The Insanity of the "right" to have guns!

[Wrangler]

But that’s not the end of the story in Scripture. We don’t see your scenario of battle being played out at all with the swords being used to win some kind of physical battle.

Appeal to Strawman. Now you are being overly specific AS IF the matter hinges on a type of weapon. It matters not what weapons Christ uses in the end. The point is he uses force to militarily defeat the forces of evil, PERIOD.

That is what I aim to model, the actions of my lord in the face of the enemies end.

 

[Wrangler]

So obviously Jesus was referring to the disciples in getting the spiritual sword (Which is Scripture).

Shocking disingenuousness! If Jesus were referring to a spiritual sword, why would the Apostles have to sell their coats to obtain one?

It was already explained that there is a difference in using a weapon for attack than for defense. I hope no one is buying what you are selling.

 

[Titus]

Heres another true story.
A pacifist in New York city took a job as a cab driver.
One day a pimp and his employee ie hooker,
Got into his cab.

As soon as they took off.
The pimp took out his snub nosed revolver, and pistol whipped the back of the cab drivers head.
Then the pimp asked the cab-driver if he believed in Jesus.
The pimp while holding a gun to the mans head told him about Jesus and how he needed to believe in him or he was going to hell.
The cab driver got into traffic. They came to a red light.
The driver threw his door opened and ran for his life.

That cab- driver is no longer a pacifist.
He carries daily.
Reality opens peoples eyes to the truth sometimes.

 

[Wrangler]

Let's save souls for Jesus but kill them if they get nasty.
This message in reality is, don't give a tinkers toss for dysfunctional people....eliminate them.
How do we interpret Jesus' words 'don't resist an evil man' ? Matthew 5:29

I think you meant Mat 5:39 CJB But I tell you not to stand up against someone who does you wrong. On the contrary, if someone hits you on the right cheek, let him hit you on the left cheek too!

You are falsely comparing as equal revenge with avenge. Acting to protect innocent life is not the same as seeking revenge.

Also, you are falsely equating a mere insult to a life threatening danger. A 'slap on the cheek' is a metaphor for an insult.

 

[Mantis]

The problem is not with guns per se but with a gun culture. America is a place of extremes and that includes extreme irresponsibility. People tend to react to an extremist view with another extreme view ...thinking that 2 extremes make a balance. But very few seek balance by advocating....balance! Likewise in the US we see racism being fought with more racism of another kind. Whereas a man like MLK advocated equality....balance. His arguments are being cast aside for a more extreme racist view advocated by race baiters (hucksters) like BLM.

There's nothing wrong with guns, or knives, or even explosives.

Cain killed Abel with a rock. Should we ban rocks? The problem is in the human heart. Should we own knives? Knives are the MOST popular weapon in homicides.

I own several rifles that I have used to hunt and target shoot. I would never think of those guns as weapons to be used against people.

Besides, guns don't kill.....it's the bullets.

In the US people are trained to shoot at human forms on targets. To me, that's a problem right there. In the club that I was part of it was illegal to shoot at human form targets. But I live in a moderate country (Canada).

This racism thing is fully media driven. There is not a white racist behind every tree in America like they would like you to believe. There is more black hatred of white people racism that I see.

 

[Titus]

This racism thing is fully media driven. There is not a white racist behind every tree in America like they would like you to believe. There is more black hatred of white people racism that I see.

Black Lives Matter is the black version of the KKK.
Just as black Panthers are a racist militant group.

American media demonizes the white KKK.
And justifiably so.

O! The hypocrisy! The Media glorified BLM.
So, so true there is a racist agenda in America against whites

 

[Taken]

the OP is for the crazy gun "laws" in the USA!

A citizen being Informed to REGISTER their own gun IS CRAZY!

As CRAZY as the govt asking one has to REGISTER with the Government, they bought a refrigerator, lip stick, a home, a pack of gum....

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The govt ASKING for your personal information is ONE THING...
And the MAJORITY of people who willingly hand over their personal information....DO SO BECAUSE? The same who asks attaches their FEAR tactic if one does not YEILD to their requests!

 

[Taken]

This racism thing is fully media driven. There is not a white racist behind every tree in America like they would like you to believe. There is more black hatred of white people racism that I see.

