I know that it may seem weird that a Christian would be so supportive of gun rights. You would think that we would be for gun control because we would want to end the gun violence plaguing our nation. We...
"What about you, Brian? Where's your witness. All you do is tear down, where's the building up?" (Onlookers can SEE Michele's response to my post on "Senate passed Iraq funding bill".)
First of all, like a moth to the flame, I'm back here. Second, Michele you must've missed the part of my post two above yours on this thread:
'I'm sure I'll see Michele on the other side of ETERNITY, and we'll have a good laugh about frustrated feelings on this side.'
I truly believe that. But, I also believe that the Evangelical program, MORE OR LESS, has become about Republican talking points:
SUPPLY-SIDE ECONOMICS (Seriously, how does that coincide with the 'Sermon on the Mount'?)
PARANOIA (In your new post 'Christianity and Guns' you state, "When we were covering the Sermon on the Mount in my Gospels class, the professor mentioned that it was OK to kill someone if you were doing it to protect another but it wasn't OK to kill someone to protect your own life (that puts the value of your life above another). That's why Christians can be soldiers, they are killing to protect the citizens of their country."
Where does your gospel class meet? Is it in South Central or Compton?)
WAR (In your post "Senate Passed Iraq Funding" you're gloating about the fact that the Democrats can't override the Executive Branch of Bush-Cheney to end the war.
My brother-in-law is about to be deployed. Other troops have done multiple deployments. Thousands have died. Many are coming back to a broken VA system with psychological issues, head trauma from IED explosions, etc.
Does your post express things in a sensitive way for the above mentioned folks being affected by this prolonged war?)
And LGJ has a point: "Another day, another post that has zero to do with Reformed theology, or with anything other than simplistic Republican talking points."
Seriously Michele, Steven Colbert could read some of your posts with a straight face and verbatim on his show to get a lot of laughs. Evangelicals have gone lockstep with Bush so much, they're quite easy to caricature.
And then there's this response you had to another post about unwanted children on "The Family Research Council's Ad...": "I'm sorry but you don't get to define what pro-life means. We don't have to raise the child just to save its life."
Didn't Jesus command love?
And now you're using "ESV Matthew 10:16 "Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves." to justify blowing somebody away?
Maybe if you wanna split hairs you can find some Old Testament justification. But, this is comparing apples to oranges. Jesus and his disciples weren't armed mercenaries working for a stone-age BLACKWATER.
In fact, Jesus dying on the cross for undeserving sinners, is probably the ultimate form of nonviolence.
I did graduate from Columbine High School and lived in the area when the massacre went down. Before that we had a disgruntled X go into an Albertson's and take out some folks.
I am sympathetic to hunters' rights.
LONG STORY SHORT: If I didn't believe in Jesus, and I'll I had to go on was your posts, I'd agree with Ghandi: "I'd be a Christian, if it wasn't for Christians." You really are dragging the Christian brand through the gutter.
Still, I only mock you as an apparent ZOMBIE REPUBLICAN. I'm sure ,beneath the layers, an oil drill could get to the core and display you're divine relation to God.
makarios
June 28, 2008 12:57 PM
Not so fast dude. From the same chapter that Michelle pulls her proof text she could have used several other verses. For example:
Verse 17 - "Be on your guard against men. Meet force with greater force. Lethal force is recommended.
Verse 21 - 22 - "Brother will betray brother to death and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. All men will hate you because of me but he who stands firm to the end with a lethal weapon will be saved."
Verse 28 of the same chapter, "Do not be afraid of those who kill the body. Arm yourself so that you can kill them first."
Or from the Sermon on the Mount, chapter 5:38-44 "You have heard it said an eye for an eye but I say, do not resist a violent man. Kill him before he gets a chance to make the first move. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, shoot him between the eyes. If someone wants to sue you, shoot him in the shoulder. If someone tries to take your coat, shoot him in the gut. Give it to those who are asking for it. Kill your enemies. Blow away those who persecute you. You have heard it said, Love your neighbour and hate your enemies, But I tell you, Kill your enemies. And if you don't believe me, just as Michelle."
You Americans are a real piece of work.
Peace!!
