Pastors carrying guns

[Yeshua1]

And by...

Luk_22:36 He said to them, "But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one."

That was Jesus talking, FYI. Swords are not for cutting up vegetables, in case you didn't know. A man who refuses to defend his wife and children (and others who are weaker than himself), is a coward, and is worse than a tax collector; hiding behind pseudo-Christianity.

wasn't jesus sayin gin the good sameritan parable that we should look out for welfare of others, just as if we needed to be helped ourselves?

If i see a man raping a woman, can either walk away, pray about it, call 911, or else jump in and try to break it up?

And that jumping in to help is the preferred option!

 

[USN2Pulpit]

protestations

I deny that I live in fear. I deny that I'm paranoid. Is that a protestation?

I'm glad you have travelled the world and seen many things probably - and have never run into that kind of trouble. A lot of that has to do with "not looking for trouble," and I'm sure you credit that to the grace and protection from God Himself. Praise God for your testimony.

Having said that, there are also many that are well travelled and have to many "difficult" places, and do not have the same story you do.

 

[Crabtownboy]

And by...

Luk_22:36 He said to them, "But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one."

There is evidence that the word "sword" was added to the original text at a later date.

Clarke's Commentary on the Bible

He that hath no sword - Bishop Pearce supposes that the word μαχαιραν, sword, has been inserted here from what is said in Luke 22:38, as it is evident our Lord never intended to make any resistance, or to suffer a sword to be used on the occasion; see Matthew 26:52. The word stands rather oddly in the passage: the verse, translated in the order in which it stands, is as follows: And he who hath none, let him sell his garment and buy - a sword. Now it is plain that the verb πωλησατω, let him buy, may be referred to πηραν a scrip, in the former part of the verse: therefore if, according to the bishop's opinion, the word sword be omitted, the passage may be understood thus: "When I sent you out before, Luke 10:1, etc., I intended you to continue itinerants only for a few days, and to preach the Gospel only to your country-men; therefore you had but little need of a staff, purse, or scrip, as your journey was neither long, nor expensive; but now I am about to send you into all the world, to preach the Gospel to every creature; and, as ye shall be generally hated and persecuted for my sake, ye shall have need to make every prudent provision for your journey; and so necessary will it be for you to provide yourselves victuals, etc., for your passage through your inhospitable country, that, if any of you have no scrip or wallet, he should sell even his upper garment to provide one." Others, who are for retaining the word sword, think that it was a proverbial expression, intimating a time of great difficulty and danger, and that now the disciples had need to look to themselves, for his murderers were at hand. The reader will observe that these words were spoken to the disciples just before he went to the garden of Gethsemane, and that the danger was now so very near that there

And Christ did not mean it literally for each person then and now. He is referring to spiritual warfare. And he did in the garden criticize Peter for using a sword.

Geneva Study Bible

He says all this using an allegory, as if he said, O my friends and fellow soldiers, you have lived until now in relative peace: but now there is at hand a most severe battle to be fought, and you must therefore lay all other things aside and think about dressing yourselves in armour. And what this armour is, is shown by his own example, when he prayed afterward in the garden and reproved Peter for striking with the sword.

Wesley's Notes

22:36 But now - You will be quite in another situation. You will want every thing. He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one - It is plain, this is not to be taken literally. It only means, This will be a time of extreme danger.

Matthew Henry's commentary.

At the time the apostles understood Christ to mean real weapons, but he spake only of the weapons of the spiritual warfare. The sword of the Spirit is the sword with which the disciples of Christ must furnish themselves.

 

[USN2Pulpit]

Most people do not realize how much you can do by simply not being hostile and by acting confident ... IMHO.

I absolutely agree with this statement.

 

[Yeshua1]

I absolutely agree with this statement.

if Charles manson and his family had attacked your home, to kill your wife and kids off...

Would they get the "lets talk on this", or a 12 gauge between their eyes?

 

[Havensdad]

There is evidence that the word "sword" was added to the original text at a later date.

No, there is not. Some bishop objecting to the word is not "evidence." The word "sword" is present in the earliest manuscripts. That it comes at the end of the sentence should not surprise anyone with the least bit of knowledge of the Greek language. There is NO reason for believing it was added.

And Christ did not mean it literally for each person then and now. He is referring to spiritual warfare. And he did in the garden criticize Peter for using a sword.

