Same here, Airianna!


Very good points there, Neil.

Well, I have no animosity on my side. I just don't think it's profitable for me to continue in at the moment. I appreciate you coming in though, Jordan, as I am sure you debated it for a while.

*chuckles * I have a feeling neither of us will ever agree with Astro on this one.

I wasn't referring to you (you've handled yourself better than I usually do). Yeah, I don't usually let myself get involved in these discussions any more.

Oh yes, I know you were not. I was still blessed by your comment, though.

*bows out of the conversation *

I believe that killing in self defense is not wrong, but I will not go into that – I simply wanted to mention that killing is hard. Not physically speaking, mentally and emotionally. Especially for people who are not absolutely sure that they are doing the right thing in killing.

Because of this I have a lot of characters who may seem like pacifists if you see them in certain circumstances, but who would not hesitate to kill if it is needed. They hate it, and so they avoid it if they can, even in a case of self defense. Usually they are good enough at fighting that the risk of not killing them is minimal – and they have no qualms about violence.

I also have one character in particular who almost killed another character, but was stopped by the other character's best friend. He was probably mad enough that he might have killed him, but he – er – well he didn't kill him. Not really out of mercy – just he was really really mad and he said he wanted him to remember for the rest of his life.

And he did. He couldn't kill anyone, for the rest of his life. He was a desperado, and he had no qualms with his men killing people (as long as he wasn't watching), but when it came to him actually killing someone himself he couldn't do it. He had absolutely no nerve left.

There has been some discussion here (and some active non-discussion, which is also good).


Romans 12
...for it is written, Vengeance [is] mine;...
It is written: vengeance always was and always will be God's.
Deuteronomy 32
35 To me [belongeth] vengeance, and recompense; their foot shall slide in [due] time: for the day of their calamity [is] at hand, and the things that shall come upon them make haste.
This does not mean we ought to do wrong, and reject the commands God has given us.


I do not think people understand the reason for punishment. It is never to force some one to believe or choose anything. That is a ridiculous idea. It is to do what is right on your part that you punish those who do wrong. If you cared about what is right, then what is wrong will grieve you, and you will rejoice to punish it.


Is the government not called to love their enemies? What of those of us that are in the government?
2 Samuel 23
3 The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men [must be] just, ruling in the fear of God.


This would be to say that if we do not sacrifice at the Temple (and of course rebuild it) then we must eat blood, murder, commit fornication, steal... and so on.


Are the Ten Commandments the only commandments in the Bible we must obey?


Romans 13
8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.


We always were called to love all people.
Psalms 109
5 And they have rewarded me evil for good, and hatred for my love.
Exodus 23
4 If thou meet thine enemy's ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again.
"Love your enemies" was from the Old Testament law.


We are free from the curse of the law through Christ. No man is ever free from the obedience of the law.

1 Corinthians 6
1 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?
2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

2 Samuel 23
3 The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men [must be] just, ruling in the fear of God.

1 Timothy
9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,


Rather funny since I said I would not hesitate to kill you if you started killing non-Christians for no reason.


The teachings of the Old Testament are the teachings of Jesus.


I do not remember that you said anything about me.


Revelation 19
11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him [was] called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
Does this mean that Christ will stop loving his enemies?


John 15
13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
"the old covenant way of killing your enemy"
This was not the old covenant way. The way of life was, and still is, to kill those that you ought to kill: witches, murderers, adulterers, so on.
1 Samuel 25
33 And blessed [be] thy advice, and blessed [be] thou, which hast kept me this day from coming to [shed] blood, and from avenging myself with mine own hand.


Is Jesus not called to love?


The law is written on all hearts. If ones convictions are against the law they are sin, not conscience.
1 Samuel 13
12 Therefore said I, The Philistines will come down now upon me to Gilgal, and I have not made supplication unto the LORD: I forced myself therefore, and offered a burnt offering.
13 And Samuel said to Saul, Thou hast done foolishly: thou hast not kept the commandment of the LORD thy God, which he commanded thee...

Tsahraf, I'd like to briefly address a couple things.



Free of the Law? Never. But as you have very aptly demonstrated, we Christians are to be judges, ruling in fear of God. To this I would add, we are "lords of the sabbath", that is, we rule over The Law, and to meet out justice in the fear of the Lord is to meet out justice after the example of Jesus, who showed that in the Law there is grace, in justice, mercy.

Yes we judge. And because we judge, what we forgive shall be forgiven in heaven. The Law was made to convict the unrighteous of their sin, that they might be forgiven.



First, you know that Saul was not following his convictions but attempting to circumvent the Lord's edict in order to be practical. Second, you know that Saul did not sacrifice because he wanted to, but because he was told to, and God desires only the willing sacrifice.

So Saul was not following his convictions, nor attempting to behave righteously.

Second, conviction is of the Holy Spirit and exists to guide our consciouses. Conscious is not a trump card for my arguments or yours.

Lastly, your statement implies that Astronmer's opinion places him in sin. I don't know if this was intentional, but I adjure you, please be careful. Not only is such a statement not appropriate for Holy Worlds, it is a path that a Christian must walk prayerfully and slowly.

You have conviction, and I not only respect that, I in part agree with you. But be careful in asserting that your conviction is the only correct belief or opinion. I humbly, and respectfully, insist that we are all equally fallen and apt to err in deed or belief, and that therefore we ought to be courteous and gracious to those who differ from us, so that we do not unwittingly sin by judging them wrongly.

