I've always been of the mind that (justified) violence is a-okay, but a while ago I had a real confirming moment. I won't go into too many details, but basically my wife and I were in a very dangerous spot when God sent someone to rescue us literally at the last moment. I left with the distinct conviction that I as a husband need to be more capable of protecting my wife, and as a man of protecting all innocence. Luke 22:36 has been ringing in my head. I have started working out, I conceal carry now (I used to, but got out of the habit a couple years ago), and I am learning how to threat-identify. It is now a mission of mine to remind Christian men of this duty, and have a church full of men who are both deep and strong.

@calebneff5777

Жыл бұрын

I should clarify that I do not learn this for self-defense, but defense of others. My life is not my own, so for the sake of Christ I will suffer, but for the sake of Christ I will also defend my family and community.

@timothyjavor

Жыл бұрын

@@calebneff5777 You speak with great wisdom. I believe that God put you in that situation for you to realise what you need to do. But please protect yourself as well, don't turn the other cheek.

@calebcalvin

Жыл бұрын

Self defense is ok unjust unprovoked violence isn't ok

@ogloc6308

Жыл бұрын

based

@jtraptor7776

Жыл бұрын

@@calebneff5777 Good to see that I’m not alone in this philosophy regarding self defense vs the defense of others! It’s the exact same conclusion that I’ve come to. Perhaps my reasoning isn’t too bad when it comes to this. Though I think I might still be able to justify defending myself when I’m alone? But the caveat is that it only applies if I have a family. This is because if I don’t defend myself, my family could be left without a provider. So, if I fail to keep myself as the provider, in some sense I’ve failed in that part of my life. So basically, because I have an obligation to defend others and provide for others, I might end up having to defend myself. But even in this scenario, I’m exceedingly far more loath to use lethal force if I’m only defending myself, than if I’m protecting my family, or more generally those around me.

Does it bring glory to Christ that you defend yourself against an assistant attempting to murder you? Debatably. Does it bring glory to Christ that you allow yourself to be hacked to death by a lunatic? If it could be argued, then may pigs fly. In all that we do, we should aspire that it, ultimately, may bring glory to the Lord God. Jumping in front of your family to let them rum from the approaching lion is heroic, and brings great glory to the Lord. You have fulfilled your purpose as a father and a man. Walking up to the lion without purpose is foolish. You ought not test your Lord with such idiocies. Do not fight, when you are able. Always fight, when you must.

I'm Catholic adolescent from Poland. Faith is really important to me and i've been trying my best to learn about theology to figure out, how to live my life the way that would make Our Father proud. Usually i trust the interpretations of the majority for it makes sense to me that if the majority of the qualified people interpret the bible in one way then it is most likely the right way. However I've watched numerous videos about christian view on self defence and the overwhelming majority of them say that violence is only acceptable when: 1. A parent protects his family, when there is a leathal threat. 2. The police force and the army use it to defend its people. But when you are being assaulted you ACTUALLY SHOULD turn the other cheek and NOT respond with violence. I've been thinking a lot about this and i came to the conclusion that I refuse this idea for it is absurd. A Christian should not attack, bully or assault. A Christian should use violence only to protect himself or others. If i somebody attacked me, started hitting me, i would absolutely hit him right back enough times so that he would understand that he cannot mess with me for i WILL protect myself. And I believe that others should do the same. Being passive to violence or bullying means allowing it and I wholeheartedly believe that our God would not want that. Somebody insults you with words? Turn the other cheek. Show that it does not affect you. Somebody assaults you? Tries to humiliate you? Fight back, protect yourself, don't let them think that their actions will go without consequences. You're a Human, you've got God given Dignity and you are NOT a punching bag. Amen.

@timothyjavor

Жыл бұрын

@@iamishin7675 Interesting argument, but it still doesn't persuade me. The fact that jesus did something doesn't exactly mean we should or can. He is God, he can do more than us and he can take on more than us. I don't think we can all be martyrs. We should pray for the people that persecute us, forgive them and try to help them change, but I can't see how letting other people asaault you would help them or make them see what they're doing is wrong. Thanks for the feedback tho.

Jesus was not adverse to using violence and held no general principle against violent action in itself, he endorsed self-defense as a last resort. He only told us to love our enemies and to turn the other cheek, which means to forgive those who seek forgiveness interpersonally, and to be stoic. War is justified only insofar that it meets the requirements of a Just War, and that you as an individual hold no hatred or animosity to those you are fighting. treat all with honor and dignity.

