This is a lot more about Government than it is about Self-Defense.
Do Christians Have a Right to Self Defense , Part 1
Do Christians Have a Right to Self Defense , Part 2
Do Christians Have a Right to Self Defense , Part 1
Do Christians Have a Right to Self Defense , Part 2
Do Christians Have a Right to Self Defense?
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]PART 1
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Does a modern Christian have a right to self defense? With every right there is a correlative responsibility. The ancient right to bear arms has been described in antiquity as the obligation to bear arms in defense of your community. In those ancient times if you would not arm yourself to defend your community you were often shunned if not run out of town all together. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Chuck Baldwin in and article published by NewsWithViews.com quoted the statistic that “as of 2004, 50% of the adults in the United States own one or more firearms.” My first reaction was, why so few? As someone who once wore a badge and a gun to protect the property and lives of citizens I can testify that my biggest disappointment was the apathy and even cowardice of the people I was often expected to protect.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
To refuse to come to the aid of others has been considered a crime and good Samaritan laws have prosecuted citizens who failed to assist and aid people in need of assistance or protection. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Yet, I have heard many people say they would not own a gun or they did not believe in guns. On further inquiry everyone of these purveyors of pseudo-pacifism confirmed that if someone was breaking into their house they would call the police, who will come with guns. The truth is they do believe in guns, but they are either to lazy, to cheap, to cowardly, or just to irresponsible to own one. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
One of the last things Christ said to His apostles before His crucifixion was to go and buy a sword, even if they had to sell their garment to do so.[/FONT][1][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] When armed men came “with swords and staves for to take” Jesus, one of His disciples, realizing what was coming, asked if they should “smite [them] with the sword.”[/FONT][2]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Jesus chose not to fight that day. He told Peter to “put up thy sword into the sheath”.[/FONT][3][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] Jesus did not tell Peter to throw his sword away. He simply had a better strategy to free the people from the exercising authority of the corrupt government set up by the people who were “making the word of God to none effect.” [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
The apostles were armed men, but they were also men of peace. They were “gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy.”[/FONT][4][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] They supported the weak, patient toward all men,[/FONT][5][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] with “love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, [of] faith,”[/FONT][6][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] but they were armed.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Jesus never came to disarm or weaken the people. That would only tempt brutes of the “world”. Had Peter, the apostles and their thousands of supporters began armed conflict to establish their liberty under God there would have been disastrous and fruitless bloodshed. The people needed to learn first hand the courage and sacrifice needed to sustain a truly free society.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
There has been a lot of talk about government usurpation, declarations of independence, sovereign states, rights of citizens, and even references to revolution and armed rebellion in America, but such talk is not only foolish, but unwarranted. You have the government you deserve.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
The diminishing rights of people are the direct result of personal neglect, abdication or the waiving of rights in exchange for peace, security, and bountiful benefits. The decline of liberty is always due the failure to retain rights. The failure to retain rights is always linked to the failure to put your hand to the responsibilities of the individual to society. The secrets of a free society belong to the diligent, humble, and wise.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
There were no greater revolutionists than John the Baptist, Christ, and His apostles. Their call to repentance, was a call for change. The way of John and Jesus was also truly one of hope. It changed the course of history by changing the ways of the people. If the people were to be ruled by God they had to pursue the righteousness of God. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
With this renewed spirit of liberty early Christians tended to what Jesus called the “weightier matters of law, justice, mercy and faith” by loving one another in a international network of faith, hope, and charity under the perfect law of liberty. They did not create a socialist state which exercised authority one over the other. That was forbidden by Christ and Moses before Him. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
In the decaying Roman Empire the people had returned to the ways of Pharaoh's Egypt and Nimrod's Babylon. They prayed daily for the privileges and benefits of those authoritarian governments provided at the expense of their neighbor, but Christians did not.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Christians could not covet their neighbor's goods through the exercising authority of Rome nor the government of the Pharisees. Christians prayed to their Father in heaven, not the fathers in Rome.[/FONT][7][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] The gifts and benefits of a Christian government were freely given by the people in a network of the people in congregations, for the welfare of their society and rightly divided from house to house by the chosen ministers of His Church.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
The modern church and their people have relinquished that responsibility of care and sacrifice to the governments of the world that exercise authority. They tickle the ears of their congregations with great swelling words but no longer teach the people to live by true faith, hope, and charity. Because they have forgotten the perfect law of liberty, they are no longer at liberty.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
