Is it sinful to kill in self-defense?

The San Fernando Valley NRA Members' Council ^ | 7/14/2013

[Redcloak]

Is it sinful to kill in self-defense?

This is a topic that I’ve been wanting to write about for a while now and this rant from NEA Vice President Lily Eskelsen Garcia got me thinking about the subject again. At the Netroots Nation conference,  Garcia said of gun rights supporters…

“I’m not an ordained minister; I’m not a theologian, but these guys are going to hell.”

I’m not an ordained minister or a theologian either, but what does God think of those of us who own firearms? Did He really give us a right to keep and bear arms; to have deadly weapons?

Ultimately, the right to keep and bear arms is about the People retaining the ability to use deadly force to defend themselves, as a group or as individuals, from harm. If we are endowed by our Creator with the right to life, then the it follows that we have the right as individuals to possess the means necessary to defend ourselves from those intent upon harming us and threatening our lives. That threat may come from a criminal or from a tyrant, but the concept is the same; the right to possess defensive arms is a basic human right and one that the 2nd Amendment recognizes and protects.

But the question many people of faith ask is this: Is it moral to use deadly force in self defense? Do we sin against God by killing in self defense?

[ConorMacNessa]

Certainly not! Life - the first right - its preservation the prime directive.

I will not be part of the mass suicide that describes the contemporary ethos of the media, Academia, and of course, "our" government!



"Dia shábháil ar fad anseo!"

Genuflectimus non ad principem sed ad Principem Pacis!

Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from far; The LORD hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name. (Isaiah 49:1 KJV)

[CodeToad]

No! It is sinful to not value life and protect it from those that wish to end it. It is exactly why we also are against killing babies, something the liberals termed “abortion”.

[mrsmith]

A good read: erudite and unaffected.
.

[servo1969]

#10

I agree.
Languages change over time and words have different meanings today than they did 400 years ago.

Nowadays, the word ‘kill’ simply means ‘to cause the death of a living organism.’ Something or someone was alive and now they’re dead due to some action or inaction on your part. How and why is irrelevant.

A more correct translation into modern English would be -
“Thou Shalt Not Murder” or “Thou Shalt Not Commit Murder”
where ‘Murder’ is the killing of the innocent.

It is not Murder to kill in combat, to kill in legitimate defense of yourself or another, or to kill the truly wicked.

[Marcella]

You’re right as usual - Redcloak is a blog pimp.

[PistolPaknMama]

No.

[Nevadan]

I don’t have the Bible sitting front of me but in the Old Testament (probably Deuteronomy or Leviticus) the laws regarding premeditated murder, manslaughter, and killing in self defense are all spelled out in detail.

Jesus said He did not come to do away with the Law, the Prophets, or the Commandments so the principles regarding self-defense are still in force.

As some of you mentioned, the teachings of Jesus regarding “turning the other cheek” have to do with your Christian witness, not in a situation where’s you are defending your family, a helpless person, or or country in a time of war.

Even on a case of being attacked physically because of your beliefs, I don’t believe that Jesus is commanding us to just stand there and take it. The Apostle Paul asserted his rights several times as a Roman citizen - once when he was about to be beaten he questioned the officer in charge and reminded him that what they were about to do was illegal - the officer ordered a stand down because he knew what Paul said was correct.

Jesus ‘s teachings in the Sermon on the Mt often use exaggerations to
make a point. For example He tells His listeners that unless they “hate” their mother and father they cannot be His disciples. Now Jesus did not literally mean that we are to hate your family, He meant that in comparison to their love for Him, their love for Him should be so great and deep that their love for their parents would seem like hatred.

He also uses these same type of exaggerations with the “turning the other cheek”, the “walk the second mile”, “give to whoever asks”, etc.

Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying Jesus doesn’t want His followers to be like Him and show radical love to even our enemies for that is exactly what He wants from us, but He never meant that one could not defend oneself when necessary.

Of course, there are Christians who are total pacifists and look to those very same passages as proof that Jesus meant all those commands to be taken literally. But, most conservative Christian scholars say that Jesus meant those commands to mean that His children are to be radically different than the world in their behavior, but not to the extreme where you don’t defend yourself or your family. Jesus was not speaking to those issues.

[ConorMacNessa]

And another thing!

Where do the Atheist, Agnostics, and Secularists get to talk about sin?

In my somewhat quaint view of the universe, the concept of sin presupposes the existence of a Deity, leaving to those who do not acknowledge a Deity only human made law.

