Protecting Loved Ones

[bybee]

Wow. See? You don't know who your family is. It's limited to those people.

And what would your Father do if someone tried to murder you? :think:



NO!

Are you pretending you didn't read anything I posted or proving you didn't?

How offensive.

My father was a WWI veteran. He was gassed in the Trenches in France. He was awarded a Purple Heart. He always defended those who couldn't defend themselves.

 

[matt86]

Romans 12:18 Says "If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men."

Why does it say if it is possible if all you are going to do is roll over and submit? Romans speaks a lot of vengeance and revenge, condemning them and telling us to allow God to handle them, but it speaks nothing of self defense.

 

[serpentdove]

Jesus took a lot of guff and responded peacefully but when men linger: dishonored his dad, he wouldn't take it (Jn 2:15).

Yes, we should defend our loved ones and strangers. We are permitted to use reasonable force against villains.

 

[elohiym]

That depends on which state you are in.

True.

 

[elohiym]

My father was a WWI veteran. He was gassed in the Trenches in France. He was awarded a Purple Heart. He always defended those who couldn't defend themselves.

What would your Father (in heaven) do if someone tried to murder you?

Would He do more or less to help you than your earthly father?

 

[elohiym]

Why weren't they protected, as you claim they are?

Why don't you think they were protected? I believe they were protected. Are you assuming that protection necessarily means spared from crucifixion?

That is one of your arguments against self-defense, is it not? I would think you'd be glad to answer, as it's rather integral to your argument.

The scriptures state God's followers are protected by Him. It's not something I have to argue is true; one either believes it or one does not.

The promise obviously wasn't to them, else they'd have been protected.

Protected from what, death? They have eternal life and the ones killing them were dead in their sins and lost. God created a no-lose situation for his people: they cannot die.

John 11:26 and everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die. Do you believe this?"

The martyrs likely believed they were following Christ's example and instruction.

John 12:24-26 Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit. He who loves his life loses it, and he who hates his life in this world will keep it to life eternal. If anyone serves Me, he must follow Me; and where I am, there My servant will be also; if anyone serves Me, the Father will honor him.

 

[meshak]

Of course after your enemy has slaughtered your family and then slaughters you he is free to commence slaughtering others.

Why do you create something may not happen in your life time?

Those situations are not realistic.

 

[meshak]

I agree. Jesus says do good to your enemies. It's slightly hard to do that if you are already dead.

This kind of mentality seems just excuse of notion Jesus' teachings are not good enough.

 

[Desert Reign]

I can't compare what I'm suggesting to jumping out of a plane without a parachute.

I'm sure you wouldn't. But it was I who was making the comparison. Here's another one: you will buy your children Christmas presents, yes? But the money could have been spent on mission work and someone could have been saved if it weren't for the fact of you selfishly buying your daughter or grand-daughter something to bring them happiness. Therefore because it could have been spent for the Kingdom, it ought to have been so spent. Do you agree with that logic? It's really the same logic as you employed to convince yourself that it was right to give up your life and your family's for the sake of someone who might (not would but might) become a Christian later.

As for realistic, I've had a gun to my head and seen my loved ones robbed in front of me. There was nothing I could do without getting us all shot. And we begged for our lives when they told us to start climbing the staircase to the roof. If I could go back in time to that situation and relive it, I would not want a gun. I would want what I have now, no fear of death (Heb 2:15) and the knowledge of God.

I'm sorry to hear of your ordeal. However if there was nothing you could do at the time, then it doesn't come into the discussion. The discussion is if you have the choice, should you defend your loved ones? And again, it's not about would but ought. If you want to put your family's and your life at risk needlessly because of your ideal that someone might be saved, then that is fine. That is your own choice. But the question is should you do it?

As for family, I view the attacker as God's child who is dead in sin and lost. My self-defense response will be tempered by that reality because I believe it and my choices are determined by my beliefs. Whether or not I owe my family protection in every sense is debatable. You first have to define family and explain why others are excluded, like the unborn victims of abortion.

I view the attacker in the same way, a lost child. Or at least that might be my initial response to someone I didn't know. But this would only make me feel all the more sad if I had to kill or maim him to protect myself or my family. It would have no effect on my defensive respnse.

But Jesus did say love your enemies and be merciful as God was merciful to you. In what way have I misunderstood that? I don't see that His words preclude physical force or cunning to defend oneself. However, I do see that mercy precludes killing a lost person who is already dead in sin when you have the power to let him live.