Michele McGinty
June 28, 2008 2:08 PM
"I truly believe that. But, I also believe that the Evangelical program, MORE OR LESS, has become about Republican talking points:"
Brian, I may support capitalism, smaller government, etc. but I do so because of my view of total depravity. Do you think the Republicans do so for the same reason? We may say similar things but we do so for vastly different reasons. You may not agree that my position is biblical but you can't just call it a Republican view.
"Where does your gospel class meet? Is it in South Central or Compton?"
Glennside.
"Evangelicals have gone lockstep with Bush so much, they're quite easy to caricature."
You're comparison is simplistic because it isn't even touching on the difference of motives. Sorry but if you articulated your positions how close would they be to the Democrats? It's easy to tear down but are you able to articulate your own position and how your religion colors your view?
"Didn't Jesus command love?"
Of course that is why you wouldn't kill the person bent on harming you. You wouldn't put your life above their own. But is it loving to let my kids get killed?
"And now you're using "ESV Matthew 10:16 "Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves." to justify blowing somebody away?"
I justified it for owning a gun, not blowing someone away. How would you protect your family if you felt it was your job to do so?
"Jesus and his disciples weren't armed mercenaries working for a stone-age BLACKWATER."
Though I agree with you that they weren't armed mercenaries, they did have swords. Also, how is a citizen owning a gun equivalent to "armed mercenaries?"
"In fact, Jesus dying on the cross for undeserving sinners, is probably the ultimate form of nonviolence. "
No, it was actually a demonstration that his kingdom was not of this world:
ESV John 18:36 Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world."
If it had been, his people would have fought. Doesn't sound like a pacifist to me.
"LONG STORY SHORT: If I didn't believe in Jesus, and I'll I had to go on was your posts, I'd agree with Ghandi: "I'd be a Christian, if it wasn't for Christians." You really are dragging the Christian brand through the gutter."
Not too much I can do about that except to remind you that Christ is greater than my bad example and much more powerful. He can even overcome my bad witness as well as your's.
"Still, I only mock you as an apparent ZOMBIE REPUBLICAN. I'm sure ,beneath the layers, an oil drill could get to the core and display you're divine relation to God."
You can mock me all you want and give yourself an out because you don't like my politics (labeling me a Republican) but I don't think that you really can get around God's mandate on this:
ESV 1 John 3:23 And this is his commandment, that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another, just as he has commanded us.
You talk about the love of Christ? You might want to start with that plank in your eye.
Rob
June 28, 2008 5:51 PM
As obnoxious as you no doubt found the discussion, Michelle, I am beginning to see where you're coming from. And for that, thanks.
Guy Arthur Thomas
June 29, 2008 5:13 PM
It's not okay to use a gun to kill someone in order to protect your own life? This is what a Professor at WTS teaches? And his ridiculous assertion is that to kill someone to protect your own life is to value yours above his?
Does this clown and anyone else accepting this cockeyed premise have any idea the nonsense one would be forced to conclude if this were applied prescriptively.
Michele, you're as gullible as a goldfish if you imagine this principle to be right and even worse if you imagine it is only okay to kill to protect others.
Absolutely NOTHING in the Bible teaches this. The first divine institution created by God in human history was that of the individual. You not only have a right to protect your life you have an OBLIGATION. By killing someone else in order to prevent them from killing you is NOT valuing YOUR life above their's it adhering to the VALUES of GOD who ALREADY valued your life so much so that killing in self-defense to protect yourself is never viewed immorally or illegally in the Bible but is justified.
That professor is an IDIOT at best and a theological disease.
anonymous reincarnate
June 29, 2008 9:22 PM
"You talk about the love of Christ? You might want to start with that plank in your eye."
of course, this is the canned michele argument #6. she can attack obama, his wife, or any liberal (and does so, often). but this line hits the web whenever she gets a taste of her own medicine. i can take it... i never promised to be perfect in the lord's eyes, only a struggling human willing to point out michele's hypocrisy when i see it.
buckyblue
June 30, 2008 7:50 AM
Just more American Christian (Republican) talking points. Truly just another example of how far off course we have strayed. I don't see the mention of 'rights' at all in the Bible? BTW, every country that has successfully banned guns from their citizens (most European countries, Japan) have a fraction of the violence that we have, as in one tenth the violence. It has and does work, though I don't think it would work in America because, well, because of people like you who are more concerned with your individual rights than the larger community. Please get your facts right before posting this Republican slop.
