Proof: Parkland Survivors Screaming For Gun Control Aren't Serious About Fixing The Issues
Comments
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not take the whole Bible? Surely they would act out your understanding of it if it were true.
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not take the whole Bible? Surely they would act out your understanding of it if it were true.
I have already addressed this. You take things out of context and assume that because the NT doesn't deal directly with an issue that was dealt with already in the OT it means it is forbidden.
Perhaps you don't know that we do not have record of every moment of every member of the church in the NT. Nor do we need it. Why? God already gave us the OT that deals with a whole host of issues.
Let me ask you this, if you were at home and someone broke in and was raping your wife. Are you honestly telling me the Bible says to stand by and let this happen? We do not find that in Scripture.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not? Surely they would act out your understanding of the Sermon if it were true.> @davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not take the whole Bible? Surely they would act out your understanding of it if it were true.
I have already addressed this. You take things out of context and assume that because the NT doesn't deal directly with an issue that was dealt with already in the OT it means it is forbidden.
Perhaps you don't know that we do not have record of every moment of every member of the church in the NT. Nor do we need it. Why? God already gave us the OT that deals with a whole host of issues.
Let me ask you this, if you were at home and someone broke in and was raping your wife. Are you honestly telling me the Bible says to stand by and let this happen? We do not find that in Scripture.
Do you find killing your enemy in the NT?
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not? Surely they would act out your understanding of the Sermon if it were true.> @davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not take the whole Bible? Surely they would act out your understanding of it if it were true.
I have already addressed this. You take things out of context and assume that because the NT doesn't deal directly with an issue that was dealt with already in the OT it means it is forbidden.
Perhaps you don't know that we do not have record of every moment of every member of the church in the NT. Nor do we need it. Why? God already gave us the OT that deals with a whole host of issues.
Let me ask you this, if you were at home and someone broke in and was raping your wife. Are you honestly telling me the Bible says to stand by and let this happen? We do not find that in Scripture.
Do you find killing your enemy in the NT?
It doesn't need to be there Dave.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not? Surely they would act out your understanding of the Sermon if it were true.> @davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not take the whole Bible? Surely they would act out your understanding of it if it were true.
I have already addressed this. You take things out of context and assume that because the NT doesn't deal directly with an issue that was dealt with already in the OT it means it is forbidden.
Perhaps you don't know that we do not have record of every moment of every member of the church in the NT. Nor do we need it. Why? God already gave us the OT that deals with a whole host of issues.
Let me ask you this, if you were at home and someone broke in and was raping your wife. Are you honestly telling me the Bible says to stand by and let this happen? We do not find that in Scripture.
Do you find killing your enemy in the NT?
It doesn't need to be there Dave.
Jesus never says to wing it, he asks: ““Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and don’t do what I tell you?” (Luke 6:46)
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not? Surely they would act out your understanding of the Sermon if it were true.> @davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not take the whole Bible? Surely they would act out your understanding of it if it were true.
I have already addressed this. You take things out of context and assume that because the NT doesn't deal directly with an issue that was dealt with already in the OT it means it is forbidden.
Perhaps you don't know that we do not have record of every moment of every member of the church in the NT. Nor do we need it. Why? God already gave us the OT that deals with a whole host of issues.
Let me ask you this, if you were at home and someone broke in and was raping your wife. Are you honestly telling me the Bible says to stand by and let this happen? We do not find that in Scripture.
Do you find killing your enemy in the NT?
It doesn't need to be there Dave.
Jesus never says to wing it, he asks: ““Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and don’t do what I tell you?” (Luke 6:46)
Who said anything about winging it? I follow the Bible, the Bible permits violence in matters of self defense. Never does it forbid it. Not once.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not? Surely they would act out your understanding of the Sermon if it were true.> @davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not take the whole Bible? Surely they would act out your understanding of it if it were true.
I have already addressed this. You take things out of context and assume that because the NT doesn't deal directly with an issue that was dealt with already in the OT it means it is forbidden.
Perhaps you don't know that we do not have record of every moment of every member of the church in the NT. Nor do we need it. Why? God already gave us the OT that deals with a whole host of issues.
Let me ask you this, if you were at home and someone broke in and was raping your wife. Are you honestly telling me the Bible says to stand by and let this happen? We do not find that in Scripture.
