• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Poll: If the 2nd A was constitutionally repealed…….

Would you comply with the law to confiscate guns.

  • Yes, I would turn over the guns

    Votes: 7 50.0%
  • Yes, but only if they found where I hid them.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No, I would be uncooperative, but would not use violence

    Votes: 1 7.1%
  • No, they can have my guns when they pry them from my cold dead fingers.

    Votes: 6 42.9%

  • Total voters
    14
Status
Not open for further replies.

percho

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Is the mark of the beast going to be a law of the government? According to scripture, should one take the mark of the beast or not take the mark of the beast?

During the time spoken of in Rev. is the mark of the beast pre or post the kingdom of this world are become the kingdom of the Lord and of His Christ?

What about Romans 13? Apply or not to the mark of the beast?
 

canadyjd

Well-Known Member
Why is one “obviously evil” and the other “not at all an obvious evil”?

The GOVERNMENT declared that it was wrong to kill babies and right for people to own weapons to prevent tyranny. That SAME GOVERNMENT later declared that a baby was not a baby until it was born (so it was not wrong to kill an unborn baby) and that the people had no need to own weapons to prevent tyranny (ban on automatic weapons). So when you posit that this SAME GOVERNMENT someday decides that people need to own NO WEAPONS to prevent tyranny, what makes SOME decisions of the government GOOD and other decisions of the same government EVIL? A LAW is a LAW and you are asking if CHRISTIANS will obey the government (Romans 13) and obey the LAWS.

Is it so unreasonable to ask if the government that can support killing defenseless babies might support tyranny against defenseless citizens?
Killing babies is obviously evil, no matter what the government approves. Whether or not people get to own guns is not an obvious evil. It is a poor comparison.

The “government” didn’t declare the 2nd A into existence. The people of the country demanded its inclusion in the constitution for ratification and also approved a protocol for changing the constitution; which is ultimately left in the hands of citizens.

In the hypothetical, the process of changing the constitution has been followed properly.

peace to you
 

canadyjd

Well-Known Member
Is the mark of the beast going to be a law of the government? According to scripture, should one take the mark of the beast or not take the mark of the beast?

During the time spoken of in Rev. is the mark of the beast pre or post the kingdom of this world are become the kingdom of the Lord and of His Christ?

What about Romans 13? Apply or not to the mark of the beast?
That’s a good question for another thread. You should start one.

peace to you
 

canadyjd

Well-Known Member
Generally speaking, I believe in a God who supports freedom of choice. I also don't believe in a government who can restrict sporting equipment.
Scripture supports the idea in Christian liberty, the ultimate focus of that liberty is in how we live our lives for the cause of Christ.

peace to you
 

Lodic

Well-Known Member
It must be noted that the founding fathers were not following Christ Jesus in the writing of the Constitution. They were mostly Deists who lived by values found in the Bible. I do not worship our flawed father's, though I do admire they recognized all humans are corrupt by nature.
I must respectfully disagree. According to David Barton and other historians, the majority of our founding fathers were devout followers of Christ Jesus. Do you believe they made the wrong decision in their rebellion against the British Empire?
 

Earth Wind and Fire

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I flagged wetlands for a long time. I own more than one machete (used for work) and can chop down a 2” diameter tree in a single blow and a 4” diameter tree in multiple blows. I suspect that it would hurt someone intent on harm if the need arose.

(… imagine what my neighbor could do with his chainsaw?) ;)
I like drones and today they are cheap and effective. Also, explosives can be made from household items purchased at any Walmart.
 

AustinC

Well-Known Member
I must respectfully disagree. According to David Barton and other historians, the majority of our founding fathers were devout followers of Christ Jesus. Do you believe they made the wrong decision in their rebellion against the British Empire?
Scripture points out they were not obeying God when they revolted. Many colonists also disagreed with them. The Revolutionary War was actually the First Civil War of neighbor against neighbor.
It was the tactics of the Rebels that has been used in many other places in the world, including the Vietnam communist rebels who revolted against France and later the US.

