Guns

[Luther073082]

Right. Now I think I'm on the same page with you. But definetily not killed him (the thief) unless by a very unfortunate accident. Rather, injured him if needed and then taken him into their house and taken care of his wounds and told him about Christ, without a grudge for him having broken into their house and trying to hurt them (that is, in a Christ-like manner). And that attitude is very seldom found among these so-called neo-conservative gun-loving "rid the earth of evil scums" Christians.

I agree with you they would have tried to avoid making things lethal but sometimes you can't control that. It all depends on how far the intruder is willing to carry it in both cases. If your intruder is carring a knife or nothing at all then you can probably just pop him in the leg and you'll be just fine. If he's got a gun too, you'd probably be smarter to shoot to kill. Minor wounds might put him down but they won't stop him from shooting back.

Just stop yourself from being harmed. I'm not a neo-con, nor am I a liberal (anymore). It feels like both of them are too busy toeing a line to stop and think about these and look at them from a neutral prospective.

 

[Blackguard_]

i think the v-tech incident shows the world where america is currently at with its relationship with guns.

Yep, it showed the insanity of gun free zones and relying on the cops to save you.

Port Authur happens in Australia and the government heavly restricts firearms, no such incident happens again. Dunblane happens and the UK restricts firearms, again, no such incident happens again.

Luby's Cafetaria happens and Texas issues concealed weapon permits, no such incident happens again.

Colimbine happens and the Right of the US blame the parents, TV and Marylin Manson.

Yeah, how dare we blame anything but an inanimate object. Heaven forbid we blame the shooter. (you're not entirely wrong though, the Right was wrong to blame Marilyn Manson and Doom for that)

V-Tech happens a few years later and no major debate is sparked.......in the future the same thing will happen again and again and again untill something changes!

Yeah, until murderers disappear.

other countries learn and move forward. America seems obsessed with living in the middle ages, afraid of English comming back or something?

The Enlightenment, actually. By the way, new ideas and practices are not necessarily progress. What are thse countries moving forward too? The latest European fad about guns? "commoners owning guns is soooo 1880"

i find it frustrating that innocent lives must suffer because of the violent majority and the false sense of insecurity that they feel in their safty.

 

[Vigilante]

Right. Now I think I'm on the same page with you. But definetily not killed him (the thief) unless by a very unfortunate accident. Rather, injured him if needed and then taken him into their house and taken care of his wounds and told him about Christ, without a grudge for him having broken into their house and trying to hurt them (that is, in a Christ-like manner). And that attitude is very seldom found among these so-called neo-conservative gun-loving "rid the earth of evil scums" Christians.

After this post, I wonder if we haven't just been arguing around ourselves. I agree with this post almost 100%. (The exception being that, in a gun fight, you might have to shoot to kill instead of injure if the other person is also shooting to kill. If you shoot him in the leg to injure him and he goes down, then he uses his bullet to shoot you in the chest, well... you've just died. I think another poster already reflected this sentiment.)

But at least trying to avoid killing the criminal is what we should be aiming for (pun intended!). Tending later to his wounds and sharing the Gospel with him, though, is just brilliant, and not something I'd even considered up until this point. Brilliant post.

As for the persecution stuff, you can read my post (number 180 in this thread). I had a nice discussion going on with Vigilante there, and I'll continue when I have energy to write a lenghty response again.

No need to continue, I think.

I believe we're on exactly the same page now. I was unable to articulate the distinction between dying for your wallet and dying for Christ. Thanks to you and Luther073082 for clearing up the mist on that one. In a situation where one is faced with a choice between dying for one's faith and rebellion, martyrdom might very well be the right (although very difficult) choice to make. Clearly, the impact of your story in saving the souls of others would outweigh your own earthly life. On the other hand, in a situation where a man broke into my house and tried to kidnap my child right in front of me, I would resort to what I believe would be justified violence in an effort to save my kid.

How does that settle for you?

Yep, it showed the insanity of [...] relying on the cops to save you.

There's a funny quote for that.

"When seconds count, help is only minutes away!"

If I remember right Jesus even told his diciples to sell everything in order to have a sword with them before walking through a dangerous area.

It's funny to think that the modern equivalent of that (if Jesus' story had taken place in our generation) would be Jesus telling his disciples to sell everything so that they could have Glock 23s with them during urban witnessing. How many anti-gun people today would tell Jesus that his idea is unhelpful and counterproductive? Too funny.

