A short video clip went viral on social media: a conservative campus speaker was attacked by a young woman who believed him to be a Christian.
She shouted obscenities, accused him of “hate speech,” and lunged toward him in a burst of rage.
The speaker, surprised but prepared, reached for a canister of pepper spray and defended himself.
Police arrived moments later and arrested the attacker.
Once in custody, the young woman insisted the speaker was a hypocrite.
“He is a Christian,” she said, “and Christians aren’t supposed to fight back!”
The irony was rich: the man wasn’t a Christian at all, but a non-Christian conservative. The woman was not a Christian, yet appealed to her understanding of Christian virtue to leverage a claim of hypocrisy.
Yet the woman’s accusation struck a chord. Many Christians, when confronted with violence or intimidation, wonder: Is it unchristian to defend myself or others?
The answer requires a full look at Scripture, history, and conscience.
Christianity is not pacifism, though it calls for meekness and mercy. The Bible teaches that human life is sacred—and that preserving it can be a moral duty.
The Biblical Foundations of Self-Defense
The Mosaic Law and the Value of Life
Exodus 22:2–3 establishes a clear principle:
If a thief is found breaking in and is struck so that he dies, there shall be no bloodguilt for him; but if the sun has risen on him, there shall be bloodguilt.
This distinction between night and day reflects moral proportionality. In darkness, an intruder’s intentions are unknown; defense is justified. In daylight, when the threat can be judged more clearly, killing may be excessive.
In other words, Scripture recognizes the right of personal defense, while placing boundaries around vengeance. The law assumes that life—including one’s own—is precious and should be protected.
The Duty to Preserve Life
Deuteronomy 22:8 commands homeowners to build a parapet (a low wall) on the roof to prevent injury. This law about architecture reveals a moral principle: God’s people are responsible to prevent unnecessary harm. The Westminster Catechism later drew on this to teach that the Sixth Commandment—“Thou shalt not kill”—also implies the duty to preserve life.
In this light, self-defense is not an act of selfishness, but of stewardship.
Biblical Examples of Lawful Defense
Nehemiah 4:13–18 records the Jews rebuilding Jerusalem’s wall with trowel in one hand and sword in the other. They prayed and trusted God, but also stood ready to defend themselves:
We made our prayer unto our God, and set a watch against them day and night.
Likewise, Esther risked her life to expose Haman’s plot, but the Jews were later authorized “to defend their lives” against those who attacked them (Esther 8:11).
These were not acts of vengeance but of justice and preservation.
Jesus, the Disciples, and the Sword
Luke 22:36 is often cited:
Let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.
Jesus was not calling His disciples to armed rebellion; He was preparing them for a dangerous world after His departure. Later, when Peter used the sword to cut off the ear of the high priest’s servant, Jesus rebuked him (John 18:10–11)—not because Peter carried a weapon, but because he wielded it rashly.
The principle is clear: possession for defense is permitted; aggression is condemned.
The Apostolic Witness
Paul in Acts 22 invoked his Roman citizenship to protect himself from unlawful beating. He didn’t meekly submit when there was a lawful means of defense.
Romans 13 further teaches that government “does not bear the sword in vain.” The state’s use of force to restrain evil reflects the same moral logic as personal self-defense: the preservation of order and life.
What the Church Has Taught Through the Ages
Scripture is our authority, but the wisdom of godly teachers helps us apply it faithfully.
John Calvin (1509–1564)
In his Commentary on Exodus 22, Calvin wrote:
If we are unjustly attacked by robbers or assassins, the Lord allows us to defend our lives, for He has committed to each the care of his life.
Calvin distinguished between private vengeance (forbidden) and lawful defense (permitted). In the Institutes he reminds Christians that government is ordained “for the punishment of the wicked and protection of the good.”
He was realistic: pacifism was no virtue when innocent lives were at stake.
Richard Baxter (1615–1691)
In A Christian Directory, Baxter counseled believers to guard against malice even in defense:
You must take heed that in defending yourselves you intend not revenge, but only the saving of your lives.
He adds:
If a man assault you suddenly to take away your life, you may defend it though it be with the killing of him that unjustly assaults you, if there be no milder way of escape.
Baxter’s moral balance—avoid cruelty, yet defend life—is a model of sober biblical ethics.
The Westminster Larger Catechism (1647)
Q135 teaches:
The duties required in the sixth commandment are all careful studies, and lawful endeavors, to preserve the life of ourselves and others… by just defense thereof against violence.
