Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
Strengthening families through biblical principles.
Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.
Read daily articles from Focus on the Family in the Marriage and Parenting Resources forum.
I have already addressed this - please see post 220.Drew let me ask you this question, and it is only for you, would you just stand there and let someone beat you to death or your mother or your kids. Now this is a question from me to you. I want a straight answer nothing else.
Drew ok, but how about protecting the wife the kids your mom and so on ?I very much agree with this distinction. Although my posts may lead people to think otherwise, I am not advocating a "stand there and take it" response to violence. I would say that its OK to "fend off blows", or to try to "disarm", even through physical actions. But, as I think you are saying, once you cross the line to one where you make the injuring of your opponent the objective, then I think you have gone too far. I recognize this "line" is not clear in many situations. But I am not suggesting that people "let themselves get punched".
I would say that the same general principle applies. You can take defensive actions to protect your family. I suspect you are going to say that, in some cases, the only way to protect your family is to take offensive actions in the context of a general effort to defend kith and kin - to punch in the face, use a gun, etc. Well, I do not think such actions can be reconciled with the gospel. That does not mean that I would do such things - who can say how they will act under such a circumstance?Drew ok, but how about protecting the wife the kids your mom and so on ?
Drew for the first time on this subject and the others that you have been involved in, talking about this very same thing. I can truly say that this is the first time that I heard you say the right thing. and that isI would say that the same general principle applies. You can take defensive actions to protect your family. I suspect you are going to say that, in some cases, the only way to protect your family is to take offensive actions in the context of a general effort to defend kith and kin - to punch in the face, use a gun, etc. Well, I do not think such actions can be reconciled with the gospel. That does not mean that I would do such things - who can say how they will act under such a circumstance?
(who can say how they will act under such a circumstance?)
I am with youClearly, the distinction between defensive and offensive actions needs to be defined. I don't know why.....seems like common sense to me.
How on earth can any actions I take be seen as offensive if I'm the one being attacked???
Someone breaks in my house to do who knows what and I shoot them..?
Defensive
Someone tries to take my purse and I kick them in the nuggets..?
Defensive
Someone tries to rape me and I squish their Johnson..??
Defensive
Force has to be met with force, but without excessive force.
A physical attack has to be met with a physical defense.
A deadly attack has to be met with lethal force.
You don't meet deadly force with teddy bears and lollipops....
Yup.Clearly, the distinction between defensive and offensive actions needs to be defined. I don't know why.....seems like common sense to me.
How on earth can any actions I take be seen as offensive if I'm the one being attacked???
Someone breaks in my house to do who knows what and I shoot them..?
Defensive
Someone tries to take my purse and I kick them in the nuggets..?
Defensive
Someone tries to rape me and I squish their Johnson..??
Defensive
Force has to be met with force, but without excessive force.
A physical attack has to be met with a physical defense.
A deadly attack has to be met with lethal force.
You don't meet deadly force with teddy bears and lollipops....
Yup.
No. This is an offensive action - an action designed to kill. This cannot be reconciled with the gospel imperative to love our enemies.Someone breaks in my house to do who knows what and I shoot them..?
Defensive
No. The "defensive" action here is to let the person take your purse.Someone tries to take my purse and I kick them in the nuggets..?
Defensive
Like the other examples, this is not really a defensive action.Someone tries to rape me and I squish their Johnson..??
Defensive
Here is the problem:Force has to be met with force, but without excessive force.
Which is more important to you?You can go ahead Drew and keep saying that just because it works it doesn't mean its what we should do and you're right, in some cases, absolutely you're right, but we live in a fallen world and sometimes we absolutely must respond with equal force to keep from being a punching bag.
Which is more important to you?
1. Surviving some violent encounter;
2. Obedience to Jesus if, repeat if, Jesus tells us to not use force as a mode of dealing with evil?
No. This is an offensive action - an action designed to kill. This cannot be reconciled with the gospel imperative to love our enemies.
Shooting someone cannot be construed as an act of love.
No. The "defensive" action here is to let the person take your purse.
Like the other examples, this is not really a defensive action.
Here is the problem:
So many things Jesus said contradict this notion that "force has to be met with force". We are told to turn the other cheek. We are told to love our enemies. We are told to take up our crosses.
As shocking as it may seem to some, our coming out of some encounter "alive and well" is not the prime consideration. For those who would follow Jesus, it is obedience to the kingdom values Jesus taught and modeled.
And Jesus clearly repudiates the use of force to achieve goals. When He was before Pilate he explains that it is the very nature of the kingdom that He is initiating that explains why His disciples are not fighting to procure His freedom.
I do not believe matters are this simple. When Jesus is captive before Pilate, how does He explain that His disciples are not fighting to save Him (Jesus) from a certain fate? Does He say something like "my disciples are not fighting to recue me because God needs to be sure that I go to the cross to bear the world's sin".You have to fight back (sometimes), you have to protect others.
I do not see how this works. Can you explain? It would seem to me that a violent blow to the head is the antithesis of love.Drew you can knock someones block off and still love them in the name of Jesus.