Protecting Loved Ones

meshak

BANNED
Banned
He also advocated responding to evil by not stooping to the level of one's opponent.Jesus counsels resistance, but without violence

You are right.

Jesus' teachings are practical. We need to read what Jesus teaches with overall context.
 

Huckleberry

New member
The verse according to a new translation called the "Scholars Version" reads in Matthew: "Don't react violently against the one who is evil."
Even if that were so (I disagree and find that whole post to be a big ball of twisted definitions) it still doesn't correspond to the question of "responding to violence in kind" nor self-defense.
 

elohiym

Well-known member
Let's figure that out. Give me some examples.

Crack a history book open.

All of them? Really? News to me.

Did I say all of them? No.

We have to right (duty, I'd argue) to defend ourselves and the innocent, not just any old thing we decide we'd like to defend, like a nation or its politics.

Talk is cheap. What are you doing to defend the babies being aborted near you?

Explain why their opinion trumps anyone and everyone else's.

I haven't said their opinions trump other opinions, but we should consider why the Ante-Nicene period church was against military service and violence in self-defense.

Against lawful authorities. The rebuke was obviously (to anyone not having a vested interest their willing to twist scripture over anyway) a warning that lashing out at the guards like they could get you very dead. And rightly so, as they were performing the duty quite lawfully!

They were trying to arrest God. Okay? Just drop the lawful authority argument right there.

Word: macaira
Pronounce: makh'-ahee-rah
Strongs Number: G3162
Orig: probably feminine of a presumed derivative of 3163; a knife, i.e. dirk; figuratively, war, judicial punishment:--sword. G3163
Use: TDNT-4:524,572 Noun Feminine
Heb Strong: H1270 H2595 H2719 H3979
1) a large knife, used for killing animals and cutting up flesh
2) a small sword, as distinguished from a large sword
2a) curved sword, for a cutting stroke
2b) a straight sword, for thrusting

You are only proving what I claimed. What you need to do is prove he meant take two swords to stab their enemies instead of for cutting meat.
 

matt86

New member
So are you saying that according to the Gospel if we are attacked by someone or our family is attacked by someone right in front of us who is trying to kill or seriously injure them we are to just sit and watch/allow it to be done to us?
 

elohiym

Well-known member
So are you saying that according to the Gospel if we are attacked by someone or our family is attacked by someone right in front of us who is trying to kill or seriously injure them we are to just sit and watch/allow it to be done to us?

That's not what I'm saying to do.

Between do nothing and violent self-defense there are a multitude of options, especially for those being protected by God.

Do you disagree?
 

TomO

Get used to it.
Hall of Fame
So are you saying that according to the Gospel if we are attacked by someone or our family is attacked by someone right in front of us who is trying to kill or seriously injure them we are to just sit and watch/allow it to be done to us?

Well....You can sing "Kum-Bah-Yah" too if it makes you feel better. :idunno:
 

TomO

Get used to it.
Hall of Fame
I talked my way out of two muggings. :blabla:

(No surprise, huh?)

Actually, No, It's not :chuckle:...While I am a rather strong proponent of self-defense I am in full agreement that violence should always be a last resort and quite often is unnecessary if alternate approaches are considered.
 

matt86

New member
That's not what I'm saying to do.

Between do nothing and violent self-defense there are a multitude of options, especially for those being protected by God.

Do you disagree?

Somewhat. I believe that God guarantees nothing for you but salvation. He gives people on earth free will. If someone uses their free will to attack me or my family, I do not believe that I should be able to defend my family and myself with what means I need to. Usually asking them to just stop doesn't work.
 

elohiym

Well-known member
Somewhat. I believe that God guarantees nothing for you but salvation.

Consider these scriptures:

Isaiah 41:10 fear not, for I am with you; be not dismayed, for I am your God; I will strengthen you, I will help you, I will uphold you with my righteous right hand.

Isaiah 54:17 no weapon that is fashioned against you shall succeed, and you shall refute every tongue that rises against you in judgment. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD and their vindication from me, declares the LORD.”

Psalm 46:1 God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble.

Psalm 91:1-3 He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High will abide in the shadow of the Almighty. I will say to the LORD, “My refuge and my fortress, my God, in whom I trust.” For he will deliver you from the snare of the fowler and from the deadly pestilence.

Psalm 121:7-8 The LORD will keep you from all evil; he will keep your life. The LORD will keep your going out and your coming in from this time forth and forevermore.

He gives people on earth free will.

That doesn't mean He doesn't intervene. The Bible records Him intervening because He does, and He still does in this age. Have faith He will intervene and He will because it is written that he will, and the scriptures cannot be broken.

If someone uses their free will to attack me or my family ...

For the record, such a person has a will in bondage to sin--not free (Ro 8:7).

... I do not believe that I should [not] be able to defend my family and myself with what means I need to. Usually asking them to just stop doesn't work.

What you believe will determine what you do in that situation, just like the person attacking you and your family. If you fear for your life, you will fight for it ... or beg for it.
 

elohiym

Well-known member
And if you believe God's promises for protection I shared above, that will temper your response.
 

Huckleberry

New member
Crack a history book open.
It was your question, not mine. :idunno:

Did I say all of them? No.
Then whether some soldiers believe they're defending a political point it's all the more irrelevant to the question of self defense, innit? Maybe you shouldn't have offered that as an argument.

Talk is cheap. What are you doing to defend the babies being aborted near you?
I'm starting to catch on to how when you can't answer a point, you throw out some moral challenge that hasn't anything to do with anything.

I haven't said their opinions trump other opinions, but we should consider why the Ante-Nicene period church was against military service and violence in self-defense.
Why, in particular? I would think you'd be more than willing to explain why their opinion matters so much to you, other than their agreeing with you.

They were trying to arrest God. Okay? Just drop the lawful authority argument right there.
That was part of it, yes. Just as Jesus clearly suggested. He also made the very point I made. It's you trying to twist that into some other meaning, not me. Besides, you're the one who brought it up, back in post #27, so why are you telling me to drop it?

You are only proving what I claimed. What you need to do is prove he meant take two swords to stab their enemies instead of for cutting meat.
I think scripture speaks for itself. Considering I'm in agreement with the vast majority of those who've studied that scripture and your interpretation is in distinct minority, then it seems to me that it behooves you to prove that Jesus was telling them to sell their clothes to buy knives to scale fish with, or whatever. Most people are able to recognize that's ridiculous. Why would scripture spend so much emphasis on that? :AMR:
 
Top