Search results

The Bondi Beach massacre in Sydney last year, when 15 people were killed, was carried out by Islamic State. ASIO (like FBI) reports that Islamic terrorist plots are increasing ... fortunately most of them are detected.

Re the sentence I bolded, personally I do not know anyone who believes that. However, I do keep many of the commandments in the Law, such as the Ten Commandments ... don't you?

The disciples had a chance to flee after Jesus knocked all the soldiers down to the ground. But you are avoiding the question that Scot answered in a straight forward manner. A home intruder that attacks you and your family is going to require a physical defence to stop him from doing harm to...

I would still like to know your scriptural support for the physical force you might use. I cannot see how physical force of any kind is compatible with your understanding of Scripture.

You linked to an article by Scot McKnight as a good explanation of pacifism Scot said, "What about a person who invades your home? I’d use force to the point of not murdering him." ETA: What is the scriptural support for that?

Your understanding is that Jesus did not use any physical force, so what is your Scriptural support for you using non-lethal physical force.

What is your scriptural support for using "non-lethal means"? Surely your understanding of Jesus and the apostles never using physical force to protect anyone, would prevent you from using physical force of any kind.

... in which you say you are happy to pay others to protect your children, when you will not

you could link the post in under 60 seconds ... I did

Some argue they will not kill to protect their children from being slaughtered in an evil attack ... and yet they are quite prepared to pay others to do it for them. Pacifism is morally repugnant on so many levels.

You said you did not know https://www.christianityboard.com/threads/biblical-justification-for-harming-or-killing-followers-of-jesus.77519/page-2#post-2285195

No, you have not addressed it, you just gave an IDK. I provided evidence from early Christianity which shows that there were Christian soldiers serving in the Roman army.

In two recent cases here, they were only able to stop the killing by bringing down the perpetrators. Unfortunately, in both cases the police were late in arriving ... in one situation 6 were killed, in the other 15 were killed. that is a cop out We have no way of knowing who is a Christian...

Then in many situations you would be killed, and of no use to anyone ... while the killing still went on ... the killing that could have been stopped by you. Pacifism in extreme situations becomes morally indefensible.

I can see you are reluctant to say how you would intervene.

That is very commendable but it does not answer the question.

Acts 13:4 "For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer." The argument that a follower of Jesus must not be "God's...

Both Jesus (John 8) and Paul (Acts 23) intervened to prevent a person's death. In the Temple and in the Garden Jesus used physical force. Paul asked for an armed escort to go from Jerusalem to Caesarea (Acts 27) But I assume the answer to my question is that you would allow an unlimited number...

It is also interesting to consider what was going on in John 18:6 when Jesus made the men who came to arrest Him fall to the ground ... which gave his disciples time to flee.

How many innocent people would you allow to be killed before you intervened?