Do you think it's Christian to own guns?

[South Bound]

This question would not be debated in the UK. Only a small number of people have a gun/riffle and it is just for sport. I don't think anyone should have a gun. The right to have a gun is out dated.

Since when do rights come with an expiration date?

 

[South Bound]

Jesus would be ashamed if we owned guns. He came to abolish the laws of the Old Testament (eye for and eye).

First of all, why would we be ashamed if we owned guns? He wasn't ashamed when His followers owned swords.

Second, why do you believe Jesus came to abolish the Old Testament, when he said (a) that the Word of God stands forever, and (b) that He came to fulfil the law, not to abolish it?

Third, what does owning a gun have to do with "an eye for an eye"?

He asks to seeks forgiveness.

So, if somebody is murdering your family, you're supposed to ask them for forgiveness? Do yo have any idea how stupid that sounds?

Jesus didn't even raise a finger when being crucified but instead thought if God wills it. So, no. To be Christian is to be a follower of Christ, not a follower of the second amendment.

Actually, it isn't the 2nd Amendment that gives us the right to keep and bear arms. The 2nd Amendment only codifies the right to keep and bear arms into law.

The right to keep and bear arms is a natural right that, with which all men are endowed by God.

 

[SteveIndy]

It is not Christian to own guns for the express purpose of self-protection and Jesus would not approve of it. As a matter of fact, Jesus gave us very clear instructions on the issue of self-defence and our attitude toward our enemies.Jesus even forbid us from being angry. A Christian would have to deny Christ and His teaching to defend their self, serve as a policeman, be in the military, serve on juries, or swear allegiance to a flag or a nation. These are not difficult ideas to understand, Jesus has spoken plainly, but Christians follow the teaching of men and the traditions of men. Most Christians will not give up their "right" to self-preservation and protection and therefore, can only be called un-believers. Christ gave us His instructions, then He allowed himself to be murdered without opening His mouth and forgave His murderers from the very cross they nailed Him to. His Apostles understood perfectly His instructions to follow Him and likewise died not resisting the evil doer Mat. 5:39.

What part of "Turn the other cheek" don't Christians understand?

 

[South Bound]

It is not Christian to own guns for the express purpose of self-protection and Jesus would not approve of it.

Verse, please.

As a matter of fact, Jesus gave us very clear instructions

Cite the verses where He gave "very clear instructions" about self defense.

Jesus even forbid us from being angry.

First of all, Jesus didn't forbid us from being angry. He forbid us from being unjustly angry.

A Christian would have to deny Christ and His teaching to defend their self, serve as a policeman, be in the military, serve on juries, or swear allegiance to a flag or a nation.

Why?

These are not difficult ideas to understand, Jesus has spoken plainly

And yet, you can't even post one verse.

What part of "Turn the other cheek" don't Christians understand?

Actually, it's you who doesn't understand "turn the other cheek", as "turn the other cheek" refers to not seeking revenge for a personal offense, not allowing someone to murder your family.

 

[SteveIndy]

Since when do rights come with an expiration date?

The general principles you speak of are not the general principles of Christianity, they are the principles given by Moses. Jesus said in The Sermon on the Mount, "You have heard it said" i.e. from the Law of Mose, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, BUT I SAY" i.e. Jesus is here annulling the Law of Moses, "Resist not an evil person." The whole idea of American Justice is founded on laws that Jesus did away with. If a Christian wants to live under the Law then he better be prepared to be judged by that law; and I think you can grasp to the conclusion to that little problem.

 

[South Bound]

The general principles you speak of are not the general principles of Christianity

No, they're not. But they are compatible with Christianity.

they are the principles given by Moses. Jesus said in The Sermon on the Mount, "You have heard it said" i.e. from the Law of Mose, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, BUT I SAY" i.e. Jesus is here annulling the Law of Moses, "Resist not an evil person."

Actually, Jesus never annulled the law of Moses.

Second, again, we're talking about self defense, not "an eye for an eye".

The whole idea of American Justice is founded on laws that Jesus did away with.

Actually, Jesus didn't do away with any laws.

If a Christian wants to live under the Law then he better be prepared to be judged by that law; and I think you can grasp to the conclusion to that little problem.

Owning a gun doesn't mean you live under Old Covenant laws.

 

[NHB_MMA]

I don't know about conspiracy theories I've noticed a lot of videos by the Gun Lobby preparing for war they have been around for
a long time. I thought it was conspiracy but these people are really serious in their preparations

Wow, I have never seen a video by "the gun lobby" suggesting building up arms to prepare for a war.

Maybe some fringe organization with no real presence, but no mainstream organization backing gun ownership rights.

