In Defiance of Christ’s Teachings Right Wing Evangelicals Become Gun Toting Maniacs

[wpe3bql]

Is a whip a weapon?

Ask the money changers at the temple what they thought it was.

I don't recall reading that any of them grabbed any swords to chase Jesus away from the temple mound either of the times He upset their tables (at which most of the money changers were also ripping off lots of people by charging exorbitant exchange rates).

Maybe your Bible states that these money changers attacked Jesus those two times he confronted them.

If it does, either your Bible is different than mine is, or mine is one of those with a bunch of missing verses.

Which is it, my friend? :wavey:

 

[Alcott]

Padre, a rather liberal interpretation of those verses as they are about following him and the problems that may cause. Those verses are not about worshop services.

So is it alright to be a gun-toting maniac outside a worshop service? And is it alright to cause dissension and enmity, as Jesus himself did? If your answer is other than 'yes' to that, then tell us why you do it. Of course, your normal reaction is to ignore a question like this, while criticizing others for not answering yours.

 

[Crabtownboy]

So is it alright to be a gun-toting maniac outside a worshop service?

Your words not mine. Strange interpretation from you on that one.

And is it alright to cause dissension and enmity, as Jesus himself did?

In some families it is possible that becoming a Christian will cause family problems. In 1995 I met a new Christian in China who said it would cause huge problems in her family.

If your answer is other than 'yes' to that, then tell us why you do it. Of course, your normal reaction is to ignore a question like this, while criticizing others for not answering yours.

In this topic I see that following the examples and teachings of Jesus certainly does cause heartburn with some.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

And once again, this is your teaching.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Unholy guns in holy places

My most core Christian convictions center in the lordship of Jesus Christ, who laid down his life but did not take anyone’s life — and taught his followers the same pattern. When he could have defended himself, he did not. When the early church could have defended itself, it did not. Martyrdom and not defensive violence became the Christian paradigm. The early church dreamed of and worked for a renewed world and an end to its bloody violence.

But eventually Christians came to a theoretically limited embrace of violence, first in defense of the (supposedly Christian) Roman state and then its successors after the 4th century. Sometimes they embraced violence in the name of both state and church, for example, in suppressing heretics. Christians tended to support and participate in the violence governmental leaders ordered them to commit in criminal justice and in war, though just war/just violence theory set some limits – which gradually became refined over time.

Just war thinkers always drew a sharp line between defensive and offensive violence, between justified and unjustified force. But just war theory was primarily focused on the defense of the community or the state, not the individual Christian or the congregation. Romans 13:1-7 was read to authorize state violence as a deterrent, as defense, and as punishment of the wicked for violating communal peace and harming innocent people. But responsibility for executing that violence was left in the hands of government and its officials, which could and did include individual Christians but was separated from the function of the church. I could be shown to be wrong, but my reading of the Christian tradition is that the idea of heavily armed congregations hunkered down in self-defense in their houses of worship is a foreign concept.

- See more at: http://davidgushee.religionnews.com/2015/06/24/guns-emanuel-ame-charleston/#sthash.I8X6QV2I.dpuf

 

[padredurand]

John 10:18 NAS77

18 "No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father."​

Jesus was not a defenseless victim.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Still no biblical smoking gun, eh ?

 

[Tom Bryant]

Tom, a very liberal interpretation of that passage. It has to do about traveling, not worship services in a building.

Too bad Jesus didn't say that. He spoke this in the context of the mission trip they went on earlier. Now Jesus says "take personal protection"

So why don't you just admit that your "heresy" comment was over the top and wrong.

But I love the idea that you, the King of liberal thought here, describe anything as liberal. If you want to know what liberal interpretations are, read what you write.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Too bad Jesus didn't say that. He spoke this in the context of the mission trip they went on earlier. Now Jesus says "take personal protection"

Of course, personal protection while traveling. That is the straight forward conservative interpretation.

So now you know you are a liberal in interpreting scripture. :laugh:

 

[Tom Bryant]

Of course, personal protection while traveling. That is the straight forward conservative interpretation.

So now you know you are a liberal in interpreting scripture. :laugh:

Actually it's the conservative interpretation because the context - if you read and understood Scripture - says that they are on a mission trip, not just traveling.

So how are we heretics? You said it. Defend it.

 

[Alcott]

So if a criminal gang busts into a church service uttering loud GD's (in other than Obama's and j.Wright's church), then take a girl from the youth section and start tearing off her clothes while they circle around her.... do nothing, except maybe call the police, as only 'higher power' officials may use any kinds of force or violence against those baaaaad guys?

 

[Alcott]

Your words not mine. Strange interpretation from you on that one.

"Gun-toting maniacs" the term YOU put into this thread in your title.

