" Founded A Christian Nation "

[justadisciple]

shiloh357, I do not expect you to agree with me or with others on this issue, but I do ask that you change your attitude towards us. You keep telling us that we know nothing of the Scriptures, that what we are saying is nonsense, etc., when we are actually sincere Christians who are trying to do God's will and submit to Jesus' teachings, even when they are not convenient... even when it may mean losing our lives for the Gospel.

There is nothing in the teachings of Jesus or in the whole of the New Testament that justifies anyone in taking up arms in self defense.  I hope you would be honest enough to agree.

You have pretty much admitted that your position is not based on anything the New Testament actually says, but based on what it does not say (ie. "since nobody can provide a verse to prove that it is wrong to take up arms in self defense, it must be right").

But there are two serious problems with this approach.

1. Every time someone does present you with verses which clearly speak against using violence, you claim it is invalid for one reason or another and does not apply to self defense or to Christians.

2. You not only justify your own position on the grounds that no verse in the New Testament against the use of violence mentions the words "self defense"; but you also accuse those of us who DO base our position on what the New Testament says of somehow being out of sync with the Scriptures, being irresponsible and preaching nonsense.

I ask that you reconsider your attitude towards Christians who disagree with you on this, given that we actually have Scriptural grounds for our beliefs.  You don't have to agree with us, but it would do you good to at least see that your position is not as solid as you think it is.

[justadisciple]

Let me address now more of the type of reasoning you provide to support your position...

Quote

 

There is nothing in the Bible that teaches against it.  If God were against self-defense of one's life or one's family, one would find teaching against it present in Scripture.   I can support my position from understanding the godly behavioral paradigm that exists in Scripture as it relates to how a man should care for his family.   The principles that are present in Scripture about caring for a family can be used t shed light on the issues not directly addressed.  

For example.  Child molestation is not anywhere mentioned in the Bible.   Neither is spousal abuse.   But we can deduce from the biblical moral paradigm that such things are a sin.     So if God wants to provide for our families in every other area of concern such as food, shelter, clothing, education, biblical instruction, health care, then it follows that protecting our families from harm, even  if it means having to stand up and fight against  a murderer or rapist is part of that paradigm. 

 

First of all, I can appreciate where you are coming from.  I understand your argument, that we are to provide materially for our families, therefore that must include their protection (and here comes your own added teaching...), which means that it is okay to use violence to achieve that goal.

You see, it does not follow logically from providing for your family to taking up weapons to defend them.  If it did, it could also be argued that it is okay to sell cocaine to earn money to feed my family... and guess what, there is no verse in the Bible you could use to argue against it, because I would just use your own tactic and say that nowhere in the Bible does it mention anything against selling cocaine.

Your own argument above about child molestation ironically supports what I am saying: just because there is no verse in the New Testament that specifically mentions "self defense" it does not follow that using taking up arms and using violence to defend ourselves is okay, especially given that the teachings of Jesus do speak of NOT using violence, his very example screams of it, and the rest of the New Testament supports it, as well as centuries of Christian tradition that have honoured Christian martyrs who did not fight people who were trying to kill them.

Again, read everything the New Testament says on the topic of violence, and you do not get a picture of Christians being called to take up arms and kill others as a way of protecting themselves and their families.  You can argue all the techinicalities you want with it, but it still won't hold.  

But even if you decide that Christians are indeed "allowed" to kill others in the name of self defense, then at least have the humility to accept that others who are trying to take seriously what Jesus said about turning the other cheek and loving our enemies do have a Scriptural basis for their belief that is not based on silence, but on what Jesus and the New Testament actually says.

[Marilyn C]

I think God`s word is quite clear regarding `taking up arms.`

 

1. Man has been given the responsibility to govern, justly -

`Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning; from the hand of every beast I will require it, and from the hand of man. From the hand of every man` brother I will require the life of man.`

"Whoever sheds man`s blood, by man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God He made man...` (Gen. 9: 5 & 6)

The highest function of government is the judicial taking of life. All other governmental powers are implied in that.

 

2. The Body of Christ is told -

`For thought we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh,....` (2 Cor. 10: 3)

`For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood...` (Eph. 6: 12)

Clearly governments are responsible for law and order, however they have not been given a mandate to go to war against others. That is man`s desire for power and control over others and will continue till the Lord comes when the world armies surround Jerusalem.

The believer in the Body of Christ should have NO part in going to war (fighting) against other nations. They can of course be Chaplains, nurses, doctors, ambulance drivers, mechanics, etc looking after people and sharing their trust in Christ for eternal salvation.

The believer in the Body of Christ obviously can protect themselves or their loved ones, disarming but refrain from killing. We DONOT war according to the flesh as God`s word tells us.

Marilyn. 

[Guest shiloh357]

5 hours ago, justadisciple said:

shiloh357, I do not expect you to agree with me or with others on this issue, but I do ask that you change your attitude towards us. You keep telling us that we know nothing of the Scriptures, that what we are saying is nonsense, etc., when we are actually sincere Christians who are trying to do God's will and submit to Jesus' teachings, even when they are not convenient... even when it may mean losing our lives for the Gospel.

There is nothing in the teachings of Jesus or in the whole of the New Testament that justifies anyone in taking up arms in self defense.  I hope you would be honest enough to agree.

You have pretty much admitted that your position is not based on anything the New Testament actually says, but based on what it does not say (ie. "since nobody can provide a verse to prove that it is wrong to take up arms in self defense, it must be right").

Your position IS nonsense because the Scriptures you cite are addressing how believers should respond to persecution.   You have twist the Bible, take verses out of their immediate context  and pretty much engage in a sloppy handling of Scripture in order to hi-jack the Bible to support your position.

I didn't say my position wasn't based on what the Bible didn't say.   I said that the Bible does not directly address the issue of self-defense, but that it does provide us behavioral paradigm by which we can judge issues like self-defense and other issues that the Bible does not address.

The Bible doesn't address child molestation or spousal abuse.   It doesn't address gay marriage or transgenderism, or people thinking they were born the race.   However, we can take the moral paradigm the Bible establishes through what it does mention in order to judge those issues not included.

Self-defense and the defense of the family does not violate any moral paradigm of Scripture. The Scripture does not forbid Christians from taking any measures of self-defense or defense of family.  It condemns murder, rape, or what we would call mugging or other violent activity that is wantonly inflicted on others.  

The Bible does not forbid Christians from being in the military and/or going to war.   All you are doing is projecting your own personal opposition to those kinds of things on to the Bible and trying to mold the Bible around your beliefs, rather than letting the Bible be shaping element that it is supposed to be in our lives.

Quote

 

But there are two serious problems with this approach.

1. Every time someone does present you with verses which clearly speak against using violence, you claim it is invalid for one reason or another and does not apply to self defense or to Christians.

 

And that is true. The verses you provide are addressing how to respond to persecution.  Persecution and criminal activity are two different things, entirely. 

Quote

2. You not only justify your own position on the grounds that no verse in the New Testament against the use of violence mentions the words "self defense"; but you also accuse those of us who DO base our position on what the New Testament says of somehow being out of sync with the Scriptures, being irresponsible and preaching nonsense.

You're not basing your position on the NT.  You're basing your position on a grotesque perverted interpretation of the NT.  And yes it is irresponsible.

Quote

I ask that you reconsider your attitude towards Christians who disagree with you on this, given that we actually have Scriptural grounds for our beliefs.  You don't have to agree with us, but it would do you good to at least see that your position is not as solid as you think it is.

You're making moral judgments by claiming that it is wrong for Christians to join the military or to fight in war.  You are trying to base that on Scripture and sense Scripture is the final arbiter on all matters of faith and practice, you are absolutely casting a moral judgment on Christians who you think violate the Bible regarding self-defense or being in the military or whatever. 

My position is far more solid and far more in line with Scripture than yours ever can be.  Your position is inferior and not based on a solid ability to either understand or interpret the Bible.

[Guest shiloh357]

4 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

The believer in the Body of Christ should have NO part in going to war (fighting) against other nations. They can of course be Chaplains, nurses, doctors, ambulance drivers, mechanics, etc looking after people and sharing their trust in Christ for eternal salvation.

That is not a biblical position and is morally inconsistent.   If I am working supply and ordinance and I am providing the weapons and ammo for the ones doing the killing, If I am the medic who patches up soldiers so they can return to the field to do more killing, if I am driving the trucks that take the troops to the field, if I am the mechanic who fixing the equipment so that the killing can continue, how is that any different than doing the actual killing from a moral perspective?

I don't know how they do things in Oz, but in the US, even if you don't actually rob the bank or the convenience store, you are just as morally culpable if you had any participation in the planning of the crime or if you drove the getaway car or even provided the inspiration and opportunity for the robbery.  If you participated on any level you will get the same sentence as the guy(s) who actually committed the robbery.

And how would it be morally acceptable for nonbelievers to go to war and kill, but immoral for believers?

[Guest shiloh357]

Quote

First of all, I can appreciate where you are coming from.  I understand your argument, that we are to provide materially for our families, therefore that must include their protection (and here comes your own added teaching...), which means that it is okay to use violence to achieve that goal.

You see, it does not follow logically from providing for your family to taking up weapons to defend them.  If it did, it could also be argued that it is okay to sell cocaine to earn money to feed my family... and guess what, there is no verse in the Bible you could use to argue against it, because I would just use your own tactic and say that nowhere in the Bible does it mention anything against selling cocaine.

No, that logic doesn't work.  You cannot compare taking up arms to provide defense of your family with using cocaine, as if both of those things are morally equivalent.   Owning guns is legal.   Possessing and using cocaine is illegal.   So you really offer up an analogy that is wildly flawed.   The argument is not that we provide for our family at any cost and that illegal activity can be justified on the grounds that one's children need to eat.  That has never been a defense.   The Bible's moral paradigm prohibits us from turning to criminal or illegal activity to keep a biblical command.  So yes, I can use the Bible to argue against using cocaine.  Romans. 13 provides me that moral paradigm to use against turning to illegal activity in order to provide for my family.  And that is not the only passage I could use.

Quote

Your own argument above about child molestation ironically supports what I am saying: just because there is no verse in the New Testament that specifically mentions "self defense" it does not follow that using taking up arms and using violence to defend ourselves is okay, especially given that the teachings of Jesus do speak of NOT using violence, his very example screams of it, and the rest of the New Testament supports it, as well as centuries of Christian tradition that have honoured Christian martyrs who did not fight people who were trying to kill them.

When I mentioned child molestation, I referenced in connection to the behavioral/moral paradigm of Scripture.  The Bible condemns all forms of sexual activity outside of marital relations.   You don't have a moral paradigm in Scripture that prohibits self-defense, even violent self-defense.   The Bible does not condemn all violence. It condemns the wanton taking of human life, i.e. murder. It condemns lying wait to mug someone on the street.  It never condemns war, or killing of animals in hunting, or defending one's family from danger, particularly danger from another person. 

Quote

Again, read everything the New Testament says on the topic of violence, and you do not get a picture of Christians being called to take up arms and kill others as a way of protecting themselves and their families.  You can argue all the techinicalities you want with it, but it still won't hold.  

I am not arguing technicalities.  I am arguing against your less than skilled handling of Scripture and the wildly inaccurate misinterpretations you are engaging in.

Quote

But even if you decide that Christians are indeed "allowed" to kill others in the name of self defense, then at least have the humility to accept that others who are trying to take seriously what Jesus said about turning the other cheek and loving our enemies do have a Scriptural basis for their belief that is not based on silence, but on what Jesus and the New Testament actually says.

That would be fine if we are talking about how to respond to persecution.  But my position remains the same.  You are twisting Scripture to make a moral judgment about Christians engaging in self defense and even your first response in another thread, you made a disparaging innuendo about Churches who seek to provide defense for their members.

[Marilyn C]

7 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

That is not a biblical position and is morally inconsistent.   If I am working supply and ordinance and I am providing the weapons and ammo for the ones doing the killing, If I am the medic who patches up soldiers so they can return to the field to do more killing, if I am driving the trucks that take the troops to the field, if I am the mechanic who fixing the equipment so that the killing can continue, how is that any different than doing the actual killing from a moral perspective?

I don't know how they do things in Oz, but in the US, even if you don't actually rob the bank or the convenience store, you are just as morally culpable if you had any participation in the planning of the crime or if you drove the getaway car or even provided the inspiration and opportunity for the robbery.  If you participated on any level you will get the same sentence as the guy(s) who actually committed the robbery.

And how would it be morally acceptable for nonbelievers to go to war and kill, but immoral for believers?

Hi Shiloh,

I don`t think you read my comments very carefully bro.  

Clearly governments are responsible for law and order, however they have not been given a mandate to go to war against others. That is man`s desire for power and control over others and will continue till the Lord comes when the world armies surround Jerusalem.

The believer in the Body of Christ should have NO part in going to war (fighting) against other nations. They can of course be Chaplains, nurses, doctors, ambulance drivers, mechanics, etc looking after people and sharing their trust in Christ for eternal salvation.

No one has been given the right to go to war against others.

And believers are in this world, but NOT of it. By your strange reasoning then the boss should not pay the worker who is beating his wife or taking drugs etc for that would make him participating in the other`s wrong deeds. Nutty. It is the MOTIVATION of the heart that God is looking at, and for a believer to be a nurse or ambulance driver (& mechanic for that I was meaning) then they would be in a prime place to lead people to the Lord, as I said.

Marilyn.

[Guest shiloh357]

44 minutes ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi Shiloh,

I don`t think you read my comments very carefully bro.  

 

Oh I read them quite carefully and I addressed them directly.

Quote

Clearly governments are responsible for law and order, however they have not been given a mandate to go to war against others. That is man`s desire for power and control over others and will continue till the Lord comes when the world armies surround Jerusalem.

Then any rights or freedoms that you enjoy as a citizen that are kept secure by your military, which will go to war to preserve those rights and freedoms are immoral and wrong for you to enjoy.

It's like when someone either knowingly or unknowingly purchases  stolen goods like a TV or jewelry.   Even though purchaser didn't steal them, it is wrong for them to enjoy what was stolen and belongs to someone else.   By that same moral paradigm, if you sleep under the watch of your military who is tasked with going to war to defend your country, your freedoms are the product of something you consider immoral and are thus tainted with the same immorality.

Quote

The believer in the Body of Christ should have NO part in going to war (fighting) against other nations. They can of course be Chaplains, nurses, doctors, ambulance drivers, mechanics, etc looking after people and sharing their trust in Christ for eternal salvation.

But as I pointed out, the roles you describe are roles that support and enable other soldiers to go out and do the killing.  The guy who feeds the soldiers, who fixes their equipment, who provides medical attention so thy can heal up and go back to the field are all part of the same killing machine.   You cannot single out the non-combat roles as if they have nothing to do with the killing.   Without the mechanic, cook, medic/nurses and drivers, etc.  there could be no killing.   How can a chaplain be exempt since he helps provide the spiritual support for those doing the killing?

 

I would also point out that It is partly because Christians HAVE gone to war, that the western hemisphere of this world is not goosestepping and speaking German and saluting a NAZI flag.

There is nothing in the Bible that you can produce that prohibits God's people from going to war.  Nothing. 

Quote

No one has been given the right to go to war against others.

Sure they have.   There is no prohibition against war in the Scriptures.

Quote

And believers are in this world, but NOT of it.

True, but that is a misapplication of that concept.

Quote

By your strange reasoning then the boss should not pay the worker who is beating his wife or taking drugs etc for that would make him participating in the other`s wrong deeds. Nutty.

No, that is not how my reasoning works.  The military is made up of component parts all which serve a common goal.  That is not analogous to a boss paying his employee who happens to be a spousal abuser.  He is not sustaining and assisting that man in a common goal to beat his wife.   The nuttiness is in your flawed analogy.
 

Quote

 

It is the MOTIVATION of the heart that God is looking at, and for a believer to be a nurse or ambulance driver (& mechanic for that I was meaning) then they would be in a prime place to lead people to the Lord, as I said.

Marilyn.

 

A guy or woman joins the military for one reason:  To assist in going to war if necessary to defend the nation.  The nurse and the medic jeep driver or the guy who works on a naval medical vessal are as much a part of the war machine as the infantry  or the artillery soldiers.  Their goal is make sure the soldiers who do the killing can keep on doing the killing.

So your argument is really a non-starter.

[John Robinson]

As an Army vet, I've long held the suspicion that most of what passes as pacifism is really nothing more than cowardice in better clothes.

[hmbld]

5 minutes ago, John Robinson said:

As an Army vet, I've long held the suspicion that most of what passes as pacifism is really nothing more than cowardice in better clothes.

Is it brave, or biblical to attack the character of those who disagree with your opinion? 

My flesh would rather kill than be killed, so for me I see more bravery in restraint.