If your implication was not intentional, then I apologize for my misinterpretation and hope that we can clear it up quickly.



Astronomer,

Sorry for not getting back to this sooner. I think I'll now be able to give it a proper response.

By the way, would it be all right if I called you by something shorter? Like Astro, or maybe even Ast?

Anyway, this is my response, addressed in the order that comments arise.

Visiting China does not make you a Chinese citizen, nor would being a Chinese citizen make China a legitimate government (which it is not, although that topic is beyond the scope of this discussion).

Peter is instructing us to be "exiles and aliens" in regards to this world, in so far as it belongs to the Prince of the Power of the Air, and in so far as it is part of the spiritual Babylon. The "world" is the collective of all non-believers and all that belongs to them. But government, though earthly, is not worldly, because it does not belong to them.

Earthly government, like earthly church and earthly family, is an institution mandated by God. Note that like church, and family, it is earthly, but not worldly. And, because it is instituted by God, like church and family, and is not of the world, it is a duty and a privilege of the Christian to defend this institution and to correct it when it errs.

That's all I can say with out going far beyond the scope of this discussion. If you want to learn more, you can take a look at the works of Reformation leaders Luther and Calvin, who both discuss this topic, and you can explore Jay's blog for details on his theory of the subject, which supports my basic premise.

Bringing this back on topic, government has nothing to do with territory. Government is about wrong-doing and right-doing and, most relevant, self-defense.

Fighting for your country is a personal decision, based on your decisions. I, personally, do not support current American millitary actions (again, beyond the scope of our discussion), but I have many relatives and friends who are either veterens or active duty or Weekend Warriors. In fact, my father, grandfather, and greatgrandfather all served during times of war, in wars that I personally don't like.

But I not only respect them, I admire and praise them for their bravery, honorable conduct, and service to their country. Their personal conviction to fight was their business, not mine.

Finally, yes, people are more important than territory. And, personally, I put a higher value on the lives of the unsaved over my own. Which is why I wouldn't shoot to kill in self defense. But would I kill to protect someone else's life? I can't honestly say for sure, but my feeling is, yes, I would. There's nothing wrong with you if you feel differently, and there's nothing wrong with me for feeling the way I do.

Finally, I will say this.

We live, praise the Lord, under His Common Grace, in a fallen world. Sometimes there aren't black and white options. Sometimes we don't have time to consider choices. The Father knows we won't always make the right choice, or the best choice, but he promises to guide us and sanctify us if we listen to Him.

Do your best to walk with Him. He's already taken care of everything, and promises that whatever you do, it will ultimately be to His glory and the church's benefit.

So live in a spirit of graciousness toward fellow Christians with different convictions.

I admire you both (Tsahraf and Astronomer) for your conviction and willingness to participate in this thread, and for the respect and ability you have shown here. I hope that we are all becoming more understanding of Christ, His Word, and each other through this most interesting discussion.

[Note: I hope you all will pardon my highly formal choice of words. It was necessary to maintain civility and to communicate clearly and concisely. If this just made it all even more confusing than it already is, then please, let me know and I'll try to talk more like non-internet, highly informal self. ]

I found it pleasant to read and easy to understand.

Thanks! Really. I get a little self-conscious sometimes.

I'd like to ask a question to this: Shouldn't you kill me, then? I am not perfect; I have hated people in my life. Jesus said that hatred was equal to murder. Therefore, should you kill me?

I think I agree with this. Could you show how you think this should be applied to killing for self defense?

I did not say anything about Astronomer. But it is a good thing to be concerned about since we are not here to talk about each other, but to improve each others writing by improving each others doctrine. I think everyone here agrees that this is the most fundamental way to improve your writing.

What I was trying to say was that no one can be convicted to disobey God. Even without the Bible no one can say, "I know some people believe it is wrong to murder, but I have been "convicted" otherwise." What various people feel, or are used to, has nothing to do with whether we ought to kill in self defense.

When people commit human sacrifice, for example, in the name of doing what is right, it does not make it right. It only condemns them more, in that they are calling good evil, and evil good. According to God these people do not need to be treated with more care, or their views even considered, rather they are cursed.

Thus we ought to kill for self defense, because it is right, whether or not we feel like it is right.
1 John 3
20 For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.
Paul had to do this to accept Christ.

The path of knowing what is and what is not sin? Or do I misunderstand you?

Do you mind if I start another thread about this idea?

Ditto!
Ah, I mean,
Dictus.


Matthew 5
21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

I do not believe this means we ought to punish unjust anger the same way we ought to punish murder ("bless them that curse you"). Rather this means that it is as wrong, it is simply not acted on as far, just as lusting after a woman (in the law, "coveting thy neighbor's wife") is adultery, but adultery in the heart.

But whether or not Jesus was saying that anger ought to be punished as murder (that would be a strange idea, I think), he said that murder ought to be punished. In other words he said, you know that murder is worthy of punishment, but unjust anger is just as bad!

I understand where you are coming from. It is difficult to not kill someone if they are attempting to kill someone you love, but I believe it would be wrong. You can choose differently, and I would disagree with that choice, but I believe that we can both look at Jesus and still come out with slightly different views, as long as Jesus is our center. If I am striving to follow Jesus and you are as well, then surely we will bring God glory for the right, and be forgiven for the wrong.


