Showing posts with label Self-Defense. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Self-Defense. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 23, 2015

SELF DEFENSE, FAMILY DEFENSE, FIREARMS: A CHRISTIAN DEFENSE





Do Christians have a duty to defend their families? Evidently, Syrian Christians think so:

  • “A group of about 50 Syrian Christian women have left their homes, jobs, and children to form a new battalion to fight the encroaching ISIS terrorists… ISIS, which has forced many women and girls into sexual slavery, has also driven thousands of Syrian Christians from their homeland since civil war began in the region in March, 2011.” (CNSNews.com)
Some cite Jesus’ teaching to turn-the-other-cheek against self-defense. However, Paul argued that taking care of one’s family is our duty:

  • If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever. (1 Timothy 5:8; All verses from the NIV)
However, providing support for our families is the focus of this verse. Could this principle also pertain to defending our family? It must! Just think of the absurdity of telling your daughters:

  • I will gladly provide you food, clothing, and shelter, but if ISIS comes to make you their sex-slaves, I must turn-the-other-cheek.
This, of course, is absurd! But some will argue that the Christian faith is absurd and that we should be willing to live according to its alleged foolishness. Really?

Embodying God’s wisdom in our lives is intended to win the respect of the skeptic. Therefore, Paul instructs Titus to:

  • Encourage the young men to be self-controlled. In everything set them an example by doing what is good. In your teaching show integrity, seriousness and soundness of speech that cannot be condemned, so that those who oppose you may be ashamed because they have nothing bad to say about us. (Titus 2:6-8)
Turning-the-other-cheek to ISIS by letting them take our wives and daughters as sex-slaves will win no one’s respect but rather their contempt and disgust.

Likewise, Peter argues:

  • Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us… For it is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men. (1 Peter 2:12,15)
Sometimes, to love the oppressor is to hate the innocent. If we fail to do good by protecting our families and even our pagan neighbors against the horrors of ISIS, we will be regarded with the contempt as we would deserve. It will bring humiliation, not honor! This will also bring disrepute upon our faith by showing that it lacks wisdom.

But didn’t Jesus teach passivity in the face of death? While He did teach non-retaliation, as did Paul (Romans 12:14-21) and the rest of the NT, He never taught against self-defense, either for ourselves or our families. Instead, He acknowledged that we have a right to protect our families:

  • “But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into.” (Matthew 24:43)
Jesus acknowledged that it is understandable and legitimate to protect our families. His teaching is in keeping with the Hebrew Scriptures, which Jesus fully endorsed (Matthew 5:16-19; 22:29; 4:4). The Israelite had a legal right to defend his household:

  • "If a thief is caught breaking in and is struck so that he dies, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed.” (Exodus 22:2)
Today, we can’t even consider defending our family without a firearm, especially in view of the current threats. But I do not own a firearm; nor do I plan to obtain one. My wife and I have no one else in our household, but if I did have children, I believe that it would be my responsibility to obtain one.

But shouldn’t loving one’s enemies take precedence over self-defense? Aren’t we supposed to overcome evil with good?

  • Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. (Romans 12:17-18)
We have to “do right in the eyes of everyone.” However, doing right might entail defending our families and neighbors. Yes, we are to “live at peace with everyone.” But only “if it is possible!” Sometimes, it is not, and evil must be resisted. Paul resisted the evil of Elymas, who was speaking against the Gospel, by striking him down, by the grace of God, with blindness (Acts 13:11).

Paul didn’t live at peace with the Philippian authorities who had him unlawfully arrested and beaten him. Instead, he had them put to shame by demanding and receiving an official escort out of the city (Acts 16:37).

There are times when passivity isn’t appropriate. Instead, self-defense is sometimes the appropriate response. Did Jesus denigrate all forms of violence? Certainly not! While He wouldn’t allow Peter to drive away His assailants with a sword, He drove the money changers out of the Temple with a whip (John 2:15). There are times when force is appropriate. For this reason, God had ordained the rule of law to exercise God’s wrath upon evil (Romans 13:1-4).

How then should we understand Jesus’ command to turn-the-other-cheek? Most commentators agree that Jesus was correcting the unbiblical Jewish practice of personally taking revenge. Instead of revenge, Jesus taught that it is better to suffer indignities and to turn-the-other-cheek than to seek revenge:

  • In the present case, Jesus aims to correct the revengeful spirit and practice to which the Jews were greatly addicted, and which they justified by a loose application of the law of Moses. (2) Our Lord here, as we have observed in former instances … selects an extreme case, in order to exhibit more vividly the principle by which we should be guided. So far from vengeful resistance and retaliation being right, it would be better, if that were the alternative, voluntarily to submit ourselves to a yet greater wrong. Better to turn the other cheek, to give up the other garment, to double the impressing officer's requisition, than to permit ourselves to practice that passionate resistance and that revengeful retaliation to which we are all prone, and which the Jewish teachers defended. (Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew.)
Ideally, we are to leave retaliation in the hands of the police and the armed forces. However, what do we do when these ordained powers are collapsing? We must restore order, even with force.

