The Full Armor of God has No Protection for the back. Why?

[bornagainathiest]

Ephesians  6 : 10 - 18

 

¹⁰ Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. 

¹¹ Put on the full armor of God, so that you can TAKE YOUR STAND against the devil’s schemes. 

¹² For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

¹³ Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to STAND YOUR GROUND, and after you have done everything, TO STAND. 

¹⁴ STAND FIRM THEN, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, 

¹⁵ and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. 

¹⁶ In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 

¹⁷ Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.

¹⁸ And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the Lord’s people.

 

The apostle Paul exhorts the Christian to put on the full armor of God.

 

This consists of a belt, a breastplate, footwear, a shield, a helmet and a sword.

 

But no protective armor for the Christian's back.

 

Why is this?

[★ Citsonga ★]

That's so God can stab you in the back.

[Thurisaz]

To be fair, as far as I know many armor designs are at least weaker at the back than they are at the front. You're supposed to wear that for fighting, and that tends to mean the danger comes from your front side

[TheRedneckProfessor]

You don't need it because:

1.  You're not supposed to run away.

2.  god has your back.

[Jeff]

because when youre making shit up, sometimes you make a mistake 

[bornagainathiest]

13 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

You don't need it because:

1.  You're not supposed to run away.

2.  god has your back.

 

You have it right, Prof.

The full armor of God has no protection for a Christian's back - because they should STAND their ground and not run away.

The apostle Paul says this four (4) times in the Ephesians quote in the OP.  (See above, highlighted in RED.)

So, are there any recent incidences in Ex-C where a Christian has stood their ground and not run away?  

 

Here, perhaps?   http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76496-existence-of-the-god-of-the-bible/  Where the Christian didn't even arrive, to stand his ground?

 

Here?  http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76642-conversion/  Where the Christian ran away from giving a specific example of a radical conversion?

 

Here?  http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76643-the-bible/  Where the Christian ran away from justifying his claim with evidence?

 

Here?  http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76413-genesis-5/  Where the Christian ran away from justifying his claim with evidence?

 

Here?  http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76408-archeology/?page=1  Where the Christian ran away from answering the questions of 7 different Ex-Christians?

 

Here? http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76485-thoughts/ Where the Christian ran away from answering his own questions, when they were put to him?

 

Here? http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76484-voices/  Where the Christian ran away from answering the questions and requests of 4 different Ex-Christians?

 

Here? http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76336-moral-law/  Where the Christian ran away from answering the questions and requests of 5 different Ex-Christians?

 

Here? http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76414-true-believers/?page=1 Where the Christian ran away from answering the questions of 4 different Ex-Christians?

 

Here? http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76343-athiests-and-belief/?page=1 Where the Christian ran away from answering the questions of 4 different Ex-Christians?

 

Here? http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76345-please-answer-ex-christians/ Where the Christian ran away from answering the questions of 8 different Ex-Christians?

 

 

 

.

.

.

'nuff said?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[LogicalFallacy]

If I may also bring to everyone's attention:

 

 

Once we got down to tin tacks this Christian fled as if 10,000 lions were after him. In reality there were only two!

[bornagainathiest]

How long has the Christian in those two threads been running away, LF?

 

Could you check and give us a figure (days, weeks, months) please?

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

[LogicalFallacy]

Certainly

 

The In the Beginning thread has queries outstanding from @bornagainathiest and myself as follows:

 

BAA Last bump 23rd March 2017. Queries as at today outstanding for 208 days

 

LF last bump April 25 2017. Queries as at today outstanding for 106 days

The last reply from Ironhorse to any query in that thread was on January 25 2017.

 

 

For the The Simplicity of the Christian message thread queries outstanding from BAA and myself:

 

BAA Last query April 24. Outstanding 17 days

LF last query April 11. Outstanding 30 Days

The last responses from Ironhorse to this thread were one line assertions not justified - simply his opinion.

 

Thanks

LF

 

[bornagainathiest]

Thanks, LF.  

 

The usual bill of fare for we Lions is... Christian meat.

 

A meal that virtually prepares itself.

 

All we have to do is wait and by their own conduct, they will prepare themselves for us.

 

 

 

[Joshpantera]

 

 

You have it right, Prof.

The full armor of God has no protection for a Christian's back - because they should STAND their ground and not run away.

The apostle Paul says this four (4) times in the Ephesians quote in the OP.  (See above, highlighted in RED.)

So, are there any recent incidences in Ex-C where a Christian has stood their ground and not run away?  

 

Here, perhaps?   http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76496-existence-of-the-god-of-the-bible/  Where the Christian didn't even arrive, to stand his ground?

 

Here?  http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76642-conversion/  Where the Christian ran away from giving a specific example of a radical conversion?

 

Here?  http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76643-the-bible/  Where the Christian ran away from justifying his claim with evidence?

 

Here?  http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76413-genesis-5/  Where the Christian ran away from justifying his claim with evidence?

 

Here?  http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76408-archeology/?page=1  Where the Christian ran away from answering the questions of 7 different Ex-Christians?

 

Here? http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76485-thoughts/ Where the Christian ran away from answering his own questions, when they were put to him?

 

Here? http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76484-voices/  Where the Christian ran away from answering the questions and requests of 4 different Ex-Christians?

 

Here? http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76336-moral-law/  Where the Christian ran away from answering the questions and requests of 5 different Ex-Christians?

 

Here? http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76414-true-believers/?page=1 Where the Christian ran away from answering the questions of 4 different Ex-Christians?

 

Here? http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76343-athiests-and-belief/?page=1 Where the Christian ran away from answering the questions of 4 different Ex-Christians?

 

Here? http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/76345-please-answer-ex-christians/ Where the Christian ran away from answering the questions of 8 different Ex-Christians?

 

 

 

.

.

.

'nuff said?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Quite clever. Thanks for putting this problem in their faces. It's quite the problem, really. 

[Joshpantera]

On 5/10/2017 at 6:03 PM, bornagainathiest said:

Thanks, LF.  

 

The usual bill of fare for we Lions is... Christian meat.

 

A meal that virtually prepares itself.

 

All we have to do is wait and by their own conduct, they will prepare themselves for us.

 

 

 

 

A more fitting rendition of the tune, might be, "...because WE are weak and THEY are strong, yes I love Jesus...." 

 

Christians are in fact some of the weakest in mind. Certain varieties of non-christians, however, can be very strong in mind. Thank god this sort of thing can be demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt. The highest of IQ apologists, are still apologists. They're still stuck with a ball and chain that requires stepping out of in order to ever really get anywhere, regardless of credentials, regardless of IQ, regardless of everything. 

[bornagainathiest]

 

 

A more fitting rendition of the tune, might be, "...because WE are weak and THEY are strong, yes I love Jesus...." 

 

Christians are in fact some of the weakest in mind. Certain varieties of non-christians, however, can be very strong in mind. Thank god reason this sort of thing can be demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt. This highest of IQ apologists, are still apologists. They're still stuck with a ball and chain that requires stepping out of in order to ever really get anywhere, regardless of credentials, regardless of IQ, regardless of everything. 

 

I've just fixed your latest message, Josh.

 

Don't fret about it.  

 

Old habits die hard.

 

[Joshpantera]

I stand corrected, BAA. 

 

Another thought here is that we're little guys with a stone and sling shot that can take down an arrogant giant, with that little stone. You've struck those idiots square in the forehead! And they've tumbled down. You've taken heads! They're the Philistines of their own story for crying out loud....

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

I just always assumed the Roman Breastplate they were used to seeing covered the back also ?

[bornagainathiest]

You would think so, wouldn't you DB?

No Roman soldier in his right mind would go into battle without his full armor.  His panoplia.  https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/panoply  Yet here we have the apostle Paul clearly explaining that the panoplia of the Christian is different.  Paul uses the word twice.  In Ephesians 6 : 11 and 13.  http://biblehub.com/greek/panoplian_3833.htm  

 

Paul would have known that no suit of armor is complete without a backplate.

He grew up and lived in the Roman world and would have seen the soldiers of Rome and it's client states almost every day.  The same would have true of anyone living in Ephesus at that time.  Paul would have known that any Ephesian hearing his epistle would do a double take and wonder why he didn't mention any spiritual armor to protect the Christian's back.  So can you see what's he's doing here?  

 

Paul's using an attention-grabbing, literary device.

A soldier with no back armor!  Unheard of!  How can this be?  What's going on?  And so, by using this device, he gets the Ephesians to think more carefully and more deeply about the meaning of his words.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

[LogicalFallacy]

Might I propose a simpler solution?

 

Perhaps Paul when he is writing this simply couldn't come up with a use for a spiritual back plate so left it out?

 

Hmm I think I'll scrap my own proposal, Paul doesn't seem short on metaphors.

 

What he is doing though is creating a sense of a fight which excites the reader and motivates them to 'stand firm' in the faith. In short he is creating an emotional response which strengthens the allegiance to the new religion. Quite clever.

 

You see the same thing today when various interest groups call for a fight for this or that, or stand against this or that. It creates a "yes we can!" feeling.

[whitehorse]

 

Ephesians  6 : 10 - 18

 

¹⁰ Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. 

¹¹ Put on the full armor of God, so that you can TAKE YOUR STAND against the devil’s schemes. 

¹² For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

¹³ Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to STAND YOUR GROUND, and after you have done everything, TO STAND. 

¹⁴ STAND FIRM THEN, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, 

¹⁵ and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. 

¹⁶ In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 

¹⁷ Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.

¹⁸ And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the Lord’s people.

 

The apostle Paul exhorts the Christian to put on the full armor of God.

 

This consists of a belt, a breastplate, footwear, a shield, a helmet and a sword.

 

But no protective armor for the Christian's back.

 

Why is this?

It's metaphorical armour, so it has no real world application.

[bornagainathiest]

 

It's metaphorical armour, so it has no real world application.

 

Agree, Whitecloud.

 

But here's the rub.  

Christians don't believe that God's armor is metaphorical.  They believe that it does have a real world application.   They believe that verse 12 is an accurate description of the real world.   That reality is filled with invisible spirits who are bent upon evil.  Which is why Paul made such a big deal of telling Christians to STAND THEIR GROUND in the face of these demonic attacks and not to show their backs to the enemy.   Any soldier of God who STANDS FIRM has no need of spiritual protection for their back - because they are commanded never to show their back to the enemy.  This explains why the FULL armor of God isn't full in an real world sense.  It's only full in a spiritual, other-worldly sense.

 

If you check out posts # 6, 7 and 9, there's plenty of evidence that the Christians, Jon and Ironhorse haven't stood their ground in this forum.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

 

[whitehorse]

 

 

Agree, Whitecloud.

 

But here's the rub.  

Christians don't believe that God's armor is metaphorical.  They believe that it does have a real world application.   They believe that verse 12 is an accurate description of the real world.   That reality is filled with invisible spirits who are bent upon evil.  Which is why Paul made such a big deal of telling Christians to STAND THEIR GROUND in the face of these demonic attacks and not to show their backs to the enemy.   Any soldier of God who STANDS FIRM has no need of spiritual protection for their back - because they are commanded never to show their back to the enemy.  This explains why the FULL armor of God isn't full in an real world sense.  It's only full in a spiritual, other-worldly sense.

 

If you check out posts # 6, 7 and 9, there's plenty of evidence that the Christians, Jon and Ironhorse haven't stood their ground in this forum.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

 

You're right, to them it has real world applications. Once they are protected in the spiritual, then the physical will be uninterrupted by their agenda.

 

I think I'll change my opinion here, it's more mental armour than metaphorical. I think they read those passages and mentally imagine each piece of amour going on, like Iron Man.

 

 

 

 

 

[Mak]

Hello,

Just as the back of one Soldier is defended by other Soldiers.

Just that way God wants our back to be protected by the fellow believers.

God wants us to be a part of the Body of Christ.

Thank you

[TheRedneckProfessor]

41 minutes ago, Mak said:

Hello,

Just as the back of one Soldier is defended by other Soldiers.

Just that way God wants our back to be protected by the fellow believers.

God wants us to be a part of the Body of Christ.

Thank you

Sorry, Mak.  I knew too many other believers to think that's true.  The army of god is the only army that kills its own wounded.

[midniterider]

Maybe he wants to check out our back side.

 

Why not just wear an iron chariot?

[Justus]

Quote

 

This consists of a belt, a breastplate, footwear, a shield, a helmet and a sword.

 

But no protective armor for the Christian's back.

 

Why is this?

 

Well that might be what you interpret as the full armor of God

but I would say it it is like what is written in Mark 10:21
Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him,

One thing thou lackest: 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

12 hours ago, Justus said:

Well that might be what you interpret as the full armor of God

Nobody is interpreting anything here, JustAss.  The scripture makes it plain what the "full armour of god" is; thus, interpretation is unnecessary.