Do you find killing your enemy in the NT?
It doesn't need to be there Dave.
Jesus never says to wing it, he asks: ““Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and don’t do what I tell you?” (Luke 6:46)
Who said anything about winging it? I follow the Bible, the Bible permits violence in matters of self defense. Never does it forbid it. Not once.
““You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’But I say to you, do not resist the evildoer. But whoever strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other to him as well. And if someone wants to sue you and to take your tunic, give him your coat also. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to the one who asks you, and do not reject the one who wants to borrow from you. “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor’ and ‘hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemy and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be like your Father in heaven, since he causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Even the tax collectors do the same, don’t they? And if you only greet your brothers, what more do you do? Even the Gentiles do the same, don’t they? So then, be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Matthew 5:38–48)
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not? Surely they would act out your understanding of the Sermon if it were true.> @davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not take the whole Bible? Surely they would act out your understanding of it if it were true.
I have already addressed this. You take things out of context and assume that because the NT doesn't deal directly with an issue that was dealt with already in the OT it means it is forbidden.
Perhaps you don't know that we do not have record of every moment of every member of the church in the NT. Nor do we need it. Why? God already gave us the OT that deals with a whole host of issues.
Let me ask you this, if you were at home and someone broke in and was raping your wife. Are you honestly telling me the Bible says to stand by and let this happen? We do not find that in Scripture.
Do you find killing your enemy in the NT?
It doesn't need to be there Dave.
Jesus never says to wing it, he asks: ““Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and don’t do what I tell you?” (Luke 6:46)
Who said anything about winging it? I follow the Bible, the Bible permits violence in matters of self defense. Never does it forbid it. Not once.
““You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’But I say to you, do not resist the evildoer. But whoever strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other to him as well. And if someone wants to sue you and to take your tunic, give him your coat also. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to the one who asks you, and do not reject the one who wants to borrow from you. “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor’ and ‘hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemy and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be like your Father in heaven, since he causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Even the tax collectors do the same, don’t they? And if you only greet your brothers, what more do you do? Even the Gentiles do the same, don’t they? So then, be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Matthew 5:38–48)
That is not talking about self defense Dave.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not? Surely they would act out your understanding of the Sermon if it were true.> @davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not take the whole Bible? Surely they would act out your understanding of it if it were true.
I have already addressed this. You take things out of context and assume that because the NT doesn't deal directly with an issue that was dealt with already in the OT it means it is forbidden.
Perhaps you don't know that we do not have record of every moment of every member of the church in the NT. Nor do we need it. Why? God already gave us the OT that deals with a whole host of issues.
Let me ask you this, if you were at home and someone broke in and was raping your wife. Are you honestly telling me the Bible says to stand by and let this happen? We do not find that in Scripture.
Do you find killing your enemy in the NT?
It doesn't need to be there Dave.
Jesus never says to wing it, he asks: ““Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and don’t do what I tell you?” (Luke 6:46)
Who said anything about winging it? I follow the Bible, the Bible permits violence in matters of self defense. Never does it forbid it. Not once.
““You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’But I say to you, do not resist the evildoer. But whoever strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other to him as well. And if someone wants to sue you and to take your tunic, give him your coat also. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to the one who asks you, and do not reject the one who wants to borrow from you. “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor’ and ‘hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemy and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be like your Father in heaven, since he causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Even the tax collectors do the same, don’t they? And if you only greet your brothers, what more do you do? Even the Gentiles do the same, don’t they? So then, be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Matthew 5:38–48)
That is not talking about self defense Dave.
How so?
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not? Surely they would act out your understanding of the Sermon if it were true.> @davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
In view of Jesus' stated purpose for coming to earth, I believe we should always ask if our doctrinal or political positions tend to abundant life or detract from it.I would think saving lives leads to abundant life, that is what the 2nd Amendment allows for.
It equips carnal minded people for killing under what they think are justifiable reasons.
No it doesn't actually. That is the major point you miss. Criminals will get guns no matter what and kill no matter what. And whether you think so or not, the Bible actually states there are justifiable reasons for killing. I know that may shock you, but they are there.
You cannot justify killing because criminals do it. How do you fit in with James' view?
