Guns: An Important Discussion

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Let's assume you fail to get your family to safety... you'd pray that God gives you the strength NOT to use violence or lethal force to protect your wife or girlfriend from being raped by government agents persecuting you over your faith??? She's screaming, "Help me!!!!" Do you say, "Honey, I can't use the gun... this is persecution. Just focus on Jesus!"???

I am saying I don't know how I will react. My instinct will be to remove the threat. If God gives me the grace to override that instinct He will give me what I need to overcome any obstacle that presents itself.

You should ask your self the same question. You have waffled saying self defense is okay but not okay while staking out the claim that it is not okay under any circumstance and attacking those who disagree stating the y are not "real Christians".

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Pliny

I am saying I don't know how I will react. My instinct will be to remove the threat. If God gives me the grace to override that instinct He will give me what I need to overcome any obstacle that presents itself.

Okay, that’s a fair answer. However, perhaps that’s not exactly what I’m asking. I’ll try to clarify. You said that there is an ethical “difference” between how we should respond to an act of violent crime being perpetrated against us and violent persecution. What do you BELIEVE is the biblical response to government agents breaking into your home to victimize your family and rape your wife on account of your faith? Please underscore that difference… or admit that there isn’t one.

You should ask your self the same question.

I have. I don’t believe it’s ethically “Christian” to respond to criminal actions or persecution using lethal force.

You have waffled saying self defense is okay but not okay while staking out the claim that it is not okay under any circumstance and attacking those who disagree stating the y are not "real Christians".

I’ll try to clarify. This isn’t about “gun control” or criminalizing the use of deadly force to protect your family. Those are strictly "legal" issues. I’m talking about the “ethical Christian response”. You indeed have the "legal right” to defend your family, and politically I stand by that. However, if one uses lethal force… I believe that they have violated the ethical commandments of Christ.

… attacking those who disagree stating the y are not "real Christians".

Perhaps I was being too dogmatic. I apologize. Maybe I should have said that I believe that they are “not obeying the Christian ethic with regards to using violence and lethal force”.

[Aquila]

What... no resonse from the "pro use of lethal force crowd"???

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Okay, that’s a fair answer. However, perhaps that’s not exactly what I’m asking. I’ll try to clarify. You said that there is an ethical “difference” between how we should respond to an act of violent crime being perpetrated against us and violent persecution. What do you BELIEVE is the biblical response to government agents breaking into your home to victimize your family and rape your wife on account of your faith? Please underscore that difference… or admit that there isn’t one.

I don't recall ever using the word ethical. That is your word. The most fundamental of all instincts is to defend yourself from harm. that is a God given fundamental instinct. The patriarch's defended themselves and their families. Peter after 31/2 years of living with God felt comfortable in using a sword in self defense. I guess he missed that whole Christians are pacifists lesson you subscribe to. My default program is remove the threat. If God wants me to go bound to prison He will make it known. The grace of God will give me the strength and peace to accept it. There is a difference between self defense and persecution and I have outlined this before but here goes again. Persecution comes in the form of govt. stamping out religion. This happened with the Sanhedrin and the Roman govt. that instigated the ten general persecutions during the first four centuries of the church. Jesus said we would be delivered up to the councils.

Mar 13:9 But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them.

Mat 10:17 But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues;
Mat 10:18 And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles.

Just a couple examples

I have. I don’t believe it’s ethically “Christian” to respond to criminal actions or persecution using lethal force.

Again the lethal force. Self defense does not always require lethal force. Get over it.

I’ll try to clarify. This isn’t about “gun control” or criminalizing the use of deadly force to protect your family. Those are strictly "legal" issues. I’m talking about the “ethical Christian response”. You have the "legal right” to defend your family, and politically I stand by that. However, if one uses lethal force… I believe that they have violated the ethical commandments of Christ.

Again the "lethal force" argument. Get over it. Self defense does not always require lethal force. We simply vehemently disagree as to what you think the "ethical commandments of Christ" are. Apparently Peter missed that tutledge as well.

Mt comments in red above.

Perhaps I was being too dogmatic. I apologize. Maybe I should have said that they are “not obeying the Christian ethic with regards to using violence and lethal force”.

