Can a Christian defend himself OR others? (Defensive killing)

[real tree]

Grow up

 

[real tree]

Here again, the confusion comes in from a lack of understanding of Scripture and the purpose of the O.T. and the N.T. The O.T. cannot be used for justification of violence because it has been abrogated by the N.T. Jesus re-wrote His Last Will and Testament then He died forever sealing the document. In Matthew 5 Jesus states six times, "You have heard it said . . . but I say . . . ." With those words, He effectively abrogated the Old and instituted the New Testament. In John Jesus says, "The Law and the Prophets were until John(the Baptist)". and In Hebrews 8:7, it is stated that "If nothing had been wrong with the first there would have been no need for another." And, also in Hebrews 9:16-17 it is stated, "In the case of a will, it is necessary to establish the death of the one who made it, 17because a will does not take effect until the one who made it has died; it cannot be executed while he is still alive.…" Jesus changed His will then He died forever sealing His desires for His Church. The Old Testament, if used to justify your actions before the Judge of the Universe, will not be admitted and you will be thrown into outer darkness.

Now, regarding the defeat of Hitler and the position of Christians. God has instituted a worldly government for worldly people. Governments were designed to be administered by worldly people for worldly people, and not Christians. Nowhere in the New Testament are Christians commanded to get involved in the running of worldly affairs. This is a great mistake of the Church ever since Augustine linked arms with the Government in the 4th century. Ever since that time Christians, except for a small remnant, have colluded with the world to integrate Christian and civil rule. The Bible warns us this un-Holy mixture but Christians up to our own day have ignored Scripture. God allowed the world to handle the Hitler situation with Christian involvement but they could have done it without Christians defiling themselves and disobeying their Lord.

Christians who advocate for non-resistance of the evil person nowhere say that they should not intervene and help the person who is being violated in whatever regard. Many have done exactly that and have paid in like manner as Christ, with their lives. But, they do this without themselves doing harm. This is the correct manner in which the Church should conduct itself, and as the old saying goes, "The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church," and still is.

Where in the new testament does it say christians can not work in positions such as police military or government.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Grow.

"... There seems to be something particularly significant about Jesus' thirst, since once Jesus receives the wine he says, It is finished, and dies (v. 30). On one level this thirst is the only reference in this Gospel to Jesus' actual physical suffering on the cross. But the idea of thirst may also have spiritual significance. Earlier Jesus had said, "My food . . . is to do the will of him who sent me and to finish (teleioo) his work" (4:34). And when he was arrested he told Peter to put his sword away, saying, "Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?" (18:11). "Hunger and thirst become images for Jesus' desire to fulfill the Father's will to the end" (Schnackenburg 1982:283). Since the cup represents wrath and suffering (see comment on 18:11), Jesus' taking of this drink may suggest the completion of that experience, as the Lamb of God now takes away the sin of the world. The work he has come to do is now complete...."

Did the Creator , Messiah, King, defend Himself ? no.

 

[real tree]

Grow

WONDERFUL ! ..... oh, wait, not just for prophecy to be fulfilled - although that is perfectly sufficient why , it is enough for anything that it fulfill prophecy,

yet there is A GREATER REASON ![/QUOTE

WONDERFUL ! ..... oh, wait, not just for prophecy to be fulfilled - although that is perfectly sufficient why , it is enough for anything that it fulfill prophecy,

yet there is A GREATER REASON !

Grow up.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Psalm 52:8-9Christian Standard Bible (CSB)

8
But I am like a flourishing olive tree
in the house of God;
I trust in God’s faithful love forever and ever.
9
I will praise you forever for what you have done.
In the presence of your faithful people,
I will put my hope in your name, for it is good.

http://biblehub.com/matthew/18-3.htm
Matthew 18:3 And he said: "Truly I tell you, unless you change and ...
biblehub.com/matthew/18-3.htm - Cached - Similar
And he said: "Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. New Living Translation

 

[real tree]

There is no single verse that supports self defense as much as the WHOLE BIBLE supports self defense.
In the days of David a wolf, a thief, and a bear approach the herd of sheep that David is tending. The wolf grabs one by the neck and saunters off. The bear swats several of them on the head and gathers them in his mouth and walks away. The man comes up behind David with a knife and hatchet and raises it to kill the elect of God and take the whole herd of sheep from his Father. According to those who refer to the phrase that Jesus used toward Peter, David should do nothing and allow all three to do as they wish while he does nothing to stop them.

