I want to preface this post with this statement “This post is not for the sake of aruging”!!!!!
After reading the comments on the previous post I now have to ask this question in scenario format. I was speaking to my brother Saiko today and he said that the woman who terminates the life in case of the rape is “murdering” the baby. Which I agree that abortion is murder; however, I believe it is murder only in the sense that it is malicious. I believe the bible deals with Murder as it stems from revenge, anger, jealously, lust, envy and that the law under the Old Covenant had different ramifications in different circumstances. So I asked Saiko about this scenario in which he said it would be okay to take this man’s life which I think goes hand in hand. If one is given the liberty the other is also.
Scenario
You and your family is sharing the Gospel in your neighborhood. You communicate the Gospel with someone who tends to be a bit hostile and upset that you told him that he would go to hell and that his religion is not acceptable to God. In return, during dinner he kicks in the door of your home and tells everyone to get on the floor so that he can murder you execution style. You have the ability to take his life regardless of how that can happen. Do you in this circumstance have the right to retaliate and protect your family and take the life of this man?
My immediate answer is no if the woman who is raped can’t terminate the pregnancy. Why? Just as your family is innocent in this case of any wrongdoing so is the wife who has to tell her husband or daughter who has to tell her father that she is pregnant by someone who raped her. I then appeal to this verse as a foundation for your prohibition to take the man, who is going to murder your family, life.
Romans 12
19 Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” 20 To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” 21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
We also understand what Jesus did (and said about turning the other cheek and so forth), what the Apostles did according to tradition and what the early Christians did. None of them attempted to protect their lives by force so how can we say we want to be like them but in turn say we have the right to protect our lives through deadly force?
Good one although I’m sure I’d shoot…
Please pray for a sista…
Wha? OK, I really don’t get the relationship between the two situations. An unborn infant or a murderous pagan — which one can we kill justifiably? Is that what you’re asking?
If motive is the only thing that makes abortion wrong (i.e. malice) then women who think they’re just getting rid of a clump of tissue would be ok, right? Or women who cry the whole time? Or women whose boyfriends force them to get the abortion?
Help me out here, I think I must be misunderstanding you. To me, a man who’s about to execute your family is nothing like a defenseless infant still in the womb who has not yet chosen to sin a single time.
LOL Laura,
I knew you were a firecracker all bloggers are rather they believe it or not. LOL. I don’t take the tissue stance though both are lives. I am saying the woman who is raped is just as innoncent as the baby, does she now have no right to protect herself against something she had no part in whatsoever. Her hands are as clean as the family who is being executed.
But I am lean more towards if someone breaks into my home to murder me for the Gospel that I am to be a Martyr. It is funny we preach and commend Stephen but don’t want to be him. If the woman who was forced with no contribution to this life other than having a egg that was fertile is guilty so is the man who takes the life. God is sovereign in both situations and we do have clear cases of the execution of families in scriptue and history and if protecting your life is the position it is defintely not a biblical one.
Huh… I guess I don’t think that a baby is something to “protect” yourself against. To use your example, if I were raped and became pregnant, why would I make the choice to kill a child (who also had no part in the matter), when to preserve life, to bring a child knit together by the very fingers of God into the world, would be a testimony to the redemption I have in Christ? I think of Genesis 50 and the story of Joseph facing his brothers who sold him into slavery — he says to them, “As for you, you meant it for evil” as a rapist does, “but God meant it for good” as sparing the child’s life would accomplish.
How would killing the child “protect” a woman? Would killing the child undo the rape? Or would it merely undo the outward evidence of the rape, by inflicting unthinkable suffering and ultimately death on an unborn child?
Wow, I was looking at these last two post thinking it’s getting thick in here. I can see that God needs to deal with me because you can mess with me but my family, I would protect. You ripped the covers off on this one brother. Good! God bless
To:
Gunny, Laura, Tyris, Saiko, Gabriel, Kathy and others. Through this dialogue and wrestling through this issue with other brothers in the faith I have come to the conclusion that even in the extreme cases I presented and anything worse (Like a daughther being impregnated by her Father) that abortion would be sin. Though I believe it would be difficult and that God would grant me the case if this were to ever come before me to be graceful and loving I would say that the termination is equivalent to murder. Thank you for your understanding.
