General JWs on When is Self-Defense Justified?

[benadam1974]

Interesting article from the Watchtower on When is Self-Defense Justified?

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102008204#h=11

NOTE: not one NT scripture is given to support the following concluding claims:
"The Bible indicates that a person may defend himself or his family if physically assaulted."

"if the aggressor was seriously harmed or killed in such a situation, his death would be accidental and not deliberate."

 

[Bvenski]

Where is the NT verse that specifically says a person may NOT defend himself or his family if physically assaulted?

Where is your authority to say part of the Law of Moses is sin when the Apostle Paul said "May it never be!", Romans 7:7?

 

[benadam1974]

Where is the NT verse that specifically says a person may NOT defend himself or his family if physically assaulted?

Where is your authority to say part of the Law of Moses is sin when the Apostle Paul said "May it never be!", Romans 7:7?

The question is regarding the NT authorization for violent, even lethal, self-defense.
I keep asking if anyone can produce one single NT verse supporting such views.

 

[Bvenski]

When a strong man (ie. the Satan), fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed. But when someone stronger (ie. the lord Jesus) than he attacks him and overpowers him, he takes away from him all his armor on which he had relied and distributes his plunder. He who is not with me (Jesus) is against me; and he who does not gather with me, scatters. Luke 11:21-23

The good, stronger lord Jesus attacks the Satan, who is evil and strong.

Surely, a good, weak man can defend against an evil, strong man.

No, you say?

The good, weak man should do nothing and allow the evil, strong man to rape & murder his wife & children and then murder him too, you say?

 

[benadam1974]

When a strong man (ie. the Satan), fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed. But when someone stronger (ie. the lord Jesus) than he attacks him and overpowers him, he takes away from him all his armor on which he had relied and distributes his plunder. He who is not with me (Jesus) is against me; and he who does not gather with me, scatters. Luke 11:21-23

The good, stronger lord Jesus attacks the Satan, who is evil and strong.

Surely, a good, weak man can defend against an evil, strong man.

No, you say?

The good, weak man should do nothing and allow the evil, strong man to rape & murder his wife & children and then murder him too, you say?

We should do everything and anything to protect self and others. Even forfeiting your life as a last resort.

 

[Bvenski]

We should do everything and anything to protect self and others. Even forfeiting your life as a last resort.

Correct.

If I am ever at a conference with you Carlos and, God forbid, someone starts shooting and I'm near you, I need to try and get in front of you and take a bullet for you, if necessary, because you are my brother.

If I am able to draw my lawfully owned concealed pistol to use in self-defense, to stop the murderer who is murdering people in front of us, does that fall within your category of, "We should do everything and anything to protect self and others."?

Or no, and you would consider me to be a murderer as well, for defending the lives of others?

 

[benadam1974]

Correct.

If I am ever at a conference with you Carlos and, God forbid, someone starts shooting and I'm near you, I need to try and get in front of you and take a bullet for you, if necessary, because you are my brother.

If I am able to draw my lawfully owned concealed pistol to use in self-defense, to stop the murderer who is murdering people in front of us, does that fall within your category of, "We should do everything and anything to protect self and others."?

Or no, and you would consider me to be a murderer as well, for defending the lives of others?

My friend, I appreciate you reading and watching our material but when it comes to this topic it’s monotonous and repetitive.
But if you ever would like to discuss/debate it in public for the benefit of others I’m more than happy to give you the opportunity on our YouTube channel, as I continue to do with others.
So please let me know: carlos@thehumanjesus.org

Bye for now.

 

[Bvenski]

Instead of pivoting, you could just simply answer my 2 questions on this Simply Christian forum.

Then, what you consider monotonous & repetitive, (whereas I consider this to be highly spiritual & important), can come to its rightful conclusion.

Will you please answer my 2 questions?

 

[Bvenski]

Why the sad face?

Are you afraid to answer them, or something?

Regardless of what your answers are, I'm not going to condemn you anything.

This is a tough topic.

Please don't avoid me on this.

 

[Lori Jane]

Luke 22:35-38

The Two Swords

35 And he said to them, “When I sent you out without a money bag and a traveler’s bag and sandals, you did not lack anything, did you?”* And they said, “Nothing.” 36 And he said to them, “But now the one who has a money bag must take it,* and likewise a traveler’s bag. And the one who does not have a sword must sell his cloak and buy one. 37 For I tell you that this that is written must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was counted with the criminals.’g For indeed, what is written* about me ⌊is being fulfilled⌋.”h 38 So they said, “Lord, behold, here are two swords!” And he said to them, “It is adequate.”

22:35 Nothing During the disciples’ earlier mission (9:1–6), God saw to it that their needs were met.


22:36 has a money bag must take it The change in Jesus’ instructions indicates that a crisis is coming, as explained in v. 37.


sell his cloak and buy one Jesus’ instructions to buy a sword seems strange, especially in light of his condemnation of violence when Peter cuts off the guard’s ear in vv. 50–51. Jesus could be endorsing the legitimacy of self-protection or be speaking in hyperbole, since Peter has just spoken about his willingness to face violence (v. 33).

