Should Christians take up arms?

[Seth]

I wonder why the Apostles didn't defend themselves with violence and why they taught nonviolent responses. BTW I've addressed the protection of children.

[Psalm91:4]

Seems that each of us may likely have a different response to participating in a war effort (could even be a doctor or nurse to help the wounded) or regarding  self-defense (is it persection for being a believer or a general act of violence with intent to harm against an innocent) or the death penalty for any convicted person.

Times ahead will likely get a bit rough as this age winds down. I do expect to see the Lord`s mighty deliverences and intervention in such threatening situations if someone tried to take a life before the appointed time just as when they wanted to push Him off the cliff in Nazareth and he walked right through or past or down the midst of them.  That was one angry mob that day! But it was not his time and he could not be harmed by anyone.

It would be interesting to see a poll here and how we think we would all vote on these various issues....death penalty,  self defense. Then the generally quiet members, like me :-)  could participate too.  Just a suggestion.

[Tom]

I think it's just an assumption that none of the apostles ever resisted a violent attack from animals or humans. Maybe they chose to be martyrs. There's nothing in scripture about any of that. Maybe you choose to be a martyr. I'd say a man should protect his family though. Everybody has to do what they think is right. If we're voting, I vote for self-defense, but we have to abide by the laws of the state even if we disagree with them. That's the case for the death penalty, abortion, gay marriage, and whatever else may offend us as believers.

[Psalm91:4]

I think it's just an assumption that none of the apostles ever resisted a violent attack from animals or humans. Maybe they chose to be martyrs. There's nothing in scripture about any of that. Maybe you choose to be a martyr. " 

Well we know from Acts 22:23 that Paul did defend himself to that centurion who was about to flog him, appealing to the fact that he (Paul) was a Roman citizen, and he questioned the legality of his punishment since he was not legally found guilty of anything yet. 

It worked too!  :-)  I love how he then took advantage of the fact that both Pharisees and Sadducees were present there (Acts 23:6 ) and how that turned out with some of the Pharisees defending Paul. LOL

So, it seems to me that Paul was in no rush to be a martyr, and the Lord was with him and gave him the wisdom needed right then there to hush that angry mob who intended to murder him.  I don`t think a sword would have done him much good in that kind of situation anyway.

( I really would like to comment more but this phone is
difficult to type with )

[dajomaco]

The question (Should Christians take up arms?)
There is no cohesive group called Christian.
We are all individual believers.
The question should be (would God command a believer to kill someone?)
It is an appointed time that every-man dies.

[Tom]

I think the idea was resisting violence with violence. I guess I messed up by not repeating that. You need a laptop, sis. I think God has commanded believers to kill people. Maybe the question should be is killing ever justified? I believe it is.

[Seth]

I think it's just an assumption that none of the apostles ever resisted a violent attack from animals or humans. Maybe they chose to be martyrs. There's nothing in scripture about any of that.

To me, I think it's pretty clear all through the NT that the apostles not only re-payed violence with non-violence but preached the same. But I guess we can agree to disagree on that.

[Seth]

I think the idea was resisting violence with violence. I guess I messed up by not repeating that. You need a laptop, sis. I think God has commanded believers to kill people. Maybe the question should be is killing ever justified? I believe it is.

God commanded believers to kill other people in the Old Testament, but Jesus said

Matthew 5
38Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Jesus NEVER recommended Christians should be killing anyone, and none of the Apostles as well. In fact, they always led their lives by repaying evil with good and never striking their attackers back.

[eaglesway]

Sometimes we generalize statements based on principles that seem universal but maybe arent. These are just my opinions.

1)A policeman who is a Christian may have to violently subdue or kill someone in the line of duty.

2)A Christian soldier may have to kill someone in the line of duty.

These would be justified, before God, and even- as Paul defined it, even sanctioned by God, altho there are moderating factors on both for a Christian. "Am I defending someone or just killing". "Am I defending my nation or just killing for an oppressor". Many soldiers and police have at some point reached a crisis of conscience because they no longer felt their call to duty was a just one, so they refused to serve any longer, and sometimes paid a high price for that.

