Jump to content
IGNORED

Pastor claims bible says guns are ok


ayin jade

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  29
  • Topic Count:  593
  • Topics Per Day:  0.08
  • Content Count:  55,875
  • Content Per Day:  7.55
  • Reputation:   27,626
  • Days Won:  271
  • Joined:  12/29/2003
  • Status:  Offline

So let me guess... The ones on this thread who are for guns, either own a gun or their wife or husband owns one, and the ones here who are against guns don't own one.

I think we're missing a point here, there is nothing wrong with police officers owning guns to protect the public and the military protecting their country, and of course there is nothing wrong with protecting someone or ourselves if we own a gun. However, for the ones who do own a gun as a means of protection "just in case" JUST IN CASE SOMETHING GOES WRONG ...who do you rely on protecting you more efficiently, your gun or God? Do you believe you and your families are safer owning gun? what if you didn't own one do you believe God would let something happen to you or your family before it was your time if you didn't own a gun?

That's the whole point of my personal debate, God's Will in a "Christian's" life will be done no matter what, if you have a gun then He might make you use it to protect someone or yourself, but if you don't own one He still will protect you and whoever else He needs to protect. Owning a gun is a personal choice but it won't prolong your life or anyone else's life if it isn't His will to do so.

I actually rely on God to guide me in protecting myself and my wife and maybe others with my weapons....     just because you have guns or any other weapons doesn't mean you intend on killing anyone......   

 

I might add that I'm not the kind of person who sets around waiting for God to hand me things on a platter......     When I need something I am more attuned to asking him to help me do it or get it rather than asking him to do it for me, or send someone by to do it for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  29
  • Topic Count:  593
  • Topics Per Day:  0.08
  • Content Count:  55,875
  • Content Per Day:  7.55
  • Reputation:   27,626
  • Days Won:  271
  • Joined:  12/29/2003
  • Status:  Offline

 

 

 

does it say that it's bad to die by the sword even in the context of the scripture...   I've pondered on that for some number of years.

Interesting thought, never thought of it like that. However, I look at this way. Jesus is the example we are to follow. Jesus was never violent. Now some may say, hold up a minute, what about when Jesus made the whip, and overturned the money changers tables. wasn't that violent? I say no it was not a violent act, and I'll give you 2 reasons why. 1st, even the pharisees response wasn't about violence but " what sign is this that you show us"? Even the pharisees who had opposed Jesus at every turn recognized it as a sign. A sign, a divinely inspired act (Which by the way is what I've been saying is the only exception) and not a violent act. 2nd, When Jesus was buried, he was put in a rich mans tomb....why? The bible says because it was to fulfill Isaiah 53:9, which says he was buried with the rich because he had done no violence. So back to my point, Jesus never responded with violence and neither did the 12. from the book of Acts onward. Jesus said we are in a new covenant, which included turning the other check, not responding with an eye for an eye, which Jesus said we are not to do.

 

Simply put, motive I think is irrelevant. We are to be known by our love, not because we respond with violence.

 

I don't know about dying from the sword being bad, but David couldn't build the Temple of God because of violence,    so clearly there are consequences for violence.

 

Interesting thought, you'll have me thinking on that one for a while. lol 

 

 

1 Kings 5:2 And Solomon sent to Hiram, saying,

5:3 "Thou knowest how that David my father could not build an house unto the name of the LORD his God for the wars which were about him on every side, until the LORD put them under the soles of his feet.

5:4 But now the LORD my God hath given me rest on every side, so that there is neither adversary nor evil occurrent.

 

It seems to me that David could not build the temple because of all the violence around him having to defend Israel........   personally I don't see the problem as him being a violent person, but too busy violently defending the people.

 

however he did have that one murder on his hands, even though he didn't actually commit it himself.

 

I got the idea from the verse below

 

1 Chronicles 28:3

 But God said unto me, Thou shalt not build an house for my name, because thou hast been a man of war, and hast shed blood.

 

Ok, that wasn't the same as what i was looking at, but I can see where you get that from, however I think God put David in the position of a warrior and I kind of find it hard to believe he would then hold it against him........       Shed blood......     Well he basically did have his wife's husband killed by sending him into battle with that in mind.....    God didn't have him do that, nor perform the adultery with her...    That's kind of where I was coming from....