 

[NHB_MMA]

Read the Bible, not just the parts the unbelievers like. God, who is the same yesterday, today and forever, told His people to not only defend themselves but to utterly destroy whole cities. That same God is love. We don't understand it, but it is all true. I would argue that it is unchristian to not be willing to use whatever force is necessary to defend the defenseless, not just myself, but my neighbor as well. If someone broke into one of my neighbors homes and attempted to harm their children it would be evil of me not to do whatever it took to stop the aggressor. Somehow people have forgotten what the Bible has to say about innocence and guilt and perverted it to where they claim that the guilty have more standing with God than the innocent, and that is calling good evil and evil good.

I wouldn't conclude some obligation to own guns from this line of thought. I own several and I would be the first to say if you don't feel comfortable with them don't get one.

 

[NHB_MMA]

Well all I can say is if that is Christianity for today it's no small wonder that people are turning away from it.

Since the number of households in the U.S. that own firearms is barely half of what it was a few decades ago and the number of practicing Christians is also declining I have to question if the data in any way supports your sentiment. It would appear to support the complete opposite.

 

[liberal.luke]

First of all, why would we be ashamed if we owned guns? He wasn't ashamed when His followers owned swords.

Second, why do you believe Jesus came to abolish the Old Testament, when he said (a) that the Word of God stands forever, and (b) that He came to fulfil the law, not to abolish it?


Third, what does owning a gun have to do with "an eye for an eye"?



So, if somebody is murdering your family, you're supposed to ask them for forgiveness? Do yo have any idea how stupid that sounds?



Actually, it isn't the 2nd Amendment that gives us the right to keep and bear arms. The 2nd Amendment only codifies the right to keep and bear arms into law.

The right to keep and bear arms is a natural right that, with which all men are endowed by God.

(Whoops, excluding those who hunt). It is fundamentally insane to think of Jesus escalating any form of violence even in self defense. That's what makes Jesus, well Jesus, Jesus. He's a humanist in tragedy.

You're right about fulfillment, not abolishment. But the old law replaced the previous law, the law of Hammurabi. Using guns as a form of defense is a micro-eye for an eye scenario. Where if someone breaks into your home, robs you, tries to kill you, some instances even give a dirty look on the street, you can shoot them to end their life. To think Jesus would agree with this behavior is absurd, even if his own family were to be attacked. He probably would have put faith in God to help guid those commuting a crime. And that's it.

To think its stupid to put faith highlights the entire point of this forum article. Jesus who had ultimate faith in God did not need a gun. He never would have carried out physical violence even to protect. So if that were happening to my family, I would probably do the same.

Any right to bear arms is not endowed by God. It's granted by man to be used by man as part of technological advancement. Guns allow hunting to be done with less effort, wars to be carried out more quickly (sometimes), self defense (where the perpetrator faces death),and allows a sport in the olympics. To think this peice of technology made of wood and steel and iron is endowed by God (which it's not mentioned in any religious text) is absurd. Mail service must be endowed by God too.

 

[Ned Netterville]

Hi Malvina, thanks for starting a good conversation, and I hope your still with it to hear my comment. I haven't read all of the comments, but I rather doubt you've run into some of what I have to say.

I am a disciple of Jesus, by which I mean a student of his teaching and a follower, however faltering, of his way. I do not call myself a Christian because I think most "leaders" withing the Christian faith have strayed from the way Jesus laid out.

One of those ways was the path of nonviolence. For that reason, I am a pacifist resolved to renounce the use of force in all of my human affairs. By following his teaching, particularly from his Sermons on the Mount and on the Plain, I am rendered by God secure from all harm, so I have no need for a gun. He said, "Seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all of those things (our material needs) will be given to you." I know that to be the case, and I know that my own and my loved ones safety and security are best "defended" by never resorting to violence myself--not even in self-defense.

However, it is my position on laws pertaining to guns that I believe is different from most. To begin, I think all "kingdoms" (we would say nation-states nowadays) wherein some people rule other people by force and coercion (that is how all rulers rule) are contrary to God's wishes as revealed by Jesus. Luke's account of Jesus' temptation in the wilderness shows that those with the authority and glory of leaders of nation-states have been given that authority by Satan. God is mankind's only legitimate lawmaker, all others making laws, rules, regulations, etc., are usurping His authority. Any human legislation, including gun laws, are contrary to the wisdom and teaching of Jesus. For that reason, I am opposed to any rules, regulations or legislation restricting people's freedom to own and peacefully use guns. Those who turn to government to control the benign behavior of their fellows are no better than any other thugs who use force and coercion to have their way. There is no need for guns among those who understand Jesus' teaching, just as there is no need for human legislation.

Keep the faith

 

[NHB_MMA]

In case you are not aware, medical and hospital treatment is not free in the USA, they both involve a lot of fees and charges.

