Thanks for all the imput, unfortunately they all use the KJV. I don't know if I mentioned this yet but they would also say that by killing someone you are trying to be God since he holds all life in his hand. Best argument I've heard here against that is free will but I could be wrong.

Keeping the 21'er stereotype alive.....

They are wrong. Self defense is not murder. Murder is premeditated.

Well, to be completely clear, it translates the original Hebrew as "moicheuseis."

Do they think that King James and his scribes were infallible?
It's one thing to have a preferred translation and another to exclude all others.

That is progressive, brain washed, controlling, making people victims, bullshit.

I have to live in this life first. If I spend eternity in hell for protecting my family against lethal harm, then so be it.

I will take that risk for love and doing what is right and required.

The way I read the Bible says fuck up anyone who poses harm to the innocent.

Religions that preach "pacifism" to the point of don't stop someone from hurting your own child are just plain wrong.

You have been here since 2005 and can't read? He never said that he didn't believe in self defense, it was his friends who don't. This is also the religious forum, not GD.

This.

I believe everyone on our team would only use deadly force if needed, but if needed it would be used.

OP - I know you were referencing friends,  what would your response be if a threat came into your church
& lives were at risk? (especially loved ones)   I realize that may be  the reason for the thread.
If so, I hope you find your answer.  Pray about it.  

Anyone who carries should have a good idea what they would do.  They should be at peace with
that before they ever start carrying

They use the KJV to the point that the preacher reads the bible and then translates parts of it into proper English.

Let me clarify before I answer. I'm not actually a Christian but I follow most of the rules and go to church. The self defense issue is the main reason I haven't become one. For your question, if a threat came to the church I would try my best to take it out. Would be difficult since I can't carry though.

Being a Christian has nothing to do with the rules of a particular denomination.
It's about a personal relationship with Christ.
I suggest you find a different source of guidance.

The Lord is my Shepard

I am but one of his sheepdogs


this is part of my church load out

Do you go because your wife goes?

No, I go with my parents since I'm only 17.

I have no issue reconciling protecting my family with my Christian beliefs.

Finding God is a part of manhood and self reflection. In a perfect world everyone just believes and acts appropriately but you and I both know we do not live in a perfect world.

Embrace your questions about God and seek them out.

If you fall away from either your faith or the church, that is fine but always ask yourself why you don't believe in the church or God.

Seek your answers. If you do not desire to know God, you will never know him. If you're closed to the influence of God you will not see him.

It is perfectly fine to seek your own way, every man does it. I myself am doing it right now. Just make sure you're doing it from a position of wanting knowledge. If you are concerned with the question of God then it is your duty as a human being to seek answers. I would read lots of books and listen to lots of podcasts, from both atheists and various denominations. Then use your logic as a man to decide what is true. Then devote yourself to it.

I do not see any answer other than Monotheism logically, but many guys end up in different places after realizing this logical fact.

Exodus 22:2 — King James Version (KJV 1900)
2 If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him.

Luke 22:36 KJV

36 “But now,” he said, “take your money and a traveler’s bag. And if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one!

Here's my take, and I've been contemplating about this a great deal.

No one at my church carries to church. It's not because everyone is a lib, this, that, or the other. Politics, social issues, and everything else is left at the door. There are no worldly distractions. Everything is left outside.

When we walk in the door, the environment is conducive to putting our hope, trust, and faith, 100% with God. The Holy Spirit fills the church. When we walk back out the door, we do the best we can to take what we were given in the church into the world.

If someone comes into the church looking for Christians to murder, we can rest assured the outcome will be according to God's glory, regardless of what the outcome may be.

Feel free to ask questions.

In our church, some serve in education
Some serve in music
Some serve in facilities
Some serve in security

Tell them that we are not trying to kill them, we are trying to stop them from doing evil.

A whole lot of people do, few actually know what’s in it.

Same

You are 17 and you are respecting your elders. Good for you. If you do become a Christian and study what the Bible says more than what others tell you it says, I believe there is a possibility you might come to a different conclusion on the topic.

Most people in our church will welcome death when it comes, *especially* if it comes through martyrdom (given the opportunity).