A man with with four children finds another man in his house in the middle of the night? I would ask God what to do, but I wouldnt wait long for an answer. If I did not see a weapon I would probably say something, like, "Get out of my house now, I have already called the police." But I would be prepared for violence and if my children or my wife were at risk I would be ready to get violent in their defense- short of a very strong impression or direct word from the Spirit that I shouldnt.

I think it would simply be wrong to judge a man for defending his family. God is the only judge of such things. If a husband and wife have decided together that they would not resist a robber- that is a matter of their conscience. My conscience would not allow me to do that. I would feel responsible to defend my family.

I am so grateful I have never had to test that out, altho I did at one time threaten a 21 year old student teacher who was trying to romance by beautiful but naive 14 year old daughter, who hated me for it :o), and now(18 years later) she loves me for it.

I just think this is one of those things will not fall under these universal ideals that get tossed around, in either direction.

Exodus 20:13 says You shall not murder in every major version except the KJV, Thou shalt not kill

The difference between kill and murder is signifigant. Murder is ALWAYS murder. Killing is not always murder. Murder is ALWAYS wickedness. Killing is not always wickedness.

God did not give the Israelites 10 prime directives one of which was "You shall not kill", and then tell them to go out and do just the opposite to the inhabitants of Canaan and their own serious criminals and sinners. The prime directive they received was, "You shall not murder". Then He told them to kill the Canaanites. Jesus was murdered. Stephen was murdered- but Paul did not see it as murder, nevertheless he was guilty of murder- so we see what a slippery slope this can be. :o)

The word in Exodus 20 is ratsach, it means to murder, similar to tabach(slaughter, kill ruthlessly with accusative personal)

this is as opposed to qetal, descriptive and objective of having been killed, slain....or harag which is also objective descriptive to kill(animal or man).

So I would not judge a person regardless of whether they chose to, for instance,

Join the army
Become a police officer or security person.
Defend there family in a life or death situation
Refuse military service because of their regard for the sanctity of life
Not embrace any calling or duty that might requre violence as a matter of conscience
Not defend their family in a life or death situation as a matter of conscience.

All of these things are beyond what any person is allowed to judge of another- only God can, and He will.

Dietrich Bonhoffer was one of the great Chrstian writers and theologians. He was executed for being in the resistance against Hitler in WW2. He worked with and was close friends with Hans Dohnanyi, who had planted a bomb in two champagne bottles on a plane Hitler was flying in(the mechanism failed).

"In October 1940, Dietrich Bonhoeffer began work as an agent for Military Intelligence, supposedly using his ecumenical contacts to help the cause of the Reich. In reality, he used his contacts to spread information about the resistance movement. In trips to Italy, Switzerland, and Scandinavia in 1941 and 1942, he informed them of resistance activities and tried, in turn, to gain foreign support for the German resistance."

On September 5, 1941, all Jews in the Reich were ordered to wear the yellow star; the first deportations to the East from Berlin occurred on October 15. On October 17 or 18, Bonhoeffer and Friedrich Perels, a Confessing Church lawyer, wrote a memo giving details of these first deportations.  The memo was sent to trusted German military officials in the hope that it might move them to action(to overthrow Hitler), as well as to ecumenical contacts and the US State Department.

The arrests of Dohnanyi and Bonhoeffer followed in April 1943.(after they were discovered using large amounts of money they had received in donations to help Jews escape and emmigrate).The Gestapo report on Bonhoeffer described him as "completely in the opposition".

In October 1944, Bonhoeffer was moved to the dreaded Gestapo prison in Berlin; in February 1945, he was taken to Buchenwald. He was then moved to the Flossenbürg concentration camp where, on April 9, he was hanged, together with Canaris, Oster, and other conspirators.

The SS doctor who witnessed Bonhoeffer's death later recalled a man "devout . . . brave and composed. His death ensued after a few seconds . . . I have hardly ever seen a man die so entirely submissive to the will of God." Bonhoeffer sent one final message, to George Bell in England: "This is the end, for me the beginning of life."

In one of the last letters he wrote, to a former student, he said,

We realize that the world is in God's wrathful and merciful hands.... We learned too late that it is not the thought, but readiness to take responsibility that is the mainspring of action. Your generation will relate thought and action in a new way.

His book, The Cost of Discipleship, is one of the most revered Christian books outside of the Bible.

[Seth]

I think if it's a matter of judging, I don't judge anyone for doing those things. But, I think it's diffiult to live by Christ's directive to not repay eye for eye, and evil for evil, but to turn the other cheek when attacked, if joining the army to fight that same attacker  :dontknow:

I think the turn the other cheek scripture is so difficult it tends to just be made into a suggestion, rather than a directive. I've seen Biblical literalists claim that Jesus meant something else, wasn't being literal or clear. I think he was pretty clear and literal myself. And, I can see how people reason about the child in danger, but I really don't see how joining a war fills Christ's commandment not to repay evil with evil. I mean, pretty much it can be reasoned into such a corner that it's like Jesus never said it. One preacher once said "don't confuse your personal life with your national life" as a way to justify not turning other cheek in war time, and repaying evil with evil (anyone who has seen war knows it's evil.)

But then others will say, that it doesn't even really apply to your own personal life (not talking about protecting a child, but one's personal self). Basically it works out that you don't really need to repay evil with good, only in very specific isolated circumstances. To me, that put restrictions on the text that Jesus never did. And if you apply both approaches at once, it renders the text as though it never existed.

And I think the apostles demonstrated their adherence to that commandment in the manner that the apostles lived, receiving all manner of degradation and physical assaults and literally applying Christ's words in ALL those situations and being at peace with all men, while letting God judge the outside world.

But oh well. Nobody agrees on everything.  :Peace2:

[Shev]

I think if it's a matter of judging, I don't judge anyone for doing those things. But, I think it's diffiult to live by Christ's directive to not repay eye for eye, and evil for evil, but to turn the other cheek when attacked, if joining the army to fight that same attacker  :dontknow:

I think the turn the other cheek scripture is so difficult it tends to just be made into a suggestion, rather than a directive. I've seen Biblical literalists claim that Jesus meant something else, wasn't being literal or clear. I think he was pretty clear and literal myself. And, I can see how people reason about the child in danger, but I really don't see how joining a war fills Christ's commandment not to repay evil with evil. I mean, pretty much it can be reasoned into such a corner that it's like Jesus never said it. One preacher once said "don't confuse your personal life with your national life" as a way to justify not turning other cheek in war time, and repaying evil with evil (anyone who has seen war knows it's evil.)

But then others will say, that it doesn't even really apply to your own personal life (not talking about protecting a child, but one's personal self). Basically it works out that you don't really need to repay evil with good, only in very specific isolated circumstances. To me, that put restrictions on the text that Jesus never did. And if you apply both approaches at once, it renders the text as though it never existed.

And I think the apostles demonstrated their adherence to that commandment in the manner that the apostles lived, receiving all manner of degradation and physical assaults and literally applying Christ's words in ALL those situations and being at peace with all men, while letting God judge the outside world.

But oh well. Nobody agrees on everything.  :Peace2:

Very well put, Seth. Obviously a very thorny and touchy subject, but it has drawn some thoughtful, measured responses on all sides, as is to be expected from this forum.

Personally I just feel very wary about the lack of violent example from Christ and His followers, in addition to the scriptures such as turning the other cheek that you quoted. For me to follow Christ, and to do something He commanded against, and did not set an example of, is very shaky ground. I just feel as though all the justifications for violence come either from the Law, or else rationalization of things said and done by Christ and the disciples that appear to be against violence. It almost becomes something along the lines of "we never are told that they DIDN'T use violence, therefore they must have."