Wednesday, August 6, 2014

Anti-Semitism in the Spirit of Hitler




I’m not quick to call anyone anti-Semitic. In fact, I can’t remember ever having applied this terminology directly to anyone. Instead, I am more inclined to laugh at anti-Semitic jokes. However, anti-Semitism – the kind that calls for the death of the Jews, the kind that has been past-ripe in Muslim lands - has resurrected the long-dormant cries for the “death to the Jews” and “Hitler didn’t go far enough” in Western Europe.
This is troubling. As our heart gives birth to our words, our words also bear violence – a truth that has been demonstrated repeatedly in our history.

This kind of thinking is even leaking over into the church, of course, without the calls for death. Recently, I re-posted an article on the persecution of Christians in Islamic lands. One Christian responded back about the death of Christians in Gaza in the wake of the Israeli invasion, as if the incidental death of Christians in Gaza is equivalent to the purposeful death of Christians elsewhere. Is this an anti-Semitic response? How can we know what is in a person’s heart!

Another Christian just blogged that the Jews are not chosen of God:

  • As for Jews being God’s chosen people: This is a matter of biblical and/or theological understanding. I consider being chosen (in this context) to mean elected unto salvation; and I believe salvation is to be found only in Christ. God’s people are saved (in both Testaments) by grace through faith. Biology saves no one and never did. That is to say, no one has ever been or ever will be saved simply because he or she is Jewish.

Although I agree that salvation is matter of believing in Messiah Jesus and that “biology saves no one,” this Christian is certainly taking an extreme and unbiblical position by denying that Israel is chosen. I cannot fathom what motivates this blogger, and I will not try. However, such a message of Israel’s supposed non-chosenness will inevitably serve to undermine support for Israel among those who take the Bible seriously.

Instead, Scripture uniformly attests that God chose the Jewish people as His own special possession:

  • For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. The Lord your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession. (Deuteronomy 7:6)
  • For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. Out of all the peoples on the face of the earth, the Lord has chosen you to be his treasured possession. (Deuteronomy 14:2)

As His chosen, God also made many indelible promises to Israel:

  • “But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, you descendants of Abraham my friend, I took you from the ends of the earth, from its farthest corners I called you. I said, ‘You are my servant’; I have chosen you and have not rejected you. So do not fear, for I am with you; do not be dismayed, for I am your God. I will strengthen you and help you; I will uphold you with my righteous right hand. All who rage against you will surely be ashamed and disgraced; those who oppose you will be as nothing and perish. Though you search for your enemies, you will not find them. Those who wage war against you will be as nothing at all.” (Isa 41:8-12)

Has God utterly washed His hands of Israel, as many falsely allege?

  • For your Maker is your husband—the Lord Almighty is his name—the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer; he is called the God of all the earth. The Lord will call you back as if you were a wife deserted and distressed in spirit—a wife who married young, only to be rejected,” says your God. “For a brief moment I abandoned you, but with deep compassion I will bring you back. In a surge of anger I hid my face from you for a moment, but with everlasting kindness I will have compassion on you,” says the Lord your Redeemer. (Isaiah 54:5-8)

Nor does the NT revoke these truths. Paul affirmed that Israel, as God’s chosen but errant people, still has a place within God’s plans:

  • For if their rejection brought reconciliation to the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? If the part of the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, then the whole batch is holy; if the root is holy, so are the branches. (Romans 11:15-16)

Clearly, in God’s mind, Israel remains special and holy. Also, His promises remain in effect, despite Israel’s rebellion:

  • I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers and sisters, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in, and in this way all Israel will be saved. As it is written: “The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. And this is my covenant with them when I take away their sins.” As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable. (Romans 11:25-29)

What should our response be to all of this? The Gospel:

  • For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile. For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed—a righteousness that is by faith from first to last. (Romans 1:16-17)

However, there is also a place for seeking justice and speaking truth. Everyone has a right to protect themselves, their families and their communities. However, this is a right that is now being denied to Israel. Why? According to author and commentator Charles Krauthammer:

  • “When it comes to Europe, I think the overwhelming factor is raw native deep-seated anti-Semitism,” he told Fox News on Tuesday. For a long time, the anti-Semites of Europe discovered that by using the “veneer of anti-Zionism,” they could get away with it, he said.
  • “Now, the veneer and cover are gone,” Krauthammer said. Signs used by European protests saying “Hitler was right” and chants about gassing Jews makes anti-Israel protests into “raw anti-Semitism finding a semi-respectable outlet,” he said.
Enough said!

