Jumpstarter 7 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 7

In the “restrain an attacker” scenario (school shooter, abuser), the speakers emphasized taking harm oneself, nonviolent restraint, and crying out to God because “God can paralyze people…better than I can”; what does that reveal about God’s power and our faith assumptions, and how would your reactions change if you truly believed intervention begins with prayer rather than control?

Another way to ask: What does the “restrain an attacker” example teach about trusting God’s power instead of taking control? How would you act differently if you really believed the first move is prayer, even in danger?

Direct Answer The teaching assumes God is actively powerful in crisis—able to stop evil in ways we can’t—and exposes how quickly we default to control instead of faith. If intervention truly begins with prayer, the first impulse would be to cry out to God, then act in a Christlike way (even taking harm oneself) rather than harming the attacker.

Support from Transcript:

Tony says Christians shouldn’t “stand there and look the other way,” but he would want to “step in and take the harm.”
He allows for “restraining…in a nonviolent way,” “just to try to hold them,” not killing or harming.
He confesses: “Too often…I don’t cry out to God quick enough.”
Key claim: “God can paralyze people. He can blind people. He can disable people better than I can ever do it.”
Dean adds mission-story examples (e.g., prayer stopping bullets, guns jamming) as illustrations of God’s intervention.
Another speaker warns we’re “reactionary,” so we must ask God to form a Christ-centered reflex before crisis.

Discussion Follow-ups What does your “first move” in fear reveal about your theology of God? How could regular prayer and obedience now shape your instinctive response when a real emergency hits?

Jumpstarter 7 of 10

Add your phone number?

Thank you!

Jumpstarter 7 of 10