Self Defense~Is it sin?

[Lyndie]

IMO, God is going to have alot more to say to you on judgement day because you failed to protect you wife, children etc. than if you did protect them.

[Butch5]

Was David trusting God when he slew Goliath using a sling? Was Gideon trusting God when he used lamps? Was Joshua trusting God when he used shouts to bring down the walls at Jericho?

I think it interesting that with Shadrach, Meschach and Abednigo the reason they were to be killed was they were worshiping the Lord and refusing to bow the knee. Such was not the case with David, or the Midianites, or Jericho.

If God tells us to use a sling, or a lamp, or a shout, then we are trusting the Lord when we do so.

Mark,

The key here is that the Law was given to the Jewish people for the establishment of a physical nation. Jesus' kingdom is not now a physical kingdom. The fact that the only examples that can be presented come from the OT speaks volumes. The Law under which David and the others operated was given to the Jewish nation. It wasn't given to all of mankind. Therefore if Christians want to argue from the OT that they can use self defense are obligated to become Proselytes to Judaism. If they choose to do that then they are seeking their righteousness from the Law of Moses. Paul had something to say about that.

Galatians 5:4(KJV)
4Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

Paul also made it clear that the Law that allowed those men to do that has come to an end.

[divaD]

Yet many of the same Christians say if a drug addict attacks it's Ok to take him out because you're not praching the Gospel.

I don't know about taking him out. I wouldn't go that far myself, unless there was no choice in the matter. If I had this person already subdued, I wouldn't continue going to town on him, so to speak. So I would definitely disagree with that idea. But I'm just saying, if I were being attacked and my life was in danger, then why wouldn't I try to defend myself if there is no cause involved, such as was with Stephen? And if I did happen to come out on top, why continue the battle? No need to beat someone if they're already down. is there?

[-SEEKING-]

Where's the pesky dead horse image when you need it?

[Brother Mark]

Mark,

The key here is that the Law was given to the Jewish people for the establishment of a physical nation. Jesus' kingdom is not now a physical kingdom. The fact that the only examples that can be presented come from the OT speaks volumes. The Law under which David and the others operated was given to the Jewish nation. It wasn't given to all of mankind. Therefore if Christians want to argue from the OT that they can use self defense are obligated to become Proselytes to Judaism. If they choose to do that then they are seeking their righteousness from the Law of Moses. Paul had something to say about that.

Galatians 5:4(KJV)
4Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

Paul also made it clear that the Law that allowed those men to do that has come to an end.

Abraham did the same thing before the law with Sodom concerning Lot and his sons. Melchizedek (a type of Christ) Blessed Abram and stated that God had delivered him from his enemies even though Abram used the sword. And all of this was pre-law.

[Butch5]

Ah yes, the good old approach of asking if I've actually read my Bible. Nice one. It really helps make a point.

Lots of Christians talk lots of twaddle. I'm sure that isn't really a surprise to anyone. I probably talk twaddle every once in a while too.

Let's cut to the chase and get direct here. Does my vow, taken before God and before man, to protect my wife bind me or not? If it does, what methods would you approve of me using if I am ever called upon to protect her from violence? If it does not, what other parts of my marriage vows can I wriggle out of if they prove inconvenient?

Yes, let's cut to chase. Your vows, are they vows that God has approve of and given? If your vow violates God's word, no it doesn't bind you. However, I see don't God accepting a vow to violate His law.

Can't you guys see that all you can bring to the table are these arbitrary arguments? Jesus is that prophet and Peter said,


Acts 3:20-23(KJV)
20And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:
21Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.
22For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. 23And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.

That prophet said, do not resist evil.

[Fenris]

That prophet said, do not resist evil.

And the other prophet said it's ok to kill a burglar.

Decision, decisions...

[Butch5]

Abraham did the same thing before the law with Sodom concerning Lot and his sons. Melchizedek (a type of Christ) Blessed Abram and stated that God had delivered him from his enemies even though Abram used the sword. And all of this was pre-law.

Yes, and all of that came to an end.

[t1mlew1s]

But what happened to him was an entirely different concept than what has been discussed in this thread, isn't it? He died for a cause, didn't he? That is way different than a senseless attack on someone or their loved ones by drug addicts, armed robbers, etc. I seriously doubt they would be attacking you for the same reasons Stephen was attacked. Don't we have to keep these things in context?

I don't thing I am taking anything out of context. My apologies if it is perceived so. I merely wanted to convey that Stephan had no concern for his mortal life because he was focused on what is to come after. I wouldn't want to die for any reason, but if I had to, I would like to know it was as Stephan did. That's all I meant by my statement about Stephan. The rest of my statement is within the context of this discussion, I believe.

[Butch5]

I don't know about taking him out. I wouldn't go that far myself, unless there was no choice in the matter. If I had this person already subdued, I wouldn't continue going to town on him, so to speak. So I would definitely disagree with that idea. But I'm just saying, if I were being attacked and my life was in danger, then why wouldn't I try to defend myself if there is no cause involved, such as was with Stephen? And if I did happen to come out on top, why continue the battle? No need to beat someone if they're already down. is there?

It's the motive, even if no one was there to see if you resisted evil or not, God still sees your intent.

There was no one there with Abraham and Isaac, it was just between Abraham and God. Abraham could have said, I believe you God we don't really have to do this. However, God wanted to see if Abraham was serious about following Him or not. What was God's response when Abraham was about to sacrifice Isaac? God stopped him and said,

Genesis 22:11-12(KJV)
11And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I.
12And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.

If we're in a life and death situation it may very well be that God wants to see if we'll obey as Abraham did.

[rejoice44]

Because when Fenris showed verses from the first testament that justified a man defending his property with force, you said this:



The law said it was OK to use force (i.e. the OT says it's ok). If it agrees with the NT about such things, then shouldn't the NT also be OK with force? Or is it possible they are not in agreement?

Ex 22:2

2 " If the thief is caught while breaking in and is struck so that he dies, there will be no bloodguiltiness on his account.
NASU

Jesus kept the law. It is just that there is a better way. In regards to the adulterous woman, Jesus said to stone her.

[Fenris]

If we're in a life and death situation it may very well be that God wants to see if we'll obey as Abraham did.

Um, Abraham was operating under direct instructions, personally, from God. No one today can say that. (Well, they can, but they end up in the rubber room)

[Butch5]

Um, Abraham was operating under direct instructions, personally, from God. No one today can say that. (Well, they can, but they end up in the rubber room)

Romans 15:1-4(KJV)
1We then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves.
2Let every one of us please his neighbour for his good to edification.
3For even Christ pleased not himself; but, as it is written, The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me.
4For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.


John 20:29(KJV)
29Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

[Fenris]

4For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning

Everything is for our learning?

OK.

Does that mean that we should all take our kids up on an altar and try to sacrifice them? Wait for God to tell us no?

[t1mlew1s]

Everything is for our learning?

OK.

Does that mean that we should all take our kids up on an altar and try to sacrifice them? Wait for God to tell us no?

Of course not, the rest of that verse states "that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope."

Your post seems a tad antagonistic.