Piper's Guns and Martyrdom - Page 5

Reformed Baptist · #**161** (**permalink**) 07-10-2008, 01:51 PM

Hey PB peoples,

Haven't posted in a long, long time. There is no way I could read this whole thread. But, my comment..

If someone breaks into my house, and the Lord in His mercy gives me the time and ability to retrieve either my wife's .22 pistol with the hollow points and laser site, or my .357 Magnum, and I have time to point it at the intruder, then I believe I would conclude that the Lord has delivered the man into my hands and I will shoot him.

I would wrestle later with the theological or moral ramifications over a cup of Starbucks with my wife.

Jerusalem Blade · #**162** (**permalink**) 07-10-2008, 03:25 PM

First of all, that automatic pistol we keep seeing the photo of sure looks like a .45 automatic and not a 9 mm (is the caliber not engraved on the slide?)

We keep seeing in the news (and on threads here) articles on the mounting homosexual agendas. If we do see the day when the social order -- and the laws of the land -- deteriorate to the point when Christians are considered fair game for persecution -- outlaws and enemies of the New Order of Humanity -- and one is attacked by homosexuals (as happened around the house of Lot in ancient Sodom), I doubt we will see many pacifists then. There is a limit.

When I see the remarks of the pacifist brother who said that he could envision scenarios of his becoming violent if wife and step-daughter were attacked, but that he would still consider it sinful -- there is a disconnect with reality there, in my view. This needs to be thought out and resolved before any such events may occur.

A good resource for consideration would be Rich's post #55 WLC on the sixth commandment

I think the Westminster Larger Catechism's statements on this are profound. They speak both to the issues of justice and mercy.

The succinctness of the Shorter Catechism speaks well also:

WSC #68 - What is required in the sixth commandment?

A: The sixth commandment requireth all lawful endeavours to preserve our own life, and the life of others.

WSC #69 - What is forbidden in the sixth commandment?

A: The sixth commandment forbiddeth the taking away of our own life, or the life of our neighbour unjustly, or whatsoever tendeth thereunto.

You will note, it talks of lawful endeavors to preserve life -- ours and others. And forbidding the unjust taking away of life.

In my post #120, the incident described there, had I not threatened (and been prepared to exert) extreme violence in that situation, would not the possible resulting violence and trauma to all concerned have been staggering, and what is more, allowed to happen because of my wicked refusal to protect both myself and my children?

The questions and answers of the catechisms are godly, reflect Biblical teaching, and are worthy of being taken to heart and lived out. We do not resort to violence because we hate life, but because we love it, and honor the God who gave it to us, and His instructions concerning it.

sastark · #**163** (**permalink**) 07-10-2008, 04:28 PM

I thought this was germane to this thread:

Quote:

FRONTLINE MISSIONARIES ATTACKED

During the Reclaiming Africa for Christ Biblical Worldview Summit, the Deputy Director of Frontline Fellowship, Charl van Wyk, and Creation Science lecturer Philip Stott, were held up in an attempted hijacking at Khayelitsha while en-route to record a radio programme.

While two thugs pointed their automatic pistols at Uncle Philip threatening and manhandling him, Charl drew his pistol and opened fire, sending the assailants scurrying for cover.

Charl then came under fire from a third assailant who was concealed by the side of the road. By God’s grace, our speakers and vehicle escaped the attempted hijacking and ambush unharmed. Our people have laid charges of attempted murder, hijacking and robbery with the local police. We praise the Lord for His protection, that no lives were lost.

However, a number of foreign passports and identity documents of participants of the Great Commission Course were stolen by the attackers. This has caused much extra expense and time wasting disruption as each of the participants whose passports were stolen need to make application for emergency travel documents, travelling to their embassies, some of which are only in Pretoria (1,400 kilometres away), necessitating changes of flights, extra expenses and other complications.

Please join us in praying that the Lord would work all things together for good for those who love Him and are called according to His purpose. That this, which man meant for evil, God will use for good. Let us continue to pray that the Lord would bring those responsible for this attack to justice, to conviction of sin and to full Repentance.

For firsthand reports on the attack please read the articles written by Philip Stott and Charl van Wyk:

Khayelitsha In The Morning

"Give me your cell-phone."

