Should Christians take up arms?

[Jock]

I live in the UK and guns are very much black market here. However, I lived in the States (Oregon) for 14 years and I have many friends in Michigan who are all Christians and who have a whole arsenal of weapons. Personally, I have some air guns which have a limited effect. However, I see no harm in a man having a shot gun to protect his family.

What say you?

Regards

Jock.

[Lazarus Short]

I look to the example of Abraham, who was a peaceful man, but when a family member was at risk, he roused up all the men of his household, and they spilled buckets of blood.

[Searching_For_The_Truth]

I believe in taking up arms for the purpose of self defense

[jabcat]

CCW   :)

Protection of the innocent.

[Lazarus Short]

CCW   :)

Protection of the innocent.

"CCW"?  Counterclockwise?

[sheila]

concealed carry weapon......

[Shev]

But Jesus said to him, "Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword.  53 Or do you think that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He will provide Me with more than twelve legions of angels? (Matthew 26:52-53)

Jesus is not only forbidding physical violence here, but putting the emphasis onto the reality of God's strength. On other words, if we trust God is able to protect us, why do we need to protect ourselves?

"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.'[f]-  39 But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. (Matthew 5:38-39)

Jesus clearly says here "I tell you not to resist an evil person." I am not sure what can be added to that!

Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here." (John 18:36)

Jesus shows that His kingdom is not of this world, so then neither do His servants fight.

For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds,  5 casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ,  6 and being ready to punish all disobedience when your obedience is fulfilled. (2 Corinthians 10:4-6)

Paul above asserts that our weapons are NOT carnal, but spiritual.

I don't believe in any armament other than God Himself, and this is part of walking by faith. I find that the physical violence question is a lot like tithing, inasmuch as any scriptures used as justification are from the OT. I also find that people rationalize the need for violence, usually saying something along the lines of "well, what if someone was going to hurt your wife?" To me this very thought is a lack of faith, as it is envisioning something that is not a reality, in order to justify something that is not scriptural.

Ultimately, we are ministers of Life, not Death. There comes a time when God may release His mighty hand of protection, and we may indeed be martyred. But far be it from me to even entertain the thought of doing harm to another man, wicked or not.

I truly believe that if Jesus sanctioned violence, He would have left us an example in His life to follow, or even in the life of the apostles after they were filled with the Spirit. But did Jesus resist the violence of the Jews or Roman guards? Did Paul punch and kick on any of the multiple times he was arrested, or did any of his friends jump in with sword in hand? Did Stephen rise up and throw stones back at his accusers, or did he rather echo the words of His blessed Lord?

"Do not hold this sin against them!"

[jabcat]

You make a lot of interesting points.  Generally, I certainly believe we should walk by faith, trusting God to protect.  I also believe He may provide various means for that to occur. 

I don't believe we should live by the sword, as in, go around looking for trouble, illegally and immorally attempting to hurt people.  Remember the words of Jesus also, when He said "if you don't have a sword, buy one".  As far as Jesus not fighting back; Jesus' mission was specific.  He was GOING to die, GIVING UP His life.  That was the plan.

I personally am not "an authority" as spoken of by Paul.  However, I believe there's a bigger discussion to be had about being in a position to protect oneself and even more importantly, others in their care.  Paul said "for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil."  Also, yes it is OT, but there is a scripture along the lines of entering someone's house illegally, and that one is bringing danger upon himself.  (Little "random" thought;  is it a lack of faith to lock ones' doors?)

If anyone doesn't believe they should carry or own a weapon, especially if it bothers their conscience, I don't believe they should be badgered about it.  However, I do believe it is a matter of conscience;  involving one's desires (do I just want to hurt or "get" someone), their intentions, attitudes, behavior, etc.    I can see the objection.  I can also see the side of trusting God in all things, but also realizing He may provide a reasonable means (varying by individual) to accomplish certain things.  (similar to carrying money but knowing God meets our needs.  Or praying for healing but still going to a doctor or hospital).  Is going to the doctor a lack of faith?  It might be.  But it also might be a person trusting God, but also knowing He may send the right doctor, right medicine etc.; or, just miraculously intervene without man lifting a finger.  ("every good and perfect gift is from God").

