This Guy: Mark Keith Robinson

I think the idea is to take military grade weapons away from everyone except the civil magistrate. If they tighten gun laws so only good people have these weapons, what would their purpose in having them? How would these weapons be of use to the Christian who never practiced violent self-defense without rebuke in the New Testament?

 

The New Testament doesn't rebuke self defense of violence.

 

Thanks for your response. Do you have any examples of this? I know Jesus told us to love our enemies and he demonstrated this for us by his life and defenseless death at their hands.

 

Because it was necessary that He go to the cross.Let's not divorce His actions from their context. If someone breaks into your house to attack your family you would not defend them?

 

Even if I killed an enemy instead of loving them, I do not see this in the example Jesus gave for us to follow. Nor do I see it in any NT passage. They robbed Paul, and his countrymen left for dead on several occasions. Yet he told us vengeance belongs to the Lord.

 

Let's not conflate vengeance with self defense.

 

Let's say we are to love our enemies, not kill them. We are not to avenge ourselves, but place vengeance in God's hands where it belongs. And that there are no NT examples of believers practicing violent self-defence. Except for Peter whom Jesus rebuked.

 

Again the rebuke was in the context of Jesus going to the cross. Love our enemies is not in the context of self defense.

 

Thanks for sharing your views. I think the ideal of nonviolence is the "target" we should shoot for, instead of enemies. I hope God will give me the courage to allow an enemy to send me to heaven rather than me sending him to Hell.

 

That is fine I will not allow someone who intends to do my family harm to do so. I will protect them at all costs.

 

I fully understand your position because this comes natural, especially for the unbeliever. But I would rather uphold Christ's teachings and suffer the consequences than kill and send someone to hell. If I am not willing to die for Christ, nothing I do in his name has any real merit. It is an empty shell of religious activity.

 

First scripture doesn't say let your family be harmed. In fact Jesus warned His disciples to protect themselves should they need to:

Luke 22:36 He said to them, “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.

In fact scripture says that those who do not provide for their families are like those who are lost:

1Timothy 5:8 But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

I would say what can be natural is to fail to provide for your family.

 

Thanks for sharing. We provide for our families. But we love Christ more than we do our families. If we love our enemies as we do our own selves, why would we not allow them to send us to heaven rather than us sending them to Hell?

 

Not if you refuse to defend them. No sir

 

But Jesus says love your enemies. If you could go to heaven instead of sending your enemy to hell, wouldn't that be loving them? Where killing them and sending them to hell would be hating them?

 

Again you conflate things in order to justify your position. Defending me or my family from someone who intends to do them harm is not hating them. It is preferring my family over them. Further, love your enemies is never in the context of self defense of physical harm. You take that passage out of context which does violence to scripture.

 

I can show examples of believers loving enemies. And because of them losing life and all in the NT rather than harming them. But I cannot find your reasoning in the NT. Faith comes from hearing the Word, and whatever is not of faith is sin.

 

That is do to your presupposition.

 

I cannot find believers using physical violence to defend themselves in the NT. Peter tried and Jesus rebuked him because of it.