| Should A Christian Own A Gun?|
(I posted this below to an earlier Thread minutes ago and thought afterwards that it may have been better to start a new Thread with the question).
Ummm, I have a question for you: should a Christian own a gun?
As a side-note:
No doubt, watching the video footage of the shooting aftermath has been something very gruesome for everyone. Especially seeing the victims' family members and loved ones with tears streaming down their faces.
Maybe we now have a taste of what has been happening in other countries on a near daily basis and for many years now. Everyday a group of tidy men are arbitrarily deciding to visit murder and mayhem on any number of homes and community places. The list of their victims far surpasses those of the Colorado carnage; by 10's of 100's.
Of course 'C_No_N_ews' isn't there to record the wailing shrieks of the innocent children who awakened to find their parents strewn as straws of flesh in the front yard. Neither is 'FraudCast News' there to place microphones into the tearful faces of the survivors. No one hears about the good father whose life was snuffed because he was 'at the wrong place at the wrong time'. Nor of the sister who dissolved into a plume of smoke while grinding flour.
Regardless, the 'C_riminal N_ews B_ankster C_rimes' Network continues to happily report the increasing share price of the gun manufacturers and armament industry. And, Christians continue to go along with their merry way winking about their deadly thirst for pretended security. There's hardly a ping of conscience for those victims whose only sin was to live in the kill-zone of a country's insane desire for empire and oil.
Of course there are those delusional among us claiming that the murder and mayhem committed in our name is God's work. They have licensed themselves with a criminal sense of entitlement; boasting about being the 'chosen' of God. They are convinced that those who worship false gods are inherently worthless and near sub-human and deserve to be eradicated. In every way they have supplanted God ... even made themselves gods .... demanding that we worship and adore their murderous sprees.
Did we think that our killing spree could continue with impunity?
"Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword" ....
| 2012/7/21 3:46||Profile|
| Re: Should A Christian Own A Gun?|
It all depends on it's use. The solution for abuse is not non-use but right-use. Hunting is a valid use of a weapon. Protection of society is a God-ordained use of a weapon.
For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is Gods minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is Gods minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. (Romans 13:3, 4)
Robert Wurtz II
| 2012/7/21 4:46||Profile|
| Re: |
Jesus also said those who pick up the sword will due by the sword.
| 2012/7/21 6:11|
| Re: |
I suppose I should have posed the question more clearly; I was meaning to ask about Christians owning a firearm which is not suitable nor intended for sport or hunting.
Concerning your reference to Romans 13:3,4 :
My own opinion is that the all-encompassing command is: "We must obey God rather than men!", (Acts 5:29).
Earthly governance is formed by what Paul named as 'elemental spirits'. As such, they are weak and beggarly and prone to "repay evil with evil"; also, simultaneously reaping what they sow.
So, for the sake of this discussion, let's lay out the underlying parameters:
While we are citizens of a heavenly kingdom, we also live in the natural world. Therefore, the disciple of Jesus is also a good citizen of the emperor, an orderly citizen of his town, a punctual taxpayer and respectful towards the representatives of the government and of the authority. This is why the early Christians were not rebels against the state. They submitted to the government; despite the fact that oftentimes their leaders invited disgust and contempt.
We know that in the Kingdom of God there are both principalities and powers. This confirms that not all spirits in the unseen world are equal. In addition, there are throne angels, cherubs, governments, angel of the church, messengers, and there is also the angel of the Lord. Further, there are also tens of thousands of angels who stand under their own princes.
The devils also know a similar hierarchy. They have their principalities, powers, rulers and their legions of evil spirits too which are subject to their leaders.
The human spirit too belongs to God's hierarchical order. Mankind shares a hierarchy; king and subject, state government and federal government, parent and child, master and servant, employer and employee. The hierarchical formation of human spirits are what constitute our social and political order.
It is this hierarchical order which makes known the reigning "elements of the world" which cause life to be possible on earth. While all these hierarchical power relationships are God ordained, this doesn't mean to say that the authorities are directly appointed by God.
So it is that we are living in a world which is ruled by innate hierarchical laws. As a side thought: this same hierarchy role and structure can also be found in the animal world. In the animal world too we find leadership roles and relations between creature parents and the obedience of their offspring.
Therefore, we also see how the Law of Sinai made use of some sort ordering and structure and therefore it too is directly associated with the "elements of the world", (Gal 4:3,9 and Col 2:8 & 20).
The Bible describes these "elements of the world", (or, "elementary spirits"), as being weak and beggarly because they are human spirits which are without the power of the Holy Spirit and therefore unable to oppose the lawless forces originating from the kingdom of darkness.