Watering down your "dogmatism" still infers the same thing. You have staked out the claim that a person cannot defend themselves and be a real Christian. That is your opinion - it's not mine. My opinion is you are not a man if you leave your family defenseless.

I do not advocate violence nor has anyone advocated such here. However, I will defend my family from a animal or a human acting like an animal. You don't think I am a "Christian" because of that great. I could care less. You are not my judge. My family knows they can rely on me for their safety. If God wants me delivered up councils or governors or kings then He will give me the grace to handle it with a quiet poise and peace that passes understanding. I will stand before Him with full knowledge that as a husbandman to my family I have protected them from harm and sought only their health and growth. You are free to stand before God and blame him for their lack of safety while hiding behind your opinion of "obeying the Christian ethic with regards to using violence and lethal force".

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Aquila

What... no resonse from the "pro use of lethal force crowd"???

You continue to confuse self defense and lethal force. And give people time to respond.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Pliny

Watering down your "dogmatism" still infers the same thing. You have staked out the claim that a person cannot defend themselves and be a real Christian. That is your opinion - it's not mine. My opinion is you are not a man if you leave your family defenseless.

I do not advocate violence nor has anyone advocated such here. However, I will defend my family from a animal or a human acting like an animal. You don't think I am a "Christian" because of that great. I could care less. You are not my judge. My family knows they can rely on me for their safety. If God wants me delivered up councils or governors or kings then He will give me the grace to handle it with a quiet poise and peace that passes understanding. I will stand before Him with full knowledge that as a husbandman to my family I have protected them from harm and sought only their health and growth. You are free to stand before God and blame him for their lack of safety while hiding behind your opinion of "obeying the Christian ethic with regards to using violence and lethal force".

So essentially, you admit that there isn't an ethical difference. And you affirm your right to defend yourself and your family in any situation. Am I correct?

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Aquila

So essentially, you admit that there isn't an ethical difference. And you affirm your right to defend yourself and your family in any situation. Am I correct?

I guess you missed the scriptures presented before... Wow...

here are some more:
Mat 10:17 But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues;
Mat 10:18 And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles.

Mar 13:9 But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them.

Mat 10:17 But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues;
Mat 10:18 And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles.

Luk 21:12 But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake.


Persecution is a govt. based system. Robbers are not.
You are now trying to advance your delusion by placing words in my mouth. Perhaps you must to justify your failure to be a husbandman. I don't know but don't put words in my mouth.

As I have said. My default is to defend my family. I wonder how you feel about women. Is the desire of men and women a God given instinct? I say yes. Another God given instinct is self preservation the right of self defense. Nowhere is the right of self defense abrogated by some form of sloppy agape.

Again this is "SELF DEFENSE" which may include lethal force but is not limited to the use of lethal force. So get over the whole "lethal force" hyperbole. You admit you will not defend your family under any circumstance. I feel sorry for your family. Just don't try to push that nonsense on me and don't try to sell it as the only Christian ethic. That is highly arrogant and frankly I am tired of it. You want to watch your family suffer that is your business. I will not. Should persecution come I pray God gives me the grace to do His will.

[Aquila]

Maybe someone else can voice what I'm trying to say.

Can someone else shed some light on my point???

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Pliny

I You admit you will not defend your family under any circumstance. I feel sorry for your family. Just don't try to push that nonsense on me and don't try to sell it as the only Christian ethic. That is highly arrogant and frankly I am tired of it. You want to watch your family suffer that is your business. I will not. Should persecution come I pray God gives me the grace to do His will.

Actually... that's NOT what I said. Here's what I said, and I quote...

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.

For those wishing to read the entire post they may go here:
http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...8&postcount=46

Now, you keep telling me that there is an ethical difference between persecution and being victimized by a criminal act. You admitted that you'd be willing to use lethal force against a robber who attempted to rape your wife. I'm now asking if you can illustrate the difference if it were a government agent raping your wife in an act of persecution?

So why divide the two? Why not simply say that you believe a Christian should be able to ethically use lethal force to defend self or family from both a criminal act AND government endorsed persecution???

[Hoovie]

I have mixed feelings about the matter... but then I AM a recovering pacifist!