Failing to defend life, when possible, can itself be sinful (Q136):
The sins forbidden… are the neglecting or withdrawing the lawful and necessary means of preservation of life.
Thus, self-defense is not only allowed—it can be a moral duty.
Baptist Voices
Benjamin Keach and the Particular Baptists adopted similar teaching. They affirmed that while Christians should endure persecution for Christ’s name, ordinary criminal violence could be resisted. As Keach put it:
If a man will slay thee unjustly, it is no sin to flee or defend thyself.
The early Baptists saw no contradiction between self-defense and discipleship.
Modern Reformed Commentators
Charles Hodge (19th century Princeton theologian) echoed this:
Self-defense is an act of obedience to the divine law of self-preservation, when the intention is simply the protection of life against the unjust aggressor.
To refuse to protect one’s family, he said, “is to be guilty of their blood.”
The Anabaptist and Amish View: A Different Tradition
The Anabaptists of the 1500s, precursors to the Mennonites and Amish, reacted to the brutality of both Catholic and Protestant persecution. Many were tortured, drowned, or burned at the stake. Out of this suffering arose a radical commitment to non-violence.
The Schleitheim Confession of 1527, a foundational Anabaptist document, declared that Christians “shall not bear the sword, nor use force.” They interpreted Christ’s words in the Sermon on the Mount—“Resist not evil”—as an absolute command.
The Amish Context
The Amish, descending from Jakob Ammann’s 17th-century movement, maintained this principle amid centuries of hardship. They viewed separation from the world as essential to holiness, and non-resistance as obedience to Christ.
In their communities, humility, forgiveness, and simplicity are safeguards against pride and revenge. Their refusal to sue, to serve in the military, or to fight even in self-defense springs from the conviction that vengeance belongs to God alone.
Their restraint commands respect. It rebukes the violent instincts of a fallen world and models radical trust in divine providence.
The Evangelical Response
Yet evangelicals respectfully disagree. The Sermon on the Mount forbids retaliation, not protection. Jesus’ call to turn the other cheek addresses insult and persecution, not murderous assault.
Moreover, love of neighbor includes defending the innocent. To stand by while a child, spouse, or elderly parent is harmed is not humility—it’s moral negligence. The same Jesus who said “turn the other cheek” also praised the Good Samaritan for intervening to protect a wounded stranger.
Christians must therefore read the whole counsel of God. Mercy and justice, compassion and courage, must coexist. The Amish testimony against vengeance is admirable, but Scripture does not demand helplessness in the face of violence.
The Duty of Masculine Protection
A biblical man is not a brute or a bully, but he is a protector. Ephesians 5:25 commands husbands to love their wives “as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” That self-giving love may, in the fallen world, include the willingness to defend her from harm.
Paul reminds Timothy, “If anyone does not provide for his relatives… he has denied the faith” (1 Tim. 5:8). Provision includes safety. A man who passively watches his family attacked has failed not only his home but his God-given role.
This instinct for defense is built into creation. David defended his flock from lions and bears before he faced Goliath. God Himself is repeatedly called our “shield” (Psalm 28:7). Masculine strength, rightly used, reflects the protective character of the Lord.
National Defense and the Sword of Justice
If individuals may defend life, nations may do so on a larger scale. The same moral reasoning that justifies personal defense justifies military action to restrain tyranny and defend the innocent.
The Second World War remains the starkest example. The Allies’ resistance to Nazi Germany was not aggression but the defense of civilization itself. The liberation of Europe and the rescue of Jewish survivors were acts of costly mercy, not vengeance.
Likewise, during centuries of Islamic expansion into Europe, Christian nations stood as bulwarks. At Vienna in 1683, Polish King Jan Sobieski’s victory over the Ottoman army preserved the Christian West. Such defense was not unchristian—it was the preservation of faith, family, and freedom.
Romans 13 calls the ruler “God’s servant for your good.” A godly government bears the sword not to dominate but to restrain evil. Peace is preserved not by pacifism, but by justice backed with strength.
The Cosmic Dimension: War in Heaven and at the End of the Age
Self-defense is not merely an earthly principle—it mirrors the cosmic conflict between good and evil. Revelation 12 depicts Michael and the angels warring against the dragon. Spiritual beings, acting under God’s command, engage in righteous battle to protect the saints.
Christ Himself will return as a warrior. Revelation 19 describes Him riding a white horse, “judging and making war,” His robe dipped in blood, striking the nations with a sharp sword from His mouth. The Prince of Peace is also the Captain of Heaven’s Armies.
This eschatological warfare is not a contradiction of His mercy—it is the final triumph of divine justice. If heavenly beings and the Lord Himself act to restrain evil, Christians cannot claim that all force is inherently sinful.
The Christian’s Balance: Mercy Without Cowardice
The New Testament does not glorify violence; it disciplines it.
Paul says, “As much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men” (Rom. 12:18). Yet he immediately adds, “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” Sometimes “good” includes stopping an attacker, protecting a victim, or preserving one’s own life for future service.
The Christian conscience should be tender, not timid. A believer should always prefer peace—but not at the expense of truth or duty.
Practical Application: Street Evangelists and Everyday Christians
Christians who evangelize in public sometimes face hostility. If a protester merely yells or insults, responding with patience honors Christ. But if violence erupts—if fists or knives or clubs appear—non-lethal self-defense such as pepper spray or physical restraint can be a righteous act.
Such defense must never flow from rage. The goal is to create space, prevent harm, and submit to lawful authority afterward. Like Paul, Christians may invoke legal rights and seek protection from police or courts without compromising faith.
This balance between boldness and prudence keeps witness strong and conscience clear.
A Call to Rethink Christian Duty
The accusation that “a real Christian wouldn’t fight back” misunderstands the gospel. Jesus’ command to love our enemies does not cancel our obligation to protect life. Love does not require surrender to evil; it requires obedience to God.
To defend oneself—or one’s neighbor—against unjust attack is not hypocrisy but faithfulness. It honors the God who made life sacred and who entrusted each believer with the stewardship of that gift.
The Christian who refuses to kill out of hatred is righteous. The Christian who refuses to defend when he can prevent murder is negligent. Between cowardice and cruelty lies the narrow path of courage tempered by charity.
Conclusion: Strength Under Control
The gentle Savior who turned His cheek before Pilate is the same Lord who will one day crush the serpent underfoot. Christian strength must imitate His—patient, disciplined, but ready to act when justice demands.
In a violent world, believers are called not to be aggressors but guardians. To carry a weapon or a canister of pepper spray is not a failure of faith; it can be an act of stewardship. The Christian’s defense must always be measured, reluctant, and governed by love.
There is a time to flee, a time to endure, and—on rare and solemn occasions—a time to stand.
Let those who love peace prepare their hearts, their minds, and yes, when necessary, their hands.
S.D.G.,
Robert Sparkman
rob@basedchristianity.org
P.S. I would always advise a Christian to follow his Scripture-guided conscience in this regard as it is a Romans 14 issue. I have been on both sides of the issue myself. RLS.
RELATED CONTENT
Concerning the Related Content section, I encourage everyone to evaluate the content carefully.
I will continue to add videos and other items to the Related Content section as opportunities present themselves.If I have listed the content, I think it is worthwhile viewing to educate yourself on the topic, but it may contain some opinions I don’t agree with.
Feel free to offer your comments below. Respectful comments without expletives and personal attacks will be posted and I will respond to them.
Comments are closed after sixty days due to spamming issues from internet bots.
You can always send me an email at rob@basedchristianity.org if you want to comment on something afterwards, though.
If you have evidence that I am wrong about a material statement of fact, provide the evidence and I will gladly review it and make revisions if merited.
Obviously, there are some assertions that are matters of opinion that I will not change, but I always strive to be truthful. We are all capable of mistakes and misunderstandings on occasion, though.
Regarding depictions of Jesus, images accompanying the article may contain depictions of Jesus. I realize that some fellow Christians, particularly some conservative Presbyterians, consider these images to be a form of idolatry. I do not agree with their opinion on this matter. These images are for illustrative purposes and do not represent a form of worship.
I recommend these Youtube channels for good content on Christian matters: Founders Ministries, Ligonier Ministries, Grace to You, G3 Ministries, and Truth for Life. RC Sproul, Voddie Baucham, Alistair Begg, Kevin DeYoung, Albert Mohler, Tom Ascol and John MacArthur are well-known, trustworthy pastors and teachers with content across multiple forums.
Francis Schaeffer, Tom Ascol, Allie Beth Stuckey and Nancy Pearcey have some valuable materials related to cultural matters, as well.