Friday, July 26, 2013

Progressives, Non-Violence and Gun Control



  Should a Christian store a gun at home for self-defense? As a probation officer, I was entitled to own a gun, but I decided against it. However, this wasn’t because I thought that it was wrong for me to have a gun. Instead, I just didn’t want the hassles associated with it.

In contrast, in a blog entry entitled What Would Jesus Say to the NRA?, progressive Christian, Shane Claiborne, argued that Jesus was against all forms of violence:

  • Everything in Jesus' world, just as in ours, contends that we must use violence to protect the innocent from violence, which is the very thing Jesus came to help us un-learn through his nonviolent life and death on the cross. Surely, we think, if God were to come to earth, he should at least come with a bodyguard -- if not an entire entourage of armed soldiers and secret service folk. But Jesus comes unarmed. Surely, we think, if God were about to be killed he would bust out a can of butt-kicking wrath; but Jesus looks into the eyes of those about to kill him and says, "Father forgive them." The Bible goes so far to say that the wisdom of God makes no sense to the logic of this world, in fact it may even seem like "foolishness" (or at least utopian idealism).  
Claiborne mistakenly interprets Jesus’ prayer, "Father, forgive them," as His rejection of any punishment. However, it can’t possibly mean that. Jesus had talked more about the consequence of hell than did anyone else in the Bible!

More to the point, Claiborne insists the Jesus’ “nonviolent life and death on the cross” represents the rejection of any use of the sword. However, this is contradicted by many NT verses (Rom. 13:1-4; 1 Peter 2:14).

However, it’s necessary to acknowledge that Jesus’ cross is supposed to guide our conduct:

  • To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps…When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly. (1 Peter 2:21-23) 
Clearly, Jesus’ life models for us non-retaliation. However, does this say anything against  defending our families? Evidently, Claiborne thinks that it does:

  • When soldiers come to arrest and execute Jesus, one of his closest friends defensively picks up a sword to protect him. Jesus' response is stunning: He scolds his own disciple and heals the wounded persecutor. It was a tough and very counter-intuitive lesson: "The one who picks up the sword dies by the sword ... there is another way."
Claiborne seems to think that any use of violence is unacceptable. However, should we never pick up the sword? Should we never own a gun or defend the vulnerable? This brings us to the question: What does it mean to pick up the sword? Certainly, we can’t take this statement literally. There is nothing wrong with literally picking up a sword. The criminal justice system picks up the sword. Their very role requires this (Rom. 13:1-4).

Nor can we maintain that Jesus swore off of all violence. He forcefully drove money changers out of the Temple (John 2:12-16; Mat. 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-46).

It’s therefore hard to maintain that Jesus had taught against all force or violence. In fact, the use of force was very much a part of the revelation of the Hebrew Scriptures. God had ordained certain wars. He had also mandated capital punishment, even before the Mosaic Covenant (Gen. 9:6), and there is no reason to believe that the cross changed any of this. In fact, Jesus even reaffirmed capital punishment:

  • “For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.'” (Matthew 15:4) 
But what about owning a gun for the defense of one’s home and family? While God clearly ordained certain forms of violent judgment – wars and capital punishment – does Scripture make any allowance for self-defense? There is surprisingly little written about this in the Bible. Perhaps it’s not because self- and family-defense were not acceptable, but perhaps because it was such an obvious truth that it didn’t require biblical support. Perhaps the concept of self-defense was as acceptable as drinking water.

However, there are verses that do speak to this:

  • "If a thief is caught breaking in and is struck so that he dies, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed.” (Exodus 22:2) 
Although murder was such a serious crime, defending one’s home and family took precedence!

Jesus Himself even seemed to endorse a forceful defense of one’s home. He likens the necessity for keeping watch spiritually with keeping watch over one’s home:

  • "Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come. But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into. (Matthew 24:42-43; Luke 12:39)
According to Jesus, the homeowner has a perfect right to forcefully resist the thief from breaking in.

I am not suggesting that we all go out and buy a gun. Sometimes, the Lord is best served when we simply rely upon Him. If we do buy a gun, we need to note the very limited circumstances where lethal force is justified.

Guns are not only powerful instruments, they can also powerfully affect our attitudes and behavior. They can wrongly teach us self-reliance as opposed to God-reliance. Power can mysteriously wean us away from our real source of power, placing our focus on the things below instead of the Transcendent. Power can cause us to forget to love and seek first His kingdom and righteousness, knowing that if we do, He will watch over us (Mat. 6:33).

What then does it mean “to live by the sword?” I think that Jesus was referring to trusting in the sword – the wrong object.