During His mortal life, Jesus did only two things I know of that could be construed as acts of violence: He cursed a fig tree, and cleansed the Temple.
I have heard Jesus' cleansing of the Temple used as an excuse to be belligerent or even violent. "See, Jesus did it too; I am allowed to get mad at others," seems to be the argument. "Nevertheless, he has sinned; but verily I say unto you, I, the Lord, forgive sins unto those who confess their sins before me and ask forgiveness, who have not sinned unto death. My disciples, in days of old, sought occasion against one another and forgave not one another in their hearts; and for this evil they were afflicted and sorely chastened. Wherefore, I say unto you, that ye ought to forgive one another; for he that forgiveth not his brother his trespasses standeth condemned before the Lord; for there remaineth in him the greater sin. I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men. And ye ought to say in your hearts—let God judge between me and thee, and reward thee according to thy deeds" (D&C 64:7-11).
It seems to me that the One most qualified to judge is slowest of all to judge. Why is it that the "greater sin" is in the one who will not forgive, rather than in the perpetrator of the first sin? Jesus gave a parable of a servant who owed his lord ten thousand talents, an astronomical sum. Initially, the lord was about to sell the servant and his family into slavery to at least cover part of the debt, but the servant begged for clemency, and the master simply wrote off his servant's debt. Yet the same servant found someone who owed him a dollar, and took him by the throat, demanding to have his debt paid. The master heard of this behavior in the recently-forgiven servant: "Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me: Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee? And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him. So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses" (Matt. 18:23-35).
I have heard Jesus' cleansing of the Temple used as an excuse to be belligerent or even violent. "See, Jesus did it too; I am allowed to get mad at others," seems to be the argument. "Nevertheless, he has sinned; but verily I say unto you, I, the Lord, forgive sins unto those who confess their sins before me and ask forgiveness, who have not sinned unto death. My disciples, in days of old, sought occasion against one another and forgave not one another in their hearts; and for this evil they were afflicted and sorely chastened. Wherefore, I say unto you, that ye ought to forgive one another; for he that forgiveth not his brother his trespasses standeth condemned before the Lord; for there remaineth in him the greater sin. I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men. And ye ought to say in your hearts—let God judge between me and thee, and reward thee according to thy deeds" (D&C 64:7-11).
It seems to me that the One most qualified to judge is slowest of all to judge. Why is it that the "greater sin" is in the one who will not forgive, rather than in the perpetrator of the first sin? Jesus gave a parable of a servant who owed his lord ten thousand talents, an astronomical sum. Initially, the lord was about to sell the servant and his family into slavery to at least cover part of the debt, but the servant begged for clemency, and the master simply wrote off his servant's debt. Yet the same servant found someone who owed him a dollar, and took him by the throat, demanding to have his debt paid. The master heard of this behavior in the recently-forgiven servant: "Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me: Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee? And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him. So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses" (Matt. 18:23-35).
No matter how large a debt anyone owes us, we can never repay the debt we owe to Jesus, who ransomed all of us, including the people we hate, in Gethsemane and on the cross. He paid a price more dear than anyone else, both for our sins, and the sins committed against us. To demand our dollar, or else, from those who owe us, when Jesus is eager and willing to forgive sins we commit on a regular basis, is the essence of hypocrisy. What does it mean to be in heaven? To be like God. What is a major part of being like God? Forgiving sin, all day long, every day. He has commanded all men, everywhere, to repent; it must follow that God is eager to FORGIVE all men, everywhere, including the people who annoy or harm us personally.
Even though Jesus had a blank check regarding the condemnation of anyone He met, He did not come into the Temple like an enraged bull, blind and senseless in its distribution of pain and damage: "...and Jesus went up to Jerusalem, And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting: And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the tables; And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise. And his disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up" (John 2:13-17).
Notice that Jesus took time to deliberately braid a whip; He was in control of Himself. He drove the men and cattle out, but instructed those who had birds in cages to carry them away; knocking over cages could injure the animals.
