Should A Christian Keep & Bear Arms? A Biblical Response to Pastor John Piper

This post is in response to an article by John Piper found here, https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/should-christians-be-encouraged-to-arm-themselves, that was originally written in 2015 and that I saw making the rounds again on Twitter last week. It is not intended to be a point for point refutation of Piper’s article, but rather to engage some of his key points and to put forward a positive alternative position, grounded in the Scriptures, in support of self-defense. So that there is no misunderstanding, I like John Piper. I appreciate what he has to say on many issues, have learned a great deal from him over the years, and I’m a fan of his “Ask Pastor John” podcast. That said, I think that he is fundamentally wrong on this point, as he overlooks relevant passages of Scripture and makes some key category errors. While others have maligned and taken issue with some things he has said over the years, often taking some of his statements out of context to mean things that I don’t think he intended to say, I have endeavored not to do so here, and I believe my critique of his position is both measured and fair.

The main issue that I take with Piper’s article is that it fails to recognize the difference between self-defense and retaliation in vengeance. Self-defense uses force in an active and ongoing situation to restrain an act of violent evil. Retaliation, on the other hand, seeks to settle a score for a situation that has already occurred. In Exodus 22:2-3, it is declared that a man who kills an intruder that is breaking into his home at night shall not be guilty of murder. However, if the same confrontation occurs during the day, then he is guilty of murder. The idea here is that at night, the owner would have a harder time discerning the motives of an intruder. I believe this passage alone is enough to establish the principle of judicious use of force in self-defense. There are some who understand this to mean that using a weapon with the intent to kill is never allowed. While I believe that force used in self-defense should be applied judiciously, there will be times that deadly force will be the required force necessary for effective defense. Therefore, in some cases, the intention to use lethal force is both judicious and justified, but to be clear, we should never celebrate the taking of the life of another human being. However, retaliation for an act already committed, no matter how heinous the crime for which it is sought, is always sinful and is never permissible for a Christian. At that point, justice belongs to God and his agent, the civil government, as it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay”, says the Lord (Romans 12:19), and as Paul says of the civil authorities “They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.” (Romans 13:4)

Jesus also advised his followers to be prepared, including arming themselves, before He was arrested. “And he said to them, “When I sent you out with no moneybag or knapsack or sandals, did you lack anything?” They said, “Nothing.” He said to them, “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one. For I tell you that this Scripture must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors.’ For what is written about me has its fulfillment.” And they said, “Look, Lord, here are two swords.” And he said to them, “It is enough.”” (Luke 22:35-38). Piper acknowledges this text, but points to the uncertainty over its meaning in avoiding drawing any conclusions from it. While Piper is right about the uncertainty, as many make the argument that the only purpose for the swords was for Jesus to be numbered with the transgressors, I do not accept that argument for three reasons. First, it disregards the mention of the moneybag and the knapsack. Those items serve no purpose in that understanding. Second, the swords in question were common objects and their presence alone would not be evidence of criminal activity. Third, considering the entirety of the passage, including the juxtaposition of Jesus’s prior instructions with His new ones, points to an interpretation of general preparedness. Honestly, while also recognizing that I may be being far too bold here, outside of how to understand that last phrase, “it is enough”, I truly do not see the reason for all the uncertainty as to what this passage means. I think it’s clear that Jesus knew He was sending His apostles out to begin spreading His message and building the church in an environment that would be hostile to them, unlike when He sent them out earlier, and He wanted them to be prepared for what they would face.

What about Jesus’s command to turn the other cheek? In Matthew 5:38-42, Jesus says, “You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you.” This text is often misunderstood and used to argue against the idea of self-defense for a Christian, but I believe that a closer look at the text demonstrates a failure to consider the full context of the passage. The general sense of the text here is that Jesus is referring to personal insults and petty legal disputes, not attacks that might lead to death or grave harm. The Old Testament text that Jesus cites for an “eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” is Deuteronomy 19:21. That text also mentions “life for life” and Jesus never revises or even addresses that section. He only discusses the relatively minor incidents in view. As one commentary I read put it, I think the message of Jesus here is that His followers should bear whatever losses they can afford to bear, and they should extend forgiveness instead of taking people into court for petty losses and minor injuries. However, I find nothing in Jesus’s words that commands us to passivity while ourselves or others around us face death or grave harm.

But what about the emotions of anger and aggression? Would they not be a sign of sin and vengeance? This is an objection that I have heard from others in the past. Coincidentally, a conversation I had with a coworker recently relates to this issue. We were discussing current events and defense and security came up. She was quite surprised at the strength of the language that I used to express using a firearm in self-defense in the case of a home break-in. She commented that my phrasing was symbolic of some aggression, though she also considered it a good thing. I completely agree with those thoughts because I believe that anger and aggression are God-given emotions. While it is true that when left unchecked they can certainly lead to sin, they can also be justified in certain circumstances and channeled into righteous action. Jesus was not meek or gentle when He cleansed the Temple of the moneychangers that were taking advantage of the people that lived far off and were required to travel to Jerusalem to worship for feasts. Though that situation did not involve self-defense, it does establish that anger and aggression are not inherently sinful. If that is true, then it seems completely reasonable and biblical, in my opinion, that whenever violent evil angrily and aggressively manifests itself, such as in the case of a home invasion threatening death or grave physical or emotional harm, to channel those same emotions into using whatever force is necessary to restrain it in a righteous manner. I believe that God ordains and accomplishes his will through our actions in this life, and our acting on rightly directed feelings and emotions may be how he chooses to restrain evil in some circumstances.

What about suffering for the cause of Christ? Didn’t Jesus say that His followers would suffer? Piper’s article speaks of how the early church dealt with persecution in the book of Acts and I know that many readers will be thinking of Jesus telling Peter to put his sword away while they were in the Garden when Jesus was arrested. He told Peter that those who live by the sword will perish by the sword. Is not that a rejection of the use of arms? Well, in its context, it is clear to me that Jesus is simply stopping Peter from preventing what He knew must be done to accomplish His Father’s will. Jesus knew that He had to face the cross and die for the plan of God to unfold, and that the hour that God had ordained for that had arrived. Likewise, we are also told that we are not to further His kingdom by the point of the sword, but rather by preaching the Gospel, baptizing believers, and winning the hearts and minds of people (Matthew 28:18-20). Because the message of the Gospel commands repentance from sin and evil and turning in obedience to God, certain teachings in our message will be unpopular far more often than they are welcomed, and we are very likely to suffer persecution of varying degree in many cases. Whenever we do so, we are supposed to count ourselves blessed to suffer on his account. However, this is something entirely different than subjecting ourselves to the daily violent acts of evil men. There is a distinction to be made between suffering persecution on account of being faithful to the Lord and being murdered by a random highway robber or home invader. Jesus told His followers to expect the first as inevitable and ordained by God for His glory. For the second, He told them to be prepared.

In conclusion, I believe that there is a coherent biblical basis for the idea of armed self-defense for Christians. The principle is found in the general equity of the Old Testament Law. Jesus advised His disciples to arm themselves as one aspect of general preparedness. These are both consistent with Jesus’s teaching concerning “turning the other cheek” as that statement is made in an entirely different context than situations involving death, grave injury, or severe emotional harm. Also, God uses our prudent decisions and correctly governed anger and aggression in his efforts to restrain evil in the present world, and all of this is completely consistent with Jesus’s warning that we will face persecution, judgement, and possibly even death for the sake of the Gospel because we can correctly recognize the difference between persecution over the faith and the general evil actions of a fallen and sinful humanity.