he has no “love”; that everyone should have the “free will” to do what they please and “God will judge them in the end”; and that he has not the “peace” of Christ.

Such people hate the Divine Law, and only wish to use words such as “grace” and “New Covenant” so that society continues “in sin, that grace may abound” (Romans 6:1).

The entire trend of using the term “New Covenant” in order to halt any discussion on political laws against evil doers, has been being used to enable the servants of the devil, and is extremely inadequate to the nature of Scripture and is contrary to the Spirit of Christianity.

In the modern worldview, ideas and beliefs should never be punished, but only actions that physically hurt others. And some so called Christians will use the “New Covenant” argument to justify such an opinion.

Where in the entire New Testament does it say that government laws must no longer punish homosexuals and other evil doers, but can only punish murderers, rapists, and any other crime where someone is physically injured? No where. But this is the type of political worldview that they subscribe to.

The Old Testament says that rapists and murderers are to be put to death, should we then throw away these laws because we are no longer under the Old Covenant? Only a madman would say yes. But under the logic of such deceivers, rape and murder should be given license because we are under the “New Covenant.”

Since when are homosexuals exempt from the Divine Law? Modern Christians only want to accept the laws that prohibit murder, rape and theft, because it suites today’s moral worldview, and they reject the laws against homosexuality and evil doctrines, because it is too intolerant for their present minds.

One does not have to be under the Old Covenant in order to enact laws, through legislation, against homosexuals, abortion rights advocates, and other wicked people.

Nebuchadnezzar was not under the Old Covenant, and yet he established a law proscribing blasphemy against God:

Any people, nation, or language that speaks anything against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego shall be torn limb from limb, and their houses laid in ruins, for there is no other god who is able to rescue in this way. (Daniel 3:29)

Nebuchadnezzar was not an Israelite, not under the Mosaic Law, and not under the nation of Israel. He was a Babylonian, and yet he made a law that punished blasphemy against God with the death penalty.
Artaxerxes was not under the Old Covenant, and yet he told the prophet Ezra,

And whosoever will not do the law of thy God, and the law of the king, let judgment be executed speedily upon, whether it be unto death, or to banishment, or to confiscation of goods, or to imprisonment. (Ezra 7:26)

Artaxerxes was not an Israelite, he was not under the Mosaic law and nor was he under the nation of Israel, he was a Persian sovereign and yet he decreed that the Law of God must be followed.
Job was not a Hebrew, he was an Arab not under the Old Covenant, and yet he believed infidelity of government punishment:

If mine heart have been deceived by a woman, or if I have laid wait at my neighbour’s door;
Then let my wife grind unto another, and let others bow down upon her.
For this is an heinous crime; yea, it is an iniquity to be punished by the judges. (Job 31:9-11)

Job also believed that the crime of worshipping the sun and moon also merited punishment:

If I beheld the sun when it shined, or the moon walking in brightness;
And my heart hath been secretly enticed, or my mouth hath kissed my hand:
This also were an iniquity to be punished by the judge: for I should have denied the God that is above. (Job 31:26-28)

Abraham was not under the Old Covenant, but under the Order of Melchizedek, and was very militant, executing a war on the conquering pagans who kidnapped Lot and all of Sodom, in order to liberate his nephew and his fellow man:

And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued them unto Dan.

And he divided himself against them, he and his servants, by night, and smote them, and pursued them unto Hobah, which is on the left hand of Damascus.

And he brought back all the goods, and also brought again his brother Lot, and his goods, and the women also, and the people.” (Genesis 14:15-16)

Did Melchizedek, the high priest, condemn Abraham and say “We do not go against flesh and blood”? No. Instead he praised God for the victory:

Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:
And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. (Genesis 14:19-20)

Not only was Abraham under the Order of Melchizedek, but Christ is of this same Order as well, as we read in the Psalms:

Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek. (Psalm 110:4)

Since Christ is of the Order of Melchizedek, the Church is of the same Order, and therefore Christians can launch and partake in Holy War.

St. Paul was under the New Covenant, and he firmly believed in the state slaying evildoers, saying:
“For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:

For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. (Romans 13:3-4)

St. Peter was under the New Covenant, and yet he did not say give freedom to homosexuals, but instead believe that rulers are sent by God “for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.” (1 Peter 2:14)

In the minds of St. Peter and St. Paul, evil definitely consisted of homosexuality, teaching ideologies for the killing of human life, and spreading false doctrine.

If America ever enacted laws punishing homosexuality, we would be completely in the right to do it. For the sword that shed the blood of an evildoer, is not of a murderous nature, but is of justice. St. Bernard, inspired by St. Paul’s words from Romans 13, praised the holy warriors of the Crusade when he wrote:

If he fights for a good cause, the outcome of the battle can never be evil… The knight of Christ, I say, may strike with confidence and succumb more confidently. When he strikes, he does service to Christ, and to himself when he succumbs. Nor does he bear the sword in vain. He is God’s minister in the punishment of evil doers and the praise of well doers. Surely, if he kills an evil doer, he is not a man-killer, but, if I may put it, an evil-doer. (St. Bernard, In Praise of A New Knighthood, chs. 1.2, 3.4, trans. M. Conrad Greenia, ellipses mine)

Tertullian distinguishes the just sword from the unjust sword,

As for the sword, which is drunk with the blood of the brigand’s victims, who would not banish it entirely from his house, much more from his bed-room, or from his pillow, from the presumption that he would be sure to dream of nothing but the apparitions of the souls which were pursuing and disquieting him for lying down with the blade which shed their own blood? …The sword also which has received honourable stains in war, and has been thus engaged in a better manslaughter, will secure its own praise by consecration.” (Tertullian, On the Resurrection of the Flesh, ch. xvi, ANF, vol. 3, ellipses mine)

The passage from Tertullian is more significant, because Tertullian lived before Constantine, and it is a common myth that before Constantine Christians were pacifist, and that it wasn’t until Constantine that Christians began to change their theology to fit for war. This passage proves that before Christians began conducting war, the theology of militancy and holy war was already being developed.

It is completely of the Spirit of Christianity to slay evil doers under the state, and it is completely of the Spirit of the Antichrist to believe in freedom for the wicked.





, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,