October 5, 2018 at 6:28 pm #51112October 5, 2018 at 6:40 pm #51118
New Wessex. How many guilds are there?
(sorry for all the questions, I’m just trying to figure this out…which I guess you are too. 😀)
"But how could you live and have no story to tell?" - Fyodor DostoyevskyOctober 5, 2018 at 6:41 pm #51120storyjoy@storyjoy
Idk… at least three, but I think there’s a lot more than that. I really have no clue, though. xD
That’s fine, I don’t mind! 😀
*cartwheels out*October 5, 2018 at 9:58 pm #51160theinconceivable1@theinconceivable1
@h-jones: Alright, I found time to respond to this (BTW this is a responce to your post way back on page 6 XD)
“I think it’s great to follow your convictions as a general rule, I personally think that’s a smart thing to do considering emotions can sometimes be interpreted as the Holy Spirit ” So true! It’s really hard for me to tell the difference. “I were presented with a situation in which myself/someone were to be injured by another person, my initial instinct may be to punch the person instead of try to resolve the matter peacefully” ya, same… “I believe he was talking about evening out the odds here, not necessarily defending yourself or others” right… me and wordsmith talked about this and I think you guys are right, this veres seems to be talking about revenge… “BUT. I think it is loving to defend yourself and others. Defending yourself because there may be other people who need you (e.g., a father, mother, etc.), or a work that God wants you to do” I feel like this gets into a ‘greater good’ argument you know… That’s sketchy ground but I’ll talk about it when we can actually talk to each other and I’m not responing so late XD “Jesus even exhibits this himself to some degree. (Matthew 21:12: “Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves.”) He was defending His Father’s Temple. He loves God, and He couldn’t just watch people misuse God’s Holy Place. And Jesus, as we all know, was the most loving Person to have ever walked the face of the Earth, but that doesn’t mean He just let people walk all over Him and what He cared about.” well, not to sound rude or anything, but he kinda did XD. You know the whole cross thing and what not… Also, I was thinking about that ‘Jesus getting angry’ verse before and I wouldn’t qualify it as self-defense verse. Like I was saying to wordsmith theirs a difference between self-defense and what I’m calling “corporate self-defense” and this would be corporate self-defense cuz he’s defending God (if he really is defending… I’m not sure he is but let’s go with it) (although, I guess he is God so that does make things more confusing XD). Anyway, thanks for speaking your mind!
@the-fledgling-artist *is catching up on posts an then reads this *”While it seems kind of pointless to keep debating” Ah! No, wait! we were making progress done abandon it all now DX
@wordsmith: *finish’s catching up* Whew, ok I’m good. Alright right wordsmith I’m defidently not done because this topic is still unresolved for me and I want an answer! (sorry @the-fledgling-artist but, if you dont mind, I would really like this debate to continue!) However I will say the fledgling artist has a point. Thus I think we should clairify a few things…
1. Are you open or closed minded? Ok, this requires being honest because I think we would both rather be open-minded, but do you believe you would actually change your beliefs given sufficient evidence? See im in a (rather unique) position where I am genuinely open-minded. The result of this debate will actually affect and likely change my beliefs (unless I later learn of some piece of evidence that pushes me to the other side again XD). we all have biases and we have to recognize that, but in the case of this debate, my bias is actually in your favor. I’m an American and as such have always had a gun in my house and been taught to use it should the need arrive. My family is very pro-self-defense and until it was mentioned on here I never thought anything of what seemed to me a “obvious belief”. Moreover, its far easyer for me to live life is I accept your belief as I than can act when pushed rather than just having to take it on the chin. So, my point is, the odds are in your favor! However, as a natural thing I do, the way I discover truth is to play the best devels advocate I can and fight my own argument! (I would assume you do the same sort of thing as your my personality type but extraverted) whichever argument wins is the belief I adopt; so right now I’m embodying the antithesis of your argument and, in my mind, I’m winning. So this is real for me, I’m not trying to force my argument on you I’m, in essence, battling myself. So my question is are you open-minded and willing to change your believes if my argument seems reasonable cuz I know I am.
2. if you are open minded what will it take to convince you? I think alot of times we have this rainbow of an answer that remains ever out of reach so I think its important that we both put, in writing, whats holding each other back from accepting the other’s beliefs. For me its a few things:
-a really good explanation for why, if Jesus commanded self-defense, we don’t see it at all NT. If its a ligit and viable part of Jesus teaching it should be mentioned and acted upon more then once, preferably over 3 or 4 times.
