Guns: An Important Discussion

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Pliny

And how did you come by this information? Have you spoke to all those "Christians" in those parts of the world? Where is the data to back up the claim? Just saying something does not make it so, unless to live in Washington DC and work for the govt.

So again we see the arrogance of stating "REAL" Christians must believe your way or they are not "REAL" Christians. How absurd. If a man points a gun at me in an attempt to rob me or harm my family it will b e a bad day for that individual. I will be happy to witness to him during prison ministry. All I see is hyperbole and zero facts to back up the claims unless of course a Hollywood program is to be used as "facts".

Is the use of "I was in the Army" or my first pastor was "Marine" supposed to mean something? I appreciate the service you and others have made but that has no bearing on the current discussion. Most Pastor's do admonish members not to join because you are often placed in situations that are not in keeping with good moral behavior such as the barracks life style. The whole "wine, women. and song" mantra of going out to either get drunk and find a girl or get drunk and find a fight. Many cannot handle the military life and remain Christian.

Don't tell me your a man and sit back and watch you family be raped and murdered. You can blame it on God if you want to but I will stop the intruder if I can. I will gladly lay down my life to protect my family in their defense - there is no greater love than this, to lay down your life for your family.

Let me apologize for saying "real" Christians. Let's just talk about the points of view.

Can you provide a biblical example of a Christian using lethal force against anyone without rebuke???

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Aquila

There isn't a world of difference between obedience and disobedience. In my opinion, and I could be wrong, the idea of a difference sounds like situational ethics. We're to do harm to no man, turn the other cheek, not fear those who can kill the body, never render evil for evil, or even resist evil... unless it's a doped up kid breaking into our house at 2am.

Doesn't make much sense to me.

Please understand, I dont' advocate sitting idily by and doing nothing if one's family is in danger. If at all possible I believe that it is perfectly ethical for a Christian to employ non-lethal measures to protect self and family. It seems like when we talk self-defense... we instantly think of guns and blowing somebody away. Maybe that's a symptom of our culture. But a Christian can ethically resort to the following:

*divine intervention - Depending on God to deliver miraculously.
*escape - Fleeing from the source of danger.
*ruse - Out smarting or using trickery to escape or to be released without injury.
*nonlethal force - Using non-lethal physical force to subdue an attacker to prevent injury to others including the attacker themselves.
*moral disarming - Speaking to the attacker with an appeal to conscience securing safety and release.
*martyrdom - Dying with the word of Jesus on your lips without inflicting injury or harm to the attacker.

And on the flip side of the subject... I'd not criminalize guns. I believe in gun rights. In addition, I'd not agree with prosecuting someone who did use lethal force to protect their family. One has the right to use lethal force. But to me... as a Christian... I believe we should strive for a higher, more Christlike, ethic.

It is not situational ethics. This may help you understand "situational ethics":
http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/si...nal-ethics.htm

It is not a question of obedience vs disobedience or that coin can be flipped and stated as you are the man of the house act like one. In obedience one should, as the protector of the family, protect them in obedience and disobedience would be allow the violence to happen then blame it on God because you "trusted Him" and He failed you.

We are to live peaceably with all men as much as lies in us. No one here is advocating going out and using injustice as an excuse for violence. It is self defense when all else fails - when push comes to shove. A man is a "husbandman" where we get the word husband. Like a farmer who cultivates the soil and protects to garden from the violence of animals the husband is to cultivate the family and protect it from the violence of this world. It is hypocrisy to argue that it is okay to protect the family from a wild animal and watch as men acting like animals do the same and/or worse and do nothing. Being a Christian does not mean being a limp wristed do nothing. Sometimes you have to take a whip out and cleanse the house.

As to the use of force I do not think I ever stated anything about deadly force. I have simply stated "self defense". I am not opposed to weapons (guns) or the ownership of such though I currently own none. I may in the future but as for now I don't own one. I do have some knives and a few other instruments but no guns. Well I take that back. I just made a marshmallow gun and plan to have a marshmallow war with the youth tonight. Not much good for self defense though unless the burglar is allergic to marshmallows... I agree with non lethal use of force unless there are no alternatives.

I believe God has given to all creatures the basic fundamental right of self defense. This is played out in nature every day as the hunted seek to defend themselves when there is no other recourse available.

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Hey, hey, hey, relax Tex. Put down yer guns. lol I'm not saying that you're automatically wrong. I'm sharing a different opinion.

Also...

NO ONE said one should just idily stand by and allow harm to come to themselves or their families if they have opportunity to prevent said harm. I even listed methods a Christian could employ if facing a dangerous situation. Perhaps I could have included the use of a "Taser". lol

As I discovered, you'd be amazed at how many women tell their husbands not to buy firearms and that they'd be willing to suffer at the hands of an intruder than to see the intruder's life taken.

Several questions I was asked were:

Do you believe REALLY in Heaven?
Do you believe REALLY in Hell?
Are you ready to die and go to Heaven?
Is the intruder ready to die and go to Heaven?
What action would serve the greatest good relating to the lost soul's eternity?

So now what about all those insinuations of "trusting God" and/or "being obedient" etc.?
Now it is okay for self defense?
So we agree?
Then why have you been arguing about it?

I would be amazed to have any woman tell me they would be willing to be raped by an intruder to keep guns out of the house. She is ignorant (meant not as a pejorative but in the true sense of the word). It sounds "holy" but is crazy. Would she be willing to watch her daughter be brutalized as well? Doesn't sound like love to me sounds like a Pharisaical spirit.

As far as the questions go, I care more about my family than the dude intent upon malice. If I can be used to witness to him/them I will. I will use two axes and two thirty eights... J/K. I don't own either except one very small hatchet. I have had a gun pulled on me and I asked the offender questions while I closed the gap. He was screaming he would put a bullet in my head. I did in fact feel the presence of God. When I was close enough I told him to shoot. He backed down. I had the legal right to attack, I was unarmed and if I would have killed him no jury in the world would have convicted me. The assailant was armed with a pistol and I was empty handed. I am very comfortable with my ability to disarm and remove the threat. I did not feel the need to do this. After the brief confrontation I called the police and the police arrested the man without incident and I did not have to remove the threat. I am capable enough of doing this but self defense and the right of self defense does not mean we always go for the last option first. This is the reason I briefly related the story above. The last option is just that - the last option. Make no mistake, when the time comes for the last option I will not hesitate when all other options have been removed.

[J4Truth]

Originally Posted by Pliny

It is not situational ethics. This may help you understand "situational ethics":
http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/si...nal-ethics.htm

It is not a question of obedience vs disobedience or that coin can be flipped and stated as you are the man of the house act like one. In obedience one should, as the protector of the family, protect them in obedience and disobedience would be allow the violence to happen then blame it on God because you "trusted Him" and He failed you.

We are to live peaceably with all men as much as lies in us. No one here is advocating going out and using injustice as an excuse for violence. It is self defense when all else fails - when push comes to shove. A man is a "husbandman" where we get the word husband. Like a farmer who cultivates the soil and protects to garden from the violence of animals the husband is to cultivate the family and protect it from the violence of this world. It is hypocrisy to argue that it is okay to protect the family from a wild animal and watch as men acting like animals do the same and/or worse and do nothing. Being a Christian does not mean being a limp wristed do nothing. Sometimes you have to take a whip out and cleanse the house.

As to the use of force I do not think I ever stated anything about deadly force. I have simply stated "self defense". I am not opposed to weapons (guns) or the ownership of such though I currently own none. I may in the future but as for now I don't own one. I do have some knives and a few other instruments but no guns. Well I take that back. I just made a marshmallow gun and plan to have a marshmallow war with the youth tonight. Not much good for self defense though unless the burglar is allergic to marshmallows... I agree with non lethal use of force unless there are no alternatives.

I believe God has given to all creatures the basic fundamental right of self defense. This is played out in nature every day as the hunted seek to defend themselves when there is no other recourse available.

Is self defense to be used in the circumstance of religious persecution? Religious persecutors are the same as rabid animals.

How do you draw the distinction and how would you act, for instance, to a group breaking into your house to do you and your family harm because of your faith vs to just do you harm regardless of your faith?

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Let me apologize for saying "real" Christians. Let's just talk about the points of view.

Can you provide a biblical example of a Christian using lethal force against anyone without rebuke???

I have.
Abraham
Nehemiah
David
Peter - he used his sword and the rebuke was not in that he had a sword or that he was willing to use it, the rebuke was because it interfered with the plan of God. The fact that Peter had lived with Christ for 31/2 years and learned far more than what is recorded yet felt comfortable in the presence of God to use the sword for self defense is very telling.

Can you give a Biblical example where a man is to be a pacifist to the point of watching his family be brutalized while he does nothing?

Cornelius was in the Army but was not told to retire.
And now you have changed the discussion form self defense to lethal force.
Lethal force is always the last choice, after all else has failed.

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by J4Truth

Is self defense to be used in the circumstance of religious persecution? Religious persecutors are the same as rabid animals.

How do you draw the distinction and how would you act, for instance, to a group breaking into your house to do you and your family harm because of your faith vs to just do you harm regardless of your faith?

Religious persecution is typically govt. initiated. The ten general persecution of the church were instituted under Roman rule. The persecution of the Jews towards Christians were initiated by the Sanhedrin, the ruling body of Judaism.

Someone breaking and entering or just trying to rob you is pretty distinct from the persecution. As deplorable as persecution is it is man made laws that form the basis of the persecution. Paul appealed to Caesar etc. The Christians were brought before the magistrates for atheism etc.

A burglar or rapist is not a religious persecutor he is a criminal.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by J4Truth

Is self defense to be used in the circumstance of religious persecution? Religious persecutors are the same as rabid animals.

How do you draw the distinction and how would you act, for instance, to a group breaking into your house to do you and your family harm because of your faith vs to just do you harm regardless of your faith?

Perhaps he assumes a band of attackers intending to "persecute" will actually say, "We hereby wish to do violence to you on account of your faith in Christ." In many countries a band of attackers will brutalize a Christian without even saying why. They were targetted on account of their faith.

Also, his false dichotomy fails in another way. He states that a Christian shouldn't use lethal force against persecutors... but ethically it's permissible to use lethal force against violent attacks such as robberies and rape. What if a persecutor chooses to rape his family and burn them alive??? Will he refrain from using lethal force to protect them???

That's why when I hear people draw distinction between persecution and criminal acts I cry fowl. They'd blow away an intruder intending to rape their wives or girlfriends... but they'd not blow away a persecutor breaking into their home to do the same???

Logic fails.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Pliny

Religious persecution is typically govt. initiated. The ten general persecution of the church were instituted under Roman rule. The persecution of the Jews towards Christians were initiated by the Sanhedrin, the ruling body of Judaism.

Someone breaking and entering or just trying to rob you is pretty distinct from the persecution. As deplorable as persecution is it is man made laws that form the basis of the persecution. Paul appealed to Caesar etc. The Christians were brought before the magistrates for atheism etc.

A burglar or rapist is not a religious persecutor he is a criminal.

So... if four government agents broke into your home in the dead of night to brutalize your family and rape your wife or girlfriend because you're a Christian... you'd draw a distinction and not use lethal force to stop them???

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Perhaps he assumes a band of attackers intending to persecute will actually say, "We hereby wish to do violence to you on account of your faith in Christ."

Also, his false dichotomy fails in another way. He states that a Christian shouldn't use lethal force against persecutors... but ethically it's permissible to use lethal force against violent attacks such as robberies and rape. What if a persecutor chooses to rape his family and burn them alive??? Will he refrain from using lethal force to protect them???

That's why when I hear people draw distinction between persecution and criminal acts I cry fowl. They'd blow away an intruder intending to rape their wives or girlfriends... but they'd not blow away a persecutor breaking into their home to do the same???

Logic fails.

Hey... I can hear you gossiping...
I pray I do not ever have to face persecution if so i pray even more that I will not have to answer the question because I know the way I would lean. I pray that the Grace of God will allow me the help I need to make the choice He desires.

You can cry fowl all you like I simply don't care. I am the man of my house and I will defend my family. Your family will live and/or die with your decision but my family knows the safety of a fathers love. Whether the logic in incomprehensible to you or not makes no difference to me. On the one hand you infer self defense is okay but here you are back at it again inferring it's not. Your logic is incomprehensible and double minded.

[RandyWayne]

Originally Posted by Pliny

Hey... I can hear you gossiping...
I pray I do not ever have to face persecution if so i pray even more that I will not have to answer the question because I know the way I would lean. I pray that the Grace of God will allow me the help I need to make the choice He desires.

You can cry fowl all you like I simply don't care. I am the man of my house and I will defend my family. Your family will live and/or die with your decision but my family knows the safety of a fathers love. Whether the logic in incomprehensible to you or not makes no difference to me. On the one hand you infer self defense is okay but here you are back at it again inferring it's not. Your logic is incomprehensible and double minded.

Or as the yard sign says, "I believe in guns. My neighbor does not. Out of respect for him and his family I will not use my guns to defend his home."