[ Home | Eschatology | Bible Studies | Classics | Articles | Sermons | Apologetics | Search | F.A.Q. ]

Author Topic: Gun Toting Ministers?  (Read 3062 times)

laurenp

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: Gun Toting Ministers?
« Reply #15 on: December 20, 2015, 02:58:52 AM »
What about the pilgrims who would walk to church with guns because they were constantly being attacked by Indians in the beginning? Same concept? Actually that makes me wonder....is self defense biblical? If someone is trying to kill you, do you let them? That can't be right. But can you harm or even kill someone if they are trying to kill you? Or especially your wife and kids? You have the duty to protect their lives, but can you lawfully kill another soul in the process? I would *assume* so....but but it does say turn the other cheek, which I'm not sure if that's to be interpreted literally...also thou shalt not kill, those who live by the sword, love your enemies, etc. But that just begs so many other related questions...like the death penalty, war, etc. It would be a hard and grievous thing to kill an attacker and know that that man just went to hell. But even more grievous would it be to fail to protect your kids and let them be slain, possibly in a horrific way. I guess the broad and basic question should be asked- is it EVER lawful for a Christian to kill another human being? Including Christians serving in the army, Christian police, Christians in government administering capital punishment, etc. Should genuine Christians avoid these occupations, knowing they will likely have to kill people?

Kenneth White

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 298
  • Gender: Male
  • Thinking Christians, Intelligent Theology
Re: Gun Toting Ministers?
« Reply #16 on: December 20, 2015, 08:46:26 AM »
What about the pilgrims who would walk to church with guns because they were constantly being attacked by Indians in the beginning? Same concept?

Isn't "what about" the same concept as "what if?" I think that answering scripture with these phrases is the easy way to try and get around God's word concerning fear of those who can kill the body. The Pilgrims have to answer for themselves, we have to answer for what we do today. We can't base our behavior and theology on what the Pilgrims did nearly two centuries ago. The Pilgrims weren't all peace loving peaceful people, history shows they were as much to blame (or more) than the native Americans. These Pilgrims also burned people they claimed were witches. Wht don't we ask, What about that behavior? My point is that we all can use the defense of "what about" when we want to defend something that we want to do. I've been in this forum for over 10 years and I hear "what about" to defend everything, including abortion, accepting homosexuals, embracing free will and divorce. Couldn't I just as easily say what about the native Americans at that time? This was their land, so didn't they have the right to defend themselves against the often conniving, cheating and encroaching Pilgrims?

All I'm saying is that it is a tangled web when we look to history to try and define Christian behavior and theology instead of the bible. Tony is a conscientious Christian and therefore he gave the Christian example of Stephen, but there are many more martyrs. Do you think those people had any right to kill Stephen? No. So why didn't Stephen take up the sword and defend himself rather than sit humbly and meek as Christ did, and ask God not to lay his unjust death to these murderer's charge? That's christian selflessness. Maybe because he was a real Christian, as opposed to the self righteous, witch burning, tax evading, lawyers, Pharisees and hypocrites of our time. Maybe he actually followed Christ's direction and example that we are not to look for an eye for an eye. Because that leaves everyone blind.

"Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. Matthew 5:38-39"

We can say what if someone beat us and put out our eye, are we then justified to defend ourselves by attacking him back and putting out his eye? The church today would say of course, that's justice. No, that's because (for the most part) they are of the flesh. But as Tony said, the Christian path is different from the carnal path of the world. Yes, this is not the natural inclination because we are still in the flesh and our will apart from God is to react carnally just like the world. Yet it is the spiritual inclination that should drive us because we are a new creation in Christ. Read Matthew 5:38-39 again. Christ taught it, Stephen lived it unto death, and we should hold to it despite our carnal side that rebels against it.

Proverbs 1:5-6 "A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels: To understand a proverb, and the interpretation; the words of the wise, and their dark sayings."

Mitchell

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 34
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: Gun Toting Ministers?
« Reply #17 on: December 20, 2015, 06:33:47 PM »
You're right. You are in the minority of conservative Christians. Both you and Kenneth. I'm not going to turn the other cheek when someone attacks me. Sorry. That's just not smart. And a pastor has a right to defend his house from intruders. God gave us a brain in our heads to think, it's not just there as a place for hats.

Davis

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 37
  • I'm a llama!
Re: Gun Toting Ministers?
« Reply #18 on: July 11, 2016, 08:17:30 PM »
Sometimes being in the minority is a good thing Mitchell.

Fred

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 292
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: Gun Toting Ministers?
« Reply #19 on: July 12, 2016, 08:28:42 AM »
Sometimes being in the minority is a good thing Mitchell.

And most times, it isn't! Liberals and politically correct ministers are always whining about guns, whether they be carried by Pastors or your average American Patriot. And you guys sound like liberals to me. Whether it's being against guns or against Trump or against the war in Iraq. The bottom line is you politicians take the liberal position every time. Next time you get mugged and beaten to a pulp by ghetto punks, you'll wish you had a gun. Then it will be too late.