All rights originally come from God, not the State. Christ, Moses, and Abraham were teaching us how to be responsible and free souls under God so that if we were set free from our bondage to men we could live as a “peculiar people”.[/FONT][8]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Many people who profess Christ as Lord today do so with their lips, but deny the power thereof.[/FONT][9][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] They do not really understand how much Christ set the people free. Jesus could have appealed to Rome for protection from the Pharisees, but His kingdom was not a part of the “world”[/FONT][10][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] order of Rome. To Appeal to Pilate for protection would have subject Jesus and His kingdom to the jurisdiction of the Roman Patronus, Father of Rome.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Few people today understand how Abraham set many souls free from the bondage of city states like Ur, Haran and Sodom, nor do they understand the persona jurisdiction of the Israelites in the bondage in Egypt. They are again entangled in those elements of the world.[/FONT][11]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Jesus came to set the captive free from the same sin and bondage that has always enslaved men under the gods of the world. Jesus had kept His apostles separate from that “world” in a unique manner used by Moses and Abraham centuries before.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Anyone in Judea who got the Baptism of Jesus was cast out of the system of social welfare offered by the government of the Pharisees, while the Pharisees went more under the authority of Rome by denouncing Christ who was the king of peace and freedom under God and saying they had no king but Caesar, the Father of Rome. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
The Church established by Christ was not subject to the decrees of Caesar because it was not a part of that “world” and they often did contrary to those decrees according to a natural God given right and Liberty in Christ, but they had to care for the needs of their own community and did not pray to Caesar for his benefits.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]The Church was “one form of government” recognized by Rome[/FONT][12][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif], and was called a republic by historians like Edward Gibbon. It taught the people true freedom under God by serving one another in love as Rome declined and fell under the authority and the corruption of a socialist state.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Today, Citizens often bear arms for the defense of themselves and their neighbor not so much by right, as by privilege. They do not like to hear and will undoubtedly protest that truth, but it would be better to follow the advise of men like Patrick Henry who was, “willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst; and to provide for it.”[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Patrick also said “The great object is, that every man be armed.” To be armed may include the principle of being prepared for any disaster which may strike individuals or communities. Are we prepared to come to the defense of our neighbor or will we continue to rely on the protection of an unresponsive government that serves its own interests?[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
There are fundamentals in a free society that require that we allow others to be as free as we wish to be free ourselves. There is also the requirement of a free society to come to the aid of their neighbor. The early Christian Church was the social welfare system of the faithful. They provided the needs of society in a way contrary to the system of social security offered by the Pharisees, which made the word of God to none effect.[/FONT][13]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
If we are to be a government of, for, and by the people then the people should be the first line of defense for the protection of the people. If you will not take back your responsibilities for yourself and to your neighbor then the one who bears that responsibility will assume your right. Have we forgotten the wisdom expressed by Plutarch 2000 years ago "Protection draws to it subjection; subjection protection"?[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
If we covet our neighbor's goods providing our personal welfare through the exercising authority of governments we ordain, then we are bad citizens and Patrick also stated “Bad men cannot make good citizens. It is when a people forget God that tyrants forge their chains. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, is incompatible with freedom. No free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue; and by a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles.”[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] Modern practices, policies, and pandering of US citizens and their governments are seemingly void of moderation, temperance, and frugality, with justice and virtue in short supply when the desire for personal benefits are demanded by the public. The whole truth may hurt, but, for those who are willing to take responsibility for their own part in the decline of liberty and are willing to change their ways, it will be worth the journey.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]In Part two of this series on self-defense we will take a deeper look at the problems that arise among a people who are no longer free and the nature of the impediments that makes them subjects of the will of others. For part two click below.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]PART 2[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]As we saw in Part 1, it is clear by an honest reading of the Bible that while the men of the Old and New Testament were consistently armed their motives were equally divided between defending themselves and defending others. Their mandate by Moses and Jesus was always to love others as much as they were to love themselves. This meant they were to diligently tend to what Jesus called the “weightier matters of law, justice, mercy and faith” or lose the rights endowed upon them by God and end up serving those who by nature are not gods.[/FONT][1]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Paul said there were gods many[/FONT][2] [FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] and of course both the Old and New Testaments tell us that those gods were ruling judges who ruled the people. Men often are cunningly coerced into into giving other men power by waiving their own rights in exchange for personal benefits or security. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
People from the beginning were not to oppress the stranger in their midst,[/FONT][3] [FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] nor deprive the workmen of the value of his labor,[/FONT][4] [FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] nor do anything to their neighbor that they did not want done to themselves, nor covet their neighbor's goods in any way. They were to even love their enemy,[/FONT][5][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] being just to all people, defend the weak, and care for the needy without using force.[/FONT][6][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] The gods of the “world” often disregard these precepts.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Are Christian soldiers and policeman not to have their weapons any more and give beasts and bullies of society the right to rob and murder with impunity? That is not what John the Baptist said. [/FONT][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]“And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse [any] falsely; and be content with your wages.” Lu 3:14 [/FONT][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]There is a difference between violence and using strength to put yourself reasonably in harms way to defend the needy. Recently in California several men raped a 15 year old girl on school grounds while dozens of people stood around doing nothing. Those who did nothing were just as guilty as the criminals. They did not love their neighbor nor tend to what Jesus' “weightier matters.” Their apathy, sloth or cowardice was an act of violence.[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]“Thus saith the LORD; Execute ye judgment and righteousness, and deliver the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor: and do no wrong, do no violence to the stranger, the fatherless, nor the widow, neither shed innocent blood in this place.” Jermiah 22:3 [/FONT][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]In a pure Republic the obligation of good government falls on the shoulders of everyman who must come to the aid of his neighbor by every means at his disposal. To righteously defend the lives of others who are unjustly violated by the brutes and criminals of the world is a duty and an obligation of everyman. It is not violence to do so, but violence to fail to do so.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
