JohnB, Respectfully if you look at the numbers compared to the outrage, things are not equal. The lone individual with a firearm has little impact on anything. It's distraction from the real issue. The Beast of Revelation and the false prophet has all the "guns" so to speak. SDA having fits about individuals with firearms is not an issue. Good example is who won the battle at Waco? Nutty Branch Davidians were an excuse and firearms did not help.
An individual kills people 20 people in a Walmart, big headlines. People like ZJ loose collective minds calling for confiscation and more laws. Does it relate to Sunday law in the USA? Possibly. In Canada and the UK you have already lost the right to free speech and you will never get it back.
The police, or military in a Middle Eastern country or Central Africa shoot a 100 civilians and it isn't even a thought. No one cares. No big deal In fact excuses will be made.
John do you "in the state we trust". Love and respect for Gods law and respect for human life is what matters. Firearms are not the issue. Human hearts are.
Bart, you ask if I trust in the state. No, I trust in God. But why do you need to ask that?
This appears to be obfuscation and avoidance of the issue. The topic of the thread is self-defence and the Bible but all I am seeing is diatribes about Christians carrying guns. I dont understand this obsession with firearms. It seems to be a US thing because nobody else goes on about it in such a way, to the point, it seems, of guns being the exclusive and essential sole objects of self-defence. Somehow the idea of a well-regulated militia has morphed into people carrying and using firearms. I still dont see Christ's words being addressed, it seems like they are, in the main, ignored as they get in the way of the righteousness of carrying and using guns.
Similarly, I dont understand the reference to a loss of free speech in the UK? What is meant by that and what does it have to do with the topic?
Great post JohnB, I totally agree with you. If we are following Jesus as our example, it's a no brainier, using violence towards someone to protect yourself should be avoided... and no... it's doesn't mean Christian men (in the voice of Arnold) are "weak sissy men"..
Whether man or woman, whether using hands and feet because your a black belt or trained in the mountains of shaolin and mastered the crane, golden Palm and 18 diagram pole technic... or having a gun, a Rambo knife, nunchucks, brass knuckles, etc.. It doesn't matter, we are to follow Jesus' example, no violence!
It's definitely a mucho thing, it's in us, to hurt someone by defending yourself is second nature for many. Thank GOD I haven't been in a situation where someone wants to physically harm me, but if I was, I'm afraid the sinner in me of wanting to use physical harm towards someone wanting to use physical harm towards me and my family would come out. I really pray it won't. Lol... Not saying It would stop me from getting beat up, but I ain't going out like a that. The mentality is screwed up.
That's why I need Jesus, to keep me far away from the person in me that goes against His will and example. Tough pill to swallow to get slapped and turn the other cheek to get same thing done. But I believe the closer we come to Jesus, or better yet, since Jesus is right at the door of our hearts, allow Him to fully come in and transform our life, then wanting to use violence to stop someone wanting to use violence against us won't even be an option in our mind.
Like your example JohnB, stay committed to your path, trust in and let GOD guide and protect you through potential harmful situations. Faith is the only thing that can gets us through.
Thank you for your post. Blessings!
A non-Adventist friend commented that a great deal of Adventist males probably get to much soy in their diet. I am beginning to agree and personally avoid soy do to the estrogen effects. I will stand up for the people I love.
The entire soy/oestrogen thing is a myth - it is phytoestrogen which is at a low level anyway.
However, it does bring in another point: there appears to be an underlying misogynistic attitude that is equating pacifism with weakness and inferring that to be a "man" one has to possess, or want to use, firearms.
Considering that Christ said that we should "turn the other cheek" and respond to evil with love does that mean that Christ was effeminate and weak? By extension is being a peaceful Christian a sign of weakness?
There is also the question of why guns appear to be the only form of self-defence being promoted by our North American cousins - where does this infatuation with deadly weapons, objects designed solely with the intention of taking life, fit in with the pursuit of Christianity?