"christianity is a book club but nobody has read the book". it's kind of scary to read how many people call themselves 'religious' and then have no idea how to explain their own beliefs.

there is no verse that says do not murder.

exodus and deuteronomy has a commandment that says 'do not murder'. this is not a commandment of god to all people for all time. this a specific verse to the people of the time - the consequences require DNA lineage recording. literally, only the levitical priests were authorized to accept redemption. as a result, the 'do not murder' clause is literally part of a covenant. it may require reading more than just a single verse at a time, admittedly, but it's a little mind boggling to claim to follow a religious theology and be unable to understand an entire passage. this is not a commandment for modern day people, it was literally part of a sacred covenant between a small group of people and god. those people, literally, don't exist anymore. after many wars and intermarriage, those people are completely gone.

matthew 5 reinforces this statement. christ says that this commandment comes with not just a redemption requirement, but also a mindset. but christ also says repeatedly that he is sent only to the covenant members (the jewish people) and not to everyone else (the gentiles). in fact, one of the parables is exactly this (paraphrasing), a gentile women says 'can you help me bro?' and christ says 'gtfo, jews master race lol' and she says 'but i like and subscribe lol' and he consents and heals her (matt 15:21..28).

the only verse that really has any application to murder is 'do unto others as you would have them do to you'. however, it's important to note that in self defense the objective is never to kill the assailant. it's to stop the attacker, shoot until the threat is no longer present. many people would condemn 'anchor shots' for a downed assailant, because this is malicious intent. that's why there is no verse that says 'do not end a life', but there are many verses that say 'do not express malicious intent'. how does the verse apply? every time you don't kill someone for an offense, you are doing this - you are treating others the way you want to be treated, you neither kill people for no reason nor do you want to be killed for no reason. similarly, if we were to commit an egregious offense, we would like a chance to present our case in a court of law. this is exactly what self defense is - an attempt to stop the threat so that everyone can prevent their case. unfortunately, human technology does not have phasers set to stun. we have firearms and no way to rewind time reliably - even still, this is how modern technology affects the spirit of the law which remains consistent with societies both modern and ancient.

I used to get in trouble in sunday school for asking this question:  If the commandment says people shouldn't kill people, why did God help the Israelites kill so many people?"  At that point the sunday school teacher would look at me, tell me he'd talk to me later and then not let me ask anymore questions till sunday school was done and then he'd rush us out of the room to go find our parents.

Do you carry when not at church?

Yes, but not always.

A couple of things….

1. Why are they trying to apply the law to those not under it? Justification? Do they think the keeping of  commandments will affect their salvation?

2. They need to study to show themselves approved and rightly divide the word of truth.

3. To those who criticize the KJV text. There is nothing wrong with the text. The problem is Christians that don’t want to study the Word.

4. Had they done point 2. They would have read the Pentateuch and understood what was meant and that self defense was permitted in certain situations. Also as Rollpin pointed out God wouldn’t tell them not to do something and then command them to do it.

5. Was Samson wrong for killing 1000 men with the jawbone of a ass? Hint. No, the scripture says the Spirit of the Lord came mightily upon him just before that.

6. Did David sin when he killed Goliath? No. Did he sin when he had Uriah killed? Yep. See the difference?

7.  Was self defense listed by the council of Jerusalem as a no go for gentile Christians as the Holy Spirit told them what we should abstain from in the book of Acts? Answer, No.

8. Was self defense ever listed by Paul as a reason men don’t inherit the kingdom of God? No. But he mentioned murder a lot.

9. Had they done #2 they would know Matthew 5 is tribulation doctrine for Jews to get into the millennial kingdom and the doctrine for all those that enter into it in their mortal bodies. It’s not doctrine for the Christian (gentile at that) that is saved by grace. Jesus was a minister to the Jews and he only came to the Jews. Rom 15:8, Matt 15:24.




At the end of the day this is a Romans 14 situation. For whatsoever is not of faith is sin. If their conscience toward God tells them they shouldn’t defend themselves then so be it. Who am I to judge another man’s servant. But I can’t in conscience allow my family to be murdered for no reason at all. Sure if they are coming to kill us for the faith, that’s different but just to allow them to die in a random act of violence I couldn’t do. Just like I couldn’t stand by and watch some little old lady get her head smashed in or something similar. We all have a ministry. Christ is the head of the man, the man is the head of the family. As Paul puts it. You’ve denied the faith and are worse than a infidel if you don’t take care of those of your house. Would it bring reproach to the gospel or the name of Christ if a man defended his family? I think not.


My suggestion to op is let them be. Let their conscience toward God be their conscience toward God.


As to carrying and church. I’m of a similar mind as @Anastasios. Wouldn’t want to cheat myself out of rewards if the Lord finds me worthy to be martyred. I’m reminded of the Apostles in acts rejoicing that they had been found worthy to suffer for the name of Christ after the priests had them beaten.

Martyrs are commemorated throughout the year in our daily readings. They all receive their day of remembrance. These men and women possess unerring faith in God.

Attached File

What are your thoughts on self defense in general?
A martyr is someone who chose his faith over his life.
The mugger on the street pointing a gun at your family isn't persecuting you for your faith.