 

But we all have our own walks with the Lord and not all expected to be or do the same things......    and I'm good with that in all of us

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  28
  • Topic Count:  338
  • Topics Per Day:  0.05
  • Content Count:  15,676
  • Content Per Day:  2.46
  • Reputation:   8,498
  • Days Won:  39
  • Joined:  10/25/2006
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/27/1985

 

First it doesn't matter. If you say your going to or had, either way your still in the conversation. Second I can tell by your very reply that your angry because we don't hold your view. Your very comment here shows that and while i don't know if you intended it it reeks of arrogance. The "I'm right and your wrong and living in sin" attitude. It doesn't lead to a healthy discussion. I can say the same about you and it will just turn into a giant fight.

So instead of us getting all worked up, how about we start over. If you want to have a calm respectful discussion or debate about whether the ownership of firearms and their use then let us do so. But if all you want to do is stand on your soapbox and scream angrily-then perhaps its time to agree to disagree and you step out of the debate like you already said you did.

And for the record I have never attacked you I've just disagreed with you and listed why. If you want to convince me I'm wrong-your going to have to learn the difference between an attack and a disagreement. In fact in my last post I even said and I quote I respect where your coming from.

You want to start over, I have no problem with that. I will start with reaping and sowing.

 

What does reaping and sowing have to do with guns? Let me explain. If you take a seed, lets say an apple seed and plant it in the ground when it is time reap what you have sown you will have apples. The same goes for any and all seeds. Whatever the seed is, that is what will be there to harvest at reaping time. It doesn't matter WHY you plant the seed, just that you plant a seed. Every action and word is a seed. 

 

The above is a biblical principle. The bible talks about it directly or indirectly a lot. So what does this have to do with guns? Simple, violence is a seed like so many other things. One of my favorite verses talks about this same principle with violence in mind.

 

Revelation 13:10

 He who leads into captivity shall go into captivity; he who kills with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.

 

Violence is a seed, like all seeds it doesn't matter why it is planted, it doesn't matter what the motive is behind it being planted, no all that matters is if it is planted or not. because once the seed of violence is planted, you will reap a harvest of violence.

 

 

 

Sorry for the late reply, I havent been able to get on until now, but I feel that verse is taken out of context, that verse is part of a prophecy concerning end times-if you take it like you are meaning it to, then now the Bible is in contradiction to itself, because Jesus himself commanded His disciples to sell their garments and buy a sword (luke 22:36) Why would he order His disciples to purchase a weapon that was evil?

 

Lets compare the sword and the gun. A gun, can be used for many things-offense, (war) defense, as well as food gathering. You can't  call gathering food evil-God commanded of us to have dominion over the earth. So the gun, does have a practical purpose besides the killing of humans. A Sword on the other hand-can only do two things-kill others (offensive) or defend oneself against an attacker. Its one and only purpose, is to kill. period. You cannot hunt with a sword (kinda hard to take a deer down with one!) Yet, Jesus told His disciples to purchase them. And later, in the garden, notice, Jesus did not rebuke Peter for having the sword that He told Peter to buy-nor did He order Peter to get rid of it, instead He rebuked Him on the use of it-Jesus basically said this is the wrong time.

 

I know, the standard come back to Jesus ordering the disciples to buy swords-was that Jesus had a "reason" well, it doesn't even matter what that reason is. If swords were evil, then Jesus could not have told His disciples to buy them. If Jesus told His disciples to do something evil-no matter what the reason, then Jesus is not God. A perfect God would not tell us to break His own commandments, so by that logic, we can only assume that the ownership of swords (or guns) is not, a sin. At all. You cannot say that it is, otherwise you are attacking the deity of Christ Himself. Even your verse in revelation-does not say that it is a sin to own a sword, just to kill by it.

 

What is a sin-or is not a sin, depends on what you do with the weapon of choice. I think we can all agree, going out and murdering someone-be it with a sword, knife, gun, car or any other weapon-is wrong, and is a sin. But according to OT law there is a time and place-where it is lawful-and ok, to use a weapon in self defense. Many of these have been brought up already so I won't bother repeating them-but before you throw out the argument that we are no longer under the law-your right, we are not under the law, but that doesn't mean the law is thrown out. The law, was put in place so we know what sin is (romans 7:7) So if the law defines sin-and the law allows for self defense, then obviously, defending yourself-whether its by sword, or by gun, is not a sin. It is not the weapon that makes a person violent-it is ones heart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  44
  • Topic Count:  6,178
  • Topics Per Day:  0.88
  • Content Count:  43,784
  • Content Per Day:  6.23
  • Reputation:   11,227
  • Days Won:  58
  • Joined:  01/03/2005
  • Status:  Offline

 

I think the thread has derailed over issues of faith and what is apparently perceived as a lack of faith from those who believe you can defend yourself.

 

I am no longer seeing guns as the issue here.  I think the issue may have been defense from point a onwards...after all, that is what a Christian would presumably be

using a gun for?

 

 

As the OP Im ok with the topic derailing. It has been and continues to be an interesting discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  62
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  1,113
  • Content Per Day:  0.26
  • Reputation:   442
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  06/06/2012
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  10/17/1975

Sorry for the late reply, I havent been able to get on until now, but I feel that verse is taken out of context, that verse is part of a prophecy concerning end times-if you take it like you are meaning it to, then now the Bible is in contradiction to itself, because Jesus himself commanded His disciples to sell their garments and buy a sword (luke 22:36) Why would he order His disciples to purchase a weapon that was evil?

 

Lets compare the sword and the gun. A gun, can be used for many things-offense, (war) defense, as well as food gathering. You can't  call gathering food evil-God commanded of us to have dominion over the earth. So the gun, does have a practical purpose besides the killing of humans. A Sword on the other hand-can only do two things-kill others (offensive) or defend oneself against an attacker. Its one and only purpose, is to kill. period. You cannot hunt with a sword (kinda hard to take a deer down with one!) Yet, Jesus told His disciples to purchase them. And later, in the garden, notice, Jesus did not rebuke Peter for having the sword that He told Peter to buy-nor did He order Peter to get rid of it, instead He rebuked Him on the use of it-Jesus basically said this is the wrong time.

 

I know, the standard come back to Jesus ordering the disciples to buy swords-was that Jesus had a "reason" well, it doesn't even matter what that reason is. If swords were evil, then Jesus could not have told His disciples to buy them. If Jesus told His disciples to do something evil-no matter what the reason, then Jesus is not God. A perfect God would not tell us to break His own commandments, so by that logic, we can only assume that the ownership of swords (or guns) is not, a sin. At all. You cannot say that it is, otherwise you are attacking the deity of Christ Himself. Even your verse in revelation-does not say that it is a sin to own a sword, just to kill by it.

 

What is a sin-or is not a sin, depends on what you do with the weapon of choice. I think we can all agree, going out and murdering someone-be it with a sword, knife, gun, car or any other weapon-is wrong, and is a sin. But according to OT law there is a time and place-where it is lawful-and ok, to use a weapon in self defense. Many of these have been brought up already so I won't bother repeating them-but before you throw out the argument that we are no longer under the law-your right, we are not under the law, but that doesn't mean the law is thrown out. The law, was put in place so we know what sin is (romans 7:7) So if the law defines sin-and the law allows for self defense, then obviously, defending yourself-whether its by sword, or by gun, is not a sin. It is not the weapon that makes a person violent-it is ones heart.

See in your response is my problem and why I remain unconvinced. You as well as others keep using that same verse, that same 1 verse and that's it. It's like this entire POV is built around the 1 verse about Jesus saying go buy a Sword. I have given multiple verses that states we are not to respond to violence with violence but that we are called to peace, and every single time I'm told I'm mishandling scripture. Remembering that Jesus said

 

Matthew 5:38-39

You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth'. 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also 

 

Remembering Jesus said the above can you show me where Jesus or the 12 or Paul taught we are to respond to violence with violence in the bible. I ask in the bible and not opinion because every verse I give I am told I am mishandling and using wrong. Also, remember we are not held to the Old testament covenant but the New. We don't sacrifice Animals, or take ritual baths before entering the temple of God. We live under a New and better covenant where Jesus said the above and left us the example to follow of never responding to violence with violence.

