As gun owners we have all considered the possibility that there might be a nationwide gun confiscation or other government oppression that might result in a revolution or civil war.

The purpose of this thread is not to speculate on the likelihood of either one happening in the near future, but to ask "When is it murder, and when is it war?"

Does war require legitimate military discipline and a declaration of such from someone in authority to be legitimate in the eyes of the Lord?

By that standard, I suppose a citizen-led boogaloo would necessarily remain "murder" from a spiritual perspective.

But is that the proper place to draw the line?

Did the Confederacy have a legitimate cause to rebel, or did members of the Southern forces remain murderers in the eyes of God because they revolted against the official government of the United States of America?  Should they have continued to render unto Caesar even if it meant surrendering their principles to the Federal system versus states rights?

Should the American colonies have remained British subjects under the same theory?

Why was it that the Founding Fathers considered their cause just?  Were they incorrect?

Is a guerilla war legit war, or just organized murder?

One supposes that blowing up an abortion clinic is always murder, correct?  One does not want to use killing to stop killing, right?  Or is that how God looks at it?  Why were the Israelites told to kill everything, including men, women, children, and even farm animals when invading new territories?  That doesn't sound very "Christian," right?

What say you:  Where do  you draw the line between legitimate war vs. murder?

When they strap a bomb to a child and send them on over like red rover!
On a serious note, I would say when you or your loved ones lives are at risk and/or people that know they're doing wrong (just following orders) and continue
to follow orders because they're afraid to stand up against the flow.

And yet millions of Christians allowed themselves to be mercilessly butchered by the Romans without revolting.  How does one interpret their actions?

Cowardice?

(Note that when I make arguments in this thread I'm trying to be somewhat Platonian and rhetorical.  I may post something not necessarily because I personally believe it but to elicit responses).

About then Attached File

I wouldn't say cowardice necessarily.
It was probably similar to what happened to the jews when hitler was in power.
Just watched a documentary about it. Most couldn't believe it was happening until it was actually happening and they were being loaded on trains.
Now days, we have guns and we are ultra informed about what's happening all over the world at any given time, hopefully we would have time to prepare.
And you have to figure out what your line in the sand really is.  And if it's going to be a fight or flight response.

It’s ok to be a murderee!

I remember when I asked my CCD teacher about that.

He literally said that the 6th Commandment (which to us was "Thou Shall Not Kill") "Didn't count in war."

I know he was a bad ambassador for the Faith but that was the day I started to suspect something wasn't right.

The actual translation is "You Shall Do No Murder."  That probably doesn't help much, but then you go over to Ecclesiastes and it clearly says there's a time to kill.

We want to know where one draws the line between "a time to kill" and "you shall do no murder."

There must be one.

I've thought very long and hard about this myself.

The way I look at it, god doesn't expect us to literally wait until death is on our doorstep to defend ourselves.

We've been told over and over what these people intend to do.

It's been demonstrated time and again that they are willing and able.

When I pass I won't have any regrets or any fear for where my soul is headed.

In the old testament, they weren't shy about killing other tribes to travel/move through the land and set up where God told them to live.  He even helped.

And, in the original language the commandment was about killing, it was about murder.  Murder isn't killing in self defense, killing to protect property, killing to protect family, killing to protect the tribe, killing to do the will of God.

When the bible was translated to English the King of England directed his churches scholars/monks to interpret/translate the bible in a manner than solidified is rule/power over his people.

In the 9th grade, my best friend was Jewish.  He and his father tried to explain some of that to me at the time.

The Yankee Invaders committed murder; Confederates fought to free their lands.

Q: Can you murder a legitimate enemy as a soldier?
A Yes.

Murder and killing are not the same thing.

That said I'm not aware of the apostles killing anyone, post crucifixion of Jesus. It's interesting that tonight I should read Titus 3:1-7 as my nightly reading.

That said,  I do believe it's justified to kill to protect "innocent people" and family, especially our wives and children.  But not to go seeking a fight, avoiding a fight if at all possible and fleeing if an option, only fighting for others as a last option. There's other nuanced things though, like if someone were to persecute you for your faith, I'm not sure under the threat of death if it's right to defend yourself with lethal force or not. I think there's some evidence in scripture that the right course of action is to be more of a martyr. Trying to minister and love the person, of course this is all situational and there's a million possible scenarios. It's a complicated thing to ponder as a Christian.

