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

[S.O.J.I.A.]

But I say to you, do not resist an evil person

we need to read this in light of the verse right before it as well as the one after it:

"you heard that it was said" an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth"

"but whoever slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also"

these verses do not speak on the subject of self-defense. taking someone's eye or tooth because of what they did to yours is not an act of self-defense. slapping someone because they slapped you first is not an act of self-defense. these would be acts of retaliation, retribution, or vengeance.

this passage in matthew 5 as well as the parallel passage in luke 6 do not condemn self-defense at all but rather they speak against the act of trying to get even with someone for doing something bad to you.

 

[expos4ever]

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

Two points:

1. No matter who wrote the commentary, the facts are undeniable: Jesus explains that the sword instruction was given to fulfill a prophecy that Jesus would be seen as a transgressor. No fancy footwork can change this.

2. You frequently argue for a literal reading of Genesis 1 even though almost all scholars reject such a position. So please explain: why are you suddenly chummy with commentaries when that kind of approach clearly would work against you in the Genesis 1 issue?

 

[-57]

Jesus explains that the sword instruction was given to fulfill a prophecy that Jesus would be seen as a transgressor.

Present to OT prophecy.

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

 

[expos4ever]

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

I am sure lurkers and others are interested in how you explain that Jesus connects the sword instruction to a particular prophecy about Jesus being seen as a transgressor.

So please, forget sending us to commentaries; explain this connection to fulfilled prophecy in your own words.

 

[expos4ever]

Present to OT prophecy.

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

I suggest you don't want to pursue this strategy. The more you evade the clear words of Jesus, the more your position will seem suspicious to others.

You are trying to get out of your difficult position by sending me off to read commentaries. Well, since a responsible poster would not direct others to commentaries he has not even read, surely you can explain in your own words how we are not supposed to take Jesus at His word when He tells us exactly why the sword instruction is given.

 

[381465]

How do you know what they're trying to do or what they have or have not read?

I'm not suspicious of the poster or the motives.

If someone doesn't want to defend thselves or others...wonderful. if someone does want to defend themselves or othets...wonderful.

Why is this topic so bothersome to some folks?

 

[expos4ever]

Why is this topic so bothersome to some folks?

It's the lack of honesty, frankly. Whether or not Jesus approved of self-defence, Luke 22 does not make the case. Jesus cannot be misunderstood: the sword instruction is related to fulfilling a prophecy, not self-defence.

Yet people intentionally ignore our Lord and effectively erase His words from their Bible.

How is this not dishonest?

 

[-57]

I suggest you don't want to pursue this strategy. The more you evade the clear words of Jesus, the more your position will seem suspicious to others.

You are trying to get out of your difficult position by sending me off to read commentaries. Well, since a responsible poster would not direct others to commentaries he has not even read, surely you can explain in your own words how we are not supposed to take Jesus at His word when He tells us exactly why the sword instruction is given.

You're presenting your very own commentary...and not supporting it. Whan asked to see the original prophecy that was fulfilled...you seem to come up short.

 

[-57]

It's the lack of honesty, frankly. Whether or not Jesus approved of self-defence, Luke 22 does not make the case. Jesus cannot be misunderstood: the sword instruction is related to fulfilling a prophecy, not self-defence.

Yet people intentionally ignore our Lord and effectively erase His words from their Bible.

How is this not dishonest?

It's not that difficult. What jesus was saying was that he would be numbered with the transgressors...quoted Isaiah. In Isaiah we are told Jesus would be led like a sheep to slaughter..not put up a fight.
Jesus told them to but a sword...for their defense and not to defend Him with the sword on the events leading up yo the crucifixion.

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

 

[381465]

Others have referenced scripture in opposition to what you believe. No one here called anyone a liar...except you.
And you didn't even throw in the obligatory "in Christ" of "in love".

If you are so passionate and convicted...don't defend yourself.

2 camps, 2 opinions, 2 extrapolations...move on.

 

[expos4ever]

How do you know what they're trying to do or what they have or have not read?

If they have read the commentaries then they should be able to answer the challenge I have presented in their own words.

 

[expos4ever]

Others have referenced scripture in opposition to what you believe. No one here called anyone a liar...except you.

You seem to think it's inappropriate to call people on lies. I stand by the claim; by any reasonable standard -57 is lying. He knows what the text says, yet won't deal with it and sends me off on a wild goose chase.

All I ask for is an explanation. Perhaps you can give it. If Jesus really is teaching us about self defense, why does He explain his instruction as fulfillment of a prophecy about Him being numbered with transgressors.

Good luck, you have a challenging task.

 

[expos4ever]

It's not that difficult. What jesus was saying was that he would be numbered with the transgressors...quoted Isaiah. In Isaiah we are told Jesus would be led like a sheep to slaughter..not put up a fight.
Jesus told them to but a sword...for their defense and not to defend Him with the sword on the events leading up yo the crucifixion.

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

Nice footwork. The fact that Isaiah says Jesus would not put up a fight does not address the specific prophecy that Jesus would be seen as a transgressor. And Jesus explains His instruction to get the sword by appealing to that particular prophecy.

You almost certainly know this, so your honesty remains in doubt. And you are bearing false witnesdwhen you insist He told them to get the sword for self-defence. He said nothing of the sort. You inferred it with no textual justification.

About the commentaries. If you have read them, you can explain how they deal with the challenge I have posed on your own words.

 

[section9+1]

So having a sword made Jesus a transgressor? Why? What connection between sword and transgression?

 

[381465]

I always took Jesus referencing being numbered with the transgressors as the Jewish political leadership labeling and convicting him of blasphemy and the fact that he was crucified with 2 criminals and was treated as one.
I do not take the reference to disciples being told to obtain swords making Jesus a criminal/transgressor.

 

[expos4ever]

So having a sword made Jesus a transgressor? Why? What connection between sword and transgression?

If Jesus is seen in the company of armed men, people will infer that He is the leader of a gang of thugs. That casts Jesus in the role of one who "transgresses" against public peace and good order.

 

[expos4ever]

I always took Jesus referencing being numbered with the transgressors as the Jewish political leadership labeling and convicting him of blasphemy and the fact that he was crucified with 2 criminals and was treated as one.

Fair point, I never denied this.

But the fact remains: Jesus invokes the "numbered among transgressors" in specific relation to the instruction to get swords.

No one can deny this - it is plain as the nose on one's face

I do not take the reference to disciples being told to obtain swords making Jesus a criminal/transgressor.

Well, then, you are not taking Jesus at His word. Here is the text yet again:

...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'

 

[expos4ever]

You're presenting your very own commentary...and not supporting it.

Obfuscation - I am presenting Jesus' own words. It is you who has to deflect by sending me off to read 11 commentaries. I simply post Jesus' own words.

Whan asked to see the original prophecy that was fulfilled...you seem to come up short.

Not sure where I was asked this. I have agreed that the "numbered with transgressors" bit is also fulfilled at the cross. But that doesn't change the fact that Jesus said the "buy a sword" instruction fulfills the same prophecy.

Let's be clear: You directly deny the words of Jesus if, repeat if, you reject Jesus' clear claim that the "get a sword" instruction functions as fulfillment of the "be numbered with transgressors" prophecy.

 

[section9+1]

Having swords hardly made anyone a thug back then. That's a reach to assume that. If you traveled around the country you'd better have some swords. There was no 911 or police to protect you. You protected yourself. Swords were the difference between prudent and stupid. Prudent lived and stupid died.

 

[381465]

So Jesus was to be arrested for being with those having swords, because of the swords, but those in possession of the swords are not arrested for actually having swords?