No one condemned Jesus for doing this, though they were perturbed. Rather, they wanted to see His credentials. "Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things? Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up" (John 2:18-19). In other words, "Kill me, and I will be resurrected in three days." I have never heard of anyone else saying something like that when asked why they became angry or administered some form of correction or retribution.
When are we permitted to correct others? D&C 121:43 makes it clear when we are allowed to tell someone what to do: "...when moved upon by the Holy Ghost..." There is no other time when correcting others is approved, at least none I am aware of in scripture. And we are also required to show forth an increase of love after the reproval, that the one receiving reproof will know "...that thy faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death" (v. 44). Jesus invited his critics to murder Him after He drove the merchandisers out of the Temple, and they did. He also performed the Atonement in the process, which made it possible for these critics to repent and be forgiven. His faithfulness and love for them was literally stronger than the cords of death.
Is this kind of command performance useful in justifying our petty criticism? Does it bear the slightest resemblance to the vitriol, mockery, and vilifying that define talk radio? Does it make my grudges respectable instead of infantile?
Righteous men become angry in the Book of Mormon, but I believe their wrath is only justified because it was good and appropriate for them to imprison or take the lives of the objects of their hate. "...there is nothing that the Lord thy God shall take in his heart to do but what he will do it (Abraham 3:17). This valuable insight into God's nature shaves enormous amounts of nonsense and waste off from our emotional lives and internal workings. God does not entertain desires in His heart unless He plans to ACT on them. I believe this separates much anger from the so-called "righteous wrath" of Moroni and various other warriors in the Book of Mormon. Anger is the desire to do harm; they were justified in this desire toward certain men. Even then, in the midst of war, Moroni will always avoid harming his enemies when he can help it.
Do these virtues characterize political discourse today?
The Book of Mormon says that "fools mock," (Ether 12:26), yet Elijah mocks the priests of Baal (1Kings 18:27). Is it good to mock, or bad? The men Elijah mocked apparently deserved death, because Elijah ordered the people to kill them all. We hear Elijah grieving to the Lord: "...the children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant, thrown down thine altars, and slain thy prophets with the sword; and I, even I only, am left; and they seek my life, to take it away" (1Kings 19:10). "Fools mock, but they shall mourn..." is the rest of the scripture. Elijah was no fool, but he mourned afterward anyway. It seems that a let-down, a kind of depression after the buzz, may be part of the price of light-mindedness and loud laughter (something I experienced last night; it also shows up in a talk by President Hinckley. It begins on a very humorous note, yet descends into painful descriptions of what people went through because of their memberships in the Church. In any case, what behavior do we expect in heaven? Mockery? Not a bit, and if we insist on keeping it in our repertoire, we may find ourselves locked outside the door, mourning with the other foolish virgins.
I believe the cleansing of the Temple could only have been performed by Jesus, because He was the only one with the credentials of being able to resurrect Himself. He needed a way to get the elders of the Jews to conspire against him, to kill him, and he kicked the biggest hornets' nest of all by interfering with the corrupted economics of Herod's Temple. We are each, individually, a Temple, and Jesus will drive the animals and corruption out of our natures, if we let Him. Animals DID belong in the Temple, but only in an orderly fashion, according to law. Jesus forcefully reminded everyone of this fact. (They were all mutually tolerating the inappropriate arrangement; I wonder how many friendships are based on the mutual acceptance of bad behavior.) We bridle our passions, mastering them, letting them serve us, rather than hoping to be rid of our physical bodies one day. I believe this is the greater, symbolic meaning behind this controversial act.
Rather than look to exceptions to justify our bad behavior and negative tendencies, let us embrace the Lord's definition of being "perfect, even as [our] Father which is in heaven is perfect" (Matt. 5:48). The context for that statement is the idea of loving our enemies. The natural man is an enemy to God (Mosiah 3:19), and yet God loves His enemies. If we cannot muster the same maturity and forgive the petty infractions against us, we will not be fit to enter His presence. There are so many scriptures stating forgiveness of others as a prerequisite for our own forgiveness that it is pointless to catalog them. Many, if not most, came straight from Jesus, who exemplified love, compassion, kindness, forbearance, patience, and long suffering, rather than hostility or compulsion.
