rbanks qrites....." I have entrusted my family to God for his protection and salvation."Amen, no safer hands to be in. There's the key word again, trust........Frank
I believe that I would protect my family from an attacker as it is my duty to look after them.
may I ask why other then perhaps hunting, would you as a child of the most high and sovereign God need a weapon to defend yourself?
I think I got your meaning. But you wrote it in such a way that one could construe your meaning that Christ as a Person is divided. I don't think you mean that. But this is what we are left with when reading your words. That's all.Yes. Blessed are the merciful for they shall obtain mercy.God be with you.
God being my helper I would walk right into harms way for my wife and family believing God and his spiritual weapons.
While the following verse is about work ethic and providing for your family... I do not consider it taken out of context or twisting scripture to say that it also can be applied to protecting your family as well...[b]1 Timothy 5:8[/b] [i]But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.[/i]Krispy
"While the following verse is about work ethic and providing for your family... I do not consider it taken out of context or twisting scripture to say that it also can be applied to protecting your family as well...1 Timothy 5:8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." KrispyAmen. Provision seems to be a general statement here. Although the obvious presents itself, providing protection I think can also be applied. But I also say that the battle for protection isn't just in our physical capacity... not every man in every household can walk, run, or move swiftly.... it is in the prayer closet. I had surgery a couple of years ago that left me medicated and incapacititated... my protection was rendered useless. So my trust and strength was in God's faithfulness to provide what I clearly couldn't. As much as food, drink, and shelter are all noble things in provision... a prayerless man in the household does his whole family a disservice in his duty of provision.
I have not been following this threads closely but as I perceive it folks are wondering what would they do if their family is being attacked.All I can say is that for our own church people is the males would do whatever they can but shooting to kill is not one of the options. Seems to me this point is too many times overlooked, as though shooting to kill is the only option one can use to protect/defend himself against harmful behaviors. (Oh, have you not read the recent incident in FL of a man who awoke at night hearing a noise in the house who took his gun and killed the 'intruder' only to find he killed his fiancee? So much for self-defense.)ginnyrose
rbanks wrote:The apostles did not carry carnal weapons to use against others
We are all called to be apostles.
"John 18:10 Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus" murrcolrThere's a presumption here that is made that the bible doesn't specify. The bible doesn't say why they carried the swords. And it doesn't make sense for them to be told to have them to chop off ears and inflict physical harm, if they are going to be subsequently rebuked by the same one who told them to carry in the first place. Just as one can presume that the swords were for their proper defense, a defense that was rebuked, one could also speculate that they use the swords for protection against animals or to kill and eat. Jesus' rebuke of the use of the sword was clear, exactly why Peter had it in the first place was not discussed.