Yes. It depends on what you mean by 'the power to let him live.' I would think that if you were not rightfully defending yourself, others, important property, etc, against an obvious criminal then you would not have any right to kill him anyway. So I don't see how this choice can arise. If the situation requires you to use lethal force, letting someone get away with his crime is not mercy; it's only an invitation for the criminal to go and rob someone else and kill their family after they have killed you and yours.

I don't need violence to defend myself or my family, so it's not a law for me. We believe God protects us; He shows us and provides for the reasonable precautions we need to take in this evil world.

So you don't consider defending yourself against an attacker a reasonable precaution?

As for the Army, I served in combat and know a little about fighting. In war, it's best to win without firing a shot while using non-lethal force and cunning.

Yes, that sounds right.

In the United States, there is a duty to retreat from attackers. You can't just gun someone down.

I didn't know that but it sounds sensible.

I should also mention that it takes training to defend your family against armed attackers. Most people would be incapable of doing anything in a real situation; it's all just tough talk.

Sure, but that's not the issue.

 

[elohiym]

Romans 12:18 Says "If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men."

Why does it say if it is possible if all you are going to do is roll over and submit?

First, I don't claim all we can do is roll over and submit. Christians were martyred because they weren't rolling over and submitting to Roman authority; but they also weren't offering armed resistance.

Second, Romans 12:18 is addressing the possibility of peace as it depends on you because you can't force others to live peacefully with you. Those who can not live peacefully suffer plagues until they hit rock bottom and repent or die lost.

Romans speaks a lot of vengeance and revenge, condemning them and telling us to allow God to handle them, but it speaks nothing of self defense.

Self-defense can be doing things like building a wall, getting some dogs, avoiding bad neighborhoods or running for safety.

Jesus predicted the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of God's temple. Did He tell His followers to defend anyone or fight? No. He told them to flee. Luke 21:21.

 

[Totton Linnet]

If it is accepted that the police force is an institution of God to upkeep law and order...it does kind of follow on that if the policeman is not present then the stronger ones should assume responsibility.

 

[bybee]

What would your Father (in heaven) do if someone tried to murder you?

Would He do more or less to help you than your earthly father?

Why do you suppose he gave us brains?

I am careful to avoid trouble.
But, if it cannot be avoided, I will defend myself with every God given talent at my disposal.
I am my Father's mind and heart and hands at this time in this place.

 

[elohiym]

Here's another one: you will buy your children Christmas presents, yes? But the money could have been spent on mission work and someone could have been saved if it weren't for the fact of you selfishly buying your daughter or grand-daughter something to bring them happiness. Therefore because it could have been spent for the Kingdom, it ought to have been so spent. Do you agree with that logic?

No, because you are comparing something that is not necessarily true, and likely isn't true, to something that is certainly true. Furthermore, my mission field is my children; and I only have what God has given me to provide for them, so it has nothing to do with me being selfish. God hasn't tasked me to save the world single-handedly, and he's filled my hands with seven children.

It's really the same logic as you employed to convince yourself that it was right to give up your life and your family's for the sake of someone who might (not would but might) become a Christian later.

That's not accurate. I said our life cannot be taken, and that is true. I have not claimed it's wrong to defend myself, just that I object to lethal force. And I didn't convince myself but was convinced by Christ, what he said and did by example.

I'm sorry to hear of your ordeal. However if there was nothing you could do at the time, then it doesn't come into the discussion.

In a rare and unlikely situation where I could actually do something (in my home) there is no apparent reason that I would need to use lethal force. I could use a taser gun or gas. Not only would it spare the idiot's life, it would decrease the real risk of my children getting shot when a bullet passes through their bedroom walls. Also, using Bybee's example, someone raping my daughter would be too close to her for me to risk shooting with a gun or stabbing with a knife. Other options make more sense even absent any spiritual ideals.

The discussion is if you have the choice, should you defend your loved ones? And again, it's not about would but ought. If you want to put your family's and your life at risk needlessly because of your ideal that someone might be saved, then that is fine. That is your own choice. But the question is should you do it?

I follow God's example.

If someone was going to murder your family in the next minute what do you believe your Father in heaven should do about it?

I view the attacker in the same way, a lost child. Or at least that might be my initial response to someone I didn't know. But this would only make me feel all the more sad if I had to kill or maim him to protect myself or my family. It would have no effect on my defensive respnse.

Why maim or kill instead of temporarily incapacitate?