What really helped me was when Laura and Kathy both said they would bear the child and if they would when it is them experiencing the rape and the emotional attachment to the child then I have to side with them. Thanks again for the friendly (and fiery Laura) dialogue it was definitely eye open to see my grave error on a sensitive issue.
Finally I will say that I believe Self Defense violates Romans 12 and 1 Peter 4. Which could be another post if anyone is interested in such a discussion.
12 Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. 13 But rejoice insofar as you share Christ’s sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed. 14 If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. 15 But let none of you suffer as a murderer or a thief or an evildoer or as a meddler. 16 Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name. 17 For it is time for judgment to begin at the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God? 18 And
“If the righteous is scarcely saved,
what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?”
19 Therefore let those who suffer according to God’s will entrust their souls to a faithful Creator while doing good.
Lionel wrote:
“Finally I will say that I believe Self Defense violates Romans 12 and 1 Peter 4.”
I’ll give you the benefit of doubt here that you’re defining “SD” in terms of taking a life to protect your own.
Otherwise, I would have to agree. If the bad guy wants to blow my head clean off and I can defend myself in such a way as to prevent that, but not take his life, then I’m down with that.
AND I think I can still operate within the Matt 7:12 Golden Rule of doing to others as I would have them do unto me.
I would be preventing him from sinning, which is to his advantage. This is another topic, but at a minimum I would be making his judgment less harsh on some level.
Based on the pictorial options presented above, at a minimum he would be saying to me, “Don’t taze me, bro! Don’t taze me! Don’t taze me, bro!”
Or I might have to say to him, “I know what you’re thinking. ‘Either he fired 6 shots or only 5.’ Tell you the truth, I kinda lost track myself. But being this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and would blow your head clean off you have to ask yourself one question, ‘Do I feel providentially blessed?’ Well do ya, punk?”
As an aside, Jesus would be in a different category at the point of taking their abuse and scorn as part of God’s plan, for He did not allow them to kill Him in those previous instances, because it was not His time.
Pastor Gunny,
“Or I might have to say to him, “I know what you’re thinking. ‘Either he fired 6 shots or only 5.’ Tell you the truth, I kinda lost track myself. But being this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and would blow your head clean off you have to ask yourself one question, ‘Do I feel providentially blessed?’ Well do ya, punk?”
Cut it out or I will block all future post LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If I may add to this discussion,
I was wanting to add/throw out some of the links that actually involve cases including the extremes Lionel brought up (which indeed do happen QUITE OFTEN but many go simply unreported) many of the links/resources I’ve studied in times past on the issue for youth ministry and working with younger women….and many of them have been highly praised on this sensitive issue in which it now seems we have some conclusion on.
http://www.family.org/lifechallenges/A000000125.cfm
Prayerfully, they’ll be a blessing/aid for further insight to you as they’ve been to me
http://www.heartlink.org/beavoice/
And this:
http://www.heartlink.org/hottopics/a000000268.cfm
And this:
http://www.abortionfacts.com/reardon/rape_incest_and_abortion.asp
And this:
http://www.abortionfacts.com/bible/pastor_cole.asp
When we look to Christ it seems almost impossible not to let this thug kill you and your family. As I was the Bible through my head looking for versus to refute romans 12-i simply cannot do it.
I do think we have to realize there is a huge difference between murder and killing. Murder along with all sins is a heart issue. In this situation you would be defending your family which I would not consider murder by any means. But in the same token would have a hard time looking my wife in the eye if we both survived and my son was murdered and say, “Gods Sovereign plan” I would be single faster than the super hero FLASH!!