 

Respond to this how you like, I mean it's not my place to tell you how to post. However, with all due respect I don't want to respond to opinion, I am looking for scripture. For me, I look at things like this and I ask myself, ' Why do I believe what I do about violence and guns or whatever the subject is?'. " Is my beliefs based on scripture or Personal preference,  opinion, tradition, fear, or any other outside source other than the bible"?  Because if I hold on to a belief that is not based on scripture, from Genesis to revelation then I must let it go. Lastly, I honestly believe that the Pro-gun responses I have been receiving are ignoring a lot of scripture about us being called to peace. I also believe it's ignored for a good reason.  If you admit we are called to peace and not to respond with violence to violence, then the burden to prove an exception falls to you. Please show me in the bible where Jesus taught that we are to respond to violence with violence.

 

Added later----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

P.S. Remembering we are under the New Testament, which was sealed with the Crucifixion. I keep hearing about defending oneself.  Can you show me someone defending themselves taking the Life of the attacker in the New testament? Their is plenty of times were the 12 or Paul's life was in danger. How come they never responded with violence ? How come they never defended themselves? Why are we better than them, that we get to love our life and defend ourselves and they didn't?

 

How come there is such a contrast from how the Old Testament Saints responded to violence compared to how the New Testament Saints responded to violence?

Edited by firestormx
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  62
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  1,113
  • Content Per Day:  0.26
  • Reputation:   442
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  06/06/2012
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  10/17/1975

 

 

 

 

does it say that it's bad to die by the sword even in the context of the scripture...   I've pondered on that for some number of years.

Interesting thought, never thought of it like that. However, I look at this way. Jesus is the example we are to follow. Jesus was never violent. Now some may say, hold up a minute, what about when Jesus made the whip, and overturned the money changers tables. wasn't that violent? I say no it was not a violent act, and I'll give you 2 reasons why. 1st, even the pharisees response wasn't about violence but " what sign is this that you show us"? Even the pharisees who had opposed Jesus at every turn recognized it as a sign. A sign, a divinely inspired act (Which by the way is what I've been saying is the only exception) and not a violent act. 2nd, When Jesus was buried, he was put in a rich mans tomb....why? The bible says because it was to fulfill Isaiah 53:9, which says he was buried with the rich because he had done no violence. So back to my point, Jesus never responded with violence and neither did the 12. from the book of Acts onward. Jesus said we are in a new covenant, which included turning the other check, not responding with an eye for an eye, which Jesus said we are not to do.

 

Simply put, motive I think is irrelevant. We are to be known by our love, not because we respond with violence.

 

I don't know about dying from the sword being bad, but David couldn't build the Temple of God because of violence,    so clearly there are consequences for violence.

 

Interesting thought, you'll have me thinking on that one for a while. lol 

 

 

1 Kings 5:2 And Solomon sent to Hiram, saying,

5:3 "Thou knowest how that David my father could not build an house unto the name of the LORD his God for the wars which were about him on every side, until the LORD put them under the soles of his feet.

5:4 But now the LORD my God hath given me rest on every side, so that there is neither adversary nor evil occurrent.

 

It seems to me that David could not build the temple because of all the violence around him having to defend Israel........   personally I don't see the problem as him being a violent person, but too busy violently defending the people.

 

however he did have that one murder on his hands, even though he didn't actually commit it himself.

 

I got the idea from the verse below

 

1 Chronicles 28:3

 But God said unto me, Thou shalt not build an house for my name, because thou hast been a man of war, and hast shed blood.

 

Ok, that wasn't the same as what i was looking at, but I can see where you get that from, however I think God put David in the position of a warrior and I kind of find it hard to believe he would then hold it against him........       Shed blood......     Well he basically did have his wife's husband killed by sending him into battle with that in mind.....    God didn't have him do that, nor perform the adultery with her...    That's kind of where I was coming from....

 

But we all have our own walks with the Lord and not all expected to be or do the same things......    and I'm good with that in all of us

 

Me and Sevenseas were having a nice little conversation about that shed blood. She brought up it could be Uriah's blood that God was talking about and not all the war.  I admitted I had never thought of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  764
  • Topics Per Day:  0.18
  • Content Count:  7,626
  • Content Per Day:  1.82
  • Reputation:   1,559
  • Days Won:  44
  • Joined:  10/03/2012
  • Status:  Offline

How does the idea above in bold about today's military and law enforcement conform with passages like Romans 3 for example?

Rom. 3:1-7

1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7 Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.

God bless,

GE

I don't see a contradiction between the 2. Are you implying that all military and all police only follow God and not worldly law and standards all the time? If not I don't see the problem. I don't think I have ever met a cop that deserved respect.