Purses and cloaks are literal. Likewise should the sword be understood as literal; this is made clear, for when the disciples say that they have swords, Jesus says that they are sufficient. He didn't say "oh no, that isn't what I meant."

And no, Jesus did not criticize Peter for drawing his sword. He told him to put his sword away...not to get rid of it. He then stated that anyone who tried to stop His crucifixion would die, because it could not be stopped (any who draw the sword, will perish by the sword." That was not a universal principle, but a warning to the disciples not to try and stop His crucifixion.


We serve the God of the Old Testament. The God who said things like:

Exo 32:27 And he said to them, "Thus says the LORD God of Israel, 'Put your sword on your side each of you, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and each of you kill his brother and his companion and his neighbor.'"

Your liberal revisionism cannot change who God's word says that He is, and what we are to do. The man who does not physically defend the weak, is a coward, hiding behind his pseudo-christian religion.

 

[Monster]

Why do you abandon your responsibility to protect your wife (and others) when you leave your home? Do you only have a responsibility to protect her why you are home?

And for the record, I would never protect my property with deadly force. If someone wants my T.V. or laptop, they can take it...



Of course, Matthew 7 (and James) says this is sinful, but hey, who cares?

Defending others is a responsibility for a man. Its not optional.

You certainly are very selective about what you respond to with this first paragraph. And you certainly take liberties with the words of others in those responses. I'm doing okay with my side of the dialogue, no need to inflate what's there, if I need help with it I'll ask you.

- You've assumed I wouldn't protect my wife because I question the need to carry a gun to church, the store, where ever?

- You've assumed that I can only protect her via firearms? I'm a big dude with an interesting past, I don't necessarily need a gun in most cases. Do you recognize the other possibilities of self-defense, not involving hot lead and that don't end in likely death or serious injury for an opponent?

- What's your address? I could use a decent laptop, new TV or even a nice house? And thanks in advance...this one is tongue-in-cheek of course, I would never harm someone over "stuff" or take "stuff" that's not mine. But I will defend the peace and safety of my home and those that dwell within.

And for your second point; I can add sinner to my ever growing BBB labels, thanks! You like to unleash that rudder of yours, don't you? (see James) Just so you know though, Satan does a pretty good job of reminding of my sinful ways already, but you can pride yourself at being his recent helper in my life (although I don't recognize my lack of carrying a firearm at all times as sin). And interestingly enough, if not carrying a gun to defend myself is sin, would carrying a really-really big gun make me really-really righteous? Me thinks your logic bucket has a few leaks.

You still seem angry, is that the righteous kind? Or not? I figured you may want to peruse James a bit more while your there, it has a little something to say on the subject of anger.

And as parting albeit, slightly cheap-shot; do you ever wonder if George Zimmerman has second guessed his decisions? I do. He may have been perfectly justified, I don't know but if I were in his shoes (paper slippers probably) I'd imagine that I wished I had a can of pepper spray or maybe a blackjack rather that a hard caliber. Just conjecture on my part, not a judgment by any stretch.

 

[Monster]

No, there is not. Some bishop objecting to the word is not "evidence." The word "sword" is present in the earliest manuscripts. That it comes at the end of the sentence should not surprise anyone with the least bit of knowledge of the Greek language. There is NO reason for believing it was added.




Purses and cloaks are literal. Likewise should the sword be understood as literal; this is made clear, for when the disciples say that they have swords, Jesus says that they are sufficient. He didn't say "oh no, that isn't what I meant."

And no, Jesus did not criticize Peter for drawing his sword. He told him to put his sword away...not to get rid of it. He then stated that anyone who tried to stop His crucifixion would die, because it could not be stopped (any who draw the sword, will perish by the sword." That was not a universal principle, but a warning to the disciples not to try and stop His crucifixion.


We serve the God of the Old Testament. The God who said things like:

Exo 32:27 And he said to them, "Thus says the LORD God of Israel, 'Put your sword on your side each of you, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and each of you kill his brother and his companion and his neighbor.'"

Your liberal revisionism cannot change who God's word says that He is, and what we are to do. The man who does not physically defend the weak, is a coward, hiding behind his pseudo-christian religion.

But of course we serve the God of the New Testament too, right? He said a little something about how the entire law is summed up? That's always so inconvenient to consider isn't it?

 

[Havensdad]

But of course we serve the God of the New Testament too, right? He said a little something about how the entire law is summed up? That's always so inconvenient to consider isn't it?

Not at all. "Loving your neighbor" would include putting the bullet in the head of their attacker.