Personally I would kill the dude and sleep well that night. The next night after reading romans 12 and looking at CHRIST, Stephen, Peter, Paul, and the others and then have to repent with confusion. Very difficult topic in which I hope would never be a reality for any of us. With this particular stance I guess we would all have to be against the death penalty as well since the Lord said Vengeance is mine. What a difficult topic to think about. In Christ Alone
The verse translated “Thou shalt not kill” in the KJV translation, is translated “You shall not murder” in modern translations – because these translations represents the real meaning of the Hebrew text. The Bible in Basic English translates the phrase, “Do not put anyone to death without cause.” The Hebrew word used here is ratsach, which nearly always refers to intentional killing without cause (unless indicated otherwise by context). Hebrew law recognized accidental killing as not punishable. In fact, specific cities were designated as “cities of refuge,” so that an unintentional killer could flee to escape retribution. The Hebrew word for “kill” in this instance is not ratsach, but nakah, which can refer to either premeditated or unintentional killing, depending upon context. Other Hebrew words also can refer to killing; the punishment for murder was the death sentence. However, to be convicted, there needed to be at least two eyewitnesses. The commandment “Thou shalt not kill” is really not as general as the King James Version would indicate. The commandment actually refers to premeditated, unjustified killing – murder. In the case of protecting one’s self or one’s family from danger or an unlawful act on is biblically justified to take a life, mind you this is the law. Since were no longer held captive by the law and we can do all things, through all things might not be right, 1Cor 10:23 “All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not”. Believers are held to a higher standard by God and the world, if we fall short of that high standard and take a life while protecting a loved one, family or self, are we dammed to hell? Do we put ashes on our head? Our do we approach our father covered in the blood of Christ and ask to be forgiven?
And this is why I love your site, Brah. Theology meets REAL LIFE ISSUES instead of remaining in the realm of discussion alone.
Though the subject of self-defense is a hard subject to be consistent on, one has to realize that God promises those who live by violence will die by it (Matthew 26:52)….and whether we like it or not, Christians must treat others with kindness, gentleness and love (Luke 6:27-36, Galatians 5:14-15).
If someone were to murder my family, naturally I’d want to take vengenance upon them……but at the same time, would that show I have a true understanding of what the GRACE/MERCY OF GOD is about since He could’ve done the same thing to me ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS and yet treats me better than I deserve? Even when I was HIS ENEMY?…..
Though I agree that murder is wrong, one would have to be very careful if there was not made a clear distinction between that and KILLING, as to what killing entails and when it is acceptable. Otherwise, when it comes to things such as people in law enforcement or going to war (which can be a larger form of self-defense, IMHO), there may be confusion.
On the issue of MURDER, here’s some info that may be beneficial:
Murder
(From International Standard Bible Encyclopedia)
1. Terms:
mur’-der (haragh, “to smite,” “destroy,” “kill,” “slay” (Psalms 10:8; Hosea 9:13 AV), ratsach, “to dash to pieces,” “kill,” especially with premeditation (Numbers 35:16 and frequently; Job 24:14; Psalms 94:6; Jeremiah 7:9; Hosea 6:9); phoneus, “criminal homicide,” from phoneuo, “to kill,” “slay”; phonos, from pheno, has the same meaning; anthropoktonos, “manslayer,” “murderer,” is used to designate Satan (John 8:44) and him that hates his brother (1 John 3:15); a matricide is designated as metraloas (1 Timothy 1:9); compare adelphokionos, “fratricidal” (The Wisdom of Solomon 10:3).
The plural of phonos, “murders,” occurs in Matthew 15:19; Mark 7:21; Galatians 5:21 the King James Version; Revelation 9:21; compare 2 Macc 4:3,18; 12:6):
2. The Hebrew Law:
The Hebrew law recognized the distinction between willful murder and accidental or justifiable homicide (Numbers 25:16); but in legal language no verbal distinction is made.
Murder was always subject to capital punishment (Leviticus 24:17; compare Genesis 9:6). Even if the criminal sought the protection of the sanctuary, he was to be arrested before the altar, and to be punished (Exodus 21:12, Exodus 21:14; Leviticus 24:17, Leviticus 24:21; Numbers 35:16, Numbers 35:18, Numbers 35:21, Numbers 35:31).
The Mishna says that a mortal blow intended for another than the victim is punishable with death; but such a provision is not found in the Law. No special mention is made of (a) child murder; (b) parricide; or (c) taking life by poison; but the intention of the law is clear with reference to all these eases (Exodus 21:15, Exodus 21:17; 1 Timothy 1:9; Matthew 15:4). No punishment is mentioned for attempted suicide (compare 1 Samuel 31:4 f.; 1 Kings 16:18; Matthew 27:5); yet Josephus says (BJ, III, viii, 5) that suicide was held criminal by the Jews (see also Exodus 21:23).
An animal known to be vicious must be confined, and if it caused the death of anyone, the animal was destroyed and the owner held guilty of murder (Exodus 21:29, Exodus 21:31).
The executioner, according to the terms of the Law, was the “revenger of blood”; but the guilt must be previously determined by the Levitical tribunal. Strong protection was given by the requirement that at least two witnesses must concur in any capital question (Numbers 35:19-30; Deuteronomy 17:6-12; Deuteronomy 19:12, Deuteronomy 19:17).