I know there are others who don't believe in physically protecting self, family, or other innocents'.  But I've had the thought re: if a person doesn't believe in carrying protection and I was with them and their family.  If they were attacked, God might just show up with a big old angel and remedy the situation right off, which would of course be tremendous.  Otherwise, I would hope God would provide the means for me to be able to take action to help protect them in their innocence Then we could argue about the moralities of it later if they wished. :)

Again, I think everyone should take it before the Lord, in their own conscience;  taking into account ALL relevant scriptures, and each do as they need to do.  God bless.

[Seth]

For it does not bear the sword for nothing. A minister of God to bring wrath on the one who practices evil.

That sounds like an apt description of Babylon to me. God used them for the same purpose on Israel. But I wouldnt want to be a Babylonian soldier. They themselves were judged too. I don't think Paul said that as a way to encourage participation in that wrath, but to be bearers of love and peace. I do believe it was Christs plan and his mission to not fight back. But I think it was also his mission to conform us to his image in this life. I think Paul many times told the church not to fight against evil in the way of the world.

I'm not sure about shotguns to protect the home. I choose not to have one personally. But as far as joining the army to fight a war, I'm totally against it for myself, and I don't think it coincides with what the ekklesia is meant to be and do as a contrasting entity to the rest of the world.  :HeartThrob:

[joeteekay]

You make a lot of interesting points.  Generally, I certainly believe we should walk by faith, trusting God to protect.  I also believe He may provide various means for that to occur. 

I don't believe we should live by the sword, as in, go around looking for trouble, illegally and immorally attempting to hurt people.  Remember the words of Jesus also, when He said "if you don't have a sword, buy one".  As far as Jesus not fighting back; Jesus' mission was specific.  He was GOING to die, GIVING UP His life.  That was the plan.

I personally am not "an authority" as spoken of by Paul.  However, I believe there's a bigger discussion to be had about being in a position to protect oneself and even more importantly, others in their care.  Paul said "for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil."  Also, yes it is OT, but there is a scripture along the lines of entering someone's house illegally, and that one is bringing danger upon himself.  (Little "random" thought;  is it a lack of faith to lock ones' doors?)

If anyone doesn't believe they should carry or own a weapon, especially if it bothers their conscience, I don't believe they should be badgered about it.  However, I do believe it is a matter of conscience;  involving one's desires (do I just want to hurt or "get" someone), their intentions, attitudes, behavior, etc.    I can see the objection.  I can also see the side of trusting God in all things, but also realizing He may provide a reasonable means (varying by individual) to accomplish certain things.  (similar to carrying money but knowing God meets our needs.  Or praying for healing but still going to a doctor or hospital).  Is going to the doctor a lack of faith?  It might be.  But it also might be a person trusting God, but also knowing He may send the right doctor, right medicine etc.; or, just miraculously intervene without man lifting a finger.  ("every good and perfect gift is from God").

I know there are others who don't believe in physically protecting self, family, or other innocents'.  But I've had the thought re: if a person doesn't believe in carrying protection and I was with them and their family.  If they were attacked, God might just show up with a big old angel and remedy the situation right off, which would of course be tremendous.  Otherwise, I would hope God would provide the means for me to be able to take action to help protect them in their innocence Then we could argue about the moralities of it later if they wished. :)

Again, I think everyone should take it before the Lord, in their own conscience;  taking into account ALL relevant scriptures, and each do as they need to do.  God bless.

Wise words James. Often when thinking about this topic and when discussing it with others I always think of:

Mat_5:44  But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
Luk_6:27  But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,

I believe this but the challenge of how to respond to someone who says if Your wife or children are about to be shot in front of you, what do you do? Shoot them first? Pray? Do both? I pray that none of us are put into that position. Sometimes I say I will take the bullet. But so what. Bottom line : all is of God

[jabcat]

A few related, scattered thoughts on Seth's post;

I wouldn't go to war if it was strictly a war of aggression.  I wonder (and have changed a little on this lately) if there might be a war with a "righteous" cause, strictly protecting a people who were "innocent" and could not protect themselves..maybe.   :Chinscratch:      I WOULD fight to protect our own country from invasion, and especially my own household.  My preference would be to flee/hide if I could, live in an isolated/protected area out of harm's way, but that may not always be reasonable/feasible.  Especially with family and extended family (children, grandchildren).  I honestly am sure I couldn't stand, pray and passively watch while my family (or other innocent) was being molested, even though I believe in prayer.  With God's help, I'd more likely be trying to end the threat to my loved ones (perhaps while whispering a prayer for help).

