Guns, self-defense and Christians

[Sean]

I dont know guys- preaching the gospel to a thug while he is slaughtering my family rather than protecting them (if I could) seems a bit much-- and I truly think the Lord would be appalled by such a thing. I think that is stretching scripture to the breaking point.

This is not what I said. Yet this issue quickly becomes emotional leading to a false dichotomy between killing and doing nothing. Yet I never said do nothing. Nor do I consider myself or family superior to that "thug".

But come on now- I cannot believe Jesus would expect any man, or woman, to stand by and allow their family to be murdered if they had some power to stop this from happening. If a robber attacked Mary physically, I believe Jesus would have protected her.

TK

What I can't believe is Jesus would expect me to kill anyone. Protect your family? Sure. But kill them? Nor do I see a blur in the line between the governing authorities who bear the sword and the people who we are told don't (Romans 12-13).

What happens if the "thug" has a knife, you pull out your gun & the "thug" takes your gun and murders your family? Maybe he wouldn't have killed anyone if you hadn't pointed a gun at them. You just never know how someone like this is going to react, nor can you, with exact certainty predict you will win an altercation with a "thug" if you pull a gun on them.

Yeah i kind of don't get it, a wife is supposed to submit to her husband so that he can stand by and let her and the kids get murdered because we are concerned the murderer may go to hell if he may be killed?

I've always wondered why the church for the first 300 years never thought this way?

I realize that this doesn't present a biblical case either for or against home self-defense. But I think this is one of those issues that Christians have liberty to decide for themselves based on their conscience before God. I've heard great arguments on both sides.

Lord bless.

And on that I agree.

When it comes to non-lethal self defense (even against animals) pepper spray and/or a Tazer would seem to be preferable. Both have good stopping power (guns sometimes do not), and neither device does permanent harm to the man or animal on the receiving end. If a Christian is totally against offering any form of resistance to attackers, then these devices would not be acceptable to him, but for those who believe that painful, but not lethal, forms of family protection are consistent with Christian love, these options leave little to which to object.

I would also agree with this.

Personally, I would stop any attacker. It does not matter if it were my own family or someone else. Even if the person was armed. I'm simply not "wired" in such a way to fear a violent oppressor. It actually has the opposite effect on me for some reason. But that in no way means I would try to kill them.

[Homer]

What puzzles me are the references to Romans 12 & 13 in regard to self defense. It seems to me that self defense is not addressed there. The role of government in punishing (and deterrence) is an after-the-fact role in almost all cases. The threat of punishment is of no utility once the evil perrson has commenced his attack, and the governments' wrath is applied only after the attack so it is no defense in that case. It is vengeance, or justice, which is forbidden for us to take.

It seems to me the principles in the law, Exodus 22:2-3 would be helpful in thinking this matter through.

Exodus 22:2-3 (New King James Version)
2. If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed. 3. If the sun has risen on him, there shall be guilt for his bloodshed. He should make full restitution; if he has nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.

This appears to give permission to defend yourself and family from an attacker were there is no alternative. It is dark, the intent of the attacker is unclear, and there is little opportunity to escape. In daylight presumably there is opportunity to identify the attacker, discern his intent, and also to escape.

[brody196]

I see nothing morally wrong in protecting your family from an intruder or anyone who aims to harm an innocent person. My reasoning is summed up in these points:

1.) Justice: It is not just in anyway to allow your family, whom God intrusted to your care, to be harmed by a criminal. If I were to allow such, I would not be able to live with myself knowing that I let my family suffer when I could have stopped it. Unfortunately, people sometimes make the wrong choices and allow themselves to get into situations that may well cost them their lives. If a criminal were to choose to break into my house with the intention of harming my family, I would not hesitate to put him down. This may sound harsh, but the truth of the matter is, I value the life of my innocent family than that of the criminal intending to harm them.

2.) Mercy: I would look for other ways to diffuse the situation before resorting to "shoot to kill". If the intruder was not armed, I would hold them at gun point until the cops arrived to carry them away. If I was not able to get to my gun, I would take them down, pass their guard, and use my Jujitsu to choke them out. This would not kill them, but render them harmless until the cops arrived.