@TitusCastiglione1503

10 ай бұрын

This is a good take. Well done, sir.

"Can Christians ever fight?" Literally everyone in the old testament: Yes.

@digiornospizza8411

Жыл бұрын

Name a single Christian in the Old Testament.

@Dock284

Жыл бұрын

@@digiornospizza8411 Noah boom not that hard (That's what she said)

@dino_boyles1271

Жыл бұрын

@Dockboi's Time Clips Noah was a Jew. Christians didn't exist until the 1st Century AD. You know, when Christ came

@Dock284

Жыл бұрын

@@dino_boyles1271 ok yeah sure but if they are Jewish according to the bible they went to hell because Jesus didn't exist so they couldn't believe in him which obviously no Christian want's to accept.

@Dock284

Жыл бұрын

either way why the hell are you making an argument out of this?

I don't know how one would separate one's vocation from one's interpersonal life

@joshuas1834

11 ай бұрын

Exactly. It doesn't make any sense. We don't get to be a part of the kingdom of God on the weekends and then jump into the kingdoms of this world for the work week.

Sometimes peace is not an option.

Awesome content! Brilliant mind

God bless ❤ Praise be to Jesus our Lord and Savior

Very interesting zoomer, I’m catholic trying that’s been to strengthen my faith in the past few months. At the same time I’m also trying to join the U.S. Marine Corps, and it’s been kinda hard to put the two together. I know that there definitely have been other Christians in the branch, but I didn’t know how to handle my faith and future career at the same time. Also I thought you were gonna mention that the 6th commandment “thou shalt not kill” has been mistranslated and the original was “thou shalt not murder”. Very good video👍

I mean, there a lot of important centurions in the New Testament described as men of God.

Hi, I'm currently working on a Grad School paper and I was wondering where in the Reformed Tradition (as a Catholic I'm not too familiar) they talk about "vocation"? Thanks

i love your videos

Pursue peace when you can endure bloodshed when you must

Great video! Can you talk about calvinism in the OT or maybe make an IG post about it? I was just reading Psalm 20:6 "Now I know that the LORD saves his anointed; he will answer him from his holy heaven with the saving might of his right hand." It sounds like the elect and I want to learn more but there are very few videos I can find on youtube that talk about this (and most are anti-calvinist).

@littlefishbigmountain

9 ай бұрын

My two cents that you didn’t ask for, David wrote this psalm about how the LORD answers prayers in times of trouble, and they praise the LORD for hearing them and delivering them from their enemies in battle. “His anointed” from this perspective is King David, which is a position that he was literally anointed with oil in the name of the LORD to mark him for. The ultimate fulfillment of this, unsurprisingly, is found in Jesus Christ. Christ itself being from a Greek form of the Hebrew word for Messiah, which both mean “anointed one”. It’s similar to how Psalm 91 was applied to Jesus by the devil when he tempted Him in the wilderness. Therefore, applying this to ourselves would be at least a tertiary reading of the text, which is not a bad thing at all but must be done with discernment. And when you do look closer you see that this only says that the LORD hears the prayers of His anointed and rescues them according to their supplications. It doesn’t actually have any information that supports any doctrine Calvinist soteriology, such as saying anything about HOW they became His anointed or when and by what He chose them, so it seems to me that reading Calvinism into this text would be eisegetical, but if you see something I don’t see then feel free to point it out of course. I could always be wrong :p I love that you’re using Scripture to support your beliefs, though! That’s the best thing to do. Just be careful not to make a text say more than it says (or less than it says for that matter). Hermeneutics can be quite delicate

@howardparkes8787

9 ай бұрын

@@littlefishbigmountain Thank you, brother, I love and appreciate your open-handedness and humility about this issue and I will look into that Psalm, but I still see it as a consistent story through the bible that God is completely sovereign over his creation, and those who are saved he chose from before the foundation of the world, (Rom. 8:29, 1 Cor 1:28-30, Eph. 1 and 2, John 6:37-39)

@littlefishbigmountain

9 ай бұрын

@@howardparkes8787 Yes, those verses can be used to much more strongly draw direct Calvinist conclusions from the text that actually positively assert tenants of the doctrines

the 5th commandment is a mistranslation it is thou shall not murder which means there is times were it is ok

@insigniaofficial398

11 ай бұрын

Exactly. Killing is okay but not murder. Murder is unjust killing.