Thanks Joe, I appreciate it.  I've had to look at my own attitudes and motives, and have been led to pray that God would let me never have to shoot anyone.  Do I have the means?  Yes.  I may someday be in a position where shooting someone might protect an innocent person.  If so, then the prayer might have been so I would have the right attitude and motive;  i.e., not desiring to hurt others, take vengeance, live by the sword.

Also, I believe in turning the other cheek.  However, I personally see this as being willing to take insult, ridicule, be done wrong etc. without [literally or] figuratively "taking a brother to court".  Be willing to be wronged.  Even in a non-life-threatening situation, literally taking a slap without fighting back.  However - at some point (and judgment and discernment is a must) - I would likely protect myself.  But especially, others.  I think I'd find it easier to even be physically harmed or killed if it was just me.  But again, those within my trust and care?  I'm afraid I'd have to wield the sword in an attempt to protect them.  Not avenge them, but protect them if possible.

Anyway, each to his conscience and leading.   :2c:

[eaglesway]

Each to his own conscience and leading, yes. I think it is a very difficult question to generalize. I think police bear arms for good reason in a civilized country. I think defense forces are sanctioned by God.  I think it gets real dicey when it gets broken down beyond that point and highly individual to the situation and ones convictions. I personally would defend my family, or an innocent victim of violence or an endangered  child if I had the means, but I also have a lot of respect for someone who says they will not use violence for any reason.

I would not respond to persecution with violence, by God's grace, I hope.

[jabcat]

Each to his own conscience and leading, yes. I think it is a very difficult question to generalize. I think police bear arms for good reason in a civilized country. I think defense forces are sanctioned by God.  I think it gets real dicey when it gets broken down beyond that point and highly individual to the situation and ones convictions. I personally would defend my family, or an innocent victim of violence or an endangered  child if I had the means, but I also have a lot of respect for someone who says they will not use violence for any reason.

I would not respond to persecution with violence, by God's grace, I hope.

:thumbsup:

[Seth]

The source of my reasoning concerning war and why I wouldn't even fight invasion, is because I don't think of myself in terms of being American. Technically I am an American citizen and I intellectually appreciate the wisdom in the Constitution, but if I am ever faced with a choice between my weapons of war being carnal or not carnal, I choose the latter. Redefining my citizenship has allowed me to do that while reconciling the fact that if America wanted to survive it would have to fight. But I don't have to be involved. I can be a totally unabashed passfist without irony.

This has been a long journey for me because I used to be staunchly patriotic. And some people would be angry  and sarcastically ask what about the men who died to give me the freedom to even say that. My answer is that James says that all good things are from God. As much as he chose to form me in the womb of my American mother, he also formed people in despotic regimes.

God is involved and all good things come from him, so I can honestly say that while I don't have any cruel thing to say to a soldier who fought in American wars, I also don't credit them as the source for my freedom. That came from God and again he is involved in the political schema of this world.

Since I believe I am a stranger in a strange land, I have no need to fight in the army of any foreign nation. But just as Eaglesway said, these are my beliefs, and I don't know if I have the guts to back them up and stand on them when the time came. I depend wholly on grace for that because I am a weak human being in my own self.

[eaglesway]

For it does not bear the sword for nothing. A minister of God to bring wrath on the one who practices evil.

That sounds like Babylon to me. God used them for the same purpose on Israel. But I wouldnt want to be a Babylonian soldier. They themselves were judged too. I don't think Paul said that as a way to encourage participation in that wrath, but to be bearers of love and peace. I do believe it was Christs plan and his mission to not fight back. But I think it was also his mission to conform us to his image in this life. I think Paul many times told the church not to fight against evil in the way of the world.

I'm not sure about shotguns to protect the home. I choose not to have one personally. But as far as joining the army to fight a war, I'm totally against it for myself, and I don't think it coincides with what the ekklesia is meant to be and do as a contrasting entity to the rest of the world.  :HeartThrob:

I never kept a gun because I had three sons and the possibilities were just too worrisome. I think more people are killed when the wrong person in the house at the wrong time(drunk, angry, etc) grabs the gun that was meant for protection and shoots someone in the house, than get killed trying to break into a house, so I consider keeping a gun a dubious protection. Good locks, alarms, a baseball bat are probably more effective. Not to many people get shot by burglars. Lots of people get shot by angry family members or children playing etc.