The words hardly register. I am deep in thought - full of hope and joy. Open on my lap is Favoured UdoJesus Edwin Akubuiroh's book "The New Wine Church". I have been meditating on a stunning observation – Africa has long been in trouble because "her witchcraft activities, idolatry, wickedness and all manner of sins brought her torment and the wrath and punishment of God." For years I have been despondent about the state of Africa. So much missionary effort, so little fruit, and I'm convinced that one of the main roots of the problem is that Africans never seem to accept any blame for their woes. The problem is always the old colonial powers, or the slave trade or something of that sort. But to hear an African acknowledge that witchcraft, idolatry and all manner of sins are to blame has filled me with hope. If a new generation like Favoured Akubuiroh is going to arise and acknowledge such sins in sincere repentance, then God could be on the verge of doing something wonderful and magnificent in Africa. When the door opened I had hardly noticed. It was almost as if it had happened in a dream.

"Give me your cell-phone. Now!"

I'm in a daze. I notice the reasonably tidily dressed man of about thirty standing at the open door. He's not quite as dark as most Africans – probably some racial mixture – and his English is surprisingly good. Somehow I seem to be in a trance, and I can't focus on him or pay attention to what he is saying.

My attention is fixed on the gun in his hand.

The gun is in very sharp focus.

It's a 9mm semi-automatic pistol with an unusually long barrel. I don't think I have seen a pistol with as long a barrel as this before. The gun is not new. It has seen hard service, much of the bluing is worn and the silver-grey metal is showing through the black coating of the barrel. The handle is brown. It could be wood, or perhaps plastic that looks like wood. His hand is wrapped tightly around that handle and the barrel is pointing at my stomach.

"Give me the cell phone."

"I haven't got a cell phone with me."

"Give me your money."

"I didn't bring any money with me."

"Give me your gun."

"I haven't got a gun." I make a gesture with my empty hands but he doesn't believe me. He starts again on his cycle of demands and paws my jacket searching for whatever he can find. He feels the outline of my camera through the soft material and starts to try and force his way in.

"Why haven't you given us your cell phone?"

It's a different voice.

There's a movement just inside my field of vision on the left. A more vicious looking fellow pushes another gun towards me. I hardly catch a glimpse of it before it is pressed against my side. The first thug stops groping my clothes and the second takes over demanding my money, my gun, my cell phone. I gesture helplessly and explain once again that I just don't have what they're asking for. Thug number two seems to be losing patience. Thug number one resumes fingering the camera through my jacket. The long barrel of his pistol swings from my stomach to my knees and back again. Thug number two angrily demands a cell phone again and jabs his gun into my ribs.

I'm in a dream. Can this be really happening? What can I do? I'm almost paralyzed. I gesture helplessly with my empty hands.

Then out of the blue there's Charl. Moving past the driver's-side window on the right.

He's always such a soft-spoken, mild-mannered chap with a constant look of joy on his face. But he doesn't look the same now. His jaw is set in a hard line. There's a determined expression on his face. He's crouching as he glides swiftly past the widow towards the bonnet. He has a gun clasped in both hands. He shouts. The thugs suddenly lose interest in me. They snatch their weapons away and pandemonium breaks loose.

Charl's gun roars and jerks up into the air with the recoil, shots ring out behind me to the left. The thugs have disappeared. I grab the door, slam it shut and crouch down trying to get my head out of sight below the level of the windows. Somebody is shooting somewhere over to the left but I can't tell where the shots are coming from. Charl fires again. Sipho, who had thought he was just getting a lift home as usual, shouts "Charl! Get down!" Charl ducks. More shots ring out and I hold my breath expecting bullets to shatter the windows or smash through the metal-work. Charl throws the driver's-side door open and pushes Sipho inside. Sipho fumbles as his feet get caught between the clutch and brake pedals, he fights his way past the gear lever and flattens himself down next to me. Charl slams the door closed, rams the lever into gear and races towards the cross-roads.

As we drive towards the police station I look past Sipho - perched uncomfortably on the handbrake - towards Charl. He still has that hard line to his jaw. I've known him for a long time, but I've never seen him quite like this.

I have known for a long time he takes the responsibility of protecting his wife and children seriously.

I'm conscious of being very thankful that he takes the responsibility of protecting his passengers seriously too.

Philip Stott

Attackers Flee

"A righteous man who falters before the wicked is like a murky spring and a polluted well." Proverbs 25:26

"Don't move! Don't move!" The gun-toting thug held his firearm pointed towards me whilst another came from behind and searched my jacket pockets. "Give us your money and cell phone. Where is your gun?"

I was busy unloading the back of our mission pick-up at 09h00 Tuesday 1 July 2008 in Khayelitsha, Cape Town. Sipho , ex-terrorist unit commander, now turned Christian, was passing his bags of clothing from the back of the vehicle. We were giving him a lift from the Frontline Fellowship Biblical Worldview Summit held at Mizpah.

I gave the thieves my wallet, identification document and cell phone. They helped themselves to 10 foreign passports in my jacket pocket. These belong to Summit participants - I was to make copies of the documents so that our foreign ministry guests would be allowed into prisons to minister to convicts during the upcoming Great Commission Course.

The thug, who pointed the firearm at me, walked over to Sipho behind me and asked for his cell phone whilst the searcher carried on body searching me, trying to find a firearm. By God's grace, he was unsuccessful.

The attackers made their way over to my passenger, creation scientist, Philip Stott, a guest speaker at the Summit. I was to interview Uncle Philip for a radio show later that morning.

The passenger door was ripped open and the armed thug pointed his firearm at Uncle Philip who was reading and had no idea of what had been going on behind the vehicle. "Give me your cell phone, money and gun!" the thief commanded. Thug two, the searcher, moved in right next to my passenger and stuck a pistol into his ribs. They could not believe that he had nothing. They were agitated, frustrated and aggressive.

Uncle Philip was cool-headed whilst explaining why he had nothing to give them. He wisely also did not look either of them in the eye - many attackers fear being recognised in court and will easily kill you if they think you may be able to recognise them later.

This gave me time to move towards the driver’s door of the vehicle and draw and **** my 9mm Heckler and Koch pistol. Sipho heard me **** my firearm and thus took cover on my side of the vehicle. I moved to the front of the pick up, I shouted at the thugs as they were threatening the life of Uncle Philip. For a split second they were distracted and I opened fire.

They fled, and are hopefully still running. What I had not realised was that there was a third party covering them from a distance. He returned fire. I heard Sipho shouting, "Charl get down!"

I took cover behind the vehicle at the driver’s door, which I opened; Sipho and I jumped in and we drove off as fast as possible. By God's grace none of us were hit by flying bullets, and the mission vehicle was undamaged.

On the highway, a taxi van with about 12 passengers drove past; the passengers were waving, making positive hand gestures and showing thumbs up. "They are showing us that you hit one of the attackers Charl," Sipho explained.

Praise the Lord for His grace and protection over us.

We'd appreciate your prayers:

- That the thieves will come to repentance and faith in Christ.

- For me , as I deal with the police.

- That applications for all bank cards, licenses and cell phones etc will run smoothly - that can be pretty onerous.

- The return of the passports of our foreign guests - it is difficult to get travel documents - most embassies are 1,000 miles from Cape Town - the expense, time wasting and inconvenience for Frontline Fellowship is crippling.

Yours in the service of King Jesus,

Charl van Wy k

Frontline Fellowship
P.O. Box 74
Newlands, 7725
Cape Town, South Africa
Tel: (021) 689-4480
Fax: (021) 685-5884
admin@frontline.org.za
Frontline Fellowship

rmdmphilosopher · #**164** (**permalink**) 07-11-2008, 08:02 PM

Hmm... After reading Piper's post and then White's, the reaction almost seems an over-reaction. Piper's post actually never describes the specific course of action he would take were his family threatened in his own home--it merely describes his resistance to preparations that would ensure a violent reaction to that threat. The entire tone of the article seems musing and, shall we say, allusive, to me... It was almost painful to read White taking that and reading explicit views about self-defence from it. I think it was more of a though-provoker than a manifesto on Piper's part.

But anyway, on the larger subject of Pacifism in general... I was writing an essay about the death penalty earlier in the year for a class at college, and I came across a comment somewhere (don't quite remember where anymore--but I think possibly from C.S. Lewis) that when governments--or individuals for that matter--cease to uphold the temporal rule of justice, and treat criminals in the modern 'humanitarian' vein, they actually treat them as less than human by acting as if they were animals to be merely trained out of their bad habits rather than humans with moral natures. This doesn't preclude mercy, it seems to me--but the source of this comment went on to point out that God's mercy in Christ was only justice displaced or redirected, not justice dispensed with. The substitutionary atonement of Christ and pacifism are two very different categories of sacrifice I think--one has an effect, the other is essentially pointless.