@Doorknobperson

11 ай бұрын

@@insigniaofficial398 good man

@libertycommentator

Ай бұрын

That’s why I reject King James onlyism

Gearing up for the protestant retaking of the holyland

I Greet Thee, Who My Sure Redeemer Art ❤️

I would love for you tackle Christian Anarchism as its unique in its approach to how Christians should view the state (the name kinda gives it away) and many of its views are similar to anabaptists albeit more politically charged I’d recommend Christian Anarchism: A Political Commentary on the Gospels for run down of the core beliefs

Nice

I am not Reformed or Calvinist, but I can learn good stuff from them.

I've always wondered implications of going to war with another country like Russia where a large majority are Christian

@timothyjavor

Жыл бұрын

If christian Russians are going to war to harm, then other christians should stop them.

@duriuswulkins4324

Жыл бұрын

It shouldn’t be done. John 13:34 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.”

@EcclesiastesLiker-py5ts

Жыл бұрын

It seems deeply unloving to go to war to kill other Christians, and Jesus commanded us to show love among ourselves. John 13:34-35 "I am giving you a new commandment, that you love one another; just as I have loved you, you also love one another. By this all will know that you are my disciples- if you have love among yourselves.” Can it be loving to go and kill people, even people of the same denomination?

@redbrixanimations

Жыл бұрын

Here’s what I’m wondering. Let’s say we go to war with Russia and Russia invades and occupies California (where I live). Then I join a resistance group to fight the occupiers. I wonder if that’s allowed, although they are Christian they invaded us and I’m just protecting my homeland.

@imperialbricks1977

11 ай бұрын

Christianity doesn't exist in Russia.

"If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone." Romans 12:18. Sometimes it doesn't depend on us. On the topic of "turn the other cheek" (and it's paired statement, "if anyone takes you shirt, give them your cloak also"), I once had a theology professor who made the argument that, in their cultural context, these statements may have meant something closer to "If someone attacks you, instead of fighting them directly, defend yourself by making it shameful for them to attack you farther." She also purported that "An eye for an eye," was meant to be the upper limit of retribution (specifically in legal arbitration), not a standard or minimum, i.e., justice should be fair, not vengeful.

@Redeemed Zoomer can I get your opinion on a Christian doing MMA?

The point of giving up the tax isn’t that you should pay your taxes. The coin is the property of the republic, regardless of whose pocket it’s in. You need to pay the tax not because it’s just arbitrarily good to pay taxes and indirectly contribute to evil, which makes no sense, but because the currency is the property of the state and not the individual that holds it.

For a man that’s supposed to be hyper pacifist, the lack of Jesus or the New Testament explicitly condemning violence used in the name of justice has always struck me as odd. That certainly isnt the case in the Old Testament *AT ALL.* The verses usually brought out to defend their position are actually pretty vague when you think about it. That’s not to say the pacifist position doesn’t have its merits, but it’s far too strict to be credible, IMHO. The strongest argument for the pacifists position is clearly from the pre-Nicene church, but even there, the situation is much more ambiguous than is often claimed. The idea of a hyper non-violent early church that totally forbade military service has been disputed by many historians. “Scholars are not agreed on the question of the attitude of the early Church towards military service. Some claim the evidence clearly points to a pacifist position (Bainton and Horus, following Cadoux), others that there is plenty of material to show that Christians in fact served in the Roman army, and developments after Constantine, when Christianity became the religion of the Empire, were certainly anticipated in the earlier period (Harnack, Helgeland/Daly/Burns). Those who have examined the material have too often approached it with an axe to grind. Those who would in principle seek to be objective, must recognize the fact that there is no such thing as an entirely neutral observer, and the presentation of the evidence involves interpretation whether we like it or not.” “The Early Church: Military Service, War and Peace.” by Frances Young.

Amen🙏🕊️❤️😇✝️😊😀🍞🍷🎉

Can you give an example of a just war in the last, let's say, two centuries? And if someone refused to participate (i.e. agree to kill other people), would that be considered a sin?

@beanie3427

10 ай бұрын

Not RZ but I would say that WWII was pretty clearly a just war. Also the Civil War. But generally I agree that most modern wars have been unjust.