Where did Jesus say that murder ought to be punished? Jesus said whosoever is angry without cause is in danger of judgement! What judgement would the listeners think of? Probably death, for that was the punishment that he had just seconds ago spoken about. Whoever insults his brother, acts on anger, is in greater trouble: He's in danger of the fires of hell!
If you do have a just cause for anger against your brother (say, he hits you), then can you kill him? No, for then you should do the same to him as you would to anyone else who hurts you: bless him and do good to him.

I was applying this to your logic that the Law demands we punish evildoers. I'm not saying it has any relevance except that as a judge, you may have the sword of force in one hand, but you ought to have the other extended in mercy so that someone might reach out and take it.



Just to be clear, in case I'm wrong, I'm interpreting what you're saying as this: "Killing in self-defense is right and God wants you to do it."

If that's what you really believe, then I can't continue the discussion on this particular point any farther, because we've come to the point where, neither of us is going to change the other's mind.



The path of correcting and reproving another Christian of a sin.



About which idea? Convictions, aptness to err, or judging other believers?
_________

I'd just like to make a quick disctinction between intent and action. In terms of justice, no human being has the power to punish someone for an act that hasn't been committed. We can kill in self-defense if we want, because our life is at stake, but because our life hasn't actually been taken, you can't say that "justice" demands that you kill in self-defense. Justice demands equal recompense for wrongs done. You can't retribute an act that hasn't been committed. (An example is going back in time to murder Hitler as a child. Technically, that child isn't a murder as far as men are concerned.)

That may or may not having bearing on the discussion.

I actually meant that it would be hard for some people to kill some one, even if they are attempting to kill some one you love, and even if you know you ought to.

Genesis 9
6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

Though what I was referring to was that whether or not some one thinks Jesus said that wrong anger should be punished the same as murder, it does not effect whether or not murder should be punished in self defense.

That would depend.
Matthew 5
39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Exodus 21
12 He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death.

Yup. In other words, whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed.

Yes.
James 5
20 Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.

I think the idea of asserting what you believe would cover all three. I will start one if I can.

Okay, I would like to say one thing: when I asked you to tell me when Jesus said self-defense was okay, I meant when he was here on earth in human form. The Old Testament reference was still Jesus/God, but that was a time where polygamy, revenge, and hatred was not against the law. Jesus, when he came to earth in human form, took the law from simply an outward obedience to an inner transformation.

In reference to some of the other things you said: Hatred is identical to murder, because it is murder of the heart. Jesus said hatred is murdering someone in your heart, the same as lust is committing adultery with someone in your heart. Therefore, if we are to uphold the same punishment as the Old Testament law, we should kill people every time they hate someone because that is murder.

In reference to the verse from James: We should save sinners from death. A sinner is someone who has not yet accepted Christ, because if they have then they are not sinners (those who make a habit of sin), but they are Christians, those who make a habit of Christians acts. Therefore, according to this verse, should we not save the lives on non-Christians rather than kill them so that they might be saved from death?

Scenario: You are the lone Christian at an Atheist conference, perhaps as a counter speaker or as a reporter for a Christian magazine. You know you are the lone Christian because you sign a waiver declaring your faith, handed it to the man at the registration booth, and he says, “Wow. You’re the only Christian in attendance. I know because I keep track of these things for our official records. You must be incredible brave or foolish.”

During the conference, a man stands up wearing a God is Dead shirt, pulls out a gun, proclaims nothing ultimately matters in life and therefore all our lives are meaningless and begins shooting the attendees. His intentions are clear, he will not stop.

You have access to a firearm, either your own or one belonging to an attending police officer killed among the initial victims. You have a clear shot that will kill the attacker. It is apparent he is wearing body armor under his clothes. He sees you but is in the middle of reloading his weapon. You have three seconds.

The lives of the non-Christians in the room depend on your actions. According to this verse, we should save sinners from death. What do you do?

What would I do? I don't know. I do know that I would probably do more harm than good if I had a gun. I would probably pray, because I believe God has more power than any weapon ever could.
Though, since you took such liberty to create such a scenario, I'll add a few more details: The man is standing a few feet to my right, which is why I survived the shootings in the first place, and I have enough time to get to him. Therefore, I dart across the gap, tear the gun from him, restrain him.
Unlikely? Yes. However, so is the other scenario.

If you feel my original scenario was unlikely then I will change the date to August 5th, 2012, the setting to Sikh temple in Wisconsin, the shooter to neo-Nazi, white supremacist, and former soldier Wade Michael Page, and the dead officer to severely injured officer Lieutenant Brian Murphy.

Lieutenant Murphy has been shot eight or nine times, news article was not specific, and is disabled on the ground.

The president of the temple, Satwant Kaleka, was shot and killed earlier as he tried to tackle Page to the floor with a knife. I’ll go ahead and assume your tactics of rushing him empty handed will fail as well.

In this scenario, Lieutenant Murphy, the first responding officer at the scene, was unable to incapacitate the shooter, passes out and cannot continue the fight. He falls to the ground and his weapon slides into your reach. You are in a doorway right across from Lieutenant Murphy. The room you are in is a storage room with no exit. Page, who has been shot many times, is not killed but injured. Page is 40 feet down the hallway getting off the ground.