Read the passage again brother. We respect authority (police, military) not because they deserve it but because that is honoring God. It is a respect of the position. I think you are confusing it with respecting individuals who serve in that position. Some serve well. Others do not. Do you see?

God bless,

GE

How is saying that police and the military follow worldly laws and worldly standards violate this piece of scripture? Are just trying to pick a fight?

I was simply going off of what you said here:

First, Thank you for encouraging me to read the Bible. How could any child of God have a complaint about that.

I figured you'd welcome being pointed and encouraged to read Scripture. And I'm trusting the Holy Spirit to be the Holy Spirit by speaking through God's Word. What is God trying to say to us here?

Not trying to pick a fight. Trying to learn together.

God bless,

GE

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  28
  • Topic Count:  338
  • Topics Per Day:  0.05
  • Content Count:  15,676
  • Content Per Day:  2.46
  • Reputation:   8,498
  • Days Won:  39
  • Joined:  10/25/2006
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/27/1985

Firestorm you claim I was only using the one verse. Well, first-if you had read my entire reply you would see that I didnt-i made a very strong argument using old testament law. If you choose to ignore everything else I said that's fine-but don't sit here and say that's all I'm using.

Second yes I bring it up because no one-to date including you-has been able to refute it. You still haven't. How can a God order you to break His rules-for any reason whatsoever, and still be a just God? He can't. I don't care how you spin it Jesus won't order you to sin. So obviously owning weapons is not a sin. In fact no where in the Bible does it say that, it is not biblical. Even the verses you brought up only deal with the use of said weapons-not whether or not you can own them.

And you can't just use the new testament you have to include the old. It is part of the bible and its all profitable to teaching, reproof and doctrine-the apostle Paul said that. Paul also said the law was given so that we know what is and what is not sin. If we ignore the old testament we are ignoring the apostle paul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  62
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  1,113
  • Content Per Day:  0.26
  • Reputation:   442
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  06/06/2012
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  10/17/1975

Firestorm you claim I was only using the one verse. Well, first-if you had read my entire reply you would see that I didnt-i made a very strong argument using old testament law. If you choose to ignore everything else I said that's fine-but don't sit here and say that's all I'm using.

Second yes I bring it up because no one-to date including you-has been able to refute it. You still haven't. How can a God order you to break His rules-for any reason whatsoever, and still be a just God? He can't. I don't care how you spin it Jesus won't order you to sin. So obviously owning weapons is not a sin. In fact no where in the Bible does it say that, it is not biblical. Even the verses you brought up only deal with the use of said weapons-not whether or not you can own them.

And you can't just use the new testament you have to include the old. It is part of the bible and its all profitable to teaching, reproof and doctrine-the apostle Paul said that. Paul also said the law was given so that we know what is and what is not sin. If we ignore the old testament we are ignoring the apostle paul.

So what you are saying is that you are incapable of answering my questions in post # 291. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  62
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  1,113
  • Content Per Day:  0.26
  • Reputation:   442
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  06/06/2012
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  10/17/1975

 

 

 

 

How does the idea above in bold about today's military and law enforcement conform with passages like Romans 3 for example?

Rom. 3:1-7

1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7 Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.

God bless,

GE

I don't see a contradiction between the 2. Are you implying that all military and all police only follow God and not worldly law and standards all the time? If not I don't see the problem. I don't think I have ever met a cop that deserved respect.

 

Read the passage again brother. We respect authority (police, military) not because they deserve it but because that is honoring God. It is a respect of the position. I think you are confusing it with respecting individuals who serve in that position. Some serve well. Others do not. Do you see?

God bless,

GE

 

How is saying that police and the military follow worldly laws and worldly standards violate this piece of scripture? Are just trying to pick a fight?

 

I was simply going off of what you said here:

First, Thank you for encouraging me to read the Bible. How could any child of God have a complaint about that.

I figured you'd welcome being pointed and encouraged to read Scripture. And I'm trusting the Holy Spirit to be the Holy Spirit by speaking through God's Word. What is God trying to say to us here?

Not trying to pick a fight. Trying to learn together.

God bless,

GE

 

If you have a question, then ask, but please don't patronize me or try to lead me around by the nose. If you have a point , just say it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...