3.) Conscience and societal norms: Lastly, while I love all men and desire all to know Christ, I could not violate my conscience by standing around and doing nothing while my innocent family was being victimized by an intruder. The social norm in my area is to protect your family, and while I do not adhere to every social norm in my area, I find nothing wrong with this one. If I were to allow my family to be victimized, I would be viewed as a coward.


Those are my thoughts, you are welcome to disagree. Since this is such a grey area, I did not provide many bible references.

God bless.

[brody196]

What puzzles me are the references to Romans 12 & 13 in regard to self defense. It seems to me that self defense is not addressed there. The role of government in punishing (and deterrence) is an after-the-fact role in almost all cases. The threat of punishment is of no utility once the evil perrson has commenced his attack, and the governments' wrath is applied only after the attack so it is no defense in that case. It is vengeance, or justice, which is forbidden for us to take.

It seems to me the principles in the law, Exodus 22:2-3 would be helpful in thinking this matter through.

Exodus 22:2-3 (New King James Version)
2. If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed. 3. If the sun has risen on him, there shall be guilt for his bloodshed. He should make full restitution; if he has nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.

This appears to give permission to defend yourself and family from an attacker were there is no alternative. It is dark, the intent of the attacker is unclear, and there is little opportunity to escape. In daylight presumably there is opportunity to identify the attacker, discern his intent, and also to escape.

Hi Homer, I take the phrase "if the sun has risen on him" to mean that if a thief breaks in and gets away with the stuff and you go and find him the next day and kill him, you will be guilty of murder. I may be mistaken though...

[markyzz]

My views can be found here: http://www.thenarrowpath.com/ta_resistance.php I wrote that back in 1999, but still am fairly persuaded of the same position today.

Nice dude.

[Singalphile]

It seems to me like defending victims is a no-brainer, even if killing the aggressor is necessary to save the victim, for the reasons already mentioned. I might not take such action if I knew that the (soon to be murdered) victim was a Christian, knew that the victim would not want me to intervene, and thought that inaction could accomplish some good.

How one should defend himself and his own property? Scripture and the attitude of Christ leans heavily towards non-violence and non-resistance, I think.

Fortunately, it's probably extremely unlikely that any one of us will have to deal with this type of confrontation. Crime rates are still trending down, I think. ... unless you're in a gang or something.

P.S. Joan, if you're still around, I hope you've stopped walking in those woods at night!

[SteveF]

I might not take such action if I knew that the (soon to be murdered) victim was a Christian, knew that the victim would not want me to intervene, and thought that inaction could accomplish some good.

According to the Waodani in Ecuador, this was the very decision Jim Elliot, Ed McCully, Roger Youderian, Pete Fleming, and Nate Saint made when they chose not to defend themselves. This literal Christ like act was the very thing that touched the heart of the Waodani.

Choosing self-defense may have bred more violence (we don’t know), but their self-sacrifice clearly bore fruits of righteousness.

[Singalphile]

Oh, yeah. I saw that movie. I think you're right.

[dwilkins]

I looked through the posts and didn't see much engagement of Christ's admonition to the Disciples to sell their coats to buy a sword because he was about to leave them,

Luk 22:35 And he said to them, "When I sent you out with no moneybag or knapsack or sandals, did you lack anything?" They said, "Nothing."
Luk 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.
Luk 22:37 For I tell you that this Scripture must be fulfilled in me: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors.' For what is written about me has its fulfillment."
Luk 22:38 And they said, "Look, Lord, here are two swords." And he said to them, "It is enough."

I am not arguing that this one passage negates everything Christ previously taught, but I'm curious about how to integrate it with the rest of the message.

Regarding Romans 13, keep in mind that, from a basically preterist point of view, the narrative of the New Testament is fundamentally that the Jews were about to have God's vengeance executed against them by the Roman government. This means that the context of Romans 13 is important, and might not be universally portable.

Doug

[MMathis]

For those who say ",...but kill them?...I would say this. If you are ever confronted in your home, I hope you have all this worked out ahead of time, because it will be over before you can think.

Aim for center of mass, and try not to jerk the trigger.

PS: The registered guns are the only ones that will be picked up.