Is it moral to Kill in self-defense?

[Ed B]

It is moral and to kill in self defense and to protect family. But we do see examples in the first few centuries of the Church where our brethren chose martyrdom over self-defense.

I will gladly accept correction here but I don't recall any mention in the history of the first few centuries of the Church where Christian leaders or Christian communities rose up in arms to defend themselves in times of persecution. It seems to me we have the right to defend ourselves but in some cases martyrdom might be a better way. But allowing a criminal to harm or kill you does not in and of itself equal martyrdom. And there is no way I could stand by and watch a family member hurt or killed without defending them, and I am certain I would defend my own life in most circumstances. I hope I would not kill a thief who was only trying to steal my TV. I would try to stop it and be willing to use physical force, but I don’t value a TV over a human life – even the life of a thief.

 

[plain_n_simple]

Put another way, how do we overcome evil?

"And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death."

Says nothing about killing those who do evil against you.

In fact, Jesus said to bless your enemies, and to love them, forgive them. This is the greatest command.

Our warfare is not against flesh and blood.

Carry the sheild of Faith.

These teachings are relevant to a true believer and are opposite of killing the man that brings evil upon you.

These teachings of Jesus are opposite of what the world teaches.

If you claim Christ and need a gun for protection, how is that any different than the man who walks without Christ and needs a gun? There is no difference no matter how you try to justify it.

 

[HAMel]

...some of you folks are really strange.

Baptist with an Amish upbringing?

 

[revmwc]

Put another way, how do we overcome evil?

"And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death."

Says nothing about killing those who do evil against you.

In fact, Jesus said to bless your enemies, and to love them, forgive them. This is the greatest command.

Our warfare is not against flesh and blood.

Carry the sheild of Faith.

These teachings are relevant to a true believer and are opposite of killing the man that brings evil upon you.

These teachings of Jesus are opposite of what the world teaches.

If you claim Christ and need a gun for protection, how is that any different than the man who walks without Christ and needs a gun? There is no difference no matter how you try to justify it.

And yet the Passage in Luke that has been posted says sell your clock and buy a sword. Why would Jesus tell his followers to buy a sword? Peter had a sword and jumped to Jesus aide and Christ told Peter to put it away for it was time, and he healed the mans ear that very night.
Jesus didn't rebuke Peter for coming to His defense but said that the hour was come.
So Christ believed the disciples had need of protection on their journey.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Why would Jesus tell his followers to buy a sword?

They needed the swords as protection against wild animals.

Ancient Palestine hosted a number of (now extinct) species like lions, bears, leopards, poisonous snakes that persistently threatened to encroach upon human territory.

http://tmackie.wordpress.com/2009/09/25/jesus-and-wild-animals/

 

[Arbo]

...some of you folks are really strange.

Baptist with an Amish upbringing?

Just lambs who want to be slaughtered.

I really am beginning to think that some here have the idea that the sacrifice of themselves and their families to criminals would be noble.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Or to rephrase the question, "Is it moral to preserve one's life (Kill) in self-defense?"

I certainly believe it is moral to take another's life in self-defense, if necessary, as well as take another's life in defense of another person.

For instance, if someone is attacking a child with the obvious intent to kidnap, rape, or murder the child, I will do everything within my power to prevent the attacker from doing so, including ending their life.

My two cents worth: Since it is moral to preserve one’s life, it is immoral for a Christian to do otherwise. :smilewinkgrin:

Nope. You've just condemned Jesus with this ethic.

As for myself, I am actually much more likely to take someone else's life on behalf of another person than to preserve my own life. I am not afraid of death, I have faced it several times before, so I am much more likely to try to delay the use of lethal force in preservation of my own life as I am the life of someone else who may not have the assurance of eternal life in Christ.

I carry a concealed semi-automatic handgun with me wherever I go except where it is not permitted, to give me options in countering a threat. Some people automatically assume my first choice in any difficult situation would be to draw and fire, but that's actually the choice of last resort. Most of the time you can defuse a situation verbally or back off. I'll gladly give someone my wallet and valuables if that will allow me not to physically harm them. However there are situations where it is clear that the bad guy wants to murder, rape, molest and destroy, and cooperating with them only makes it worse and allows them to harm more people. At that point, the handgun comes into play.

If someone is going to carry a handgun, I strongly recommend tactical firearm training, because Hollywood-style tactics will simply get you (and probably other innocent people) killed.

 

[thegospelgeek]

Interesting topic that I have considered many times over the years. No one has ever been able to show me scripture that supports the position of taking a life in order to save my own. I am convinced that the scripture supports valueing another more than my own.

I am however unsure of the position of defending my family. Should I take the position that my wife is saved and the other lost? Maybe I should but I would not unless God's grace interviened and made me able to do so.
I often hear Christian people speak of defending their home and posessions, both on this forum and at church, and think that we are missing the boat. Do we REALLY get what Christ taught?

 

[Don]

They needed the swords as protection against wild animals.

Wow. I gotta tell you, that was weak.

I read the article you provided; you apparently missed the part where there's a distinction made between "wilderness," farmlands, and towns. Since Jesus had just finished the Passover, and was on His way to the nearby Mount of Olives, He wasn't in a wilderness.