Under the monarchy the duty of executing justice on a murderer seems to have been assumed to some extent by the sovereign, who also had power to grant pardon (2 Samuel 13:39; 2 Samuel 14:7, 2 Samuel 14:11; 1 Kings 2:34).
On the issue of self
As another wisely said on the issue (from “Got Questions.org), “Without close study, the Bible can seem to give conflicting instructions on this subject. There are numerous passages that speak of Christians being pacifistic (Proverbs 25:21,22; Matthew 5:39; Romans 12:17). And yet there are many passages that talk about war and violence that God approves of. Such as David slaying Goliath (1 Samuel 17). Not to mention the fact that God commanded the Israelites to completely destroy everyone and everything in the promised land! So in the Luke 22 passage, Jesus does tell his disciples to get a sword. Jesus knew that now was the time when Jesus would be threatened (and later killed) and his followers would be threatened as well. Jesus was giving approval of the fact that one has the right to defend himself. Now just a few verses later we see Jesus being arrested and Peter takes a sword and cuts off someone’s ear. Jesus rebukes him for that act. Why? Peter was trying to stop something that Jesus had been telling His disciples was in fact going to happen. In other words, Peter was acting unwisely in the situation. He was trying to stop something that was not supposed to be stopped. We must be wise when to fight and when not to.”
Even more interesting is the fact that protection of one’s life is seen in the NT.
As another wisely said, “God protected Jesus a number of times by having him flee. The wise men that traveled from the east were asked by Herod to report back to him so he can know where He is and go to worship him also Mt.2:7-8, but his intentions were really to kill him. They disobeyed Herod because God warned them by a dream vs.12. In Mt.2:13 God warned Mary and Joseph to flee to preserve Jesus’ life.”
“When Jesus was alive he also did what was necessary to preserve his life so he could complete his mission. There was a time to lay His life down, Jesus knew that time was not yet. Matthew 12:14-15 The Pharisees plotted to kill Jesus, so he left the area. Jesus would remove himself from harms way. He taught to flee to save a life instead of fighting. John 7:1 Jesus avoided an area because the Jews there were waiting to take his life. Luke 4:4:28-30 A crowd tried to throw Jesus off a cliff, but he walked through the crowd to escape. He did not surrender to the mob and allow this to occur. John 7:30 The Jews tried to seize Jesus in the temple courts, but “no one laid a hand on him, because his time had not yet come.” In other words, they wanted to and tried, but were unable because He escaped.
The apostles followed his example, Paul was let down in a basket to escape those who were looking to kill him. Acts 9:23-25. In Acts 9:29-30 Saul (Paul) debated with the Grecian Jews, who then tried to kill him. When the other believers heard of this, they sent him to another area. Acts 14:5-7 there was a plot to mistreat and stone Paul and Barnabas, so they fled to another region and continued to preach the Gospel. 1 Corinthians 15:30-32 Paul says he was endangered “every hour” and he described this peril as He fought “wild beasts” in Ephesus, those who wanted to rip him apart.
http://www.letusreason.org/Doct40.htm
If anyone disagrees, I’d love to hear feedback……….& if anyone’s interested, here’s an EXCELLENT article on the subject of SELF-DEFENSE that has greatly benefited me
http://www.foxven.com/s-self.html#apostles
If all self defense is unbiblical, I also have to wonder about issues of war. The Bible does allow for killing in self-defense, provided it be made clear there are different kinds of self-defense. There is personal self-defense, self-defense of the society (“social self-defense”) and there is national self-defense, which we call “war.” Of course, there are unjust wars of aggression for property, wealth, or slaves, and the heads of state who start those wars will be held responsible by God at the Judgment. Furthermore, not all killing in a war is justified, and almost every war has cases of what are now called “war crimes.”
On the issue of self-defense, something I found interesing was In the Book of Esther when we are told of one man’s obsession to destroy the Jews. Haman was so obsessed with his hatred of Mordecai that he deceived the king into signing a death sentence for all Jews (Esther 3:13). Over the next few chapters we see the progression of Haman’s downfall because of his hatred, but Esther 8:11-12 has a very interesting decree. When the king finally sees the folly of the law he signed for Haman, he signs another law giving the Jews the right to defend their lives by killing anyone who is trying to murder them.