Barry, J. D., Mangum, D., Brown, D. R., Heiser, M. S., Custis, M., Ritzema, E., … Bomar, D. (2012, 2016). Faithlife Study Bible (Lk 22:35–36). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

22:35–38 On when I sent you out without, see notes at 9:1–2, 3–5. Because of the rejection they would face, Jesus emphasized that the apostles must prepare to take care of their own needs (money-bag, traveling bag) and protect themselves physically (a sword). By arming themselves, Jesus’s apostles unintentionally paved the way for Jesus to fulfill the rebels’ prophecy of Is 53:12. Jesus’s call for a sword was likely only figurative, but the apostles responded that they had two swords among them.

Evans, C. A. (2017). Messianic Expectations. In E. A. Blum & T. Wax (Eds.), CSB Study Bible: Notes (p. 1653). Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers.

 

[Bvenski]

Luke 22:35-38

The Two Swords

35 And he said to them, “When I sent you out without a money bag and a traveler’s bag and sandals, you did not lack anything, did you?”* And they said, “Nothing.” 36 And he said to them, “But now the one who has a money bag must take it,* and likewise a traveler’s bag. And the one who does not have a sword must sell his cloak and buy one. 37 For I tell you that this that is written must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was counted with the criminals.’g For indeed, what is written* about me ⌊is being fulfilled⌋.”h 38 So they said, “Lord, behold, here are two swords!” And he said to them, “It is adequate.”

Hi Lori, I didn't post these verses because Carlos, and others, do not believe they are about Jesus authorizing his disciples to arm themselves for protection, because of the dangers ahead. They believe its ONLY for OT prophesy to be fulfilled so that Jesus would be reckoned among the transgressors.

I believe its about both, authorization to be armed & OT prophesy being fulfilled.

It didn't feel worthwhile to argue about.

 

[benadam1974]

Luke 22:35-38







Barry, J. D., Mangum, D., Brown, D. R., Heiser, M. S., Custis, M., Ritzema, E., … Bomar, D. (2012, 2016). Faithlife Study Bible (Lk 22:35–36). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.





Evans, C. A. (2017). Messianic Expectations. In E. A. Blum & T. Wax (Eds.), CSB Study Bible: Notes (p. 1653). Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers.

Thanks, what's your point?

 

[Lori Jane]

Thanks, what's your point?

Uhhh - just researching instances where it seems (at least to me) there is support for self-defense biblically.

There are several commentaries - yours included - and they vary. I think it shows this is an age old debate and we all have to do our own research, pray over it and be led by holy spirit as best we can.

For me I feel comfortable with self-defense but would do my best to not kill - subdue would be the goal. That is why my kids are in Ju Jitzu right now. I probably would not have a gun - even tho it can be used to subdue it is more likely going to kill.

 

[Bvenski]

It is an age old debate.

Concerning research, there are a million+ instances, every year, w/ people drawing their guns and not firing and de-escalating the criminal situations.

Guns drawn, (not fired), prevent thousands of crimes a day.

Weapons should definitely be used as an absolute last resort.

Ju Jitzu is cool. One can still kill with their hands, though, sometimes on accident.

Jesus said we can buy swords. I believe him.

That doesn't mean we can use them to threaten, rob or murder people. And we definitely shouldn't use them to attack and cut off people's ears.

Lots of prayers to be led correctly on this one.

 

[benadam1974]

Uhhh - just researching instances where it seems (at least to me) there is support for self-defense biblically.

There are several commentaries - yours included - and they vary. I think it shows this is an age old debate and we all have to do our own research, pray over it and be led by holy spirit as best we can.

For me I feel comfortable with self-defense but would do my best to not kill - subdue would be the goal. That is why my kids are in Ju Jitzu right now. I probably would not have a gun - even tho it can be used to subdue it is more likely going to kill.

Thanks for clarifying.
The "two swords" argument can be easily countered with Jesus' own reason in v.37, i.e., in order to fulfill what was written about the Messiah found with "insurrectionists," or state terrorists.

Here's another good footnote from the NET Bible:
Here are two swords. The disciples mistakenly took Jesus to mean that they should prepare for armed resistance, something he will have to correct in 22:50-51.
It is enough. The disciples’ misunderstanding caused Jesus to terminate the discussion.

 

[Bvenski]

Thanks for clarifying.
The "two swords" argument can be easily countered with Jesus' own reason in v.37, i.e., in order to fulfill what was written about the Messiah found with "insurrectionists," or state terrorists.

Here's another good footnote from the NET Bible:
Here are two swords. The disciples mistakenly took Jesus to mean that they should prepare for armed resistance, something he will have to correct in 22:50-51.
It is enough. The disciples’ misunderstanding caused Jesus to terminate the discussion.

That is totally opinionated, Carlos. Its ok if you want to believe it, though.