The central reality to following Christ is that we are conformed to His image. The things that we do, we are then testifying that He does, because He is in us. To say (or imply) that Jesus Christ leans on the arm of the flesh for His protection, makes Him (to my mind) no different than the military messiah the Jews (and now modern Christians) are waiting for - who will subdue His enemies by force of arms, instead of by the spiritual double edged sword of the Word of God.

[eaglesway]

 The way I look at is this. If Paul says the sword is implemeted by God so that evil-doers will fear- then it is so. Paul never disagreed with Jesus- the scriptures cannot be broken. There is no less authority in those words than in the words, "resist not evil, overcome evil with good"or, "turn the other cheek"- but the context is different, and they only connect in principle(all should always strive for peace). Paul is making it clear that God sanctions the rule of law and that the rule of law requires enforcement and that in a world of depraved violence and predation, sometimes the correct response is violent enforcement(military or police action). If Paul meant ANYTHING ELSE he would have used some other terminology than, "the sword". When it comes to defending the innocent from the predator, sometimes it is God's will to use violence. The fine lines of application in that, whether it is national military or community policing is something that everyone who engages in that will be judged in, because anything God sanctions that involves the exercize of power is judged more strictly.

The real purpose of police is to defend the weak against predators. Abuse of police power is judged unrighteous.

The real purpose of the military is to defend the community/nation against aggressors. Imperialist wars are judged unrighteous.

[sheila]

   John 18;21-23  is an example of Jesus doing the turning of the cheek.  physically violent attack over offense of the "word of truth"

    spoken[offended over a word]    He turned the other cheek,right there...and did not back down from speaking truth..even knowing

  it may result in more violence against His person. it was about the testimony there/witnesses and establishing truth.


   if thy ear offend thee..cut if off..Peter was called satan and told to get behind me..for the desire of men/not God.

     Peter was offended that the Lord would be crucified. I wonder if it was   the same servant of the High Priest whose ear was cut off

   by Peter..and Jesus replaced..that slapped Him..?.


       

    our battle is not against flesh and blood,but against [corrupt] powers and principalities in High places[like Ahab and Jezebel

   did to Naboth for his vineyard,like Jesus parable of vineyard let out to tenants..that killed the Master's son]

   
   WHAT IS TRUTH? 


You white-washed tombs..offspring of vipers..hypocrites etc..doesn't seem like peaceable speech..but downright imflammatory or

provoking at times...the truth in your face!!


   if we share spiritually in the 'word of God'  likewise we share materially.... If a man spiritually be the head of his wife...so

  too,phyisically......giving up his life to present her spotless and blameless unto himself........under the law covenant..he did

  that by taking on the appearance of sin..and laying His life down......40 lashes save one..etc..........


   isn't their something about love not seeking after it's own advantage,but the advantage of other's........


   sometimes our hands are tied[bound on earth/bound in heaven] and we can't do much[the night comes when no man can work]

   ...and the Lord may reply...why do you trouble her?  ..she did what she could.


      but...I can not leave this topic without mentioning the book of Ester.  .and Hamaan[symbolizing the wicked  enemy of Israel]

    setting a day to kill/exterminate all the jews..after all..when Hamaan wanted Mordecai to stand..he didn't,when he wanted

   Mordecai to bow,He didn't..   Ester ch 3  please read about documents sent throughout the land pertaining to exterminating

  the jews. Then read  Odes of Solomon ch 23..about sealed document sent out throughout the land........


    Jesus is a Lamb..Jesus is a LION OF THE TRIBE OF JUDAH.  there were two High Priests...one was anointed for war...He makes

  war in righteousness.  Do not think I come to bring peace..but a sword..


        ..Zechariah ch 1 Angel of the Lord among the Myrtle trees    Ester/Myrtle/Hadassah...four horns,four craftsmen,four chariots.

  ten men[Zechariah 8;23] versus ten sons of Haman] from all languages and nations..   will say..'let us go with you,for we have

heard 'God is with you[o'immanuel]  Zechariah 9;14   the Lord will appear  over them,His arrow will flash like lightening[see arrow shot

violently from the bow in Ode 23]

     the jews were granted to fight to defend themselves from annihilation per Hamaan in Persia......


