Would you shoot a home invader?

[Zebra1552]

It has everything to do with the discussion at hand. Because the cross - self-sacrifice - is the Jesus way of dealing with what is wrong in the world.

No, that is how Jesus enabled us to have salvation. Self sacrifice is not an end all solution to all the world's problems. The cross has no relation to this discussion.

You already have all the evidence - I assume you have a copy of the New Testament.

'Go read the NT' is not evidence for what you claimed. I state again, Jesus was not a pacifist and there is nothing in the NT to condemn self defense or the defense of others. In fact, the very Bible you mention says there is a time to kill, and a time for war as well as healing and peace- even a time to hate. If you have anything to refute this claim, then present it. I have no interest in word games.

 

[ebia]

No, that is how Jesus enabled us to have salvation. Self sacrifice is not an end all solution to all the world's problems. The cross has no relation to this discussion.

The cross is precisely the answer to this discussion. That's what salvation is - God dealing with everything that is wrong with the world and calling us to participate in that.

'Go read the NT' is not evidence for what you claimed. I state again, Jesus was not a pacifist and there is nothing in the NT to condemn self defense or the defense of others. In fact, the very Bible you mention says there is a time to kill, and a time for war as well as healing and peace- even a time to hate. If you have anything to refute this claim, then present it. I have no interest in word games.

Where could I possibly begin if you have no interest in anything I say? You already have the data, and you've repeatedly said that you've no interest in anything I have to say about how to read that data.

 

[ebia]

Acts 7, North American Version:

When they heard these things, they became furious 1 and ground their teeth 2 at him. But Stephen, 3 full 4 of the Holy Spirit, looked intently 5 toward heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing 6 at the right hand of God. “Look!” he said. 7 “I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!” But they covered their ears, 8 shouting out with a loud voice, and rushed at him with one intent. When 9 they had driven him out of the city, they began to stone him, 10 and the witnesses laid their cloaks 11 at the feet of a young man named Saul. They 12 continued to stone Stephen while he threw the rocks back at them shouting "take that, you no-good scum".

 

[interested in life]

Self defense is ok.Letting yourself get battered,while the very real probability that your family will be next isnt using God given common sense.

 

[interested in life]

Acts 7, North American Version:

When they heard these things, they became furious 1 and ground their teeth 2 at him. But Stephen, 3 full 4 of the Holy Spirit, looked intently 5 toward heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing 6 at the right hand of God. “Look!” he said. 7 “I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!” But they covered their ears, 8 shouting out with a loud voice, and rushed at him with one intent. When 9 they had driven him out of the city, they began to stone him, 10 and the witnesses laid their cloaks 11 at the feet of a young man named Saul. They 12 continued to stone Stephen while he threw the rocks back at them shouting "take that, you no-good scum".

He was toast anyway.And probably in Gods plan to raise him to heaven.Plenty of examples where Gods servants died horrible deaths.

 

[wayseer]

He was toast anyway.

Please elaborate on your theological explanation.

Do you mean that Jesus was not a sacrifice? Do you mean Jesus was nothing more than a wandering rabbi who stirred up enough trouble to get himself executed?

As one who claims (elsewhere on CF) that you are conversant with the biblical texts I look forward to your explanation.

 

[ebia]

He was toast anyway.And probably in Gods plan to raise him to heaven.Plenty of examples where Gods servants died horrible deaths.

::speechless::

 

[wayseer]

No, that is how Jesus enabled us to have salvation. Self sacrifice is not an end all solution to all the world's problems.

Then Jesus' death was in vain.

 

[silence_dogood]

I have never read Scripture of Jesus harming another person, that is all I can say.

Really? Your Bible doesn't have Genesis in it?

For goodness sake! Jesus wiped out every living thing on the planet save for eight people and a handful of animals!

You may live your life as you please, but as for me and my house we will serve the Lord as we have been called, through unwaivering peace and love.

As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord, a part of which is fulfilling my God-ordained role to protect my family from those who wish to harm them.

 

[interested in life]

Please elaborate on your theological explanation.

Do you mean that Jesus was not a sacrifice? Do you mean Jesus was nothing more than a wandering rabbi who stirred up enough trouble to get himself executed?

As one who claims (elsewhere on CF) that you are conversant with the biblical texts I look forward to your explanation.

I was talking about stephen.Are you claiming he could of fought off a mob?They decided he was toast.And its a situational thing.I would say in most cases the ghandi approach works,however i believe that as a last resort you are entitled to preserve your life and the lives of the ones you love.
Sound fair enough?
And im just a student like yourself boss,no need to hold grudges buddy

 

[interested in life]

::speechless::

Good post.

 

[Rick Otto]

quote=Jaws13; No, that is how Jesus enabled us to have salvation. Self sacrifice is not an end all solution to all the world's problems. The cross has no relation to this discussion.

That's got to be one of the all-time most wrong things I've ever heard.
That, & that there is no child behavior problem that can't be solved with enough duct tape.

'Go read the NT' is not evidence for what you claimed.

Right, except that it is the thematic touchstone of western civilization and expresses basicaly what you have just disclaimed.

I state again, Jesus was not a pacifist and there is nothing in the NT to condemn self defense or the defense of others.state again Jesus was not a pacifist and there is
In fact, the very Bible you mention says there is a time to kill, and a time for war as well as healing and peace- even a time to hate. If you have anything to refute this claim, then present it. I have no interest in word games.