Guy Arthur Thomas
June 30, 2008 8:31 AM
Just more American Christian (Republican) talking points. Truly just another example of how far off course we have strayed. I don't see the mention of 'rights' at all in the Bible? BTW, every country that has successfully banned guns from their citizens (most European countries, Japan) have a fraction of the violence that we have, as in one tenth the violence.
Posted by: buckyblue | June 30, 2008 7:50 AM
_____________________________________________________________
Show me the statistics PER CAPITA. After you do your research, you'll find yourself HIGHLY embarrassed. But then we won't look to see you admit that later.
Michele McGinty
June 30, 2008 8:42 AM
"Just more American Christian (Republican) talking points. "
How is wisdom ever used as a defense in American Christian/Republican circles. Show me those talking points. I haven't seen it.
"BTW, every country that has successfully banned guns from their citizens (most European countries, Japan) have a fraction of the violence that we have, as in one tenth the violence."
Do you know that Japan under reports their crimes? You would if you actually read this blog.
John T Meche III
June 30, 2008 9:02 AM
I think John Piper's words are applicable here:
"What do the supreme court ruling on guns and the martyrdom of missionaries have to do with each other?
Noël and I watched Beyond Gates of Splendor, the documentary version of End of the Spear, the story of the martyrdom of Jim Elliot, Peter Fleming, Ed McCully, Roger Youderian, and Nate Saint in Ecuador in 1956. That same day we heard that the Supreme Court decided in favor of the right of Americans to keep firearms at home for self-defense.
Here’s the connection. The missionaries had guns when they were speared to death. One of them shot the gun into the air, it appears, as he was killed, rather than shooting the natives. They had agreed to do this. The reason was simple and staggeringly Christlike:
The natives are not ready for heaven. We are.
I suspect the same could be said for almost anyone who breaks into my house. There are other reasons why I have never owned a firearm and do not have one in my house. But that reason moves me deeply. I hope you don’t use your economic stimulus check to buy a gun. Better to find some missionaries like this and support them."
Michele McGinty
June 30, 2008 10:41 AM
"Here’s the connection. The missionaries had guns when they were speared to death. One of them shot the gun into the air, it appears, as he was killed, rather than shooting the natives. They had agreed to do this. The reason was simple and staggeringly Christlike:
The natives are not ready for heaven. We are. "
Do you think that if the natives had come to torture their wives and children, they would have hesitated to protect them?
Michele McGinty
June 30, 2008 10:49 AM
"of course, this is the canned michele argument #6. she can attack obama, his wife, or any liberal (and does so, often). but this line hits the web whenever she gets a taste of her own medicine. i can take it... i never promised to be perfect in the lord's eyes, only a struggling human willing to point out michele's hypocrisy when i see it."
Just as Michele is when she see's it on the left and occasionally the right. Difference is she does so without personal attacks.
KM
June 30, 2008 1:22 PM
Michelle:
Posts like this make me just shake my head and wonder where people get these ideas. Certainly not from the bible. I know there is no point arguing because you will not change your mind. You are, however, utterly and totally wrong in your use of the bible to justify gun ownership and war. I find it sad that so many Christians think like you do.
anonymous reincarnate
June 30, 2008 2:01 PM
hang, on. let me clarify what you wrote. you said, "Just as Michele is when she see's [sic] it on the left and occasionally the right." but what you probably meant was, "just as michele is when she perceives it on the left, and as michele occasionally is when she perceives it on the right." because there's a difference in that you love to ignore the constant hypocrisy of the right, that's why i keep coming back, to fill in the gaps you leave.
"Difference is she does so without personal attacks."
what you give is no kinder to the person in your attacks than what you get back. i'm sure to you it doesn't seem fair, but hey, maybe you need thicker skin.
Michele McGinty
June 30, 2008 2:33 PM
"maybe you need thicker skin."
Please! If my skin was thin, I wouldn't allow comments.