Ask yourself this though, maybe it will help. Do you want to kill those people who want to undermine our country?
Why? Shouldn't you rather they find truth? What would that change? Wouldn't that be far better?

All that said,  my door gets kicked in at 2am, and I'm going straight into seek and destroy mode. But that's to protect my wife And children.

Just things to ponder.

The Bible has always separated killing (justifiable homicide) from murder.

The difference is intent, for which the Bible has always placed an emphasis on throughout the New Testament especially.

Jesus told his disciples, "If you don't have sword, sell  your cloak and buy one."  Clearly, He allowed a place for violence even in trying to bring the Kingdom of God to the world.

There's some debate over what he meant by that, but he was certainly not advocating using the sword to advance the gospel.

If he was telling them to use it at all ot was in view of self-defense to protect them as he sent them out "as sheep among wolves".

The long and short of it is: "that's a toughie".

Wars will be won and lost as Christ dictates them to be regardless of your participation. Whether he wants you to participate is the question at hand.

If you want a hard and fast rule, the point of Christ doing away with the law was to get rid of such things, as we are now adults and can think with the upbringing the law gave us (but do not interpret that as license). I don't thing you should look externally first, but internally. What are your motivations? Why do you go, for glory, for revenge, bloodlust, etc.... or love, and then, love of what?

The default position should be don't go to war, but one must keep in mind that the fist mentioned gentile convert in the NT was a centurion (Acts 10-11), and the greatest faith in all Israel that Jesus noted was also a centurion (Luke 7).

Jesus did not do away with the law.  He said He came to fulfill the law.

He did fulfill it and the covenant terms are complete. Thus, there was a change in priesthood and so also there was a change in law (Heb 7:12). The covenant the law was under rolled up and blew away (see Heb 8) and we are now under a better covenant.

This is not to say the law should be ignored, but rather the law was and is a great teacher of principles for ethical behavior and human flourishing. It also teaches how to obey the two greatest commandments, that is to love the lord your God with all of your heart (commandments 1-4) and love your neighbor as yourself (commandments 5-10).

This circles us back to your question. You are in a nation that isn't bound by the law of Moses. How do you decide? The answer is you have to go back to the principles taught in the law  and discern how these principles support the highest principles (that is love God/love neighbors). The answer to your question begins with your motivations (love, hate, etc....)

Let's take a plausible scenario.

The State of Booginia passes a massive firearms registration law.  Citizens who own certain firearms have 90 days to register them with a huge fee (making it impossible for most to afford), or the guns have to be turned in.

At the end of the 90 days, it has become apparent that most gun owners have failed to do either.

The governor issues a confiscation order, utilizing the state police to go house to house rounding up guns.

You as a gun owner have decided to resist violently rather than comply, even if it means  you  must fire upon law enforcement officers who are simply carrying out orders.

Although  you know others in the state will do the same, none of you are organized into any kind of  unit.

Are you about to commit murder, or are  you legitimately utilizing deadly force to further a  military objective?

I always took it as being a practical concern, chiefly that travel was dangerous and a certain amount of preparedness for that danger was reasonable and prudent.

Not to make you mad, but the info presented might not be complete enough for me to answer.  The motives of leadership and your own personal context do matter.

Why is the state doing this?  That they are doing it is not moral or correct, but the intent does matter, and not the stated intent (which will be a lie) but the actual intent.  Are they just do gooders that want to try this for a time and who are otherwise strongly in favor of protecting individual's natural rights granted by God?  Or are they commies who obviously intend to commit mass murder against anyone who disagrees with the Party?  One may warrant a different response than the other.  For the do gooders (I know that scenario  is extremely unlikely, humor me), civil disobedience might be more proper.  IE, your law is immoral and I am going to break it.  There, I broke it, now you have to take me and everyone else to jail.  If they're commies intending to commit mass murder, I'm inclined to fight without any discussion.

What of my own personal context?  Who am I, how am I perceived, what effects will my actions have?  Am I a minister who will lose moral authority if he fights?  OR, am I a minister who, by resisting, will be deliver a message to the blinded that what they are doing is incredibly evil, and cause them to reconsider their actions?  Am I a random Joe who wants to be left alone?  Am I a missionary?  What are my own personal motives?  What does my conscience given to me by God tell me?  If one of my purposes in life is to be a person of absolute peace, it may be against my own personal mission to fight.  However, if I'm cut from the same cloth as a guy like Chris Kyle, it may be against my own mission and purpose to not fight.