So, it is that these weak and beggarly spirits can only resist and maintain their authority by natural remedies and penalties; unable to overcome the powers of evil, they are left with no alternative but to exterminate its manifestation.
Without observing the social and political relationships, life on earth would be impossible; everything would soon tumble into a chaotic and undisciplined mob. Not surprisingly, anarchy is said to be a special sign of the end times.
The Apostle Paul fully knew that the Christian is no longer subject to "the law". Rather, the Christian is free and no longer a slave, a king and a priest, an heir of God and joint-heir with Christ.
However, he also knew that in the natural world the Christian remained subject to the requirements of the 'elementary spirits'. A slave was to remain obedient to his master, (both the good and the bad), a child to his parents, (both the believer and unbeliever), and also the citizen must remain obedient to an often unreasonable and immoral government.
So, member 'RobertW', the Scriptures about submission to authority which you referenced are (needless to be said by me) clear and straightforward truth.
It was a lying, false accusation, when the Jews accused Jesus before Pilate against Caesar, saying that He forbade to give tribute to Caesar, (John 19:12, and Luke 23:2). Our Lord Himself paid both the Synagogue taxes and secular government taxes, (Matt 17:24-27). He also subjected Himself to the world spirits during His natural life. He remained submissive to the hierarchical order; example: subservient to his parents, recognizing that Pilate had power over Him, (having received such power from above), (John 19:11).
An incompetent and unwise government is still better than no government. For times of bad government, the Lord says, "Be not afraid of those who kill the body but can not kill the soul", (Matt 10:28). It's not for nothing that the Bible says, "I exhort first of all supplications, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all men, for kings and all in authority, that we may lead quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and dignity", (1Tim 2:1,2).
Anyways 'RobertW', I said all the above to clearly state that I don't wish to be found twisting the Word "to their own destruction, (2Pet 3:16).
The word "sword" in your referenced Scripture illustrates the avenging justice on this earth; a justice which repays evil with punishment. The government bears the sword and she is the only person in the social hierarchical order on earth that has consent to punish. They repay evil with evil, and therefore speak the language of workers of wrath. [ Man can only judge "to appearance", (the outward man), but the Lord "looks at the heart", (the inner man)].
We are entering into a time when the following is being fulfilled: "And I will give children [to be] their princes, and babes shall rule over them. And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour: the child shall behave himself proudly against the ancient, and the base against the honourable", (Isaiah 3:4,5). Therefore it is becoming increasingly necessary to submit, not only because of fearing the workers of wrath, but also for conscience sake.
Many think a government is owed their obedience only if it matches their views and their interests. This is not scriptural. A Christian, who is truly a spiritual man, will for the sake of his conscience not engage in disorderly conduct. Both Paul and Peter lived at a time of a very tyrannical regime and yet lived victoriously. They did not speak criticism against their governments because they didn't consider this as their task. Instead, they had a positive posture about the governing authorities and obeyed. They prayed about their governments, for their good, if there was any, as well as for their evil.
| 2012/7/21 6:34||Profile|
| Re: |
My personal answer from a previous posting
by Blayne on 2012/7/21 0:15:51
Ummm, I have a question for you: should a Christian own a gun?
If they know how to use it and handle it I don't see why not. When it comes to guns I find something amusing. When incidents like Colorado and schools stuff happens there is an outcry on gun control yet if you look carefully the people who have these guns are city people who probably don't use these guns very much. Contrast this to those who hunt. They will have their kids shoot the guns and teach them about the guns and to respect the guns. When the guns are done they are locked up and the kids know not to mess with them until an appropiate time. We rarely hear of issues with hunters and guns. Only with those in the city but that is never brought up.
I don't own a gun, I really have not reason to own a gun but if I did I would make sure I respected that thing and took classes and went to the gun range and understood the thing.
| 2012/7/21 8:01||Profile|
| Re: |
And again Jesus said, those who i pick up the sword will die by the sword.
| 2012/7/21 8:09|
| Re: |
Bearmaster quoted Jesus words to Peter at Gathsemane
And again Jesus said, those who pick up the sword will die by the sword.
Here is an interesting reflection on that event. Apparently the only reason Peter even had the sword was that Jesus had instructed him, and the other disciples, to carry them.
Then Jesus asked them, When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?
Nothing, they answered.
He said to them, But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you dont have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:35-35 NIV
In the text we see that if they did not have a sword Jesus instructed them to sell some of their clothes and buy one.
I find that fascinating when coupled with Jesus words to Peter in Gathsemane to not take up or live by the very sword He instructed Peter to buy.
