The story from YWAM Arvada

An interview in CT
Matthew was in the building for half an hour talking with students, and then he asked to spend the night. Tiffany was called to the front because she handles hospitality. Normally, we would not have someone spend the night without knowing them or arranging ahead of time. After that, Matthew said, "Then this is what I've got for you," pulled out a gun and began shooting.
How much more do the pacifists want? As I wrote before, Matthew Murray was committed to violence. It was an act of God that he was quickly locked out of the building.
After firing a few shots, he had his foot in the door, and at some point his foot slipped and he fell back. The door slammed shut on him and automatically locked so he could not get back in again.
I contend it was also God's hand the next day that left him wounded from multiple gunshot wounds. His suicide was a continuation of his rampage against all that bear the image of God.

The pacifists at Witherington's blog reject the argument that times have changed. They believe in self-defense in some measure but with 1st century technology. It is fine to use a short knife if a murderer is coming with another hand weapon. That's basically hand to hand combat. But bullets create a much larger sphere of violence, a sphere that someone with a knife would have a hard/difficult/impossible time penetrating (unless they were ninjas). Should churches have armed guards? Depends. To protect themselves from the government? No. To protect their weak from the criminally violent? Yes.


Anonymous said…
I don't get what the Witherton folksw are so upset about. The woman, Assam, warned the guy several times and fired [not fatally]. I think that's the best that could have happened under the circumstances. It is nasty, tragic and brutish, but that is life in a fallen cosmos. I think part of what is eating away at Ben and others [besides the clear injunction to turn the other cheek and love your neighbor] is that they are not big fans of the 2nd amendment as currently applied. Violent response is supposed to be a last resort as it was in this tragedy.

Peace, Dan
John Umland said…
In all fairness to them Dan, they are fine with the 2nd amendment to some degree, but not with Christians using that right. Their argument runs that Christ commanded us to love our enemies, shooting them isn't a loving action, therefore it is, in their understanding, never right to shoot someone, not even if they are shooting others. All of this, to me, sounds like straining a gnat and swallowing a camel.
God is good

Popular posts from this blog

Twilight and LDS communion

Why did Peter put his coat on before jumping in the water? John 21:7

fun with contonyms