Vox Day pointed this out semi-recently, and I have to admit, it caught me off guard.
Most people are familiar with the point in the New Testament where Christ is being arrested, and Peter responds by pulling out his sword and slicing off the ear of the high priest's slave. Jesus immediately rebukes him, which most people typically take as a rebuke against violence in general from Christ.
Vox's view seems to be that it was a specific criticism of violence in that situation, since Christ had to be crucified. His point: if Christ objected to violence, period... then why was Peter carrying a sword to begin with? Apparently Christ had no objections to that.
I am sure someone can fire back with some kind, any kind of answer to this. But I admit, that one struck me as interesting.