Just a thought.

Sonoftheday · #**165** (**permalink**) 07-11-2008, 10:08 PM

Someone breaks into my house while my family is sleeping and there dead. It seems like owning a gun ensures that they have a less painful death than if I must resort to a more primitive weapon. SO from the humanitarian viewpoint Ill own a gun.

timmopussycat · #**166** (**permalink**) 07-12-2008, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rmdmphilosopher

But anyway, on the larger subject of Pacifism in general... I was writing an essay about the death penalty earlier in the year for a class at college, and I came across a comment somewhere (don't quite remember where anymore--but I think possibly from C.S. Lewis) that when governments--or individuals for that matter--cease to uphold the temporal rule of justice, and treat criminals in the modern 'humanitarian' vein, they actually treat them as less than human by acting as if they were animals to be merely trained out of their bad habits rather than humans with moral natures. This doesn't preclude mercy, it seems to me--but the source of this comment went on to point out that God's mercy in Christ was only justice displaced or redirected, not justice dispensed with. The substitutionary atonement of Christ and pacifism are two very different categories of sacrifice I think--one has an effect, the other is essentially pointless.

Just a thought.

Two Lewis essays in which you might have found this thought are The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment or Delinquents in the Snow both found in God in the dock ed. Walter Hooper.

Pergamum · #**167** (**permalink**) 07-12-2008, 02:25 AM

No one has adequately dealt with the early Christian martyrs in the Roman arena who went passivley to their deaths, with their whole families... [see my previous posts]

kvanlaan · #**168** (**permalink**) 07-17-2008, 08:35 AM

Quote:

No one has adequately dealt with the early Christian martyrs in the Roman arena who went passivley to their deaths, with their whole families...

Nope. I hear the crickets in the background too.

And I don't have an answer for you either. For some reason, I feel that a violent attack based on personal gain by a thief or murderer can be justly answered and defeated with violence. But a 'rounding up' of Christians based on a confession of faith is a different matter. Can we still fight to save our families? Not sure. I think it will be made clear when it happens. (I'm hoping so, anyway.)

larryjf · #**169** (**permalink**) 07-17-2008, 09:04 AM

Was it wrong for the people of God to take up arms against those who wanted to destroy them in the book of Esther?

I believe that gives us good insight into the biblical method for self-defense. It was made legal first, and then it was carried out. So as long as it's legal to defend yourself you can.

With the martyrs of Rome, it would not have been legal for the Christians to defend themselves against the emperor.

TimV · #**170** (**permalink**) 07-17-2008, 09:46 AM

One point is that the early church was faulty on many points of theology. The Kingdom is like a mustard seed, and grows in knowledge as well as size, so I wouldn't necessarily use the early church as examples of proper behavior or theology.

But a more practical point is that there was simply nothing a small minority of people could do in the Empire if the Empire wanted them dead. A Roman Legionnaire had to be 5 foot 9 inches, which was gigantic in those days, and they were superbly armed, and trained beyond the belief of what we call discipline nowadays. How could you take up arms against the Empire? And don't forget the principle behind decimation. It's to teach a lesson, and even if a few men got together and successfully jumped a couple of soldiers, the Empire would have made the whole Christian community pay dearly.

So I think that to be a case of practicality rather than sound principle, although I take nothing away from those who did go with calm assurance of an afterlife.

mangum · #**171** (**permalink**) 07-17-2008, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pergamum

No one has adequately dealt with the early Christian martyrs in the Roman arena who went passivley to their deaths, with their whole families... [see my previous posts]

Maybe because the differences between criminal (i.e., unlawful) assault on one's self and family and the *lawful* (i.e., in accordance with the law) execution by the State is self-evident.

You and your family being sentenced to death in accordance with the *law* (and those martyrs were sentenced to death *lawfully*) for the capital crime of being Christian is suffering for Christ in accordance with 1 Peter 3:13-21; 4:12-16 to name but a few. Your home being invaded and your family attacked (unlawfully) by a thief are in a completely different category isn’t it?