No doubt racism is a handy TACTIC...
Seriously look at Biden, a blundering idiot SUPPOSEDLY have taken a oath (multiple times) to Uphold the US Constitution....is the epitome of being a RACIST, when he announced BY SKIN color, GENDER the only person he would consider for a Supreme Court appointment.

Are y’all feeling confidant in the gang that sits as US FEDERAL Supreme Court Justices.......as themselves being JUST in the matter of court rulings?

A Supreme Court Justice, as any Judge Of ANY court, is suppose to render a ruling ACCORDING to Laws, within the Constitution...

LOL Biden’s pick....based ON Racial bias and to boot his pick...is unable to define what a WOMAN IS....lol...leaves one wondering IF “IT” is capable to define Truth, Fiction, WITHIN the Law, or whatever “IT” thinks at the moment.

 

[Behold]

IF there were ANY truth to what you are saying, Jesus would not be prophesied to return as the militarily conquering hero.

There is a context to what you are trying to understand regarding your idea of "non-resistance".

Its this.

The NT teaches that in this world you shall have Tribulation.
See that?
That is not referring to allowing a Muslim Fanatic to saw your head off for "allah".
Not at all.
But rather, the "tribulation" is "for the sake of the Cross, you will suffer".
See that?
That's a Martyr, not a gun hating politically corrected boob who wants to lay down in front of the Taliban, or allow someone to kill their family so that they can prove they didn't have the God given good sense to protect their family with a hand gun.

 

[Wrangler]

Are y’all feeling confidant in the gang that sits as US FEDERAL Supreme Court Justices.......as themselves being JUST in the matter of court rulings?

I love Huckabee's quip that the Supreme Court is NOT the Supreme Being.

 

[Lifelong_sinner]

Good thing non-Americans have no say what us Americans do.

 

[Wrangler]

When Jesus says, blessed are the peacemakers; that applies to those who stop a violent criminal in his tracks for in the most literal sense, peace is made.

 

[Taken]

I love Huckabee's quip that the Supreme Court is NOT the Supreme Being.

The USSC is simply a gang of jokesters, sitting in an exclusive cushy chamber, rendering opinions pursuant unconstitutional laws.

I can sit in my comfy recliner and cite the Founders, that if a law is Unconstitutional, it is no law at all......so why debate the unborn, when they have taken an oath to secure the rights of citizens? The govt has no business meddling in rights of individuals...or their unborn non-citizens...nor compelling the public to pay for their exclusive cushy chamber for them to discuss that which IS outside of the US constitution.

Not impressed with the SCOTUS...”I’m female, I’m black, I’ve been a judge, I’m long standing in judicial matters, I’m a scholar”.....don’t care.
Are ya at all familiar with the LIMITS of the US Constitution?
Prove it.
That seems to be conveniently MISSING when it comes time for Judgeship appointments.

 

[Titus]

Can Christians Use Self-defense and Lethal Force?

Main point in this lesson: There are not different laws for the non-Christian and Christian.

Example, if a homosexual is "married" to his partner and they both desire to become saved Christians.
They cannot get saved and somehow God pardons, justifies the sin of their homosexual fornication

No, they must stop the sin. They must no longer practise homosexuality. Or God will not save them.
This applies to ALL sin before someone desires to be saved.
You cannot practise sin, say be a serial killer and go get saved and the sin of murder is magically no longer murder in Gods eyes.
His law does not change.
Important note: I am not teaching the old covenant law of Moses.
I will only be referring to the law of Christ, the new testament covenant, Galatians 6:2.

Fact: all are under the same law.
There is not a law for the non-Christian and another law for the christian.
Example: Idolatry is a sin under Christs law for both non and Christian alike,
Revelation 21:8.

Now heres the Biblical evidence for why pacifism is not Gods will for mankind.
Pacifist's who claim to be christians teach non-christians can take jobs that use lethal force,
Examples, Police officer, military soldiers.
But a christian cannot.

It is also true that you are guilty of sin even if you ask someone else to commit the sin for you.
Example, hire a hitman.

