TexasCHLforum.com

jmorris wrote:

WildBill wrote:

TangoX-ray wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Bitter Clinger wrote:Exodus 22 offers the case of self-defense by a homeowner against an intruding burglar. The Torah makes a clear distinction between a nighttime and daytime robbery – as does Texas law!

This passage from Exodus introduces the classic principle of self-defense, "If someone comes to kill you, rise up and kill him (first)." If there is homicidal intent, self-defense is more than permitted; it is required. This is a common principle of all legal systems, America's included and Texas especially!

Can you provide a link to these references?

Exodus 22:2 (NIV) wrote:If a thief is caught breaking in at night and is struck a fatal blow, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed;

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=NIV

Thank you sir. It is in my Bible as well.

Ah, I see my problem. Exodus 22:2 was easy but I at first thought that he was saying "If someone comes to kill you, rise up and kill him (first)" was also a passage but he's saying Exodus 22:2 *supports* that concept.

At least, I think that's idea.

jmorris wrote:

WildBill wrote:

TangoX-ray wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Bitter Clinger wrote:Exodus 22 offers the case of self-defense by a homeowner against an intruding burglar. The Torah makes a clear distinction between a nighttime and daytime robbery – as does Texas law!

This passage from Exodus introduces the classic principle of self-defense, "If someone comes to kill you, rise up and kill him (first)." If there is homicidal intent, self-defense is more than permitted; it is required. This is a common principle of all legal systems, America's included and Texas especially!

Can you provide a link to these references?

Exodus 22:2 (NIV) wrote:If a thief is caught breaking in at night and is struck a fatal blow, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed;

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=NIV

Thank you sir. It is in my Bible as well.

Ah, I see my problem. Exodus 22:2 was easy but I at first thought that he was saying "If someone comes to kill you, rise up and kill him (first)" was also a passage but he's saying Exodus 22:2 *supports* that concept.

At least, I think that's idea.

george wrote:I don't believe the Bible gives you a "right" to anything.

WildBill wrote:

jmorris wrote:

WildBill wrote:

TangoX-ray wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Bitter Clinger wrote:Exodus 22 offers the case of self-defense by a homeowner against an intruding burglar. The Torah makes a clear distinction between a nighttime and daytime robbery – as does Texas law!

This passage from Exodus introduces the classic principle of self-defense, "If someone comes to kill you, rise up and kill him (first)." If there is homicidal intent, self-defense is more than permitted; it is required. This is a common principle of all legal systems, America's included and Texas especially!

Can you provide a link to these references?

Exodus 22:2 (NIV) wrote:If a thief is caught breaking in at night and is struck a fatal blow, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed;

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=NIV

Thank you sir. It is in my Bible as well.

Ah, I see my problem. Exodus 22:2 was easy but I at first thought that he was saying "If someone comes to kill you, rise up and kill him (first)" was also a passage but he's saying Exodus 22:2 *supports* that concept.

At least, I think that's idea.

I am not a Bible scholar, but quite a bit of a leap IMO.

Pawpaw wrote:I suggest you go to the link superchief posted and read the whole thing. It is a very good reference and backs up everything it says with scripture.

Bitter Clinger wrote: Bill,
It is NOT found in the Bible per se, it is a Talmudic commentary, ascribed to Rabbinic scholars of the post 2nd Temple era. That is why you cannot find it verbatim... "If someone comes to kill you, rise up and kill him (first)" is considered, therefore, at least by observant Jews, to carry the same legal weight as Biblical law itself (10 Commandments, 613 Mitzvot for Jews, Noahide Laws for non-Jews, etc). Since there are numerous Christian scholars on this forum, I will leave the any Christian expounding to those more learned than myself.

WildBill wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:I suggest you go to the link superchief posted and read the whole thing. It is a very good reference and backs up everything it says with scripture.

Sorry, I still don't see it.

Pawpaw wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:I suggest you go to the link superchief posted and read the whole thing. It is a very good reference and backs up everything it says with scripture.

Sorry, I still don't see it.

Here 'ya go: http://www.biblicalselfdefense.com/

Bitter Clinger wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:

wil wrote:I've never seen anything within the new testament which prohibits the moral use of force, it does say "thou shalt not murder" which is the wrongful taking of an innocent life. It does not actually say "thou shalt not kill" the hebrew writing says murder. As for being persecuted for being a christian to the point of myrterdom, I am no scholar on the subject but I've always thought the idea simply means refusing to reject one's faith in Christ regardless of the circumstances. And that includes using force if need be to defend oneself up to and including death if need be in the face of refusing to reject or disavow one's faith. The idea of the christians passively allowing themselves to be fed to the lions never seemed to make sense, grab a sword or a spear and defend one's faith and by extension one's self. You may still die but you are dying because of your refusal to reject your faith regardless of the fact you are still defending yourself.
Jesus himself was not above the use of force, in this case brute force. He did not ask the moneychangers in the temple to please leave. He got ahold of a whip and beat them until they left.

Except it has been explained to me that the original language does not directly translate to any English word. The closest phrase is, "Thou shalt not kill with evil intent."

The words in Hebrew for "kill" or "murder" are as separate and distinct as they are in English. The Commandment translates exactly to "Thou shall not murder" (in Hebrew; "Lo Tirzach").

The most important distinction between a killing and murder is that of motivation and intent as you correctly point out.

Bitter Clinger wrote:

george wrote:I don't believe the Bible gives you a "right" to anything.

Inalienable Rights are given by God. The Constitution renders them as US law. IANAL.

Our rights are protected by the government, not granted by it. Our nation was founded on the principle that we have rights granted to us by our Creator, rights that exist because we exist, and the role of government is to protect our freedom to exercise those rights. The government certainly has the power to take away my freedom to exercise my rights, but it does not have the authority to do so. When the government becomes the instrument by which we are deprived of our rights, it is acting outside its authority and those actions must be met with firm resistance.