When an attacker rushes an officer at 21 feet the officer can recognize the charge, unholster his weapon, and fire two shots before the attacker reaches him. This is called the 21 Foot Rule in law enforcement. In this case the distance is nearly doubled, Page is unholstered, and looking down the the hallway at Officer Murphy. If you charge you will be killed. You will not reach him. Satwant Kaleka was armed with a knife and failed. You are armed with fists. Lieutenant Murphy's firearm is two feet away.

Page’s focus is on Lieutenant Murphy. He is slowly standing and steadying himself. It is clear he will not stop his rampage unless killed.

Lieutenant Murphy, Page, and the remaining followers of Sikhism are not Christians.

The lives of the non-Christians depend on your actions. According to the previously quoted verse, we should save sinners from death. How would you apply the verse to this situation? Will you save the sinners from death? Are you willing to kill one sinner in order to save multiple non-Christian lives? What do you do?

The only fictitious events in this story is Lieutenant Murphy did not kill Page, your location, and Page’s location. Current news stories I have researched do not reveal the actual distance between Lieutenant Murphy and Page.


Then, please, think about what you would do. You gave a similar “I don’t know” response to my real world video examples in the pacifism thread and left it at that. You don’t need to reply immediately to my scenario here, I am asking hard questions on a tough subject matter that requires time and thought. It is a passionate subject close to your heart, mine as well, but I do expect some sort of serious answer instead of a quick rule change to make the scenario more appealing.

Roager, the instance that you present is as simple as, somebody is pointing a gun at you, what do you do? You were talking about weighing your life against the lives of other vicitims, most of us were talking about weighing our life against the life of our attacker.

What would I do, hypothetically, if placed in a situation like this? I hope I would leave the gun, and die for what I believed. Hopefully, through a such a display, others might come to know Christ, even if people died because of my unwillingness to use a weapon.
In a situation like this, there's not an easy right or wrong answer. I don't understand why Jesus would want us to allow others to die by not killing the evil person, but I believe that is what loving our enemies entails. He said 'Take up your cross and follow me.' That's a death sentence for every one of his followers. However, I believe that if I, as a member of the body of Christ, lived more like Christ and less like myself, then perhaps less of these murders would be commonplace.
Even though we may not agree on the ends, do you agree that we should live our lives for others, loving everyone so that such things like this might not happen? Doing good for even our enemies, so that they might be changed before they do such things as this?

Also, what do you think of war?

The instances I present is somebody is pointing a gun at someone else, what do you do?

Self defense is not limited to protecting only your life but extends to the lives of others. The instances I present were about weighing the life of the attacker (a sinner) against the lives of other victims (sinners), not your own life (Christian). The Christian character is put into an opportunity of action, and his action or inaction will result in the death of one sinner or many sinners. The life or death of the Christian in this scenario is irrelevant based off of Astro’s viewpoint in the pacifism thread: “If I die it’s no great loss, I’ll be in heaven.” Life goes on for the Christian, however, death means death for the attacker and the victims.

Both my scenarios are based Astro’s viewpoint and this statement:


According to this verse, we should save sinners rather than kill them so that they might be saved from death.

My scenarios present the attacker as a sinner, victims as sinners, and you/me as the lone Christian. The Christian has the illusion of three options: Run away, try non lethal force, or use lethal force. The non lethal option is inadequate to stop the attacker, however, the Christian has time to kill the attacker and save the sinners from death. The Christian’s life is of no consequence and the lives of the unsaved are put above his own.

As Astro’s interpretation of the verse calls for the Christian not to kill sinners but save them from death, my question is what do we do in these scenarios? Do we kill one sinner in order to save many sinners from death? Or do we try non lethal means or run away and condemn many sinners to death?


I apologize for the mix up. Astro’s quote shifted from singular to plural and I interpreted it as meaning multiple lives vs one. I didn’t intend to shift the conversation. We can go back to weighing the Christian life vs the attacker’s life and save my questions for a later and more appropriate time when the debate shifts this way.

Hey Astronomer!

I was wondering if you were asking about war in general, or war in terms of self/country-defense?

It's been interesting to read this thread, y'all! It's neat to see all of your interactions. Thanks for having a good discussion, it's interesting to look over. I'd just like to remind everyone to keep remaining respectful of each others' views. Thanks for being awesome everyone!

I plan on asking my dad about this topic for us to look into, so perhaps after I discuss it with him I'll share my thoughts.

The law has not changed with those, in the way they are wrong now they always were wrong before as well.

In the way revenge is wrong it was wrong before.
1 Samuel 25
31 That this shall be no grief unto thee, nor offence of heart unto my lord, either that thou hast shed blood causeless, or that my lord hath avenged himself: but when the LORD shall have dealt well with my lord, then remember thine handmaid.

In the way it was right it is right now.
2 Corinthians 7
11 For behold this selfsame thing, that ye sorrowed after a godly sort, what carefulness it wrought in you, yea, [what] clearing of yourselves, yea, [what] indignation, yea, [what] fear, yea, [what] vehement desire, yea, [what] zeal, yea, [what] revenge! In all [things] ye have approved yourselves to be clear in this matter.

Hatred was always wrong.
Psalms 109
3 They compassed me about also with words of hatred; and fought against me without a cause.
4 For my love they are my adversaries: but I [give myself unto] prayer.
5 And they have rewarded me evil for good, and hatred for my love.
6 Set thou a wicked man over him: and let Satan stand at his right hand.
7 When he shall be judged, let him be condemned: and let his prayer become sin.

I think when people do not read the Old Testament they are often mislead into believing that it has all sorts of things wrong with it. When people argue from quotes of the Old Testament they are condemned. If this is so then God himself falls under this condemnation, for he said, "It is written."

The law still is an outward obedience, and salvation always was an inner transformation. Jesus did teach that sins of the heart were as evil as sins actually committed, but they always were as evil, and that was taught before.

Isaiah 29
13 Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near [me] with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Even outward murder can not be punished if there are no witnesses. But inward murder is not punishable. If anyone was guilty of inward murder it would have been Paul before his conversion. Yet he said:
Acts 25
11 For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die...

Hatred did not become the same as committing murder outwardly, and it is the outward deed that is punished by man. The sins of the heart are, and were, only known by the man that commits them and God. Uncommitted sins are between the guilty man and God, and only God can punish them. Those that are committed outwardly God has given us the responsibility to respond in righteousness to what we have seen, and punish as God commanded.

If hatred was the same as murder in all ways, then the law would say, and would have always said, that those who hate shall be put to death. Hatred did not become the same as murder when Christ said so: the way it is the same now it always was the same. Jesus did not say that those who hated should be put to death any more than David did.

James 5
20 Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.

1 Corinthians 5
5 To deliver such a one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

Proverbs 10
20 The tongue of the just [is as] choice silver: the heart of the wicked [is] little worth.

Galatians 6
10 As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all [men,] especially unto them who are of the household of faith.

Those that are worthy to die should not be spared of hell, or of death on earth. If it is wrong for us to punish them with death that are worthy to die, how much more wrong would it be for God to put them in hell that are worthy of hell?
Yet unbelievers that are not worthy to die should be avenged and defended as well as those who believe.

Here I will try to sum up everything I've been trying to say:


Make sense?

The verses are clear, but they do not seem to sum up what you were trying to say. It seemed that you were saying that it was wrong to kill in self defense. Do you mean that you were not trying to say that, but were only saying we should have compassion like the good Samaritan? I do not see how they are connected, since I do not think anyone would be so mixed up as to say, "Because we should kill in self defense we should leave people we find wounded to suffer and die."

Also, mercy is good, as a virtue, and as an act it is either good or bad depending on how it is used, just as hatred is an evil attribute, but is either good or bad as an action depending on how it is applied.

Psalms 109
17 As he loved cursing, so let it come unto him: as he delighted not in blessing, so let it be far from him.
(Notice that this is a curse.)

So in certain places it is a sin to have mercy.

Deuteronomy 7
2 And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, [and] utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them:

Nehemiah 1
5 And said, I beseech thee, O LORD God of heaven, the great and terrible God, that keepeth covenant and mercy for them that love him and observe his commandments:

In order to show love, mercy, or pity towards that which is hateful you must be hateful yourself.

1 John 2
15 Love not the world, neither the things [that are] in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

1 Corinthians 3
17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which [temple] ye are.

Which commandments? The Old Testament Law (the moral code, not the dietary or economical) was based around the way to be holy. If I obeyed the law, I would be holy and blameless. If I failed to uphold the law, then I was to be killed. Yet, there was a way for me to regain that holiness by sacrificing a spotless lamb, goat, ram, whatever the circumstance warranted. Jesus was that spotless lamb. He took away our sins for all time. This means we do not have to follow the law to be pure, but rather we should follow Jesus' laws, for those 'trumped' the former laws. Therefore, what should be our foremost goal: to fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith. Who, for the joy set before him, endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.
We should be like Jesus, sacrificing our lives rather than taking them. Self defense, when it comes between me and the gunman, should always end with me laying down my arms. For, truly, there are only two options then: If they are a Christian, we are brothers! And if I can lead him away from sin, then surely I have brought him away from not just a physical death, but an eternal one.
If he is a non-Christian, then my first and foremost goal should be to bring him to Christ! For I am his neighbor, and should have mercy upon his soul just as the Good Samaritan had mercy upon his enemy. If he kills me, then he kills me and I go to be with my savior. To live is Christ, to die is gain.



The world which John is referencing is not the literal world and the people in it (for then we would be disregarding scripture by loving one another or by loving our enemies) but rather than worldly lusts and wants. If you read the rest of that passage (16 For everything in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comes not from the Father but from the world. 17 The world and its desires pass away, but whoever does the will of God lives forever.) He explains what he meant by the world.

In 1 Corinthians, Paul is writing to the Christians and what is he speaking about: He's talking about the church! We, the body of Christ, are the temple of God! If we, the members of the body, defile God's temple, do things that God is not proud of, then surely God will destroy us for blaspheming against him! Yet, who is doing the destroying? Not the Christians, but God! And who does God usually use to punish his chosen people? From looking at Old Testament examples, we can see he uses non-Christians to punish us.

Now, I would ask you to answer just this one question at least: How are we to love our enemies? If God tells us to kill all those against him, then surely we aren't to love our enemies, but rather to punish them. If the early church did that, then surely Saul and the rest of the Jewish people would have been utterly destroyed. Therefore, I ask, how are we to love our enemies?