15:09 link? :D

@redeemedzoomer6053

Жыл бұрын

my apologies!! Just added it

@Quisl

Жыл бұрын

@@redeemedzoomer6053 ty :)

Most orthodox protestant out there

It says just play mindcraft lol.

15:47 I hate when people do this. Lutheranism/Anglicanism shouldn't be an experimental zone for Protestants playing around with Catholicism. They're traditions with communities grown around them in their own right -- stop using my heritage as your gateway drug.

imma summon herobrine to haunt your minecraft server

@PeoplesRepublicNewSilesia

Жыл бұрын

Lol

@JesusLiftedMySins

Жыл бұрын

Casting Herobrine out in the name of Jesus

I must disagree on several points here. The whole argument from Augustine only works if he is reliable, but his argument about vocation is simply not found in the Bible. Yes, John the baptist did not call soldiers to leave their faith, but his whole purpose was to point to Jesus, John the baptist was Jewish, not Christian, and the Mosaic Law was still in force. Yes, we are called to do our job well, but not if that job is sinful. If our job is "shoe maker", make great shoes, but if our job is "tobacco farmer", grow something else, and if our job is "soldier", quit, or if you're conscripted, endure persecution rather than sin. Jesus commanded us at John 13:34-35 I am giving you a new commandment, that you love one another; just as I have loved you, you also love one another. By this all will know that you are my disciples-if you have love among yourselves.” We CANNOT be showing love among ourselves if we are killing each other for some Ceaser or other.

@TitusCastiglione1503

10 ай бұрын

What if someone was being murdered right in front of you?

@EcclesiastesLiker-py5ts

10 ай бұрын

@@TitusCastiglione1503 A Christian is commanded to show love to both neighbor and enemy, we show love to a neighbor who is being attacked by trying to protect him or her from the attacker, we show love to our enemy by seeking, not the death or injury of the attacker, but simply them not acting violently toward someone else. There is a great difference between restraining someone holding a weapon and carrying a weapon yourself to kill that person. In broader life, proclaiming the good news of Jesus Christ is a much better way to disarm our enemies than seeking them out and doing harm to them.

@TitusCastiglione1503

10 ай бұрын

@@EcclesiastesLiker-py5ts “restrain?” How would this not involve violence of some sort? I also feel obliged to point out the man you’re quoting as saying that “love is totally antithetical to any kind of violence in any way shape or form” chased people out of the temple with a whip. That’s sounds kinda violent to me. Or, are we allowed only be “sort of” violent… I guess?

@EcclesiastesLiker-py5ts

10 ай бұрын

@@TitusCastiglione1503 I am not at all saying that Jesus is opposed to all violence, indeed, I eagerly await the day when Christ will return and judge the world, executing the wicked. Neither Jesus nor his Father have been unwilling to justly punish he wicked. However, Jesus commanded his followers to do certain things, and among those things are numbered: "Love your neighbor as yourself" and "Love your enemy and pray for the one who persecutes you". Christians are told "Vengence is mine, says YHWH, I shall repay." This is not saying that there is not time that violence is righteous, rather that it is not the place of Christians to carry out that violence. As for the practicalities, in the case you invision of a murderer trying to kill someone, it would be right, in fact obligatory, to try to protect the potential murder victim by restraining the would be murderer, but not right to take vengeance into our own hands and seek the murderer's death or otherwise seek to harm him. The difference is a matter of intent, using force to prevent someone coming to harm or using force to cause harm to the guilty one. Of course, in reality things like that would differ from situation to situation. Here's one example of the principle I'm speaking of in practice: www.jw.org/finder?wtlocale=E&docid=2017366&srcid=share

@TitusCastiglione1503

10 ай бұрын

@@EcclesiastesLiker-py5ts I don’t think you’ve really answered the question. How does one practically stop a murderer without using violent force? And, by what verse do you support the interpretation that Jesus is ok with physically restraining, but with nothing beyond that? I think of any verse where says that; if anything, Jesus says to resist no evil. Not *partially* resist evil, but don’t do it at all. Interpreting this do literally out of its context strikes me as fundamentalist absurdity.

well Romans 13 has officially made me not Christian anymore

@redeemedzoomer6053

10 ай бұрын

what?? why?