Rich Aikers

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 109
  • I'm a llama!
Re: Gun Toting Ministers?
« Reply #20 on: July 12, 2016, 09:44:35 PM »
Yeah Fred, and Christians only have two enemies. The Devil and their carnal nature.

Tony Warren

  • Administrator
  • Affiliate Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2061
  • Gender: Male
    • The Mountain Retreat
Re: Gun Toting Ministers?
« Reply #21 on: July 13, 2016, 02:19:37 PM »
>>>
Sometimes being in the minority is a good thing Mitchell.

And most times, it isn't!
<<<

What would make you say that, since that's not a Biblical statement. Consensus has never been a deciding factor of what was God authored doctrine since there are always a lot more unfaithful than faithful, even in the church.  You will note that of all the children of God that Moses took out of Egypt, only a few of them were truly saved, and the rest all perished in the wilderness because of unbelief. Of all the people who claimed to be servants of God in Elijah's day, only Elijah and 7000 were actually elect, the faithful or chosen of God. In Christ's time, of the whole nation of Israel who "thought" they were true children of God, only a residue, a vestige, a remnant out of the whole nation were actual children who were saved--and the rest again all died in unbelief. Do you see a pattern here? The majority of God's people are usually quite carnal and humanistic. For many are called, but FEW are chosen. It is the few of the church who actually take the path that is "restricted, the path not commodious, the path not widely traveled. It is because "the flesh" is weak and many there are that succumb to its wever constant pull.

Matthew 7:13-14
  • "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and MANY there be which go in thereat:
  • Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and FEW there be that find it."

God's words, not mine. There are many gates that people take in their attempt to get right with God, but only one that enters into the true Kingdom ruled over by the true Christ. By your presupposition, you surmise that the majority of the church today is faithful because they hold the majority view, and that is a very bad assumption--and assumption is the mother of error.


Quote
>>>
Liberals and politically correct ministers are always whining about guns, whether they be carried by Pastors or your average American Patriot.
<<<

If that is the case, then it's good that I didn't get my marching orders from Patriots, Liberals, Conservatives or Politically Correct ministers, but from the word of God itself--and to be frank, I hear as much whining from one group on this side as from another.  But if I base by beliefs on God's word alone (Sola Scriptura), that way I know I'm doing His will rather than my own, your will, a minister's or politician's will.  The truth is, none of them are either objective or a authoritative source for the Christian.

Matthew 7:28-29
  • "And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine:
  • For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes."

The WORD of God is the authority, and He speaks to us today through His word. Those scribes or writers of Matthew 7 understood a liot of things but "ultimately" understood nothing. They were ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of truth because they didn't actually defer to the authority of the word of God in their beliefs. Likewise, there are a lot of modern day scribes or writers here also who make all sorts of claims without any biblical authority whatsoever. The living word teaches with authority, professing Christians today don't seem to need authority to say or believe anything, they simply name it and claim it. To them, God expects us to take up physical arms to protect His hurch, and to even crusade in a holy war as the Catholics did. The authority to do so is theirs because in actuality, they don't trust God to protect them. They would never say so publicly/verbally, but their thoughts and actions reveal they feel Apostles like Stephen were foolish not to defend themselves, and should have armed themselves with swords to prevent such murders.


Quote
>>>
And you guys sound like liberals to me
<<<

A tree is known by its fruits, not its labels! Liberals claim I'm a far right wing conservative, and conservatives claim I'm way too liberal, so I must be doing something right!

I can understand that from your "political" perspective I sound liberal in this instance of rejecting the idea of Ministers of God brandishing guns in His Sanctuary. Frankly, from reading your posts I think your worldview is that of your own authored liberty, the idea of a man's basic rights to liberty and property without taxation, a theory that emphasizes the fundamental freedom of the individual. By contrast, my worldview is not of human freedom and personal liberty, but of an indentured servitude to Christ. And in this bond-service work of Christ, I find not only true freedom but perfect rest. As His bondservant, this is the only true and perfect peace, safety and liberty. The "work" to protect Him or His house is not mine (except abstractly in faithfulness), it is His work, His walls, His Sword and His Bulwark. The Lord is "my" defense, my battlement, protector and Shepherd, I shall not want. Yes, I understand that to the worldly or carnal mind, this is (ironically) God's people acting like sheep, and thus unpalatable. Imagine, God's people as sheep among wolves ?

This doctrine is to the willful, being foolish--but to the spiritual, as Stephen was, it is the only way to find safety and real rest in this world. We cannot protect God's people by the sword of our own hand, and it is actually foolishness in thinking we can--that's the Lord's job, and He does it perfectly.

Matthew 11:28-30
  • "Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
  • Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.
  • For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light."

The services that Christ requires are not burdensome like in other religion, for there is no work required. Grace is as easy as it is unmerited, free and undeserved. It doesn't require me to resist evil (see Matthew 5:39) except spiritual evil in my own person, nor to start a CDA or church defense army, start a holy war, a crusade or take up arms to protect the house of God. It's a whole "different" philosophy of liberty/bondage, peace/war, love/hate, friend/enemy, wise/fool, church/state. It's to come to the realization that only God Himself can truly protect the parishioners or the church from intruders. No gun carrying Pastor ever will be able to do that. Indeed, once again this idea of men reminds me of the episode of Uzza.