 

[Conspiracy Theory]

Never shoot to kill. Shoot to stop the threat.

 

[Blackguard_]

The martyrs didn't just let themselves be killed, but they where forced to choose between renouncing Christ and death.

Not always. Sometimes it was basically "suicide by cop", such as how in Cordoba in the 8th century after the Mohomedden conquest, where it was illegal to publically preach christianity, monks from the surrounding monastaries would periodically go into town, preach, and lose their heads.

Try reading The Passion Of Perpetua and Felicity
the tone is pretty much; "we're going to be Martyred!

".

Imagine that you are an American citizen making a time trip to the era of the early Church that is currently plagued with some serious persecution by the Roman empire and preparing to witness to Christ in the 'martyr way'. You walk up to the Christians saying, "Hey guys, I got some swords here. Take 'em. You have a constitutional right to arm yourselves against those evil tyrants". What do you think their response would be?

"What, and give up fame and fortune?!" (of course they'd use higher falutin terns like "heavenly rewards", "martyrs' crowns" and "being an inspiration to the brethren"). Martyrs were just shy of worshipped("venerated") and expected lots of nice things in Heaven. Martyrdom is not always a selfless and/or desperate act of someone backed into a corner.

Plus, they were pacifists, and many, particulary in the North African church, would have had a low opinion of St. Paul's actions in Acts 9:25, much less actively resisting resisting those trying to kill them for thier faith.

My question is: Would there have been martyrs if the early Christians had followed and acted according to their 'constitutional rights'?

Yes, such as the instances of people captured by Muslims during the Crusades being told "convert or lose your head".

 

[The Princess Bride]

Never shoot to kill. Shoot to stop the threat.

Sure, just let them sue the pants off you later and pay their medical bills.

 

[Suomipoika]

Sure, just let them sue the pants off you later and pay their medical bills.

Nice irony.

But "Love thy enemy, and pray for those that persecute you", said the Messiah.

If you have this attitude and at the same time you can purposefully shoot him dead, instead of at least trying to 'just injure him to stop the threat', go ahead. At least you can keep to yourself what really matters, your money..?

Everyone should read Loren Cunninghams' "Making Jesus Lord - The Dynamic Power of Laying Down Your Rights". That's a book that illustrates the Christ-like attitude toward our 'enemies'. Not to say that I would be a master of those skills either. Well, as long as you know the master you can know what to strive for..

 

[MezzaMorta]

Never shoot to kill. Shoot to stop the threat.

If I ever have to use a weapon in my or anothers defense i'm not going to be thinking about how to most effectively wound him. I'm going to aim and empty the clip into him as fast as the pistol will fire. Anything less would be neglecting my duty to protect myself and others.

 

[Suomipoika]

If I ever have to use a weapon in my or anothers defense i'm not going to be thinking about how to most effectively wound him. I'm going to aim and empty the clip into him as fast as the pistol will fire. Anything less would be neglecting my duty to protect myself and others.

Well, I'll just have to say that you are then resorting to the ways of your own human nature, and not following the principles of Christ. And by the way, what you quoted wasn't something that I said originally anyways.

 

[Sketcher]

Dictatorships in sight, in the U.S.? Wouldn't that mean that it is a 'democratically elected dictatorship', knowing your system?

How about Romans 13, then? I see it ardently cited in the death penalty threads, but how about in this context?

"1Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 6For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing".

So what about "getting up in arms against the government" in the light of this God-breathed Scripture? What about the American revolution?

You can take as much of this as irony as/if you want to.

It's always a roll of the dice, but God is also behind regime changes as the book of Daniel teaches. I personally wouldn't be comfortable with participating in an armed revolt though. I am glad that we have the freedoms we do, and the checks we do in order to keep those freedoms. The Second Amendment's existence serves as a deterrent to tyrants I believe. Any good tyrant, if he knows his opposition is armed, will try to disarm them before exercising his tyranny on them. Since we have this law on the books, and since we cherish it, abridging this right serves as a good early warning system. We can then fight this through legal means which, since they are legal and since we have separation of powers, cannot be against the Scripture you quoted.

 

[koban4max]

It was stated in another thread that "Guns are Immoral" but not explained why or given reason. Discuss your thoughts, the discussion also includes Gun Control and your thoughts of how far it should extend if at all.

If police or soldiers need to kill bad guys or to prevent them from hurting others...what else can they use?????