The fact is that there is not a pat answer to this question.  I can only tell you what I've determined to do.  When the day comes, I have faith that God will make His desires known.  If it is His will for me to lay aside my arms and be martyred as a witness for Him, that is what I will do.  If He commands me to oppose evil by force, then I will fight.  If He doesn't give me a clear command and expects me to come to my own decision while remaining subject to Him, I will make the best decision I am able to with the information I have at that time.

Ecclelsiastes was already referenced in this thread, but I think it addresses this very issue, that there is a time for everything.  What we have to do is be close enough to Him that we can hear Him tell us what kind of time it is, and then act accordingly.

This is the best answer so far:  Get close enough to God to hear His leading.

You have two choices

You can hang with sheep waiting for your slaughter

Or you can make a stand

Me, I’m in better to die standing than serve on your knees camp

Depends on what you think you got to lose

Scripture clearly points to the taking of another's life (that of the enemy) in war as acceptable much of the time, tho there are exceptions when war is entered into for the wrong reasons. I can tell you that I wouldn't want to be in the position that some of the DOD's drone pilots are in as warriors today and have to live with some of the situations they're put in on this topic. (close friend of mine sits in that seat and it aint easy).

I think if you want a good summary on this topic with healthy scripture references you can review the treatment that WarriorPoet did it on here https://warriorpoetsociety.us/iskillingasin/. I find this to be a healthy perspective from a Ret. Ranger and also a guy who's spent time in the mission field with an evangelical para-church organization.

I think any attempt to understand this subject outside of adherence to an inerrant (completely true and authoritative for use in life, theology and science) view of the Bible is destined to simply be 'like....your opinion, MAN".

As we look at what commands from the old testament survive the new covenant with Jesus, those that are ceremonial (e.g. sacrifices of animals and dietary restrictions) and those that are judicial (e.g. when some does X then his punishment is Y) fall away. Those that remain are the Moral commands (e.g. the 10 commandments). So we certainly still have 'tho shall not kill' and others like it as applicable to us.

Marrying the moral commands of God with the HEART of Chris is really where the rubber meets the road on this question. Staying sinless is something that NONE of us can do in this life, and only those that follow Jesus have the spiritual ability to attempt it with the power of the Holy Spirit. This boils down to your heart before God as you make the decision to take another's life, which is why it's so healthy that the firearms community harps on thinking this thru before you end up in that situation.

The GREAT news is that while we're all called to attempt to follow Gods commands to our fullest and be Christ-like in this life, we need only one answer when we stand before God and that's simply pointing to His Christ, in whom we are hidden and by whom we are justified!

I can't envision Jesus giving an approval of attacking the state officials in such a scenario.

What is HIS work that the body of Christ (believers) are commissioned to do? Hard to do if you're dead. But even in prison you can if you have breath.

This is a fantastic post.

Probably because he didn't read Aquinas, and couldn't reasonably expect a 6th grader to do so, either.

I can't read for you, but start with Just War Doctrine, nest that under Aquinas' Double Effect writings and proceed from there.

You'all motherfuckers need Aquinas.

In the American tradition, we also have popular sovereignty, in that the authority to both rule and kill is maintain by the popular mass, not the individual sovereign. Thus the use of lethal means to defend oneself or another falls under the idea of the "welfare of the whole community." It is the legal reason why the death of all are investigated as homicide, but the clear assumption is made on behalf of an innocent private citizen or police officer, or in the case of military issues, the military person as assuming to act in the name of the community entire.

This is a can of worms, though.  "Welfare of the whole community" is rather broad.  Star Chamber much?  In a strictly self-defense scenario the outcome might be obvious, but what about the case of a known rapist (with a long rap sheet) released on O.R. who goes out and rapes again?  Would the "welfare of the whole community" seem to justify vigilantism, even if it's on an extremely limited basis in this instance?

Similarly, if 100,000 gun owners in a  state agree that the "welfare of the whole community" is enhanced by their scoffing at a confiscation law, would that seem to justify a level of vigilantism to prevent tyranny?

It's simple: you have "god given rights".  If the government tries to take those "god given rights" away than you can either submit or fight.

Go on.....