Again, I found that interesting
msamu,
Thanks for taking the time to write this; I have learned a lot.
Nonetheless, I will hold to my “personal” stance by holding to, “Thou Shall Not Kill/Murder and leave it at that.
I will however say that “thou” shall shoot, but in the knee–:-)
lol
Wait a minute msamu!
You “almost” got one past me!!! lol
Now, you say what, we can do “all” things???
Since were no longer held captive by the law and we can do all things, through all things might not be right, 1Cor 10:23 “All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not”.
Righter: you made my point, you have the right to follow YOUR convictions not mine, not your pastors not the popes, you have the spirit of God dwelling in you and he’ll guide
you through life, that’s what liberty in Christ is all about bro. I will on the other hand Shoot em dead
Msaum you tripping again dude what does Paul mean by:
19 For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. 23 I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.
So let me ask can I now commit adultrey, lie, steal, fornicate, abuse my wife, get drunk, live in unforgiveness, involve myself in homosexual activity, worship idols? Please be very careful how you answer these bro.
Righter has been “thinking” too much and is stressed…
Lionel,
In regards to your original question–do we as Christians have the right of self-defense–I would say “yes.” The verses you quoted as well as the examples in the Bible were all in the context of being persecuted for the faith and the sake of the gospel. I think there is a world of difference between a burglar holding a gun to your wife’s head because he wants to steal your stuff, and persecution for the sake of the gospel. I think also that back in Biblical times, Christians could legally be persecuted and killed; so that is another difference. In your scenario, the would-be murderer is acting outside of the law, while the persecution that Paul, Jesus, and others endured was within the bounds of the law, and was not typically “personal” like in your scenario. Stephen and the early Christians in Jerusalem were persecuted by the Sanhedrin (a legal body); and when Paul was beaten in Philippi, and also when he was dragged out of the Temple towards the end of Acts, he asserted his rights as a Roman citizen, which included the right of a trial before punishment, including execution. This persecution was also legal; whereas your above scenario is illegal. That might make a difference.
Your scenario reminds me of something I heard that a Quaker did a few centuries ago. One time a man broke into the house of a Quaker, and he said, “Friend, thou art standing where I am about to shoot!”
Kathy
Ok msamu,
You are saying tha someone has the right to do wrong but be punsied for it?
I guess I’m having difficult with the fact that “God hates sin”. So, how can we have the “right”?
Word to the wise–Righter is a sister!!!
I think the self defense issue is a good topic.
to Righter: again 1Cor 10:23 “All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not”.
What does it say ” ALL things are lawful for me” what thing’s ” all things”
Do I have a responsibility in exercising my liberty, absolutely because ” all things are not expedient”
(Suitable for achieving a particular end in a given circumstance)
The answer is yes, my action will produce a reaction
What is the end Christians attempt to achieve (letting our light shine, so men will glorify God).
What does it say “All things are lawful”
How is that possible, when I break the law I’ve sinned, my sin is unto death, but Christ died for
my sins this is a fact, the sins of omission and commission, that is for my past and for my future sins,
with the price being paid I am free from sin and death.
But I have a responsibility to the body, my life should edifyi the body, and because I love the body I will sacrifice my wants ( which are lawful) for the bodies needs.
in protecting myself I’ve exercised my liberty, through in killing to do so might upset my body, I can ask to be forgiven and my body will forgive me.
Hey Kathy read the Scenario again:
You and your family is sharing the Gospel in your neighborhood. You communicate the Gospel with someone who tends to be a bit hostile and upset that you told him that he would go to hell and that his religion is not acceptable to God. In return, during dinner he kicks in the door of your home and tells everyone to get on the floor so that he can murder you execution style. You have the ability to take his life regardless of how that can happen. Do you in this circumstance have the right to retaliate and protect your family and take the life of this man?
Michael,
You didn’t answer my question. Here it is again
Msaum you tripping again dude what does Paul mean by:
19 For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. 23 I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.
So let me ask can I now commit adultrey, lie, steal, fornicate, abuse my wife, get drunk, live in unforgiveness, involve myself in homosexual activity, worship idols? Please be very careful how you answer these bro.