Me neither either.
You got that part dead on, brother.
He is sovereign over both life and death.
"The Lord giveth & the Lord taketh away.
Blessed be the name of the Lord." - Job

 

[The Penitent Man]

The American Jesus

 

[Rick Otto]

Hilarious,,, (sadly).

 

[Zebra1552]

That's got to be one of the all-time most wrong things I've ever heard.

Then perhaps you'd like to enlighten me as to how sacrificing yourself to a home invader is helpful to anyone who cares about you, or how it's a wise solution to the problem.

 

[Zebra1552]

Acts 7, North American Version:

When they heard these things, they became furious 1 and ground their teeth 2 at him. But Stephen, 3 full 4 of the Holy Spirit, looked intently 5 toward heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing 6 at the right hand of God. “Look!” he said. 7 “I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!” But they covered their ears, 8 shouting out with a loud voice, and rushed at him with one intent. When 9 they had driven him out of the city, they began to stone him, 10 and the witnesses laid their cloaks 11 at the feet of a young man named Saul. They 12 continued to stone Stephen while he threw the rocks back at them shouting "take that, you no-good scum".

Perhaps you could tell me how exactly these people were invading this man's home and threatening him and his family.

 

[Zebra1552]

Then Jesus' death was in vain.

Hardly. Jesus' death gives us the opportunity to repent of sin and be saved. That has nothing to do with self defense, and self defense is never condemned in the Bible. Not once. Furthermore, Jesus never told to soldiers to quit their job. To try to bring in the cross to a situation that has nothing to do with salvation is to take Jesus' death out of context.

 

[Zebra1552]

The cross is precisely the answer to this discussion. That's what salvation is - God dealing with everything that is wrong with the world and calling us to participate in that.

God did not let Jesus die and declare that things were finished, that everything was made right again. Nor did God tell us to go off ourselves. Nor did God tell us that defending others and ourselves from wanton violence that has nothing to do with Him is wrong. You are attempting to use Jesus' example outside its context. That is neither impressive or respectful.

Where could I possibly begin if you have no interest in anything I say? You already have the data, and you've repeatedly said that you've no interest in anything I have to say about how to read that data.

You have not presented any data yourself. You've merely offered what you think the data means, without any references. The data you have given has nothing to do with self defense. Therefore, what you say doesn't matter, what you present as evidence and what is evidence does matter. Start with the evidence and I might be inclined to listen. I'm not at all interested in disputing your interpretations with you when there is no evidence involved. A good argument has a foundation, and I will not engage another's position if it is lacking a foundation.

 

[dies-l]

Context. That was talking about insults, not people who actually wish to do you physical harm.

I'm sorry, but the context does not support this reading in any way. In fact, the plain reading of the passage is the one most clearly supported by the context. In fact he opens this part of the sermon, by saying "you have heard it was said, 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.'" In other words, the standard way of doing things is to return violence with violence. "But I say, do not resist an evil person." Alas, he is pronouncing a better was of life, one which returns violence with compassion. You see, the context actually strongly supports the plain reading in this case and undermines the modernist version that is proposed by some who find the teaching too difficult to digest (i.e., "what he was really talking about is verbal insults.").

But, even if yours were a viable argument, the fact remains that there exists a basis in Scripture to lead one to believe that Jesus and the early Christians were either pacifists or at least proponents of non-violence. You may interpret the passages differently, and that we can discuss. However, it is patently dishonest to pretend that no such indications exist in Scripture.

 

[Zebra1552]

I'm sorry, but the context does not support this reading in any way. In fact, the plain reading of the passage is the one most clearly supported by the context. In fact he opens this part of the sermon, by saying "you have heard it was said, 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.'" In other words, the standard way of doing things is to return violence with violence.

That's wrong. The context for that was eye for eye, tooth for tooth- equal justice upon those who do wrong. If they take out an eye, they lose one too. If they kill a donkey, they get one of theirs killed or have to pay for it. OT was all about equality in justice. It was not limited to violence, and what Jesus further said was to show mercy rather than justice.
The passage you reference earlier about slapping, that's about insults. It was a cultural thing that you should be familiar with if you pay attention to theology.

"But I say, do not resist an evil person." Alas, he is pronouncing a better was of life, one which returns violence with compassion. You see, the context actually strongly supports the plain reading in this case and undermines the modernist version that is proposed by some who find the teaching too difficult to digest (i.e., "what he was really talking about is verbal insults.").

Again, that is wrong. It was not talking merely about violence, that's why he said 'you have heard it said'. He was referencing OT Law, which demanded equal punishment for any crime. Jesus was essentially saying to show mercy on wrongdoers. It had nothing to do with what to do while the crime was taking place.

But, even if yours were a viable argument, the fact remains that there exists a basis in Scripture to lead one to believe that Jesus and the early Christians were either pacifists or at least proponents of non-violence. You may interpret the passages differently, and that we can discuss.

Merely saying 'this means that' while ignoring the OT context of the NT is not going to convince me. If you think you can show me where self defense is condemned, then cite your source. If you can show me where it says either directly or indirectly that Jesus is a pacifist, then cite your source. Until I see evidence to the contrary, I stand by my claims.

However, it is patently dishonest to pretend that no such indications exist in Scripture.

I don't appreciate being called a liar, and certainly not by a moderator, by the way.