For example:
Genesis 9
6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

Not necessarily. Some crimes were punished with beating, fines, restitution, maiming, so on. Death was never the only punishment.

The sacrifices were symbolic of Christ.

Hebrews 10
4 For [it is] not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

The only thing that Jesus changed was this:
John 4
21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.
Luke 21
6 [As for] these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

Israel ceased to be a nation of Priests. The law which always bound all men is still binding.
1 Timothy
9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

The law was never contradicted in the New Testament, rather, the doctrine of the New Testament was argued by quotes from the Old Testament law.
1 Timothy 5
18 For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer [is] worthy of his reward.

If we do not follow the law, then we are liars, murderers, adulterers, witches, so on.
1 Corinthians 6
9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

We can not be pure if we do not follow the law. Only God can purify us from the guilt of not following the law.
James 2
20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
Abraham was justified by faith because he followed the law that God gave him.
We ought to sacrifice our lives.
Judges 16
30 And Samson said, Let me die with the Philistines. And he bowed himself with [all his] might; and the house fell upon the lords, and upon all the people that [were] therein. So the dead which he slew at his death were more than [they] which he slew in his life.

We should be like Jesus.
Revelation 19
21 And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which [sword] proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

Were the people of the Old Testament, David and Elisha and Samuel, supposed to not be like Jesus? Was it wrong for them to be like Jesus? No, rather, they were like Jesus.

A prayer for self defense would be, "It is written, God is a man of war. Blessed be God, who teacheth my hands to war and my fingers to fight." I pray that all men would yield to God teaching their hands to war.

Precisely.
Psalms 83
17 Let them be confounded and troubled for ever; yea, let them be put to shame, and perish:
18 That [men] may know that thou, whose name alone [is] JEHOVAH, [art] the most high over all the earth.

Luke 10
36 Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves?
37 And he said, He that showed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.

The point was that the Jew was not the Samaritan's enemy, but his neighbour, rather than the other Jews, who did not shew mercy on him. The point was that it did not matter whether they were Jew or Samaritan, but rather whether they were righteous or wicked.

Deuteronomy 19
12 Then the elders of his city shall send and fetch him thence, and deliver him into the hand of the avenger of blood, that he may die.
13 Thine eye shall not pity him, but thou shalt put away [the guilt of] innocent blood from Israel, that it may go well with thee.

And he will be that much farther from the Saviour.
Deuteronomy 13
10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.
11 And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you.

Psalms 78
34 When he slew them, then they sought him: and they returned and inquired early after God.
For all that [is] in the world, the lust... is not of the Father, but is of the world.
The lusts he speaks of are of the world, thus the world is that which lusts these lusts. That is why we should not love the world, for these evils are of the world.

1 John 5
19 [And] we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.

2 Chronicles 19
2 And Jehu the son of Hanani the seer went out to meet him, and said to king Jehoshaphat, Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the LORD? therefore [is] wrath upon thee from before the LORD.
It is true. But do you mean that each of us is not a temple of God? Only the Church as a whole?

1 Corinthians 6
19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost [which is] in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

1 Corinthians 3
17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which [temple] ye are.

But what I argued from the verse was this: God will destroy that which defiles his temple, though his own temple is what he destroys. Some say that if it is wrong to destroy the Image of God in murder, then it is wrong to destroy it in punishment, and I was pointing out that God does this very thing.

One thing that must be understood is that loving your enemies is not a new command. It is an Old Testament command that was written into the law:

Exodus 23
4 If thou meet thine enemy's ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again.
5 If thou see the ass of him that hateth thee lying under his burden, and wouldest forbear to help him, thou shalt surely help with him.

An important thing to notice about the sermon on the mount is that at first Jesus quotes from the law and says, "Ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time..." and in all these cases he expands on the principles of what is said: "...But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment..."
But then he says, "Ye have heard that it hath been said..." not, "by them of old time," and then he contradicts rather than adds to what is said. The things that he contradicts the law also contradicts.

Proverbs 24
17 Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth:
18 Lest the LORD see [it,] and it displease him, and he turn away his wrath from him.

We must love as God loves, not as sinners love. It is not of love to love those that hate God, for God is love.

For one thing God does kill all those against him. But he has given us the responsibility to kill in punishment of certain sins, not all sins. If to punish wrongdoers is to not love your enemy, was it then wrong for the Old Testament saints to love their enemies?
Galatians 1
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
Would this be to not love your enemy?
Does God not love his enemies when he casts them into the lake of fire?

So you are arguing to be like God then? Do we have a right to be jealous? Why not? God is jealous, so we can be to. NO! That is not what the Bible teaches. God has a right to be jealous, because he is the one who is worthy of our praise. If he is worthy of it then he will want it because he deserves it. We are to be like God, but only in a way which we are worthy of. We have no right to claim to be equal to God, but should strive to be more like him, but not do things which we have no right to do.
Also, when God kills his enemies in Revelation that is a time when there is no choice. They have chosen all their lives not to accept him, so he throws them into a lake of fire because of their choice. At that point, there is no future choice when they could choose to change their minds. Here on earth, they have a choice up until the day they die. We cannot know if they will accept God in the future, so we should not kill them in the present.