      Place me as a seal upon your heart and arm[sos] Ode 23 v6 and many hands rushed to the letter,to seize it and to take it,

   and to read it,and it escaped their fingers and they were affrightened at it and the seal that was upon it. Because it was not permitted

  unto them to loose it's seal;for the power that was over the seal was greater then they[for love is as strong as death]


    Ester would not have bothered her Lord..with her request..if it was just a matter of being sold into slavery....they were facing

   annihilation/genocide..........

   before I knew it..my desire found me among the royal chariots of my people.

       

[Jock]

Some excellent posts here from everybody. I especially enjoyed Eaglesway's post including the story of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. One can see, even in a small grouping of Christians that there are many different takes in these matters. Every situation (should they occur) will be unique and every brother/sister, unique, all desiring to do God's will.

I would want to try to diffuse the situation if I could by offering food, water, valuables or whatever and in a perfect world, offer him a meal and speak to him about Christ. But we know that our next breath and our future rests with God. I would just pray that the Spirit would speak in my inner ear and I could obey. Anyway, it has been a most interesting and soul searching thread.

Thanks to you all  :dsunny:

Shalom :Peace2:

Jock

oh, btw, here is a link that I received this morning through the daily telegraph. I would not judge these men. I am not in their position and have no idea in my wildest imagination, what it would be like. That rests with God alone I think.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9539244/Syria-Christians-take-up-arms-for-first-time.html

[Lazarus Short]

I'm reminded of this:

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Seth]

It's true that God implements the sword. But the same Apostle Paul who said that also said we ought not be the judges of the outside world, to repay evil with good, Harcourt weapons of war are not carnal but Spiritual.

And Jesus said himself not to repay eye for eye but to turn the other cheek. the way I see it, the outside world is to be for God's judgement, but blessed are the meek and the peacemakers.

the Bible says that some Christians were turned over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh so that the man live in the day of the Lord. In other words Satan is another tool of God. But that doesn't mean I want to be Satan. & I wouldn't want to be a Babylon soldier either even though God use them to judge Israel.

[Tom]

