Christian artist

[bushido_man96]

No need to apologize, BB of C. I know that your intentions are good. I would just hate to see a hesitiation on your part because you feel like you have an obligation to someone who is attacking you.

Even those who say things like you quote, still don't realize how difficult it is to do something like that. If you plan on beating someone to death, you have to get them pretty well incapacitated first. Once they are unconcious, then the real damage gets done. Sure, there are some freak accidents that happen at times, but they are few and far between.

[The BB of C]

Thanks. That's sincerely reassuring

[KarateEd]

No need to apologize, BB of C. I know that your intentions are good. I would just hate to see a hesitation on your part because you feel like you have an obligation to someone who is attacking you.

I agree with bushido_man, no need to apologize.

Ed

[Throwdown0850]

Actually 'Thou shall not kill' is a mistranslation, although it is understandable how it came about. That particular term started with the king James bible as the first major edition to appear in (granted, dated) English. However the actual term translated from original Hebrew is 'You shall not murder'. Granted both actions involve killing, however the difference is intent and purpose/justification. For instance, lets say I don't like someone so I shoot him. Is such an action justified? On the other hand, what if someone is on a shooting rampage and I can stop them with a gun before they kill someone else. Both cases involve the action of killing, however the reasons for doing so make the difference if it was justified or not. You could say the same thing for driving. What if one day I go 100 MPH through the neighborhood to buy drugs, while the next I drive my grandmother to the hospital? I drove in both cases, however in one my driving was 'bad' and the other my driving was 'good'. What's the difference between manslaughter and murder? An act of self defense and picking fights? So it is the same for that particular commandment. That isn't to say that it is bad to want to avoid hurting someone- I'd say that is a very good thing. And lets face it- are most of the killings done in the world not done for good reasons?

wow.. I didnt know that. you guys are full of info here..

[bushido_man96]

Pretty cool stuff, huh?

[The BB of C]

I'd agree.

[seersin]

Actually 'Thou shall not kill' is a mistranslation, although it is understandable how it came about. That particular term started with the king James bible as the first major edition to appear in (granted, dated) English. However the actual term translated from original Hebrew is 'You shall not murder'. Granted both actions involve killing, however the difference is intent and purpose/justification. For instance, lets say I don't like someone so I shoot him. Is such an action justified? On the other hand, what if someone is on a shooting rampage and I can stop them with a gun before they kill someone else. Both cases involve the action of killing, however the reasons for doing so make the difference if it was justified or not. You could say the same thing for driving. What if one day I go 100 MPH through the neighborhood to buy drugs, while the next I drive my grandmother to the hospital? I drove in both cases, however in one my driving was 'bad' and the other my driving was 'good'. What's the difference between manslaughter and murder? An act of self defense and picking fights? So it is the same for that particular commandment. That isn't to say that it is bad to want to avoid hurting someone- I'd say that is a very good thing. And lets face it- are most of the killings done in the world not done for good reasons?

wow.. I didnt know that. you guys are full of info here..

Get a good strongs concordance,It has every word in hebrew9the old testament) and the actual meaning and a section for the (Greek) new testament. Like for instance if you went to Exodus 20:13,then looked up kill in the hebrew section.It gives and number flip over to the number part,and it gives the actual definition of the word in the Hebrew meaning.In this case the word kill there is not to murder,kill cold bloodedly to not murder maliciously.

PS I know I'm a little late but I havent been to these forums in a few months.

[st0ut]

OK i am a n00b on this forum and only a purple belt but what I have read on this thread leads me to belive this is dangerous. Granted I am not a christian however. i know at least my sensai is.

Self Defence:

If you do not teach strikes that can cause death or serious bodily harm this leaves your students in grave danger. Your 5'2 115 lbs female student will not be able to into a long duration fight with a male 200 lbs attacker. unless she uses strikes that are designed to immediatly stop the attacker. these strikes are going to cause serious bodily harm or death. Or are you expecting a lock and then what she is stuck trying to keep this guy on the ground and hopefully he is alone?

State of mind and body:

If your mind is clouded by a WWJD view on the world every decision you make will have to be thought out and then decided to go that route baised on a Christian morality. I see this as creating a wall between the body mind and spirit (very anti Zen) and all three will arguing over the correct coarse of action.

[/code]

[tallgeese]

With respect, stout... Of course every Christian has to weigh his or her actions against their beleif system. It's that system that defines our faith. You can't take it out of the equation when it is suddenly inconvienant for the situation. It's that kind of outlook that should permeate the life of every beleiver (still working on it myself).

So how do we address the application of those values in a sudden situation? We deal with those questions before they arise, thus removing the doubt from our actions ahead of time. Then, you can react on your programming and not your inner turmoil. It all needs to be resovled ahead of time.

As far as what people are teach and what they choose to learn, BBof C or anyone else practicing should practice whatever and however they choose. I think that those practices should be given a long and hard look as to their actual productivity is the situations that you are asking them to function in. But that's really another topic altogether.

And finally to the strikes used by smaller or weaker people to cause instant death....few and far between. As said ealier, much harder to do that to talk about. Even a good eye gouge, one of my personal favorites, comes no guarentee of success or victory on your part. Should these types of strikes be taught? Absoultly, I won't promote someone past white belt who dosen't have an understanding of eye gouging, but relying on them to even all odds is overly hopeful at best.

As for my personal stance, and that's all it is, I follow the "thou shall not murder" school of thought. For me, studying MA's is about learning to fight, to defend one's self, to survive violence. To do that, you have to consider training movements that may heavily injur or kill another person. Remember, even though the word "artist" was used in the title of the thread, there is a "martial" side to that as well. At it's heart, it's about interpersonal combat.

[st0ut]

I" So I follow that, and even further, don't even practice techniques that could cause permanent damage to an opponent.

I could go on all day with this stuff too

This is the problem i have with the smaller girl vs bigger bad guy(s)

For kata and forms I agree no sence in practicing deadly harmful things but for self defence no she must be able to do much damage in a short amount of time.

I have a 19 yo BB in my calls she is 4'8 and only 80 lbs if she where attacks following the logic here she would not be able to parctice a deadly forse strike as she would not have been able to practice it.