Michele McGinty
June 30, 2008 2:38 PM
"Posts like this make me just shake my head and wonder where people get these ideas. Certainly not from the bible. I know there is no point arguing because you will not change your mind. You are, however, utterly and totally wrong in your use of the bible to justify gun ownership and war. I find it sad that so many Christians think like you do."
I agree with you that there is no arguing with people whose mind is made up, that's why I rarely argue beyond a comment or two with the commenters and will not do so with you as well.
I'm not a pacifist and stand in the tradition of the Reformed elders who went to war against England during the Revolutionary war and in their support of guns.
Michele McGinty
June 30, 2008 3:01 PM
" "just as michele is when she perceives it on the left, and as michele occasionally is when she perceives it on the right." because there's a difference in that you love to ignore the constant hypocrisy of the right,"
I tell you what, I'm a lot more willing to point it out than you are to point it out. You have never criticized Obama even though he has flip-flopped on many of the issues of the left.
anonymous reincarnate
June 30, 2008 9:32 PM
are you talking about hypocrisy, or flip-flops? i was addressing hypocrisy.
but fine, let's talk about the flip-flops. how many flip-flops from the right - more specifically from mccain - have you posted about and where are they?
how many of your perceived flip-flop posts are just on obama alone?
let's list them here and discuss them so that you can understand why you're wrong (or not) about these being flip-flops. i'm honest when i say that i understand why you would consider them to be a change in his position.
John T Meche III
July 1, 2008 12:15 AM
Well, actually, after Jim and the other guys died, the women and children went to the tribe and converted them all to Christianity. The same man who killed Jim Elliot is now a close friend of the family. Elizibeth Elliot raised her child among the very same people who murdered her husband.
Michele McGinty
July 1, 2008 8:26 AM
See? You still focus on the McCain and not Obama because you can't say anything against your candidate. You are too much of a political hack to do it.
Michele McGinty
July 1, 2008 8:30 AM
"Well, actually, after Jim and the other guys died, the women and children went to the tribe and converted them all to Christianity. The same man who killed Jim Elliot is now a close friend of the family. Elizibeth Elliot raised her child among the very same people who murdered her husband."
Um...I know the story of the Elliots, what Christian doesn't know that story? My question was based on a hypothetical. They brought their guns for a reason, right? They chose to not use them to save their own lives but would they do the same for their family. Would they have made that decision for their kids?
Paul C. Quillman
July 1, 2008 11:04 AM
I think everyone is missing the point of the Second Ammendment here. The purpose of the Second Ammendment is to allow the citizens to defend themselves against a tyrannical government. Hunting and defence from theft, murder or other things are secondary issues. The primary issue is to allow the citizens (non military) to keep the government in check.
Moonshadow
July 1, 2008 8:19 PM
They brought their guns for a reason, right?
To hunt, of course, and protect themselves from wild animals.
Do you think that if the natives had come to torture their wives and children, they would have hesitated to protect them?
They took their wives and children into knowing dangerous surroundings. Based on that, I don't think they would have resisted, even for their sake.
It's not Christian to be a pacifist
I am opposed to taking children into hostile missionary territory but I wouldn't label those who decide otherwise "not Christian." Put another way, pacifism is compatible with Christianity: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_nonviolence#Early_Church
anonymous reincarnate
July 2, 2008 4:26 AM
"See? You still focus on the McCain and not Obama because you can't say anything against your candidate. You are too much of a political hack to do it."
nope, i'm willing to focus on both of the candidates and discuss their positions, and how they have changed. what i want you to do is list where you have come out against mccain's flip-flops, as you claimed that you do. list obama's as well so that we can discuss them.
i my problems with obama. i disagree with obama's interpretation of the second amendment; i think that he's wrong there. i also wish that he had not voted to give immunity to the telecoms for aiding bush in breaking federal law.
anonymous reincarnate
July 2, 2008 2:35 PM
"See? You still focus on the McCain and not Obama because you can't say anything against your candidate. You are too much of a political hack to do it."
nope, i'm willing to focus on both of the candidates and discuss their positions, and how they have changed. what i want you to do is list where you have come out against mccain's flip-flops, as you claimed that you do. list obama's as well so that we can discuss them.
i my problems with obama. i disagree with obama's interpretation of the second amendment; i think that he's wrong there. i also wish that he had not voted to give immunity to the telecoms for aiding bush in breaking federal law.
Efi
August 6, 2008 12:22 AM
This woman actually understands the Bible upside down. So instead of trusting God to protect you, you think a gun can protect you? I am ashamed that a Christian thinks a gun can protect them and that God wants them to use a gun to protect their family. Aren't you tired of seeing the slaying of innocent victims all across you cities? You may not know it but the people who are advocating gun rights is the powerful gun lobby that has a huge influence over you country. The sell their arms to many in my continent of Africa so they can kill themselve in civil wars. In return they get diamonds, gold and oil. It's rather unfortunate that many American Christians think only about themselves. You are adulterating the gospel.Where have you kept the passage of the gospel that says you should love even your enemies? If you lose your life for Christ you gain it. If you try to protect your life, you lose it.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.
Subscribe
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
"What about you, Brian? Where's your witness. All you do is tear down, where's the building up?" (Onlookers can SEE Michele's response to my post on "Senate passed Iraq funding bill".)
First of all, like a moth to the flame, I'm back here. Second, Michele you must've missed the part of my post two above yours on this thread:
'I'm sure I'll see Michele on the other side of ETERNITY, and we'll have a good laugh about frustrated feelings on this side.'
I truly believe that. But, I also believe that the Evangelical program, MORE OR LESS, has become about Republican talking points:
SUPPLY-SIDE ECONOMICS (Seriously, how does that coincide with the 'Sermon on the Mount'?)
PARANOIA (In your new post 'Christianity and Guns' you state, "When we were covering the Sermon on the Mount in my Gospels class, the professor mentioned that it was OK to kill someone if you were doing it to protect another but it wasn't OK to kill someone to protect your own life (that puts the value of your life above another). That's why Christians can be soldiers, they are killing to protect the citizens of their country."
Where does your gospel class meet? Is it in South Central or Compton?)
WAR (In your post "Senate Passed Iraq Funding" you're gloating about the fact that the Democrats can't override the Executive Branch of Bush-Cheney to end the war.
My brother-in-law is about to be deployed. Other troops have done multiple deployments. Thousands have died. Many are coming back to a broken VA system with psychological issues, head trauma from IED explosions, etc.
Does your post express things in a sensitive way for the above mentioned folks being affected by this prolonged war?)
And LGJ has a point: "Another day, another post that has zero to do with Reformed theology, or with anything other than simplistic Republican talking points."
Seriously Michele, Steven Colbert could read some of your posts with a straight face and verbatim on his show to get a lot of laughs. Evangelicals have gone lockstep with Bush so much, they're quite easy to caricature.
And then there's this response you had to another post about unwanted children on "The Family Research Council's Ad...": "I'm sorry but you don't get to define what pro-life means. We don't have to raise the child just to save its life."
Didn't Jesus command love?
And now you're using "ESV Matthew 10:16 "Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves." to justify blowing somebody away?
Maybe if you wanna split hairs you can find some Old Testament justification. But, this is comparing apples to oranges. Jesus and his disciples weren't armed mercenaries working for a stone-age BLACKWATER.
In fact, Jesus dying on the cross for undeserving sinners, is probably the ultimate form of nonviolence.
I did graduate from Columbine High School and lived in the area when the massacre went down. Before that we had a disgruntled X go into an Albertson's and take out some folks.
I am sympathetic to hunters' rights.
LONG STORY SHORT: If I didn't believe in Jesus, and I'll I had to go on was your posts, I'd agree with Ghandi: "I'd be a Christian, if it wasn't for Christians." You really are dragging the Christian brand through the gutter.
Still, I only mock you as an apparent ZOMBIE REPUBLICAN. I'm sure ,beneath the layers, an oil drill could get to the core and display you're divine relation to God.
Not so fast dude. From the same chapter that Michelle pulls her proof text she could have used several other verses. For example:
Verse 17 - "Be on your guard against men. Meet force with greater force. Lethal force is recommended.
Verse 21 - 22 - "Brother will betray brother to death and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. All men will hate you because of me but he who stands firm to the end with a lethal weapon will be saved."
Verse 28 of the same chapter, "Do not be afraid of those who kill the body. Arm yourself so that you can kill them first."
