Simply because he preached the doctrine: Thou shalt not resist evil with evil.

This Tolstoi condemned on the ground that we are not to resist evil.

A Quaker would resist evil and violence only by enlightening them.

The legitimate use of this word is to resist evil.

There are ways to resist evil without resorting to bloodshed.

Some have little power to do good, and have likewise little strength to resist evil.

One cannot resist evil, but one can resist good.

If you would resist evil, you cannot just stand idly by and watch its dominion spread.

But I say, Do not resist evil.

However, in their refusal to participate directly in such evil as war, even non-resistants do actually resist evil.

We are not only to not resist evil outwardly, but to have no resisting feeling in our hearts.

Then Lucien fallen into the clutches of poverty would not have the force of character to resist evil?

Yet nothing prevents clemency and meekness from having a certain restricted excellence among the virtues which resist evil inclinations.

Not to resist evil, etc.

But it is allowed to resist evil, at least, as far as staying out of its touch is resistance.

He is strong to do good, strong to resist evil, and strong to bear up under difficulty and misfortune.