intruder = dying for the sake of Christ's words. = martyr.A martyr would be someone who died for the sake of the gospel. I’m talking about an intruder. Big difference.
intruder = dying for the sake of Christ's words. = martyr.A martyr would be someone who died for the sake of the gospel. I’m talking about an intruder. Big difference.
Clue me in. What's a "red letter" Christian?So you are a red letter Christian. That explains a lot.
No exceptions. No Sermon = no Christ.
They are not the Christian's calling. But God appoints them to that role.Are you anti-police, anti-military?
intruder = dying for the sake of Christ's words. = martyr.
Clue me in. What's a "red letter" Christian?
What about those fed to lions? Those who died from torture? All parts of our calling?Intruder means wife getting raped and beaten. Are you saying the rape and beating should not be stopped for the sake of Christ? As the husband you would stand idly by allowing it to happen?
How is Paul different from Jesus? He quotes the Sermon too.One who only lives by the red letters and does not acknowledge Paul’s writings to the body of Christ, the Church.
What about those fed to lions? Those who died from torture? All parts of our calling?
“As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.” Romans 8:36 (KJV 1900)
What if they are armed?I would make a whip and physically drive the intruder out of my home.![]()
What if they are armed?
I'm willing to die for others. But not kill.And if they are not? Would you help your wife?
Would it be a sin not to help others in their distress?And if they are not? Would you help your wife?
I'm willing to die for others. But not kill.
Would it be a sin not to help others in their distress?
If you love your enemy as your own self, what would you do?No one said anything about killing. I’m talking about self defense against an intruder wanting to cause harm to your wife.
No, it would not be a sin. Seems like you’re starting to change your tune.
Find Paul, Jesus, or any other believer in the NT approving of it. Find approval for it anywhere in the Sermon on the mount.
The two swords were part of Jesus' being numbered with the transgressors. Where does the bible say what you think it says?In the verse I quoted Jesus approved of self-defense and instructed his disciples to carry swords to protect themselves. I don't believe he was saying to carry a sword as a fashion accessory, but as an offensive weapon.
Jesus also says to turn the other cheek if someone strikes you there. The implication is a measured response of wisdom and tact when an assault occurs.
The majority of the time a passive response is probably warranted, other times a sword might be necessary. It's circumstantial given the context of each scenario, that's where wisdom and tact comes in.
If you love your enemy as your own self, what would you do?
The two swords were part of Jesus' being numbered with the transgressors. Where does the bible say what you think it says?
“Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.” Romans 12:17 (KJV 1900)
“Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.” Romans 12:19–21 (KJV 1900)
He had to be framed as a transgressor to be numbered as one.The transgressors he was numbered with were the two criminals he was crucified with, it is a reference to his crucifixion. (See Isaiah 52:12 and Luke 23:33)
Yes, all of the verses you quoted are correct and I am not contesting that. Just to stay on topic, I'm only showing how there is a time and place for self-defense and a time and place for passivity.
The majority of the time passivity is the answer.
He had to be framed as a transgressor to be numbered as one.