Or from the Sermon on the Mount, chapter 5:38-44 "You have heard it said an eye for an eye but I say, do not resist a violent man. Kill him before he gets a chance to make the first move. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, shoot him between the eyes. If someone wants to sue you, shoot him in the shoulder. If someone tries to take your coat, shoot him in the gut. Give it to those who are asking for it. Kill your enemies. Blow away those who persecute you. You have heard it said, Love your neighbour and hate your enemies, But I tell you, Kill your enemies. And if you don't believe me, just as Michelle."
You Americans are a real piece of work.
Peace!!
"I truly believe that. But, I also believe that the Evangelical program, MORE OR LESS, has become about Republican talking points:"
Brian, I may support capitalism, smaller government, etc. but I do so because of my view of total depravity. Do you think the Republicans do so for the same reason? We may say similar things but we do so for vastly different reasons. You may not agree that my position is biblical but you can't just call it a Republican view.
"Where does your gospel class meet? Is it in South Central or Compton?"
Glennside.
"Evangelicals have gone lockstep with Bush so much, they're quite easy to caricature."
You're comparison is simplistic because it isn't even touching on the difference of motives. Sorry but if you articulated your positions how close would they be to the Democrats? It's easy to tear down but are you able to articulate your own position and how your religion colors your view?
"Didn't Jesus command love?"
Of course that is why you wouldn't kill the person bent on harming you. You wouldn't put your life above their own. But is it loving to let my kids get killed?
"And now you're using "ESV Matthew 10:16 "Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves." to justify blowing somebody away?"
I justified it for owning a gun, not blowing someone away. How would you protect your family if you felt it was your job to do so?
"Jesus and his disciples weren't armed mercenaries working for a stone-age BLACKWATER."
Though I agree with you that they weren't armed mercenaries, they did have swords. Also, how is a citizen owning a gun equivalent to "armed mercenaries?"
"In fact, Jesus dying on the cross for undeserving sinners, is probably the ultimate form of nonviolence. "
No, it was actually a demonstration that his kingdom was not of this world:
ESV John 18:36 Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world."
If it had been, his people would have fought. Doesn't sound like a pacifist to me.
"LONG STORY SHORT: If I didn't believe in Jesus, and I'll I had to go on was your posts, I'd agree with Ghandi: "I'd be a Christian, if it wasn't for Christians." You really are dragging the Christian brand through the gutter."
Not too much I can do about that except to remind you that Christ is greater than my bad example and much more powerful. He can even overcome my bad witness as well as your's.
"Still, I only mock you as an apparent ZOMBIE REPUBLICAN. I'm sure ,beneath the layers, an oil drill could get to the core and display you're divine relation to God."
You can mock me all you want and give yourself an out because you don't like my politics (labeling me a Republican) but I don't think that you really can get around God's mandate on this:
ESV 1 John 3:23 And this is his commandment, that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another, just as he has commanded us.
You talk about the love of Christ? You might want to start with that plank in your eye.
As obnoxious as you no doubt found the discussion, Michelle, I am beginning to see where you're coming from. And for that, thanks.
It's not okay to use a gun to kill someone in order to protect your own life? This is what a Professor at WTS teaches? And his ridiculous assertion is that to kill someone to protect your own life is to value yours above his?
Does this clown and anyone else accepting this cockeyed premise have any idea the nonsense one would be forced to conclude if this were applied prescriptively.
Michele, you're as gullible as a goldfish if you imagine this principle to be right and even worse if you imagine it is only okay to kill to protect others.
Absolutely NOTHING in the Bible teaches this. The first divine institution created by God in human history was that of the individual. You not only have a right to protect your life you have an OBLIGATION. By killing someone else in order to prevent them from killing you is NOT valuing YOUR life above their's it adhering to the VALUES of GOD who ALREADY valued your life so much so that killing in self-defense to protect yourself is never viewed immorally or illegally in the Bible but is justified.
That professor is an IDIOT at best and a theological disease.
"You talk about the love of Christ? You might want to start with that plank in your eye."
of course, this is the canned michele argument #6. she can attack obama, his wife, or any liberal (and does so, often). but this line hits the web whenever she gets a taste of her own medicine. i can take it... i never promised to be perfect in the lord's eyes, only a struggling human willing to point out michele's hypocrisy when i see it.