-another really good explanation for how harming someone, even in self-defense, fit’s into Jesus message of love (remember we not talking about ‘corporate self-defense’ were talking about just me getting hurt. Lets try not to add a ‘greater good’ element in hear as that gets really complicated really fast. (unless you want to make the argument their inseparable if you feel thats necessary then lets go for it…)) You need to show me how ‘defending yourself’ is more loving then ‘taking it on the chin” like Jesus did.
At this point those are the two points between you and me. I might get more later but right now thats what your up against. so if you could say what your answers to these questions is that would be really helpful from my point of view : D
Alright, I think this is helpful, I’m guessing you will too, but in the off chance it does offend you I’m sorry XD
@storyjoy: alright here is a lovely link! (anyone you’re free to look at it if you want but be forwarned, alot of it isnt very good XD. BTW everything in white is at a quality level I’m happy with…) And if you never get around to reading it, that’s totally cool!
@eden-anderson: “Ummm…that’s probably how you would do it…but I think we’re supposed to focus on writing in this forum, not on starting fan clubs or other distracting stuff…” alrigth well we’ll have a imagonary fan club in that case XD! Got any Ideas for memebers? Oh! what should we name it!
alright guys I did it! I responded to all the posts! (I feel so proud of myself : D) so I will sign off by a quote from the best movie ever… “Have fun storming the castle!”
INTJ- trying to grow into real wisdom; James 3:17October 5, 2018 at 10:29 pm #51170
Thanks for asking those questions! I will answer them before replying to your slightly earlier post…
Published author, student in writing, works with HazelGracePress.comOctober 5, 2018 at 10:52 pm #51173Hedges@h-jones
@theinconceivable1 Thank you for listening and responding! 🙂
As for Jesus letting people walk all over Him, let me explain:
No, there is too much. Let me sum up. I believe he let people walk over Him. The crucifixion, his death and abuse, were all part of His plan. It was intentional. Not necessarily due to passivity, I don’t think. Though, not sure why this would be a direct point for the self-defense side. Either way, I don’t think Jesus refraining from acting out in self defense is an argument against it. As @the-fledgling-artist pointed out, I believe Jesus came for the intention to show mercy and love to us rather than judgment, and therefore wouldn’t exercise his right to punish sin.
Could you define “corporate self-defense?”
Also, completely random, are you from New Zealand??
Married a blacksmith, and now frequently uses his knowledge for writing fantasy.October 5, 2018 at 10:55 pm #51174
I’m really mad at myself… I just accidentally deleted my post.
Published author, student in writing, works with HazelGracePress.comOctober 5, 2018 at 11:11 pm #51176
Okay… Because I deleted that… I will be brief in summing up…
1. I am open minded. I have a belief system already, but in no way claim to know it all, and be always right. I, being man, am prone to err as are we all.
2. If you can show me where the scriptures prohibit self defense (the collective scriptures). I will definitely re-think.
Okay… so I don’t believe that Jesus commanded us to self defense, but instead that it is an option that we have. Furthermore may I remind you that anything in the old and new testament is Jesus word. All of it. He wrote every bit. This leads to my big point:
I believe that the entire word of God, from the OT to the NT is equal. What changed in the NT is something that was foretold, and was pointed to in the OT. Jesus full filled certain things, he didn’t change them. Because to say that the NT trumps the OT is to say that Jesus’s words now trump Jesus’s then. Jesus’s words never have to trump Jesus’s words. They never contradict.
Furthermore… 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.
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?
And no… I am not offended 🙂 You’re just fine.
Published author, student in writing, works with HazelGracePress.comOctober 6, 2018 at 12:25 pm #51222
Who can be in our imaginary fan club?…I’m thinking…
"But how could you live and have no story to tell?" - Fyodor DostoyevskyOctober 6, 2018 at 5:45 pm #51279Ara@itisastarrynight
@eden-anderson I just need to say that the hedgehog in your profile picture is soo cute. Is he yours? It is such a nice picture.
Well some years back when I was much younger I wrote stories, poems, and lyrics for songs. I get a laugh out of them now! I do not write anymore, apart from school and letters. I did do some writing some months back while I was mentally figuring out a WIP for a comic, if that counts. I will say that I don’t feel like God wants me to continue developing this story (or any?)right now, so it is on the back-burner, at best.
But I do draw and paint. I do not do it very much now that I am more busy, but I’ll usually do it once a week atleast. I’ll assume you are a writer, but do you draw any?