Two children approach a merry-go-round and one says, "May we play with you?" He waits for a reply. Meanwhile the other child rolls his eyes, stops the merry-go-round and grabs three of the children by the collar and throws them off. He then calls three of his friend thugs over and tells them to get on and starts the merry-go-round again.

Which is living according to Christ?

If a Christian man conducts his daily life in search of peaceful solutions, trying to be amicable with his fellow neighbors, looks for a win-win situation whenever he can, then he is fulfilling Jesus directions as given throughout the Bible? Likewise, if that same man carry's a weapon for protection, how is that different from David as a shepherd carrying a staff and sling with preselected rocks? How is that different than Jesus telling his disciples to sell some things and purchase swords?

It isn't different; but when we hear someone refer to Jesus telling Peter that 'he who lives by the sword will die by the sword' they are taking that notion of what Jesus said to Peter totally out of context. Carrying a gun or sword or knife for self-protection or protection from a thief or thug or your enemy that wishes to kill you or your kin is not what Jesus was referring to.

In this specific case Jesus had a mission and Peter was interfering with it in spite of Jesus having told them it was time. Consider this from Zechariah 11:12-13 “And I said unto them, If you think good, give me my hire; and if not, forbear. So they weighed for my hire thirty pieces of silver. And Jehovah said unto me, Cast it unto the potter, the goodly price that I was prized at by them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them unto the potter, in the house of Jehovah”.

Six centuries before Jesus was born Zechariah prophesies the Betrayal of Jesus. Furthermore, Zechariah details certain things that could not have been known six hundred years into the future. Such as the fact that silver was offered. (Gold and copper where the exchange metal of Zechariahs' day.) (Such as the fact that 30pcs of sliver was the price for a slave (so they weighed me for my hire) in the days of Jesus.) Each of these details can be identified and they are grand considerations of what is to come, but there is something that is not considered as frequently in the prophecy and that has to be fulfilled as well.

That is, All the men with Jesus had to be let go free when he was taken prisoner. So, when Peter drew his sword and cut off the servant's ear he was in danger of being arrested and if he were, then prophesy would be void. Instead, Jesus healed the ear and Peter was not arrested but Jesus, knowing he would no longer be around to coach Peter, also had to remind him something he had told him before about his rash anger.

When Jesus said to Peter, "Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword," that was not a commandment made up by Jesus at that moment for all of mankind to follow. Jesus was reminding Peter specifically as he had warned him before to not be one who lives daily with violence and power through brute strength. But to be one who seeks peace in peaceful ways.

What it means, of course, is that people who conquer through violence ultimately end up dying by violence. Or to put it more simply: what goes around comes around.
Live a peaceful life towards others and they will generally be peaceful to you. But that does not take away the responsibility of the soldier or policeman or husband/father for his family when it comes to those who bring violence to the table or who use brute force without seeking a peaceful coexistence.

If you are going to use the Bible as a tool to live by, then by all means study it. ALL of it.

 

[real tree]

WONDERFUL ! ..... oh, wait, not just for prophecy to be fulfilled - although that is perfectly sufficient why , it is enough for anything that it fulfill prophecy,

yet there is A GREATER REASON !

Thank you so much for your wisdom ole righteous one.

 

[real tree]

This keeps being used as an argument for self-defence, but I think it does not work. Please excuse the length of what follows but I want to be thorough.

The following text, from Luke 22, is often used to support the right to bear arms:

And He said to them, "But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one. 37"For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me, 'AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH TRANSGRESSORS'; for that which refers to Me has its fulfillment." 38They said, "Lord, look, here are two swords." And He said to them, "It is enough."

Obviously a “superficial” reading suggests that Jesus is advocating the “right” to carry a weapon. However, the fact that such a reading is deeply at odds with other things Jesus teaches should be a tip-off that things are not as they appear. And indeed, such is the case here. When this text is understood in broader context, we realize that Jesus is not making any kind of a case for the right to bear arms (swords or otherwise).