But, of course, I'm just another hidebound apologist for the concepts underlying "Western Civilization" - that body of learning gleaned though thousands of years and passed down to us by anonymous monastics in inhospitable scriptoria though centuries of pagan assault.

Sorry to vent - We're in a World turned upside down - I can't believe how bad things have gotten since the time of my youth.

We need to find our way home, and that way is not through the dis-establishment of traditional matrimony; it is not through the banishment of our God from public discourse; and it is not through unilateral disarmament in the face of Islamist Terrorism, Russian resurgence, or the emergence of China as a major military power.


I categorically reject this option! Have at them, and if we fall, we fall in battle having fought the Good Fight!



"Dia shábháil ar fad anseo!"

Genuflectimus non ad principem sed ad Principem Pacis!

Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from far; The LORD hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name. (Isaiah 49:1 KJV)

[SECURE AMERICA]

No.
That would mean it was a sin for America to stop the Nazi from destroying the world.
That would mean it is a sin to be a Police Officer or a Soldier.

[The_Sword_of_Groo]

Bingo! i had a chat recently with a member of my church and suggested that Peter was the first advocate for concealed carry. Of course, she looked at me with a dumbfounded look on her face.

[Crucial]

You have a moral responsibility to defend yourself from evil. To let that evil prevail without a fight is unconscionable as it encourages it further.

[ansel12]

I’m also under the impression that all men traveled with their own knife, it would be a primary eating utensil and everyday tool, and that even Jesus probably carried one for eating, even as a guest in some homes.

While not necessarily carried as a weapon, my impression is that in that era, Jesus very well could have carried a knife, if not him for some reason (like being Jesus), then all the other members of his party would have.

[Trod Upon]

Sinful? It is a virtuous act.

[infowarrior]

"But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one."

And bear in mind that the sword was the AK-47 or M4 of its day. It was the standard issue infantry weapon of the time.

I'll have to take a bit of exception to your analogy, as while swords *were* standard issue within the Roman Legions that the Lord would have been quite familiar with during His earthly sojourn, it was a secondary, and not the primary 'issue weapon' which would have been the 'pilum', or spear. *THAT* weapon would have been the M4/AK47 of its time...

the infowarrior

[uncommonsense]

"This had been floating around in my head for a while. Lily Eskelsen Garcia's comments and more recent events pushed me to complete it."

Based on my word study, within the context of Exodus Ch. 20 - using Strong's Concordance primarily:

Exodus 20:1-17 (NIV)

13 “You shall not murder.

ALSO SEE: The ten commandments are spoken by Jehovah (Biblos Interlinear Bible)

[Albion Wilde]

Hell, no.

[BwanaNdege]

Exodus 20:13 “Thou shalt not kill.”

Hebrew word translated “kill” in the King James is “ratsach”
- to murder, slay, kill

“Murder is the unlawful killing of another human being, usually premeditated. The Hebrew word ratsach, always translated as “murder,” is used for this commandment to contrast this prohibition with other forms of killing such as accidental death, war, self-defense, capital punishment and the killing of animals. “

http://pastorkenneth.wordpress.com/2012/12/19/ratsach-murder-bible-study/

[Las Vegas Ron]

Wow, no one has posted this yet?

Ecclesiastes 3

King James Version (KJV)

3 To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:

2 A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;

3 A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;

4 A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;

5 A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;

6 A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away;

7 A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;

8 A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.

9 What profit hath he that worketh in that wherein he laboureth?

10 I have seen the travail, which God hath given to the sons of men to be exercised in it.

11 He hath made every thing beautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end.

12 I know that there is no good in them, but for a man to rejoice, and to do good in his life.

13 And also that every man should eat and drink, and enjoy the good of all his labour, it is the gift of God.

14 I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before him.

15 That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been; and God requireth that which is past.

16 And moreover I saw under the sun the place of judgment, that wickedness was there; and the place of righteousness, that iniquity was there.

17 I said in mine heart, God shall judge the righteous and the wicked: for there is a time there for every purpose and for every work.

18 I said in mine heart concerning the estate of the sons of men, that God might manifest them, and that they might see that they themselves are beasts.

19 For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity.

20 All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again.

21 Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?

22 Wherefore I perceive that there is nothing better, than that a man should rejoice in his own works; for that is his portion: for who shall bring him to see what shall be after him?

[TigersEye]

Is it sinful to let yourself be killed if you are able to defend yourself?

That was basically the question I had. That would essentially be suicide wouldn't it?

[BigCinBigD]

The thought that I would hesitate to defend myself based on religion is insulting.