A LOT of Christians and churches are falling for the leftist anti gun propaganda, looks like maybe here as well when it is relegated to "ethics and morality" to participate in the safest sport and activity there is, and a way for families to gather and inculcate values that this world needs.
Is it possible that lots of Christians simply take Jesus seriously when He says, "Whoever lives by the sword dies by the sword"?
The fundamental ethical question about firearms--about any weapon--is what purpose does one have it for?
Do I own a firearm because I'm a hunter and I hunt animals for my own food?
Or do I own a firearm because I plan on using it on another human person?
For the first nearly four hundred years of Christian history the universal and unanimous position of the Church was that violence was contrary to Christian ethics and morality, it contradicted Christ's teachings. Which is why the Church frowned on Christians serving in the Roman military or serving as magistrates who may have to sentence people to death.
Views on this subject began to change with the conversion of Constantine to Christianity, as Christians who now were no longer being imprisoned and put to death by the Roman state were now given positions of importance within the Roman state--heck, the emperor himself confessed himself to be a Christian.
And so the questions arose, such as, can Christian rulers go to war? Can Christians serve in the military? And out of these questions, arising post-Constantine, a general view tended to slowly arise that there may be cases of justified violence. Now, justified violence isn't the same thing as good violence. Violence isn't good. But generally the Church came to regard violence, in very specific circumstances, to be justified--so long as executed by the proper authorities, largely in keeping with what St. Paul says in Romans 13 about the state as executing the sword to curb evil.
Now, of course, there's a lot of history between then and now, and we can see a lot of unjustifiable violence done by Christians, and at times the Church acting complicit. That's because history is complicated and messy.
But here's the thing: What is the Christian ethic on these matters? This isn't a "left" or "right" issue. These are legitimate questions to be asked in the context of Christian discipleship.
When, if ever, is a Christian justified to use violence? After all, Christ Himself commands that we repay no one evil for evil, that if we are struck, to offer the other cheek, and to never retaliate. He commands that we love our enemies, and that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. And we can see that the Apostles, and the ancient fathers of the Church all understood this pretty strictly. The ancient patristic position is that Christians are called to lives of intentional peace, that violence is unacceptable, that it is better to be killed than to kill.
Is self defense justifiable violence? Possibly, but don't simply take it as a given. The question of violence, the question of harming another person (not to taking their life), should be an immensely hard question for us.
If we are comfortable then something is probably wrong, and we should search ourselves about it. No one should be comfortable with violence, even if they may reach an ethical conclusion that violence may sometimes be justified.
This isn't political, it's biblical.
-CryptoLutheran