If you believe we should follow the Old Testament laws, then you had better live it out. Which would mean (if I remember correctly) killing everyone who worships someone other than God (Do not make for yourself any idols, Commandment No. 2). This means killing all Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists, anyone who does not worship God. Which makes evangelism pretty pointless. Also, kill any divorcee, because anyone who marries someone after divorce is committing adultery (Matthew 5). If this is true, there could be a lot more killing going on and all in the name of Christ!
Now, that would be taking it to an extreme, I know. But, the ten commandments were punishable by death and enforcing them is what you are advocating for, right?

If you read Hebrews 8 you will find a different view than yours (at least, that is what I read):
What do you make of that?

*jumps in*
On something someone said about laying down their arms when there is a crazed gunman about to kill hundreds of people:
Which is better? The gunman surviving, or you taking the opportunity and shooting the gunman, the gunman dying and hundreds of people surviving? Aren't we supposed to defend the helpless?
I, for one, know that I would take the shot.

Now say a crazy gunner came and pointed a gun at me and told me to renounce Jesus Christ. In that case, I would die. Because there is no way I would deny Christ.

Hey everyone!

I wanted to let y'all know that this discussion has seemed to turn mostly into a debate instead of an edifying discussion to find an answer and sharing of points of views. Although we encourage discussion here and allow more general talk than just about writing, we don't let debates carry on in threads. If you wish to continue this as a debate, please do so in a PM, but otherwise keep the talk in here to a discussion level.

Thanks everyone! I hope to see some more awesome discussions in here soon.

Since this is a question of self-defense, I am presenting a case for a situation in which it is either my life or the gunman's. Other-defense is a different topic, I believe, one about which I am not entirely decided.

Thank you for the reminder Nemo!

I think I can make my sentences less short. I was trying to avoid tall paragraphs which would be hard to read, especially in long posts, but I think it made me sound terse.

1 Peter
16 Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.

Actually I was saying that since we should be like Jesus, we should not hesitate to kill those that we ought to kill. "Love your enemies" is a specific command: bless those that curse you, etc.

Certain things are God's jurisdiction, others are our responsibility, and the Bible says that killing in self defense is one of these things.

Genesis 9
6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.
It was always true that we do not know if some one will accept God in the future, but this does not effect how they are punished in the present.

Ezekiel 33
14 Again, when I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; if he turn from his sin, and do that which is lawful and right;
16 None of his sins that he hath committed shall be mentioned unto him: he hath done that which is lawful and right; he shall surely live.

God allows people to die even though they may turn from their wickedness. And also, it does not cause people to turn to God to leave them unpunished.

Proverbs 19
19 A man of great wrath shall suffer punishment: for if thou deliver [him,] yet thou must do it again.
This was not in the law, but we could discuss this topic in a different thread if you would like.
It is adultery, but not punishable, like adultery in the mind. In the law it was not punishable by any punishment.
The killing that was done in the Old Testament was done in the name of Christ. It is a good thing, rather than a bad thing. Murder that is done in the name of Christ is as bad as righteous killing in the name of Christ is good.

Hebrews 8 is talking of the changes Jesus made, Israel ceasing to be a nation of priests, the Chosen people being those that are righteous, rather than the children of Jacob.

Luke 21
20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

Hebrews 9
10 [Which stood] only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed [on them] until the time of reformation.

It is interesting. I am reading through the Bible and I was reading in Hebrews the day I saw your post. I was actually at Hebrews 8 this morning.


Here are some examples of killing in self defense that I remembered:

Exodus 2
11 And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out unto his brethren, and looked on their burdens: and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, one of his brethren.
12 And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that [there was] no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand.

Judges 15
14 [And] when he came unto Lehi, the Philistines shouted against him: and the spirit of the LORD came mightily upon him, and the cords that [were] upon his arms became as flax that was burnt with fire, and his bands loosed from off his hands.
15 And he found a new jawbone of an ass, and put forth his hand, and took it, and slew a thousand men therewith.

2 Kings 1
9 Then the king sent unto him a captain of fifty with his fifty. And he went up to him: and, behold, he sat on the top of an hill. And he spake unto him, Thou man of God, the king hath said, Come down.
10 And Elijah answered and said to the captain of fifty, If I [be] a man of God, then let fire come down from heaven, and consume thee and thy fifty. And there came down fire from heaven, and consumed him and his fifty.

Exodus 22
2 If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, [there shall] no blood [be shed] for him.