....harsh language?

 

[MezzaMorta]

Well, I'll just have to say that you are then resorting to the ways of your own human nature, and not following the principles of Christ. And by the way, what you quoted wasn't something that I said originally anyways.

So you are saying Jesus would not protect himself and his family?

 

[Blackguard_]

At least you can keep to yourself what really matters, your money.

Becasue no one has ever been killed even though they cooperated with the robber/rapist/whatever?

Everyone should read Loren Cunninghams' "Making Jesus Lord - The Dynamic Power of Laying Down Your Rights". That's a book that illustrates the Christ-like attitude toward our 'enemies'. Not to say that I would be a master of those skills either. Well, as long as you know the master you can know what to strive for

Let me take a guess; it's a mix of Pacifist Christianity and Stoicism isn't it?

If I ever have to use a weapon in my or anothers defense i'm not going to be thinking about how to most effectively wound him. I'm going to aim and empty the clip into him as fast as the pistol will fire. Anything less would be neglecting my duty to protect myself and others.

I don't think that;s what Tisiphone meant, or at least what he said doesn't have to mean that. Shooting to stop could include emptying the magazine into them. But lets say after emptying the gun the guy is clearly no longer a threat but is still alive. Or how about if he ceases to be a threat while you're still firing that mag? Do you finish him off?

I took Tisiphone to mean "shoot to stop, whether the guy dies or not is secondary" and not "shoot to wound".

 

[Suomipoika]

So you are saying Jesus would not protect himself and his family?

Well, I don't know exactly what Jesus would do. Jesus could clear the gun in the attacker's hand of ammo by saying just one word and then teach him a verbal lesson and say the words "go and sin no more" if he wanted to.

As for what a Christian should do.. well it's a different situation if you actually have to protect a company of people from an armed attacker. I think the principle would still be "the least possible damage". When it takes a paralyzing shot to protect people (I would say especially people other than yourself) from being killed then that's what you should do. If the shot turns out to be lethal (which should never be a Christian's real intention in a self-defence situation), then your attitude as a Christian should be "Lord forgive them for they don't know what they're doing", instead of kicking his bloody corpse and wishing him a nice day in perdition. Of course, you can always pray the Lord for the shot not to turn out a lethal one.

But the attitude of "emptying your clip on him without a second thought", from a Christian, gives me creeps.

Btw, I've done my military service, too, and still roughly remember how to handle an assault rifle.

 

[Suomipoika]

Let me take a guess; it's a mix of Pacifist Christianity and Stoicism isn't it?

No, Cunningham is actually the founder of YWAM (Youth With A Mission). Of course you can check out deceptioninthechurch.com to find out if he's a Stoicist or pacifist. The book, I could say, is about the principles of "radical following of Christ" and "laying down your whole life" and not least "giving up your rights to God (rights to 'my money', 'my life', 'my wealth', 'my career', 'my education'..)", some things that I myself admit to being a million light-years away from. After reading that one, I could just take a deep breath and wonder what kind of "me, me, my rights first" people we Christians actually are. "Good Christians". "Hey, I'm Jari, I'm a good Christian". Far from that, really. The way Christ descended himself and gave up his rights and became a servant is still something so very different from my character. Oh well..

 

[MezzaMorta]

I took Tisiphone to mean "shoot to stop,

Thats why I got a .45

 

[Blackguard_]

Ok, I'll check that ste out, although I can't help but be suspicious of a site with a name like "deceptioninthechurch.com"

 

[MezzaMorta]

But the attitude of "emptying your clip on him without a second thought", from a Christian, gives me creeps.

Easy to say living where you do, how ever growing up in a place where that second thought will get you killed might give me a different outlook on some things.

 

[Blackguard_]

Thats why I got a .45

oh great, I hope this doesn't turn into a 9mm vs. .45 thread.

 

[Suomipoika]

Ok, I'll check that ste out, although I can't help but be suspicious of a site with a name like "deceptioninthechurch.com"

That's was irony. I don't believe Cunningham's name is the first one you'll find on their 'lists'. Anyways, that's going way off-topic..

Easy to say living where you do, how ever growing up in a place where that second thought will get you killed might give me a different outlook on some things.

Oh, I'm really sorry to hear if you have experiences of something like that. And still, nowhere did I say that self defence would not be right. But at least reading some writings of Christians under persection might be something you could find edifying, then?