Just more American Christian (Republican) talking points. Truly just another example of how far off course we have strayed. I don't see the mention of 'rights' at all in the Bible? BTW, every country that has successfully banned guns from their citizens (most European countries, Japan) have a fraction of the violence that we have, as in one tenth the violence. It has and does work, though I don't think it would work in America because, well, because of people like you who are more concerned with your individual rights than the larger community. Please get your facts right before posting this Republican slop.
Just more American Christian (Republican) talking points. Truly just another example of how far off course we have strayed. I don't see the mention of 'rights' at all in the Bible? BTW, every country that has successfully banned guns from their citizens (most European countries, Japan) have a fraction of the violence that we have, as in one tenth the violence.
Posted by: buckyblue | June 30, 2008 7:50 AM
_____________________________________________________________
Show me the statistics PER CAPITA. After you do your research, you'll find yourself HIGHLY embarrassed. But then we won't look to see you admit that later.
"Just more American Christian (Republican) talking points. "
How is wisdom ever used as a defense in American Christian/Republican circles. Show me those talking points. I haven't seen it.
"BTW, every country that has successfully banned guns from their citizens (most European countries, Japan) have a fraction of the violence that we have, as in one tenth the violence."
Do you know that Japan under reports their crimes? You would if you actually read this blog.
I think John Piper's words are applicable here:
"What do the supreme court ruling on guns and the martyrdom of missionaries have to do with each other?
Noël and I watched Beyond Gates of Splendor, the documentary version of End of the Spear, the story of the martyrdom of Jim Elliot, Peter Fleming, Ed McCully, Roger Youderian, and Nate Saint in Ecuador in 1956. That same day we heard that the Supreme Court decided in favor of the right of Americans to keep firearms at home for self-defense.
Here’s the connection. The missionaries had guns when they were speared to death. One of them shot the gun into the air, it appears, as he was killed, rather than shooting the natives. They had agreed to do this. The reason was simple and staggeringly Christlike:
The natives are not ready for heaven. We are.
I suspect the same could be said for almost anyone who breaks into my house. There are other reasons why I have never owned a firearm and do not have one in my house. But that reason moves me deeply. I hope you don’t use your economic stimulus check to buy a gun. Better to find some missionaries like this and support them."
"Here’s the connection. The missionaries had guns when they were speared to death. One of them shot the gun into the air, it appears, as he was killed, rather than shooting the natives. They had agreed to do this. The reason was simple and staggeringly Christlike:
The natives are not ready for heaven. We are. "
Do you think that if the natives had come to torture their wives and children, they would have hesitated to protect them?
"of course, this is the canned michele argument #6. she can attack obama, his wife, or any liberal (and does so, often). but this line hits the web whenever she gets a taste of her own medicine. i can take it... i never promised to be perfect in the lord's eyes, only a struggling human willing to point out michele's hypocrisy when i see it."
Just as Michele is when she see's it on the left and occasionally the right. Difference is she does so without personal attacks.
Michelle:
Posts like this make me just shake my head and wonder where people get these ideas. Certainly not from the bible. I know there is no point arguing because you will not change your mind. You are, however, utterly and totally wrong in your use of the bible to justify gun ownership and war. I find it sad that so many Christians think like you do.
hang, on. let me clarify what you wrote. you said, "Just as Michele is when she see's [sic] it on the left and occasionally the right." but what you probably meant was, "just as michele is when she perceives it on the left, and as michele occasionally is when she perceives it on the right." because there's a difference in that you love to ignore the constant hypocrisy of the right, that's why i keep coming back, to fill in the gaps you leave.
"Difference is she does so without personal attacks."
what you give is no kinder to the person in your attacks than what you get back. i'm sure to you it doesn't seem fair, but hey, maybe you need thicker skin.
"maybe you need thicker skin."
Please! If my skin was thin, I wouldn't allow comments.
"Posts like this make me just shake my head and wonder where people get these ideas. Certainly not from the bible. I know there is no point arguing because you will not change your mind. You are, however, utterly and totally wrong in your use of the bible to justify gun ownership and war. I find it sad that so many Christians think like you do."