Remember we are all held accountable to Jesus' law.
So, if a Christian calls 911 to get a police officer to kill a spouse that has told you she is going to murder you.
And has the weapon in hand. You are guilty of sin if the police officer kills your spouse.

Heres why,
Since the non-christian police office is under Christs law just as christians are.
If he uses lethal force, he has sinned if Bible Highlighter's interpretation of the scriptures is true.

Also the christian who calls upon the police officer to defend, protect him is guilty of sin because he is requesting the police officer "violate Gods law by killing another person if need be."

So, it must be true since non-christians and christians alike are under the same law.
Therefore christians can be police officers and vice versa.

If Bible Highlighter is correct. A Christian cannot call on a non-Christian like a police officer to do his "dirty work".

Proof that God approves of jobs that require physical violence.
Romans 13:1,
-let every soul be subject to the government authorities. For there is no authority except from God and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.

Police officers are Gods enforcers.
God approves of violence when justice is being carried out.

John told the Roman soldiers they had to repent.
He did not tell them they had to quit being soldiers! John did not teach pacifism.

Luke 3:14,
-Likewise the soldiers asked him, saying "And what shall we do"?
So John said to them, Do not intimidate anyone or accuse falsely, and be content with your wages.

Did John tell the soldiers to repent from their violent occupations?
Did John tell the Roman soldiers to give up being soldiers for the Roman government?
No he did not!
God approves of his people working in violent occupations.

Next example,
Cornelius was a military officer, Acts 10:1,7
-There was a certain man in Ceasera called Cornelius a centurian of what is called the Italian Regiment.
-and when the angel who spoke to him had departed, Cornelius called two of his household servants and a devout soldier from those who waited on him continually.

Cornelius is lost.
Peter commanded by God comes to Cornelius to preach the gospel to him that he might be saved.
Acts 10:34-48

Now notice, does Peter tell Cornelius he must no longer be a soldier to be a Christian?
Does Peter condemn his violent occupation?
No, Peter has no problem with Cornelius being a Christian soldier.

Peter approves of Christians in jobs that require lethal force.

Next example, the Philippian Jailer.
The Jailer job involves carrying a sword to kill if nessary.
Does Paul tell the Philippian Jailer he must quit his job to become a Christian?
No!
Paul says nothing about the Jailer carrying a sword.
Paul does not see the Philippian Jailers occupation as sinful,
Acts 16:26,27,28
-suddenly there was a great earthquake so that the foundations of the prison were shaken: and immediately all the cell doors were opened and everyone's chains were loosed.
-and the keeper of the prison awaking from sleep and seeing the prison doors open, supposing the prisoners had fled, drew his sword and was about to kill himself.
-But Paul called with a loud voice, saying Do yourself no harm, for we are all here.

Now Paul is going to preach the gospel to the Jailer.
The Jailer obeys the gospel and is saved,
Acts 16:29-36.

Did Paul teach the Jailer he could no longer use a sword being a converted christian?
No!
Paul approves of his occupation as a now born again christian using a sword.

Now for the individual protection of self and others,
Matthew 26:52, Jesus teaches a sword has its place. Not to be used for revenge.

1Timothy 5:8,
-but if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

We must provide for our families!
Now, that includes food so they do not starve.

Does anyone think that also does not include protection from child-raptists?
Of course God expects us to provide, that must include protection from those who would do our families harm!

The golden rule must be obeyed!

We are instructed to treat others the same as we would want to be treated,
Matthew 7:12,
-Therefore whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

This commandment of Jesus makes christians obligated to not allow things to happen to others that we would not want to be done to us!

If you have been given the ability by God to rescue a person who is being attacked wrongly with physical violence.
If you are capable to protect that person, you are obligated to do unto others as you would have men do unto you!

If wicked men were trying to kill you.
Would you not want other men to help you out?
Of course you would.
This is why you must defend others who are being abused if God has given you ability to do so.

The Jews were guilty of violence even though they had the Romans murder Jesus,
Acts 2:23,

Since the Jews were guilty of using other men to enact violence on Jesus.
A Christian would also be guilty if we requested a police officer to become violent with a problem.

But the Jews did this AGAINST THE LAW.
But as you see, if Bible Highlighter is correct, then Christians would be guilty if we called on the Police.

