Deliver a Serious Beat Down

I did ask specifically where in the Bible Jesus said it was OK to do violence to another person. And still have not had one Christian respond back with the correct answer. -- Iago

I offered a brief comment in response, referring back to Iago's previous comment to Ray. Iago had challenged Ray to provide a reference to a verse where Jesus says it's "okay to deliver a serious beat down" on someone attempting to rape your wife.

I attempted to show that Ray's comments (about defending his wife) were in line with Scripture. Specifically, 1) that the defense of one's spouse from rape is not just okay, it is a responsibility, 2) that seeking revenge or seeking to cause harm is a violation of God's commands, and 3) that God's judgment looks at a man's intent, not just the consequences of his actions.

Iago offered this comment in response:

Wow that has to take the cake for the most idiotic use of scripture to date. And that is saying alot. You have to be one of those special fundies that rides on the special bus. You take the statement that most fundies use to equate being angry with someone to murder and twist it into some perverted sense of defending yourself or others. -- Iago

Iago,

If I recall the context correctly, Ray was speaking to using an amount of force both necessary and sufficient to stop an attack on his wife. I think he said he would use a gun, if he had one, and would shoot the attacker in the foot or lower leg, and if that did not stop the attack, he would shoot again, higher on the leg, continuing up until the attack stopped. (That's not an exact quote, but it expresses the gist of what he said.)

I understood your words "okay to deliver a serious beat down " to mean it was appropriate to seek revenge or intend serious injury to someone, you are correct, that verse is not in the Bible.

But as to causing injury to someone attacking your spouse, it's really a matter of the intent, not just the action.

If your intent is to seek revenge or do harm to the attacker, then that violates the commandments. If however your intent is to protect your spouse, and a necessary consequence is an injury to the attacker, then that is not a violation of the commandments.

If you can not find a Bible verse that supports reasonable defense of one's wife from physical attack, I would refer you to Exodus 22:2. [a]

"If a thief is caught in the act of breaking into a house [in the dark of night] and is struck and killed in the process, the person who killed the thief is not guilty of murder." Exodus 22:2 (NLT)

Jesus says that it is proper to defend ones possessions. (Given the cultural context of the audience [a], a man's wife and children would have been considered possessions.) Jesus says that it is right to defend the life of family members, and protect family from harm. Just as he says it's proper to defend material possessions from theft and destruction. It's not just okay, it is a responsibility.

If a man's intent is to defend his spouse from attack (not to seek revenge or cause harm), then he is not guilty of breaking the commandment.

Why is intent so important?

Why is it wrong to seek revenge?

Why is it wrong to intend to cause harm?

The short answer is that it's important to us because it's important to God.  God commands us not to seek revenge. God commands us not to cause to do harm.

Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord  Romans 12:19 (NIV)

See Matthew 5:21-23 for what Jesus says about intent and action. (A Brief Defense)

If you insist on chiding against using force to defend one's spouse, then you should also probably chide against installing deadbolt locks on doors, since there isn't a specific 'red letter' verse in which Jesus gives approval for installing locks.

Your failure to understand the truth of God's word is not due to a problem of God's word, Iago. And its not a problem with translation to modern English (although the historical context does give rise to some difficulty.) The root of the problem, Iago, is the condition of your heart.

NOTES:

[a] The qualification in Exodus 22:3 speaks to the historical, cultural context of the audience.

 We understand the commands of the Old Testament were given to specific audience, the nation of Israel.  (Or the more popular "ancient nomadic goat herders" commonly used in comments left on Ray's blog). New Covenant believers are not under the requirements of the Old Testament law, but the entirety of the Old Testament, including the law, reveals truth about Jesus.

I anticipate your objection that Exodus 22:2 is not in red letters and is not the words of Jesus. But that objection completely misses the main point of the entire Bible: who Jesus is.  Jesus is the Word incarnate (in human form), the "Word Became Flesh", from the beginning, before there was time.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. John 1:1-3 (NIV)