Guerilla warfare, per your example. Small cells of combatants engage in guerilla warfare not because it sounds cool, but because it is the only way a small group can fight against a large group. Most of guerilla warfare doesn't involve sexy gunfights as it does breaking other people's stuff and making it hard for your enemy to operate uninhibited. Break a communications link here, a supply chain there... you get the point. As the guerilla movement progresses, the group grows. It naturally gains personnel, equipment, infrastructure and legitimacy. At that point, a guerilla force slowly transforms into a militarized arm of a political movement. Then, acknowledgment, negotiations and representation in government. So, guerilla warfare isn't a sin. It's simply the early and raw stage of gaining political acknowledgment, representation.

As far as guerilla warfare being sin, that is a personal struggle not a public one. If one believes in God and finds themselves on the cusp of engaging in guerilla warfare, it's between you and God. Not the Hive and God. As a believer myself, I guess just like anything else. I'd pray about it. Pray for clarity and direction. "Lord if this be your will, please make it apparent. Please remove hurdles in my way and bless my efforts. If this is not your will, bring roadblocks and signs to help me see." Etc... Something like that.

Good questions OP!

Great replies as well.

Some really smart guy once said; One life lost is a tragedy, two lives lost is a coincidence, ten thousand lives lost is a statistic. The corollary to this statement is that if one person kills someone it's murder. If two people kill someone it's a conspiracy. If 10,000 people are killing other people it's Government action.

Murder is defined by those in power-and that isn't you-or is it?

A long time ago as a young convert to Christianity I also asked these types of questions and wrestling with the answers radically changed the course of my life. Everything seemed more black and white in those days but as Christians and warriors we have to answer these fundamental questions don't we?

As Christians our daily goal (and I would argue the will of the Father) this to become more like Jesus.  Romans 8:29 tells us that the reason all things work together for good (verse 28) is so we might become conformed to the image of Christ. Paul writes in Philippians (2:12 ) and tells them to work out their own salvation with fear and trembling. Ultimately we must reach a conclusion and become fully convinced in our own heart of thie answers to these questions.

Once upon a time I followed a strict Pacificistic interpretation of scripture. As a young Believer I attended Quaker meetings and held to those teachings. As I matured in my understanding of scripture and the world I have found myself believing something quite different.

Our world is a dangerous place and yet God is Sovereign in all things. Wars suck. I believed that then. I still do. Do everything you can to avoid them-they are not the BEST earthly solution to a problem but sometimes they are the only solution. Paul says to be at peace with all men so long as it depends on you....BUT there are times when war, violence, or the threat of war and violence-unbidden and unwelcome-comes to your door and when it does you have three options. Submit, flee, or fight. Wisdom will dictate your best course of action. Decisions will make themselves and maybe two of the three options are not available. Lines are getting a little thin. When "war" (violence) came into the life of Jesus here on earth He chose to flee and then submit (as this was His purpose and the will of the Father)  although in the garden Peter (a man who just spent three years with Jesus) was swinging his very sharp sword with the intent to kill (my belief) the high priest but missed and hit his servant. (Matt 26:51) When Jesus returns it will be as a warrior on a white horse with a sword.

In the meantime; Robert A Heinlein (Starship Troopers) wrote that;  "When you vote you are exercising political authority, you're using force. And force my friends is violence. Violence is the supreme authority from which all other authorities are derived".  This is how the world functions.  Worldly civil Government gives to itself the authority to commit violence (murder) by virtue of implicit or explicit acceptence of its behavior by those it claims authority over.  ( see Declaration of Independence or Mao if you are so inclined). Today, our "Government" or "the "State"  says it's okay to murder babies and based on the massive numbers of people gunning down abortion doctors, nurses, or Planned parenthood supporters on a daily basis to stop this abhorrent evil-it IS okay to murder babies....right?  There are no perfect civil Governments or authorities-only differing shades of imperfection and therefore by extension-evil.

I have the inalienable (individual personal God given-non transferable) right to disagree with and resist that authority/evil as does everyone everywhere-we all do. Jesus did.  The apostles did. The early Christian Church did. Individuals throughout history have.....our country was founded by those who did and yes even our civil war was fought by those who were led by God. The "morally righteous" northern aggressors thought they were going to war to stop what to them was the evil practice of slavery while the Southern states were just defending their conservative and Biblical way of life. Both were justified. Both were wrong. That is often the way of God and it's a mystery. But the fact remains is we would not have become the country we are today without that civil war or any of them actually. It was God's will that we become this nation....right?

The TL;DR. My conclusion is that we live in an age of evil and grace and whatever conclusion you come to regarding your willingness to resist evil is covered by the blood of Jesus. Bottom line; We all die. The only real questions are; when, why, and did you make a difference with your life and do as the Holy Spirit led you when and if evil showed up?

I was with you until you typed this.  Maybe I'm reading this sentence wrong, but doesn't this sort of get to "everyone did what was right in his own eyes?"  Doesn't this sort of defeat the notion that there is an Absolute Authority on good and evil and the approved behavior thereof?

As a Christian.....we are assuming some things.

First is that you are filled with the Spirit and striving daily to br conformed to His image. I think with that foundation you are not your own but have been bought with a price. You are a slave to Christ so you don't get to do what you want.

ETA. I know people- good Christians on both sides of the war is murder/ war is moral argument. I've been on both sides myself. That is what I was trying to say.....grace covers both positions.

I think you may need to broaden your sources to find your answer.  The Bible being the perfect book is about perfection.  It is a manual for how a person should act in order to live a perfect life.  If everyone lived a perfect life than the world would be close to perfect.  However assuming the existence of evil and Satan there will be circumstances where righteous men will need to follow the lead of the Archangel Michael and be a warrior of God against evil and Satan.  Wisely, unlike the Koran, the Bible does not detail how, why and when men should take up arms and fight.  The Bible cannot be twisted into rationalizing war such as the Koran and jihad.  Good men will avoid unnecessary conflict by turning the other cheek under most circumstances.

History has many lessons to be learned.  There are examples when men fought back and won, examples when men fought back and were crushed and examples when men did not fight back and were crushed.  Our own American Revolution was a great example of good men fighting for liberty and freedom.  The British was stunned when George Washington did not make himself King and when he did not seek a third term of Presidency.  American revolted when the British attempted to force submission.  We can look at the Jews and Nazi Germany as an example of the price paid for not fighting back.  Sun Tzu's "Art of War" can provide insight on the failures of past unsuccessful revolts.

I think the people of Virginia are an inspiration regarding how to act.  The Virginia Government is bordering on Tyrannical yet the citizens are showing both resolve and restraint.  The majority of counties are letting it be known they will not comply with unconstitutional laws.  I think there is a good chance Virginia may go "red" this November I and think the State government may be flipped during the next State elections.  If the State attempts to force compliance with violence there will be resistance.  I doubt it will go this far because the democrats are fearful of an armed, righteous population.

Murder is also part of intent of the heart.  Hating someone and wanting them dead is a sin.  Self defense to protect yours is not murder.

This qualifies as one of the most penetrating moral/philosophical posts I've seen here. Thanks for elevating the dialogue.

The correct answer to the question is less important than the struggle to answer it, which we are happy to tackle.

I’m not picking on you personally MJBT cause we all know who you are and what you do for a living but....is it “murder” when some armed group terrorizes you by kicking in your door at 2:30 am and you kill them in self defense?  Is that fine?  And if not....what’s the difference?

I think I saw this link posted here at one point: Thomas Aquinas on the Right to Resist. I’m not well versed enough to endorse or condemn the argument, but it is thought-provoking.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church addresses killing:

2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one's own life; and the killing of the aggressor. . . . The one is intended, the other is not."

2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one's own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:

If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one's own life than of another's.

2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.

There is a clear difference between murder and killing in war or armed conflict. It boils down to the intent and motive of the individual. A person knows the difference in their heart when they fighting and defending versus murdering.

Tough question to answer. Killing another person.

Did not Christ say you could be forgiven of sin. Is killing, killing no matter how it's looked at. I do not know the answer and I'm not even going to try and answer that.

But I do believe that a person can live in their own hell after taking a life. Unless they can forgive themselves. It's like a ghost that's always there.

Remember native Americans after a battle and they killed. They would go through a cleansing process. To rid themselves of the bad, I guess medicine of taking a life. It was very important to them.

So if you kill cleanse your spirit. Even a murder can be forgiven by Christ But that does not mean they can escape the consequences of their actions. I was haunted by ghosts for many years. But not anymore.

I do not have an answer. I don't know. We all can hypothesis. But one thing I do know is you can be forgiven for killing.

I will say this. If there is evil. It is our duty to rid the world of it. The Romans killed Christians and Jewish. The Nazi killed Jewish people. Not all allowed themselves be killed. Some fought back.

I often thought of this same question.