I want to live in peace. I have inner peace thanks to the power of the holy spirit of God. I'm not bloodthirsty, and I don't even want to hurt another human being emotionally. But I know a person, when faced with danger up close and personal, will react instinctively with survival skills whether that person is a believer or not. You may feel bad about it later if you have to hurt or kill somebody to save yourself and your family, but, in the seconds it takes for the violence to happen, you don't have time to think about turning the other cheek. You will just be trying to stay alive like any other living soul would do. Some people are better equipped to do so than others, but I think most people would do whatever is possible to try to react to the situation in a way that stops the attack by the perpetrator. You can have a debate afterward about if you think you did the right thing, but I think your family will be grateful you did something to protect them. It may result in another human being getting hurt very badly or even killed, but I think you would be justified for defending yourself and your family. Unfortunately, there are some places where the legal system would consider you a criminal for doing so. I recently read about an old guy who was attacked in his home by a few thugs, and he used his gun which was illegal in that place. Now he faces ten years in prison, and the guys who put stitches in his head before he fired a few shots hitting one of them will only have to do a couple of years because their crimes are seen to be less serious than the guy using a gun in his own home to protect himself. I learned a long time ago that the so called justice system is not fair, and you only get as much justice as you can afford. I think it's immoral that governments disarm their citizens when they need guns to protect themselves from criminals. The cops can't protect you because the violent crime happens in seconds. All the cops do is show up and do some paperwork while your dead body is laying on the floor. Before I moved to Florida, I lived on the south side of Chicago where there was gunfire on my street several times a week. I had a shotgun that I had to register with the city and .357 snubby that was illegal in the city. I kept them both loaded and ready all the time, and sometimes I had to get my ex down on the floor when the shooting was going on right outside my front window. I hear you can own a pistol in Chicago now, but it never should have been illegal to do so. People deserve to be able to protect themselves. There are a lot of stories about people getting locked up for doing so. The post about Hitler reminded me about how he easily managed to round up the Jews and take them away to die after he made it illegal for them to possess firearms. The government and the police are not your bodyguards with you 24/7. So you better be able to protect yourself and your family. I consider a violent person attacking me or my family a vicious predator just like a wild animal. I don't think there's time to consider spiritual matters when it happens. You just have to react with force to stop the attack. The intent is not to kill but to stop the violent confrontation that happens in a matter of seconds. People can philosophize all they want after you do what is necessary to stop the attack, but you have to stop it with whatever force and skill you have. If I'm going to be accused of being a bad Christian or a non-Christian because I used violence to stop an attack, I don't care. It would just be another reason I'd be criticized by people for not conforming to their beliefs. I believe the inspired written word of God, and I believe the section of Revelation about Christ coming back, fighting, and defeating the forces of evil is literal. I think there's a time and place for everything. I know there's a lot of debate about literal vs. figurative or metaphysical especially in Revelation, but I believe you should interpret everything literally unless it obviously can't be. I know some people think most of scripture is figurative, and some even think it's all fantasy. I think even those who aren't familiar with scripture or even Yahweh and Yeshua HaMashiach can still have a good conscience given to them by God and be good people. They may not be in the body of Christ and receive eonian life, but I believe God loves them and will save them from death at the consummation of the eons. I even believe God loves the violent criminal who may attack my family and will save him from death at the consummation of the eons because evil will eventually be nullified and death will be abolished. I can even say I love the violent criminal with the love of God, but I won't let that stop me from using force against force if I and my family are attacked. I believe God is love, but I also understand why God causes us all to be dying. I think we all experience dying to help us really appreciate life more. I think the darkness helps us appreciate light more. I think evil helps us appreciate good more. I think God is very wise to cause us to experience the full spectrum of life by subjecting us to evil and good. Thank God we have an expectation that a time will come when we will no longer have to experience evil or death. In the meantime, I'll try to do my best to follow the teachings of Christ but keep things in context. I'm sorry for the long post, but I just don't believe I'm supposed to be passive when confronted with violence if I can do something about it.   

[Seth]

The things about literal vs figurative is interesting because the only place anyone can find an example of Christ supposedly condoning violence is from passages which are from parable or Revelation.

In revelation 19 the sword comes out of Christ's mouth. Do you LITERALLY believe that Christ is going to fight with a sword in his mouth? I think it shows that Christ method of fighting the world is by speaking the truth.

Jesus LITERALLY said that if someone strikes your cheek, turn the other one. How does that work with conceal and carry for self protection, or dropping napalm on villages to fight the commies?

[Seth]

The thing about the literal-first approach, especially how it has been used in this conversation, is that  literal-first is a presupposition, whatever is assumed before reading the text. We all pre-suppose things, some of which the Bible says (i.e. God exists). The problem for me with literal-first is that the scripture never says that. It never says "assume a literal reading first."

To me, that makes it a personal presupposition, and so being, could be wrong. I could be wrong about things too, so not saying people have to be perfect. But in this conversation, evidence based on personal presuppositions, not specifically endorsed by scripture, are not convincing proofs to me that Christ condones violence for the ekklesia. YOU choose to take things literally first? That's fine. I don't. My method is to take every scripture as it comes without assuming anything, look at the context, compare against other scriptures and see if any ideas form from there. Right or wrong, that is my approach, and since the presupposition of literal-first is personal, I don't see why I should incorporate your methodology to accept Revelation and Gehenna examples as proofs for Christ-condoned violence.

[CHB]

I would say that however we handle a situation that involves protecting ourselves or others, is how God wants the situation to be handled else it would be different. It's all in his hands, even our actions.