“From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” (James 4:1–4)
Once again a passage taken out of its context. Is that all you know how to do?
Isn't James speaking about the Zealot types? Similar to our own Zealot types?
Actually I would consider you a zealot. That being said, yes, James is, but you still take it out of context and misapply it to our current conversation.
The Zealots were violent. I'm not. Nor is anyone who follows Christ.
Perhaps you should lookup the definition of zealot....
Rather than argue word meanings, let's look at what James says and then ask, who might this apply to today?
You have to look at in context and in the whole of Scripture Dave, including the OT. And you, and I mean you personally now, need to understand the people you are trying to apply it to.
You do not understand the NRA or people who support gun rights. You think you do but you don't. You apply an understanding to them based on what a certain section of the population applies to them. An understanding that is not reality.
No matter how you approach it, NT Christians have no involvement with killing for any reason.
But it is not forbidden either. There's the problem Dave. You ignore the whole of Scripture and take a section of Scripture, and because that section of Scripture doesn't deal with a topic that was dealt with in the part you ignore you take it that it means that is forbidden. That is a horrible hermeneutical approach and flat wrong.
Love your enemies? Do not resist violence? Put away your sword? etc. etc...
Love your enemies, yes. Where does it say do not resist violence? Where does it say to always put away your sword? In fact, Jesus said to purchase a sword.
If you carefully read the Sermon, Jesus says to love our enemies. He also tells us not to resist (physical) evil (violence) when hit on the face, but to turn the other cheek too. If we cannot do this, we will never be able to do what demands even more courage. Jesus told Peter to put away the sword when he used it for self defence.
- I agreed we are to love our enemies. This does not mean let our enemies run over us.
- Jesus did say to turn the other cheek. But he was not talking about self-defense. He was talking about vengence. There is a major difference in those two.
- Jesus did not tell Peter to put the sword away for using it in self defense and to say so is ignorant at best. The situation was something Peter did not understand. He would have stopped what would have saved the entire world. And, Peter was not acting in self-defense. He was not personally being threatened, nor was Jesus, yet. He was being arrested. There is a major difference.
Once again, you take things out of their context to misapply a meaning that doesn't exist to a situation that is not relevant.
“For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
Who did no sin, (if Jesus says to love our enemies, it is sin if we do not) neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:” (1 Peter 2:21–23)
We do not see your understanding of the Sermon on the Mount anywhere in scripture. And Jesus also told Peter to put away the sword rather than defend himself and the group with it.
Once again your classic move of taking things out of context. And with Peter, you totally ignored my rebuttal to your position. To put it simply, you misinterpreted that passage.
Please show examples of Jesus or any of the NT believers doing what you would do in a violent situation.
Unlike you I take the whole Bible, not just the NT. Exodus 22 permits self-defense.
Are you saying Jesus and the NT believers did not take the whole Bible? Surely they would act out your understanding of it if it were true.
I have already addressed this. You take things out of context and assume that because the NT doesn't deal directly with an issue that was dealt with already in the OT it means it is forbidden.
Perhaps you don't know that we do not have record of every moment of every member of the church in the NT. Nor do we need it. Why? God already gave us the OT that deals with a whole host of issues.
Let me ask you this, if you were at home and someone broke in and was raping your wife. Are you honestly telling me the Bible says to stand by and let this happen? We do not find that in Scripture.
Do you find killing your enemy in the NT?
It doesn't need to be there Dave.
Jesus never says to wing it, he asks: ““Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and don’t do what I tell you?” (Luke 6:46)
Who said anything about winging it? I follow the Bible, the Bible permits violence in matters of self defense. Never does it forbid it. Not once.
““You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’But I say to you, do not resist the evildoer. But whoever strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other to him as well. And if someone wants to sue you and to take your tunic, give him your coat also. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to the one who asks you, and do not reject the one who wants to borrow from you. “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor’ and ‘hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemy and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be like your Father in heaven, since he causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Even the tax collectors do the same, don’t they? And if you only greet your brothers, what more do you do? Even the Gentiles do the same, don’t they? So then, be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Matthew 5:38–48)
That is not talking about self defense Dave.
How so?
Go back to the eye for an eye passage, it was not talking about self defense either.