Last Paul requested help from soldiers to protect him.
Paul is requesting men that can legally be violent for his protection.
Remember all under the same law.
Therefore non-christians and christians are held to the same standard.
If it is sinfull for the non-Christians to protect Paul.
Then it is sinfull for the christian to request soldiers to protect him with violence if nessary.
Acts 23:10; 17; 23-24
Acts 23:23-24

 

[BarneyFife]

@Bible Highlighter

I knew Desmond Doss, personally, and what you say about him here is true:

"Besides, there was one Christian I know of who has even served in the military who did not take up a weapon to protect himself, and he still put his life on the line to save many lives."

But this is, quite frankly, a rather blatant falsehood:

"Granted, he was not a perfect man. He did hold to the error of the SDA Church in that says we must keep all of the 613 Old Testament Law of Moses (like keeping the Saturday Sabbath, etcetera; For the Old Law is no more because we are not under the Old Covenant contract anymore according to Scripture. Believers are to follow the commands of Jesus and His followers in the pages of the New Testament, instead)."

It's odd that it seems important to you to qualify your positive statement about him with your understanding that he wasn't perfect because he espoused error. As if being something other than Seventh-day Adventist would have made him perfect. After all, the only way you could judge him less-than-perfect would be in the same way that all men are not perfect—because all have sinned...

...or that this had anything to do with the topic of the thread at all.

(But since you brought it up:

The "Saturday Sabbath" is not a "law of Moses." It is the law of God and was etched in stone in a fearful display at Sinai by the finger of God Himself. Until about 50 years ago, virtually no one disputed this—not even unbelievers. There is only one Sabbath—the seventh day of the week as stated plainly within the commandment, and as is substantially evidenced by the dozens of languages the world over that use some form of the word "Sabbath" for the day we call "Saturday." The old covenant was never meant to be a complete system of redemption. It never saved anyone. Only the New or Everlasting Covenant has the power to do so.)

I met Brother Desmond (as he preferred to be called—he didn't care much for "Sir" or "Mr. Doss") in the early '90s when he made an appearance at a denominational convention I was also attending (I had always hoped to meet him—one of the nice things about being a Seventh-day Adventist is that those who are also high-profile, so to speak, are always willing to make themselves available to common people). He was gracious enough to talk with me for about 20 minutes. I ran into him several times after that, and we also spoke by telephone several times later that year when I was considering becoming a chaplain in the Army. Both he and a serving chaplain told me that the challenges facing a Seventh-day Adventist believer in the military were not something that would be wise to voluntarily subject oneself to in a peacetime environment. And since I had served 4 years in the Air Force long before becoming a Seventh-day Adventist, I couldn't bring a reasonable argument against their advice.

Doss was a member in good standing of the worldwide Seventh-day Adventist church until the day he died and never, during his entire life, did he believe or teach that the "Mitzvot" was incumbent upon Christians. The "Mitzvot" is not even without controversy within Judaism itself. And while the Seventh-day Adventist church does teach that some of the Old Testament laws (in addition to those of the Decalogue) are not without holy merit (as do non-Adventists—Leviticus 18:22 comes to mind) we also, as do most Christians, believe that the 1050 commands given in the New Testament are to be obeyed by Christians as well. Unless one believes we're not "under" that law, either.

I'd be interested to see if you could provide some documentation for this "613" claim you've made. You won't find it at Adventist.org or any other official website of the church.

 

[Titus]

@Bible Highlighter

I knew Desmond Doss, personally, and what you say about him here is true:

"Besides, there was one Christian I know of who has even served in the military who did not take up a weapon to protect himself, and he still put his life on the line to save many lives."

But this is, quite frankly, a rather blatant falsehood:

"Granted, he was not a perfect man. He did hold to the error of the SDA Church in that says we must keep all of the 613 Old Testament Law of Moses (like keeping the Saturday Sabbath, etcetera; For the Old Law is no more because we are not under the Old Covenant contract anymore according to Scripture. Believers are to follow the commands of Jesus and His followers in the pages of the New Testament, instead)."