 

[Zaac]

There has been a shift among evangelical Christians of late to openly oppose everything Jesus taught and commonplace to openly judge people, withhold sustenance from the hungry, deny healthcare to the infirm, and harbor hate based on race, religion and sexual orientation. They have also been fierce advocates for guns that appears to be a fundamental principle defining evangelicals and belies their Christianity they claim spurs them to do “the lord’s work.” The new “American Christianity” has adopted Old Testament lessons of vengeance, massacres, slavery, and intolerance and summarily rejected Christ’s teachings of peace, charity, and concern for humanity. Oddly, pseudo-Christians do not even follow the Old Testament’s Mosaic Law they cite to justify their hatred towards gays, mistreatment of women, and their gross misconception of when a fetus becomes a person. They do not even adhere to the scriptural Ten Commandments they claim should replace the U.S. Constitution.

Although they violate most of the Ten Commandments, they are particularly guilty of sacrilege for disregarding the 4th commandment. It says, “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Exodus 20:4-6, Deuteronomy 5:8-10). The evangelicals claiming to be “real Americans” show reverence for, devotion, and service to the American flag with its likeness of “anything that is in heaven above” (50 stars). The faithful also eat pork, shellfish, wear mixed fabrics, work on the Sabbath, and violate most of the Mosaic Laws leading a skeptical person to believe their claim to follow their holy book is one of convenience and not devotion to the scriptures.

It is irrelevant, really, why so many Americans claim they adhere to Christianity when they hardly adhere to any of their bible’s tenets, but it is relevant that they use that designation as their divine right to impose their harsh form of Christianity on the rest of America, including other Christians. Doubtless, their religion’s namesake, Jesus Christ, would condemn their rejection of his simple commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself,” and the Old Testament god would condemn them for violating most of the Ten Commandments. The real Christians in America, and there are many, and real clergy, there are few, should condemn them for disparaging their shared faith; particularly the Texas preacher advocating open-carry sidearms and frightening people in the name of his real religion; the 2nd Amendment and the National Rifle Association.

http://www.politicususa.com/2013/08...ngs-wing-evangelicals-gun-toting-maniacs.html

:applause::applause::applause:

 

[Bro. Curtis]

And when you're done smooching CTBoy you can show us this heresy he's telling us about.


There's enough scripture to reject the both of you.

 

[Revmitchell]

When it comes to security in the church there is a little thing called due diligence. Lack of this little thing will create laws suits should a gunman come into the church and attack people. The liability and due diligence could shut a church down should it be found guilty of not taking proper precautions to protect people who come on the property.

Now how that occurs can be addressed in a number of ways. Either hire some security or the church can use its own people for it. Either way security on church property needs to be obtained in some fashion in order to provide due diligence.

Further, the premise of the op is incorrect. The premise being having or using a gun is wrong. Guns like anything else can be used with evil intents or they can be used with good intentions. Saving the lives of the innocent is, of course, the latter.

Those who disagree with that are fine to do so but demonizing them simply because you disagree is as unChristian as anything else.

 

[Baptist Believer]

There has been a shift among evangelical Christians of late to openly oppose everything Jesus taught and commonplace to openly judge people, withhold sustenance from the hungry, deny healthcare to the infirm, and harbor hate based on race, religion and sexual orientation.

Who are these people?

They have also been fierce advocates for guns that appears to be a fundamental principle defining evangelicals and belies their Christianity they claim spurs them to do “the lord’s work.”

Really? How is being someone who approves of the freedom to defend oneself, their loved ones, and their neighbors belie their Christian faith and message?

The new “American Christianity” has adopted Old Testament lessons of vengeance, massacres, slavery, and intolerance and summarily rejected Christ’s teachings of peace, charity, and concern for humanity.

Where are these "American Christians" this article is describing?

Oddly, pseudo-Christians do not even follow the Old Testament’s Mosaic Law they cite to justify their hatred towards gays, mistreatment of women, and their gross misconception of when a fetus becomes a person.

These pseudo-Christians sound like a bad crowd. How do we know a pseudo-Christian? Are they the same as the horrible "American Christians" or the "evangelical Christians" referred to earlier? Does this article have anything to say except engaging in name-calling, broad-brush condemnation, and the stereotyping of all persons in a movement based on the bad behavior of a few?

They do not even adhere to the scriptural Ten Commandments they claim should replace the U.S. Constitution.

Who are these people and why do they advocate for the replacement of the U.S. Constitution with the Ten Commandments? That is not even a coherent thought?

Although they violate most of the Ten Commandments, they are particularly guilty of sacrilege for disregarding the 4th commandment. It says, “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Exodus 20:4-6, Deuteronomy 5:8-10). The evangelicals claiming to be “real Americans” show reverence for, devotion, and service to the American flag with its likeness of “anything that is in heaven above” (50 stars).

They do? The flag is an object of worship?

The faithful also eat pork, shellfish, wear mixed fabrics, work on the Sabbath, and violate most of the Mosaic Laws leading a skeptical person to believe their claim to follow their holy book is one of convenience and not devotion to the scriptures.

The accusation shows an enormous ignorance of the New Testament. This is condemnation of some weird bunch of Christians for not being orthodox Jews and actually accepting the teachings of Christ, the revelation of Acts 10, and the decision of the Jerusalem Council described in Acts 15 - which, by the way, tells Gentiles to abstain from sexual immorality. Therefore, one can't make the argument that laws related to sexual immorality are only part of the Mosaic Law. That is sheer ignorance.

It is irrelevant, really, why so many Americans claim they adhere to Christianity when they hardly adhere to any of their bible’s tenets, but it is relevant that they use that designation as their divine right to impose their harsh form of Christianity on the rest of America, including other Christians.

Again, who are these nut jobs? Sounds like a straw man to me.

Doubtless, their religion’s namesake, Jesus Christ, would condemn their rejection of his simple commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself,” and the Old Testament god would condemn them for violating most of the Ten Commandments.

Really? This person knows what Jesus (Who he/she doesn't believe is associated with the Old Testament God) would condemn? Given the biblical ignorance here, I doubt this person can legitimately make that call.

The real Christians in America, and there are many, and real clergy, there are few, should condemn them for disparaging their shared faith; particularly the Texas preacher advocating open-carry sidearms and frightening people in the name of his real religion; the 2nd Amendment and the National Rifle Association.[/quote}
I would if I knew who these people are. I suspect they don't really exist as described.

http://www.politicususa.com/2013/08...ngs-wing-evangelicals-gun-toting-maniacs.html

Oh, you're reading this garbage. This stuff will rot your mind.

By the way, no one is walking around with "assault rifles" (aka machine guns). They are highly illegal except for a very few who have special permits. Anyone who claims otherwise is a liar or profoundly ignorant.

Articles like this are not designed to inform or change anyone's mind. They are designed to reinforce anger, contempt and ignorance.

 

[Revmitchell]

Articles like this are not designed to inform or change anyone's mind. They are designed to reinforce anger, contempt and ignorance.

And most likely the intent behind posting it here.

 

[carpro]

There has been a shift among evangelical Christians of late to openly oppose everything Jesus taught and commonplace to openly judge people, withhold sustenance from the hungry, deny healthcare to the infirm, and harbor hate based on race, religion and sexual orientation. They have also been fierce advocates for guns that appears to be a fundamental principle defining evangelicals and belies their Christianity they claim spurs them to do “the lord’s work.” The new “American Christianity” has adopted Old Testament lessons of vengeance, massacres, slavery, and intolerance and summarily rejected Christ’s teachings of peace, charity, and concern for humanity. Oddly, pseudo-Christians do not even follow the Old Testament’s Mosaic Law they cite to justify their hatred towards gays, mistreatment of women, and their gross misconception of when a fetus becomes a person. They do not even adhere to the scriptural Ten Commandments they claim should replace the U.S. Constitution.

Although they violate most of the Ten Commandments, they are particularly guilty of sacrilege for disregarding the 4th commandment. It says, “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Exodus 20:4-6, Deuteronomy 5:8-10). The evangelicals claiming to be “real Americans” show reverence for, devotion, and service to the American flag with its likeness of “anything that is in heaven above” (50 stars). The faithful also eat pork, shellfish, wear mixed fabrics, work on the Sabbath, and violate most of the Mosaic Laws leading a skeptical person to believe their claim to follow their holy book is one of convenience and not devotion to the scriptures.

It is irrelevant, really, why so many Americans claim they adhere to Christianity when they hardly adhere to any of their bible’s tenets, but it is relevant that they use that designation as their divine right to impose their harsh form of Christianity on the rest of America, including other Christians. Doubtless, their religion’s namesake, Jesus Christ, would condemn their rejection of his simple commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself,” and the Old Testament god would condemn them for violating most of the Ten Commandments. The real Christians in America, and there are many, and real clergy, there are few, should condemn them for disparaging their shared faith; particularly the Texas preacher advocating open-carry sidearms and frightening people in the name of his real religion; the 2nd Amendment and the National Rifle Association.

http://www.politicususa.com/2013/08...ngs-wing-evangelicals-gun-toting-maniacs.html

Unmitigated garbage.

 

[church mouse guy]

Crabtown, this is typical 1930s Great Depression era theology of the social gospel of the full belly.

As for the flag in a church, this issue is over a hundred years old, also. When The Salvation Army came to the USA, they encountered resistance from the public because of their English origins. The Booth Family took to waving the flag in public meetings to counter-act that notion. The overwhelming majority of American churches have an American flag--so what?

Now we have had for many decades, armed people invade religious services of all types and murder people. There cannot be anything wrong with churches being armed to stop this senseless slaughter of the sheep since someone had a weapon at the time of the illegal arrest of Jesus--it was not that he should not have had a weapon but that he should not have used it, huh?

The theology of the full belly notes that people are falling off the cliff. That theology calls for building a hospital at the bottom of the cliff to treat the victims.

Orthodox theology calls for building a fence to prevent people from falling off the cliff.

 

[sag38]

Unmitigated garbage.

We would expect no less from Crabby. He simply being true to form and as always shows his complete ignorance of sound Biblical interpretation and application. His Bible must be the Leftist's Study Bible..You know the one with an introduction to world peace written by John Kerry.