Littlelambseativy Posted May 23, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 230 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 4,941 Content Per Day: 0.95 Reputation: 2,003 Days Won: 14 Joined: 02/08/2010 Status: Offline Share Posted May 23, 2015 Where man has no gun, he has a knife, if no knife he has a club, if no club he has stones....if one is bent on murder, the handiest weapon available will do. How many in the Middle East are stoned to death ..or knifed. If you knew someone was coming to do you harm, would you not defend yourself? Where guns are permitted there is much less murder....a great deterrent. Can't say the same for finding and aiming with a stone... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdemoss Posted May 23, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 59 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,402 Content Per Day: 0.99 Reputation: 2,154 Days Won: 28 Joined: 02/10/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/26/1971 Share Posted May 23, 2015 Why is it that when this topic is discussed those on the side of using violent means for protection of self, family and liberty of nation use logic instead of showing where Jesus, Paul, Peter or John taught to fight others? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew T. Posted May 23, 2015 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 9 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 481 Content Per Day: 0.15 Reputation: 537 Days Won: 2 Joined: 04/20/2015 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/08/1959 Share Posted May 23, 2015 Why is it that when this topic is discussed those on the side of using violent means for protection of self, family and liberty of nation use logic instead of showing where Jesus, Paul, Peter or John taught to fight others? I guess because it's a given that Jesus is just as present in the Old Testament as He is in the New. Grace did not change the fact that there is sometime a need for war... all the way to the end of the book in Revelation. It's not hard for me to figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdemoss Posted May 23, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 59 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,402 Content Per Day: 0.99 Reputation: 2,154 Days Won: 28 Joined: 02/10/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/26/1971 Share Posted May 23, 2015 Why is it that when this topic is discussed those on the side of using violent means for protection of self, family and liberty of nation use logic instead of showing where Jesus, Paul, Peter or John taught to fight others? I guess because it's a given that Jesus is just as present in the Old Testament as He is in the New. Grace did not change the fact that there is sometime a need for war... all the way to the end of the book in Revelation. It's not hard for me to figure. Ah the old fig tree. Got it. It is easy to see in the Old Testament so no need to prove it in the new. Sorry I can't accept that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted May 23, 2015 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 598 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,132 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,859 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted May 23, 2015 Why is it that when this topic is discussed those on the side of using violent means for protection of self, family and liberty of nation use logic instead of showing where Jesus, Paul, Peter or John taught to fight others? I guess because it's a given that Jesus is just as present in the Old Testament as He is in the New. Grace did not change the fact that there is sometime a need for war... all the way to the end of the book in Revelation. It's not hard for me to figure. Ah the old fig tree. Got it. It is easy to see in the Old Testament so no need to prove it in the new. Sorry I can't accept that. if you take the position of the complete pacifist that you seem to be talking about here, we would not be a free nation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OakWood Posted May 23, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 867 Topics Per Day: 0.24 Content Count: 7,331 Content Per Day: 2.00 Reputation: 2,860 Days Won: 31 Joined: 04/09/2014 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/28/1964 Share Posted May 23, 2015 OldSchool2 said in post 1: Faith and Firearms: Should Christians Own Guns? Under the Old Covenant, murder was forbidden (Deuteronomy 5:17), but killing in a war commanded by God was required (1 Samuel 15:3). But under the New Covenant, which Christians are under (Matthew 26:28, Jeremiah 31:31), Christians are commanded to never harm anyone, even in self-defense (Matthew 5:39, Matthew 26:52). They are to be as harmless as doves (Matthew 10:16c). For Christians are commanded to love even their enemies (Matthew 5:44), and this means they must do them no harm (Romans 13:10a, Matthew 7:12). It is the meek who will inherit the earth (Matthew 5:5, Psalms 37:11). Christians don't employ physical weapons or any other violence against people (2 Corinthians 10:3-5, Ephesians 6:12-18). Instead, Jesus at his first coming set the example for what believers are to do when they are physically attacked by people (1 Peter 2:19-23). They are to go meekly like sheep to the slaughter (Romans 8:36), just like Jesus did (Isaiah 53:7). Obedient believers don't fear death (Hebrews 2:15), and don't love their lives unto death (Revelation 12:11b), but hate their lives in this world, so that they might retain eternal life (John 12:25, Mark 8:34-38). For obedient believers know that death is no loss for them, but gain (Philippians 1:21), as it brings their still-conscious souls into heaven to be with Jesus (2 Corinthians 5:8), which is far better than remaining in this world (Philippians 1:23). During the future tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24, believers (not in hiding) will have to face martyrdom with patience and faith to the end (Revelation 13:7-10, Revelation 14:12-13, Revelation 20:4, Matthew 24:9-13), just as believers have always had to spiritually overcome in the face of martyrdom (e.g. Revelation 2:10-11). That's simply not scriptural. You have misunderstood it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdemoss Posted May 23, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 59 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,402 Content Per Day: 0.99 Reputation: 2,154 Days Won: 28 Joined: 02/10/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/26/1971 Share Posted May 23, 2015 Why is it that when this topic is discussed those on the side of using violent means for protection of self, family and liberty of nation use logic instead of showing where Jesus, Paul, Peter or John taught to fight others? I guess because it's a given that Jesus is just as present in the Old Testament as He is in the New. Grace did not change the fact that there is sometime a need for war... all the way to the end of the book in Revelation. It's not hard for me to figure. Ah the old fig tree. Got it. It is easy to see in the Old Testament so no need to prove it in the new. Sorry I can't accept that. if you take the position of the complete pacifist that you seem to be talking about here, we would not be a free nation. Where did I say I take any position? I simply am asking questions and seeking answers. You assign a position to me by reading into my post using speculative imagination it appears. I want someone to defend their position of agression using the New Testament. You declare that we could not be a free nation without the use of violent force. How can you declare such as true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted May 23, 2015 Share Posted May 23, 2015 Gary, Why do I need a verse that says it's okay for a Christian to defend his/her family??? Point to a verse in the teachings of Jesus that prohibits beating your wife. Show me ONE verse where Jesus says anything against rape or child molestation. You can't. The Bible doesn't cover every single situation that a person can encounter. So I don't need a verse that says you can defend your family even with violence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted May 23, 2015 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 598 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,132 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,859 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted May 23, 2015 Why is it that when this topic is discussed those on the side of using violent means for protection of self, family and liberty of nation use logic instead of showing where Jesus, Paul, Peter or John taught to fight others? I guess because it's a given that Jesus is just as present in the Old Testament as He is in the New. Grace did not change the fact that there is sometime a need for war... all the way to the end of the book in Revelation. It's not hard for me to figure. Ah the old fig tree. Got it. It is easy to see in the Old Testament so no need to prove it in the new. Sorry I can't accept that. if you take the position of the complete pacifist that you seem to be talking about here, we would not be a free nation. Where did I say I take any position? I simply am asking questions and seeking answers. You assign a position to me by reading into my post using speculative imagination it appears. I want someone to defend their position of agression using the New Testament. You declare that we could not be a free nation without the use of violent force. How can you declare such as true? I will repeat myself "If you take the position of the complete pacifist that you seem to be talking about here......." I did not accuse you of taking any position, just what IF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missmuffet Posted May 23, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 34 Topic Count: 1,991 Topics Per Day: 0.48 Content Count: 48,689 Content Per Day: 11.80 Reputation: 30,343 Days Won: 226 Joined: 01/11/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted May 23, 2015 This is why I do not go into "having guns" debates.It is usually a heated argument and many are very defensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts