Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Sorry but my standards are higher than the definition of murder provided by the US gov't. God's standards for believers are the standards of Christ and I sure don't see him going around killing everyone that brought harm to him. Nor can I read anywhere that the apostles reacted this way either, even though they were much abused.Many scriptures are taken out of context, yours below included.
Killing someone in defense of your life or the life of another isn't murder.
The 'enemies' that were to be forgiven was the Roman government and it's abuse of Jewish slaves. An 'eye for an eye' was never used by the Jews against the Romans, therefor this is a non-sequitor and an out of context statement.
I do not understand the 'Christian' position that holds that life is all important. A postition that seems to say that the end of this life is the end of everything.
There are scriptures that make it rather clear that harming innocent children has consequences far worse than mere death. E.g. "It would be better for him to never have been born".
If one kills someone about to Rape a child it would seem that they are actually doing a favor to the would be rapist. They are keeping him ut os that level of damnation.
Sorry but my standards are higher than the definition of murder provided by the US gov't. God's standards for believers are the standards of Christ and I sure don't see him going around killing everyone that brought harm to him. Nor can I read anywhere that the apostles reacted this way either, even though they were much abused.
Jesus came riding on a donkey in that day. When he returns he will be astride a war horse.
Jesus came riding on a donkey in that day. When he returns he will be astride a war horse.
Like I said, it is God's place to give life and God's place to take away - not ours.
He has the right to interrupt your life by striking you dead - I don't.
Jesus killed no one while he was a human on this earth, neither did his apostles.
Like I said, it is God's place to give life and God's place to take away - not ours.
He has the right to interrupt your life by striking you dead - I don't.
Jesus killed no one while he was a human on this earth, neither did his apostles.
Judas had a bit of blood on his hands.
Thank you all for responding to my questions.
To me, that view is simply not compatible with Christ's teachings of love and forgiveness. If killing is demanded of us, why are more of us not killing? It seems that even non-Christians who believe that life begins at conception and that killing to save innocents is "right" or "good" should be out killing. Could it be that we all know (whether we admit it or not) that we are not supposed to take a life in order to save lives?
Yep, and then he killed himself. Judas is not one of the 12 any longer either.Judas had a bit of blood on his hands.
Like I said, it is God's place to give life and God's place to take away - not ours.
He has the right to interrupt your life by striking you dead - I don't.
Jesus killed no one while he was a human on this earth, neither did his apostles.
Jesus and the disciples didn't say or teach a lot of things, among these missing teachings is deadly force for self-defense.
If one wants to extract a spiritual principle from Jesus teachings in regard to self defense you need to look no farther than the 'goodman' who did not allow his house to be broken up. House meaning all of his possessions including his family.
I do not understand the 'Christian' position that holds that life is all important. A postition that seems to say that the end of this life is the end of everything.
There are scriptures that make it rather clear that harming innocent children has consequences far worse than mere death. E.g. "It would be better for him to never have been born".
If one kills someone about to Rape a child it would seem that they are actually doing a favor to the would be rapist. They are keeping him ut os that level of damnation.
If you allow it to continue, it is as if participating, the guilt is unconscionable. Someone who would not intervene shames humanity.I do not believe that a person is held accountable for the actions that his actions allow. Meaning if I kill a rapist who is in the process of raping, he is already a rapist, and me stopping the act did not stop the sin. It was already committed. If I kill him, I am responsible for ending his opportunity to be saved (if he is not already and I am only guessing that he is not), and for that, I am responsible. If I do not kill him and if he commits the rape, I am not responsible for the rape, because I did not commit it. What is worse the rape of an innocent or the loss of a soul?
But He did hold himself accountable. Jesus bore the full weight of sin when he was crucified. That some choose to reject the gift of salvation does not change the fact that Jesus carried the debt. The wages of sin is always death. Jesus truly died on the cross, not mostly dead or partly dead, full dead. Read the Nicene Creed sometime, it is a basic statement of Christian faith.I cannot imagine God holding us accountable in situations in which He does not hold Himself accountable.