@frandor

10 ай бұрын

@@redeemedzoomer6053 while I was being a bit rash completely renouncing my faith it has very much rocked my recently discovered faith has inspired a lot of research on my part

@TitusCastiglione1503

10 ай бұрын

@@frandorhow so?

@wild_burn

7 ай бұрын

@@redeemedzoomer6053 I understand his frustration. The Governments of this fallen world are deeply corrupt, almost to the point of Weimar Germany. Many public officials actively deceive, and blaspheme against God, some are even into the occult. Many of us in these types of circles have a revolutionary mindset, and want to overthrow these evil tyrants. However believe that Good will triumph evil, and God will deliver the justice we pray for

UUMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

I think you missed the target big time on this one. I don't know how you can love your enemy while you're shooting him in the head. I don't think we just get to throw out the first 300 years of church history because Saint Augustine said something different. Even if you are going to use just war theory we have to remember that it's actually a specific thing with very specific tenants and I would argue that they're has never been a war that has actually met all of the criteria of just war theory so none of the wars we ever fight are actually just ones. Before America dropped the first nuke the pilots took communion from a Catholic priest and then flew across the ocean, used a Catholic cathedral as the landmark to aim their bomb and dropped the nuke on a church in a city with no military base that was filled with non-combatants including extra children because the Japanese had moved children there from other cities where there were military bases.

@oldfarmerboy4158

11 ай бұрын

There was a big change after the first 300 years. His name was Constantine. He wed the church to the state. And of course there was Augustine. But he was only a man. Before that time, Christians were powerless. It is easier to be non-resistant when you are weak. Now, they had the power of the state behind them. So, things changed. That took place all the way through the reformation period. Then instead of the Roman church being in control, the reformers were in control (of cities anyway) and they used their power to control.

You say, "If it is your vocation", It's okay to commit violence. What if your vocation is "Prostitute"? Assassin? Drug dealer?

@dino_boyles1271

Жыл бұрын

Kind of a non-sequitur. Prostitution is called fully wrong, it isn't equal to protectionary violence. Assassin's are also probably kind of a grey area depending on your definition. If you mean someone who illegally murders people for money then your key words there are "illegal" and "murder". Killing and murder are different. When you say drug dealer that also depends on definition. A doctor could be considered a drug dealer as they can prescribe addictive or even dangerous drugs and medicines to help people. But if you mean someone who is illegally selling illicit drugs and contributing to addictions and other dangerous things then you have an issue.

@oldboyxanliquidrage

Жыл бұрын

Read Romans 13 soldiers executioners police officers self defenders judges are ministers of god who punish unjust doers for god

@digiornospizza8411

Жыл бұрын

@@oldboyxanliquidrage Do you mean to say that the romans were not sinning when they killed Jesus? They were just doing their jobs, after all.

@digiornospizza8411

Жыл бұрын

@@dino_boyles1271 I am positing that killing (in all its forms) is wrong for a Christian, as Jesus preached nonviolence. In the self-denial required of us as we follow Jesus, we must even be willing to give up our vocation, if it gets in the way of a holier life. As a prostitute should leave her career to follow Jesus, so should someone who kills for money.

@oldboyxanliquidrage

Жыл бұрын

@@digiornospizza8411 who knows because Jesus never blamed the Romans he assigned blame to the Jews and said they were going to come and kill him even though it was the Roman soldiers. Either way Romans 13 and many other parts of the Bible justifies law enforcement military ECT so there's no way to slither out of that fact even god has soldiers he actually had soldiers protect the tree of life. When John preached to the Roman soldiers he told them to justify their wages in essence saying be good soldiers

What I'm learning from RedeemedZoomer so far: pronouns in your bio are evil, killing people for money (as a soldier) is good. Got it!

@timothyjavor

Жыл бұрын

he only said that being a police officer or a soldier is just and noble when you're defending other people. He didn't say that killing people for money is good and you know that so don't manipulate the message.

@malgtuzi5020

Жыл бұрын

Killing people to defend your nation (which is to an extent your family) is justified. Killing people because your leader ordered an invasion of a neighboring country(Putin now) or even ordered the extermination of minorities within your country (Ottoman Empire with Greeks, Armenians, and Assyrians) is not justified. Quite simple really. Adherence to pronouns means you care more about how people see you rather than your relationship with God, and vanity in any shape is sin.

@GODLOVERBAM

9 ай бұрын

@@malgtuzi5020World War 2 then was not a just war?