The difference between the US rebels and the Vietnamese rebels is that the US rebels claimed God as their excuse while the Vietnamese claimed themselves as their excuse.

Look at Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine for the influence that spurred rebellion.
 

atpollard

Well-Known Member
The “government” didn’t declare the 2nd A into existence. The people of the country demanded its inclusion in the constitution for ratification and also approved a protocol for changing the constitution; which is ultimately left in the hands of citizens.
You may want to reread the Constitution and see the process for creating an amendment and then explain to me how that is not a “government” process?

You are substituting YOUR morals for Gods. “Evil” is what YOU say is evil and “good” is what you say is good.

Where does God prohibit killing a baby and where does God prohibit owning a weapon? Let GOD be the yardstick for judging good and evil, not your hatred of guns.
 

atpollard

Well-Known Member
As Salty said, the 2nd A was clearly designed to insure citizens could protect all their other liberties from an oppressive government.
Is God FOR or AGAINST “oppressive” governments?
Would a government stripping its citizens of such protection be a “good” or “evil” action?

(Your hypothetical case is founded on a false assumption that stripping the protection of the Second Amendment is a “good” thing and Christians should obey “good laws” … like making the citizens defenseless against tyranny … and oppose “evil laws” … like killing unborn ‘babies’). Since TYRANNY is evil, defending against tyranny is good and promoting defenselessness is evil.

So killing babies and killing those that oppose tyranny do hold some parallels. Defending babies and defending against tyranny also hold some parallels.

Hitler never attacked the United States, but it was right for the US to oppose the Third Reich’s conquest of Europe.
 

AustinC

Well-Known Member
Is God FOR or AGAINST “oppressive” governments?
Would a government stripping its citizens of such protection be a “good” or “evil” action?

(Your hypothetical case is founded on a false assumption that stripping the protection of the Second Amendment is a “good” thing and Christians should obey “good laws” … like making the citizens defenseless against tyranny … and oppose “evil laws” … like killing unborn ‘babies’). Since TYRANNY is evil, defending against tyranny is good and promoting defenselessness is evil.

So killing babies and killing those that oppose tyranny do hold some parallels. Defending babies and defending against tyranny also hold some parallels.

Hitler never attacked the United States, but it was right for the US to oppose the Third Reich’s conquest of Europe.
How does the Christian defend when His King is the Commander of the Lord's Army? Is not our best defense the Word of God and Prayer?

My opinion: We have been fighting this war with the world's weapons (legal battles and politics) when we should be using the weapons God has given us.

Ephesians 6:10-20

Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand firm. Stand therefore, having fastened on the belt of truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness, and, as shoes for your feet, having put on the readiness given by the gospel of peace. In all circumstances take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming darts of the evil one; and take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God, praying at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication. To that end keep alert with all perseverance, making supplication for all the saints, and also for me, that words may be given to me in opening my mouth boldly to proclaim the mystery of the gospel, for which I am an ambassador in chains, that I may declare it boldly, as I ought to speak.
 

BasketFinch

Active Member
Can the Second Amendment Be Repealed? How? - FindLaw

Leftist late night hosts are now in on disarming Americans. Colbert's rerun show this evening, a rebroadcast of some Thursday edition, has him saying it's long overdue for our government to do something about guns!

Actor Matthew McConaughey was a puppet of the White House recently. He's from Uvalde Texas, and talked about stricter gun laws, etc...
The Uvalde shooter purchased his weapons legally. Matt didn't seem to know that.

These shootings are far more in succession immediately after Uvalde than any I can recall happening just after an out of the blue (latest) massacre.

It's a pattern. One day after no reports of a mass shooting for months, one occurs.
Shortly after there's another, then another.

Children are always included among the dead in the first massacre.

Because innocent kids being shot outrages everyone.