 

[Havensdad]

You certainly are very selective about what you respond to with this first paragraph. And you certainly take liberties with the words of others in those responses. I'm doing okay with my side of the dialogue, no need to inflate what's there, if I need help with it I'll ask you.

- You've assumed I wouldn't protect my wife because I question the need to carry a gun to church, the store, where ever?

Because you make up reasons not to; you have guns. You said you would use them in defense of your wife at home. You said that, not me. So why would you not do the same at the store, or church?

- You've assumed that I can only protect her via firearms? I'm a big dude with an interesting past, I don't necessarily need a gun in most cases. Do you recognize the other possibilities of self-defense, not involving hot lead and that don't end in likely death or serious injury for an opponent?

Bro, I am an ex self defense and Taekwondo instructor. I have a second degree black belt, as well as holding belts in Japanese Jujitsu and Ninpo. I don't care how bad you are; if someone is being mugged or attacked at gunpoint, or even knifepoint, your options sans weaponry, is very limited.

- What's your address? I could use a decent laptop, new TV or even a nice house? And thanks in advance...this one is tongue-in-cheek of course, I would never harm someone over "stuff" or take "stuff" that's not mine. But I will defend the peace and safety of my home and those that dwell within.

Glad to hear it.

And for your second point; I can add sinner to my ever growing BBB labels, thanks! You like to unleash that rudder of yours, don't you? (see James) Just so you know though, Satan does a pretty good job of reminding of my sinful ways already, but you can pride yourself at being his recent helper in my life (although I don't recognize my lack of carrying a firearm at all times as sin). And interestingly enough, if not carrying a gun to defend myself is sin, would carrying a really-really big gun make me really-really righteous? Me thinks your logic bucket has a few leaks.

I didn't say not carrying a gun is sinful. Not protecting one's spouse is sinful. And criticizing others for doing so, or questioning their motives, is sinful.

Don't forget that the Holy Spirit also points out sin in our life.

You still seem angry, is that the righteous kind? Or not? I figured you may want to peruse James a bit more while your there, it has a little something to say on the subject of anger.

I am not at all angry. I am just sick of people attacking others who are simply following a Biblical mandate. I am even sicker of people who hide behind religion to justify cowardice.

And as parting albeit, slightly cheap-shot; do you ever wonder if George Zimmerman has second guessed his decisions? I do. He may have been perfectly justified, I don't know but if I were in his shoes (paper slippers probably) I'd imagine that I wished I had a can of pepper spray or maybe a blackjack rather that a hard caliber. Just conjecture on my part, not a judgment by any stretch.

Nope. I'd rather have the gun, and aim for the knee. Plenty of people will walk through pepper spray like it isn't there.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Not at all. "Loving your neighbor" would include putting the bullet in the head of their attacker.

That seems to be your only answer. There are many ways to defend your wife and children other than shooting someone you believe is threatening them.

I can see nothing in the life of Christ or in his teachings that approves of your sentence above.

 

[Monster]

Because you make up reasons not to; you have guns. You said you would use them in defense of your wife at home. You said that, not me. So why would you not do the same at the store, or church?




Bro, I am an ex self defense and Taekwondo instructor. I have a second degree black belt, as well as holding belts in Japanese Jujitsu and Ninpo. I don't care how bad you are; if someone is being mugged or attacked at gunpoint, or even knifepoint, your options sans weaponry, is very limited.



Glad to hear it.



I didn't say not carrying a gun is sinful. Not protecting one's spouse is sinful. And criticizing others for doing so, or questioning their motives, is sinful.

Don't forget that the Holy Spirit also points out sin in our life.



I am not at all angry. I am just sick of people attacking others who are simply following a Biblical mandate. I am even sicker of people who hide behind religion to justify cowardice.



Nope. I'd rather have the gun, and aim for the knee. Plenty of people will walk through pepper spray like it isn't there.

See now, I agree with just about everything you just said, even the tone is milder and for me at least, is easier to respond to. I hope that doesn't sound patronizing or come across as smug. I just love to ask questions and challenge people to consider their decisions, choices and stances. It's often responded to with defensiveness or hostility but we move forward and grow, eh?

Some of the best growth in my walk has come from the iron of others sharpening me in the same manor. I don't think I'm that good when I'm on the receiving end but I'd be a lesser man for not having my "spirits tested".

Wifey just called me for dinner, must go! Thanks for chatting, I'll be baaaaack!