Activity

@h-jones: You just gained 3 brownie points for using a princess bride quote! XD “The crucifixion, his death and abuse, were all part of His plan. It was intentional. Not necessarily due to passivity, I don’t think.” did I seem to disagree with that? Cuz I totally don’t : D; Jesus could have gone all ‘God mode’ but he didn’t because he loves us. But ya, i think it is an argument because “Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children; and walk in love, just as Christ also loved you and gave Himself up for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God as a fragrant aroma.” (Ephesians 5: 1-2 NASB) were supposed to be like Christ and that’s how Christ acted. So that’s where I’m coming from : D.

I would define ‘corporate self-defense’ as “the defense of both yourself and others.” For instanc,e killing a murder saves both you and those around you and thus is diffrent then if the murderer was just going to kill you. There’s and large element of helping other people in ‘corporate self-defense’ while there isn’t in just normal self-defense.

@wordsmith: aw man, I hate it when that happens! You are all inspired the first time and the second time feels like eating stale crackers (I dont know why I choose stale crackers XD).

1. alright, cool!

2. sweet, we’ll see what scriptures have to say… (by collective you mean OT and NT right?)

“Because to say that the NT trumps the OT is to say that Jesus’s words now trump Jesus’s then.” ok well let me clarify, I belive Jesus words now apply to our current situation while Jesus past words don’t. Not necessarily one time period of words is superior to the other. My reason I believe this because of a few scriptures:

1.”But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.” (Galatians 3:23-25) we are no longer under the law 

2. “But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.” (Romans 7:6) we are released from the law

3. “Sin is no longer your master, for you no longer live under the requirements of the law. Instead, you live under the freedom of God’s grace.” (Romans 6:14 hehe, I did NLT for this onw cuz I liked the wording better…) we no longer live under the requirements of the law

I’m sure there are others but I’m not going to go and find them; I think this proves my point : D. so we are under grace, we are under a new covenant. Because Jesus words, the ones in the NT, talk about this new covenant which he brought in we know they apply to us. The words he (well kinda spoke…) in the OT could apply to the new covenant but that doesn’t mean they do. For instance, at one point God commanded Israel to kill, like, a tone of people. if someone came up to you and said “God commanded me to go kill Muslims” you would tell them that was wrong. Why? God commanded it, its right there in the old testament. You would tell them that was wrong because it was a specific command for a specific group of people at a specific time. You wouldn’t say “sure go right on ahead because ‘Nothing said in the NT trumps that said in the OT'” there is a time to kill and a time to heal; A time to tear down and a time to build up.” (Ecclesiastes 3:3) we are in the time to heal. At this time we have not been commanded, encouraged, (or in my present opinion) permitted to kill. You can’t point back to the time to kill and be like “hey we can still do that!” because we can’t! Same sort of thing with self-defense. I don’t believe those examples of people exercising self-defense apply to our new covenant present situation. I belive were in a different time, with different requirements. Alright so I guess I’m addign a point to the ‘convince me’ list XD:

3. prove to me that the OT law still applies to christians today.

“You argue as if the apostles and Jesus were acting under the NT when they weren’t. They were acting under the OT. The New Covenant did not start until after Jesus accession (I’m not 100 percent sure when after that). They were still under the OT context. And Jesus was acting with a special purpose, one of substitution atonement. He’s not calling us to the same thing he was calling himself to.” that… is a good point. I haven’t really thought about the fact that, during Jesus life, we are technically still in the OT… Hey! that means your ‘take up your sword’ bible verse is actually said under the old covenant, which, by earlier logic, means it doesn’t necessarily apply to us today! Yay! (not writing it off completely though… that reasoning seems questionable, even to me XD)

as for your “He’s not calling us to the same thing he was calling himself to.” thing I say yes and no. Yes, he wasnt calling us to take on the sin of the world, but no, He was (is) calling us to act like him. “Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others. In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus” (Philippians 2: 3-5) and ‘Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children; and walk in love, just as Christ also loved you and gave Himself up for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God as a fragrant aroma.” (Ephesians 5: 1-2 NASB) So no, He is calling us to do the same thing he did and to live how he lived.

“I believe that the moral law has not changed one bit. Nothing said in the NT trumps that said in the OT, because it doesn’t have to. Jesus never has to reverse something he said before. If he did, what does that say about our God?” like I said earlyer different times and contexts; thats’s my answer to that.

alright, where going to get there wordsmith, now I show you what I’ve got in terms of prohibiting self defence:

*thinks about it, searches the internet for 10 minuits, comes back to the present* I, uh, can’t find any… I mean the best I got is “But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” Matthew 5: 44 and “My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. 13 Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.” (John 15:12-13) which admittedly, isn’t a prohibition in the slightest. However, these verses do make it quite clear that we are supposed to love our enemies and the best way to do that is by dying for them not *coughs* killing them. Plus, there are things that are wrong that are not prohibited in the bible (examples: polygamy, and slavery) so just cuz I can’t find a verse prohibiting it doesn’t mean its not wrong. It does, however, mean I cant meet your requirement so uh, without said verses are you officially closed-minded? Whats the new status here?

Alright, well, as always, that took a while! Hope to talk to you soon!

 

@itisastarrynight: hey! I don’t think we’ve met? “Hello, there lady!” (wait, are you a lady?) *reads this quote: “but we men do NOT have all the answers” goes onto your profile and decides you probably know your own gender* (Yes, yes you are XD.) ok sorry, focusing!

what your saying is both very true and very annoying XD. The problem is when I ask God to reveal things to me He tends to choose a date I don’t like (usually WAY in the future. In past cases, 3 years of waiting) So “Thank you for bringing up such a painful subject, while your at it why don’t you give me a paper cut and pour lemon juice on it!” Anyway, princess bride quotes aside, and in all honesty, I need to work on this area of my faith. However, I do belive He can, and often does, give said answer threw discussions like these. Also, I believe that discussing things are a relevant and effective way of finding truth (even though I do know what you’re saying about missing things). So then do you think discussions like these are pointless? just want to know whats your view…

Ok guys talk to you later!