Those Christians in the arena are being slaughtered as they “did not love their lives unto death.” This is for Christ. This is for our testimony of him. This is for righteousness.

Permitting you (and it is permission, albeit passive), your wife, and children being slaughtered in their beds by a criminal makes you an accessory after the fact - to say it in the least offensive way I can. This is not for Christ. This is not for our testimony. This is not for righteousness.

Rather, this would be wicked, perverse, and contrary to the sixth commandment. This attitude and conduct makes a mockery of righteousness – the advocate of justice.

Simply put: God commends the believer if he suffers for Christ's sake under an unjust State’s unjust law and unjust execution. Standing by and permitting the slaughter of innocents carried out by criminals (those with no authority to do so) is utter wickedness.

***
As a side note, I do believe God would approve if those martyrs would have fled the State before pronouncement of judgment to avoid persecution and death. Yet, it was their willingness to die for Christ that gave God the greater glory.

I do not see in Scripture that it is inherently sinful to avoid persecution and / or death.

TimV · #**172** (**permalink**) 07-17-2008, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Simply put: a State acting in accordance with the law slaying Christians because of their testimony of Christ is approved of God in accordance with his Word.

No, because it is a violation of Biblical law, and so can't be approved by God.

mangum · #**173** (**permalink**) 07-17-2008, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimV

Quote:

Simply put: a State acting in accordance with the law slaying Christians because of their testimony of Christ is approved of God in accordance with his Word.

No, because it is a violation of Biblical law, and so can't be approved by God.

You misunderstand me. Sorry if I was unclear in my post - I will edit it.

I meant that God approves of the Christian suffering for Christ’s sake which is abundantly clear in scripture. NOT that God approves of a wicked government pronouncing unjust judgment and executing Christians.

Anyone who knows me KNOWS I would not advocate State-sponsored terrorism.

TimV · #**174** (**permalink**) 07-17-2008, 10:51 AM

Oh, sorry and thanks!

Pergamum · #**175** (**permalink**) 07-17-2008, 10:57 AM

So the Jews should not have fought back either when the Nazis killed them, according to Nazi law?

Brad · #**176** (**permalink**) 07-17-2008, 11:01 AM

mangum · #**177** (**permalink**) 07-17-2008, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pergamum

So the Jews should not have fought back either when the Nazis killed them, according to Nazi law?

On the contrary. I really do not see how you can come away with that idea from my post. Please let me know where I may clarify my comments so as to avoid this in the future.

Point of clarification: The [unbelieving] Jews are not God's people so their refusal to fight / resist the Nazi’s has no bearing upon the Christian's “suffering for Christ’s sake” or the point of the OP which was about the Christian's (not the non-Christian's) rights or lack thereof to defend himself.

1. In my previous post, you see my comment at the end - "I do not see in Scripture that it is inherently sinful to avoid persecution and / or death."
2. An unjust law is no law at all.
3. I am afraid this is going to end up in a God's law is perfect / “Theonomy would fix this” discussion at this rate.

TimV · #**178** (**permalink**) 07-17-2008, 01:06 PM

Quote:

So the Jews should not have fought back either when the Nazis killed them, according to Nazi law?

I think there's a good parallel there with the early Christians. Jews in Germany were a third of one percent of the population, and in 1933 they lost citizenship, so didn't have any military training, and couldn't deal in arms (although I've never heard their personal guns were confiscated). There's no way they could have done anything to prevent deportation, etc...

There was no targeted killing of Jews before the war, or in it's early stages. Even after war with the UK and France broke out, Jews were allowed to leave the country. It wasn't until late in 1941 that there were targeted killings, and that wasn't on German soil, and never was during the whole of the war, for that matter.

It wasn't a sure thing for either group, and people have a tendency to think it will only happen to the other guy.

sastark · #**179** (**permalink**) 07-17-2008, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pergamum

So the Jews should not have fought back either when the Nazis killed them, according to Nazi law?

Some Jews did fight back:

Warsaw Ghetto Uprising - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pergamum · #**180** (**permalink**) 07-18-2008, 08:47 AM

Most did not. The question is not whether small pockets did, but SHOULD they have? Were they sinning by resisting, or sinning by NOT resisting? The same with the early Christians in Rome.