Sketching with no reference is like hiking without a map!October 6, 2018 at 6:02 pm #51283Ara@itisastarrynight
I think it is really neat you are so interested in what the truth is regarding self-defense.
But can I give you a suggestion? I noticed you said that your decision will be a result of however the discussion ends, more or less. If you want answers, please please go to God Himself, and prayerfully study the Scriptures. This may sound duh-ish and cliche, but we men do NOT have all the answers, or even the answers you need for your life. It may look like one side wins or the other on here, but in reality God knows all things and holds evidance and knowledge of the topic that would completely change our perspectives. If you really want to figure this out, seek God. Not us. Please do pray about it earnestly and look to what the Bible says–let that be your final answer. God can show us and teach us more than we would have imagined, and the Spirit does want to bring you to truth. But we just don’t have those answers.
Sketching with no reference is like hiking without a map!October 6, 2018 at 8:31 pm #51298
Hey, yeah, thank you…people keep asking me if Ferdinand is my pet. And it makes me want to cry. Because hedgehogs are illegal in Pennsylvania where I live. 😭 Don’t ask me why, because I have no idea. 😦
Yes, I call myself a writer, but I technically do more thinking about writing than actually writing.😀 I enjoy drawing. Mostly cartoony stuff.
And what you said to @wordsmith was some of the best advice I heard on this whole thread. SO TRUE, GIRL!!!! Thank you for sharing that. It’s a good reminder for me as well.
"But how could you live and have no story to tell?" - Fyodor DostoyevskyOctober 8, 2018 at 2:40 am #51522theinconceivable1@theinconceivable1
@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!
INTJ- trying to grow into real wisdom; James 3:17October 8, 2018 at 12:33 pm #51572
And I did it again… So this will feel like stale crackers…
I will start out by sending you Romans six and seven… because you took both of those Romans passages out of context. Romans eight still applies here, but it’s not crucial to my point. This chunk of Romans says two things that I believe are very important here (though I’m sure it says more than that). A. There is still a law we are to follow, B. We cannot follow it perfectly which would result in our death but Christ took that off of us so we can strive for it without worrying about it crushing us.
The first part of this scripture asks if we should sin that grace may abound. And the answer is no. And then it goes on to talk about how He freed us from the judgement of the law. This is speaking of justification. The law will not justify us, we cannot work for our salvation, we would be seen as crap when standing next to the law. But Christ died, and covered us in his sin (as we have faith in him because he called us), that we might live under grace. We are still expected to follow the law, because we are not to sin that grace may abound. But we don’t have the judgment of the law hovering over us as we try to fulfill it for justification. We can’t. Christ did.
“What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? 3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6 We know that our old self[a] was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. 7 For one who has died has been set free from sin. 8 Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9 We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. 10 For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God. 11 So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.
12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, to make you obey its passions. 13 Do not present your members to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness. 14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.
Slaves to Righteousness
15 What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! 16 Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves,[c] you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, 18 and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness. 19 I am speaking in human terms, because of your natural limitations. For just as you once presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness leading to sanctification.
20 For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. 21 But what fruit were you getting at that time from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. 22 But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Released from the Law
7 Or do you not know, brothers[d]—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law is binding on a person only as long as he lives?2 For a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage.[e]3 Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress.
4 Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. 5 For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. 6 But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.[f]
The Law and Sin
7 What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”8 But sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead. 9 I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. 10 The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me. 11 For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me. 12 So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.
13 Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, producing death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure. 14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. 15 For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. 16 Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. 17 So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.
21 So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. 22 For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, 23 but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members.24 Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.”
And as for the Galatians passage I say the same thing. It has the same context as that of the Romans one and I think you should read the chapters surrounding.
Now… we do know that some of the old law did pass away… but that was the law which was fulfilled in Christ’s death and resurrection. Nothing happened that contradicted the OT, only fulfilling part of it. The Mosaic covenant can be also referred to as The Mosaic Administration of The One Covenant of Grace. All throughout scripture, since the beginning of the fall, there has been a covenant of grace. That covenant never changed. But it did have different administrations. And those administrations were fulfilled in Christ coming, dying and rising.
Now… in all of the covenants God made with man, before Christ came, we see types and shadows. These were the ceremonial laws, the cleanliness laws (which were ceremonial), and the laws the applied the Israel as a Theocracy (which in and of itself is a type and shadow). All of these things were administrations of the covenant of grace. They were not the final, but pointing to.
