I think this thread has gone over the cliff. Over 60 posts since yesterday!! Seems the basic argument against self defense is that Jesus "never harmed anyone".
Well, let's examine what Jesus taught.
Luke 11:21 - When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace:
This is clear: a strong man who is armed.
What else did Jesus talk about? Luke 22:35-38 is in the context of the Last Supper:
35And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing. 36Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. 37For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. 38And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords.And he said unto them, It is enough.
OK, Jesus told His disciples to sell his garment and buy one is he has no sword. I highly doubt that Jesus was interested in simply tools for peeling figs.
Now, what do you suppose the sword was for? Matt 26:51, Mark 14:47, Luke 22:50 and John 18:10 tells us that Peter drew his weapon (sword) and cut off the ear of Malchus.
Why was Peter armed? For protection. Yes, Jesus rebuked him when the authorities came to arrest Him, but what Peter did provided more evidence that Jesus was God, when He healed Malchus' ear.
If Jesus did not intend His followers to be able to defend themselves and their families, why did He speak of a well armed man who protects his goods, or tell His disciples to sell a garment in order to buy a sword?
Those who want to just lay down in the face of attackers; be my guest. But Jesus intended no such thing.