I see what you are saying. Yet, I still disagree. Punishment should be doled out, but not by Christians. God is the one to punish for his law. Whether he use non-Christians or fire from above is not our concern. We are to let the world know us by our love, not by our vengeance. For vengeance is the Lord's, it is He who will repay. Obviously, if he is going to repay, that means it is not up to us (Christians). I think that is what was meant by the Genesis verse. If a man go around killing people, eventually he is going to get killed (because not everyone he kills will be a Christian, or the Government will catch up with him).
In Ezekiel, we are to allow a man to take the chance to rid himself of his punishment. Sure, he will die, but it doesn't say how. Eventually he will die and die the second death, if he does not repent. He will be punished, if he does not repent, and perhaps even in this life, but not (I guess) by killing.
The verse in Proverbs is a great example of letting someone learn the hard way. We should let them learn if they won't take advice, but I don't think we should allow them to die for their faults. If they do get to a place where death is obvious, then surely we should step in and stop them.
I'm glad that you agree anyone can now be a follower of God (obviously you do, or neither you nor I could be Christians). Yet, there is a contrast there. If it is not racial/national now, then it must have been racial/national then or there would be no reason to change it.* Jesus himself hung out with sinners and tax collectors and those of different race and nation. He sought again and again to get them to follow him, but he did not punish them for their sins. He let those that did not believe leave and those that did believe he called to follow him. He didn't kill them, rather he allowed them to plot their own demise.
I'm not sure what you mean by referencing Luke there. Jesus was referencing the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, which was fulfilled when the Romans destroyed it. The armies were non-Christian, not Christian. The armies were sent to punish the non-believers, but they were not comprised of Christians.
Not sure what you mean by Hebrews 9:10. From the context, I see the passage is talking about the laws of the priests and their ceremonial washings which was disbanded when Jesus came. Are you referencing how that was disbanded in Hebrews?
For the reminders of Self-Defense in the Old Testament, I thank you. Still, they were of people who were defending the nation of Israel (an earthly Kingdom).
In Exodus, I don't think Moses' killing was glorified. In fact, I think of it as more of a mistake which God later made great things come out of (I know that grammar isn't the best).
The Judges' verse also speaks of a time when God specifically told Samson to punish a group of people. Also, most of Judges tells of things for us not to do, not what we should do. It shows how bad things can get without God. Even so, the verse merely says the Spirit of God came on him to free him from the cords, I'm not sure of he was supposed to kill everyone afterward, but I'm not an expert.
In 2 Kings, the group of people serving Ahaziah were not exactly good. They surely had plenty of chances to turn away. Right then, they were insulting God by taunting Elijah. Even so, Elijah asked God to destroy them, he didn't take up a sword and strike them down himself.
The Exodus verse (the second one) is interesting. It is dark and at night. At that point, they had no electricity, which you know. They also would not have been able to quickly light a lamp. So, the thief comes into the house, the man can barely see. He seeks to stop the thief (probably incapacitate him, not kill the him). In the darkness and confusion, he accidentally kills him. This is speaking of (in my mind) a purely accidental kill. It's like having a rock throwing contest and killing someone who comes over the hill. They are guilty of killing the man, yes, but not of intentionally doing it. However, a man is not guilty of murder if God distinctly tells him to kill such a people (such as Old Testament destruction of entire nations). For that is God's vengeance upon a nation, not a man murdering another. Killing as punishment was acceptable in the Old Testament, because God commanded the government of Israel to destroy the evildoers (a nation will not last long with evildoers in its midst). Now, Jesus has taken away punishment for wrongdoings if we will only accept him. If a man/woman/child refuses to accept God, he/she will be punished in the afterlife. This is not to say that governments should not punish evildoers (a nation would not last long if it didn't). It means that we, as Christians, should seek to bring as many to God as possible so that even if all don't accept him, many will have a greater chance to.
*This is why I believe war is not credible for a Christian, for we are not of one nation. We are of many different nations, and Christians can be members of any nation. Therefore, what right do we as members of God's kingdom seek to fight for the fulfillment of an earthly kingdom? We pray (as Jesus did) for God's kingdom to come, so why bring about an earthly Kingdom if God's is coming?

Hey everyone!

This really is being more like a debate than a discussion, so if you wish to continue debating please move to PMing about this topic. But this thread is for discussion purposes.

Thank y'all!

So, getting things back on topic, how do we show self defense in our writing, as opposed to just killing? Is it self defense solely on the idea that someone else is attacking you, or is there more to it than that?

(Kaitlyn, you're fine.)

Everybody else - stop ignoring the moderator or I will lock this thread. I was catching up and wondered why something that was so clearly a debate had been allowed to go on so long and I found at least three moderator notices telling you to stop.

You are allowed to present your point of view, but when you try to convince everyone else that they're wrong you're crossing a line that we don't want to get into on this forum.

Thank you.

I should have said something to avoid this earlier. I will do what I can to clear up this miscommunication, at least on my part.

First I want to clarify certain things:

Nothing that I said in any of my posts was because of any kind of bad feeling towards the other members of this discussion.

I am very grateful to Astronomer for his clear and detailed posts and willingness to discuss this, which is an issue people would probably find hard to discuss.

If there is anything that some one has read in my posts that seemed to be directed against some one in this discussion, I pray you pm me so that I can explain myself or take back what I said.

I have not carried the discussion on in pm, on my part because the discussion was for the benefit of the forum, for the benefit of other writers, and had nothing to do with having it out with Astronomer or any one else.


I hope that this will make an end of the miscommunications about this discussion, and it can be resumed in good spirit and understanding.

Patrick, the reason for sending the discussion to pm isn't because you or Astro are being antagonistic, but because the discussion is no longer for the benefit of the forum, but merely for the sake of debate. Both of you have given your views. You have discussed them. But now, the debate has become circular as you both continue to try and show the other where they are wrong, theologically. The purpose of the thread is whether or not we should write about killing in self defense. There was nothing wrong with you guys sharing your views, but in order to get the discussion back on topic, the forum team has requested that you guys carry this debate on in pm. If you have other thoughts concerning the topic, or that is writing related, those thoughts are very welcome! But this particular vein of debate should be carried on in pm.