Gm msamu,
I have read your reply and will kindly respond this evening when I get home; I am at work and your replies require “extra” attention! lol
A Christian must not barely consider what is lawful, but what is expedient, and for the use of edification. A private Christian should do so even in his private conduct. He must not seek his own only, but his neighbour’s wealth. He must be concerned not to hurt his neighbour, nay, he must be concerned to promote his welfare; and must consider how to act so that he may help others, and not hinder them in their holiness, comfort, or salvation.
Adultrey, lie, steal, fornicate, abuse my wife, get drunk, live in unforgiveness, involve myself in homosexual activity, worship idols?
Does any of the above edify?
Is it expedient?
you’ll be motivated by your answer, which should be motivated by the Holy Spirit, which will guide you in all righteousness, can’t go worng
Hey msamu,
I forgot to add (and I hope he doesn’t mind), that I have to agree with Melvin that you are going down a rabbit hole!
LOL
We’ll talk later
I like rabbit
Lionel,
I’ve been racking my brain, and can’t come up with a Biblical excuse for self-defense in the case of someone attacking you for being a Christian. It’s just kinda hard for a red-blooded American who has seen a few too many movies to accept. Or maybe I should say my flesh is rebelling against it. The only possible “out” I can see is that whenever Christians were attacked in the Bible, it appears that the persecutors were within their legal rights–the Sanhedrin martyring Stephen, Herod martyring James and imprisoning Peter, the various times Paul was beaten. And Paul did often protect himself within the bounds of the law–seeking protection in his Roman citizenship to escape the Jews who sought to kill him when he returned to Jerusalem after his missionary journeys, asserting his Roman citizenship to avoid a beating there, as well as making the Philippians nervous that they had beaten a Roman citizen without a trial, etc.
But I will say that I’d probably shoot first and ask questions later. [Except we don't have a gun, and I don't know how to kill a man with my bare hands, so it's just a totally hypothetical statement.
] But in the above scenario, (if I had a gun), I wouldn’t have any qualms about shooting him when he entered my house, which would be before I found out that he was targeting me because of my Christian witness.
I remember listening to a sermon by Dr. Sproul on the issue of this commandment. Not to pit you against Dr. Sproul, or vice versa, but I believe he stands on the other side of this issue – namely, that the “life for a life” model was instituted for the unlawful killing of another human being, who is an image-bearer of the One, True, Living GOD. Did he get it wrong?
My other question, is it okay to take the life of another, as long as its NOT in the context of you being slayed for your Faith (i.e., its not persecution, its for a pair of sneakers)?
My last question brother, thanks for your patience, you seem to stand with the budding doctrine of New Covenant Theology. It has been my understanding that New Covenant Theology borders on Antinomianism (which I have been “taught” to condemn). Would you consider doing a posts on “What is New Covenant Theology?” Thanks.
Hey Nate,
I don’t think I ever called it Sin. I think it is lawful to take someones life in your defense, I just don’t see it modeled in scripture which makes me say, the most Christ centered thing to do is to let your life be taken. This is an opinion, but we must understand when we are dealing with a lot of Americans the slogan is “live by the gun”. Many Ameicans feel illegal immigration (though they were illegals) many believe in Government (while this nation was built on Anarchy) and many believe in the right to bear arms (which the bible tells us to not attempt to protect our lives).
Now on to NCT. This is a lie that Sproul, Waldron, an Barcellos need to repent of. It is actually slander. We believe in a higher law, namely the law of Christ. We don’t believe (nor does the bible EVER SUPPORT) that the 10 Commandments was “God’s unchanging Moral Law). See what Paul says here in 1 Cor 9
“21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. ”
Paul makes a clear distinction between the “law” and the “law of Christ”. You see Christ and His apostles brought a higher law. Not one of rules and ordinaces but a law that is guided by the Spirit. This is where we get Galatians 5, things like impatience, dissension, gossip, these things are part of the law of Christ and can’t be found anywhere in the Old Covenant.
We also belive 9 of the 10 of the 10 have been brought into the New Covenant by Christ or the Apostles. We also belive that you can no more seperate the 10 Commandments from the the rest of the Covenant Document (all of the laws, festivals, regulations) then you can seperate a ball and the goal from basketball and say you are playing a Basketball Game. The summary documents are just as much part of the Old Covenant as the Year of Jubiliee is. No where does God okay or give Sproul and others the right to seperate the two. Instead of me answering it I will give you a link:
http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/faq/covenant_theol.html