In order to arrive at the correct interpretation, we really need to step back and ask ourselves what Jesus’ larger purpose was in this dialogue. Note the connective “for” at the beginning of verse 37. It suggests that the material which follows is an explanation or amplification on the point just made – that the followers of Jesus are to sell their coats and buy a sword. So what is Jesus’ larger purpose?

It is that He been seen as a transgressor. Jesus is intentionally orchestrating things so that the Jewish authorities will have plausible grounds for arresting Him. Of course, appearing as part of an armed band would be precisely the ideal scenario to ensure Jesus’ arrest. Remember the “for” at the beginning of verse 37. If we are to be careful students of what Jesus is saying, we need to take seriously what Jesus says in verses 37 and 38 as qualifying and explaining his statement about buying a sword. We cannot simply gloss the text and conclude “Look, Jesus is making some kind of general statement about the right to self-defence with weapons”.

In fact, this very specific focus on the intent to be seen as a transgressor is powerfully sustained by Jesus’ statement that there is prophecy that He (Jesus) must be seen as a transgressor.

Remember the incident in the temple with Jesus overthrowing the tables of the moneychangers. This is not, as many people think, merely a repudiation of the sin of materialism. It is also a shrewd provocation on the part of Jesus. By creating a ruckus in the temple, He is forcing the hand of the Jewish leaders – they cannot allow such behaviour, Jesus must be arrested soon.

This is why, in the next verse, when the disciples say they have two swords, Jesus says “It is enough.” Obviously, if Jesus ever intended for the disciples to use the swords, two swords would not be nearly enough in any kind of armed action. But it’s enough to fulfill the prophecy by making Jesus appear to be participating in a violent revolutionary movement of some kind.

Unlike the “Jesus is supporting the right to bear arms” interpretation, note how the above interpretation makes sense of the entire account. If Jesus was really making some general statement about a “right to bear arms”, how exactly does that contribute to His being numbered with transgressors? And how does that make sense of the limit of two swords? Such a “right to bear arms” interpretation makes sense of neither. So it is almost certainly an incorrect interpretation of Jesus’ statement about buying a couple of swords.

Jesus was pretending to be a thug so hell be arrested, I dont think so.

 

[real tree]

Once again it is YOU who seem to be writing between the lines. Where does the bible say Jesus roll played to get arrested?

It doesn't, she is claiming that Jesus was pretending to be a criminal to get arrested which is ridiculous.

 

[real tree]

Present to OT prophecy.

Once again...Here's 11 commentaries...which one agree's with your commentary?

 

[real tree]

The apostles didn't need swords. Paul was in danger a lot but God delivered him. Paul gloried in distress, persecution, and necessities.

Wrong when Paul found out forty men were going to ambush him, he used over 470 Roman Soldiers to protect him, are you telling me that this was not a necessity. (Acts 23:12-23)

 

[W2L]

Wrong when Paul found out forty men were going to ambush him, he used over 470 Roman Soldiers to protect him, are you telling me that this was not a necessity. (Acts 23:12-23)

Paul didnt command soldiers. God delivered paul many times. You are twisting things quite a bit

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

27 This man was taken of the Jews, and should have been killed of them: then came I with an army, and rescued him, having understood that he was a Roman.

YHWH directed their steps and actions, as HE PLEASED.

Paul trusted YHWH.

 

[real tree]

Paul didnt command soldiers. God delivered paul many times. You are twisting things quite a bit

No you are, I didn't say he commanded anybody I said that he used them.

 

[W2L]

No you are, I didn't say he commanded anybody I said that he used them.

He didn't do anything, God did.

 

[real tree]

27 This man was taken of the Jews, and should have been killed of them: then came I with an army, and rescued him, having understood that he was a Roman.

YHWH directed their steps and actions, as HE PLEASED.

Paul trusted YHWH.

Wow Paul trusted God, I did not know that.

 

[real tree]

He didn't do anything, God did.

God did guide him.

 

[W2L]

God did guide him.

 

[real tree]

Okay your right I cant protect myself against rape, be headings, mutilation, stabbings or anything. I just should let it happen, thank you righteous one.

 

[W2L]

Okay your right I cant protect myself against rape, be headings, mutilation, stabbings or anything. I just should let it happen, thank you righteous one.

Do whatever you believe is right, according to the Word.