I thought I had made that clear.

Why does that stop at the door to the church?
Jesus himself cleared the temple with a whip and flipped tables when that's what needed to be done.

I put my life in God's hands everyday, but i still wear a seatbelt and carry a gun.
There are others in my life who God has given me to care for and protect.

I don't understand.

Apparently.
You say your members would welcome martyrdom, but how many would hide or fight if someone stormed in with a gun and started shooting?

I can only speak for myself.

ETA, actually, most will welcome death, as I posted. Who would decide to fight or hide in that moment, I can't say.

The mental gymnastics are tiresome.

It's good to think about things.

Statistically, as far as I know, and according to priests I've talked with who have looked at the issue, most Church shootings are not persecuting one for their faith either. Most are domestic in nature.

There's no glory in the rage-filled nutty of a jilted husband who decides to just double down on the outcome.

While Locke isn't scripture, I find his 2nd Treatise on government in alignment with the principles of scripture and doing no violence to them.  So also reasoned the nations founders who sought to embody most of his principles in the government they designed.  

See if you agree:

Sect. 6. But though this be a state of liberty, yet it is not a state of licence: though man in that state have an uncontroulable liberty to dispose of his person or possessions, yet he has not liberty to destroy himself, or so much as any creature in his possession, but where some nobler use than its bare preservation calls for it. The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions: for men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent, and infinitely wise maker; all the servants of one sovereign master, sent into the world by his order, and about his business; they are his property, whose workmanship they are, made to last during his, not one another’s pleasure: and being furnished with like faculties, sharing all in one community of nature, there cannot be supposed any such subordination among us, that may authorize us to destroy one another, as if we were made for one another’s uses, as the inferior ranks of creatures are for our’s. Every one, as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his station wilfully, so by the like reason, when his own preservation comes not in competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of mankind, and may not, unless it be to do justice on an offender, take away, or impair the life, or what tends to the preservation of the life, the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another.

CHAPTER. III.  OF THE STATE OF WAR.
Sect. 16. THE state of war is a state of enmity and destruction: and therefore declaring by word or action, not a passionate and hasty, but a sedate settled design upon another man’s life, puts him in a state of war with him against whom he has declared such an intention, and so has exposed his life to the other’s power to be taken away by him, or any one that joins with him in his defence, and espouses his quarrel; it being reasonable and just, I should have a right to destroy that which threatens me with destruction: for, by the fundamental law of nature, man being to be preserved as much as possible, when all cannot be preserved, the safety of the innocent is to be preferred: and one may destroy a man who makes war upon him, or has discovered an enmity to his being, for the same reason that he may kill a wolf or a lion; because such men are not under the ties of the common law of reason, have no other rule, but that of force and violence, and so may be treated as beasts of prey, those dangerous and noxious creatures, that will be sure to destroy him whenever he falls into their power.

Sect. 17. And hence it is, that he who attempts to get another man into his absolute power, does thereby put himself into a state of war with him; it being to be understood as a declaration of a design upon his life: for I have reason to conclude, that he who would get me into his power without my consent, would use me as he pleased when he had got me there, and destroy me too when he had a fancy to it; for no body can desire to have me in his absolute power, unless it be to compel me by force to that which is against the right of my freedom, i.e. make me a slave. To be free from such force is the only security of my preservation; and reason bids me look on him, as an enemy to my preservation, who would take away that freedom which is the fence to it; so that he who makes an attempt to enslave me, thereby puts himself into a state of war with me. He that, in the state of nature, would take away the freedom that belongs to any one in that state, must necessarily be supposed to have a design to take away every thing else, that freedom being the foundation of all the rest; as he that, in the state of society, would take away the freedom belonging to those of that society or commonwealth, must be supposed to design to take away from them every thing else, and so be looked on as in a state of war.

Edit b

So if I cut your father's throat with no forethought,  it isn't murder?

Our Lord Jesus himself armed his disciples with swords during his ministry, presumably because of dangerous people meaning to do them harm.

When I brought up this he didn't really have an answer. His best response was maybe for self defense against animals.

The USA wouldn't be what/where it is today without the contributions of the stupids.

You're 17, curious about christian self defense, throught the interweds you find Arfcom and its religious thread.. talking about threading a needle

Isnt Canada anti word of God...?? its considered hate speech..??

King James the bastard son of Queen Mary was a Flaming Homosexual who practiced Scatology.


King James did not commission the KJV (1611) for Christians to draw closer to God but to protect his throne and his divine right to rule...


Those who use the KJV need to understand it was a government publication...

double post sorry