I agree with you that there is no arguing with people whose mind is made up, that's why I rarely argue beyond a comment or two with the commenters and will not do so with you as well.
I'm not a pacifist and stand in the tradition of the Reformed elders who went to war against England during the Revolutionary war and in their support of guns.
" "just as michele is when she perceives it on the left, and as michele occasionally is when she perceives it on the right." because there's a difference in that you love to ignore the constant hypocrisy of the right,"
I tell you what, I'm a lot more willing to point it out than you are to point it out. You have never criticized Obama even though he has flip-flopped on many of the issues of the left.
are you talking about hypocrisy, or flip-flops? i was addressing hypocrisy.
but fine, let's talk about the flip-flops. how many flip-flops from the right - more specifically from mccain - have you posted about and where are they?
how many of your perceived flip-flop posts are just on obama alone?
let's list them here and discuss them so that you can understand why you're wrong (or not) about these being flip-flops. i'm honest when i say that i understand why you would consider them to be a change in his position.
Well, actually, after Jim and the other guys died, the women and children went to the tribe and converted them all to Christianity. The same man who killed Jim Elliot is now a close friend of the family. Elizibeth Elliot raised her child among the very same people who murdered her husband.
See? You still focus on the McCain and not Obama because you can't say anything against your candidate. You are too much of a political hack to do it.
"Well, actually, after Jim and the other guys died, the women and children went to the tribe and converted them all to Christianity. The same man who killed Jim Elliot is now a close friend of the family. Elizibeth Elliot raised her child among the very same people who murdered her husband."
Um...I know the story of the Elliots, what Christian doesn't know that story? My question was based on a hypothetical. They brought their guns for a reason, right? They chose to not use them to save their own lives but would they do the same for their family. Would they have made that decision for their kids?
I think everyone is missing the point of the Second Ammendment here. The purpose of the Second Ammendment is to allow the citizens to defend themselves against a tyrannical government. Hunting and defence from theft, murder or other things are secondary issues. The primary issue is to allow the citizens (non military) to keep the government in check.
They brought their guns for a reason, right?
To hunt, of course, and protect themselves from wild animals.
Do you think that if the natives had come to torture their wives and children, they would have hesitated to protect them?
They took their wives and children into knowing dangerous surroundings. Based on that, I don't think they would have resisted, even for their sake.
It's not Christian to be a pacifist
I am opposed to taking children into hostile missionary territory but I wouldn't label those who decide otherwise "not Christian." Put another way, pacifism is compatible with Christianity: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_nonviolence#Early_Church
"See? You still focus on the McCain and not Obama because you can't say anything against your candidate. You are too much of a political hack to do it."
nope, i'm willing to focus on both of the candidates and discuss their positions, and how they have changed. what i want you to do is list where you have come out against mccain's flip-flops, as you claimed that you do. list obama's as well so that we can discuss them.
i my problems with obama. i disagree with obama's interpretation of the second amendment; i think that he's wrong there. i also wish that he had not voted to give immunity to the telecoms for aiding bush in breaking federal law.
"See? You still focus on the McCain and not Obama because you can't say anything against your candidate. You are too much of a political hack to do it."
nope, i'm willing to focus on both of the candidates and discuss their positions, and how they have changed. what i want you to do is list where you have come out against mccain's flip-flops, as you claimed that you do. list obama's as well so that we can discuss them.
i my problems with obama. i disagree with obama's interpretation of the second amendment; i think that he's wrong there. i also wish that he had not voted to give immunity to the telecoms for aiding bush in breaking federal law.
This woman actually understands the Bible upside down. So instead of trusting God to protect you, you think a gun can protect you? I am ashamed that a Christian thinks a gun can protect them and that God wants them to use a gun to protect their family. Aren't you tired of seeing the slaying of innocent victims all across you cities? You may not know it but the people who are advocating gun rights is the powerful gun lobby that has a huge influence over you country. The sell their arms to many in my continent of Africa so they can kill themselve in civil wars. In return they get diamonds, gold and oil. It's rather unfortunate that many American Christians think only about themselves. You are adulterating the gospel.Where have you kept the passage of the gospel that says you should love even your enemies? If you lose your life for Christ you gain it. If you try to protect your life, you lose it.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.