Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 7
He claims, “If it’s sin for us, then it’s sin for others as well,” and then shifts the focus from legislation to calling individuals (soldier, executioner, woman considering abortion) to repentance; what challenges or objections rise up in you against that claim, and what would it require to treat “other people’s jobs” as moral discipleship issues?
Another way to ask: Nathan says, “If it’s sin for us, then it’s sin for others too,” and focuses on calling individuals (like soldiers, executioners, or someone considering abortion) to repent. What makes you push back on that, and what would it take to treat people’s jobs as a discipleship issue?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
Nathan’s teaching challenges the common impulse to excuse violence as “just their job” or “government work,” insisting that if Christians believe certain killing would be sin for them, they should also view it as morally serious for others and lovingly call individuals to repentance. The transcript doesn’t list specific objections, but it implies this requires courage, relational closeness, and a willingness to prioritize discipleship over political solutions.
- Nathan states plainly: “if that’s sin for us, then it’s sin for others as well.”
- He shifts from policy to people: “we do focus on the individual… call other individuals to repentance.”
- He names examples: “an executioner… a soldier… a woman making a decision about abortion.”
- He downplays legislation: “instead of pushing for political legislation, that’s not our business.”
- He appeals to 1 Corinthians 5: “we’re not called to judge this world… judge matters inside the church,” while still seeing repentance as part of the Great Commission.