CHB

[Patinak]

I agree that Jesus would not condone violence, after all why did God destroy the earth in Noah's time:

So God said to Noah, "I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth. Gen. 6:13

I see 'violence' as an offensive action (non-love).  Very different than the 'use of force' in a defensive action.
It's almost like the ET/UR distinction.

When God disciplines and chastises, it is not an offensive action, on the contrary, he is ultimately protecting us against ourselves.

In Paul's letter to the Galatians in chapter 5, he basically said that he wished the Judaizers would cut off their genitals.  This is not 'turning the other cheek'.   Jesus said 'But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.' Matt. 5:28, so what Paul said about the Judaizers was the same as doing it, but, it was in defense of his 'little ones'.

For me, this is where I see the dividing line, has to do with motive of the heart.  Murder is always an offensive (non-love) act.  But, I can see a circumstance when killing could be considered an act of love.

Pat

[Seth]

I see 'violence' as an offensive action (non-love).  Very different than the 'use of force' in a defensive action.

Jesus phrases it in a defensive mode: If someone slaps you first, turn the other cheek. If the apostles were facing death every day, why weren't they taking up arms against their attackers? Why were they turning the other cheek?

In other words, Christ was preaching non-violence as a counter reaction to self defense. BTW, we have seen this in practice in the 60s civil rights movement, reacting with nonviolence to incoming violence, not repaying evil for evil, and that is what shamed the racist attackers before the whole nation on tv. Many of these people could have been killed but they held to MLK Jr's radical call for complete not violent response because he understood the power in it.

When God disciplines and chastises, it is not an offensive action, on the contrary, he is ultimately protecting us against ourselves.

I agree. I just think that we are to give the place of "offensive action" to God not put it into our own hands.

In Paul's letter to the Galatians in chapter 5, he basically said that he wished the Judaizers would cut off their genitals.  This is not 'turning the other cheek'.   Jesus said 'But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.' Matt. 5:28, so what Paul said about the Judaizers was the same as doing it, but, it was in defense of his 'little ones'.

I'm not sure how the "lustfully" scripture is supporting what you are saying? How was Paul looking lustfully at a woman? Paul never went out and ACTUALLY castrated anyone. Here is what he said: that they would do it to themselves rather than trouble the church. Paul was not about to pick up a sword and go out and cut people apart because he didn't practice violence.

If Paul thought violence was a way to protect his "little ones" from Judaizing he was well within his means to tell the church to literally castrate Judaizers. I think that is obviously he would never do, and he never did. He never told the church to protect the little ones in his church through violent action.

For me, this is where I see the dividing line, has to do with motive of the heart.  Murder is always an offensive (non-love) act.  But, I can see a circumstance when killing could be considered an act of love.

So if a terrorist attacks a building, going out to kill him is an act of loving him? That's what Jesus had in mind by not fighting evil with evil and loving your enemy?

[Patinak]

So if a terrorist attacks a building, going out to kill him is an act of loving him? That's what Jesus had in mind by not fighting evil with evil and loving your enemy?

I think you missed the point.  The act of love is not toward the terrorist, but defending others from him (love for them).

[Seth]

So if a terrorist attacks a building, going out to kill him is an act of loving him? That's what Jesus had in mind by not fighting evil with evil and loving your enemy?

I think you missed the point.  The act of love is not toward the terrorist, but defending others from him (love for them).

But we are supposed to love our enemies, not go out and kill them. We are supposed to let God use the outside world not to make ourselves their judgment.

Luke 6
27"But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. 30Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31Do to others as you would have them do to you.

32"If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them. 33And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do that. 34And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, expecting to be repaid in full. 35But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. 36Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.

People may say that none of that counts in wartime. But I believe that is when it counts the most because wartime is when the worst evil is done to me enemies as a response to them doing evil to me.

[dajomaco]

Therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, I urge you to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God; this is your spiritual worship.[a]  2 Do not be conformed to this age, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may discern what is the good, pleasing, and perfect will of God.