Yep. My relatively insignificant cancer cost me thousands out of pocket and I have the best plan offered to government employees.

 

[jiminpa]

I wouldn't conclude some obligation to own guns from this line of thought. I own several and I would be the first to say if you don't feel comfortable with them don't get one.

I never said or believe that there is any requirement in the Bible for gun ownership. There is a requirement to stand by whatever means necessary and available for the helpless. If I have a gun available and someone tries to attack one of my neighbors' young children it would not be righteous of me to stand by and not invoke the weapon in defense of the child.

 

[SteveIndy]

Verse, please.

Jesus speaks in the Sermon on the Mount about Turning the other cheek and "not resisting an evil person." He disarmed Peter when Peter cut off the ear of Malchus, and said Plainly "If you live by the sword you will die by the sword." Jesus told us to, "Love our enemies" Would you kill someone you are supposed to love? Or maybe Christians don't really love their enemies as commanded. When Christ was being interrogated by Pilate He was asked if He was a king and Christ answered, "If My Kingdom was of this world then would my servants fight, but My Kingdom is not of this world." Paul reiterates these rules when he said, "Our weapons are not carnal, but spiritual." Do you use a spiritual gun to protect yourself? If not then you are denying Christ and taking your life into your own hands. Are these instructions in code, no, they are very plain and clear.

Cite the verses where He gave "very clear instructions" about self defense.



First of all, Jesus didn't forbid us from being angry. He forbid us from being unjustly angry.

Do you mean, as the KJV says, "Angry without a cause"? Have you ever been angry without a cause or reason, or unjustly?

Why?



And yet, you can't even post one verse.



Actually, it's you who doesn't understand "turn the other cheek", as "turn the other cheek" refers to not seeking revenge for a personal offense, not allowing someone to murder your family.

You have given this passage an interpretation that is not allowed. Wher does it say anything about "personal offense" chapter and verse please.

 

[South Bound]

One of those ways was the path of nonviolence. For that reason, I am a pacifist resolved to renounce the use of force in all of my human affairs.

That's very noble of you to admit that you do not love your neighbor enough to defend them from an attacker.

 

[South Bound]

You have given this passage an interpretation that is not allowed.

By whom???

Where does it say anything about "personal offense" chapter and verse please.

Where does it say anything about not defending yourself?

 

[South Bound]

(Whoops, excluding those who hunt). It is fundamentally insane to think of Jesus escalating any form of violence even in self defense. That's what makes Jesus, well Jesus, Jesus. He's a humanist in tragedy.

You're right about fulfillment, not abolishment. But the old law replaced the previous law, the law of Hammurabi. Using guns as a form of defense is a micro-eye for an eye scenario. Where if someone breaks into your home, robs you, tries to kill you, some instances even give a dirty look on the street, you can shoot them to end their life. To think Jesus would agree with this behavior is absurd, even if his own family were to be attacked. He probably would have put faith in God to help guid those commuting a crime. And that's it.

To think its stupid to put faith highlights the entire point of this forum article. Jesus who had ultimate faith in God did not need a gun. He never would have carried out physical violence even to protect. So if that were happening to my family, I would probably do the same.

Does your family know you hate them so much that you would stand by and watch them be murdered?

Any right to bear arms is not endowed by God.

Actually, it is. The Charter of Liberties, The Grand Remonstrance, English Common Law, Locke, Blackstone, Rutherford, and Montesquieu all made a compelling case that it is.

Why should I believe somebody who prays to statues of dead people over them?

To think this peice of technology made of wood and steel and iron is endowed by God (which it's not mentioned in any religious text) is absurd.[/auote]

I agree, which is why nobody said anything about "technology made of wood and steel".

 

[SteveIndy]

I never said or believe that there is any requirement in the Bible for gun ownership. There is a requirement to stand by whatever means necessary and available for the helpless. If I have a gun available and someone tries to attack one of my neighbors' young children it would not be righteous of me to stand by and not invoke the weapon in defense of the child.

We are never told to use violence to protect the poor or helpless, that is pure fiction. Peter had every right to pull his sword and to protect the Christ, but he was stopped in his tracks and told to put away his sword or he could expect to be killed with the justice meted out by the sword, and when Jesus disarmed Peter He disarmed every Christian for ever more.

 

[SteveIndy]

By whom???



Where does it say anything about not defending yourself?

When Jesus disciples requested permission to call down fire and destroy their enemies, what did Jesus say to them? Well, I will tell you, He said, "You do not know what spirit you are of, for the Son of Man did not come to destroy the lives of men, but to save them."

 

[South Bound]

[QUOTE="SteveIndy']when Jesus disarmed Peter He disarmed every Christian for ever more.[/QUOTE]

Verse, please.