1st Chronicles 13:9-10
  • "And when they came unto the threshingfloor of Chidon, Uzza put forth his hand to hold the ark; for the oxen stumbled.
  • And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Uzza, and he smote him, because he put his hand to the ark: and there he died before God."

The moral of the story? Do we not suppose that God is REALLY sovereign, and as such could prevent the oxen from stumbling with just a thought, a word, or a move of his finger? Did not God command than no one was to touch the Ark? So then, should God have been grateful that Uzza decided that he needed to put forth his own hand to protect God's Covenant Ark himself? ...Not at all. Note also that David was upset because God had killed Uzza for it, because he was thinking like a man--namely, "why would God do this when Uzza was only trying to protect the Ark?" He didn't quite understand at the time that neither God's ark, nor His people, needed protection by man's hand. And most certainly not when God has already said don't touch the Ark. Just as He has said resist not evil, or when he's said those who take the sword shall perish with the Sword. The fact that David didn't understand this principle at the time doesn't make it any less true. Uzza practiced what we might call "situation Ethics," where he surmised that the end justifies the means. That is a well oiled myth of society, but it is not true. Let us not be like Uzza and think it's our duty to protect God's ark of the Covenant, or it's just common sense for man to use his own hand to protect the Covenanted house of God today. The wisdom of Christ is there for us, let's use it.

"nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"

laurenp

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: Gun Toting Ministers?
« Reply #22 on: July 14, 2016, 02:43:42 PM »
"A tree is known by its fruits, not its labels! Liberals claim I'm a far right wing conservative, and conservatives claim I'm way too liberal, so I must be doing something right!" 

:laugh:  Right on!

Stan Pat

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: Gun Toting Ministers?
« Reply #23 on: July 14, 2016, 06:26:20 PM »
 :Goodpoint:  :amen: Indeed you are.

Melanie

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 644
  • Gender: Female
  • Psalms 52:8
Re: Gun Toting Ministers?
« Reply #24 on: November 20, 2016, 09:27:30 AM »
"A tree is known by its fruits, not its labels! Liberals claim I'm a far right wing conservative, and conservatives claim I'm way too liberal, so I must be doing something right!" 

:laugh:   Right on!

 :ditto: Amazing, Isn't it! We can't get anything right.  ;)

Peter

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 24
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: Gun Toting Ministers?
« Reply #25 on: July 06, 2017, 07:19:20 AM »
Thanks Erik for finding this.
   To all concerned, first of all I think this idea of turning the church into an armed camp is insane with a capital I. Thank God it isn't really catching on anywhere but in the south, but I don't want to open that can of worms.  I do have a question about the meaning of a particular verse I can't figure out. It's really difficult to understand.

Luke 22:36
"He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one".

Why is Christ telling his Disciples to sell their coats to but a sword? That seems very counter productive to his other teachings. I see the sword back then as equivalent to today's gun. If this is correct, what is the message here if not sell your clothing to buy a gun?  :S_Confused:


George

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 253
  • I'm a llama!
Re: Gun Toting Ministers?
« Reply #26 on: July 06, 2017, 08:39:19 AM »
That's easy!


Lieberman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 197
  • I'm a Llama
Re: Gun Toting Ministers?
« Reply #27 on: July 06, 2017, 10:33:21 AM »

 :'(  :'(  What did you expect? It's the typical George, John, Fred, David Knoles response to a reasonable, non political inquiry  :'(  :'(

Radical, Political and ignorant (the interpretation, not the people). A Carnal, trivial, worthless, flippant reaction to a very good, solemn, austere and serious question.

Jude 1:18 "How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts".

Simon

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 24
  • Gender: Male
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: Gun Toting Ministers?
« Reply #28 on: July 06, 2017, 03:31:03 PM »
What about just the minster carrying a gun?

Diane Moody

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 214
  • Gender: Female
  • The Kingdom is Within You
Re: Gun Toting Ministers?
« Reply #29 on: July 06, 2017, 09:24:36 PM »
Thanks Erik for finding this.

Erik's a good guy, he has Christian charity and helps everyone he can.


Quote
To all concerned, first of all I think this idea of turning the church into an armed camp is insane with a capital I. Thank God it isn't really catching on anywhere but in the south, but I don't want to open that can of worms.

Too late ;)


Quote
I do have a question about the meaning of a particular verse I can't figure out. It's really difficult to understand.
Luke 22:36
"He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one".

Why is Christ telling his Disciples to sell their coats to but a sword? That seems very counter productive to his other teachings.

Yeah, it kinda does seem out of place. Which means he is probably not telling anyone to sell their literal clothing for a literal gun. How does that extrude the gospel? Does anyone have any ideas?


 


[ Home | Eschatology | Bible Studies | Classics | Articles | Sermons | Apologetics | Search | F.A.Q. ]