I love the theological debate im seeing among Christians around violence vs nonviolence and what Scripture tells us to do. With the rise in protests and riots in this country, I feel like I should throw in my two cents.

John 3:15 Jesus forcefully drove the moneychangers out of the Temple, overturning their tables

In Luke 22:35-36, Jesus told his followers if they lack a sword, they are to “sell their cloak and purchase one”

There is also an interesting theological debate around his arrest.

Peter drew his sword and cut off the ear of the high priest’s slave in John 18:10. Jesus responded to this violent act stating “All those who take the sword shall perish by the sword” Matt. 26:52. Most interpret Jesus speaking to Peter; but we don't really know.

This is one of the great contradictions in the Bible. This may be him advocating turning the other cheek like with the sermon on the mount. However, this is the same Jesus that advocated his disciples to arm themselves and acted in violence at seeing greed overtake the temple.

My conclusion is that it would be simplistic to argue that he was a pacifist. Violence can never be accepted as a necessary evil nor rejected as antithetical to Jesus as per pacifists. After all, the Day of Judgment has him at the center of a violent bloodbath.

Not all violence is the same. The violence employed by the marginalized to overcome oppression, is in reality self-defense to the oppressor’s institutionalized violence designed to sustain and maintain subjugation.

The conflict and disruption that comes with following Jesus, whose consequence at times is violence, illustrates the need for an ethical praxis for the disenfranchised. Im not sure how we will do that just yet but im working on it