What's with men & GUNS???

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

His opinion was clear to me. His opinion is not diminished by it being unpopular with pro-gun people.

Maybe that's why it was clear to you. Both of us read things differently due to our political and personal beliefs.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[AMax 0]

There is one interesting correlation. It seems that guns are quite popular among conservative people. So what do you all think about guns and Christian religion? Obviously, the weapons are designed to kill. Those who owe the weapons for personal protection consider using them if needed (meaning consider the possibility of killing the human being). How does this go with the Bible? I am by no means trying to start a troll ... just curious ...

[Nightingale 0]

When people talk about Christianity and guns, they're usually thinking of the phrase "turn the other cheek".

I learned this in a Christian theology class I took in college...

The phrase "Turn the other cheek" has to be taken in historical context. At that time period, in that society, slapping someone across the face was an insult, equivalent to spitting on someone or giving them "the finger" today. In light of this context, "turn the other cheek" could be interpreted as a directive to ignore petty insults and not make mountains out of molehills. That passage in the bible doesn't address the concept of self-defense at all.


Quote:
from http://www.gac.20m.com/self-def.htm

"But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also"

Jesus specifically mentions the right cheek here , even though a blow from a right-handed person would normally fall on the left cheek. This probably means that the blow is delivered with the back of the hand, since then it would indeed fall on the right cheek. We know for certain that such a blow was considered particularly insulting. The injustice that is willingly accepted here is therefore not so much a matter of body injury as of shame. (H.N. Ridderbos. "Matthew": Bible Students Commentary. Zondervan. p. 113)

Its an interesting website. Check it out. it discusses self-defense and gun control in a biblical context.

Also, if you look at the Hebrew texts, most religious scholars tend to agree that "Thou shalt not kill" should actually be translated as "Thou shalt not murder", and in the old testament, there is a distinction between murder and manslaughter, to put it in modern terms. For example: "If a man come presumptuously upon his neighbour, to slay him with guile; thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die" (Ex. 21:14) Exodus goes on to say (Exodus 22:2-3) "If a thief is caught breaking in and is struck so that he dies, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed

The difference between killing and murdering is that murdering requires an intent to kill. With self defense, there is killing but no murder, because your main intent is not to kill someone, but to prevent that someone from killing you. In the Bible, God seemed to approve of David killing Goliath.

From www.gotquestions.org

As with many questions in our lives, I believe it all has to do with wisdom, understanding, and tact. For instance, in Luke 22, Jesus does tell his disciples to get a sword. Jesus knew that now was the time when Jesus would be threatened (and later killed) and his followers would be threatened as well. Jesus was giving approval of the fact that one has the right to defend himself. Now just a few verses later we see Jesus being arrested and Peter takes a sword and cuts off someone’s ear. Jesus rebukes him for that act. Why? Peter was trying to stop something that Jesus had been telling His disciples was in fact going to happen. In other words, Peter was acting unwisely in the situation. He was trying to stop something that was not supposed to be stopped. We must be wise when to fight and when not to.


I'm not sure if that answers your question, but it's a start, I guess.

[bobjoy9 0]

Quote

The difference between killing and murdering is that murdering requires an intent to kill. With self defense, there is killing but no murder, because your main intent is not to kill someone, but to prevent that someone from killing you. In the Bible, God seemed to approve of David killing Goliath.

-
-
Ok , I get the differance between killing & murder & how GOD condones his armies to protect from the murderers, And an eye for an eye. That's very straight forward.
-


But

Quote

Exodus goes on to say (Exodus 22:2-3) "If a thief is caught breaking in and is struck so that he dies, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed

-
-
Then why does the modern day Judge look toward the Bible when this happens today?
So many times we here how the intruder has sued the home owner for being struck.
What's up with that?
Is not the American society a huge christian society?
If so then why do the intruders getting away with it?
-
Personally I would like to protect myself with a baseball bat if I had to, but to shoot the guy?
I can't bring myself to kill him for stealing my stuff.

-
-
"LIFE IS GOOD - LIVE IT"
There's a little bit of EveL Knievel in all of us.

[bobjoy9 0]

Quote

Could have taken pics with the GLock, but it was easier to just use the pet punisher.

-
-
You really own a Glock?
So where's the bikini shot?
-
-

-
-
"LIFE IS GOOD - LIVE IT"
There's a little bit of EveL Knievel in all of us.

[chutem 0]

Only once on the comeing through the wall. The knock on the door in the middle of the night thing has happened more than once. I have not always had the funds to move to a better place. Sometimes you have to do the best you can with what you have. I have no ethical problem with useing deadly force to protect my family or yours. You will note that I refer to my firearms as weapons. I have no interest in hunting.
James

[Nightingale 0]

Well, first off, judges shouldn't be looking to the Bible. That's a first amendment violation, because then you get into the state promoting religion thing.

And, well, from reading the writings of the founding fathers, i don't believe that America was at that time, or was ever intended to be, a Christian society. It was intended to be a society where ALL religions could be practiced with freedom. A link from the US census page states that there was approximately 133,377,000 Christians (defined as all church members, their children, and other regular attendees, including, I believe, Catholics and Mormons, as there was no separate classificiation for them) in the US in 2000. The US population is 296,256,380, making less than half of US citizens Christian.

It is against the law in most (if not all...Texas?) states to use deadly force to protect property. You can, however, use deadly force if you have a reasonable belief that your life is in imminent danger. You are allowed to respond with force likely to cause death or great bodily harm if you are being threatened with death or great bodily harm. That's pretty in line with the swords in the garden story in the Bible. Have your weapons, but use them appropriately.

What I find interesting about "an eye for an eye" is that many people today believe that it was a brutal way of doing things. In actuality, at that time, it was a limitation on violence. If someone killed your brother, you could kill the murderer, but not his whole tribe/family. "An eye for an eye" is about responding to violence and threats in an appropriate manner.

People also tend to bring up "love your neighbor as yourself". For some reason, many people believe this is a call to be passive, to not respond to violence, when this is not the case. If you love someone, you're going to do what's best for them, as well as what's best for yourself, and letting someone inflict violence on your person without trying to stop them certainly isn't best for either party. Some Bible scholars say that "love your neighbor" could mean that if your neighbor is being threatened, that you may have an obligation to render assistance, because, after all, that's what you'd do for yourself.

[slug 1]

Quote

Quote

His opinion was clear to me. His opinion is not diminished by it being unpopular with pro-gun people.

Maybe that's why it was clear to you. Both of us read things differently due to our political and personal beliefs.

Hi AD

someone needs to wake up the dynamic duo JR & Mr K. their opinions on guns are very clear. really surprised they haven't humped on this thread.

R.I.P.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

someone needs to wake up the dynamic duo JR & Mr K.

We've covered all this ground before. I'm spending my limited time here on new subjects that aren't a repeat. Ho-hum!

[slug 1]

Quote

Quote

someone needs to wake up the dynamic duo JR & Mr K.

We've covered all this ground before. I'm spending my limited time here on new subjects that aren't a repeat. Ho-hum!

Hi JR

It's hard to get worked up about the SOS. But i thought you might have a couple of standard links to some of the past posts on the subject that you could cut copy and paste or do a clicky.

This thread is the same issue just a new person asking the same questions to for whatever reason.

R.I.P.