And these massacres always spark gun rights debates. And of course D.C goes on the record on the Hill.

After Uvalde though it's way more follow-up killings than before.
And you know there's something up unlike before when media adds a killing in historic Philadelphia to that tally.
When there are killings happening there every single day, bar none.

I think there's going to come a day in a relatively short time from now when another massacre will occur so profound as to cause rumblings of Martial law being invoked.

It'll happen in one location, that city,town/state, where the massacre occurred.
It'll be spun as understandable given the death toll.
It'll happen. And will last for awhile there.
Then another massacre will happen. Possibly on the opposite coast from where the order for ML was invoked.

The ML model will be touted as effective. Because there were no shootings after ML was declared "there".

And that's when , after that second large scale mass murder event occurs, ML will be promoted as ideal for the whole country.
Because mass murder is an epidemic.

There's a years old anti-gun poster on the net that talks about Britain's seizure of firearms,even antiques, years ago.
The seizure was prompted by a school massacre.

It says, ever since the gun ban there has never been another school shooting.

Now in GB knives are the number one offensive weapon.
Oh, but at least it's not a gun.
Even their police are unarmed!
If firearms are deemed necessary at a scene, responding police have to call a special branch that's permitted to carry firearms to respond.
Of course this costs valuable time waiting for their arrival. And lives potentially too.

What does an unarmed citizen population do when their government is armed to the teeth?

Anything their told to do.
 

canadyjd

Well-Known Member
You may want to reread the Constitution and see the process for creating an amendment and then explain to me how that is not a “government” process?

You are substituting YOUR morals for Gods. “Evil” is what YOU say is evil and “good” is what you say is good.

Where does God prohibit killing a baby and where does God prohibit owning a weapon? Let GOD be the yardstick for judging good and evil, not your hatred of guns.
The people vote in the process of changing the constitution. It cannot be changed by congressional action alone.

Are you seriously asking “where does God prohibit killing a Baby? If you don’t know, I don’t think anything I say can help.

I don’t hate guns. I support the 2nd A.

peace to you
 

canadyjd

Well-Known Member
Is God FOR or AGAINST “oppressive” governments?
Would a government stripping its citizens of such protection be a “good” or “evil” action?

(Your hypothetical case is founded on a false assumption that stripping the protection of the Second Amendment is a “good” thing and Christians should obey “good laws” … like making the citizens defenseless against tyranny … and oppose “evil laws” … like killing unborn ‘babies’). Since TYRANNY is evil, defending against tyranny is good and promoting defenselessness is evil.

So killing babies and killing those that oppose tyranny do hold some parallels. Defending babies and defending against tyranny also hold some parallels.

Hitler never attacked the United States, but it was right for the US to oppose the Third Reich’s conquest of Europe.
God causes all nations to rise and fall. He sometimes uses evil nations to accomplish His will, such as Asseria and Babylon to conquer Israel for their unfaithfulness.

My hypothetical doesn’t declare the repeal of the 2nd A as “good” or “evil”, only that it was done according to the constitution guidelines.

I don’t see any reasonable comparison to a Christian opposing abortion and refusing to comply with the legal repeal of the 2nd A.

peace to you
 

BasketFinch

Active Member
The people vote in the process of changing the constitution. It cannot be changed by congressional action alone.

Are you seriously asking “where does God prohibit killing a Baby? If you don’t know, I don’t think anything I say can help.

I don’t hate guns. I support the 2nd A.

peace to you
Can God prohibit killing a baby when God killed babies?
 

BasketFinch

Active Member
Yes, since He’s God, He alone gets to make those decisions and He is always just and righteous when He does.

peace to you
So God, whom we're to obey as a role model for righteous living on our part, "Christlike"=Christian, can kill babies and children because he's God. But we can't legalize abortion because killing babies is contrary to the spirit of righteousness, that is God?

When Jesus,who was God, The Word made flesh, told his Disciples, “truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven"?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top