Question #380
Is self-defense a sin?
Is self-defense a sin? I was told it is a sin, based on James 5:6, Matt. 5:39 and Luke 6:29. It does not seem right to me, but all I found is Luke 22:36-38, and he said those swords were not for self-defense, but defending each other. Can you help me?
The Answer:
Those who find commands not to defend oneself or his family when attacked in Matt. 5:39 and Luke 6:29 can only do so when they interpret these verses literally. Such an approach creates several problems. First, it does not prevent self-defense; it only delays it. After the second cheek has been turned and struck the command has been obeyed and self-defense is no longer prohibited. Second, the literalists have a problem with Matt. 5:29-30. If verse 39 must be taken literally then consistency demands that verses 29-30 also be taken literally. All who take verse 39 literally are human so far as I know. That being the case each has surely been offended at least once by hand and eye. That they are inconsistent is demonstrated by the fact that there are not a lot of one-eyed one-handed verse 39 literalists running around. It would even seem that there should be not a few blind, handless, and even footless (see Mark 9:45) literalists!
Moreover, a literal interpretation of the first part of the verse creates even greater problems. If, for instance, a Christian woman must not defend herself she could not be raped since the law requires resistance. A lack of resistance is the equivalent of consent.
If the principle involved includes all evil, and it must since there is not qualifier preceding the term, then the principle includes oral abuse as well as physical. Since that is the case scripture should contain no examples of Christians even responding to oral abuse. But that is not the case. When Paul was tried in Jerusalem he was struck in the face, his sense of justice was outraged, and he spoke out sharply against the offender (Acts 23:1-3). The literalist may respond that Paul was human and that his resisting the offense by rebuke was sin. Can they make the same argument against Jesus? When an officer struck Jesus he did not invite further indignity; instead he rebuked the man for the attack (John 18:22). It is clear that Jesus did not intend for this language to be taken literally.
What then did Jesus mean? For a discussion of this question please see “Class: Questions, Lesson 13,” Open Forum – Part 2, pages 8-12.
Do you have more questions about the Bible? Then you have come to the right place! We have hundreds of answers to submitted questions, we have thousands of pages of detailed notes on Bible books (including Daniel, Zechariah, Revelation, Hosea, and Joel), we have hundreds of audio and video Bible classes, we have thousands of sermons (many in video), and we have much, much more! Please take a few minutes to look around, and don't forget to bookmark the site! Thanks for visiting!