In context we also see they were carrying two swords with them as they traveled with Jesus.
The disciples said, See, Lord, here are two swords. Luke 22:38
He then tells them that it's enough. What is particularly striking to me is that Jesus followers are evidently armed to some degree as they are doing ministry. He initially sent them out alone without bag, purse, sword,or extra clothes. However after they returned from trusting Him with nothing they are instructed to "stock up" a bit, if you will.
We don't think of Christ's Apostles walking into town with a sword strapped to their hips. However, it appears that some of them may have done so.
| 2012/7/21 8:51||Profile|
GAMBIA, WEST AFRICA
| Re: |
Solomon101, Just continue reading the whole chapter you quotes from luke Chapter 22 as you read from verse 48 to 51 you will see
That the reason why he told them to buy the sword was that he was about to teach them a practical truth , about never using physical weapons to fight against flesh and blood.. Read below
When they which were about him saw what would follow, they said unto him, Lord, shall we smite with the sword?
50 And one of them smote the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear.
51 And Jesus answered and said, Suffer ye thus far. And he touched his ear, and healed him.(luke 22v48-52)
So you see the sword they had was not to be as a protection against those that want to kill them but he was teaching them that no matter the level of physical opposition they faced even if it require there lives they should not defend by fighting back because they battle not with flesh and blood, but rulers of darkness in high places. So there is no contradiction . Any person who use weapon as a form of protection against wickedness is not yet in the kingdom of Christ , he may still be in the law but not in the spirit of Christ.
JAMES F JARJOU
| 2012/7/21 9:24||Profile|
| Re: |
Hi brother Robert, I hear what you are saying, but did not the American revolutionaries arm themselves because they were " afraid of the authorities?" Was Britain not " God's minister to you for good?" And if they were, was not this " right to bear arms," established in contradciton of God's word ? Just some food for thought :) America has the highest murder rate per capita in the western world, four times higher than its nearest rivals. It also has a huge prision population, higher by far, by head of poplualtion than any other western country. Could this be a result of a basic violation of Gods word or is it simply just the most violent country? .............bro Frank
| 2012/7/21 9:42|
| Re: |
That is one of several possible interpretations. Throughout church history it is one that some have advanced.There are probably a half dozen various interpretations that have gained traction at one time or another in the history of the church. However, it is just one and it requires a fair amount of pure supposition to come to that conclusion. However, it is one way to view it. There certainly is nothing in the text to strongly make that the proper understanding.
One of the weaknesses of your interpretation is that you must remove Jesus words for them to "get or buy a sword" from the entire context and statement it came in. That normally will get into very faulty interpretation.
Recall that Jesus not only told them to now "get, or buy a sword" but to also to take a purse (to hold money) and a bag (that held possessions). If your thoughts are correct then where is the use of those at Gathsemane. Jesus clearly made them part of the same instructions as the sword.
A second complication of your interpretation is this - Jesus Himself said he was referring to the times of when they went out in ministry for taking the sword, purse, and bag. Note in Luke 22:35 he specifically references those times, " Then Jesus asked them, When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything? Nothing, they answered".
His words about the bag, sword, purse are then immediately given as to what they are to now take as opposed to when He instructed them to take nothing with them. It would seem fairly obvious that the clearer meaning is that they were sent out initially with noting so as to have to trust God for daily provision. Once that was experienced they could take provision having learned not to depend on those... but on God. Much as Paul saying that he had been in abundance and in want but regardless he was content in fulfilling the plan of God.
Let's also take a practical real world example. I am assuming you are a male but forgive me if not. No way to tell from an internet name. So.. I am making that assumption.
What if you came home to find your wife beaten and tied to a kitchen chair with duct tape. Your two teenage daughters also beaten, bound feet and hands and laying on the floor. Two men are in your house that did this. They are eating the supper on the table prepared by your family. You see the situation through the door window but they did not spot you. However, you do hear them tell your wife and daughters that they are going to rape them after they eat and then slit their throats. They are going to make your wife watch your daughters be raped and killed before they do the same to her. These men have no guns. They were just bigger and stronger. HOWEVER, you have a shotgun and pistol in your workshop in the back. You can get one of those firearms and save your your wife and daughters from rape and murder... or you can let it happen... or you can call the police who will make out a nice report when they come to work the murder scene in a couple of hours. Bottom line...you step in and make a move to save your wife and daughters from rape and murder now or it will happen starting in 2 minutes.
You now have 120 seconds before it begins.... what do you do?
| 2012/7/21 10:07||Profile|