Activity

@theinconceivable1

First off… It seems like you are saying NT law trumps OT law, which I would disagree with because Scripture cannot contradict Scripture. The moral law has not changed, even with the coming of Christ: “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” -2 Timothy 2:16-17-

Furthermore we see in the OT examples of men acting in both self defense and defense of others. And since Scripture cannot contradict itself we cannot look to only the NT for our moral law, but the OT as well.

Now, we also see Peter carrying a sword in John 18:10. Jesus is there, Jesus know’s he’s carrying a sword. Why would he be carrying a sword but for self defense? Also, Jesus tells the disciples to buy swords.

Now in the sermon on the mt… when Jesus says to turn the other cheek, what he is referring to is that we don’t take revenge (that is how I have understood the passage). If someone struck you on the cheek, what would that normally infer? An insult. This passage (as I have understood it) refers to not taking revenge, thus him saying “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for and eye and a tooth for a tooth.'” That is not self defense. Self defense is the preservation of my life. Jesus is not responding to self defense there.

No we are not supposed to payback… but self defense is not payback.

Another question is this: where do we draw the line between self defense and defense of others, and at what point do we say no one else is in danger? (defense of others is very clearly allowed)