I agree we could simply stop the attacker by shooting them in the leg or something, however violence, for believers in anyway, is not ok.
I see your point about calling the police, except it IS their job to keep communities safe, is it not? Is it really passing a "dirty job" onto someone else whose job it really is?
The thing that I find most curious is the view taken by Christians who believe that not only is it acceptable to kill in defense of others but that it is in fact demanded of us, a duty rather than an option. I follow the path of that thought, and I arrive at issues such as abortion. To those of us who believe that life begins at conception, abortion is murder, and it is not only murder. It is the murder of the most innocent of all humans: those not yet born. Abortion clinics present an immediate threat of death to innocent people daily, but abortion clinics are not bombed daily. Abortion providers are not shot daily. The view espoused by those who believe both that life begins at conception and that Christ demands that we kill to save others does not seem to be a view that even the believers truly accept. I do not see any relevant difference in a school shooting that leaves 20 children dead and an abortion clinic that performs 20 abortions. In both situations, 20 lives are extinguished. (Abortion is not the only situation in which innocents are killed or exposed to immediate threats of death or great bodily harm, but I think it is the clearest example for discussion. )
It's not garbage when a person states that God gives life and God takes away - at least, it's supposed to be like that.
I don't believe that killing is ever "right." But if I was attacked, or my loved ones were ever attacked, I wouldn't hesitate. I'd rather ask the Lord's forgiveness than live with the alternative.
You are welcome.
It could be on the other hand, the realization that we cannot as individuals "save the world" but that truth does not absolve us of the obligation to do what we can, where we can. Not everybody is cut out for or proficient in killing, those with no apptitude are as innocent for their inaction as those who are doing what they can where they can.
So a person is not held accountable for certain actions in the eyes of God, according to Chrisianity? Talk about a cop out.I do not believe that a person is held accountable for the actions that his actions allow.
So you are afraid you doomed his soul to hell, by saving somene else? SMHMeaning if I kill a rapist who is in the process of raping, he is already a rapist, and me stopping the act did not stop the sin. It was already committed. If I kill him, I am responsible for ending his opportunity to be saved (if he is not already and I am only guessing that he is not), and for that, I am responsible.
No, the worse is the rape of an innocent. What if the innocent person's soul was in danger of hellfire according to Chrisianity. So as a victim of the rape, and seeing the inaction of a so called "Chrisitan", they commit suicide. You just allowed an individual to go straight to hell because you refused to assist them. You just screwed an innocent, while worrying about the evil.What is worse the rape of an innocent or the loss of a soul? To me, the answer is the loss of the soul as it is permanent.
If it is wrong but if it is right to kill the felons trying to rape and kill someone, what is the difference? What formula do you use to determine when it is acceptable and when it is not?
I don't believe that killing is ever "right." But if I was attacked, or my loved ones were ever attacked, I wouldn't hesitate. I'd rather ask the Lord's forgiveness than live with the alternative.
Same said for if I find an intruder in my house when they can see I am clearly home (car in the driveway, etc.). They get one verbal warning, if possible, then that's that.
So, if you try raping me or family-you die.
If you try killing me or family-you die.
If you rob me and put a gun to my head or knife to my throat-you die.
If you jeopardize life or liberty-you die.
This includes private citizens and government as well.
I tried to address this issue under the title "Pacifism," but there were not very many people interested in a wide pacifism discussion. Since I am confronted by the topics of gun control, gun rights, and worries of possible firearm legislation in nearly every newscast I see, I thought I might try to limit the discussion to one very specific pacifistic topic, killing.
As a Christian, I do not believe it is ever acceptable for one person to kill another person. What are your thoughts?
Is it ever acceptable (moral, good, etc.) to take a person's life?
If you think/believe it can be acceptable, under what circumstances would it be permitted?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?