Killing to defend property?

Status
Not open for further replies.
What is this?! Are you suggesting that Christians cannot kill? Cannot find satisfaction in an evil wretch meeting his end? My goodness.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sad that you think this righteous view thoughtless.
What righteous view? As far as I can tell, you advocate killing a man for “trying to take my stuff from me.”

If there is more nuance to your view, you would do well to share it.

They are to be fined if after the fact they are found and discovered. That has nothing to do with them being caught in the act on my property trying to take my stuff from me. For them to do so is an act of violence against me, and I can legitimately kill them for it.
 
What is this?! Are you suggesting that Christians cannot kill? Cannot find satisfaction in an evil wretch meeting his end? My goodness.
Good brother I deleted this comment. I was proof texting and I realise that does not advance a discussion. However Tom's comment reflected my concern.
The vilest criminal still bears God’s image. With that knowledge, no Christian will be so thoughtless about taking another’s life.
I do think when you talk about taking another's life you should qualify your statements. You are killing someone made in the image of God. You are also sending the person to hell. That is serious.

I DO believe citizens have the right to protect the lives of their families. When it comes to theft I don't think this means the criminal should necessarily be shot. It depends on the seriousness of the situation.

As for your evil wretch comment, is it not true that apart from grace we are also evil wretches? When we consider how gracious God has been to us, should this not also make us prayerfully desire evil wretches turn from sin to God. In the words of Col 1:12-14 "giving thanks to the Father who has qualified us to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in the light. He has delivered us from the power of darkness and conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son of His love, in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins."
 
Does not the Lord Jesus Christ have something to say on resisting evil, including theft, in the sermon on the mount?
 
Matthew Henry on the passage in question:
"If a thief broke a house in the night, and was killed in the doing of it, his blood was upon his own head, and should not be required at the hand of him that shed it, v. 2. As he that does an unlawful act bears the blame of the mischief that follows to others, so likewise of that which follows to himself. A man's house is his castle, and God's law, as well as man's, sets a guard upon it; he that assaults it does so at his peril. Yet, if it was in the day-time that the thief was killed, he that killed him must be accountable for it (v. 3), unless it was in the necessary defence of his own life. Note, We ought to be tender of the lives even of bad men; the magistrate must afford us redress, and we must not avenge ourselves."
I’m not so sure your interpretation quite matches Henry here. I think the passage is teaching that the thief caught in the act is killed without guilt. But if he is found the next day, the victim may not seek blood vengeance but is owed restitution. It’s not that the robbery is happening during the day, but that the robbery already happened and he is later apprehended.
 
If the thief points a gun at me and warns me to leave, I am turning around to grab my gun to warn him to leave the area as I call Law Enforcement. Then I am heading out to see if I can retain him for a bit. I want to protect my neighbor from this idiot. If he neglects my pleas to desist and points his gun at me and continues to try to steal my property at gun point, that person might find himself in some sort of conflict. I don't care if it is dark or light out. Of course I will be from a different vantage point of susceptibility then before. Hopefully he packed up and left as I went to retrieve my rifle. I like long barrels. They are more accurate after 30 ft.
 
Relevant but slightly different from OP, is that today you can barely do anything to defend your property. If some guy comes on my property and steals my lawnmower, I couldn't even show a gun to scare him off without myself getting charged.

I don't think I'd kill the guy in the OP scenario, but I might take a bat to his knees so he doesn't steal my stuff. But then again, I'd get charged instead of the wanna be thief.
 
I don't think I'd kill the guy in the OP scenario, but I might take a bat to his knees so he doesn't steal my stuff.

The guy in the OP was armed though. I doubt he will let you try to take a bat to his knees and foregoes drawing on you

EDIT: But your overall point is a good one. The corruption of our laws in some jurisdictions is blatantly granting rights to criminals and taking away rights of citizens - both property rights and self-defense. You are not wrong there, brother - sadly.
 
I don't think I'd kill the guy in the OP scenario, but I might take a bat to his knees so he doesn't steal my stuff. But then again, I'd get charged instead of the wanna be thief.

He would then take you to court. He'd probably lose, but that's what will happen.
 
We should just do what our President says. Fire your double-barrel shotgun into the air.
:banghead:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top