So that's quite the stretch you're making there. Makes the scripture seem almost elastic.

 

[thegospelgeek]

I certainly believe it is moral to take another's life in self-defense, if necessary, as well as take another's life in defense of another person.

For instance, if someone is attacking a child with the obvious intent to kidnap, rape, or murder the child, I will do everything within my power to prevent the attacker from doing so, including ending their life.


Nope. You've just condemned Jesus with this ethic.

As for myself, I am actually much more likely to take someone else's life on behalf of another person than to preserve my own life. I am not afraid of death, I have faced it several times before, so I am much more likely to try to delay the use of lethal force in preservation of my own life as I am the life of someone else who may not have the assurance of eternal life in Christ.

I carry a concealed semi-automatic handgun with me wherever I go except where it is not permitted, to give me options in countering a threat. Some people automatically assume my first choice in any difficult situation would be to draw and fire, but that's actually the choice of last resort. Most of the time you can defuse a situation verbally or back off. I'll gladly give someone my wallet and valuables if that will allow me not to physically harm them. However there are situations where it is clear that the bad guy wants to murder, rape, molest and destroy, and cooperating with them only makes it worse and allows them to harm more people. At that point, the handgun comes into play.

If someone is going to carry a handgun, I strongly recommend tactical firearm training, because Hollywood-style tactics will simply get you (and probably other innocent people) killed.

BaptistBeliever has brought up a point that I didnot address, the violence against another unknown person or a child. In this case, yes I believe taking the life of the asailant is moral.

 

[Amy.G]

I guess those who are against killing in self defense are also against just war? So if the US is b*mbed tomorrow by a terr*rist country, we should just sit back and do nothing?

 

[Amy.G]

God has never said killing in self defense was a sin.

 

[Alcott]

They needed the swords as protection against wild animals.

How do you know that if that is not what Jesus said?

Besides, the title question of this thread does not differentiate between self-defense in regard to animals or humans.

 

[Don]

How do you know that if that is not what Jesus said?

Besides, the title question of this thread does not differentiate between self-defense in regard to animals or humans.

I would even go so far as to say: how is a "human" attacking you for his/her own personal gain, or to simply cause violence against you, any different from an animal?

 

[blackbird]

I guess those who are against killing in self defense are also against just war? So if the US is b*mbed tomorrow by a terr*rist country, we should just sit back and do nothing?

I'd have my best jets doin' "Rubber Band" takeoffs from every carrier I had in the arsonel!!!!!:thumbs:

 

[Bobby Hamilton]

Has anyone even mentioned war here? Isn't much of killing done in war done in self defense (yes, I know there is some that isn't).

God handed out his commandments in the OT, yet he still sent his people out on missions to basically slaughter entire populations to free up the promise land.

When did this suddenly change? Or did it?

Or even what Romans 13 says? At least here, our law states that we can kill in self defense or to protect another. Thoughts?

 

[jonathan.borland]

Where in the NT or early church history do we see examples of Christians taking lives for any reason? In fact we only see examples in the opposite direction. But on the other hand we see Paul saying that he who doesn't provide for his family is WORSE than an unbeliever. We're not talking about vigilante justice killing but rather preventing evil from snuffing out your or your wife's or children's lives. That said, I would make effort to incapacitate him without killing him if possible.

 

[jonathan.borland]

There is a paradox here, for we do want to be those who "love not our lived even unto death," but at the same time those who have faith in God and enforce justice (Heb 11:33) when evil wishes to prevail.

 

[Tom Bryant]

Question for those who don't believe self defense is the right course of action. Do you call the police when you are threatened? Or afterwards do you report the person who robbed you to the police?

 

[Van]

Reply to OP

Or to rephrase the question, "Is it moral to preserve one's life (Kill) in self-defense?"

Following Tomas Aquinas' logic:

1. Natural law dictates that it is normal to preserve one’s life.
2. Since it is a principle of natural law, it is therefore moral to preserve one's life.
3. Since it is moral to preserve one’s life, it is therefore lawful to defend one’s life.
4. Therefore, self-defense is a moral act and lawful act.

It seems that there are quite a few peacenik Christians who think that it is morally reprehensible to act in defense of self and family. What do you think?

My two cents worth: Since it is moral to preserve one’s life, it is immoral for a Christian to do otherwise. :smilewinkgrin:

Always a little saddened when positions are advocated based on what men say or have reasoned, rather than answering the question of "What does God say in scripture?"

First we must answer the question does Thou shalt not kill really mean you shall not murder. Thus the killing of plant and animal life for food or protection would be ok.

Today in America, if you see a bear threatening your children and you shoot it, you can be sentenced for killing a protected animal. If you do not shoot it and the bear harms a child, you can be sentenced for child abuse or reckless endangerment, etc.

Certainly the Bible authorizes lethal force under the color of government, so soldiers are not murders. And certainly the Bible gives direction that we should protect the innocent.

OTOH, we are to turn the other cheek, i.e. allow others to disparage us, insult us, and even to bodily harm to us, but to extrapolate this to allow them to kill us or innocents seems ungodly. Much better to act collectively, rather than individually because we should be concerned with the rights of all, not just us and not "them."