The moral law is not a part of the covenant of grace, thus we cannot say that they were erased in the fulfilling of the other types and shadows, particularly the Mosaic administration that lasted until Christ’s fulfilling.
Morality was formed in the garden when God gave a standard. It dates back before the covenant of grace. It was formed in the covenant of works. Man (in Adam) failed to uphold the covenant of works, and was thus put into a covenant of grace.
Yes… man is still expected to do good things, and uphold the law. But he is no longer bound to it by justification, and never was. It never disappeared… but Christ fulfilled its judgement for those who put their faith in him, thus fulfilling also the types and shadows which pointed to him fulfilling that part of the law.
Thus I conclude here that Jesus never changed morality. We are still to follow the law, but are not bound to it for justification which would result in our going to hell.
Now! I say that NT doesn’t trump OT, and that’s because it doesn’t need to. The OT turns into the NT without a fight and without contradiction. If we find a contradiction we can know that it is not. Jesus will not contradict anything he said in the OT (remembering that all the epistles are Jesus words). The OT is fulfilled by what it prophesied. The law was never told would go away. But it no longer enslaves us. We are free to follow it, under the mercy of Christ.
So we live in a different context… but it’s one that frees us from the slavery of the law, which would condemn us to Hell.
Also… If you get to say that the sword thing doesn’t apply to us because it’s in the OT I get to say that about Jesus sermon on the mount. It’s in the OT. 😉 Yeah… that doesn’t work.
And yes… he does call us to be like him… but we are not here for the same purpose. In fact I found a self defense passage where Jesus seems to be promoting self defense: “But no one can enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man. Then indeed he may plunder his house.” Mark 3:27
Now this passage is a bit obscure because of its context. And you might say that its context makes it not mean this. But he is using justified self defense to show a truth. If you’re gonna try to plunder a man’s house, you’re gonna have to tied him up (this implies that he’s not gonna let you, nor does he have to. And plundering is so serious, because you rely in it. May I add that if you die, your family who relies on you won’t have the strong man to protect their house. We have a certain duty to our family and loved ones, especially those that rely on us for support. Now… these words that Jesus said line up perfectly with so much of the prior OT examples.
We see over and over again that a man is justified in fighting for himself and for others. When the men go to get water for David, they do so knowing they will fight. They don’t wait until they are attacked, they attack and fight to the water. At the point they are on their way there, they are fighting to keep themselves alive… but also fighting because if they die they are leaving their king vulnerable. And so I think we are permitted to fight so as not to leave our family vulnerable.
When you mention turning the other cheek, that would be in contradiction to much of scripture, unless we read it as not having revenge, which really makes more sense, in both the language and consistency.
In Philippians: “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) That is not only referring to our relationships with one another (brothers and sisters), but it’s also referring to selfish ambitions or vain conceit. Self defense is neither of those, and if a person is attacking us we can assume by their fruit, that they are not a brother or sister. You may argue that this never says brother or sister, but it specifically tells us “In your relationships with one another…” and the letter is sent to believers (it says to saints at the beginning of the book). We are to treat fellow saints differently than unsaved. And if a fellow saint is trying to kill us, our family, or plunder our house, we can assume that they are not a fellow saint, by their works. That doesn’t mean that we have to kill them, but if it does come to that, I don’t think it’s prohibited.
And again in Ephesians “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.” This is in the context of how we act in accordance with fellow saints, not acting as the gentiles, in the futility of their minds. Besides, the sins he lists off are sins that were prohibited from the beginning. And remember that earlier on in Ephesians is says: “Be angry and do not sin;” There is a place for righteous anger. Anger is a form of resistance, whether physical or not.
And btw… when you say this “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.” Polygamy is prohibited. We see this in the seventh commandment, we see this in Genesis, we see that a man is to leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife, we see the bad effects of polygamy everywhere. Yes it is VERY prohibited… but not punished in the same way as other sins.
And slavery is not wrong, in the right context. We see slavery as right in the OT. Kidnapping is wrong. But in the case of indentured servitude it’s right. If someone had to pay off a debt they went into righteous servitude. That’s not man stealing. And a bond servant which is not wrong.
There… that is my reply! 🙂 And yes… I am open minded, but have a very strong resolve for this case. So if you show me wrong, I’ll be moved, but I already have thought about this for quite a while, and even here have been finding more reason to hold to my convictions.
Published author, student in writing, works with HazelGracePress.comOctober 8, 2018 at 12:33 pm #51573
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.