These precepts define and limit the power and authority of the people and therefore it also limits the power and authority of governments defined and ordained by men. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Rep. Fred Maslack with a stricter interpretation of the Second Amendment and the Vermont's Constitution proposed a bill to register "non-gun-owners." The bill would require them to pay a $500 fee to the state for the privilege of not owning a gun. That would seem reasonable if the citizenry will not answer the “Hue and cry” of their neighbors in distress then they should bear the weight of hiring more police. Should the government have a right to take money from non gun owners?[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
There are governments that exercise authority one over the other and force the compliance and contributions of the people, but these institutions are ordained by the selfish and self indulgent nature of men, not by God. Those governments are here to punish the wicked who create them. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Those who reject God by stealing, murdering, or merely coveting their neighbor's goods are in violation of God's law already, and are and will be judged accordingly. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Those who are slothful in the exercise of their responsibility to God and their fellow man, those who have gone away from the precepts of God by “consent”[/FONT][7] [FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] deserve the governments their own evil hearts create. The slothful should be under tribute[/FONT][8] [FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] and have no right to rebel, but only repent.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]In a recent NWV article “The Republic is Dead; We Are Ready to Fight, Now What?” Greg Evensen wrote "We as a nation of citizens, have been brutalized so badly by criminals inside the government, that we could have easily justified the use of deadly force to beat back the pillaging of our homes and communities."[/FONT][9]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
I beg to respectfully disagree. The truth is we have brutalized and pillaged our neighbor through wanton social schemes and our personal apathy and avarice. We have no right to rebel against the so called government benefactors which we have elected time and time again for our private gain. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
To protest that we have been violated is a point of hypocrisy when we are just as guilty of sloth and coveting our neighbor's goods through those schemes created by our own democratic hands and consent. The first chapter of Proverbs warns us not to “consent” with others who desire to take from one another for personal benefit or welfare or we would be snared in the net of our own making. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
In Part 1 of this series I attributed the legal maxim "Protection draws to it subjection; subjection protection" to Plutarch. While I have no doubt he would agree, what I meant to quote was his statement, “The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits.” No man can be free in society until he frees his neighbor from the tyranny in his own heart.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Government today is a product of our own greed and sloth. We have no right to fight for liberty until we set our neighbors free from our own wanton desires. We must turn around, repent, and form a society that frees our neighbor from our own covetous schemes. We must learn to live again by faith, hope, and charity under that perfect law of liberty we claim to seek as the early Church once did.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Consent of the people is created in a variety of ways, but the offer of benefits is one of the most common. Peter the apostle warned people that they would become merchandise, human resources, if they coveted each others wealth.[/FONT][10][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] He warned that with “feigned words” they would be seduced into giving up their liberty. He knew some men would promise liberty and bring in a corruption that would bring the people back into bondage to the “world.”[/FONT][11]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Although, Thomas Jefferson never said, "A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have,"[/FONT][12] [FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] it is undoubtedly true. Thomas Jefferson did say "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground." The only thing that can keep governments in check is the due diligence of virtuous people.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
The standards of virtue required are set by God and it is the job of those who serve God including the Church to point out when and where the people and their institutions stray from the moral and virtuous character of God. One problem is that the modern Church has strayed from even the most basic commandments of Christ as a matter of policy. Coveting your neighbor's goods through the agency of others that exercise authority has become commonplace and acceptable while living by faith, hope, and charity has been, for all practical purposes, abandoned except for lip service.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Even William Pitt, Prime Minister of Great Britain, knew that “As long as we look to government to solve our problems we will always suffer tyranny.” Yet we still look for state or Federal governments to solve all our problems. Could there be a better way? William Penn said it “If we will not be governed by God, then we will be ruled by tyrants.” [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
I know the people want to believe all their natural rights are retained by them, but the people have delegated or relinquished the responsibilities correlative to every natural right. Those who bear the responsibility wield the right.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]After almost a hundred years of a steady increase of socialism in the “world” are there any natural rights that have not fallen under the regulating powers of men with power? After all, if you delegate the authority to others to take from your neighbor for your personal benefit and security then it only seems reasonable that those who protect you may also regulate your right to protect yourself.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]That may not be a popular concept of law for many, but that is exactly what has happened and in part three we hope to show that there is neither a state nor federal government that you may rely on to retain the rights God has granted you. For part one click below.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]
[/FONT]