"Bart, you ask if I trust in the state. No, I trust in God. But why do you need to ask that?"
Kindly John, I am making a point. You trust the military and police to provide law and order. They have all kinds of those macho things call "guns".
People from the UK and people like Reasoning always act so silly about firearms and call them macho. It is quite telling. It is almost as if you give an object a spiritual quality and make it larger than life.
"This appears to be obfuscation and avoidance of the issue."
I have tried to get to greater issues than just "guns" as you call them, but you seem fixated on asking me the same question about Jesus and Guns. You sir seem to be stuck on the topic of guns. Like a moth to a flame you are drawn to the object itself.
I wonder if it is possible to have a real discussion about issues?
Murder there is a commandment about this. Let's avoid that topic and repeat a question.
Single mothers and young fatherless men is another topic. You have young fatherless violent men in the UK. With out guns they will become less violent? Maybe if you remove knives they will become like kittens? Instead ask why Americans love guns.
Discuss the actual topic of self defense. Example: If a man touches my wife can I punch him? Instead ask why the USA has guns.
Waco and what happened there ties into the subject of this thread. Avoid that and ask same question.
Is self defense if you defend others? Nope! guns focus on guns.
Prophecy and the US Constitution and how the 2nd Amendment protects the bill of rights and freedom of speech. Probably not an issue to someone in the UK who Nope, Jesus didn't have a gun.
It is very humorous to me that you use an evangelical argument splitting off the Old Testement from the New to avoid a difficult topic and then accuse me of obfuscation.
Maybe a real discussion rather your assumption of having higher moral authority because you live in a neutered and suppressed country.
The Old Testament is just as much from God as the New. The answer is in both volumes, not in ignoring one.
In talking with Christians who are in the military and in the police, I ask them whether they are trusting in the firearms and their training rather than trusting in God. Their answer is usually something like, "I am praying every time I have to enforce the law or go to battle. I pray that God will help me to avoid hurting another human being, but if I must, I pray that He will help me shoot straight to protect the innocent". And there are Christians in the military and in the police - good, Bible-believing Christians who show every sign of belonging to Christ (of course, no one can look into hearts). The belief that it is inherently dishonoring to Christ to take up a firearm, or commit violence to protect the innocent carries with it the concept that NO ONE in the military or in the police can be saved without renouncing the military or the police.
And the people who believe that it is inherently dishonoring to Christ to take up a firearm, seem to have no compunction in CALLING the police when a crime is committed against them, or when violence is threatened against them. That is rather like a Pharisee hiring a Gentile to carry a burden for him on the Sabbath Day, so that he will not sin (although he fully believes that the Gentile is committing sin while carrying the burden).
Jack said, "The belief that it is inherently dishonoring to Christ to take up a firearm, or commit violence to protect the innocent carries with it the concept that NO ONE in the military or in the police can be saved without renouncing the military or the police."
That is a misrepresentation of both the topic and the argument. The topic is about self-defence and the Bible. To equivocate that with state enforcement of law is to misunderstand the point.
Not true. If defending yourself with a firearm with or without a firearm is sinful, and if defending someone else in the same way is sinful, then asking someone else to do the same thing FOR you also makes you complicit in THEIR sinful act of doing what you would not do. Or are you saying that “it is sinful for me to do such, but it is NOT sinful for them”? Because it is not the big, old “state” who rolls into my yard in a SWAT van, it is individual human beings. And those human beings perform actions, actions which you have said are against Christ’s commands (I.e., sinful). Are you saying that because they are commanded/allowed/authorized by the state to do so, it is therefore not sinful for them?
Don't recall mentioning sin?
The topic is self defence and the Bible.
This "police are exempt but I am obedient" sounds like "Shabbos goy", It's ok to hire the non Jew to work on the Sabbath. This is a practice similar to what the Pharisees taught in the Time that Jesus was here on earth.
God made allowance for enforing law in order in the Bible in Noah's time after the flood. Is this allowed since it is part of the Old Testement?