It's odd that it seems important to you to qualify your positive statement about him with your understanding that he wasn't perfect because he espoused error. As if being something other than Seventh-day Adventist would have made him perfect. After all, the only way you could judge him less-than-perfect would be in the same way that all men are not perfect—because all have sinned...

...or that this had anything to do with the topic of the thread at all.

(But since you brought it up:

The "Saturday Sabbath" is not a "law of Moses." It is the law of God and was etched in stone in a fearful display at Sinai by the finger of God Himself. Until about 50 years ago, virtually no one disputed this—not even unbelievers. There is only one Sabbath—the seventh day of the week as stated plainly within the commandment, and as is substantially evidenced by the dozens of languages the world over that use some form of the word "Sabbath" for the day we call "Saturday." The old covenant was never meant to be a complete system of redemption. It never saved anyone. Only the New or Everlasting Covenant has the power to do so.)

I met Brother Desmond (as he preferred to be called—he didn't care much for "Sir" or "Mr. Doss") in the early '90s when he made an appearance at a denominational convention I was also attending (I had always hoped to meet him—one of the nice things about being a Seventh-day Adventist is that those who are also high-profile, so to speak, are always willing to make themselves available to common people). He was gracious enough to talk with me for about 20 minutes. I ran into him several times after that, and we also spoke by telephone several times later that year when I was considering becoming a chaplain in the Army. Both he and a serving chaplain told me that the challenges facing a Seventh-day Adventist believer in the military were not something that would be wise to voluntarily subject oneself to in a peacetime environment. And since I had served 4 years in the Air Force long before becoming a Seventh-day Adventist, I couldn't bring a reasonable argument against their advice.

Doss was a member in good standing of the worldwide Seventh-day Adventist church until the day he died and never, during his entire life, did he believe or teach that the "Mitzvot" was incumbent upon Christians. The "Mitzvot" is not even without controversy within Judaism itself. And while the Seventh-day Adventist church does teach that some of the Old Testament laws (in addition to those of the Decalogue) are not without holy merit (as do non-Adventists—Leviticus 18:22 comes to mind) we also, as do most Christians, believe that the 1050 commands given in the New Testament are to be obeyed by Christians as well. Unless one believes we're not "under" that law, either.

I'd be interested to see if you could provide some documentation for this "613" claim you've made. You won't find it at Adventist.org or any other official website of the church.

Acts 15:1,
-And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.

Acts 15:5,
-But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying It is nessary to circumcise them and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

Acts 15:24,
-Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettlingly your souls, saying You must be circumcised and keep the law to whom we gave no such commandment .

Galatians 2:4,
-and this occurred because of false brethren secretly brought in who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage.

To be a keeper of the Sabbath is to keep the old covenant law.
This causes one to be in bondage and not free in Christ.
Therefore those who bind Sabbath keeping, are not free.
They cannot be saved until they repent of this sin.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Wrong!
I used myself to make the point more reality than fiction.
That is just your opinion that Christians would not.
And no I would not physically attack anyone to prove a point.

So then you were lying.

As for Christians who would not do such violence.
Wel, I am not talking about nominal Christians in name only who don’t know Christ. They are not real Christians but fake or counterfeit ones.
A real Christian has Christ abiding in them and is guided by His Word (the Bible).

 

[Titus]

The "Saturday Sabbath" is not a "law of Moses." It is the law of God and was etched in stone in a fearful display at Sinai by the finger of God Himself.

Moses did not have his own law. God gave him the ten commandments. SDA try to seperate phrases in the Bible like "The law of Moses" from "law of God"
This is only done to convert folks into believing they are not both Gods law.

 

[Titus]

So then you were lying.

As for Christians who would not do such violence.
Wel, I am not talking about nominal Christians in name only who don’t know Christ. They are not real Christians but fake or counterfeit ones.
A real Christian has Christ abiding in them and is guided by His Word (the Bible).

Whatever!
Did I do any physical violence against you?
Stop making up false accusations Bible Highlighter!

As I already told you,
I would never use physical violence to prove a point.
You reported me to the administrators did you not?

 

[Titus]

A real Christian has Christ abiding in them and is guided by His Word (the Bible).

You certainly are not guided by His word on self-defense and lethal force!
You teach unbiblical pacifism.
Might as well be a Buddhist