I do not think Paul's words could be considered "Babylon" tho. All scripture is God-breathed and profitable for edification and instruction. But Paul was only talking about the established forms of law enforcement- not keeping a gun in the house :o)

I have always prayed for the protection of the Lord over my home and my family and friends homes. Thank God He has been faithful. But I always kept a billy club or a bat around, just in case. ;o)

[Seth]

About Paul's words. I meant that his description sounded like something Babylon would be, a method for God to execute judgement by the sword. But that doesn't mean I would want to be holding that sword. I didn't mean that Paul's words sounded like Babylon. Hope that clarifies. I also edited the post to reflect. :HeartThrob:

Loving to hear all the perspectives. It's a very difficult issue.

[WhiteWings]

"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.'[f]-  39 But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. (Matthew 5:38-39)

Jesus clearly says here "I tell you not to resist an evil person." I am not sure what can be added to that!

I think a lot can be added. Mentioning left and right has a special meaning beyond getting hit. Far more than pacifism. More like challenging. A cultural meaning.
I also think the "evil person" isn't a real criminal but that annoying neighbor who dumps his trash on your lawn.

While Jesus said not to use the sword, we must not overlook the fact that they did carry a sword. Jesus even orders to buy a sword.
Luke 22:36 He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.


Exodus 22:2-3, "If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him. If the sun be risen upon him, there shall be blood shed for him; for he should make full restitution; if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft."

The exact meaning of the verse can be discussed but lethal force is allowed in some cases.

I can't locate the verse atm, but there is a OT verse passage that orders to help/defend a neighbor that's under attack. And that includes lethal force.


Imo, it's clear that the Bible/Jesus does not forbid weapons and killing. BUT killing is only allowed under certain (extreme) conditions. So there is nothing wrong to defend your family from serious crime with lethal force. The keyword is 'serious'; that doesn't include someone taking your parking spot....
And because you can never really know when lethal force is needed you 'must' carry a gun at all times.

[Shev]

Thanks WhiteWings.

The thing about Luke 22, is that it is a strange order when taken together with Christ commanding Peter to put the sword away later and admonishing him about living by the sword. In the context of Luke 22 he is talking about it with regards to travel, as seen by the preceding verses. It is also a μαχαιρα, which is a very general description of a blade, and does not preclude it from being something that could have been used for non-violent travel purposes such as chopping wood, etc. Indeed, the word has come to just mean "knife" in modern Greek. I am not saying it is impossible Christ was intending it for violence, but it has to be read into the text, I am sure anyone would acknowledge.

I guess going back to my post, with something so serious in question, I would really like to see some kind of example from someone - anyone, among Jesus and his disciples, anywhere in the narrative, where they used violence to protect themselves or anyone else. There are so many opportunities in the NT narrative for disciples to have defended Christ and/or each other with deadly force, considering all the various tumults and persecutions, and yet I confess I cannot find a single example, save in the case of Peter, who was subsequently rebuked.

Without that example - or explicit command - we are left to assume that when he told them to buy the blades, He definitely meant "...and use them to kill when necessary", and besides that we are left to use Old Testament, Old Covenant justifications for violence. I personally hate using the Law to govern my actions under the New Covenant!

[Seth]

The only time I can think of a follower of Christ using violence is when Peter struck the man with his sword for the noblest purpose, protecting the Son of Man, who was innocent and defenseless. For this he was quickly rebuked, and Christ healed that man in spite of Peter rather than through him.

[Shev]

The only time I can think of a follower of Christ using violence is when Peter struck the man with his sword for the noblest purpose, protecting the Son of Man, who was innocent and defenseless. For this he was quickly rebuked, and Christ healed that man in spite of Peter rather than through him.

Amen Seth!

I also think this passage is a very deep parable. We are given the word of God (the two-edged sword) to bring good things to the ears of the world, but instead the word is so often misused, and cuts off ears instead, turning people away and wounding them with false report about God. And Christ demonstrates here that His ministry is good tidings to the ears of all men!

That may sound a bit garbled, but I am sure everyone will see what I am driving at...   :dsunny:

[WhiteWings]

Thanks WhiteWings.

The thing about Luke 22, is that it is a strange order when taken together with Christ commanding Peter to put the sword away later and admonishing him about living by the sword. In the context of Luke 22 he is talking about it with regards to travel, as seen by the preceding verses. It is also a μαχαιρα, which is a very general description of a blade, and does not preclude it from being something that could have been used for non-violent travel purposes such as chopping wood, etc.

And likely that was what it was used for most.
If that blade was a (big) knife or a real sword is likely an endless discussion like wine vs grape juice.