It's just a dream of mine but I envision my ideal security system for the house will include gas masks for everyone and several tear gas grenades. Intruders in the house? Pop a tear gas grenade into a stew pot and slide it into the living room. That will clear 'em out fast without bloodshed. :chuckle:

If the situation requires you to use lethal force, letting someone get away with his crime is not mercy; it's only an invitation for the criminal to go and rob someone else and kill their family after they have killed you and yours.

I have to kill a guy or it's an invitation for him to rob and kill again while God isn't responsible at all even though He could strike the thug dead in an instant?

So you don't consider defending yourself against an attacker a reasonable precaution?

I take precautions to prevent having to defend against attackers, and I would defend my family against attackers. There are a range of options between do nothing and waste the dude ala Clint Eastwood. When all else fails, I sing a lethal Kumbaya.

I should also mention that it takes training to defend your family against armed attackers. Most people would be incapable of doing anything in a real situation; it's all just tough talk.

Sure, but that's not the issue.

If you don't have the training then your choices are limited in how you can defend yourself, whether you are capable of directing lethal force without killing your kids. It does effect the answer to the question, imo.

 

[meshak]

Why do you suppose he gave us brains?

I am careful to avoid trouble.
But, if it cannot be avoided, I will defend myself with every God given talent at my disposal.
I am my Father's mind and heart and hands at this time in this place.

We can defend and protect ourselves within Jesus' teachings.

Jesus' teachings are clear; He commands His followers to avoid all violence.

You sound like His teachings are not good enough to protect and defend ourselves within His word.

 

[elohiym]

Why do you suppose he gave us brains?

To answer my questions.

I am careful to avoid trouble.
But, if it cannot be avoided, I will defend myself with every God given talent at my disposal.
I am my Father's mind and heart and hands at this time in this place.

If that is true I would expect you to be merciful as your Father.

:e4e:

 

[bybee]

To answer my questions.



If that is true I would expect you to be merciful as your Father.

:e4e:

I am human. I am a vessel at the Lord's command. Mercy is one of the qualities of The Most High.
Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed.

 

[elohiym]

I am human. I am a vessel at the Lord's command. Mercy is one of the qualities of The Most High.
Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed.

No doubt that God's long-suffering has come to an end on occasion. I don't envy the one who bears the sword in those times. Let that cup pass from me to one who desires it, if any can rightly desire it.

 

[bybee]

No doubt that God's long-suffering has come to an end on occasion. I don't envy the one who bears the sword in those times. Let that cup pass from me to one who desires it, if any can rightly desire it.

No one desires the sword. But, some are called to defend the vulnerable and the needy.
And those who have fought for the right shall be able to hold their heads high when they meet their Maker!

I wonder what God thinks of cowards?

 

[Selaphiel]

I wonder what God thinks of cowards?

Not willing to take up armed resistance is not the same as being a coward. While the coward also refuses to take up arms (although I think violence can just as easily be an expression of cowardice, but that is another topic), it does not follow from that that all who refuses to offer violent resistance are motivated by cowardice. The martyr has a courage that a soldier can only dream of.

Dirk Willems is an example of non-violent courage, that surpasses any violent courage. He escapes from prison, one of the pursuing guards fall through the ice into the icy water, Willems turns around and rescues him, only to be captured again and burned at the stake as a result.

Bonhoeffer is another case, he does in the end feel that Hitler needs to be toppled. But the important distinction is that he does not attempt to justify this action to be according to some eternal principle.

 

[bybee]

Not willing to take up armed resistance is not the same as being a coward. While the coward also refuses to take up arms (although I think violence can just as easily be an expression of cowardice, but that is another topic), it does not follow from that that all who refuses to offer violent resistance are motivated by cowardice. The martyr has a courage that a soldier can only dream of.

Dirk Willems is an example of non-violent courage, that surpasses any violent courage. He escapes from prison, one of the pursuing guards fall through the ice into the icy water, Willems turns around and rescues him, only to be captured again and burned at the stake as a result.

Bonhoeffer is another case, he does in the end feel that Hitler needs to be toppled. But the important distinction is that he does not attempt to justify this action to be according to some eternal principle.

Agreed. As you know Bonhoeffer is one of my heroes. However, the person who puts him/herself in harm's way to preserve the life of another shall always be a hero to me.
Sometimes, it is not enough to stand in the way of evil. Sometimes, that which is evil must be destroyed or, as in the case of Sodom and Gommorah, that which is good shall be utterly destroyed.
Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.