Would I call the police... 

Throughout the Bible, God is constantly telling us not to rule over each other.  Starting in the Old Testament, Samuel warned against the evils of a Kingdom, and the prophets disapproved of domination.  In the New Testament, Jesus says we only have one master, and we are all brothers, we shouldn't call anyone father, because we have only one father in heaven, and we shouldn't call anyone teacher, because we have only one teacher and that is Christ (Matthew 23).

Jesus didn't come to rule over us, he came to serve us.  Also, I think something can be said of the early church.  Their is no history of anyone serving in the government, or the military until around 170.  The early church fathers were against it because they didn't think the way Jesus taught was to rule over each other.  Jesus said the greatest among you will serve you.

Cops have over us.  They are appointed, by the government, to uphold the law, using force if necessary.  People listen to cops because of their gun.

As a pacifist, we should find ways to keep violence from happening, and by stopping the cycle of violence.  Calling the cops could stop the cycle of violence, but it could also intensify it.  Say the cop gets a little to rough and beats the perpetrator.  The perp goes to jail, obviously upset he was beat by the cops, and decides to extract vengeance on the cop that beat him.  I can't be comfortable with that.

I couldn't ever call on someone to protect me who uses violence.  I try my hardest to love my enemy, and those who wrong me.  I don't think I could use violence on someone while still loving them, so no...  I wouldn't call the police.

I always wondered about predestination.  Are we completely autonomous of God, or does God sit up in heaven pulling strings in our life.  Neither one sounds too appetizing to me, honestly.  I don't really understand how we have free will, but while maintaining that freedom, God can still intercede.  In Romans it says When we don't know what to pray, the Spirit will intercede for us. 

God obviously intercedes on our behalf.  Although later, in Romans, it says who God foreknew, he also predestined.  So maybe he not only interceds, he pulls the strings in my life.  In my limited understanding of predestination, it means that basically God decides the eternal destination of all, and God decides the future actions of believers to fit into his will.  Do Calvinists believe in Christian perfection, because sin isn't in God's will.  I know I have sinned, so did God not choose me. 

In Greek the word for predestination is proorizo.  The word is actually a coumpound word coming from pro and horizo.  Pro means before, and horizo means to mark off boundaries, or determine.  So, maybe the word the Bible uses for predestination doesn't necessarily mean God decides who is going to heaven or hell, but those he foreknew he marked.  As in, we are marked by the Holy Spirit.  The only thing that makes a Christian different from a non-Christian is the Holy Spirit.

Now, I don't have any good evidence to support any of this, but maybe the verse is just talking about how God gives us the holy spirit.  Later in the passage, in Romans 8, it says we were predestined to be conformed to the likeness of His Son. 

What is it that guides us, so we can be like His Son, The Holy Spirit.  So how are we to be conformed to be in the likeness of Jesu, His Son?  Guidance from the Holy Spirit.

I think it is the desire for everone to be reconcilled to Him, but I don't think I am predestined, and all my actions are God's Will.  That would set me up to have zero accountability.  That's dangerous.

Do you believe in predestination?

I use the terms Pacifist and Non-violent interchangeably, when in fact, I probably shouldn't.  I am non-violent, but I use the term Pacifist, because it is a lot less awkward sounding saying I am a Pacifist then saying I am non-violent.

To me, Pacifism is a stance against war, and violence.  It doesn't really offer an alternative to violence.  Whereas non-violence does.  I think everyone can agree that when faced with evil, the worst thing to do is nothing. 

Walter Wink said Their are three general responses to evil; the first is vioent opposition, the second is total passivity, and the third is militant non-vioence, which was articulated by Jesus.

Now, this third way, non-violence doesn't mean to do nothing, or to use violence.  It means we shouldn't retaliate evil for evil, and we should resist evil.  The word for resisting evil, is antistenai, and it means more than to just stand against evil, or to resist evil, it means to revolt, rebel, or engage in insurrection.

I have used the two terms, pacifism, and non-violence, interchangeably, but I really shouldn't.  When I tell someone I am a pacifist, they automatically think I would just sit back and watch injustice.  I couldn't, and would never do that. 

JMALLORY put up a great post about Christian Pacifism.  I wrote a very incomprehensive argument to some using Wesley's Quadrilateral to defend it.  Here it is.

According to Wesley's Quadrilateral, there are four different sources when you come to a theological conclusion; scripture, tradition, reason, and experience. 

Scripture: At the heart of of peacemaking is God's reconciling love.  As a Christian, we believe that God has reconciled us to him through Jesus.  So as a Christian we are called to reconcile others to God.(2 Corinthians 5:18)  Scripture tells us to resist the world, but we are often times leading the war cries of the world.  What if we lived strictly by the sermon on the mount?  It sums up all of his teachings, why don't we just follow it.  It states "blessed are the peacemakers."  Where, in the NT, does it condone redemptive violence, or violence in general?  I know Stephen didn't, he asked for forgiveness of those who did him wrong, when he was killed.

Tradition:  Tertullian said "When Christ disarmed Peter, he disarmed all Christians," and Clement of Alexandria said "Above all, Christians are not allowed to correct with violence."  Once Christianity became the state religion, a theology of unity spread.  We were now one Empire, of one Faith, and one Emperor.  This led to terrible things in our Christian History, like the Crusades, and the Inquisitions.  During the crusades we took the cross and the sword and conquered in Jesus' name.  We conquered the Jews, Muslims, and even some Eastern Orthodox Christians as well.  How would it ever be in God's will for a Christian to kill another Christian.  There are about 600,000 Christians in Iraq.  A Christian in the army would have killed an Iraqi Christian at some point.  There has been a rich history of peacemaking through the years; including the Quakers, Methodists, Franciscans, etc...  Current Christian Tradition doesn't point to pacifism, or peacemaking, but the first Church most certainly did.

Reason: How does making war to make peace make any sense?  We are taught when someone does something wrong to us, or even threatens to do wrong to us, we must redeem ourselves, or our country.  We have to punish others for their transgressions.  That doesn't make sense, how are we supposed to punish someone when scripture tells us to keep no record of wrongs?  How are we supposed to love someone and still kill them?  If someone could answer that for me well, then I might think again about being a pacifist.  The only reasonable explanation is you can't.  The only way to truly love someone, or a group of people, as Christ did, is to forgive, as Christ would.

Experience: Your experience is truly your own.  Successful nonviolence was experienced by Gandhi, and Martin Luther King Jr, and in South Africa to end apartheid.  It does work, but that's not why were are called to be nonviolent.  I have never been in a potential fight, where I had to be a pacifist, or nonviolent, but I have been involved in everyday life.  I know when I am cursed, to bless, when I am persecuted, to endure it, and when I am slandered, to answer kindly, not because it will evoke a better response, but because that is what God has called us to do.