Indeed, the word has come to just mean "knife" in modern Greek. I am not saying it is impossible Christ was intending it for violence, but it has to be read into the text, I am sure anyone would acknowledge.

When reading the next verse it (almost) sounds Jesus wanted to have a sword in His group so He could be among the wicked. That would sorta declare the sword as something bad. Likely not a tool to cut wood.

Luke 22:37 For I say to you that this that has been written must yet be fulfilled in Me: "And He was numbered with the wicked." For the things concerning Me will be fulfilled.

I guess going back to my post, with something so serious in question, I would really like to see some kind of example from someone - anyone, among Jesus and his disciples, anywhere in the narrative, where they used violence to protect themselves or anyone else. There are so many opportunities in the NT narrative for disciples to have defended Christ and/or each other with deadly force, considering all the various tumults and persecutions, and yet I confess I cannot find a single example, save in the case of Peter, who was subsequently rebuked.

I think there isn't such an example besides the one already mentioned.
That can have two (or more reasons):
a] They never used violence.
b] The focus of the NT is about the Spiritual Wisdom of Jesus. Not about His tactical skills in battle.

All I'm saying is that absence of something certainly is a hint but never absolute proof. The NT writes about Jesus' life, but only a small part of it. Personally I'm sure not even all His teachings are written down. Let alone things that have nothing to do with His ministry.
I think one of the reasons He didn't want the use of sword/knife was that He knew His time was come and that He in no way wanted to escape what was coming the next day.

Without that example - or explicit command - we are left to assume that when he told them to buy the blades, He definitely meant "...and use them to kill when necessary", and besides that we are left to use Old Testament, Old Covenant justifications for violence. I personally hate using the Law to govern my actions under the New Covenant!

I understand many like things the peaceful way; but 'you' can't just sweep aside the OT because you missing peace in that Book inspired by theFather Himself. Who are we to say theSon/NT got it right and the OT was/is just an obsolete mistake?

[Jock]

Blimey! I switched my computer on this morning and there was a whole slew of TM posts about Christians taking up arms or not. I expected that I was going to get battered on this one. lol. However, it gave me a chance to see into my brother's and sister's hearts. I do believe that bearing a billy club or a baseball bat can be lethal force. You could crack somebody's skull open with those.

I don't live "by the sword" but I do own a sword. If a scenario arises then I hope that the Lord will make the way forward clear to me. Otherwise I would probably act according to the scared coward that I am. If my family were under threat of harm or even death, I can tell you right now, I would act. In this present world of violence and threats, I think it's a good idea to prepare for civil unrest, martial law or an Islamic invasion. I think that the people God gives to us within our sphere, we have a responsibility to love them, provide and protect them. James, I don't think it's a lack of faith to lock your doors, it's just smart, lest you end up in a worse situation.

Israel are a good example of armed protection. Their enemies surround them and they make no bones about wanting to annihilate them. Israel has been at war since 1948, yet they still exist which in my eyes, has to be of God.

When ISIS came rolling into Mosul, raping, beheading and killing in all manner of ways, the Christians and Yazidis fled up into the mountains. Now, those very same Christians have formed a Christian Militia to try to drive ISIS out.

I say on this subject, let it be between a brother and his God what to do in a given situation. If I am to be beheaded, Oh Lord, please give me grace and courage that I can honor you in my death when it arrives.

Bless you all, I have enjoyed your posts and have absorbed the wisdom therein.

Shalom

Jock  :Peace2:

[jabcat]

I think that the people God gives to us within our sphere, we have a responsibility to love them, provide and protect them. James, I don't think it's a lack of faith to lock your doors, it's just smart, lest you end up in a worse situation.

I say on this subject, let it be between a brother and his God what to do in a given situation.

Amen. 

A lot of good points made by you and others.
--
When using it as an example, I consider that Jesus' ultimate MISSION was to die.  Why would He be defended from it?  Otherwise, I'm still where I was when making the other posts, so I won't say anything further (right now).   :icon_jokercolor:

Except;  thinking about Jesus' mission - coming to die that we may live - makes me appreciate Him just a little more, how 'bout you?

[micah7:9]

When one is truly in spirit, imo, the thought of taking up any weapon would not enter ones mind. :2c:
Isa 54:17  No weapon formed against thee prospereth, And every tongue rising against thee, In judgment thou condemnest. This is the inheritance of the servants of Jehovah, And their righteousness from me, an affirmation of Jehovah!
1Co 3:3  For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

[joeteekay]

I agree Micah  :iagree: