- Joined
- May 19, 2005
- Messages
- 30,534
- Reaction score
- 10,717
- Location
- Louisiana
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
I take the context to be simply that Jesus had the ability to condemn violence but also understand that it could be necessary to defend life.Let's put both Bible versus into perspective.
In Matthew 26:52, Christ was essentially saying that anyone who takes up a weapon for vengeance will eventually die from such a hate-filled act. Or in short, "He who lives by the sword shall die by the sword."
In Luke 22:36, Christ was instructing his disciples to prepare themselves for the eventual persecution they would soon come to face. And thus, he gave them permission to buy weapons (swords) to defend themselves against the coming aggression IF they chose to do so. And as you know, none did.
LaMidRighter,
I understand what you're trying to do and can certainly empathize with your moral struggle on self defense (see his post #301), but what reference to these Bible verses goes to once again confirm is that man will use specific passages of scripture to suit their own purposes. Unless and until you place such verses in their proper context, you risk leading man down a very dark path.
My advice to you: Guard against false witness, my friend.
EDIT: Ask yourself, were the 9 victims at the AME church being persecuted for their religious belief? If your answer is NO (and if you're honest about why Dylann Roof carried out this terrible, horrific, inexcusable act then the only conclusion you can reach is NO), then it wouldn't have made sense for these church members to conceal carry in a place of worship for any reason whatsoever.
I don't keep the clip loaded or in the gun while not in use. So if the person was armed, I probably would not see it coming anyway. If they were not, I feel I would have a better chance of running or defending myself. It is hard to say, I have never had an instance where I feared anyone. No one can truly know. I would hate to shoot someone unarmed
that is a silly response. mass shootings are extremely rare-be it churches, schools or movie theaters. Yet they happen enough for Democrats to want to ban semi auto rifles (used in less than 2% of all shootings) "high capacity" (the sign of dishonesty is using that term) magazines etc. If mass shootings are prevalent enough to call for stripping away the constitutional rights of millions then its far more reasonable for people to be armed as insurance against such shootings.
I don't attend church save for funerals or weddings these days. I don't carry all the time-I always have a firearm in my car unless its illegal and the only reason why I have a gun on me now-at home is because the house across the street was the subject of an armed robbery (a very rare occurrence) and the robber has yet to be caught and I often am 100s of yards from my house due to the size of my property.
but you would never ever know I had a gun. and if I was sitting in a pew next to you, you'd never know. So your claiming it would detract from your worship is just plain BOGUS. and that you appear to be afraid of people carrying guns is not my concern. If you are afraid to carry-DO NOT but stop judging those who do
No, but you are a trained professional (cop, I think I saw you post) and it is natural for a cop to have a protection mindset...cops are never off duty nor do they retire. LOL. Can't really compare to your average Joe or gun nut.
Now all you need to do is show me where I am compromising the safety of others.
Oh dear. I guess I am a psychopath.
I carry in church, where it is permitted... and frankly whether it is permitted is a factor in whether I attend that church.
(Protip: I'm not a psychopath. I am however aware that churches are not protected by some mystic dome of peace that prevents bad people from targeting them... and just as I am not interested in being at the mercy of thugs and loonies when shopping at Walmart, ditto at church. See Luke 22:36.)
Me I would call on Jesus to save me.
look down now
Note - That is the name of my Rottweiler.
Yes, no doubt everyone else has a Rottweiler just like you. Everyone is just like you.
No, but you are a trained professional (cop, I think I saw you post) and it is natural for a cop to have a protection mindset...cops are never off duty nor do they retire. LOL. Can't really compare to your average Joe or gun nut.
I take the context to be simply that Jesus had the ability to condemn violence but also understand that it could be necessary to defend life.
When you have substantial numbers of the population needing to carry weapons in Church, your society has problems, and it just ain’t guns.
Ex-cop. Been Ex for a long time.
My Dad was Church Treasurer. He was never in LE, though he was a WW2 vet. He carried a .38 snubnose to church, with the knowledge and consent of the pastor and Deacon board. So did some of the ushers. This was back when I was a kid, before easy CCW was even widely available in my state.
And please do not use the term gun nut. It is offensive. Most gun owners are not mentally ill.
When you have substantial numbers of the population needing to carry weapons in Church, your society has problems, and it just ain’t guns.
Let's put both Bible versus into perspective.
In Matthew 26:52, Christ was essentially saying that anyone who takes up a weapon for vengeance will eventually die from such a hate-filled act. Or in short, "He who lives by the sword shall die by the sword."
In Luke 22:36, Christ was instructing his disciples to prepare themselves for the eventual persecution they would soon come to face. And thus, he gave them permission to buy weapons (swords) to defend themselves against the coming aggression IF they chose to do so. And as you know, none did.
LaMidRighter,
I understand what you're trying to do and can certainly empathize with your moral struggle on self defense (see his post #301), but what reference to these Bible verses goes to once again confirm is that man will use specific passages of scripture to suit their own purposes. Unless and until you place such verses in their proper context, you risk leading man down a very dark path.
My advice to you: Guard against false witness, my friend.
EDIT: Ask yourself, were the 9 victims at the AME church being persecuted for their religious belief? If your answer is NO (and if you're honest about why Dylann Roof carried out this terrible, horrific, inexcusable act then the only conclusion you can reach is NO), then it wouldn't have made sense for these church members to conceal carry in a place of worship for any reason whatsoever.
Well, because then all you've done is create this national state of paranoia. EVERYONE'S carrying a gun, but you don't know who. And so the moment someone takes a shot EVERYONE draws their weapon ready to "bust a cap" in somebody's ass. Do we really want to be that nation?
Many hard line, gun owners are offensive as well....I think I clearly defined my definition of a gun nut. If it doesn't apply to you, then don't take offense.
Ex-cop. Been Ex for a long time.
My Dad was Church Treasurer. He was never in LE, though he was a WW2 vet. He carried a .38 snubnose to church, with the knowledge and consent of the pastor and Deacon board. So did some of the ushers. This was back when I was a kid, before easy CCW was even widely available in my state.
And please do not use the term gun nut. It is offensive. Most gun owners are not mentally ill.
Well, because then all you've done is create this national state of paranoia. EVERYONE'S carrying a gun, but you don't know who. And so the moment someone takes a shot EVERYONE draws their weapon ready to "bust a cap" in somebody's ass. Do we really want to be that nation?
Put another way: If you wanted to create a military state, well, there you'd have it. Only instead of it being controlled by law, you'd eventually get anarchy! Why? Because EVERYONE would feel falsely empowered to do whatever they wanted because they have a gun and, as such, they'd view themselves as being quicker on the draw, possessing more bullets than the next guy's gun, or his weapon is more lethal than his opponents. So much can AND WILL go wrong when you start arming the masses most of whom WILL use guns irresponsibly.
Well, because then all you've done is create this national state of paranoia. EVERYONE'S carrying a gun, but you don't know who. And so the moment someone takes a shot EVERYONE draws their weapon ready to "bust a cap" in somebody's ass. Do we really want to be that nation?
Put another way: If you wanted to create a military state, well, there you'd have it. Only instead of it being controlled by law, you'd eventually get anarchy! Why? Because EVERYONE would feel falsely empowered to do whatever they wanted because they have a gun and, as such, they'd view themselves as being quicker on the draw, possessing more bullets than the next guy's gun, or his weapon is more lethal than his opponents. So much can AND WILL go wrong when you start arming the masses most of whom WILL use guns irresponsibly.
But your dad likely had that weapon at church for a very simple reason: To guard against church vandalism.
I can accept that, but that's different from having a gun as a member of your church Parrish just for the sake of having a gun.
But your dad likely had that weapon at church for a very simple reason: To guard against church vandalism.
I can accept that, but that's different from having a gun as a member of your church Parrish just for the sake of having a gun.
No doubt Goshin can shoot but so can I. I regularly out shoot my LEO friends.
Why should my safety be compromised?
Could someone else be harmed in me defending myself? Yes. Same for cops.
Is that even more rare than the odds of needing to defend myself? Yes.
The fact is in over 90% of cases just showing a gun will end the attack and in a mass shooting-lets just say there are bigger risks, like the guy walking around shooting people in the face.
You are projecting your delusions. This does not happen. Concealed carry owners are quite safe and a net benefit on society. You have probably interacted with plenty and never known it-thats the idea.
Its an almost cartoon-like scenario you have running through your head.
So wait--if someone carries for a reason of which you approve, this is okay--but not okay if it's for a reason you don't?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?